JFK on censorship, secret societies and so on

[unity100]

open government and so on - this is only a short while before his assassination.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bj3AECSKmhU

.................

good words from a good heart definitely reaches good people, from wherever they are.

ps : i noticed that the last 1/4 part of the video may be about conspiracies and stuff. you may just ignore that part and listen to jfk's speech. i dont know much video editing and couldnt take that part off.

[Crown]

What an eye opener. I never knew this speech existed.

thank you.

[unity100]

he was assassinated a while after this

[zack231]

open government and so on - this is only a short while before his assassination.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bj3AECSKmhU

.................

good words from a good heart definitely reaches good people, from wherever they are.

ps : i noticed that the last 1/4 part of the video may be about conspiracies and stuff. you may just ignore that part and listen to jfk's speech. i dont know much video editing and couldnt take that part off.

Yes I posted this in the Ron Paul thread it is an amazing speech and I think the videos also suit it well this man was amazing and it is so sad that he was assassinated obviously by those behind the power whom he was trying to expose.. it's clear that secret soceities exist and want nothing more than pure control over people these groups I believe are the reason for the many difficulties of our planet.. The media is involved in all the propganda stuff these days many are paid to not question the government it's all about keeping people dumbed down so that people cannot see the truth of life... So much is withheld from us I believe many of these very dark and secret socities which worship satan (Orion group) have contact just like Ra said and exchange information.. So I believe they understand the very true nature of reality and through service to self withheld this information to keep us trapped in pop culture an all the other propaganda, to try and stop people from reaching enlightenment and understanding the true nature of life because when that happens they no longer have power for people understand and arnt kept on constant fear.

Just think we could have known about the existence of et life almost a century ago, yet with all the evidence and ufos sightings they still try to discredit it and have scientists out there saying that life only exists on earth that we are very rare.. It's all to keep us in fear and our focus only on this planet and keep us feeling as though we are trapped there is nothing else but our planet.. That is why society is set up so that people are shunned or laughed at for believing in ets they have made it seem like a weird thing to think of, with some scientists saying it isn't overly important.. Schools these days basically never talk of space or how large it is our galaxy... They teach history of our planet which is like history always is distorted and written by the victor...anyway I am rambling here all I wanted to say is that their main objective is to keep society down keep us from discovering keep us from thinking outside the box with media talking about the most mandate issues like the latest scandal or break up or who is seen with who it's all to keep us trapped in greed and fear and feel as though this is all there is...

I believe this is coming to an end though as 4th density comes into play more and more will awaken and they can do nothing to stop it for they cannot take away what is in our hearts.. Love

[3DMonkey]

Nice speech. It was not the reality then and it's not the reality now.

[Raman]

He was killed... evidence was tampered with (Best Evidence is a very good book about how he was killed and what happened after that)

http://www.amazon.com/Best-Evidence-Sign...742&sr=8-1

he was the president of the united states...kinda he knew that he was talking about...he was asking for help to the american people man...Amazing this speech survived...

There is another book or books that talk about Orion, STS, elite something like that...Oh I remember now...The Ra material...

[Nyu]

What a beautiful man. I had no idea until recently that he was like this. It makes me even sadder about the corruption of the world and makes me hope even harder that the changes coming will be for the betterment of all our societies

[3DMonkey]

Sounded like a typical pandering speech.

[Bring4th_Austin]

Sounded like a typical pandering speech.

What was typical about it? What other presidents have made similar speeches, regarding elite secret societies, open government, and empowerment of the press? To me it seemed to have much more meaning and truth behind it than any other presidential speech I've heard/seen, especially since then. Obama has even been quoted saying, "I can't conduct diplomacy on an open source."

Out of curiosity, 3DM, do you believe what we've been told by the "authorities" about JFK's assassination?

[3DMonkey]

Typical because he was speaking to an audience that would 'eat it up'. He was winning their favor by building the newspaper publishers up.

His real goal, and the part conveniently cut out of the video starting this thread, was to persuade publishers to BE SECRET and not print anything to jeopardize international military positioning.

The video clipped out the following at about 3:08 into the speech:

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. [ implied- "or else"]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. [I'm asking nicely... at first]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. ["you wouldn't be a bad boy on purpose would you?"]
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.[unless I need to] 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.[unless, like I said, it falls under 'national security']

So, you see, it was a passive aggressive pandering to news media. In a nutshell- 'get on board with what we are trying to do so we don't require passing laws which make us look bad. We can give you honorary governmental deputization to shoosh yourselves.'

source: http://www.jfklibrary.org/Research/Ready...ation.aspx

---

I think the assassination was a one man operation. A man who probably watched too many "edited youtube videos" of his own.

[turtledude23]

delete this post

[seejay21]

Authentic?

[Bring4th_Austin]

So, you see, it was a passive aggressive pandering to news media. In a nutshell- 'get on board with what we are trying to do so we don't require passing laws which make us look bad. We can give you honorary governmental deputization to shoosh yourselves.'

source: http://www.jfklibrary.org/Research/Ready...ation.aspx

---

I think the assassination was a one man operation. A man who probably watched too many "edited youtube videos" of his own.

Eye-opening post, 3DM, thank you for the elaboration. The information you presented has led me to agree with you...pretty typical pandering. It would be nice to believe an American president could reach the level of awareness and openness presented in the original context, but the full context tells a much different story.

[3DMonkey]

Thank YOU, abridgetoofar Austin.

Your questioning brought me to a better understanding of the subject too. This is a great benefit of the mutual sharing of thoughts on this forum.

---

Here is the audio of the cut out part. (easy to edit, as you'll notice no applause)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXKzKrIrg...ata_player

[Monica]

I think the assassination was a one man operation.

Not physically possible.

[3DMonkey]

I think the assassination was a one man operation.

Not physically possible.

Yes it is. .... Just as possible as a Sixth Density entity speaking through a 3D body complex ... and a huge Pyramid built by thought

I also believe LBJ's mistress's testimony.

[zack231]

I think the assassination was a one man operation.

Not physically possible.

I agree there was clearly three shots fired, it has been recreated by professional marksman and None can recapulate it. The speed that it would have to have been done at and not to mention the accuracy are almost impossible, plus there was a man standing only 30 meters from the motorcade and heard shots come from behind his head... And even if you believe that Oswald was the shooter he is also known to be in the CIA, he was framed. And did you know the only evidence that thier was one witness said they saw a man standing in the window of the hight that matched Oswald not even half a persons body could be seen in the window, so it would litrally be impossible that someone could judge the hight... To make it more suspicous Oswald was killed the next day even before a trial could be made.... Even more suspiciousin countries like australia, UK and others all had papers printed that morning, saying Oswald was responsible, before Oswald was even ocused of it..

Dont believe me check this video out it has a death bed confession from a well known person, wont say who. Yes ill admit some of it is a little over the top like the narrators voice but the infomation is amazing please watch enjoy:

Conspiracy Theory with Jesse Ventura: "JFK Assassination" (FULL LENGTH)

Also 3DM I think its wronf to just condem such a great man like JFK who so far has been the only president who has tried to end the federal reserve and give more power to the people, this is the real reason he was killed.... Dont paint the picture of a bad man you would be better to do that with Bush, Dick Chenny, Bush Senior, Nixon and even Obama.... JFK was a great man

[3DMonkey]

@zack231

What do you make of the apparent manipulation of the speech, leaving out a huge hunk of it, in order to persuade others to think of it as something it is not?

[seejay21]

Anyone trained as a marksman in the marine corps could have made the 3 shots Oswald did. It isn't a magic bullet, and he could have easily worked his rifle fast enough to get off the 3 rounds in 6 seconds. seriously, a marine marksman could have pulled it off at 140 meters. I'm absolutely sure lots of marines could tell you stories about getting off the magic bullet impossible shot. It happens all the time.

[Bring4th_Austin]

Anyone trained as a marksman in the marine corps could have made the 3 shots Oswald did. It isn't a magic bullet, and he could have easily worked his rifle fast enough to get off the 3 rounds in 6 seconds. seriously, a marine marksman could have pulled it off at 140 meters. I'm absolutely sure lots of marines could tell you stories about getting off the magic bullet impossible shot. It happens all the time.

Is there some sort of verifiable source for this information, other than from a government agency? Maybe a "MythBusters" style exposé? My own personal logic, and everything I've learned about sniping with a bolt-action rifle, leads me to be believe it would be impossible. But I'm hesitant to firmly believe either way until some reliable proof is presented.

[3DMonkey]

I have seen a tv show that reenacted it successfully within the time frame. Don't rmbr name of show. I remember they were on a scaffold in a dry river bed at night. Foggy details, I know, but i can picture the dirt road, river bed, scaffold and successful shooting.

Pen and Teller hosting? Maybe? Lol.

[seejay21]

I've read material where people scoff at the idea if Oswald was a good enough shot. Making claims, "He shot a 212 in qualification, a sharpshooter, 2 points short of the lowest qualification class of marksman."

It's also 8 points close to the highest qualification class, Expert. The difference between marksman and expert from a points standpoint could be as few as 3 shots in 50, where each shot is worth 5 points. 220 expert is technically 2 shots. You could be shooting all day as expert, get on the 500 meter line, (yes 500 meters) with a rifle without any external support. Miss 2 shots, and whoala, you get a pizza box (marksman badge) on your chest and not cross rifles (expert).

[Monica]

Yes it is. .... Just as possible as a Sixth Density entity speaking through a 3D body complex ... and a huge Pyramid built by thought

Ra didn't break any physical laws to build those pyramids. They just utilized higher laws.

The path of bullets follows laws of physics. A bit of research into the JFK assassination will easily show that it was physically impossible for a lone gunman to have killed him. (Unless one can show a higher physical law that allows bullets to change directions mid-flight.)

In the same way that it's physically impossible for the 3 skyscrapers to have collapsed at freefall speed due to fire.

I absolutely agree that there are higher laws of physics we don't know about. But that doesn't negate the laws of physics currently in operation in this density. Unless JFK's killers were aliens...The laws of physics didn't just get arbitrarily suspended on 11-22-63 and again on 9-11-01.

Those are 2 'conspiracy theories' that have such a huge abundance of irrefutable evidence...

But there are plenty of other forums that already do that, so I won't reinvent the wheel.

---

I have seen a tv show that reenacted it successfully within the time frame. Don't rmbr name of show. I remember they were on a scaffold in a dry river bed at night. Foggy details, I know, but i can picture the dirt road, river bed, scaffold and successful shooting.

That sounds like the tv show that 'debunked' crop circles. How many people never questioned the issue after that. If it's on mainstream tv, it must be true!

Pen and Teller hosting? Maybe? Lol.

Well gosh, if Pen and Teller said that's how it happened, then that settles it!

---

Anyone trained as a marksman in the marine corps could have made the 3 shots Oswald did.

It's not about marksmanship. It's about the bullet paths. Forensics. The same bullet can't change directions in mid-flight.

There are plenty of other forums to learn about this, so I'll bow out of this JFK discussion at this point.

---

Even more suspiciousin countries like australia, UK and others all had papers printed that morning, saying Oswald was responsible, before Oswald was even ocused of it..

Yeah, that's like the tv news reporting the 3rd tower collapsing, 20+ minutes before it actually did! It's so absurd, hilarious actually...you can even see the tower still standing, in the window, while the reporter says it just collapsed! That single piece of evidence ALONE is enough to totally discredit the 'official theory'!

[3DMonkey]

I'm not trying to change anyone's mind on the assasination. I've been down both roads. Occam's Razor.

Back to the JFK speech... I'd like to hear from people who bought into the first link and what they have to say about the fact someone cut out the parts that don't defend the persuasive argument.

[seejay21]

I'm not trying to change anyone's mind on the assasination. I've been down both roads. Akem's* Razor.

Back to the JFK speech... I'd like to hear from people who bought into the first link and what they have to say about the fact someone cut out the parts that don't defend the persuasive argument.

I didn't buy into the first link on first view. it seemed to perfect, and alas, it was.

I think that we all leave out the parts of topics that don't resonate with us, although mostly sub-consciously. It happens in this forum all the time.

This was deliberate, and meant to manipulate, but for why? I wonder what he gains by bending the truth in this way. What does it say about the people that buy in, even know they know it is a lie... (an sts lie?)

[3DMonkey]

This was deliberate, and meant to manipulate, but for why? I wonder what he gains by bending the truth in this way. What does it say about the people that buy in, even know they know it is a lie... (an sts lie?)

It is ironic. On the one hand, they say "look, he was trying to expose the secrets that 'rule' the government".

On the other hand, in its full context, it is another example of the government suppressing information.

So, yeah, what is to be gained?

[seejay21]

Im not well versed in rays, but maybe he likes suckling on the yellow ray and gets energy from his believers.

[3DMonkey]

Or, just screwing with people for 'fun'