Explained: JFK: "We are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy"

Mick said:
Well, at a simpler level, what action should be taken to stop the elites?
Click to expand...

At this point? More awareness in the population of the system of total exploitation and control being deliberately constructed around them. No solution is viable without a greater percentage of the people working towards it.
 
Well then, better start looking for better evidence than your internal BS detector.

What might be a testable theory regarding the elite? How could you verify any aspect of your theory? Do you make any specifica claims about 9/11 or chemtrails or suchlike, that might be verifiable? Is there actual evidence you can point to, that people can verify? Other than some arguable interpretations of quotes?
 
One thing i've noticed about the conspiracists i've encounter; they don't have an answer to the question "What is the solution?" They simply don't have a solution. I've had some heated exchanges with one conspiracist in particular and as soon as i ask him what the solution is to his doomsday scenarios he just stops and stares at me like a computer stuck in a logic loop. :cool:
 
For a conspiracy theorist, the problem is that not enough people know that there's a conspiracy. So the solution is to tell everyone.

What comes next is unclear. Of course generally they are not believed, as often the theories are based on feelings and speculations, and don't mesh with the perceptions of the majority. So they just get stuck at the "must try to convince people" stage. Or they go blow up a federal building.
 
Mick said:
What might be a testable theory regarding the elite? How could you verify any aspect of your theory? Do you make any specifica claims about 9/11 or chemtrails or suchlike, that might be verifiable? Is there actual evidence you can point to, that people can verify? Other than some arguable interpretations of quotes?
Click to expand...

I don't know. What might be a testable theory regarding your view of how our government and sociopolitical system functions? How could you verify any aspect of your theory? What evidence can you point to that I can verify? Other than some arguable interpretations of what you've seen on TV, learned in government schools, heard from a politician, or read in a newspaper?
 
Mick said:
Or they go blow up a federal building.
Click to expand...
LOL! Ooooooh crap that was funny! You're 100% correct Mick. That's exactly what my family member says when i ask about the solution. He just gets stuck in this loop about raising awareness, getting the word out, alternative news, blah, blah, balh. But no tangible solution: Step 1, step2, step 3, etc. :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
frontman behind said:
using a search for anything starting with 'com', I could not find the word communism, or anything like it, anywhere in the entire speech you refer to
Click to expand...

No, he does not use it, just refers to those who: "conducts the Cold War", which in that time period could only be the USSR.

(He does mention " Leninism, Stalinism, revolution and the cold war.", at the start, but that's in the preamble)
 
Mick said:
No, he does not use it, just refers to those who: "conducts the Cold War", which in that time period could only be the USSR.

(He does mention " Leninism, Stalinism, revolution and the cold war.", at the start, but that's in the preamble)
Click to expand...

thanks for clarifying :)
 
Mick said:
No, he does not use it, just refers to those who: "conducts the Cold War", which in that time period could only be the USSR.
Click to expand...

Not true, as our side, specifically the CIA, Pentagon, and entire military-industrial complex were conducting the Cold War too.

Is there some reason people should believe Kennedy wasn't talking about people within or behind our own government? Is there some reason people should believe Kennedy wasn't talking about Woodrow Wilson's "invisible empire" or Roosevelt's "financial element in the larger centers"?
 
That Kennedy was talking about communism seem like the oct obvious interpretation. Have you read the entire speech? You know it's about press self-censorship? And that the only reason he would want the press to self-censor would be to keep information from the communists.

You don't think he was urging the press to self-censor to keep information from the elite.

To the people in the room his intent was quite clear. Now obviously you can take any speech any has ever made ever, and read into it some kind of "nod-nod wink-wink" subtext. The fact that it's impossible to rule out a subtext does not make any one particular subtext more likely.
 
Mick said:
That Kennedy was talking about communism seem like the oct obvious interpretation.
Click to expand...

You keep repeating this as if it means anything on its own. You think that just by saying "communism", people will automatically associate the speech with Soviet communism, and hence, the Soviet Union. You seem to want people to believe Kennedy was only talking about an external threat. The problem is, communism has a different meaning than what most people were taught to believe. Communism was an internal threat just as much as it was an external threat. It was being funded and supported from Wall Street and our own State Department. It was being used by the ruling oligarchs in this country to pursue their own agenda.

Have you read the entire speech? You know it's about press self-censorship? And that the only reason he would want the press to self-censor would be to keep information from the communists.
Click to expand...

Sure, a portion of the speech is about that.

You don't think he was urging the press to self-censor to keep information from the elite.
Click to expand...

No, I think he was trying to communicate something to both the press and the American people about what we were really up against as a nation, without just coming out and saying it.

To the people in the room his intent was quite clear.
Click to expand...

Why, have you interviewed everyone that was in the room that day? How have you determined this?

Now obviously you can take any speech any has ever made ever, and read into it some kind of "nod-nod wink-wink" subtext. The fact that it's impossible to rule out a subtext does not make any one particular subtext more likely.
Click to expand...

Sure it does, especially when you understand what communism was really about and who was using it and supporting it to achieve certain, globalist goals.

You just misunderstand it.
 
Well perhaps I should have changed my debunking to "He was talking about the Soviets".

Obviously if someone has their mind made up that there's a hidden meaning, then I'm not going to change it. It just does not seem that way to me.
 
Mick said:
Well perhaps I should have changed my debunking to "He was talking about the Soviets".
Click to expand...

You probably didn't because even that's not clear.

His speech was cryptic for a reason.

Obviously if someone has their mind made up that there's a hidden meaning, then I'm not going to change it. It just does not seem that way to me.
Click to expand...

I understand that. Some people can easily spot a picture within a picture or immediately decode a double entendre, while others are left scratching their heads.

Our brains are all wired differently.
 
Juror No. 8 said:
His speech was cryptic for a reason.



I understand that. Some people can easily spot a picture within a picture or immediately decode a double entendre, while others are left scratching their heads.

Our brains are all wired differently.
Click to expand...

Indeed...and some people lead with their biases, jump to conclusions allowing for misinterpretation.

How do you know he had a reason? Did you ask him?

If there was a reason how do you know it was not a CIA plot to fool gullible people into thinking there was some hidden meaning?
 
SR1419 said:
Indeed...and some people lead with their biases, jump to conclusions allowing for misinterpretation.

How do you know he had a reason? Did you ask him?

If there was a reason how do you know it was not a CIA plot to fool gullible people into thinking there was some hidden meaning?
Click to expand...

Why, is there a reason to believe it was? And if it was, wouldn't that be all he more reason to be suspicious of our government? That they would waste resources trying to deceive the American people?
 
Juror No. 8 said:
Why, is there a reason to believe it was? And if it was, wouldn't that be all he more reason to be suspicious of our government? That they would waste resources trying to deceive the American people?
Click to expand...

Or maybe it was the Soviets....or robotic cats

Or nothing at all....maybe it's just your bias causing you to believe things that are not actually there.

That's certainly a very distinct possibility.
 
SR1419 said:
Or maybe it was the Soviets....or robotic cats

Or nothing at all....maybe it's just your bias causing you to believe things that are not actually there.

That's certainly a very distinct possibility.
Click to expand...

How do you know the things I believe in are truly not there? How have you deduced this? What understanding of deep geopolitics and history can you bring to the table?
 
Juror No. 8 said:
How do you know the things I believe in are truly not there? How have you deduced this? What understanding of deep geopolitics and history can you bring to the table?
Click to expand...

Did I say they were not there?

How do you know they are there?

How have you deduced this?

Want to attack my education level again?
 
In other words, you have nothing to bring to the table. You're just throwing whatever you can at the wall to see what sticks.

I figured as much.
 
no actually- I am using your usual tactics of obfuscation by answering questions with questions...

You want to infer something that validates your beliefs. A form of confirmation bias.

You Believe you know what JFK thought...

You ignore the obvious in favor of biased belief...
 
The context makes it extremely obvious.

It was the Apex of the Cold War.

It was one week after the Bay of Pigs.

What do you think was on his mind?
 
SR1419 said:
The context makes it extremely obvious.

It was the Apex of the Cold War.

It was one week after the Bay of Pigs.

What do you think was on his mind?
Click to expand...

Apparently a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy was, which, as he described it, wasn't an accurate portrayal of Soviet communism.

He was clearly pointing at something else ("secret societies, secret oaths, and secret proceedings"), and it was most likely the same monolithic and ruthless conspiracy Senator Joseph McCarthy tried to uncover in the U.S. government and State Department a decade before.

Not too hard to understand for people who actually have a non-public school understanding of the history of the time.
 
You can listen to Kennedy's speech a million times, but it won't do you any good until you understand the collection of entities and people who had been aiding, supporting, and funding the spread of communism both in America and around the world since the days of the Russian Revolution. Considering Kennedy's position in the government and his previous close ties to Senator McCarthy, it's almost certain Kennedy understood this.

Kennedy may as well have been speaking a totally foreign language in that speech, because you clearly don't understand it.
 
Have you listened to it? I think it's very educational to actually listen to. It's very very clear what he's talking about - the role of press self-censorship in the cold war.

Listen to it ALL, then come back and tell me what the hidden message is.
 
Juror No. 8 said:
Apparently a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy was, which, as he described it, wasn't an accurate portrayal of Soviet communism.

He was clearly pointing at something else ("secret societies, secret oaths, and secret proceedings"), and it was most likely the same monolithic and ruthless conspiracy Senator Joseph McCarthy tried to uncover in the U.S. government and State Department a decade before.

Not too hard to understand for people who actually have a non-public school understanding of the history of the time.
Click to expand...

Actually- "monolithic and ruthless" was exactly how JFK perceived the USSR- look at what he said during his Cuban Missile crisis speech:

http://www.jfklibrary.org/Asset-Viewer/sUVmCh-sB0moLfrBcaHaSg.aspx

External Quote:
"I call upon him (Kruschev) further to abandon this course of world domination"

"Our own strategic missiles have never been transferred to the territory of any other nation under a cloak of secrecy and deception; and our history--unlike that of the Soviets since the end of World War II--demonstrates that we have no desire to dominate or conquer any other nation or impose our system upon its people. "
or this characterization from his speech at the University of Washington:

http://www.jfklibrary.org/Asset-Viewer/Aw3MwwJMf0631R6JLmAprQ.aspx
External Quote:

"We cannot, as a free nation, compete with our adversaries in tactics of terror, assassination, false promises, counterfeit mobs and crises.

We cannot, under the scrutiny of a free press and public, tell different stories to different audiences, foreign and domestic, friendly and hostile.

We cannot abandon the slow processes of consulting with our allies to match the swift expediencies of those who merely dictate to their satellites. "
DO you honestly believe the USSR was NOT monolithic and ruthless?

Should I insult your education now?
 
JFK frequently referred to the communists as monolithic:

[ex=http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=8566]For the Communists rest everything on the idea of a monolithic world -- a world where all knowledge has a single pattern, all societies move toward a single model, and all problems and roads have a single solution and a single destination.
[...]
No one who examines the modern world can doubt that the great currents of history are carrying the world away from the monolithic idea towards the pluralistic idea--away from communism and towards national independence and freedom.
[/ex]

[ex=http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=9060]when you look at all those misjudgments which brought on war, and then you see the Soviet Union and the United States so far separated in their beliefs, we believing in a world of independent sovereign and different diverse nations, they believing in a monolithic Communist world, and you put the nuclear equation into that struggle, that is what makes this, as I said before, such a dangerous time,
[/ex]

See here:
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/#search

Search for "monolithic" and set the president to JFK, for other examples.
 
Mick said:
Have you listened to it? I think it's very educational to actually listen to. It's very very clear what he's talking about - the role of press self-censorship in the cold war.

Listen to it ALL, then come back and tell me what the hidden message is.
Click to expand...

I have, and he's clearly addressing something quite unique using very coded language that could be interpreted in two different ways. He was speaking to two audiences in that regard.

If you have an understanding of what communism was really about at that time, then you can understand both meanings. If you don't, you don't.
 
SR1419 said:
In other words, ignore what he actually said and just make up your own meaning to confirm your bias.
Click to expand...

The problem is, you don't even know what he actually said. He may as well have been speaking another language, as far as you're concerned.

Let me help:

Your understanding of communism =/= Kennedy's understanding of communism
 
Juror No. 8 said:
The problem is, you don't even know what he actually said. He may as well have been speaking another language, as far as you're concerned.

Let me help:

Your understanding of communism =/= Kennedy's understanding of communism
Click to expand...

I find it curious that you think you can speak to my understanding of communism...

Be that as it may...it still doesn't mean he is speaking top secret code that only you can understand.

The paragraph in question may have been a bit of a double entendre intended for some domestic ears ...."monolithic" encompassing everything from the Soviet machine to domestic networks and movements ...but the overall thrust and meaning of the speech is clear as they were literally at the height of the Cold War and his focus was on the Soviets. Indeed, in reference to the very monolithic and ruthless conspiracy in question, he says this 4 sentences later:

External Quote:
It conducts the Cold War, in short, with a war-time discipline no democracy would ever hope or wish to match.
Does that sound like he is referring to domestic some vague secret society? Or was it an accurate description of the Soviet Union?

Moreover, not a week earlier in a speech to American Society of Newspaper Editors- he says this:

External Quote:
It is not the first time that Communist tanks have rolled over gallant men and women fighting to redeem the independence of their homeland....it is clear that the forces of communism are not to be underestimated, in Cuba or anywhere else in the world. The advantages of a police state-its use of mass terror and arrests to prevent the spread of free dissent--cannot be overlooked by those who expect the fall of every fanatic tyrant.

...it is clear that this Nation, in concert with all the free nations of this hemisphere, must take an ever closer and more realistic look at the menace of external Communist intervention...

We dare not fail to see the insidious nature of this new and deeper struggle. We dare not fail to grasp the new concepts, the new tools, the new sense of urgency we will need to combat it-whether in Cuba or South Viet-Nam. And we dare not fail to realize that this struggle is taking place every day, without fanfare, in thousands of villages and markets-day and night-and in classrooms all over the globe.
That was his understanding of communism.

That there were spies infiltrating government and business does not mean he felt the real threat was domestic...the monolithic and ruthless conspiracy was being driven and directed from abroad.

To sustain any other theory requires evidence, of which you have provided none.
 
SR1419 said:
The paragraph in question may have been a bit of a double entendre intended for some domestic ears ...."monolithic" encompassing everything from the Soviet machine to domestic networks and movements ...but the overall thrust and meaning of the speech is clear as they were literally at the height of the Cold War and his focus was on the Soviets. Indeed, in reference to the very monolithic and ruthless conspiracy in question, he says this 4 sentences later:

External Quote:
It conducts the Cold War, in short, with a war-time discipline no democracy would ever hope or wish to match.
Does that sound like he is referring to domestic some vague secret society? Or was it an accurate description of the Soviet Union?
Click to expand...

Absolutely, because the Soviet Union could not be accurately characterized as a "monolithic" or "ruthless conspiracy". After all, our government wouldn't have recognized the Soviet government as legitimate if it were nothing more than just a conspiracy. Only the international communist conspiracy could be characterized in that way, and the international communist conspiracy wasn't just a Soviet or Soviet-based phenomenon. It was embedded within our own government, and was being supported from Wall Street.

Kennedy was not fooled by this.

Moreover, not a week earlier in a speech to American Society of Newspaper Editors- he says this:

External Quote:
It is not the first time that Communist tanks have rolled over gallant men and women fighting to redeem the independence of their homeland....it is clear that the forces of communism are not to be underestimated, in Cuba or anywhere else in the world. The advantages of a police state-its use of mass terror and arrests to prevent the spread of free dissent--cannot be overlooked by those who expect the fall of every fanatic tyrant.

...it is clear that this Nation, in concert with all the free nations of this hemisphere, must take an ever closer and more realistic look at the menace of external Communist intervention...

We dare not fail to see the insidious nature of this new and deeper struggle. We dare not fail to grasp the new concepts, the new tools, the new sense of urgency we will need to combat it-whether in Cuba or South Viet-Nam. And we dare not fail to realize that this struggle is taking place every day, without fanfare, in thousands of villages and markets-day and night-and in classrooms all over the globe.
That was his understanding of communism.
Click to expand...

No, it's pretty clear from that passage that he was addressing the external arm of the international communist conspiracy.

That there were spies infiltrating government and business does not mean he felt the real threat was domestic...the monolithic and ruthless conspiracy was being driven and directed from abroad.

To sustain any other theory requires evidence, of which you have provided none.
Click to expand...

Speaking of evidence, do you have any at all for the above claim? That the conspiracy was being driven from abroad? Remember, according to primary source research done by Antony Sutton at the Hoover Institute, the Soviet Union had to be propped up by Western interests - primarily those in the United States - all the way from the Russian Revolution, through WW2, and all throughout the duration of the Cold War. The Soviet Union was fully dependent on the United States for both technological and economic support for decades. Our own industrial and finance oligarchs kept the Soviet bogeyman and the tyrannical communist regime in Moscow on life support for a reason. The question you should be asking yourself is, "why?".
 
Kennedy consistently referred to the soviets as "monolithic". It's a description of their political system.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Gary C
The role of contemporary culture in the changing UFO narrative
Replies
27
Views
1K
John J.
John J.
Chief Gleeby
Scale, Viability, and Cost of 'The Conspiracy/Coverup'
Replies
28
Views
1K
John J.
John J.
Mick West
Kratsios: Our technologies permit us to manipulate time and space.
Replies
17
Views
6K
NoParty
NoParty
Gary C
A Conspiracy Theory Mindset Can Be Predicted By These Two Psychological Traits
Replies
25
Views
1K
Smythe Bacchus
Smythe Bacchus
Giddierone
Epstein Conspiracy / UFO Conspiracy Comparison
Replies
13
Views
1K
Montauk
Montauk

Latest posts

Trending content

Back
Top