General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Justice for JFK [View all]cpwm17
(3,829 posts)I think I wrote that earlier. One needs to know when to be skeptical about what, and not follow a particular dogma. Governments don't always lie, or always tell the truth. Evidence needs to stand on its own merits.
Knowing who was pushing the WMD bullshit; and having some knowledge about our media, our history, and the evidence; I knew the Bush administration and the Neocons were full of shit. Pushing bullshit to promote unprovoked wars is business as usual in the US.
I don't know what Kennedy assassination scheme you buy into. There are many. A second shooter, in itself, isn't at all far-fetched. It needs actual evidence to support none exists. Having a second shooter that was involved in some US Government conspiracy is rather far-fetched, and requires strong evidence. A US Government conspiracy to assassinate a US President, requiring many US Government conspirators, is virtually impossible.
Conducting serious crimes against US citizens, such as assassinating US presidents, is frowned upon by most Americans, and such crimes are difficult or impossible to pull off.
As I wrote above, the House Select Committee results in 1979 were invalid. They used bogus information to support the idea of a second shooter.
CT'ers have a mindset that leaves them vulnerable to believing impossible conspiracy schemes that contradict evidence. CT is a useful term. I don't consider this term a "talking point." That sounds conspiratorial. I have no agenda to silence anybody. That sounds conspiratorial also.