New declassified documents dropped 🔥 : memes

[–] HK65@sopuli.xyz 16 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

So on the one hand, the CIA did some wicked awful shit all over the world, together with the rest of the US government apparatus. MK Ultra, the crack epidemic, all that shit.

That said, while I can imagine the CIA had some eyes on what was happening in Hungary, because both them and the Soviets had eyes everywhere, I don't see the point that is trying to be made here. That the CIA was funding the revolution? With what? It lasted like two weeks and the fighting was done with captured Soviet and older Hungarian and I guess some German equipment.

The revolution was not against communism, it was specifically against the fucked up economic policy of Rákosi, and not because he was a communist, but because he wanted to transition a country that was basically one contiguous agrarian farmland into heavy industry and steel manufacturing, which led to poverty as it was braindead. We didn't have the resources, the know-how or the demand. We did have it for agriculture. The revolution was aimed at installing Imre Nagy, the previous communist leader into power, who was originally a farmer, and had a strong agrarian policy.

The guy in question, Dr. Béla Király was indeed a high-ranking Hungarian military officer at the time. He was indeed appointed the commander of the revolutionary forces, and fled to the US after the defence collapsed.

That said, when would have he been enlisted by the CIA? He served in the armed forces on the Axis side as a captain - he earned recognition for disobeying orders and treating the Jewish prisoners assigned to him humanely. He fought until the USSR conquered Hungary, and surrendered to them. He was then absorbed into the People's Army and was not really trusted since his wife was the niece of Gyula Gömbös, a late fascist-aligned prime minister of Hungary. That said, he was promoted to general because there weren't a ton of capable and experienced officers back then in the army. Afterwards, when Stalin called off the invasion of Yugoslavia, he got purged with 350,000 other people in Hungary, and spent the rest of the time until the revolution in prison.

So was he enlisted by the CIA:

as an unremarkable captain of an unremarkable country on the fascist side of WWII (why him?)
as the commander of Hungary's contribution to the planned Yugoslavian invasion (the KGB and the ÁVO would have caught that)
or as a prisoner in the ÁVO's dungeon (lol)

Even if he was enlisted by the CIA, how would have he planned or contributed to the revolution from the basement of Andrássy 62? He was released a month before as part of an attempt at appeasement to the masses and spent it in hospital because of undernourishment issues from the 5 years he spent there.

Or, as a much likelier explanation, after the revolution, as he escaped to the US as many others did as the US was open to dissidents at the time, he was employed as someone who actually fought the Soviets in guerrilla warfare, and was helping train anti-Castro forces?

[–] MarxMadness@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 15 minutes ago

as an unremarkable captain of an unremarkable country on the fascist side of WWII (why him?)

there weren’t a ton of capable and experienced officers back then in the army.

This seems like a great answer to "why him?"

I don’t see the point that is trying to be made here

A common anti-communist narrative is that communist governments are not actually popular. The main point of highlighting CIA involvement with various "popular" opposition groups is that this narrative is heavily astroturfed.

A secondary point is that all the anti-communist stories about repression and show trials should be read in the light that yes, a hostile foreign government was in fact working with your domestic opposition groups to try to overthrow your government.

[–] Melatonin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Don't forget pizza and child-eating. It's a weird thing.

[–] TwoBeeSan@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago

Hillary Clinton has child blood infusions in between the pizza pedophile parties

[–] UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 day ago

Pizzas are flat, and there is a giant bread crust along the outter rim!

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 117 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The right has conspiracy hypotheses.

The left has conspiracy theories.

[–] Fuck_u_spez_@sh.itjust.works 43 points 1 day ago (1 children)

And the right doesn't know the difference.

[–] IndiBrony@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

iT's JuSt A tHeOrY bRo. WhErE's ThE FaCtS?

It's amazing how they make up whatever meanings they like for words, but can't handle that the word "theory" has evolved two different meanings based on whether it's used in a scientific context or not.

[–] antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

There was no uprising in Hungary in 1953. There was one in 1956, but it does not seem that this "Hungarian Freedom Fighters Federation, Inc." participated in it (I mean, an "Inc." in socialist Hungary?). And the letter that this text mentions is all the way from 1963.

Can't you people read the actual text and check whether this all makes any sense? Can't you just Google one or two key words?

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 16 points 1 day ago (1 children)

There was no uprising in Hungary in 1953. There was one in 1956

My mistake, I was going off memory and got the year mixed up with the year of Operation Ajax, the Iranian coup.

but it does not seem that this “Hungarian Freedom Fighters Federation, Inc.” participated in it (I mean, an “Inc.” in socialist Hungary?).

Yes, I supposed the fact that the CIA was sponsoring a group called "Hungarian Freedom Fighters" does not definitively prove that it was it was in any way connected to partisan activity in Hungary, the way that CIA funded groups were doing all over the globe at this time. Maybe it was pure coincidence!

[–] antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

What was this group? Do you have any info on when and where it was actually active and what were its intents? Do you know anything about this incorporated (???) organisation aside from its name and that it was supported by CIA in 1963?

the way that CIA funded groups were doing all over the globe at this time

This is not how any historical event can be meaningfully approached. You're not an oracle, intuitions and insinuations are not proof, please use actual data, show actual connections and explanations of the claims regarding the 1956 revolution.

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 day ago (2 children)

This is not how any historical event can be meaningfully approached.

Isn't it? If an organization exists that has the ability to cover up it's involvement in things like this reliably and very rarely leaves behind hard evidence, and I'm a rando trying to piece together what happened 70 years later, then it seems like circumstantial evidence is the best I could reasonably expect to find. This isn't a court of law where the standard is either, "100%, beyond any reasonable doubt, or they didn't do it."

This shows evidence of a connection - would it be enough to convict in a court of law? No. But, does it shape up to being more likely than not? Seems like it to me. Past precedent shows they could do it and get away with it, and we've got their fingerprints near it, so you can keep imagining that this Hungarian Freedom Fighters org connected to the CIA was, I don't know, selling dinner plates or something, but I'm gonna connect point A to point B myself.

[–] nargis@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 18 hours ago

antonim raised a good point, actually. While I wouldn't put it past the CIA to do something like this, the fact is that this vague document is hardly evidence of the CIA funding the Hungarian revolution. Besides, a historian would be far more qualified to look at archival material since they're actually trained to do that.

[–] antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com -2 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

If an organization exists that has the ability to cover up it’s involvement in things like this reliably and very rarely leaves behind hard evidence, and I’m a rando trying to piece together what happened 70 years later, then it seems like circumstantial evidence is the best I could reasonably expect to find.

This is word for word the logic of right wing conspiracy theorists who ascribe every thing they don't like to Jews.

Have you actually tried to piece it together, though? Have you at the very least googled who these people are, what sort of plausible chronology could be reconstructed, anything? Have you noticed that Kiraly, who was involved in the 1956 revolution and subsequently left the country, lived in US at the time of the letter (1963)? Is it not worthy of considering that the HFFF Inc. was based in the US and was founded by Kiraly and similar Hungarians in exile?

There are people with the exact same resources as you, i.e. the internet, already discussing this seriously and digging for more info and trying to figure out what can be reasonably concluded: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3AHungarian_Revolution_of_1956#JFK_files

This isn’t a court of law where the standard is either, “100%, beyond any reasonable doubt, or they didn’t do it.”

In court of law, an admission is pretty solid proof. Your meme says the involvement was admitted. I guess it wouldn't look as convincing or funny if the meme said they admitted they funded some organisation outside of Hungary 7 years after the actual event.

you can keep imagining that this Hungarian Freedom Fighters org connected to the CIA was, I don’t know, selling dinner plates or something

Your arguments are growing thin. Your narrative is actually made up of vague connections with a 7-year gap. I don't even intend to suggest to know what HFFF actually did or whether CIA was involved in 1956 Hungary, my point is only that this is neither admission nor meaningful proof of anything other than that they did fund some dissidents outside Hungary in 1963. (They obviously funded dissidents all over the place throughout the decades, I mean, they'd be crazy not to, and 1956 Hungary wouldn't surprise me either, I suppose.)

See, while trawling through these JFK files right wingers have already found a connection with Jews, as tenuous as it is, and tout it as solid proof it was them who had JFK killed, because after all we already know Jews are nefarious and evil, and clearly any weak connection to JFK's death is good enough - of course (((they've))) scrubbed the proof, etc. so internet randos can go creative. Or maybe some higher standards for proof would be in order...

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 5 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (1 children)

This is word for word the logic of right wing conspiracy theorists who ascribe every thing they don’t like to Jews.

Really? Can you name 5 world leaders who were overthrown by a secret Jewish cabal the way I can for the CIA, just off the top of my head? I think, maybe, there might be a little bit of a difference there.

This comparison is so fucking stupid that it ends up being antisemitic, because by equating the two you're implying that this secret Jewish cabal both exists and has similar power and influence as the most powerful and well funded spy agency on the planet that has a very long and well documented history orchestrating coups and color revolutions and successfully covering up their involvement for decades, that also, you know, actually exists. Get a grip!

In court of law, an admission is pretty solid proof. Your meme says the involvement was admitted. I guess it wouldn’t look as convincing or funny if the meme said they admitted they funded some organisation outside of Hungary 7 years after the actual event

Yes, my meme made use of an existing meme and the phrasing of the original wasn't 100% accurate. I apologize because my username and avatar seems to have caused some confusion, but this is actually an online meme community and not a court of law.

See, while trawling through these JFK files right wingers have already found a connection with Jews, as tenuous as it is, and tout it as solid proof it was them who had JFK killed, because after all we already know Jews are nefarious and evil, and clearly any weak connection to JFK’s death is good enough - of course (((they’ve))) scrubbed the proof, etc. so internet randos can go creative. Or maybe some higher standards for proof would be in order…

Again, the difference is I can point to countless times where that actually happened with the CIA and they can't do that with Jews! I stg, it's like, if I hear about a black person who was found strung up from a tree in the 20's, I'm gonna go, "Huh, seems like it was probably white supremacists like the KKK" but apparently you'll then chime in with "wElL hOw Do YoU nNoW iT wAsN't AsIaN sUpReMaCiStS, hUh?" Because one of them is a real thing that actually existed at that time and place with significant power and a track record of doing that sort of thing repeatedly and getting away with it, and the other is a made up delusion.

[–] antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

Antisemitic conspiracy theorists would certainly be glad to send you extensive "evidence" that e.g. the Russian revolution was also supported by Jews, or various other political manipulations that they've supposedly carried out (why only limit it to toppling governments?). Now, as I've talked with these people enough times, I found it is impossible to spend days trying to check all the nonsense they may throw at me, and in general any discussion of any topic ever could be extended into eternity. What is perfectly reasonable is to abstract the individual case and figure out how it may plausibly be explained by itself. Antisemitic nonsense always fails here. In this case, so does your ascription of 1956 to CIA based on this particular document. The wider picture is different, as I've already said, it's simply much more logical that CIA has supported anti-communist movements than that the antisemitic bullshit about the Jews is true. But if your standards are low enough to be convinced by a conjecture as weak as this one, that does lead me to worry about whether your general conviction on CIA's actions is well-founded either.

I mean it is very obvious that you don't want to inquire into this any further or discuss the contents and context of the document, I've simply checked Wikipedia on Kiraly and it looks like I've already done more research about it than you have. All you have are implications, you haven't addressed the chronology, who was active where and when...

if I hear about a black person who was found strung up from a tree in the 20’s, I’m gonna go, “Huh, seems like it was probably white supremacists like the KKK”

This is a good comparison too - "in the 20's", you say, but the document you posted is not from the relevant decade, and is even from a different continent.

Besides, even just ctrl+F'ing "CIA" in the Wikipedia article on the revolution shows that yes, CIA did emit materials that were meant to stoke the Hungarians' desire for revolt. It's literally on Wikipedia, it's no CIA-hidden secret at all! And if they were active that way, maybe they also funded some of the people and organisations in Hungary at the time? That doesn't sound unreasonable to me as an otherwise uninformed person on the topic. But is that idea corroborated by this new document? No.

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

It's incredible to me how ignorant people are of the CIA's history, to the point of even calling into question whether they were engaged in these sorts of activities in general. This isn't just me saying this or just some fringe group - it's the accepted historical record. The proper propaganda line you're supposed to use here is, "of course they did all those things in the past, but that was a long time ago and they've changed" (despite nobody ever being held accountable and nobody actually doing anything to change it). Deviating into straight up denialism just makes you look ignorant to anyone who's actually informed about it.

If you want a detailed case study of how the CIA operated/operates, I recommend All The Shah's Men by Stephen Kinzer, which details the 1953 Iranian coup. Kinzer is a respected journalist who's contributed to the NYT and the Guardian.

Or we could look at different Wikipedia pages that detail the US's involvement in coups and regime changes around the world, all of which will agree with me, that the CIA did these things pretty regularly. You're the one who is deviating from the historical record accepted by actual historians.

This is a good comparison too - “in the 20’s”, you say, but the document you posted is not from the relevant decade, and is even from a different continent

Bruh. That was a separate hypothetical. You must be acting in bad faith.

Besides, even just ctrl+F’ing “CIA” in the Wikipedia article on the revolution shows that yes, CIA did emit materials that were meant to stoke the Hungarians’ desire for revolt. It’s literally on Wikipedia, it’s no CIA-hidden secret at all!

Great! So I'm right, it's just like the meme. The only detail that's in dispute is whether or not the document provides further evidence of involvement.

[–] antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

It’s incredible to me how ignorant people are of the CIA’s history

I'm not from the US and we didn't have a class on CIA history. What you expect, am I supposed to be utterly fascinated by your country's history and read about it extensively just so that we all can be as enlightened as you are?

even calling into question whether they were engaged in these sorts of activities in general

You’re the one who is deviating from the historical record accepted by actual historians.

But I literally haven't done that. If I have, show me the sentence where I did and I'll absolutely take it back. You're reading something into my comments that isn't there - just like you're reading events from 1963 US into 1956 Hungary.

The proper propaganda line you’re supposed to use here is

No, I'm not supposed to act like whatever stereotype/strawman you're imagining in your head. You can fuck right off with this sort of "communication".

Kinzer is a respected journalist who’s contributed to the NYT and the Guardian.

Thank you for the recommendation. However, if we're going to hurl stereotypes at each other instead of arguments, I can't help but point out that I've seen numerous Lemmy leftists claim that NYT is a liberal propaganda rag. So idk if that's actually a plus for Kinzer.

Bruh. That was a separate hypothetical.

What does this even mean? You brought it up as an analogy, I pointed out that the analogy has been picked to make your primary claim look more obvious and logical than it really is.

Great! So I’m right, it’s just like the meme. The only detail that’s in dispute is whether or not the document provides further evidence of involvement.

You might finally start to get it! You accused me of doubting CIA's involvment even though I literally pointed out to you that there is different, solid evidence they were involved! Like how stupid of a CIA-involvment-denier would I have to be to do that? And yet you're still failing to understand that this never was my main point anyway!

If I believe that the Earth is flat, but then I have a dream where I see that the Earth is actually round, and then I start believing that it is round, does that mean I'm "correct"? Technically maybe yes but based on wrong information/reasoning!

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

What you expect, am I supposed to be utterly fascinated by your country’s history and read about it extensively just so that we all can be as enlightened as you are?

Yes, if fact, I do! The CIA had an extensive impact on the entire world, it's the same way I have at least a general familiarity with the British Empire, even though I'm not from the UK, and that happened even further back.

Thank you for the recommendation. However, if we’re going to hurl stereotypes at each other instead of arguments, I can’t help but point out that I’ve seen numerous Lemmy leftists claim that NYT is a liberal propaganda rag. So idk if that’s actually a plus for Kinzer.

What an incredibly stupid line of argument. Ok, then go read fucking Grover Furr, for all I care. The point of recommending Kinzer (besides the fact that his work is good) is that he's respected in the mainstream liberal sphere. Obviously, far-left authors like Furr (who I haven't read and don't recommend) or Michael Parenti (who I have read and do recommend) also talk about the CIA's role in coups and color revolutions.

A very, very, very basic concept in evaluating information is to consider what the source is saying relative to the source's bias. If an ancient history commissioned by a king talks about the king slaying a three lions at the same time with his bare hands, we should treat that claim with heavy skepticism. If that same work talks about the king having a big ol' wart on his nose that everyone made fun of, that part's probably true, because it goes against the author's bias.

No source is perfect or without bias, and I'll happily critique the NYT all day long, but when even someone who writes for them agrees with me, I'll also cite them, because that's all the more compelling.

What does this even mean? You brought it up as an analogy, I pointed out that the analogy has been picked to make your primary claim look more obvious and logical than it really is.

If you understood it was an analogy, then nitpicking that the date used in my analogy "wasn't even in the same decade as my source" is utterly irrelevant.

If I believe that the Earth is flat, but then I have a dream where I see that the Earth is actually round, and then I start believing that it is round, does that mean I’m “correct”? Technically maybe yes but based on wrong information/reasoning

Except that my reasoning wasn't wrong. I saw something that suggested there was a connection between the CIA and the uprising, and, based on my prior assumptions of how likey that was and how compelling I considered the evidence to be, I concluded that the connection was there. You jumped in to challenge that it wasn't 100% proof, but also, there is other evidence that does prove it. So my process seems pretty reasonable.

It's funny that you open the comment with, "What, do you randomly expect me to be so fascinated with your country's history that I take a class on it?" while also criticizing me for not doing a thorough enough investigation into Hungary, a country I'm not from and have no connection to. If you're a leftist, you have to be an expert on the history of the entire globe, as well as economics and all sorts of other fields. But if you're a liberal, you can just go along with the status quo understanding nothing and everyone's fine with it.

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 45 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

This has apparently been publicly available since at least 2010, because I found it in that year’s edition of A. J. Weberman’s Coup d'etat In America: The CIA and the Assassination of JFK

https://archive.org/stream/CoupDetatInAmerica/NODULE%2018%20OSWALD%20IN%20NEW%20ORLEANS_djvu.txt

OS INDICES RESULTS:

Laureano Batista, a 32 year old Cuban exile, was from a wealthy Cuban family and in Cuba he was a banker. He was granted a POA in December 1959 and an OA in February 1960 for use as a PP agent in Havana, Cuba.

A copy of a letter in Subject's file dated November 22, 1963 signed by Subject as Secretary for Military Affairs, Executive Committee, Movimiento Democrata Cristiana (Christian Democratic Movement) is addressed to Major General Bela K. Kiraly, President, Hungarian Freedom Fighters Federation, Inc., and offered the services of the MDC in arranging meetings and discussions with other anti-CASTRO organizations and the Hungarian Freedom Fighters. The Hungarian Freedom Fighters were (deleted) was interested in information on the MDC before granting approval for contact between the two organizations.

[–] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 26 points 2 days ago

[–] MissJinx@lemmy.world 17 points 2 days ago (1 children)

If they admit to it, is it a theory or a fact?

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 52 points 2 days ago (1 children)

That's why it's in quotes. Things are treated as conspiracy theories and you often sound like a crazy person bringing them up, even if what you're saying is 100% factual.

[–] AnarchoSnowPlow@midwest.social 14 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Operation Sea Spray

COINTELPRO

MK Ultra

[–] Emil@lemmy.sdf.org 19 points 2 days ago (5 children)

So cia killed jfk right?

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 39 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Most of the documents we have were already partially declassified but with redacted parts. We now know more about JFK's rift with the CIA and how the CIA was wiretapping the area Oswald was working and actively recruiting double agents from there.

Skeptics will continue to treat it as equally insane as saying the moon is made of cheese unless they see an official, released document saying, "Please kill the president for me, sincerely, Alan Dulles," but there's about as much evidence as a reasonable person would expect to find in a universe where it happened.

[–] WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

But can we really trust something released by Trump? Sounds like something we would want to hear.

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 16 points 1 day ago

Well, that raises the question of whether we can we trust any documents released by the US in general. If the government killed JFK, would they really tell us, even this many years later?

[–] Melatonin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 day ago

Three letters:

LBJ

[–] bad_news@lemmy.billiam.net 19 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Yup. Manson was also MK Ultra. They allowed him to move between counties in CA while on parole (not a thing at the time) and his "parole officer" wasn't a parole officer, but a UC system researcher whose field was the use of drugs in meth gangs to turn people violent. The whole Manson family was an orchestrated op to undermine the left.

[–] CyberMonkey404@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The whole Manson family was an orchestrated op to undermine the left.

What's the connection between Mansons and the left?

[–] bad_news@lemmy.billiam.net 6 points 1 day ago

Hippie vibes

[–] sonori@beehaw.org 6 points 1 day ago

If you want an actually serious answer as to the who, how and why of the assassination and have three hours to spare, I would recommend Sean Munnger (A leftist university professor of modern political history) far to exhaustive series on the topic. For just the CIA, that starts at the 30min mark of Part 2, but builds a bit on previous debunkings.

[–] MiniMoose4Free@lemm.ee 5 points 2 days ago

Nope and the neat part is you can read it all now.

Memes

Rules: