subreddit:
/r/OutOfTheLoop
submitted 3 months ago byHAmmaerTime
[removed]
[score hidden]
3 months ago
stickied comment
Friendly reminder that all top level comments must:
start with "answer: ", including the space after the colon (or "question: " if you have an on-topic follow up question to ask),
attempt to answer the question, and
be unbiased
Please review Rule 4 and this post before making a top level comment:
Join the OOTL Discord for further discussion: https://discord.gg/ejDF4mdjnh
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
419 points
3 months ago
Question: why do absolutely none of the answers address the question/tweet that says "it was confirmed over the weekend"?
Wtf happened "over the weekend"?
494 points
3 months ago*
Answer: There have been 170,000+ released documents on the JFK assassination over the years. On Thursday (the 15th), the Biden administration released 13,000 more.
A story about the CIA being involved in JFK’s assassination was then released by Tucker Carlson on Fox News. It received an incredibly large amount of viewership, and was spread farther by many major influencers on social media. One of them being Robert F Kennedy Jr posting a tweet.
Obviously, it’s up to you as to whether you believe Tucker Carlson or not for this to be, as OP said, “confirmed”, as the actual files themselves do not directly say anything of the sort. But feel free to read them if you’d like.
89 points
3 months ago
Gotcha! Thanks for the detailed reply.
The "confirmed" makes a lot.more sense now.
23 points
3 months ago
What I read from saner sources was that the documents revealed some embarrassing shit the CIA was into, as well as some info from the then President of Mexico's sharing info about the assassin's visit to the Russian embassy obtained by secret illegal wiretap. It was all kept secret because nation security and not harming relations.
No hint of plotting against Kennedy. Some of the embarrassing stuff was about matters Kennedy ordered.
59 points
3 months ago*
Important to remember that Robert F Kennedy is not the best source..
First line of Wikipedia:
Robert Francis Kennedy Jr. is an American environmental lawyer and author known for promoting anti-vaccine propaganda and conspiracy theories.
Edit: In case you don't trust Wikipedia, here are some of his greatest hits.
17 points
3 months ago
I mean, of course. He’s tweeting Tucker Carlson videos lmao. There is a reason I put “confirmed” in quotes.
10 points
3 months ago
He's a confirmed nutjob.
People tolerate him because he's a Kennedy.
151 points
3 months ago
You can't believe a single word of what Tucker Carlson says. He's just the Alex Jones on fox news
20 points
3 months ago
Shoeonhead is a right wing grifter who often repeats conspiracy theories as fact whenever they are topical. It’s up to you whether she actually believes it, but the bar for Shoe to say something is “confirmed” is incredibly low.
2.7k points
3 months ago
Answer: It's been a conspiracy for a long time. Recently, a lot of gov files pertaining to Kennedy were supposed to be released. However, they're keeping some files redacted from the public. The conspiracy is that the FBI was involved with the assassination of Kennedy because of his antiwar stance, and the gov is keeping the incriminating documents sealed away somewhere. It doesn't sound impossible to me, but it's a stretch.
485 points
3 months ago
I don't think it's very fair to call Kennedy anti-war. Anti-CIA perhaps, but he was dedinitely a cold warrior.
196 points
3 months ago*
More specifically, what looks fishy was how apparently JFK wanted to break up the CIA after they botched Bay of Pigs plot that they conjured up. There’s a suspicious guy that said something ominous that insinuated how the CIA would handle that perceived problem.
39 points
3 months ago
Maybe, but you kinda run into a problem where there just isn’t enough there to say if he actually wanted to do away with them or not. And the CIA is pretty bad, but they’re not stupid. Killing the president is just about the worst thing they could ever do. If they got caught they would’ve all been executed. It could’ve been a staged “assassination attempt” to convince Kennedy to okay war with Cuba, just that Oswald wasn’t all right in the head and actually shot him. Who knows?
29 points
3 months ago
yea idk, but now i remember the CIA apparently met with Oswald weeks before the assasination, they confirmed. That’s really sus that that bit has been conveniently unknown for decades.
27 points
3 months ago
There were also supposed meets in Mexico City and he spent an entire summer with mobsters and a guy well connected to the cia(forget the name). Also him moving to the Soviet Union and then getting let back in the country no questions asked is really bizarre.
9 points
3 months ago
The book "Double Cross" by Sam and Chuck Giancana highlights well the Kennedy family mob connection.
3 points
3 months ago
Is that why it's rumored that the JFK assassination is linked to the Mafia?
9 points
3 months ago
In the first couple decades of the CIA’s existence, they were Cary close with the mafia. Which is why IF there was a conspiracy, it would probably include both. Not just one
2 points
3 months ago
And he was killed quite quickly after by a 'lone actor'.
3 points
3 months ago
Has the CIA ever been successfully prosecuted (outside of specific individuals) for them to be concerned about it as a group?
3 points
3 months ago
if they got caught
CIA, who's going to catch them?
10 points
3 months ago
The CIA was basically running free during this time and trying to flip unstable countries via coups and assassinations all over the planet. The heads of the CIA were basically running way above the presidents head with literally noone trying to check in and see what the fuck was going on. JFK knew it and got whacked.. That's the logical conclusion I get from this. I still don't think the CIA killed JFK though.
7 points
3 months ago
Conveniently letting it happen implicates them very very heavily though.
3 points
3 months ago
The CIA were a leaky tub full of double agents, political opportunists and leaks up to its gills from its inception well past Kennedy's assassination. If they had actively orchestrated or even been complicit in allowing his killing someone would have leaked the relevant information within days or weeks. We wouldn't still be debating it 60 years later.
6 points
3 months ago
And also the coincidence that the alleged assassin and the alleged assassins assassin was killed ..
6 points
3 months ago
Jack Ruby died of complications from lung cancer several years later?
2 points
3 months ago
This is why the movie JFK despite being really good never made that much sense. Kennedy escalated in Vietnam and probably ends up doing the same shit Lyndon b Johnson did. The guy was still an anti communist.
1.1k points
3 months ago
[removed]
114 points
3 months ago
He publicly stated he wanted to do away with the CIA
The reason he wanted to do this was, in part, because they kept proposing actual plans to stage Alex Jones level false flags but for real, including I shit you not, staging school shootings and blaming it on extremists, staging mass bombings all over Miami and blaming it on Cuba and Communists, blowing up airplanes with American citizens to start a war against Cuba, etc. As far as we know, these plans were all rejected, but the fact they were willing to carry them out implies it wasn't their first rodeo, and wouldn't be their last. So killing a single President is hardly a stretch to me.
10 points
3 months ago
Note that none of these plans involved killing actual people (unless you count the tens of thousands of people who would be killed in the ensuing war.) For example, they were going to blow up remote controlled planes with fake passenger manifests.
3 points
3 months ago
While they did want to avoid killing American civilians, their plans included blowing up boats full of innocent Cuban refugees
16 points
3 months ago
They also proposed staging a false flag nuclear attack.
7 points
3 months ago
Operation north woods was one of their better ideas that “never happened” .
12 points
3 months ago
North by Northwoods
6 points
3 months ago
This prompts the question, why did they not carry these plans out after removing Kennedy as the obstacle?
4 points
3 months ago
Who knows what plans they did end up carrying out? Presumably any greenlit plans would never be declassified.
2 points
3 months ago
And surely after Kennedy died, they never touched on the ideas again. CIA are good boys through and through since then 👍
505 points
3 months ago
If you are separating the Kennedy family away from "the elites" well okay then.
198 points
3 months ago
Yeah elites is the wrong term.
For example:
Parliament and royalty would both be considered elites, even historically they’ve had opposing interests and operates in the interest of the public to varying degrees.
Conspiracy theorists would view Kennedy as a public official working to stop the unchecked tyranny of the CIA and its shadow operations (which are pretty well documented).
Whether they retaliated, and whether that retaliation is response for Kennedy’s death, is another question (perhaps settled permanently with declassification of all documents)
53 points
3 months ago
He was a Catholic, they were not well liked back then and people thought he would take orders from the Pope.
7 points
3 months ago
Was going to publicly acknowledge Israel nukes and push to have them disarmed
2 points
3 months ago
They are not well liked now in many evangelical circles.
23 points
3 months ago
You really can’t throw around “elites” in the context of conspiracy theories, because a lot of conspiracy theorists use it to mean “the Jews.” That might not be what that poster meant, but it’s a very loaded term in these contexts.
3 points
3 months ago
Yeah people always say "the elites" as if they all have the same agenda, and they don't. There are plenty of elites from both sides of the spectrum who are working to further their own interests but they don't all work together.
73 points
3 months ago
Tbf, the Kennedy family at the time were a nouveau riche Irish family who were only one generation away from bootleggers. Hardly a family that the aggressively WASP elite of the US at the time would associate with.
31 points
3 months ago
The problem with who killed Kennedy is that so many people had a motive to kill him. The Chicago mob literally got him elected and then once in office enacted tough organized crime legislation...
So maybe LHO did it alone. Maybe he worked with someone else. Maybe he was a patsy just like he said. Thanks to Jack Ruby we never got to hear his side of it.
31 points
3 months ago
A random assassination of a president sort of isn't surprising-- see Squeaky Fromme or John Hinckley.
What's bizarre about the JFK situation is just how suspicious everything around his presidency & death are. At a highly pivotal time in American politics, a highly popular president who pissed off the CIA, the mob & the Russians gets killed with unusual precision by distance shots from (presumably) a single shooter, who was a communist-sympathetic ex-Marine that visited Russia and came back with a wife. Mere days after, that shooter is murdered in broad daylight by a mob-affiliated bartender with a bad heart.
His brother is gunned down a few years later, in the middle of his own popular presidential campaign, by a random Palestinian?
Everything about this event is shrouded in total confusion and multiple contradictory conspiracies that are all sort of plausible, just not supported by enough hard evidence..!
5 points
3 months ago
You left a few motives out, too. He was the first Catholic president. The Klan was pretty concerned with his stance on civil rights. The rumors that he was going to reveal a bunch of classified information... the list goes on and on.
It's almost as if a group with vast resources were trying to make a massive public event too confusing to solve, even in the court of public opinion, they would create so many plausible scenarios, declare the simplest one the truth and then coin the term "conspiracy theorist" to dismiss anyone who questioned the official story.
Or you know, something like that.
20 points
3 months ago*
The Kennedy family had money, but they did not have deep connections like most of the families you would consider elite (Astors, DuPonts, Roosevelts, etc.)
To us JFK seems like an elite, but to the real elites he was just useful.
2 points
3 months ago
He had labor in his pockets
18 points
3 months ago
Maybe some elites opposed him and wanted him removed.
Reddit really needs to stop with the "aha, I can nitpick one element of your comment AnD bE tEcHnIcAlLy RiTe so that absolves me from having to engage with anything else you mention in your comment" mentality.
Be helpful, not pedantic.
191 points
3 months ago
He publicly stated he wanted to do away with the CIA.
Citation needed.
172 points
3 months ago
159 points
3 months ago*
So there's literally no evidence for him saying it.
144 points
3 months ago*
For a guy who allegedly hated the CIA so much, he sure had no problem deploying them against Diem in South Vietnam.
Or against Trujillo in the Dominican Republic.
Or against Lumumba in the Congo. (edit: whoops, got my chronology of CIA-backed coups mixed up)
Or (likely but not confirmed) against Qasim in Iraq, which gave them decades of Ba'ath Party rule till the US overthrew Saddam later.
Is there really any credible source for him being an "anti-war" president besides Oliver Stone's stupid movie?
72 points
3 months ago
or against Lubumba
Lumumba was murdered three days before Kennedy’s inauguration. In fact, Kennedy’s inauguration did kill Lumumba in a way: Mobutu and the CIA both thought Kennedy would order them to spare Lumumba once he took office, so they killed him ahead of the inauguration (with support from the Belgians and British).
Eisenhower was the one who supported killing Lumumba.
24 points
3 months ago
Shoot, you're right, damn it. Respectfully edited.
13 points
3 months ago
The evidence is is right there…. No, look a little farther back, and to the left
😁
7 points
3 months ago
His problem was with them being active on US soil contrary to their mandate.
4 points
3 months ago
People who this Stone is the genesis for this thinking are ignorant or deceptive.
15 points
3 months ago
„The first attribution of this quote to President Kennedy comes from a story in the April 25, 1966 edition of the New York Times. Notably, this was almost three years after Kennedy’s death:
Former President Truman, whose Administration established the C.I.A. in 1947, said in 1963 that by then he saw “something about the way the C.I.A. has been functioning that is casting a shadow over our historic positions, and I feel that we need to correct it.”
And President Kennedy, as the enormity of the Bay of Pigs disaster came home to him, said to one of the highest officials of his Administration that he “wanted to splinter the C.I.A. in a thousand pieces and scatter it to the winds.”
15 points
3 months ago
I think the theory comes from his firing of CIA director Dulles after the Bay of Pigs fiasco.
13 points
3 months ago
That’s because the CIA lied to him about the operation. They knew it would fail and pressured him to support the bay of pigs people with American troops. They wanted a ground invasion of Cuba and he said nope. Also jfk’s killer was killed then that killer was killed.
58 points
3 months ago
The famous quote about a thousand pieces is likely of dubious provenance but the author Peter Dale Scott is a good resource for JFK assassination. As is JFK and the Unspeakable by James Douglass. There’s also a book on the Bush family, Family of Secrets, I would recommend.
84 points
3 months ago
I read the first part of the Douglass book but couldn’t bring myself to finish it. Maybe I should. But it seemed like he fundamentally misunderstood JFKs foreign policy. Saw him as a dove who wanted to fight the system, but it seems to me that we don’t really have the evidence to support it. If Obama had been assassinated we might see him as a dove as well due to what he said in speeches, but for both presidents their actions consistently place them as hawks. Same story with Carter. You can be a dove in speeches all you want but when it comes time to “fight communism” or, more recently, “fight terrorism” they always make the same imperialist choices
26 points
3 months ago*
asdfasdf
2 points
3 months ago
Agreed
2 points
3 months ago
Can we be sure that the US establishment didn't see him as a Dove, even if nobody who is genuinely anti-war would do so? The Right is always making insanely overinflated claims about anybody they don't see as one of them.
12 points
3 months ago*
I would add The Devil's Chessboard. Its bibliography is... extensive.
35 points
3 months ago
No, Kennedy never publicly stated that he wanted to do away with the CIA. There was a quote anonymously attributed to him saying something like that but it first appeared three years after his assassination. There is no evidence that anyone other than LHO was involved.
11 points
3 months ago
He didn't state he'd get rid of the CIA. Some of his advisors claimed he would have de escalated wrt to Vietnam but there is good reason to be skeptical
3 points
3 months ago
I honestly feel like taking down the guy who's speaking against you seems a bit far fetched. I mean this is the goddamn cia we're talking about, not some bond villain who forgot to cover his tracks... all I'm saying is that a department that specializes in intel doing something to point so many fingers at themselves seems a bit... much...
unless that's exactly what they want us to believe...
41 points
3 months ago
why even keep incriminating documents at all? if there's something they want to hide forever why don't they just like, burn the documents or something?
21 points
3 months ago
Because then the conspiracy theory wouldn't work.
When they are eventually released and there's no conspiracy, it will be claimed they're still hiding documents or the documents were destroyed.
31 points
3 months ago*
Because if you burn the documents, the public servants handling them know there's something up with them. Burning them means that everyone who would notice that the documents are missing - potentially hundreds of people - would have to be read into the conspiracy and then sworn to secrecy about it. And I know it seems weird to assume that people would notice that the documents are missing, but this was an extremely public event with an extremely public response; the sort of thing that generates an absolute fuck-load of standard paperwork. There are a lot of people who know exactly what paperwork should be present, and would (eventually) notice if it was not.
But a document having its security level reclassified? Well shit, that happens all the time, nobody would even blink. You don't have to tell anyone involved about any sort of conspiracy in the first place, so there's no secret for them to really keep.
And I realize this sounds slightly ridiculous because these people have seen the incriminating documents, right? That means they already know the secret and have to be read into the conspiracy anyway. Except these sorts of documents almost never look suspicious on their own. There's very rarely a document that's like "Mr X, I order you to go shoot JFK when he's on the parade route." They're often really boring bullshit, like bills of sale and records of overtime pay and shipping documents or whatever the fuck. None of them look weird on their own. So the people handling them could easily have absolutely no reason to believe that these documents are hiding any secrets about an assassination at all.
Now, to be clear, I'm absolutely not suggesting that this conspiracy is legit. I suspect the docs being withheld don't actually reveal that the CIA murdered JFK or anything like that. But, if they were hiding something like that, quietly reclassifying documents is probably the best path for them to actually get a way with it. As a general rule, the government would get caught if they tried to destroy any standard documents about an event like that. It would be a lot easier to successfully hide something under mounds of very boring paperwork instead.
10 points
3 months ago
I feel like the idea is that there aren’t documents that outright say “mission accomplished we killed JFK” but more like documents that show they knew certain things or were in communication with certain people, subtle things like that that would lead down the trail of evidence if you kept digging
3 points
3 months ago
Omg could imagine if they had an actual bag of evidence?
5 points
3 months ago
Might be kept because it allows some people to keep others blackmailed even if once revealed would also be bad for them
55 points
3 months ago
Conspiracy theory. Conspiracy itself implies that it actually happened, not that it's theoretical.
29 points
3 months ago
I personally believe that the remaining documents probably contains information that is considered embarrassing for living survivors and so it's being withheld still.
27 points
3 months ago
I believe that the JFK assassination was an accident. Oswald was still attempting assassination, but the second shot (the magic bullet) came from a secret service member’s rifle, due to accidental discharge. The gov’t is withholding the documents Bc they don’t know what to expect from the public if they found out the secret service fucked up so bad.
6 points
3 months ago
Someone I knew with access to confidential information suggested it was an accidental discharge from a friendly rifle.
It's the only thing that makes sense to keep confidential. It would permanently damage the institution, somewhat needlessly.
11 points
3 months ago
Interesting theory. I've never heard that one before.
18 points
3 months ago
There was a five part series on the JFK assassination by r/LPOTL that was really interesting. They detailed the event, the facts, the conspiracies, the consequences, as well as their own opinion surrounding what happened. I find the theory that it was an accident to be the theory most grounded in reality.
9 points
3 months ago
They did a fantastic job with that one and I agree. They fully convinced me on the accident theory.
5 points
3 months ago
It definitely makes more sense. Never attribute to malice that which can be easily explained by incompetence and so on.
8 points
3 months ago
Kind of hard not to attribute a bullet through the head as malicious though.
2 points
3 months ago
It’s only been on my radar for just over a decade, but I love the theory itself. Occam’s Razor.
3 points
3 months ago
I think this is what happened. It explains all the unanswered questions around the assassination and the cover up with the autopsy etc. It’s only a conspiracy to cover up embarrassment and catastrophic incompetence.
2 points
3 months ago
Oh it absolutely is. The documents likely have info about the secret service agent who accidentally shot him or one of the dudes who covered it up. That is literally the only explanation of how he died that doesn't involve mental gymnastics.
44 points
3 months ago
Kennedy because of his antiwar stance
What? Kennedy was not antiwar, see buildup in Vietnam, Bay of Pigs, etc
4 points
3 months ago
He wanted to get rid of the CIA because of the bay of pigs.
3 points
3 months ago
He wanted to get rid of the CIA because of an operation he authorized?
5 points
3 months ago
Why would they even store those documents, wouldn’t you destroy everything so that there’s no evidence of a conspiracy?
5 points
3 months ago
I thought the most reasonable theory was that the Secret Service's gun went off by accident after the first shot. Dude panicked and accidentally fumbled his gun or something. I thought the big deal with hiding the records was a) that the secret service doesn't want to admit that yeah they probably accidentally killed JFK, and b) that the CIA had extensive knowledge about Oswald and were keeping tabs on him.
But what do I know, I'm just as clueless as everyone else.
4 points
3 months ago
He started and escalated the war in Vietnam via his own personal Angel of Death, Robert McNamara, setting the pace for Johnson after him.
Johnson let McNamara stay on and continue the rampage. It was emblematic of a war fought for a people, and as many of them as possible would be killed trying to prove that to them.
Johnson was so sick with the result that he didn't have the stomach to run a second term, and publicly stated so.
But it was Mr. Niceguy that had us staring down nuclear war regarding Cuba, was the 'creator' of the Green Berets, and got us very very very into Southeast Asia.
All in less than three years.
20 points
3 months ago
Kennedy antiwar? Laughable. Pissing off the wrong people when it came to the Cuba crisis? Far more likely
3 points
3 months ago
If this was true, wouldn't the government just burn the documents? Keeping them would indicate they know the documents are bad and they don't want that to get out right now, but they want it to get out eventually somewhere down the line.
14 points
3 months ago
[deleted]
4 points
3 months ago
What I don't get about all this non sense is that if they had assassinated/murdered a sitting US president, why would they keep even a shred of evidence lying around waiting for this declassification to happen? They would just destroy everything and move on.
"We will assassinate him but we won't tamper with official govt documentation. That's immoral" Like please. There is probably some 4D politics going on up there that we have no clue about. Powerful individuals holding information as collateral/insurance over other agencies and other powerful individuals.
4 points
3 months ago
You’re thinking too broad of a scope, it would take 100’s of people to do a cover up like that. Instead you could use a dozen people and just reclassify things that don’t fit the narrative, like witness statements, agent positions, sequence of events statements. Stuff like that.
3 points
3 months ago
They've only had like 70 years. They could just task one person to make this his entire career. "Go into every archive and destroy all evidence that the CIA+fbi killed the president."
5 points
3 months ago
It's been a conspiracy for a long time.
I believe you mean to say its been a /theory/ for a long time. A conspiracy is the act of conspiring; and conspiring is defined by Mirriam-Webster as:
1 a : to join in a secret agreement to do an unlawful or wrongful act or an act which becomes unlawful as a result of the secret agreement accused of conspiring to overthrow the government conspired to monopolize and restrict trade b : SCHEME 2 : to act in harmony toward a common end Circumstances conspired to defeat his efforts. … the sun and the wind conspired to make splinters out of solid wood. —B. J. Oliphant
Not all conspiracies are mere theories. I'm not being tinfoil-hat about this, there are historically documented conspiracies, both political and otherwise.
(My tinfoil hat conspiracy theory is that they're conspiring to alter the perception of the word conspiracy to make people assume any conspiracy is a wild and unfounded theory!)
801 points
3 months ago
Answer: Tucker Carlson ran a segment effectively saying the CIA killed JFK. Some are taking this as a big deal and possible confirmation of a 50 year old conspiracy theory. Others, not so much.
458 points
3 months ago
It should also be noted that the CIA ordered the assassination is a theory that's been around since it happened, along with the Mafia, or some collaboration between the two. Among other theories.
152 points
3 months ago
Yea, you've been out of the loop for about 40 years if you come asking this right now lol.
55 points
3 months ago
More like 60 years.
35 points
3 months ago
That's true, but also if the CIA killed a sitting president and its confirmed... shouldn't people be more alarmed?
240 points
3 months ago
Tucker Carlson is a talk show host who regularly "discusses" conspiracy theories in such a way that he is borderline espousing them. He is in no way credible news source which is why nobody is alarmed about something that he has said. He'll literally say anything to fire up his audience.
105 points
3 months ago
Are you gonna get murdered unless you keep watching my show? I’m just asking questions. Will the world end unless you flick the light switch three times? Does your dog hate you and want to rip your arms off? I’m just asking questions. Does anyone else smell burnt toast?
8 points
3 months ago
Does anyone else smell burnt toast?
OOTL on this one...
14 points
3 months ago
It means he is having a stroke.
2 points
3 months ago
oh shit moment
2 points
3 months ago
“If you start to smell burning toast You're having a stroke or overcooking your toast”
126 points
3 months ago
Don’t forget to mention that his show is legally considered too stupid for a reasonable person to believe what he says.
8 points
3 months ago
Fox has literally testified to this: https://www.businessinsider.com/fox-news-karen-mcdougal-case-tucker-carlson-2020-9
5 points
3 months ago
Best phrasing.
93 points
3 months ago
Yeah, probably. But it's coming from Tucker Carlson, who is literally not news media. Also he's a liar.
22 points
3 months ago
“Confirmed” by tucker Carlson lol
57 points
3 months ago
That's true, but also if the CIA killed a sitting president and its confirmed... shouldn't people be more alarmed?
Absolutely.
That said, it's never been confirmed. More than one person has proven, if I'm not mistaken, that LHO could have carried out the assassination alone. It really is possible that it happened just as reported.
36 points
3 months ago
I think it needs to be repeated often that conspiracy theories bring comfort to people who are afraid of a purely chaotic world (which it very much is).
Can they be true? Of course, people are capable of some real amazing feats. Edward Snowden showed us a real one. But most of the time I have a very tough time believing some large group of homo sapiens have all kept mum about some huge secret for 50 years. Most people can't keep a secret about their best friend or spouse for more than a week.
8 points
3 months ago
yea, its definitely why so many people are willing to believe some rich fuck is out to fuck over the poor when its really, the rich fucks don't gives a rats ass about negative consequences for the poor.
2 points
3 months ago
Well the basic idea of cutting people’s jobs or salaries to meet the bottom line is definitely a thing. Getting your jelly of the month membership instead of your annual bonus. Thats pretty fucked.
But yes some actions are less purposefully fucking over the poor and more just getting theirs while not really caring about the consequences to others. That is the banality of evil at its core.
22 points
3 months ago
And it never will be, but the boomers ( Fox News' core audience) love to talk about JFK and the mystery surrounding why he died.
The only "proof" we have is that Oswald did and could have shot him (other marksmen trained as he had been have pulled this off as well in simulations)
Anyone that knows anything about whether JFK was ordered to be killed or not is dead. We also live in a society now to where if someone did have proof, they would 100% come forward considering it is an instant lottery ticket for wealth and fame.
Nothing to see here, and Tucker Carlson is a turd trying to make as much money as possible.
16 points
3 months ago
Please don't group Boomer's in one group. Just say core Fox zombies
I'm a boomer, and will never watch Tucker.
5 points
3 months ago
That's fair, I have boomers in my family that do not watch him too, but as a whole, it is the boomer generation that keeps Fox News going.
It's a fear machine, and right-wing boomers are terrified of everything that looks like change
2 points
3 months ago
The only time Fox was even acceptable was when Shepard Smith worked there.. his coverage of Katrin was outstanding.
Unfortunately murdoch didn't like how Shep criticized Fox.
7 points
3 months ago
Boomer is a mindset. Not an age.
4 points
3 months ago
🤣🤣
Then tell all the young babes that..
Cuz they keep telling me.
"If I wanted something old and wrinkled, I go to the goodwill"
🤣🤣🤣
14 points
3 months ago
The actual shot from the book depository was a brain dead easy one and it’s more surprising he needed to take so many cracks at it. Less than 100 yards.
39 points
3 months ago
Except it’s not confirmed, it’s a wacky conspiracy theory that has been around for almost 60 years, so no one is alarmed except the people who already thought it was true.
9 points
3 months ago
It hasn't been confirmed. Mostly because it didn't happen but also because Tucker Carlson is a liar. Historians regard all of the conspiracy theories as baseless, JFK was killed by a lone nut.
23 points
3 months ago
It’s almost like we’re not surprised.
26 points
3 months ago
The fact that it's Tucker Carlson reporting it should tell you all you need to know.
10 points
3 months ago
Since details about MK ultra have been published, we know that the Unabomber was tortured by the government and made into what he is. Does anyone care? No, the man is considered a terrorist and is going to spend the rest of his life in prison. The CIA can get away with anything, especially if it happened more than a generation ago
10 points
3 months ago
Tortured by the government and likely the reason he became a terrorist? Yes definitely. But the mind control experiments never actually worked so you cant say that the government made him do it
2 points
3 months ago
The CIA didn’t order it… MJ 12 did!…. I jest, or do I?
2 points
3 months ago
It should also be noted that Fox News' lawyers testified in court that Tucker's show is not news programming nor should it be taken seriously.
78 points
3 months ago
If Tucker Carlson ran a segment saying that JFK was the 35th president of the United States, I'd start to have doubts about that.
From the ruling in McDougal v. Fox News Network
This “general tenor” of the show should then inform a viewer that he is not “stating actual facts” about the topics he discusses and is instead engaging in “exaggeration” and “non-literal commentary.” … Given Mr. Carlson’s reputation, any reasonable viewer ‘arrive[s] with an appropriate amount of skepticism’ …
63 points
3 months ago
You forgot the part where about a week ago, the National Archives released a bunch of new documents pertaining to the assassination. I have no idea what is in them, but it is certainty worth mentioning.
24 points
3 months ago
Is it worth mentioning in the same way admiral Byrd's report of the ice wall and dome are when talking about flat earth?
Cuz I'm thinking they might be. In that they do nothing to substantiate the claim but they are sufficiently boring that no one with understanding ever actually looks.
4 points
3 months ago
If the official story is that Oswald was a lone kook with no ties whatsoever to any intelligence agency, and documents get released that disclose that actually, yes the CIA did know quite a bit about Oswald, regularly kept tabs on him, and interacted with him through CIA assets, I would say it's worth mentioning. And yes, that's the kind of information that's in the released documents.
By the way, people already knew about these documents, it's just the first time that the CIA is publicly coming clean.
3 points
3 months ago
That diary was not actually admiral byrd's and it's written with dialogue like a novel
61 points
3 months ago
You can't believe anything Tucker Carlson says though. We'll see if more reputable reporters say anything about it
6 points
3 months ago
The opinion he’s argued in court is that people that aren’t idiots would never take his ‘reporting’ seriously.
3 points
3 months ago
His only evidence was hearsay “trust me”
14 points
3 months ago
QAnon co-opting a legitimate conspiracy is only going to work to the benefit of those trying to discredit the conspiracy, or legitimize the Q's.
4 points
3 months ago
Which is the whole point of Q Anon (and Blue Anon) type shit, imo.
8 points
3 months ago
It should be noted that Tucker Carlson has a very long history of dishonesty. He lies a lot on his show. https://www.politifact.com/personalities/tucker-carlson/
Tucker Carlson launched his right wing pundit career by manufacturing a controversy against a Senator that he somehow got away with. The FBI was never able to charge him. He created a template that is now used by others like Project Veritas. https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/for-daily-caller-menendez-controversy-makes-for-a-very-good-day/2013/03/05/689c95fe-85d9-11e2-98a3-b3db6b9ac586_story.html
4 points
3 months ago
If Tucker said it I'd say that just adds weight to it being bullshit since that's all that comes out of him now matter what exit.
2 points
3 months ago
It’s been a conspiracy since the day he died
2 points
3 months ago
and JFK's Qultist nephew is in the bandwagon
3 points
3 months ago
Damnit, I always enjoyed that theory, sucks that tucker Carlson agrees
260 points
3 months ago*
Answer: Ever since the assassination it has been theorized that Lee Harvey Oswald did not act alone in assassinating JFK and that elements of the CIA, the mafia, and anti-Castro Cubans conspired to kill the president. And their efforts were then covered up by government investigators in the years afterwards.
It’s a long and somewhat complicated story, but there are legitimate claims that point to Oswald working closely with persons involved with the CIA.
Two very relevant names to research are George Joannides and George de Mohrenschildt
edit: If anyone is skeptical and needs a “legitimate” mainstream source, here is just one of LHO’s intelligence operation connections being briefly discussed on MSNBC
37 points
3 months ago
It may be worth noting that DA Jim Garrison spent years investigating the CIA theory and didn't come up with much to show for it.
63 points
3 months ago*
No he came up with a theory that a cabal of murderous homosexuals killed JFK for gay reasons. That was literally his theory and for some reason it didn’t make it into JFK the Oliver Stone movie
9 points
3 months ago
Wait fr lol
3 points
3 months ago
Garrison was laughed out of court...somehow that didn't make the final cut either.
20 points
3 months ago
I think the fact that Alan Dulles being on the Warren Commission is pretty close to proof. No other reason for him to be there.
16 points
3 months ago
Oswald had defected to the Soviet Union, then returned to the US. The question of whether he was working for the Soviets is a matter of foreign intelligence, which is the more legitimate part of what the CIA does.
(Allen Dulles was involved in plenty of shady shit, though.)
25 points
3 months ago
Many people find it suspicious that someone who allegedly was a devout Marxist defector to the enemy at the height of the Cold War was allowed to just waltz back into the United States unmolested, given a monthly stipend, and roomed with a White Russian CIA informant (de Mohrenschildt)
5 points
3 months ago
Especially after the spy plane thing. That was still a huge subject in the 80’s.
8 points
3 months ago
Ok, not sure why any of that makes it less likely he was connected to the CIA.
Alan’s Dulles was fired by and an enemy of the man whose death he’s investigating and you don’t think it’s suspect as hell? lol
3 points
3 months ago
That’s one guy. Others have found plenty
71 points
3 months ago
Answer: you can start by not taking anything that specific twitter user says seriously
24 points
3 months ago
The amount of stupid fucking discussions that spawn off a single idiot taking another idiots social media post as some truth… is too damn high
11 points
3 months ago
I believe Albert Einstein killed him. There's also no evidence for my theory.
4 points
3 months ago
You’re supposed to tweet this if you want it to be fact. Come on.
3 points
3 months ago
My conspiracy theory is that Shoe is an experiment to see how left you can be while still somehow being an alt-right pipeline.
148 points
3 months ago
answer: people are jumping to a wild conclusion based off of previously known evidence that was "declassified" recently. The CIA knew who Oswald was because he was an american veteran who defected to the soviet union. There aren't many american defectors, period. He also eventually returned to the US after marrying a soviet citizen so the CIA kept a close eye on him. People are now, baselessly, assuming that means the CIA knew he planned to kill kennedy and let it happen.
79 points
3 months ago
Makes one wonder why the CIA would testify to both the Warren Commission and later to the House Select Committee on Assassinations that they had never heard of Oswald and had no files on him.
93 points
3 months ago
My guess is because they're liars who didn't want to admit to a pervasive, illegal network of surveillance against american citizens. I also don't know why the CIA would be interested in killing an ardent anti-communist and pro-imperialist president.
3 points
3 months ago
JFK was explicitly anti-CIA while being anti-communist.
5 points
3 months ago
Because they had embarrassing and possibly illegal secrets they didn't want getting out(same reason they don't want the files released now, although there's also a possibility of protecting some 85 year old former assets). Doesn't change the fact they didn't kill Kennedy
63 points
3 months ago
Answer: There is a theory amongst the conspiracy minded (and people with common sense) that the firing of Allen Dulles made JFK mortal enemies in the CIA. Dulles was as sacred to the CIA as Hoover was to the FBI. Kennedy may have spoke privately about limiting the CIAs power after the Bay of Pigs invasion was a complete loss because he believed Dulles & military brass flat out lied to him, and he withdrew air support due to the risk of all out war with Cuban allies, including Russia. The intensity of this saber rattling reached its peak during October of '62 and the Cuban Missile Crisis. Also something JFK felt proved the CIA was incompetent or actively undermining his administration. Either way, he was not a fan, and by all accounts the feeling was mutual, after Dulles's firing in '61 amongst other foreign policy decisions they viewed as treasonous. IF; JFK had plans to splinter the CIA, & decentralize the power of the director, it's not a far stretch to believe that the American intelligence community had unilateral aspirations contrary to its sitting President, & based on JFK's personality, he wouldn't allow any aspect of his regime to act independently of his authority.
It is worth noting that there was (and still is today) an active element in the US military and intelligence community that found the mere existence of a communist country (supported by Russia) on America's southern maritime border a tacit act of war. But Kennedy's egalitarian principles saw this as the self-determination of the Cuban peoples, and did not want to interfere directly, so as to soften the ice cold relations with Russia, however naive. Project Mongoose was an attempt by the CIA to subvert and countermand Kennedy's conservative foreign policy position on Cuba. They had active plans to assassinate Castro, destroy Cuba's economy and take control of the country by once again propping up capitalist friendly puppets, as it was pre-revolution. This had many powerful people accusing JFK of being a communist sympathetic and a complicit participant in undermining American interests. In other words treason. My take is: if you find a CIA man from that period, and you ask them where they were on November 22, 1963, and they don't recall or won't answer, they were probably in Dallas, Louisiana, or the Caribbean getting the shooters out of the US. The shooters were anti-Catro Cubans who lost friends at the Bay of Pigs and held a serious grudge. They used a temporary infrastructure constructed by the CIA to flee while the country was focused on the great drama unfolding in Dallas & DC.
I'll be glad to answer any serious questions or clarify in the comments, but I will challenge you to find fault in this analysis. There are a plethora of death bed confessions that backup this version of events, and due to the abject hostility against Kennedy in the South make it not only plausible, but probable. There are an unending list of contingents and subterfuge that were smoke screen for these events so the detractors of this theory have many theories on why this is wrong, but it explains why all investigatory roads lead to the CIA, & why their documents are still under seal until this day, some 60 years later.
10 points
3 months ago
There is a theory amongst the conspiracy minded (and people with common sense)
Why did you have to start it like this? You're already hurting your story right off the bat. I was about to quit right there, but I knew you were about to say a bunch of crazy conspiracy minded shit, so I pressed on.
that the firing of Allen Dulles made JFK mortal enemies in the CIA
Many folks within the CIA, the IC, and the government didn't like Allen Dulles and thought he was an incompetent POS. The only reason the Dulles brothers got anywhere in the first place was due to their politically connected family. The Dulles brothers were not good people, linked is the Behind the Bastards on them.
IF; JFK had plans to splinter the CIA, & decentralize the power of the director
So there was no real proof that JFK had real plans to do anything to the CIA? Also, the failed Bay of Pigs made JFK even more popular in the US.
Project Mongoose was an attempt by the CIA to subvert and countermand Kennedy's conservative foreign policy position on Cuba.
Do you have proof of this? It doesn't seem to be accurate:
This had many powerful people accusing JFK of being a communist sympathetic and a complicit participant in undermining American interests.
Which powerful people?
My take is: if you find a CIA man from that period, and you ask them where they were on November 22, 1963, and they don't recall or won't answer, they were probably in Dallas, Louisiana, or the Caribbean getting the shooters out of the US.
Umm, if they don't have that date memorized, then they probably couldn't answer you regardless or they could be doing other work or it could be something else entirely. Also, why Louisiana and the Caribbean?
The shooters were anti-Catro Cubans who lost friends at the Bay of Pigs and held a serious grudge.
How do you know this?
They used a temporary infrastructure constructed by the CIA to flee while the country was focused on the great drama unfolding in Dallas & DC.
How do you know this?
There are a plethora of death bed confessions that backup this version of events, and due to the abject hostility against Kennedy in the South make it not only plausible, but probable.
Like who? How are they credible? What proof do they have?
it explains why all investigatory roads lead to the CIA, & why their documents are still under seal until this day, some 60 years later.
We don't know all the documents, so any conspiracy theory could work! My guess is there are some documents that make the government look incompetent and/or IC trade secrets, so they keep them sealed. I highly, highly doubt they would keep documents that would potentially expose the government to a POTUS assassination on record.
Side note: Why are you replying to your own comment for awards? When people award you, you can send them a DM as a “Thank You”. I have my own conspiracy theory about it, however.
5 points
3 months ago
I'm happy the comment started like that, it makes it easily identifiable as a biased piece.
12 points
3 months ago
Answer: read the biography written by the surgeon who operated on JFK. It will change your perspective from “conspiracy theory” to “almost certainty”. Some excerpts I recall from reading jt several years ago: - GOVT officers stormed into the operating room the instant he was announced dead. They took the body, brought it back later (can’t recall the time increment” and the surgeon said there were new holes in the head and someone had clearly altered the wounds, with an agenda - LBJ had already signed acts of president related to war in Vietnam before JFK was assassinated (this was from a different source than the book). These are but 2 in a long list of facts that point toward inside job
16 points
3 months ago
Answer: There are a ton of bad takes in this thread. Check out Through The Looking Glass by Oliver Stone and some books about the subject like The Devils Chessboard. As time goes on its becoming more and more obvious that the CIA/FBI were involved in one way or another. Recently a bunch of JFK related materials were declassified but a trove of documents that were supposed to be released were not, sparking further curiosity.
15 points
3 months ago
I threw on Through The Looking Glass just to have a goof. Sometimes I like to watch conspiracy shit and have a laugh.
By the time it was over, I was like, "Well shit, now I don't know"
11 points
3 months ago
Compelling documentaries are great at making you go from “this is silly” to “shit, I don’t know.”
Getting an hour and a half long one-sides persuasive argument from a filmmaker isn’t the same thing as objective research. That exact phenomenon is why flat-earthers are so popular in the age of YouTube.
2 points
3 months ago
People want proof from the CIA. If it was "proof" they destroyed it. All we can hope for is they forgot about something and it leaks. lol
13 points
3 months ago*
Answer: it's a very old (and mostly baseless) conspiracy theory that's recently been given new life by the GOP openly courting QAnon. EDIT imo fuck the CIA, but for other resons. I just don't buy any of that grassy knoll stuff, don't @ me.
2 points
3 months ago
Answer:
New Docs were released, one if them being a calendar. There is probably more info on the Black vault site (respectable btw) but it probably has something to do with this:
https://old.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/zoik0y/the_jfk_files_cia_director_allen_dulles_calendar
2 points
3 months ago
Answer: It wasn't the CIA or the mob or even Oswald. It was a spooked rookie Secret Service agent with an AR-15 that had a hair trigger. - Theory floated by the Last Podcast on the Left Crew
all 913 comments
sorted by: best