Tbf, I´d say the same thing if i was funded by the CIA. Please fund me, Ineed money.
Yeah ok cause there aren't any legit capitalist conspiracies or anything.
Most of the capitalist conspiracies we know of has clear realistic signs, JFK conspiracy theories are fucking stupid and invent a bunch of nonsense, the "badge man" literally might just be shitty film that people decided was a guy cause some eyewitnesses thought shots came from different directions, which is the most common thing to happen in shootings in urban environments cause sound bounces and confuses people.
look im a baby and idk about any of it honestly. Idk what a 'badge man' even is. All I heard was the shooter had ties to the CIA and JFK was planning on dismantling the CIA.
Sorta like the "bush did 9/11" no he didnt do litterally orchestrate it , but the admin knew enough to stop it beforehand and simply did not act.
Even if he had CIA connections he'd be the worst and least inconspicous person to do it, like his life is so bizarre and shady that picking him would immediately point to something fucked up instead of just picking a clean patsy.
what part of i litterally know nothing more do you not understand? These are my honest questions What kind of bizzare life did he have? What did the media say about him (and bizzarre life) at the time, how did everything react? Picking someone that seems like an absolute crank as a patsy is not bad tactics.
Its more realistic that one fuckup loser with a complex decided to take a hail mary at the president and succeed, and then for another fuckup loser with a weird obsession with the presidents family to kill the first loser, than for the CIA/mob to hire both these fucking losers to do a hit on the president.
And if you get into "Oh he was a patsy it was actually 3 shooters spread out all over and one was Woody Harrelsons dad and and and and" then you're just inventing shit, yeah it was a fucking bizarre situation, anything examined this goddamn closely eventually shows fucking weird shit.
Check out the death is just around the corner series on jfk. Oswald literally was a cia agent who "defected" to the Soviet Union only to be welcomed back in open arms at the height of the cold war. And then this "communist" started hanging out with anti communist/cia connected ex Russians. The mayor of Dallas was a cia agent at the time and he was able to change the route of the motorcade. You don't even have to get into the shooting itself to see its a conspiracy. Even though there's plenty of inconsistencies at the shooting as well.
Pretty sure the main evidence of Oswald being a cia agent is people saying they thought he was one and "Oh how else would he have done X" and then saying any other possibilities are ridiculous.
The second statement isn't analogous to the first.
If your boss is working for the mob, that doesn't mean you're mobbed up. Same thing.
Yeah, there's a lot more detail to this picture:
- If an org is a CIA cutout (like the National Endowment for Democracy), yeah, be suspicious of everything it does. But that doesn't mean any individual affiliated with it is basically a spy -- the whole point of running a cutout instead of another branch of the CIA itself is to fool people into thinking you're doing good things. Some people fall for that.
- If an org receives all of its funding from a CIA cutout, yeah, just treat it as another CIA cutout. But now it's easier to imagine individuals working with it without knowing the full story.
- If an org receives some funding from a CIA cutout, well, where's the rest of its money coming from? If it can only exist because of that funding, that's pretty sus. But if it's mostly self-funding and receives a small NED grant? The influence is more tenuous, and at this point it's very easy to imagine affiliated individuals aren't influenced at all.
- What if some individual works for a few different organizations, one of which got a small NED grant? Sure, be suspicious, but treating this person as basically a CIA agent is getting a little farcical.
The farther down the list you go, the more important it is to look at what the organization/individual is actually doing, and not just conclude that they're compromised by proxy.
I mean if your boss tells/pays you to bury a heavy body shaped bag without opening it you might be mobbed up.
I'm just confused I think. What were you even talking about?
Ok so I figured out what was confusing me, how are the two statements in the photo not analagous?
I mean, the CIA paid communists to organize against De Gaul, so like...
