Monday, October 16, 2017
Hmmm. So, your name really is Hank Sienzant, huh? But, I asked you if you were the Hank Sienzant who was the VP for Customer Relations with Enhanced Retail Solutions, and you said no. And that was after I found a communication between you and another member of Education Forum in which you said that you worked in the video game marketing business, which is what ERS does. Very weird.
But, moving on:
It cannot be assumed that Oswald was shot when he appeared to be shot, for the following reasons:
1) there was no blood and no trauma, to him or his clothing. When you consider what could be shown in a shooting hoax, no more than that was shown in this case. So, unless you are going to argue that shooting hoaxes are impossible, period, then you have to admit that this could be one.
2) the damage from the shot was instantaneous, and that damage was devastating; it was catastrophic. But, after the shot, Oswald crumpled forward and down, and then he veered backwards, and then he went up on his toes like a ballerina, and then he went straight down like a freight elevator at the TSBD. That's a lot of activity for a guy with a burst aorta. It is medically impossible.
3) the speed by which Oswald was evacuated from the garage, and the fact that no cameraman captured the sight of two men carrying another stricken man makes the claim that he was shot very suspicious.
I pointed out that neither autopsy could distinguish between Oswald being shot at 11:21 or shortly thereafter, and therefore YOU can't use the autopsy to establish that he was shot at 11:21.
And regarding the "pretend" brother and "pretend mother" John Armstrong's 1000 page book HARVEY AND LEE can answer all your questions. But, the thing is: you have to read it.
And just so you know: you can't dismiss a thousand page book with a wisecrack.
How much blood would I expect? Well, since they claim that Oswald left an extensive blood stain on the floor of the jail office, which you can see below, I'd say quite a lot. All of the blood left on the floor had to come out the whole in Oswald's body and pass through his sweater.
And what is wrong with you, Hank? I said that no one saw Oswald being carried into the jail office after the shooting, even though it would have been hard for eyes and cameras to miss it. And you cite him being loaded into the ambulance minutes later? What does one have to do with the other?
And the point is that Jack Ruby had no direct knowledge or memory of having shot Oswald. His own lawyer said so on television the day it happened, after speaking to him. Ruby didn't know he shot Oswald until Dallas Police told him that he shot Oswald. And it was depicted exactly that way in the RUBY AND OSWALD television movie, which starred Jim Leavelle. So, the story has always been that Ruby shot Oswald with no awareness of doing so, and I propose, as an alternative, that he had no awareness of it because he didn't do it.
And no: it wasn't vigilante justice. Vigilante justice is when you exterminate someone who murdered an innocent or innocents, and it's the innocence of the victim or victims AND YOUR LOVE FOR THEM that creates the outrage which demands immediate retribution. None of that applied to Oswald, the most hated man in America.
You haven't gotten any smarter, Hank, but on the bright side, I am making you famous.