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

Those entrusted to guard the secrets of the JFK assassination and hide the truth- that Lee Harvey Oswald was completely innocent- know that there are some things more dangerous than other things to the official story. And, they know that there is nothing more dangerous than Oswald in the doorway. And for that reason, there has been a systematic campaign, from the beginning and all along, to quash the awareness of Oswald in the doorway. 

Of course, it involved phony, manipulated evidence and showy displays of nonsense- such as the work of Robert Groden for the HSCA and that of the anthropologists. But, that isn't what got the job done. What got the job done was seeing to it that figures within the conspiracy movement denounced Oswald in the doorway, and to this day, that is what they rely on. 

What has done the most damage is when people like Josiah Thompson, who is supposed to be a leading conspiracy advocate, denounced Oswald in the doorway. I haven't decided yet whether Tink is just a complete fink who consciously sold-out to the other side, or if he is just a very stupid man who let them manipulate him to hell and back without even realizing that he made the trip. He should have been smart enough to know that any time that the powers-that-be treat you with respect, as they have treated him with respect, it's because he was serving their interests in some way.

As I have said before, there should be NO friendship or alignment or cooperation between LNs and CTs. It should be very much a Hatfields and McCoys situation. But, only in the sick, twisted world of the JFK assassination community do the Hatfields and McCoys get along and party together. 

A case in point would be Professor James Norwood. He has taught courses on the JFK assassination from an Oswald innocence perspective. But now, he thinks nothing of aligning himself with people who do not defend Oswald, who accuse Oswald. For instance, Mark O'Blazney trashes Oswald all the time and depicts him as Kennedy's killer. BPete places Oswald on the 6th floor "locking and loading" and "pumping rounds into Kennedy." Robin Unger has never defended Oswald, but he has defended every image and film from the assassination as being pure and unadulterated. James has expressed to me his support for the work of John Armstrong on the Two Oswalds and the Two Marguerites, and all the people James is involved with now trash Armstrong's work as they do mine. But, James doesn't care any more. He is willing to sacrifice all of that. It's like making a pact with the devil. He is so determined to disparage me now that he will support anyone who shares the same purpose. "We'll just put aside our differences about who killed Kennedy for the higher purpose of fighting Cinque." That's the mindset that is going on.

And the irony is that most of the people who are fighting me don't even have a conviction about where Oswald was at the time of the shots. No, make that all of the people who are fighting me. Of course, those who support the official story say that Oswald was up on the 6th floor shooting at Kennedy. But, I am not talking about them. I am talking about the people who are fighting me who also admit that Oswald was NOT up on the 6th floor. Where do they say Oswald was? They don't. James Norwood has never claimed to know where Oswald was in lieu of the doorway or the 6th floor. Lance Uppercut has never claimed to know where Oswald was in lieu of the doorway or the 6th floor. Rob Clark has never claimed to know where Oswald was in lieu of the doorway or the 6th floor. And the same is true of Joseph Backes except that he has shown respect for the idea that Oswald was in the doorway- as someone else. 

But, for anyone who admits that Oswald was innocent of killing Kennedy and was therefore not up on the 6th floor, unless they have proof that he was somewhere else, don't they have to at least leave open the possibility that he was in the doorway? James Norwood has never categorically denied that it could be Oswald in the doorway, and he has never endorsed any other location for him to have been at the time of the shots. So, why would he get so seething mad and so determined to fight the whole idea of Oswald in the doorway when he realizes full-well that it is indeed possible? Apparently, he knows of no other location for Oswald that is worth mentioning. He is fighting Oswald in the doorway without endorsing any place else for him. And, there is something very fundamentally corrupt about that. You would think that someone in James' position would just take a neutral stance. But no, instead, he joins the Ops. 

But, the fact is that if you're not a 6th floor advocate for Oswald, there is no place more plausible than the doorway for him to have been. And, James and the others apparently agree because they don't devote a single second to championing any other place. They're just anti-Oswald in the doorway; they are not pro any place else. Again: that is sick; that is twisted; it is wrong, terribly wrong.

But, it is typical for the very corrupt world that the JFK world is. 
         
The protectors of the official story know that it's perilous as hell if this comes down to a fight between LNs vs CTs. They figured out a long time ago that they could only stifle CTs with other CTs, that it had to be that way: CT vs. CT. So, whenever possible, they recruit people like Robert Groden, Josiah Thompson, and now James Norwood to work for them. In Groden's case, it surely involved MONEY, and he has always been the conspiracy's favorite CT. Robert Groden was a PAID consultant to the HSCA. The amount of damage that Robert Groden has done to the cause of JFK truth is incalcuable. Groden has done more damage than Allan Dulles, the acting head of the Warren Commission.

And now James Norwood, who is himself a professor, doesn't want to recognize the competence of another professor, even though he has a PhD in the field of Optics and has lectured on it to other physicists. It has reached the point that Professor Norwood has a new epistemology: "If it's anti-Cinque, it must be true; if it's pro-Cinque, it must be false." How sad that an academic would sink to that level. 

But, as they say, all's well that ends well; and I have no doubt about how this is going to end, and that is, with universal recognition of Oswald in the doorway and everything I'm saying about the Moorman photo as well. 

I contacted a photographic consultant. I was prepared to hire him. I explained the situation, that a motorcyclist was riding down the street, and the photographer was standing on the grass to his left. She shot a picture of him as he was passing her, but it only captured part of his right arm, which was distant to her. So, even though his left side was facing her, she captured none of it but only a part of his right arm; nothing else. He shared my skepticism about such a development, and it only fed his desire to see it. So finally, I sent it to him, the Moorman photo. And after that, I never heard from him again. Note: he didn't write back to say that I was wrong. He didn't reject anything I said; neither before nor after he saw the photo. He just disappeared after he saw it, which was a tacit admission that I am right, that the Moorman photo is not legit. 

Photographic consultants do a lot of work for the government. They serve as expert witnesses at trials, and often for the prosecution, which is government. The irony is that I didn't have to pay him anything, but his action after seeing the photo, which was to flee, was a non-verbal admission that I am right. He could have denounced me first; but he didn't. Was it a confirmation? You're damn right it was.

This is going to end in victory for me, and it doesn't matter how many people gang up on me. I can handle it. All that matters is the truth. The truth always wins in the end. And the truth is that Oswald was in the doorway, and Mary Moorman did not take the Moorman photo.