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

Why do so many people who claim to be Oswald defenders call him a liar?

He said he didn't go to Mexico City, that the only place in Mexico he ever went was Tijuana. Why don't they believe he was telling the truth? Why would he lie about an innocuous trip to Mexico City when he was being wrongly accused of killing the President of the United States and a police officer? Do you really think he was that stupid?

He said he didn't know anything about the assassination. His exact words- in front of world cameras to the world at large- were:

"I don't know what this situation is about. Nobody has told me anything. I only know that I am being accused of murdering a policeman. I know nothing more than that. I ask that somebody come forward to provide me legal assistance."

That's plain English, and Oswald did not lie to the world. If he knew anything about the assassination, and if he had said anything to police about the assassination, they never would have let him talk to the world. The very fact that he was allowed to speak to the world was because he had nothing to say. He didn't know anything. And, it makes sense that he didn't know anything because he was the patsy, and you don't cut the patsy in on what you're doing.

And, Oswald said that he didn't pose for the Backyard photos. He said that his face was implanted over the body of another man. And he said that he knew how it was done and could demonstrate it. So, Lee Harvey Oswald was a proponent of JFK assassination photo-altering. Shouldn't his defenders believe him that he did not pose for those photos?

And, Oswald said he didn't own the rifle or any rifle. Several of the interviewers admitted that he denied owning any rifle. Now, if you know he didn't kill Kennedy or Tippit, why would he lie about owning the rifle? Even if you think that rifle was used to kill Kennedy, and even if you think Oswald assumed it was used to kill Kennedy, why would he lie about owning it if he did? Would you? If a murder was committed with your rifle, would you deny that it was yours? Wouldn't you say something like:

"Yes, that is my rifle, but I didn't kill anybody with it. Someone must have stolen it from where I had it stored and used it to commit the crime with the intention of framing me. But, I didn't do it. Of course, I didn't do it. I'd have to be insane to do such a thing, and I am not insane. I am not a murderer, and I am not insane. I had no motive whatsoever to kill anybody. I would never do such a thing."

Isn't that about what you'd say? Then, why not give Oswald credit for being smart enough to know that if it was his rifle, then it was futile to lie about it? He had to tell police the truth about that.

The problem is that there are a lot of people who dispute the official story of the JFK assassination, but they are not really Oswald defenders. But we, at the Oswald Innocence Campaign, are real Oswald defenders. We're like his lawyers. And we have two very excellent lawyers in our group, Mark Lane and Vincent Salandria. We defend Oswald against the charges of double murder and attempted murder, and we defend him on the count of every smear made against him, including that he was a liar. Oswald told the truth. Believe Oswald.