I'm not American so it doesn't have much meaning to me, but personally I've always considered the Kennedy assassination feasible.Kyrian007 said:I'd have to second this. I've never heard a single one that makes any kind of logical sense. Like the "government or CIA killed Kennedy," or "government covered up alien contact," or the moon landing deniers... none are even rational. Our (the US) government can't even balance a budget and the tinfoil-hatters want me to believe they can manage to maintain such massive conspiracies? I don't give the government that much credit.Hazy992 said:All of them. Sorry but conspiracy theories just piss me off.
The point of a conspiracy is that you don't know about it, so it isn't correct to say they don't exist at all. Something like Enron for example was a conspiracy at one point, just one that failed badly. The key is that rather than jumping to whacky conclusions you have to apply some basic logistic and strategic thinking, as well as a little bit of occums razor. For example large nations like the US aren't past using false flag operations. During the Cold War the CIA came up with plans for Cuba to shoot down a fake airliner carrying made up college students. Compared to this flying two airliners into the WTC is really pushing excessive, but it would get the job done.
And that's kind of the point, that act alone would create the desired effect. Taking it one step further and running a controlled demolition on the two buildings to make damn sure they fell down, then for some reason running a controlled demolition on the third smaller tower, and I guess at some point their budget ran a little low so they said **** it and rather than getting another plain just shot a damn missile at the Pentagon... well yeah, not much to say there. These form the primary basis of 'Truther' conspiracies yet I've never seen an explanation as to why logistically any of this after the initial crash was necessary to create the desired effect.
The bigger the conspiracy is and the more people it requires, the less likely it's true. Go in reverse and the feasibility increases. That's why I give the Kennedy assassination a pass. I have no idea if the CIA killed Kennedy or not, but the point is if they wanted to dispose a president (being in the middle of the Cold War and all) this would be a text book example of how to do it. Keep it small scale and simple.