JFK Assassination Forum

Cancellare Crop showing Haygood standing on the overpass wall.

    This is DPD Motorcycle Officer Haygood before he jumped down and entered the railroad yard. BOTH MOTORCYCLE GLOVES ON!

https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/32101-the-once-and-future-education-forum-quo-vadis/

Even the staunch CT'ers at Education Forum-JFKA have turned on William Niedernut, the anti-Semitic, hardcore CT-max martinet censorian who somehow (inexplicably) became the sole active "moderator"  at the now-floundering EF-JFKA.

Going full volume 10, crank-crackpot, Niedernut doubles down on his narrative that Mossad (with accomplice US President George Bush) perped the 9/11 atrocity, proven by some Israelis purportedly seen "dancing" atop a van and viewing the disaster, way back when.

Niedernut believes his easily disproven, demented narrative of the WTC attack is a "fact."

What does 9/11 have to do with the JFKA anyway. Nothing, except in the fevered minds of of the nutcases now running and populating the EF-JFKA. 

BTW, a tip of the hat to Duncan MacRae, who runs JFK Assassination Forum and incurs none of the self-inflicted wounds that define the EF-JFKA.

Refugees from EF-JFKA: Please join this forum. LN'er and CT'ers participate, and sometimes even in a collegial manner. No unnecessary censorship.

There is one thread for OT commentary.

Simple, and it works.

I realize it’s tiresome to see the same people posting over and over and over, so I will return to the cave for a while after sharing this thought. The problem is, when I dive back into the JFKA the thoughts that always nag at the back of my mind keep popping to the forefront.

The Walker attempt is one of the Rosetta stones of the JFKA. It shows Oswald was a violent SOB who would risk his life and abandon his family to carry out a politically motivated assassination. That’s the LN party line – nothing to see here, move along.

I do not suggest Oswald didn’t make the Walker attempt or did so as part of a conspiracy. If you think along those lines, the irrepressible Greg Doudna has summarized his 140,000-word manuscript in an active thread at the Ed Forum. The Walker shooting was a “staged” event, a “prank.” There were three participants including Oswald. Oswald had infiltrated Walker’s circle, possibly at the suggestion of de Mohrenschildt, as part of an undercover government operation to infiltrate right-wing groups. Oswald may or may not have been the shooter (probably not), but it was his rifle and his role was pretty much as he described it to Marina. OK, whatever, I just skimmed it and you can read if for yourself if you’re so inclined. It hasn’t generated much interest.

As with Oswald’s revolver, I’m talking about things that nag at me with the standard LN narrative.

1. On March 9-10, Oswald took photos of the Walker house and alley and assembled a detailed game plan with maps, bus schedules and whatnot. He, of course, did nothing like this with JFK. Granted, he didn’t have as much time – but if he seriously wanted to shoot JFK and get away with it, no law said he had to shoot from the 6th floor of the TSBD or even on 11-22. In comparison to the Walker effort, what he actually did on 11-22 was rather a stupid "plan."

2. He ordered the rifle on March 12, so it’s a virtual certainty he had the Walker attempt in mind. Yet he ordered it by mail using a money order and his own post office box, albeit with a fake name. This made the rifle completely traceable and, as Zeon has pointed out, seems foolhardy. He could have easily bought a better rifle for cash right there in Dallas and it would have been completely untraceable. Does this seem rational for the guy who did all the planning described in paragraph 1 two days previously?

3. He clearly had some awareness of Walker as a right-wing “fascist” (his term), but Walker was pretty small potatoes. Despite being the polar opposite of JFK politically, Walker did share an intense antipathy for Castro, so the two had that in common. But was Walker really worth Oswald throwing away his life and family for? Would being known as the “assassin of General Walker” really satisfy Oswald’s thirst for a place in history?

4. The attempt was made on April 10. On April 2, Michael Paine had raised the topic of Walker at a party and got no meaningful response from Oswald that he could recall.

5. On April 10, Marina was pregnant with Rachel, and June was an infant. Yet Oswald’s note clearly contemplated that he might be arrested or die in the attempt. Does this seem plausible? To throw away his life and family to kill … Walker? And, of course, he left no similar note and gave no indication of anything brewing before the JFKA.

6. Marina said he carried the rifle fully assembled under a raincoat both coming and going from the Walker attempt and that this was what he always did when he took the rifle to practice. He carried it this way on public buses. And yet, with the JFKA he took the risks of making a paper bag and asking Frazier for a ride and carried the rifle disassembled with a curious curtain rods excuse.

7. Marina said he arrived home pale and agitated – very different from the Oswald of 11-21, the morning of 11-22 and the encounter with Baker.

8. Despite being angry that he had missed (according to Marina), he made no further attempt on Walker. In fact, on October 23 (after beginning work at the TSBD) he attended a right-wing rally at which Walker was a speaker. On October 25, he attended an ACLU meeting with Michael Paine and spoke about the rally.

9. Despite her husband attempting to murder Walker and making clear he was prepared to leave his wife, infant daughter and unborn child high and dry, Marina didn’t confide in anyone who might have helped with the situation – not Robert, not the de Mohrenschildts, not any of the Russian expatriate community who had been so helpful to her.

I don’t claim to be any great student of the Walker matter. I don’t know what, if anything, the above adds up to. But as with so much of the JFKA and particularly with Oswald, I have a sense that “something is wrong with this picture.” It’s hard for me to just keep chalking things up to Oswald (supposedly) being mentally ill and erratic.

Is this “overthinking” or just “thinking”?

(Yes, that is a new avatar. I decided to use an actual photo because it's more honest.)

LP-

I will not hold my applause. I will applaud you.

To my credit - please, hold your applause - I:

1. Was referring to Niederhut as NiederNut long ago, until I was asked to stop.

2. Called out NiederNut for his antisemitism long ago, when he first began claiming 9/11 was a Mossad operation. Do a search at the Ed Forum for posts by NiederNut and the term "Mossad" - you will be astonished. You will also find one by me stating, "I am AGHAST that this sort of anti-Semitic claptrap would be tolerated by the Administrators of this forum and endorsed by any thinking person. ... If I were a practicing psychiatrist accountable to a state licensing board, I don't believe I would be endorsing views such as this on a public forum.  No wonder this entire site seems to be fading into well-deserved oblivion."

3. Seriously contemplated reporting him to the Colorado Medical Board and asking if they really thought this guy should be providing psychiatric counseling (as opposed to receiving it!) but then decided that opening a can of worms with a loose cannon like NiederNut was probably not in my best interests.

I am beyond flabbergasted that a psychiatrist who has ideas like his floating around in his head is able to maintain a practice. It reminds me of when I first began representating a mental health agency in involuntary commitments of folks with serious mental illnesses who were a danger to themselves or others. A commitment required the testimony of two licensed psychiatrists. The attorney I replaced warned me, "You're quickly going to learn the psychiatrists are nuttier than the patients."

Although I was no longer a member of the Ed Forum, the appointment of NiederNut and Sandy Larsen as moderators was to me the clearest sign this was no longer a serious forum and that something was very, very wrong. Talk about the lunatics running the asylum.