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.
JFK OPPOSED MONOLITHIC CONSPIRACY
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.
The following is the full transcript of what has come to be known as JFK'S SECRET SOCIETY SPEECH. I transcribed it from the YouTube audio linked at the bottom of the page. President Kennedy delivered the speech on April 27, 1961 to the Association of Newspaper Publishers requesting their help in informing and alerting the American people to "the deadly dangerous threat confronting every sphere of human activity". ~ Jackie Jura
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 Dainer for an increase in his munificent salary of five dollars per installment, a salary which he and Engels ungratefully labelled as the lousiest petty bourgeois cheating. But when all his financial appeals were refused Marx looked around for other means of livlihood and fame, eventually terminating his relationship with the Tribune and devoting his talents full-time to the cause that would bequeathe to 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 newspaperman.
I have selected as a 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 twenty million 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 which 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 far greater public information and second to the need for far greater official secrecy.
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 outweigh 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 ensuring 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.
But I do ask every publisher, every editor and every newsman in the nation to re-examine 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 labour 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 wartime 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. The 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 strategies 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 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 jouranlism and not the tests of national security. And my question tonight is wheter additional new tests should not now be adopted. That 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 new types of security classifications. I have no easy answer to the dilemna that I impose 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 re-examine 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 ask the question, "Is it in the interest of 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 endeavours and subject their actions to this same exacting test. And, should the press of America consider and recommend the volunatary assumption of specific new steps or machinery, I can assure you that we will cooperate wholeheartedly with those recommendations. Perhaps there will be no recommendations; perhaps there is no answer to the dilemna 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.
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'm not asking your newspapers to support an 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 doesn't 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 emphasise 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.
It was early in the 17th 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. And that one world effort 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.
listen JFK SECRET SOCIETY SPEECH PART 1 OF 2 and PART 2 of 2
watch ALL 64 OF JFK'S PRESIDENTIAL PRESS CONFERENCES (during his 34 months in office as 35th President of the United States)
MARX COMMUNIST EVIL 200 YEARS OLD
Communists celebrate Karl Marx 200th birthday
(most malevolent spasm of evil in human history)
Marx hometown statue gift from Communist China
GlobalNews, May 8, 2018
GOLDSTEIN CONSPIRACY IN 1984
ORWELL ARCH ENEMY OF MARX &
JFK OPPOSED COMMUNIST CONSPIRACY
& 35.Big Brother's Brotherhood
President Kennedy assassinated 52 years ago
November 22, 1963 - 2015
listen JFK SECRET SOCIETY SPEECH
JFK OPPOSED MONOLITHIC CONSPIRACY
& GOLDSTEIN CONSPIRACY IN 1984
& Big Brother & BB Brotherhood
Communist China soldiers drill on USA army base
(Red China Washington state's largest export market)
Military Times, Nov 22, 2015
7.Systems of Thought & 6.Super-States
listen JFK LAST PRESS CONFERENCE #64
(USA not planning to trade with Red China)
Washington DC, November 14, 1963
listen Bye Bye American Pie Capitol Steps
(Kissinger's Game: China World Domination)
CHINA BUY BUY AMERICA BYE BYE
& Keeping Masses Down & Ministry of Plenty
listen Jackie Jura interview JFK 50th assassination, OneRadioNetwork, Nov 21, 2013. Go to JACKIE JURA INTERVIEW ON JFK 50TH
RUSSIAN KGB BUYS UK NEWSPAPERS & COMMUNISTS ENSLAVE BRITISH FREE PRESS
Belloc on Communism/Usury/TruthSuppression & watch The Bloody History of Communism (120-million innocent deaths in 20th century), SocialJustice/YouTube, Jul 29, 2013
JFK ICH BIN EIN BERLINER SPEECH (...There are many people in the world who really don't understand, or say they don't, what is the great issue between the free world and the Communist world. Let them come to Berlin! There are some who say that Communism is the wave of the future. Let them come to Berlin! And there are some who say, in Europe and elsewhere, we can work with the Communists. Let them come to Berlin! And there are even a few who say that it's true that Communism is an evil system, but it permits us to make economic progress. 'Lasst sie nach Berlin kommen.' Let them come to Berlin! Freedom has many difficulties and democracy is not perfect, but we have never had to put a wall up to keep our people in, to prevent them from leaving us....)
watch JFK Deliver Ich Bin Ein Berliner Speech
Today in history JFK made Ich Bin Ein Berliner speech, Journal, Jun 26, 1963-2012 (Forty-nine years ago today, then-US President John F Kennedy was on an official visit to Berlin when he gave what became one of the most famous speeches ever made....)
Patrick Timpone mentions JFK's Secret Society Speech on his One Radio Network show, June 25, 2012
listen THE MURDER OF JFK, The Morning Show with Patrick Timpone, One Radio Network, November 22, 2011
Jackie Jura joined us today to mark the 48th anniversary of the assassination of JFK. Jackie has passionately researched this subject for over 25 years and her findings will certainly inspire thought. Tackling the Who's, Why's and How's of this meticulously choreograhed act of evil, this is a thought provoking show on many, many levels. Enjoy!
OBAMA FOR REAL OR ROBOT? (...As a model of how speeches SHOULD be delivered -- without teleprompter or empty rhetoric and full of spontaneous wit -- watch some of conspiracy-theorist President Kennedy's speeches and press conferences...)
MAO'S LITTLE RED BOOK, Printed in the People's Republic of China, Peking 1969
...Mao Tsetung: "The force at the core leading our cause forward is the Chinese Communist Party. The theoretical basis guiding our thinking is Marxism-Leninism..."
LENINISM TODAY, Novosti Publishing House, Moscow 1969
(The eight pamphlets in this series contain articles from Soviet periodicals, in which prsent-day problems are examined in the light of Lenin's ideological legacy: Leninist Approach to the Unity of the World Communist Movement; Lenin's Party Doctrine and the Present Day; Leninism, an Effective Ideological Weapon; Leninism and the Socialist Community; Leninism versus Imperialism: The Present Stage; Principles of Lenin's Foreigh Policy; Lenin on the Socialist State; Leninist Strategy and Tactics)
ORWELL ARCH-ENEMY OF MARX
ORWELL COINED "COLD WAR"
GOLDSTEIN CONSPIRACY IN 1984
4.Old World Destruction & 16.Ministry of Truth & 25.Prolefeed & 35.Big Brother Brotherhood
JFK TRUTHS & UNTRUTHS & JFK ASSASSINATION PUZZLE PIECES
~ an independent researcher monitoring local, national and international events ~