Oswald in the doorway: the blog of the Oswald Innocence Campaign, by Ralph Cinque

bigdog

4:04 PM (6 hours ago)

On Wednesday, October 7, 2015 at 9:47:38 PM UTC-4, Ralph Cinque wrote:
> http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2015/10/this-is-daniel-sheehan-who-teaches.html

I think this is known as grasping at straws. 

Ralph Cinque:

And, you just took the 5th is what you did. You didn't say a damn thing. 

This is an unsolvable puzzle because Oswald had to sign for that rifle. If he signed as Lee Harvey Oswald, then they weren't going to hand him a rifle that belonged to A. Hidell. And if he signed as A. Hidell, then A. Hidell would have had to be a signer for the P.O. Box. But, there's no paperwork to support either claim. We don't have the signed form for the listed owner or owners of the P.O.Box, and as far as we know, it was listed in the name of Lee Harvey Oswald only, and no one has ever said or implied otherwise. And we don't have the signed form for the release of the firearm which, by law, was required to be kept on file for 2 years. 

So, who signed for the rifle, bigdog? Was it Lee Harvey Oswald? If so, then why would they give him rifle? Or, was it Alek Hidell? But, there's no evidence that he had legal access to the P.O. Box.  

And no matter who you think signed for it, the signed form should have been kept and found and showcased after the assassination. 

Or was that top secret? When were they going to release it? In 2037? After all, we wouldn't to endanger national security, now would we.  

You play chess, bigdog? Well, you've got no way out of this. It's checkmate. And, you should have conceded long ago.