JFK and conspiracy theories | Interview with a Contrarian Ep 7 - Michel Gagné
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 7 ก.พ. 2023
- When are conspiracies real and when are they just conspiracy theories? This episode we interview Michel Jacques Gagné to discuss why most conspiracy theories are the product of faulty reasoning. We also discuss how movies like Oliver Stone’s JFK mix-up critical facts about John F. Kennedy’s assassination, and delve into more details about that tragic November day, like the psychological makeup of Lee Harvey Oswald and other “lone wolves.”
------
Learn more about the Aristotle Foundation here:
www.aristotlefoundation.org/
Follow us on Twitter:
/ aristotlefdn
Like us on Facebook:
/ aristotlefoundationfor...
------
Mr. Gagne is extremely knowledgeable on the subject and presents the information well. I’ll be purchasing his book. Thanks for conducting and uploading this interview.
The guest mentioned 9-11 as an example of an unhinged conspiracy theory and lack of critical thinking.
I would love to hear him explain how two planes made three skyscrapers collapse at free fall speed. The third building wasn't hit by anything, yet its collapse was identical to the first two buildings.
How did the top 15 floor above the point of impact have the mass to plow through 80,000 tons of structural steel and concrete below, without slowing down? They dropped at the speed of gravity, encountering no resistance.
The ONLY way buildings collapse like that is through controlled demolition. That is just known physics, not a conspiracy theory.
As they said, conspiracy theories like yours are based on a lack of understanding of the actual facts. You obviously just are quick to believe what you are told.
Mark Milke; If you read this text, I would like to see a video like this done about the Sept/11/2001 collapse of the 2 Trade Center towers and building #7 as well, in New York.
It is very weird the way the 2 towers collapsed into them selves identically from one another, despite being hit by 2 different airplanes at different points and heights, they collapsed pretty much as we can see on hundreds of "controlled buildings' demolitions" videos around the world.
How do you explain the collapse of a 3rd building, "building #7", which was never hit by any aircraft at all, but that it also "collapsed" on it self all the way to the ground, having no logical explanation of its own.
How about the very reduced perforation on the Pentagon building exterior wall, but "zero" debris from any airplane's parts, such as wings or engine' parts such as fan blades made out of "titanium" and impossible to be destroyed by an impact or ensuing fire.
Same thing happened with the 4th airplane that supposedly was downed by its passengers and hit the ground in an open field, there was just a hole in the ground but absolutely NO debris left behind like, wings, engines, seats, etc... absolutely nothing like we normally see after aircraft crashes around the world.
I don't usually entertain conspiracy theories, but this one has way too many unexplained lose ends.🤔
Contrarian is a nicer word for "total idiot". Why would you use that word in this context? :-)
I have to agree with Mr Gagne to a point, in that what has evolved is a lot of people making a lot of money within a conspiracy theory industrial complex.
But there is way to much evidence of conspiracies with purpose that cannot be ignored. His talk has been sobering... But in no way a was it a debunking...
The goal in this interview seemed to be mainly to state some of the facts that undermine conspiracy theories about the JFK assassination, rather than to fully debunk them. Have you read the book?
Yes there certainly is a lack of critical thinking with the conspiracy theories in the main, if you do not agree with them for sound reasons then you are just insulted and shouted down and personally I err on the side of it being a lone gunman however there is something that is very unexplained and seemingly inexplicable, why would Ruby have shot LHO? There is nothing that I have ever heard as to why some mob guy would kill him off his own back, not the chatter around it because there is loads of hearsay, but the one unassailable fact is he killed LHO and it makes no sense at all unless there was a conspiracy
10 minutes of talk crammed into 80 minutes.
Oh and fudge is delicious is not a fact, some people think it is and some don't, roses are not always red so these aren't facts, so your critical thinking is just ad flawed
This guy is awful. As soon as he quoted Vincent Bugliosi, I laughed out loud.
This guy is awful. As soon as he quoted Vincent Bugliosi, I laughed out loud": Considering you have zero knowledge on this case I laughed out loud reading your empty comment.
If only Mr. Gagné would confront the affirmable facts of the case rather than Oliver Stone-style straw men.
What are some facts of the case he did not address?
@@9BallrGagne addressed very few facts, mostly broad generalizations re "conspiracy theories/theorists". His straw men are Oliver Stone and the movie JFK (which does have some valid material re. Oswald's reputed association w/Guy Bannister).
Gagné's conspiracy theory generalizations seem based on the mostly stupid stuff in "JFK" and also New Orleans D.A. Jim Garrison's erratic public profile (tho he did uncover important info at first) and frequently dubious works by people like Gerald Posner.
The "magic bullet" stuff, the "Oswald was too flaky to have had Intelligence connections" stuff, the backyard photo stuff...this sort of thing has very little to do with what HSCA head Robert Blakely called "a mystery wrapped inside a riddle wrapped inside an enigma".
Gagné never specifically debunks any so called conspiracy theory besides the "magic bullet", and his shallow "analysis" of that misses *a lot.* IMO the Magic Bullet, much of Jim Garrison's investigation, most of the film JFK ( backyard photo, etc.) are red herrings obstructing a serious look into Nov. 22, 1963.*
There's a TH-cam channel, if you're interested, called "Solving JFK" that presents a deeper dive, not claiming to have a definitive answer, at least so far - just a very solid look at relevant details and questions of the case, from all perspectives. Well worth your time if interested.
Would supply a link but TH-cam doesn't seem into that sorta thing.
Another serious guy on TH-cam is Robert Harris, who has often brilliant and even fresh analysis, tho his posts are mostly 10 years or so old.
Between Robert Harris and JFK Solved, you can learn a lot.
See what *you* think.
*for example, the backyard photo is clearly real, probably just another ploy by Oswald to enhance his New Orleans "crazy commie" profile.
And the "magic bullet" controversy is only relevant if you're committed to proving all the shots came from the Depository.
As it happens, the seeming best evidence location of JFK's back wound traces to the 3rd floor of the Dal-Tex Building...where a guy who turned out to be a gangster happened to be arrested right after the shooting, and then let go, thanks to an alias. (i.e. Jim Braden/Jim Brading.)
Of course, could be coincidence. Tho not sure how that checks w/Ocam's Razor ;)
@@stayclean777 I get that you think that much of what Gagne addresses here regarding conspiracy theories misses the point (e.g., addresses straw man arguments or red herrings, etc.), but I'm asking you what some of the facts are that you think are central to the view that the JFK assassination involved a conspiracy.
@@stayclean777 Okay, I like to take information like this one point at a time, so I'll start with the idea that there are simultaneous startle reactions by the occupants in the limo which you say are consistent with (I assume you know that "consistent with" just means it's possible that this could be the explanation) other shots. In what frames of the Zapruder film do these startle reactions occur?
@@9BallrFair enough, tho I do get the impression you don't read my
long laborious posts (lol, can't say i blame you) which address some important issues, but alas not in concise bullet points.
Here's a crucial piece of oddly overlooked physical evidence that you may appreciate: *Watch the Zapruder film carefully, preferably in slow motion.* You'll see in the JFK limo everyone's *simultaneous startle reactions* ...Jackie, Mrs. Connally, the Secret Service agents...consistent with at least 2 unaccounted for high powered rifle shots (misses) ripping the air overhead. Oswald couldn't have fired those shots. (SS agent Greer referred to a "fusillade of shots" in his Warren testimony.)
The key is the simultaneousness (word?) of the reactions...
I've never seen anyone point this out except the brilliant (at least re. assassination stuff) Robert Harris. Once you see it, can't be unseen.
There are many less black and white aspects to the case, as you probably know, that are also worth pursuing...
Briefly: The problem w/JFK's back wound location....Posner has to call it back/neck to trace the shot to the 6th floor Depository. Why? Because the physics of the well-below-shoulder wound point to somewhere else...the Dal Tex building.
In my 2nd post I address some of this; the arrested Mob dude at the Dal-Tex Building using an alias, etc...
Oswald associated with extreme rightists, never a Socialist, as far as evidence shows....
Oswald had an i.d. in his wallet accessing military benefits for honorably discharged Marines, which Oswald supposedly was not, that traces to the CIA...this is explored in "Oswald Talked".
(Tho I don't think "the CIA", as an institution, was guilty.)
Much solid evidence Gagné seems oblivious to - re. Oswald himself, re. forensic and ballistic evidence (tests showed Oswald supposedly didn't fire a rifle that day, but maybe a pistol) re. Oswald's supposedly expert level shooting...there's zero evidence of him practicing with the rifle, just some dry firing...tho IMO Oswald was clearly involved in some way.
Oswald's use of aliases...the background of the Paine's, both of whom were chock full of family Intelligence connections...
According to Michael Paine's comments in a 90's era Frontline documentary, both he and saintly Ruth Paine lied under oath to the Warren Commission re. their early knowledge of Oswald's rifle and seeing the infamous backyard photo.
This is cited at the end of historian Thomas Mallon's otherwise "Oswald lone nut" book focused on the Paines called "Mrs. Paine's Garage"
The famous Sylvia Odio testimony re. Oswald and anti-Castro Cubans...she actually watered down her evidence, tho even her much abridged testimony threw the Warren Comission into a tizzy. She initially told friends that she recognized Oswald, he addressed her anti-Castro group, advocated for killing Kennedy (because of the Bay of Pigs and the settlement of the Cuban Missile Crisis, part of which was a promise to not invade Cuba). These are things Sylvia told friends and associates... some of it briefly to the FBI...but not under oath to the Warren Commission.
That version was someone she believed to be Oswald and 2 anti-Castro Cubans stopped at her house, weren't let in, seeking money for the cause. One of them supposedly told Sylvia Oswald was kind of loco, capable of extreme action
When the beautiful Sylvia Odio first saw the assassination news on TV btw she fainted dead away, terrified.
There's a lot more but this is already too long lol. I highly recommend the 2 sources I cite: the LaFontaines' book *Oswald Talked* and the *Robert Harris* TH-cam channel.
Just those 2. I'm a tough guy to impress re. this stuff, just saying 😉
Oliver Stone made a movie not a documentary
I hear you, but IMO an attempt at both.
@@stayclean777 If Stone was attempting to make a documentary, he failed spectacularly.