We never expected it to. It has shed much new light on the conspiracy to cover up the crime. It also highlighted how an intelligence agency with no oversight was allowed to continually and constantly break the law and ignore the constitution.
A great story, but sadly, one the main stream media is just not interested in. For some reason.
> Some families are learning for the first time how parents, grandfathers or spouses participated in American spycraft
The CIA actively looked for American businessmen who could be useful to their operations. They called the "Clandestine Contact Service." It's about the lowest level of "participation" you can have in "spycraft."
> “confident that Oswald was at no time an agent controlled by the KGB. From the description of Oswald in the files he doubted that anyone could control Oswald.”
They just wont give up the cover up. Here we are 60 years after the _murder_ of an elected President and we're still playing these games. Ridiculous. If you accept this as true then you have to accept the United States Secret Service was criminally incompetent in failing to stop a single "lone nut."
> He was a patriot, Dorothy said, and probably saw his work for U.S. intelligence officials as a way to help his country.
...and then:
> As a child during the early 1960s, his dad would leave for Vietnam and the family wouldn’t hear from him for a month or two.
There was nothing patriotic about the war in Vietnam. This whole article is revisionist deep state jingoist propaganda.
We know for a fact they didn't do that. They intentionally obstructed several investigations. They knowingly lied to congress. They destroyed records they were ordered to preserve. These facts are all part of the released documents and they're all plain as day. They tried to keep this all locked up until 2060 for a reason.
At the very least we can retrospectively look at the actions of CIA, FBI and USSS and see their corruption. That they've never been held responsible is unconscionable. I'm glad you're somehow capable of defending them with this lazy nonsense.
Conspiracy theorists give weight to anything which confirms their worldview, and dismiss anything that does not.
It is an unfalsifiable belief system.
Lol. Please take yourself seriously. You don’t have to be anywhere near a conspiracy nut to laugh at this phrase.
Their beliefs are unfalsifiable.
Saying “their beliefs are unfalsifiable” is just a boring accusation. Like looking at the worst scientists and accusing all scientists that their research is bs.
Saying their beliefs are unfalsifiable is not a "accusation". It is a statement of fact.
If you arrive at your conclusion despite the evidence, then you are already relying on a process by which new evidence can be discounted.
The goal post can always be (and generally will always be) moved.
There's less of a history of them modifying or altering documents that they are forced to release.
Fwiw, I believe that Oswald did it, and that there's almost no evidence for any other shooter.
Stopping ‘a single “lone nut”’ is by far the hardest thing to do. They aren’t actively seeking co-conspirators so you typically have no idea what they’re planning until they take action if they aren’t blatantly stupid in their planning like trying to steal firearms or buying truckloads of fertilizer for non-ag use.
He was removed from the subversive file ONE day before the USSS searched it before the parade route. They always search the file before a parade.
Had this system worked as intended than USSS would have shut down the Book Depository and would have held Oswald in custody for the day. Even Hoover himself remarked how unconscionable this all was and he punished several agents for it.
This _particular_ lone nut should have been EASY to stop.
And even today the Secret Service occasionally screws up. The recent assassination attempt against Donald Trump made that obvious but there are likely a lot of similar errors which never get exposed.
Lol, I get it, but I'm pretty sure we've all settled on "just one shooter", or maybe "just one shooter, but secret service fumbled the AR getting into the car".
If you weren't making the reference I thought: some people believe that there were agents in the buildings around the route working together to shoot JFK - some with suppressed weapons and some without, so we wouldn't be able to easily localize where the shots came from by sound.
Preemptive detainment? That doesn't sound very constitutional, to be honest. Is it actually a thing?
Doesn’t there need to be probable cause to trigger the arrest? Thar be sketchy isn’t probable cause.
The legal system in the US rarely favors the little guy. Even if you have an ironclad case, the expense to sue isn't worth it.
Certainly, the FBI to this day regularly engages in much legally sketchier behavior with much lower stakes.
Edit: cf their weird habit of actively encouraging children to become terrorists
https://theintercept.com/2024/01/10/fbi-sting-isis-autistic-...
https://theintercept.com/2023/06/15/fbi-undercover-isis-teen...
https://theintercept.com/2023/07/31/fbi-isis-sting-mentally-...
Why wouldn’t I accept that? They’ve since failed to stop two more lone nuts. Unless you think those were conspiracies too?
I didn't realize this was up for debate.
Which 3 letter agency did Thomas Crooks [1] work for?
Our security theater apparatus largely works because nobody is trying to kill a president.
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attempted_assassination_of_Don...
Eh, it’s halfway decent at thwarting schemes. Where it fails—where most law enforcement and counterterrorism fails—is in the lone-wolf case. (I’ll call it the Wallace’s dilemma.)
Good grief. Many, many people expected it to contain confirmation of any of probably a thousand mutually incompatible conspiracies.
Then the data shows up, doesn't provide the expected endorphin rush, and now it's all "as expected" and what is really important is some bland point about cold war intelligence overreach? That's a bit much.
It literally just happened last year w/ Trump. And this is in an era w/ a trove of online data to monitor for such possibilities.
Twice!
It is almost impossible to stop a person who really wants to kill someone, and is ready to die to do it, and is a bit lucky.
A recent Ask HN:
Did someone dig into the JFK files?
"Hey by the way your 2nd cousin worked for the CIA" like, and?
Can we move on now ?
The difficulty of the shot has been exaggerated by conspiracy book and filmmakers.
hank808•1d ago
nkurz•1d ago
Thus for this one, use:
Then post the short form here: https://archive.is/uXmDZotherayden•1d ago