Originally Posted by
9/11 was an inside job
Yes but this poster hit the nail right on the head.oh and you did not answer my question of are you one of those lone nut theorist who thinks oswald did it?
Actually JFK's "secret society" speech was about national security, classified information versus freedom of the press. If one actually reads the entire speech its quite obvious. Also note that he gave it at a dinner for journalists.
Yes but he is also opposing the abuse of classifying information to the extent that TPTB keep the public in the dark about matters they should know about.
The very word "secrecy" is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it. Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment. That I do not intend to permit to the extent that it’s in my control. And no official of my Administration, whether his rank is high or low, civilian or military, should interpret my words here tonight as an excuse to censor the news, to stifle dissent, to cover up our mistakes or to withhold from the press and the public the facts they deserve to know.
And he directs this speech to journalists to inform them that a secret conspiracy does exist, and it is up to them to expose it.
If the press is awaiting a declaration of war before it imposes the self-discipline of combat conditions, then I can only say that no war ever posed a greater threat to our security. If you are awaiting a finding of "clear and present danger," then I can only say that the danger has never been more clear and its presence has never been more imminent.
It requires a change in outlook, a change in tactics, a change in missions--by the government, by the people, by every businessman or labor leader, and by every newspaper. For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence--on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations.
Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed. It conducts the Cold War, in short, with a war-time discipline no democracy would ever hope or wish to match.
Nevertheless, every democracy recognizes the necessary restraints of national security--and the question remains whether those restraints need to be more strictly observed if we are to oppose this kind of attack as well as outright invasion.
In the full speech it is quite obvious that he was addressing Communism as a particular threat. However, his remarks regarding secret societies, secret oaths and secret proceedings were separate but applicable to the context of his speech in general. The manner in which he made those statements was not by accident nor incidental, and separately, the application of those statements to communism and to the freedom of the press, which was the target of the context, was equally deliberate. After all, the speech was aptly titled "The President and the Press".
JFK's remarks regarding the opportunistic nature of those in power to seize upon times of strife and anxiety to gain a foothold against liberty are timeless and need not be reduced to a specific threat from "long ago". To do so is to reduce his words to mere anti-communism talking points.
Besides, we must remember that communism is but a tactic used by those whom would fulfill their goal of a New World Order, all the while using the press as a tool for control while implementing planks of the Communist Manifesto.-Monkey Puppet
PNAC, Zionism (Communism), anyone?
THIS POSTER TOOK K MASON TO SCHOOL
Yes but he is also opposing the abuse of classifying information to the extent that TPTB keep the public in the dark about matters they should know about.
The very word "secrecy" is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it. Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment. That I do not intend to permit to the extent that it’s in my control. And no official of my Administration, whether his rank is high or low, civilian or military, should interpret my words here tonight as an excuse to censor the news, to stifle dissent, to cover up our mistakes or to withhold from the press and the public the facts they deserve to know.
And he directs this speech to journalists to inform them that a secret conspiracy does exist, and it is up to them to expose it.
If the press is awaiting a declaration of war before it imposes the self-discipline of combat conditions, then I can only say that no war ever posed a greater threat to our security. If you are awaiting a finding of "clear and present danger," then I can only say that the danger has never been more clear and its presence has never been more imminent.
It requires a change in outlook, a change in tactics, a change in missions--by the government, by the people, by every businessman or labor leader, and by every newspaper. For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence--on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations.
Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed. It conducts the Cold War, in short, with a war-time discipline no democracy would ever hope or wish to match.
Nevertheless, every democracy recognizes the necessary restraints of national security--and the question remains whether those restraints need to be more strictly observed if we are to oppose this kind of attack as well as outright invasion.
In the full speech it is quite obvious that he was addressing Communism as a particular threat. However, his remarks regarding secret societies, secret oaths and secret proceedings were separate but applicable to the context of his speech in general. The manner in which he made those statements was not by accident nor incidental, and separately, the application of those statements to communism and to the freedom of the press, which was the target of the context, was equally deliberate. After all, the speech was aptly titled "The President and the Press".
JFK's remarks regarding the opportunistic nature of those in power to seize upon times of strife and anxiety to gain a foothold against liberty are timeless and need not be reduced to a specific threat from "long ago". To do so is to reduce his words to mere anti-communism talking points.
Besides, we must remember that communism is but a tactic used by those whom would fulfill their goal of a New World Order, all the while using the press as a tool for control while implementing planks of the Communist Manifesto.-Monkey Puppet
PNAC, Zionism (Communism), anyone?
__________________
s
__________________
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Guru
well guess my question will go unanswered that I asked three times to you two but never got an answer for which was -do you believe the lone nut theory of the governments that oswald killed kennedy.since I never go an answer,I will leave this thread and assume the answer was yes which tells me that at least a couple people here for sure are living in denial.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks