6 ms·

It’s an amazing bit of history. Leaders of major powers have regularly been assassinated in history. Here the leader of a globally hegemonic nation was assassin

by morby 3y ago

It’s an amazing bit of history. Leaders of major powers have regularly been assassinated in history. Here the leader of a globally hegemonic nation was assassinated on camera.

PrimeMcFly 3y ago
> It’s an amazing bit of history. Sure, it's the obsessing over conspiracy theories that I don't get. There's no way to verify the various speculations, so what's the point?
- diogenes4 3y ago
  There's no way (for most of us with finite resources) to verify the vast majority of history, even recent history, even history that happened today. To me this is like saying "who cares what may or may not have happened in the past". This particular conspiracy theory is interesting because the assumed enemy here—the Soviet Union—was ostensibly (and seeming authentically) unhappy to see this happen. So who wanted JFK dead and why?
  - PrimeMcFly 3y ago
    > There's no way (for most of us with finite resources) to verify the vast majority of history, even recent history, even history that happened today. That's an entirely different issue. > So who wanted JFK dead and why? Again, Occam says Oswald.
    - diogenes4 3y ago
      [dead]
- JPws_Prntr_Fngr 3y ago
  Fair enough, as long as you leave the thinking and decision-making to people who have even a modicum of historical curiosity.
neom 3y ago
Google tells me the number of leaders/former leaders assassinations in recent history that have been caught on camera is indeed very low. Kennedy, Gaddafi, Shinzo Abe, Benazir Bhutto, Yitzhak Rabin, Rajiv Gandhi, Anwar Sadat.
- gordian-not 3y ago
  Rabin assassination has a pretty weird conspiracy theory though
  - rightbyte 3y ago
    These ones? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yitzhak_Rabin_assassination_conspiracy_theories https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yitzhak_Rabin_assassination_co... The bullet points seem to be mostly confusion at the scene and shitty police work afterwards. What is the conspiracy. That he was not killed at that spot, but later by the secret service? Like "that guy fired blanks at him, lets kill the PM and frame him"?
    - gordian-not 3y ago
      I never really understood the logic because it is deeply oxymoronic. People that generally wanted him dead (ultra right) think that he was killed by the secret service (presumably left) and Yigal Amir (ultra right) was framed. But it is something about putting blank bullets in order to gather support with a fake assassination and then he was really killed by the Shabak on order of Shimon Peres (but can’t say that’s verbatim) It always seemed even less internally consistent than most JFK theories
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
      - rightbyte 3y ago
        I mean, that would be like a secret service sniper shooting JFK when Oswald missed, or something. Surely is is reasonable to believe that the risk of a secrete service assassination increases during a assassination attempt. But, there is not really anything that would indicate that. During the 1WW the death rate of officers was about twice that of privates for a sample. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1570677X22001125 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1570677X2... I believe that there is a risk of opportunity murder when bullets are flying. Using the confusion as cover. But, as I said, only speculative.

by morby 3y ago

It’s an amazing bit of history. Leaders of major powers have regularly been assassinated in history. Here the leader of a globally hegemonic nation was assassinated on camera.

PrimeMcFly 3y ago

> It’s an amazing bit of history. Sure, it's the obsessing over conspiracy theories that I don't get. There's no way to verify the various speculations, so what's the point?

diogenes4 3y ago
There's no way (for most of us with finite resources) to verify the vast majority of history, even recent history, even history that happened today. To me this is like saying "who cares what may or may not have happened in the past". This particular conspiracy theory is interesting because the assumed enemy here—the Soviet Union—was ostensibly (and seeming authentically) unhappy to see this happen. So who wanted JFK dead and why?
- PrimeMcFly 3y ago
  > There's no way (for most of us with finite resources) to verify the vast majority of history, even recent history, even history that happened today. That's an entirely different issue. > So who wanted JFK dead and why? Again, Occam says Oswald.
  - diogenes4 3y ago
    [dead]
JPws_Prntr_Fngr 3y ago
Fair enough, as long as you leave the thinking and decision-making to people who have even a modicum of historical curiosity.

neom 3y ago

Google tells me the number of leaders/former leaders assassinations in recent history that have been caught on camera is indeed very low. Kennedy, Gaddafi, Shinzo Abe, Benazir Bhutto, Yitzhak Rabin, Rajiv Gandhi, Anwar Sadat.

gordian-not 3y ago
Rabin assassination has a pretty weird conspiracy theory though
- rightbyte 3y ago
  These ones? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yitzhak_Rabin_assassination_conspiracy_theories https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yitzhak_Rabin_assassination_co... The bullet points seem to be mostly confusion at the scene and shitty police work afterwards. What is the conspiracy. That he was not killed at that spot, but later by the secret service? Like "that guy fired blanks at him, lets kill the PM and frame him"?
  - gordian-not 3y ago
    I never really understood the logic because it is deeply oxymoronic. People that generally wanted him dead (ultra right) think that he was killed by the secret service (presumably left) and Yigal Amir (ultra right) was framed. But it is something about putting blank bullets in order to gather support with a fake assassination and then he was really killed by the Shabak on order of Shimon Peres (but can’t say that’s verbatim) It always seemed even less internally consistent than most JFK theories
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - rightbyte 3y ago
      I mean, that would be like a secret service sniper shooting JFK when Oswald missed, or something. Surely is is reasonable to believe that the risk of a secrete service assassination increases during a assassination attempt. But, there is not really anything that would indicate that. During the 1WW the death rate of officers was about twice that of privates for a sample. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1570677X22001125 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1570677X2... I believe that there is a risk of opportunity murder when bullets are flying. Using the confusion as cover. But, as I said, only speculative.