See other Dead Constitution Articles
Title: JFK Speech on Secret Societies and Freedom of the Press- 5:23 minutes
Source:
youtube
URL Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlEq ... =JFK%20on%20Secret%20Societies
Published: Jun 18, 2006
Author: n
Post Date: 2006-06-18 11:02:21 by gengis gandhi
Keywords: None
Views: 637
Comments: 39
JFK Speech on Secret Societies and Freedom of the Press 5:23 minutes http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlEqtaWpKEU&search=JFK%20on%20Secret%20Societies
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: gengis gandhi. everyone (#0)
Will someone who know how to post things Tube, put up this video, please? - thank you.
this video has excellent graphics. thanks for posting.
This just about sums it up. Great video! Amazing Quote A quote from David Rockefeller's autobiography 'Memoirs' - 6-11-6 "For more than a century, ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."
The mind once expanded by a new idea never returns to its' original size
Whatever you do, DO NOT miss this video. It says it all.
Yet another reason why the spooked-up Bush crowd shot him.
Check out my blog, America, the Bushieful.
http: //www.tetrahedron.org/articles/new_world_order/bush_nazis.html Bush-Rockefeller-Nazi connection
The mind once expanded by a new idea never returns to its' original size
yep (palo thinks george herbert was a great president)
now that says it all! hope he's proud sitting on his hot seat in hell.
imo, this is worthy of a permanent link on the side bar. Thanks for your consideration.
Big Bump! Thanks for posting.
I've read that he made a similar speech at Columbia U. just a few days before he got shot. Maybe that video is it.
From the content of this speech (my dial up is slow and I've only heard half) it is clear to me that this was connected to JFKs supposed threat to scatter the CIA to the four winds.
"To be nobody-but-yourself - in a world which is doing its best, night and day, to make you everybody else - means to fight the hardest battle which any human being can ever fight; and never stop fighting." E.E. Cummings
Gallery of the Dead
The mind once expanded by a new idea never returns to its' original size
Agreed!!!!
"This country has come to feel the same when congress is in session as when the baby gets hold of a hammer." Will Rogers..... "None can love freedom heartily but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." John Milton.....
And he can keep the fire stoked up good and hot for the pending arrival of BushCo
"This country has come to feel the same when congress is in session as when the baby gets hold of a hammer." Will Rogers..... "None can love freedom heartily but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." John Milton.....
I'd like to see him dance on the end of a rope first. ;0)
"To be nobody-but-yourself - in a world which is doing its best, night and day, to make you everybody else - means to fight the hardest battle which any human being can ever fight; and never stop fighting." E.E. Cummings
There was a lot of 'snipping' out of Kennedy's speech. I found this copy of the speech at the JKF Presidential Library and Museum website. It is well worth reading: The President and the Press: Address before the American Newspaper Publishers Association President John F. Kennedy Waldorf-Astoria Hotel New York City, April 27, 1961 Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen: I appreciate very much your generous invitation to be here tonight. You bear heavy responsibilities these days and an article I read some time ago reminded me of how particularly heavily the burdens of present day events bear upon your profession. You may remember that in 1851 the New York Herald Tribune under the sponsorship and publishing of Horace Greeley, employed as its London correspondent an obscure journalist by the name of Karl Marx. We are told that foreign correspondent Marx, stone broke, and with a family ill and undernourished, constantly appealed to Greeley and managing editor Charles Dana for an increase in his munificent salary of $5 per installment, a salary which he and Engels ungratefully labeled as the "lousiest petty bourgeois cheating." But when all his financial appeals were refused, Marx looked around for other means of livelihood and fame, eventually terminating his relationship with the Tribune and devoting his talents full time to the cause that would bequeath the world the seeds of Leninism, Stalinism, revolution and the cold war. If only this capitalistic New York newspaper had treated him more kindly; if only Marx had remained a foreign correspondent, history might have been different. And I hope all publishers will bear this lesson in mind the next time they receive a poverty-stricken appeal for a small increase in the expense account from an obscure newspaper man. I have selected as the title of my remarks tonight "The President and the Press." Some may suggest that this would be more naturally worded "The President Versus the Press." But those are not my sentiments tonight. It is true, however, that when a well-known diplomat from another country demanded recently that our State Department repudiate certain newspaper attacks on his colleague it was unnecessary for us to reply that this Administration was not responsible for the press, for the press had already made it clear that it was not responsible for this Administration. Nevertheless, my purpose here tonight is not to deliver the usual assault on the so-called one party press. On the contrary, in recent months I have rarely heard any complaints about political bias in the press except from a few Republicans. Nor is it my purpose tonight to discuss or defend the televising of Presidential press conferences. I think it is highly beneficial to have some 20,000,000 Americans regularly sit in on these conferences to observe, if I may say so, the incisive, the intelligent and the courteous qualities displayed by your Washington correspondents. Nor, finally, are these remarks intended to examine the proper degree of privacy which the press should allow to any President and his family. If in the last few months your White House reporters and photographers have been attending church services with regularity, that has surely done them no harm. On the other hand, I realize that your staff and wire service photographers may be complaining that they do not enjoy the same green privileges at the local golf courses that they once did. It is true that my predecessor did not object as I do to pictures of one's golfing skill in action. But neither on the other hand did he ever bean a Secret Service man. My topic tonight is a more sober one of concern to publishers as well as editors. I want to talk about our common responsibilities in the face of a common danger. The events of recent weeks may have helped to illuminate that challenge for some; but the dimensions of its threat have loomed large on the horizon for many years. Whatever our hopes may be for the future--for reducing this threat or living with it--there is no escaping either the gravity or the totality of its challenge to our survival and to our security--a challenge that confronts us in unaccustomed ways in every sphere of human activity. This deadly challenge imposes upon our society two requirements of direct concern both to the press and to the President--two requirements that may seem almost contradictory in tone, but which must be reconciled and fulfilled if we are to meet this national peril. I refer, first, to the need for a far greater public information; and, second, to the need for far greater official secrecy. I 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 is 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. But I do ask every publisher, every editor, and every newsman in the nation to reexamine his own standards, and to recognize the nature of our country's peril. In time of war, the government and the press have customarily joined in an effort based largely on self-discipline, to prevent unauthorized disclosures to the enemy. In time of "clear and present danger," the courts have held that even the privileged rights of the First Amendment must yield to the public's need for national security. Today no war has been declared--and however fierce the struggle may be, it may never be declared in the traditional fashion. Our way of life is under attack. Those who make themselves our enemy are advancing around the globe. The survival of our friends is in danger. And yet no war has been declared, no borders have been crossed by marching troops, no missiles have been fired. 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. For the facts of the matter are that this nation's foes have openly boasted of acquiring through our newspapers information they would otherwise hire agents to acquire through theft, bribery or espionage; that details of this nation's covert preparations to counter the enemy's covert operations have been available to every newspaper reader, friend and foe alike; that the size, the strength, the location and the nature of our forces and weapons, and our plans and strategy for their use, have all been pinpointed in the press and other news media to a degree sufficient to satisfy any foreign power; and that, in at least in one case, the publication of details concerning a secret mechanism whereby satellites were followed required its alteration at the expense of considerable time and money. The newspapers which printed these stories were loyal, patriotic, responsible and well-meaning. Had we been engaged in open warfare, they undoubtedly would not have published such items. But in the absence of open warfare, they recognized only the tests of journalism and not the tests of national security. And my question tonight is whether additional tests should not now be adopted. The question is for you alone to answer. No public official should answer it for you. No governmental plan should impose its restraints against your will. But I would be failing in my duty to the nation, in considering all of the responsibilities that we now bear and all of the means at hand to meet those responsibilities, if I did not commend this problem to your attention, and urge its thoughtful consideration. On many earlier occasions, I have said--and your newspapers have constantly said--that these are times that appeal to every citizen's sense of sacrifice and self-discipline. They call out to every citizen to weigh his rights and comforts against his obligations to the common good. I cannot now believe that those citizens who serve in the newspaper business consider themselves exempt from that appeal. I have no intention of establishing a new Office of War Information to govern the flow of news. I am not suggesting any new forms of censorship or any new types of security classifications. I have no easy answer to the dilemma that I have posed, and would not seek to impose it if I had one. But I am asking the members of the newspaper profession and the industry in this country to reexamine their own responsibilities, to consider the degree and the nature of the present danger, and to heed the duty of self-restraint which that danger imposes upon us all. Every newspaper now asks itself, with respect to every story: "Is it news?" All I suggest is that you add the question: "Is it in the interest of the national security?" And I hope that every group in America--unions and businessmen and public officials at every level-- will ask the same question of their endeavors, and subject their actions to the same exacting tests. And should the press of America consider and recommend the voluntary assumption of specific new steps or machinery, I can assure you that we will cooperate whole-heartedly with those recommendations. Perhaps there will be no recommendations. Perhaps there is no answer to the dilemma faced by a free and open society in a cold and secret war. In times of peace, any discussion of this subject, and any action that results, are both painful and without precedent. But this is a time of peace and peril which knows no precedent in history. II It is the unprecedented nature of this challenge that also gives rise to your second obligation--an obligation which I share. And that is our obligation to inform and alert the American people--to make certain that they possess all the facts that they need, and understand them as well--the perils, the prospects, the purposes of our program and the choices that we face. No President should fear public scrutiny of his program. For from that scrutiny comes understanding; and from that understanding comes support or opposition. And both are necessary. I am not asking your newspapers to support the Administration, but I am asking your help in the tremendous task of informing and alerting the American people. For I have complete confidence in the response and dedication of our citizens whenever they are fully informed. I not only could not stifle controversy among your readers--I welcome it. This Administration intends to be candid about its errors; for as a wise man once said: "An error does not become a mistake until you refuse to correct it." We intend to accept full responsibility for our errors; and we expect you to point them out when we miss them. Without debate, without criticism, no Administration and no country can succeed--and no republic can survive. That is why the Athenian lawmaker Solon decreed it a crime for any citizen to shrink from controversy. And that is why our press was protected by the First Amendment-- the only business in America specifically protected by the Constitution- -not primarily to amuse and entertain, not to emphasize the trivial and the sentimental, not to simply "give the public what it wants"--but to inform, to arouse, to reflect, to state our dangers and our opportunities, to indicate our crises and our choices, to lead, mold, educate and sometimes even anger public opinion. This means greater coverage and analysis of international news--for it is no longer far away and foreign but close at hand and local. It means greater attention to improved understanding of the news as well as improved transmission. And it means, finally, that government at all levels, must meet its obligation to provide you with the fullest possible information outside the narrowest limits of national security--and we intend to do it. III It was early in the Seventeenth Century that Francis Bacon remarked on three recent inventions already transforming the world: the compass, gunpowder and the printing press. Now the links between the nations first forged by the compass have made us all citizens of the world, the hopes and threats of one becoming the hopes and threats of us all. In that one world's efforts to live together, the evolution of gunpowder to its ultimate limit has warned mankind of the terrible consequences of failure. And so it is to the printing press--to the recorder of man's deeds, the keeper of his conscience, the courier of his news--that we look for strength and assistance, confident that with your help man will be what he was born to be: free and independent.
DUH! The link! The link! http://www.jfklibrary.org/Historical+Resources/Archives/Reference+Desk/S peeches/ JFK/003POF03NewspaperPublishers04271961.htm
This link is to the set of speeches he made during his tenure in various government positions. I'm bookmarking to read when I need something to do. IIRC, he also had something to say about taxation which was more in line with a real conservative's view rather than the hogwash being spouted about by the political whores running the nation at this time. http://www.jfklibrary.org/Historical+Resources/Archives/Reference+Desk/S peeches/
Thanks so much. The entire speech is even more wonderful. imo, America, gravely ill from past insults and injuries to its Constitution, was finally murdered in Dealey Plaza.
http://www.jfklibrary.org/Historical+Resources/Archives/Reference+Desk/Speeches/ thanks
Reading something like that makes me think I have to 'revisit' some opinions created by the 'r' party hacks a long time ago. I enjoyed reading the whole thing.
It's interesting to note that all the people who speculate why JFK was assassinated, say it was because of the Bay Of Pigs fiasco. Others say The Mob. Others still say it was a lone nut case. For all the transgressions presidents since then have made, You'd think that we'd be losing a president every 4 years. It's not the case. I look at everything in this country with a jaundiced eye, and through the eyes of the supreme cynic. I trust nobody in government who claims they're helping everyone, when in fact they're selling out the nation. JFK was NOT selling out our nation. If anything, he was trying to get it out of the hole it was in, and desperately trying to free it from the clutches of a secret cabal of tyrants. It's too bad that what came next after his death has been nothing short of the longest night in American History.
#2. To: lodwick (#1)
#3. To: gengis gandhi (#0)
#4. To: gengis gandhi, lodwick, christine (#0)
#5. To: gengis gandhi, christine, EVERYONE! (#0)
#6. To: christine (#3)
#7. To: Arator (#6)
#8. To: Arator (#6)
#9. To: Itisa1mosttoolate (#4)
If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."
#10. To: christine, everyone here (#2)
Do we know exactly the group that the President was addressing here?
#11. To: gengis gandhi, *US is Proxy State For Israel* (#0)
#12. To: christine (#9)
#13. To: Grumble Jones, christine, gengis gandhi, lodwick, All (#12)
I've read that he made a similar speech at Columbia U. just a few days before he got shot.
#14. To: BTP Holdings, ALL (#13)
#15. To: lodwick (#10)
imo, this is worthy of a permanent link on the side bar.
#16. To: christine (#9)
hope he's proud sitting on his hot seat in hell.
#17. To: christine (#9)
hope he's proud sitting on his hot seat in hell.
#18. To: ALL WHO LISTENED TO THIS VIDEO (#0)
#19. To: All (#18)
#20. To: All (#19)
#21. To: rowdee (#18)
#22. To: rowdee (#20)
This link is to the set of speeches he made during his tenure in various government positions. I'm bookmarking to read when I need something to do. IIRC, he also had something to say about taxation which was more in line with a real conservative's view rather than the hogwash being spouted about by the political whores running the nation at this time.
#23. To: lodwick (#21)
#24. To: gengis gandhi (#0)
 | What's that Mr. Nipples? You want me to ask the nice lady about her rack?. |
#25. To: rowdee (#23)
Imagine that. Abraham, Martin, and John Sung by Dion (Words and Music by Richard Holler) Anybody here seen my old friend Abraham? Anybody here seen my old friend John? Anybody here seen my old friend Martin? Didn't you love the things that they stood for? Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?Without debate, without criticism, no Administration and no country can succeed--and no republic can survive.
Can you tell me where he's gone?
He freed lotta people but it seems the good they die young
You know I just looked around and he's gone
Can you tell me where he's gone?
He freed lotta people but it seems the good they die young
I just looked around and he's gone
Can you tell me where he's gone?
He freed lotta people but it seems the good they die young
I just looked around and he's gone
Didn't they try to find some good for you and me?
And we'll be free
Some day soon, it's gonna be one day
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up over the hill
With Abraham, Martin and John
#26. To: gengis gandhi, lodwick, All (#0)
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 is 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. But I do ask every publisher, every editor, and every newsman in the nation to reexamine his own standards, and to recognize the nature of our country's peril. In time of war, the government and the press have customarily joined in an effort based largely on self-discipline, to prevent unauthorized disclosures to the enemy. In time of "clear and present danger," the courts have held that even the privileged rights of the First Amendment must yield to the public's need for national security. Today no war has been declared--and however fierce the struggle may be, it may never be declared in the traditional fashion. Our way of life is under attack. Those who make themselves our enemy are advancing around the globe. The survival of our friends is in danger. And yet no war has been declared, no borders have been crossed by marching troops, no missiles have been fired....." This is a perfect description of the final battle against God's people "Israel" [Christians. Galatians 3:16-29, etc.] in the latter days, when the enemy would "come in like a cloud to cover the land". Ezekiel 38-39, Rev. 20:7-10 Eze 38:16 And thou shalt come up against my people of Israel, as a cloud to cover the land; it shall be in the latter days, and I will bring thee against my land, that the heathen may know me, when I shall be sanctified in thee, O Gog, before their eyes. http://www.bluelett erbible.org/kjv/Eze/Eze038.html#16 When you look up cloud in the concordance, you get "to cover", "to veil over", etc. When you look up the attached root word, you get "to act covertly", etc. That is what the Jews have done. As Cornwallis revealed to George Washington, "A holy war will now begin against America.....in two hundred years her churches will be teaching the Jews' religion....and working for divine government..the [Judeo-] British Empire" It was an unspoken war, in which by subterfuge and secrecy, via secret oaths, secret societies, cover-ups, etc., they have taken over the government, courts, media, medicine, education, and the churches, in order to overthrow the Lord and His annointed [Psalm 2]. He freed lotta people but it seems the good they die young I just looked around and he's gone Didn't you love the things that they stood for? Didn't they try to find some good for you and me? And we'll be free Some day soon, it's gonna be one day
#27. To: rowdee (#18)
thanks so much for transcript. great speech by JFK. he was american hero.
#28. To: AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt (#26)
very excellent analysis.
#29. To: christine, Zipporah, Neil, whomever! (#2)
Please! get this video on the sidebar for all of us, and anyone who happens by here. Thanks so much.
#30. To: lodwick (#29)
Thanks so much. My dsl blew out tonite - I concur, I want to see why we a coup de etat in the US.
Please! get this video on the sidebar for all of us, and anyone who happens by here.
#31. To: tom007 (#30)
Get on your "provider" like white on rice! Good grief.
My dsl blew out tonite -
#32. To: lodwick (#31)
They are all in India, and it's all my fault. But you knew that
Get on your "provider" like white on rice!
#33. To: gengis gandhi (#0)
Enjoy, and weep for what we have lost.
I had to find this clip for a friend - so I'm bumping it for any who may have missed it.
#34. To: lodwick, tom007, Arator, All (#33) (Edited)
The mind once expanded by a new idea never returns to its' original size
#35. To: Itisa1mosttoolate (#34)
Wake up, morons!
What can I say? It's all out there for us.
#36. To: Itisa1mosttoolate (#34)
YouTube is one of the best new tools for the patriots of this country. Thanks!
"If there’s another 9/11 or a major war in the Middle-East involving a U.S. attack on Iran, I have no doubt that there will be, the day after or within days an equivalent of a Reichstag fire decree that will involve massive detentions in this country." - Daniel Ellsberg Author, Pentagon Papers
#37. To: lodwick, robin, Raingfish (#35)
2012-The Future of Mankind
3hr +
The mind once expanded by a new idea never returns to its' original size
#38. To: Itisa1mosttoolate (#37)
bookmarked! The opening clips with the WMDs lies is wonderful. I searched a bit online, Michael Tsarion has other videos too. I'll check it out, thanks. 
"If there’s another 9/11 or a major war in the Middle-East involving a U.S. attack on Iran, I have no doubt that there will be, the day after or within days an equivalent of a Reichstag fire decree that will involve massive detentions in this country." - Daniel Ellsberg Author, Pentagon Papers
#39. To: robin (#38)
Funny one.
Great 'toon - thanks.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest