381–390 of 403 posts
If I'm the CIA and I have exclusive access to the President's food, transportation, calendar, etc...this isn't how I take him out. Plane malfunction, opiate overdose in bathtub, food poisoning. Plenty of other options with way higher probability for success.
It is if you want to make it look like Cuba did it. They (the CIA) needed it to be public.
Not directly related to this article, but I found the lone gunman theory much easier to accept after visiting the museum in the former book depository in Dallas. You can look down onto the plaza from the exact spot Oswald shot from, and you can easily imagine how the bullet fired from there would go through JFK and into the governor sitting in front of him. Not that this proves anything, it was just a "oh, I can tang…
Similar: recent PR photos made it "click" for me that modern stealthy aircraft look exactly like "flying saucer" UFOs from the front. https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/02/politics/b-21-stealth-bomber-...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The meta argument is the one which is unreasonable. Forming reasonable small arguments is easy. People engage them easily. But because so many can be created so cheaply it’s possible for people’s minds to cloud.
Ok so you acknowledge it was well reasoned and you are apologising to op for saying it wasn't. And moving forward you've come to: So many well reasoned arguments can be created so it is possible for people's minds to cloud. I have no idea what you are trying to say here but it seems like it's not contributing anything much to the discussion. Perhaps your mind clouded before you wrote it? edit: did you edit your origi…
I used to be passingly interested in the conspiracy part of the JFK assassination until I watched this EXTENSIVE in length and sourced video on the assassination: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DC8tO16xdrY It's all very logical and straightforward.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I look at it like the crazy general in Dr Strangelove that is trying to start a world war I highly doubt that a secret in the caliber of “let’s kill the President” can be kept by so many people for such a long time. In my experience large organizations of people just don’t work that way
I highly doubt that a secret in the caliber of “let’s kill the President” can be kept by so many people for such a long time. Agree. However, what if that wasn't the conspiracy? What if the conspiracy was, "let's avoid war with the USSR"? If the US Government knew of or suspected USSR involvement in JFK's assassination: their choices were essentially "war with the USSR", "look like fools who bowed down to the USSR",…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can’t say I believe there was another gunman. There may be forensics technicalities that are hard to explain but it seems that in any event that is highly ‘investigated’ people find too many patterns in the noise (9/11 for example) Like most of those Cold War events, these cover ups look more like protecting intelligence sources and blunders than some large overarching cabal
I think the 9/11 and JFK conspiracy theories are dissimilar, almost opposite. The official explanation for 9/11 is also the simplest possible explanation: terrorists carried out a very low tech and plausible hijacking attack that exploited some rather obvious holes in our airline security. The 9/11 conspiracy theories are orders of magnitude more complex than this official narrative. I don't think the JFK "second gun…
As I said elsewhere, the only evidence of a second gunman is we know Oswald was a good shot with a gun and so needing 3 shots (with a scoped rifle at close range - less than 100 meters) is something to question. But in the end it seems more likely he would have pulled the trigger himself and thus not needed help.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's because you remember correctly...the simulation just messed up the report card object and accidentally decremented the counter twice. In all seriousness it's crazy how bad memory is. Like we all have a false version of the truth.
Conversation is throwing fictional worlds at each other.
The second part was just me agreeing with their comment that it's crazy how bad our own memory is and how it's difficult to come to grips with. Like when my mom, sister, and I are all arguing over a past event and remember it very differently. The true events are (to my knowledge) absolute, but in a philosophical sense, we're all living in our own reality as our memories are telling us the events unfolded differently even though they didn't.
Isn't it pretty common knowledge now that CIA played an active role in Kennedy's assassination? Current Kennedy in 2023 running for President talks about this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I personally believe it's somewhat possible that there was some CIA involvement in JFK's assassination. I did not watch the entire video, but the part that addresses potential CIA involvement seems to have 2 main flaws IMO: 1. It only addresses the Vietnam War as a potential motive and "debunks" this motive. Geopolitics is complicated, and there are countless other potential motives, especially surrounding Cuba and t…
This is what’s fascinating and terrifying about conspiracy theories. You’re clearly an intelligent person who can articulate their thoughts. But none of this is well reasoned. In the face of compelling evidence you propose vague, unsubstantiated alternative theories. This is a bottomless pit. It’s not hard to make up a fantasy to explain reality. But that way lies madness. Reasonable people can disagree and arrive at…
People DO conspire. History is filled with examples both large and small. Suspecting a group of people of conspiring is not scary, there are lots of crazy theories out there that do no harm, ancient aliens, crystal skulls, all kinds of stuff.
"conspiracy theory" is a term with a lot of power, I would argue that people in power who actually do conspire have a pretty good incentive to call things that might expose them by that term. This ensures that the media cannot cover the topic without hurting their own reputation and that people who discuss it will be in the out-group and less likely to be taken seriously. In fact, they also have an incentive to play up the craziest ones (pizzagate, birds aren't real) to discredit and cover what might actually be a real case of conspiring.
You cannot stop people from coming up with crazy theories and talking to each other about them, particularly in the age of the Internet. The only thing you can do is discuss and provide evidence against them. Using that label only emboldens believers nowadays, since they become more convinced that the powerful are using the power of the term to suppress them.
