Who was JFK talking about here?...

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

Run time: 01:45 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_WSGwnz7XpY   Posted on YouTube: November 20, 2007 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: May 27, 2008 By DU Member: Mr_Jefferson_24 Views on DU: 1641

 
...Was he just another one of those wacky tinfoiler conspiracy nuts?

If not, who are these people he's talking about? Did they have him and his brother killed? Are they still running things?

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

1. I would guess BushCo

and I think they are still on top

[Rhiannon12866]

2. I'm not sure, but this is very disturbing.

My first thought was the communists, since they were considered the greatest threat then. But he appears to be referring to someone and something much closer to home. K&R. :-(

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

12. "...something much closer to home."

I agree.

I think he was talking about the same people Woodrow Wilson was here:

Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men's views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of somebody, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.

Source: http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Talk:Woodrow_Wilson

[Rhiannon12866]

21. I agree. When I thought it over, Dwight Eisenhower's famous words came to mind,

regarding the "military industrial complex." Obviously, that was a scary thought then, and it sure has come home to roost now. I think that Wilson was referring to the same thing.:scared:

[midnight]

3. JFK says not to shrink from controversy. He says that we need

to operate in a open society, and that there are those who are very well organized that opposes the opposite of what JFK is refering to when he talks about a Free society-choice. I suppose the people he is talking about are trying to hold on to our freedoms. They hate us for our Freedoms. They oppose our consitiution.

[Enrique]

5. he's actually asking the press to be less open with govt secrets

the full speech is here, to a newspaper association:

http://www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com/transcripts/JFK_Video_Speech.html

[dipsydoodle]

7. Well found

:toast:

[keep_it_real]

11. He's talking about a free press

[Enrique]

14. yes, and asking the press to voluntarily limit what they print

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

16. A free press as a means of what?

...What does he seem to think a truly free and independent press might be able to do?

[Enrique]

4. no, I don't think the Communists killed JFK

incidentally, did anyone else notice he mispronounced "covert" as "covet"?

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

6. No, I didn't notice the mispronunciation...

...and I would have to agree with you that Communists were not responsible for JFK's assassination.

So who do you believe JFK was talking about -- do you think it could be the same folks George Carlin is talking about here?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYIC0eZYEtI

[Enrique]

8. he's talking about the Soviet Union

he describes how they operate on secrecy, he says no we don't want to be like them, but we do have to compete against them, so, honored newspaper people, please help us in the interest of national security, by watching what you print.

[Rhiannon12866]

22. I did notice the mispronunciation, though I'm not sure if it means anything...

We tend to focus on his words, now that he's gone. And I don't think that the communists were responsible, either, would prefer to believe that it was Oswald, alone, since the alternatives are just too grim. This is one mystery that I wish would be solved in my lifetime, but now even Gerald Ford is gone...:-(

on edit: typo :blush:

[hootinholler]

32. Of course it means something...

He was from Massachusetts.

-Hoot

[Rhiannon12866]

35. I think you've got it...

:D

[RufusTFirefly]

10. Yes, I heard that...

.. but keep in mind that the "r" is frequently silent in certain Boston accents (e.g. "vigah")

[Sanity Claws]

36. Yes I did.

Could he have said "covered?" He was much too smart not to know the word covert and its correct pronunciation.

[RufusTFirefly]

9. Sorry, but most people who heard this originally thought he meant the Communists

Whether JFK was actually citing a very different threat is debatable.

The things we say about our enemies often ironically do a good job of describing ourselves. My sig line is a case in point.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

13. So who do you think he was talking about?

[RufusTFirefly]

15. The Soviet Union

If he was also sending a message to BFEE types, you can be almost certain that the vast majority of Americans didn't receive it. But in this case, I think the simplest conclusion is also the correct one: he meant the Russians. Juxtaposing his words with footage from Dallas doesn't change their original meaning. It just adds irony.

There is a famous film experiment (ironically, from the Soviet Union) called the "The Kuleshov Experiment."

In each case, moviegoers were shown the impassive face of a Russian actor. But for some of the viewers the image was alternated with shots of soup. With others, it was with a picture of a young woman. With others, the image of a dead woman in a coffin.

Depending on the image that accompanied the original, identical image of the Russian actor, audience members saw hunger, desire, or grief in the man's expressionless face.

Juxtaposition is a core technique of propaganda. Splicing together Kennedy's remarks about the Russians with footage of his own demise may lead us to read meaning into his words that probably wasn't there to begin with.

[Adsos Letter]

18. Excellent post!!

...and something we should all be aware of when we watch video produced by...well, anyone, really. :applause:

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

19. I guess it's open to interpretation...

...his remarks sound to me very much like he's talking about a threat from within.

[Enrique]

20. the above clip selectively edits the speech to make it sound like that

in fact, it's explicitly about the Cold War

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 times 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.

[RufusTFirefly]

23. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar

Thanks for providing the crucial context, Enrique!

:hi:

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

24. Indeed, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar...

...BTW, who would you say Woodrow Wilson was talking about here?

Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men's views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of somebody, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.

Source: http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Talk:Woodrow_Wilson


And who would you say George Carlin is talking about here?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYIC0eZYEtI

[Rhiannon12866]

25. As for whom George Carlin is talking about, it sounds to me like the neocons,

that "vast right wing conspiracy," which I do believe exists, and certainly BFEE. They haven't purchased land in South America for nothing.:-(

[RufusTFirefly]

26. The Wilson quote has no bearing on the Kennedy quote

I hope you're not suggesting that it does.

Also, it's more than a little ironic that the people afraid in Wilson's quote, "some of the biggest men ... in the field of commerce and manufacture" were the ones behind the plot to oust FDR. Perhaps they were looking in the mirror.

DUDE
I don't see any connection to Vietnam,
Walter.

WALTER
Well, there isn't a literal
connection, Dude.

DUDE
Walter, face it, there isn't any
connection. It's your roll.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

27. Not suggesting any connection between the Kennedy speech...

...and the Wilson quote -- just asking who you think Wilson, and also Carlin, are/were talking about.

[RufusTFirefly]

28. O.K. Sorry. I thought the thread was called

"Who was JFK talking about here?"

My bad.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

29. You're correct...

...the thread is titled "Who was JFK talking about here?" and you did offer, what I thought was a well reasoned answer to that question, and I thank you for that.

I ask about the Carlin comments and the Woodrow Wilson quote because they too seem to imply an organized but unseen behind the scenes power structure within our country. I'm just interested in my fellow DUer's thoughts on this.

[Muttocracy]

34. agree with above - an excellent post. nt

[Applepie]

17. Just think

what where this might have taken us if we had the internet back then. I have spent so much time over the last few weeks researching what is going on. I know that we must hope for the best but prepare for the worst. There are many people who are not aware of the extent of the corruption.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

30. The extent of the corruption is so...

...extreme it's hard, as well as painful, to comprehend.

[wildbilln864]

31. k&r. nt

:hi:

[Muttocracy]

33. wow, that is chilling. nt