362
363

[#14|+3933|924] TIL that in 1962 the US military suggested committing acts of terrorism on US soil to create popular support for a war against Cuba. A horrified President Kennedy personally fired the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff over the incident. [/r/todayilearned] (reddit.com)

FrontpageWatch が /r/undelete に 投稿

並べ替え:
ベスト
ベスト
トップ
新着
注目
論争中
古い順
あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]hoesenpoep 22 ポイント23 ポイント  (38子コメント)

... and we still wonder who killed Kennedy!

[–]AustNerevar 12 ポイント13 ポイント  (37子コメント)

Well, yes, we do...we don't have any evidence. We don't know that the CIA killed him anymore than we know that Oswald did. There may be a lot of circumstantial evidence and clues that point to entities other than Oswald, but the reason that JFK theories aren't accepted is because we just don't' know. Of course, the Warren Commission is total bullshit and I'm certain that when all of the files are finally declassified, we'll have a big revelation on our hands, but the most we can do is speculate upon all of the theories proposed about him.

[–]tundra1desert2 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (36子コメント)

Unless you think Oswald had a magic bullet we know it wasn't him alone anyways. He was just a patsy and a lot of people died keeping that secret. We don't know the whole story but we do know the current accepted story is BS. The declassified report is gonna be so heavily redacted we'll likely never know the truth and who made it happen.

[–]FuriousB 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (35子コメント)

When we covered the JFK assassination way back in high school, I of course was very skeptical of the magic bullet, 3 shots in 6-7 seconds or whatever it was, and 1 bullet causing 7 different wounds in 2 people. Then a few years back I saw a special on TV (maybe History or Discovery, cant remember) that set out to try to replicate the shot as best they could. Of course it isn't perfect, you'd never be able to exactly replicate all of the conditions from that day, but they managed to replicate 6/7 wounds (just barely missing out on the 7th) in nearly the exact same fashion as what we know to be true of Kennedy and Connelly's wounds from that day.

Here's the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZRUNYZY71g

When I first saw it I wanted to be skeptical. I wanted to look for and criticize any of the methods these guys were using that didn't seem accurate enough. But after seeing it, to me it spelled out that there indeed was only one shooter and that person was up in that book depository window, because it would be impossible to recreate those wounds shooting from any other angle. The odds are extremely low that Oswald's shot could have done what it did, but there are also a million other scenarios just as unlikely. Just like when you hit a golf ball that lands on a blade of grass, the odds of it landing on that individual blade are incredibly low, but the ball had to land somewhere.

That said, I hardly think there weren't other people that were in on the plan. Just too many people with shit to gain by getting rid of him. But I do believe the actual shooting more or less went down how they said it went down. Before and after that though, who knows.

[–]tundra1desert2 -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (34子コメント)

Right... Let me guess you're also on Popular Mechanics side about 9/11 also.

[–]FuriousB 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (33子コメント)

And I'm guessing you believe the moon landings were shot on a sound stage in Area 51...

[–]tundra1desert2 -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (32子コメント)

I take it from your shots in the dark about what I believe that's a yes.

[–]j3utton 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (3子コメント)

Could you be a bigger hypocrite?

[–]tundra1desert2 -4 ポイント-3 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Explain please.

[–]j3utton 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (1子コメント)

I take it from your shots in the dark about what I believe

Like you weren't taking a shot in the dark about what they believe before they did so to you.

[–]FuriousB 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (27子コメント)

I mean do you not believe that steel loses the majority of its structural integrity at around only 1200 degrees F? That's simple physics. Science. Things that are testable and repeatable. Or do you think Newton was in on it too? I maintain plenty of doubts about 9/11, but none of them extend far enough to deny measurable science so I can fill a narrative with any unsubstantiated claims I desire. I'm curious to hear an explanation, brief or otherwise, of how far you believe the conspiracy extends.

[–]SuperConductiveRabbi 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (13子コメント)

9/11 conspiracy theorists often are not capable of understanding the difference between "steel melting" and "steel losing structural integrity as it gets hotter."

[–]tundra1desert2 -4 ポイント-3 ポイント  (12子コメント)

Losing structural integrity cause it to collapse at the weakest point not completely fail at every point. Had what you're implying happened the building wouldn't have have fallen straight down... Twice.

[–]tundra1desert2 -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (11子コメント)

Do you believe the steel in the top 1/3rd of a structure is capable of collapsing directly into it's own fingerprint twice while simultaneously destroying the support of 1 building near it? Thats just absurd. No one is arguing what temp steel burns at or jet fuel but those buildings were meant to survive plane crashes. If those planes had actually caused enough damage to collapse the building themselves they certainly would not have fallen straight down with no resistance at all that's simple physics. If you think conspiracies don't happen and the government hasn't been using American blood to grease the gears of war that's your problem. Meanwhile people die because no one is questioning the bullshit we get fed. These opinions and this science is bought and paid for it's that simple. Continue believing what your told the rest of us live this shit.

Edit: still steel

[–]FuriousB 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (10子コメント)

When did I ever say I believe that conspiracies don't happen? Why would the building not pancake? Would you expect the 30ish stories to sort of just harmlessly slide off the top? What possible force would cause it to fall any other direction than straight down? That doesn't make any sense. Was floor 80 supposed to hold off the weight of the 30 floors coming down on top of it? Maybe floor 79 will have better luck holding off 31 floors. Or 78... And the engineer who said that they could survive impacts from 707 sized aircraft wasn't wrong, both buildings stood standing for about an hour plus. It was the fire that finished them off. Buildings collapse from fire all the time, it's hardly unprecedented, and that's without sustaining a major impact beforehand. But I guess anyone who believes that and has the evidence to back it up is just in on the whole thing. All those dozens upon dozens of journalists, academics, et al investing their time in keeping up a charade for a paycheck and/or threats from the government, without one of them ever cracking and blowing the whistle to the public. People in power had plenty to gain by allowing or planning an event like 9/11 to happen, but the extent to which you believe their influence propagates is so ludicrous that it makes 9/11 being a complete accident seem more likely. All they had to do was push (or allow someone else to push) the first domino, they didn't have to stand at each successive domino to make sure it all fell the right way.

[–]frog_licker 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I don't know maybe Newton was in on the conspiracy. I mean someone had to throw all of that gravity at the buildings, and who better than Isaac Newton? I mean he's got the perfect angle and everything from up in heaven.