Since some are perhaps not familiar with Greg Doudna's off-Broadway production "The Walker Follies," here it is in a nutshell from one of Greg's recent posts at the Ed Forum:
The reconstruction in the staged shot is that Walker was signaled by man No. 1 who was standing in the southwest end of the church parking lot away from his car with its engine running and headlights turned on a short distance away, standing near the wooden stockade fence over which Kirk Coleman would climb and look seconds later after the shot. Walker could see man No. 1 through the north-facing window right next to where Walker was sitting at his desk. When signaled by man No. 1, Walker would drop to the floor. In the alley, after man No. 1 signaled to them, Surrey and Oswald have a rifle and one of them--since Surrey is in command, was more experienced with shooting, and was protective of Walker's safety, probably was the actual shooter, rather than Oswald—fires a single shot through the west-facing window at where Walker's head would have been if Walker were sitting normally at his desk--then hands the rifle to Oswald who runs off with it in the other direction, while Surrey takes a few steps out into the parking lot and is seen by Coleman walking to his parked car to drive away normally.
Your first sanity check: Could you read that without giggling? If you could not - indeed, you giggled, tittered, chuckled and guffawed - you pass. MTG apparently did not pass. Did not pass big-time.
If Walker - whom, you hopefully understand, is an active participant in the Follies - wants to stage an assassination attempt, WHY THE HELL is ANY of this elaborate scenario required??? And MTG takes this nuttiness even further and has hitting the window frame somehow EVIDENCE it was a staged attempt. I mean, WHAT???
If Doudna and MTG, both of whom are educated and intelligent, are actually serious, they have more loose screws than ACE Hardware. And people like Tom Gram think Greg is really onto something here. WHAT???
I keep waiting for folks who posit these silly scenarios to say "Hey, of course, I'm just goofing around, playing with ideas just for fun." But they never do.
Why do I mostly not engage with MTG's dark "facts"? Because his underlying theories are irrational to the point of "this guy belongs in an institution."
Why do people not understand that the THRESHOLD inquiry is:
DOES THAT MAKE ANY SENSE WHATSOEVER OUT HERE IN THE REAL WORLD?
The problem with the lunatic fringe of conspiracy theorizing, which is where MTG and Doudna are solidly ensconced, is that they DON'T EVEN CARE if it makes sense.
