Can anyone give me any more info on the USSR deliberately propagating (not sure if creating) conspiracy theories on JFK’s death? I’ve heard of that before, but without details or cites.
You could start by explaining why you would pick this conspiracy theory nutcase to follow…other than the fact that he tells you what you already believe, of course. Are you just going to handwave away the links I provided?
I’ve failed greatly I’m afraid. 
I could only get through four minutes. I had to quit when I learned there were actually 8 gunmen in Dealey Plaza. I’ve been wrong for so long!:smack:
No, they relied on actual evidence, the Dictabelt recording, to reach their conclusion. They were merely mistaken, as was discovered a year after their investigation.
“[H]ow the fuck many people does it take to kill a President these days?”
The United States House Select Committee on Assassinations was a weird and political creature. That Wikipedia article doesn’t cover its origins but my memory is that they went into it hoping for glory to disprove the Warren Commission. Instead, they let themselves be swayed by a ridiculously phony piece of non-evidence and came out looking like utter fools, giving the conspiracy theorists reason to live on.
What’s truly ironic is that the real part of the investigation confirmed the Warren report all the way down the line.
But no. All that CT’s cite is the fucking dictabelt, which has been disproved by multiple investigations using different techniques by different labs over many decades. Exactly as all the other supposed “evidence” they continue to cite (or invent) have been. It’s just that this one stupid item, with the imprimatur of Congress, provides them cover even though they profess to disbelieve all other formal governmental findings and would have cried whitewash if the House confirmed Warren as it should have.
The lies, the deceit, the cherrypicking, the lack of critical thinking, the ignorance of science, the arrogance, the damage done by conspiracy theorists is maddening. When people lose their minds sufficiently to believe in one they go down the drain with all the rest.
The shitstain that did the “documentary” bardos cited also posts such goodies as SANDY HOOK HOAX – Pedophiles and Child Trafficking? and Exposing the Sandy Hook Charade – Deep State Strikes Back and Sandy Hook: Does David Wheeler’s Son Have 2 Fathers?, all from this year. There are no words of contempt foul enough for the sickos who perpetuate this.
My point was that the HSCA can’t be compared to conspiracy theorists, as bardos does. They examined actual evidence, and reached a reasoned conclusion based on that evidence. As it happens, that evidence was badly misinterpreted (not phony, the recording was genuine, and is indeed evidence) by the committee and its acoustics experts, but their process was not at all the same as a conspiracy theorist like bardos’s “documentarian”.
That is all.
My point is that they wanted to believe, and that was caused by the atmosphere of conspiracy theorists who just could not let reason take over. It’s that poison they release that despoils everything it touches. Life is messy. There is always a point or two unaccounted for, a piece that doesn’t fit. Those should not be pounced upon as aha gotcha moments that disprove everything else. The HSCA was not itself a CT but I didn’t say it was. I said it was botched because of CTs. That’s a win they obviously still celebrate.
You know, one tenant of rational thought is that you should focus your mental resources on things that ‘pay rent’.
A theory of physics can ‘pay rent’ because it lets you predict what a moving object will do and you can actually do something with it if you’re an aerospace engineer or something.
Basic arithmetic pays rent many ways.
But the ‘truth’ about an event that we have uncertain evidence of - how does that help? We will never accumulate enough evidence to be absolutely certain of what happened to Mr. Kennedy. The highest probability theory we have, there are lesser theories with much lower probabilities that probably didn’t happen, but in any case, we only have so much evidence and that’s all we’re gonna get.
There will never be a way to ‘prove’ what happened, and even if we could, what does it matter now? Even if the ‘real assassin’ could be found, they already probably died.
People just obsess over this because they have trouble accepting that the most powerful, best protected man in the world was just unlucky.
If JFK had slipped on the stairs on air force 1 that morning and fallen and broke his neck, I wonder what conspiracy theories we’d have…
I won’t even go that far.
Because you know what? We don’t have “uncertain evidence.” We have certain evidence. People are convicted each and every day in every western nation on less evidence than what we have proving that Oswald killed Kennedy. To any rational person, we can be certain of what happened to the President.
Without going into every detail, we have the gun, the bullet, photographic evidence, film evidence, computer re-enactments, etc., etc., etc. And we have over fifty years of time spend agonizing over this, and you know what? Still no evidence to the contrary. This would be the biggest news story of the next fifty years if someone could prove a conspiracy. And it won’t happen because there isn’t one.
If one isn’t convinced in 2018, it’s because no amount of evidence would prove it to them. It’s because they only want to believe in a conspiracy.
Ok, I understand. I mistook your meaning in the previous post.
No problem. I could have been clearer.
Most conspiracy theories are simply that people don’t want to believe that some random nobody decided one day to kill the most powerful man in the world - and succeeded. Most theories assume that someone powerful helped Oswald, and then had him murdered to prevent him from tattling on them.
Given that nobody has any way to prove that the CIA/Cubans/Mafia/Soviets *didn’t *meet with Oswald and goad/pay him into doing it, or that maybe there was another gunman who didn’t fire, or maybe they fired one shot and escaped, these theories persist. And they are all extremely unlikely, I’m just pointing out that the probability of any given theory being true isn’t zero, it’s just a very small chance.
We know nothing in objective reality for certain. But it doesn’t matter at this point, even if it *was *one of Kennedy’s enemies, they are also all long dead.
SamuelA, your argument is sound, I know what you mean and we aren’t that far apart.
Here’s where I’m at. I’m a middle age guy who has been interested in this since I was a kid as a history buff and all around inquisitive person. Over time it’s just abundantly clear that the Warren commission was largely right, and the evidence (and lack of intelligent evidence to the contrary) of Oswald’s guilt is also so abundantly clear. So clear, in fact, that at this stage of my life I have little patience for conspiracy nut jobs. So I don’t even want to give them an absurd, Descartes-like opening to argue. The case is that closed to me.
Exactly. It’s hard to get excited about yet another one of the gazillion claims that have been made by people who “know” who murdered JFK.
For that matter, maybe Oswald told the Cubans or Russians he was willing to kill Kennedy and they said “Sure, knock yourself out” just to get him to go away.
Has anyone claimed naming rights yet on the law “Any post involving a person saying ‘This link will show you the REAL truth and if you don’t watch it it’s because you’re afraid of the truth/shills for /sheeple’ will inevitably link to a YouTube video filled with insane nonsense”?
It’s called “The Law of The Internet.”
Or did something trivial for him like gave him a $20 or a box of ammo or something. “go for it, bro!”
Stephen King did extensive research for his novel 11/22/1963. He is 100% certain that Oswald acted alone, as he was too much of a paranoid nutjob for anyone to use him as a tool.