Brilliant work... you managed to write an entire argument that successfully completely ignores everything I wrote, puts words in my mouth so you don't actually have to argue and you manage to make explicit claims on the relevant topic, then rather than citing THOSE claims, you spin off into a tangent about Northwoods and the NSA, WHICH NO ONE BUT YOU MENTIONED!!!
Now having acknowledged your brilliance at disingenuous argument, we can look at the issues you raise:
I would say the known evidence points overwhelmingly against the official narratives in many of your examples, but the difference is that I am looking for evidence and you are not.
Or you know that the evidence you would cite is so unbelievably bad that presenting your case is less effective then claiming that you have evidence but not actually presenting it. So let me give the only possible response:
What would you have said if I told you the government was spying on every single person in America, say...... two years ago? You would have said the same thing.
Nice word you put in my mouth... actually, my response would have been "No shit". Because contrary to what you would no doubt assert (See, I can put words yin your mouth too... annoying isn't it?), NSA Spying is far from a new story. There have been stories published since at least 2006 by... let's say THE FUCKING NEW YORK TIMES
You'd probably even tell me that our government was incapable of conspiring to kill Americans in false-flag operations meant to to turn public opinion against a false foreign enemy?
Here's a tip... literally every person who has ever said anythingh pro-government on Reddit has heard about operation Northwoods. Because people will endlessly spam it as though it constitutes an argument... when in reality all it says is "Way back at the height of the cold war, the US government decided to plan and not actually carry out an idea... they then declassified it willingly when they could have just hidden it forever". I'm sorry... but the knowledge that the US government got up to some shady shit in the cold war is basically a "No duh" statement. I would submit that there is a bit of a difference between planning and not actually using a false flag attack AND MURDERING A SITTING PRESIDENT. It is a leap in logic so profound that I honestly think even you would struggle to explain why someone in the US government would kill JFK (Which is what you have implied). Here's the thing... Kennedy slept around more than an Amsterdam prostitute... in heavily Christian 1960s America and was barely even subtle about it. If someone wanted him gone, then they mail a few pictures to a newspaper and his political career is likely over. Now explain exactly why they would shoot him, make a martyr and set his brother up for success (only to later have to kill him) rather than disgrace him and destroy both their careers. Seriously... if the JFK assassination was a conspiracy for political aims, it was one of the dumbest ever executed.