Top 5 Defining Moments of John F. Kennedy's Presidency
Do you agree or not?
What would you have added/removed?
Do you agree or not?
What would you have added/removed?
Last edited by a moderator:
Controversial The JFK Assassination!
- Thread starter High Plains Drifter
- Start date
Your thoughts on this crime.....
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The JFK Papers
After the recent release of confidential CIA/FBI papers about the assassination many more questions are being raised by today's youth.
1. Lee Harvey Oswald hid in a book depository. What are books? Are they like I Pads but made of paper? The government should tell us what books are.
2. Oswald used a rifle , why not an AK-47. Was he a pacifist anti gun loser?
3.JFK has same initials as JFK airport! Coincidence? Hardly.
4. Why the fuss about a liberal president? Didn't everyone in those days share our enlightened Trump inspired views?
6. Hey! What about point 5 ?
What's Michael hiding here?!
7. If you slow down the footage of the Government official releasing these ' fake' files, and watch it after not having slept for 3 weeks, you can clearly see another official burning the real files on a grassy knoll. This proves the conspiracy theorists are right and perhaps my wife will reconsider her decision to move out.
Last edited by a moderator:
Doctor Omega
Member: Rank 10
I admire your bravery, but you are risking your life raising these points Michael! 
Numerous members of IMDF have quite simply vanished,over time - and the ironic tragedy is that most of them never even mentioned conspiracy in any posts! You have, so the danger is multiplied.
That's how brutal the New World Order is. Apparently.
Numerous members of IMDF have quite simply vanished,over time - and the ironic tragedy is that most of them never even mentioned conspiracy in any posts! You have, so the danger is multiplied.
That's how brutal the New World Order is. Apparently.
chainsaw_metal1
Member: Rank 8
This is why I refuse to take the Post-it note off of my webcam (that, and the incident involving ant-mac uploading something of me to Pornhub). Now if you'll excuse me, my tinfoil hat needs to be replaced.
Doctor Omega
Member: Rank 10
Doctor Omega
Member: Rank 10
I have actually started to think that myself and Ant-Mac might be the same person.
I used to think that myself and michallevenson were the same person a while back, then realised that we both reviewed Blake's 7 and Star Cops together and didn't always agree about certain episodes, which means I was disagreeing with myself. So that theory took a knock - as did the A-M doppleganger one when I think I saw Ant-Mac wearing a robe and mask at one of those EYES WIDE SHUT type ceremonies in a strange residence near Sydney Opera House.
I was the hired stripper for the evening, but got sent home as everyone was laughing so loudly.
Some Trump supporter got sacrificed that night, but hey, it was still a human being at the end of the day.
Sort of.
I used to think that myself and michallevenson were the same person a while back, then realised that we both reviewed Blake's 7 and Star Cops together and didn't always agree about certain episodes, which means I was disagreeing with myself. So that theory took a knock - as did the A-M doppleganger one when I think I saw Ant-Mac wearing a robe and mask at one of those EYES WIDE SHUT type ceremonies in a strange residence near Sydney Opera House.
I was the hired stripper for the evening, but got sent home as everyone was laughing so loudly.
Some Trump supporter got sacrificed that night, but hey, it was still a human being at the end of the day.
Sort of.
chainsaw_metal1
Member: Rank 8
I can attest to that not being Ant-Mac. He was in Argentina with me, hunting for Cyborg Hitler - a rumored robot Fuhrer with Hitler's brain encased within. All we found was a three-toed sloth dressed like Goebbels. And conjoined twins who would do anything you asked for $20. Anything.
Anything.
No, no no. Not human. Not anymore.Some Trump supporter got sacrificed that night, but hey, it was still a human being at the end of the day.
Sort of.
Do not worry about the IMDF members who have vanished, they are safe and well on a planet in the Alpha Centauri system. I made the trip myself, coincidentally after making a trip of another kind.
It's a strange world, there is no death, no love, no gravity, the precipitation is liquid silver that falls upwards and weirdest of all the KFC's there don't have those really large bucket portions!
It's a strange world, there is no death, no love, no gravity, the precipitation is liquid silver that falls upwards and weirdest of all the KFC's there don't have those really large bucket portions!
chainsaw_metal1
Member: Rank 8
Hmmmm....JFK was an Alpha male. The missing IMDF members have been taken to Alpha Centauri. Alpha Centauri is 4 light years away. JFK Jr. was nearly 4 when his father died. The middle letter of JFK and KFC is F. F is the sixth letter of the Alphabet. Beer is often sold in six packs. Wolves run in packs. And the head of that pack? The Alpha. The dots are there! We just need to connect them!
Doctor Omega
Member: Rank 10
Lee Harvey Oswald Killed JFK Robert Oswald Says It's There Put It To Rest
Last edited:
Doctor Omega
Member: Rank 10
With a lot of these people it seems, to me, to be a case of "better infamy than nothing!"
And they all seem smart enough to figure out that killing someone famous attaches your name to them forever, because that's how history works, sadly.
I am not convinced by a single one of the conspiracy theories, although it took me a lot of reading and documentaries over the years to settle on that position. I think that assuming there is a conspiracy is a kind of coping mechanism for people who can't believe a nobody managed to kill an often well-guarded somebody.
And they all seem smart enough to figure out that killing someone famous attaches your name to them forever, because that's how history works, sadly.
I am not convinced by a single one of the conspiracy theories, although it took me a lot of reading and documentaries over the years to settle on that position. I think that assuming there is a conspiracy is a kind of coping mechanism for people who can't believe a nobody managed to kill an often well-guarded somebody.
Doctor Omega
Member: Rank 10
Doctor Omega
Member: Rank 10
Doctor Omega
Member: Rank 10
A documentary series that I used to watch a lot.... until I ultimately rejected all conspiracy in favour of the lone nut theory.....
Episode one is still a good overview of that day's events....
en.wikipedia.org
Episode one is still a good overview of that day's events....
The Men Who Killed Kennedy - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Last edited:
Doctor Omega
Member: Rank 10
Another documentary that I owned on VHS....
The photographic "revelation" at approximately 35 minutes in used to convince me thoroughly that a second shooter had been captured on the knoll... but now I just think that anyone can see whatever they want to, if they really look hard enough.....
THE DAY THE DREAM DIED —
www.kevin-godley.com
Last edited:
Doctor Omega
Member: Rank 10
Gerald Posner talks to the Sixth Floor Museum about concluding Oswald Alone Killed JFK
In April 2017, Dallas's Sixth Floor Museum (@SixthFlrMuseum) posted video clips from its oral history collection "highlighting unique perspectives on the assassination + research efforts from notable authors." The Sixth Floor Museum posted this 1-minute clip from its longer interview with Gerald Posner, addressing the diffculty of reaching a firm conclusion in a contested area of history.
In April 2017, Dallas's Sixth Floor Museum (@SixthFlrMuseum) posted video clips from its oral history collection "highlighting unique perspectives on the assassination + research efforts from notable authors." The Sixth Floor Museum posted this 1-minute clip from its longer interview with Gerald Posner, addressing the diffculty of reaching a firm conclusion in a contested area of history.
Doctor Omega
Member: Rank 10
The photo that proves Oswald had met David Ferrie....
Doctor Omega
Member: Rank 10
John Wayne.... while Oswald lingers in the doorway in the background......
Doctor Omega
Member: Rank 10
The Speech JFK Never Gave
REMARKS PREPARED FOR DELIVERY AT THE TRADE MART IN DALLAS, TX, NOVEMBER 22, 1963 [UNDELIVERED]
President John F. Kennedy
November 22, 1963
I am honored to have this invitation to address the annual meeting of the Dallas Citizens Council, joined by the members of the Dallas Assembly – and pleased to have this opportunity to salute the Graduate Research Center of the Southwest.
It is fitting that these two symbols of Dallas progress are united in the sponsorship of this meeting. For they represent the best qualities, I am told, of leadership and learning in this city – and leadership and learning are indispensable to each other. The advancement of learning depends on community leadership for financial and political support and the products of that learning, in turn, are essential to the leadership's hopes for continued progress and prosperity. It is not a coincidence that those communities possessing the best in research and graduate facilities – from MIT to Cal Tech – tend to attract the new and growing industries. I congratulate those of you here in Dallas who have recognized these basic facts through the creation of the unique and forward-looking Graduate Research Center.
This link between leadership and learning is not only essential at the community level. It is even more indispensable in world affairs. Ignorance and misinformation can handicap the progress of a city or a company, but they can, if allowed to prevail in foreign policy, handicap this country's security. In a world of complex and continuing problems, in a world full of frustrations and irritations, America's leadership must be guided by the lights of learning and reason or else those who confuse rhetoric with reality and the plausible with the possible will gain the popular ascendancy with their seemingly swift and simple solutions to every world problem.
There will always be dissident voices heard in the land, expressing opposition without alternatives, finding fault but never favor, perceiving gloom on every side and seeking influence without responsibility. Those voices are inevitable.
But today other voices are heard in the land – voices preaching doctrines wholly unrelated to reality, wholly unsuited to the sixties, doctrines which apparently assume that words will suffice without weapons, that vituperation is as good as victory and that peace is a sign of weakness. At a time when the national debt is steadily being reduced in terms of its burden on our economy, they see that debt as the greatest single threat to our security. At a time when we are steadily reducing the number of Federal employees serving every thousand citizens, they fear those supposed hordes of civil servants far more than the actual hordes of opposing armies.
We cannot expect that everyone, to use the phrase of a decade ago, will "talk sense to the American people." But we can hope that fewer people will listen to nonsense. And the notion that this Nation is headed for defeat through deficit, or that strength is but a matter of slogans, is nothing but just plain nonsense.
I want to discuss with you today the status of our strength and our security because this question clearly calls for the most responsible qualities of leadership and the most enlightened products of scholarship. For this Nation's strength and security are not easily or cheaply obtained, nor are they quickly and simply explained. There are many kinds of strength and no one kind will suffice. Overwhelming nuclear strength cannot stop a guerrilla war. Formal pacts of alliance cannot stop internal subversion. Displays of material wealth cannot stop the disillusionment of diplomats subjected to discrimination.
Above all, words alone are not enough. The United States is a peaceful nation. And where our strength and determination are clear, our words need merely to convey conviction, not belligerence. If we are strong, our strength will speak for itself. If we are weak, words will be of no help.
I realize that this Nation often tends to identify turning-points in world affairs with the major addresses which preceded them. But it was not the Monroe Doctrine that kept all Europe away from this hemisphere – it was the strength of the British fleet and the width of the Atlantic Ocean. It was not General Marshall's speech at Harvard which kept communism out of Western Europe – it was the strength and stability made possible by our military and economic assistance.
In this administration also it has been necessary at times to issue specific warnings – warnings that we could not stand by and watch the Communists conquer Laos by force, or intervene in the Congo, or swallow West Berlin, or maintain offensive missiles on Cuba. But while our goals were at least temporarily obtained in these and other instances, our successful defense of freedom was due not to the words we used, but to the strength we stood ready to use on behalf of the principles we stand ready to defend.
This strength is composed of many different elements, ranging from the most massive deterrents to the most subtle influences. And all types of strength are needed – no one kind could do the job alone. Let us take a moment, therefore, to review this Nation's progress in each major area of strength.
Last edited:
Doctor Omega
Member: Rank 10
I.
First, as Secretary McNamara made clear in his address last Monday, the strategic nuclear power of the United States has been so greatly modernized and expanded in the last 1,000 days, by the rapid production and deployment of the most modern missile systems, that any and all potential aggressors are clearly confronted now with the impossibility of strategic victory--and the certainty of total destruction – if by reckless attack they should ever force upon us the necessity of a strategic reply.
In less than 3 years, we have increased by 50 percent the number of Polaris submarines scheduled to be in force by the next fiscal year, increased by more than 70 percent our total Polaris purchase program, increased by more than 75 percent our Minuteman purchase program, increased by 50 percent the portion of our strategic bombers on 15-minute alert, and increased by 100 percent the total number of nuclear weapons available in our strategic alert forces. Our security is further enhanced by the steps we have taken regarding these weapons to improve the speed and certainty of their response, their readiness at all times to respond, their ability to survive an attack, and their ability to be carefully controlled and directed through secure command operations.
II.
But the lessons of the last decade have taught us that freedom cannot be defended by strategic nuclear power alone. We have, therefore, in the last 3 years accelerated the development and deployment of tactical nuclear weapons, and increased by 60 percent the tactical nuclear forces deployed in Western Europe.
Nor can Europe or any other continent rely on nuclear forces alone, whether they are strategic or tactical. We have radically improved the readiness of our conventional forces – increased by 45 percent the number of combat ready Army divisions, increased by 100 percent the procurement of modern Army weapons and equipment, increased by 100 percent our ship construction, conversion, and modernization program, increased by 100 percent our procurement of tactical aircraft, increased by 30 percent the number of tactical air squadrons, and increased the strength of the Marines. As last month's "Operation Big Lift" – which originated here in Texas – showed so clearly, this Nation is prepared as never before to move substantial numbers of men in surprisingly little time to advanced positions anywhere in the world. We have increased by 175 percent the procurement of airlift aircraft, and we have already achieved a 75 percent increase in our existing strategic airlift capability. Finally, moving beyond the traditional roles of our military forces, we have achieved an increase of nearly 600 percent in our special forces – those forces that are prepared to work with our allies and friends against the guerrillas, saboteurs, insurgents and assassins who threaten freedom in a less direct but equally dangerous manner.
III.
But American military might should not and need not stand alone against the ambitions of international communism. Our security and strength, in the last analysis, directly depend on the security and strength of others, and that is why our military and economic assistance plays such a key role in enabling those who live on the periphery of the Communist world to maintain their independence of choice. Our assistance to these nations can be painful, risky and costly, as is true in Southeast Asia today. But we dare not weary of the task. For our assistance makes possible the stationing of 3-5 million allied troops along the Communist frontier at one-tenth the cost of maintaining a comparable number of American soldiers. A successful Communist breakthrough in these areas, necessitating direct United States intervention, would cost us several times as much as our entire foreign aid program, and might cost us heavily in American lives as well.
About 70 percent of our military assistance goes to nine key countries located on or near the borders of the Communist bloc – nine countries confronted directly or indirectly with the threat of Communist aggression – Viet-Nam, Free China, Korea, India, Pakistan, Thailand, Greece, Turkey, and Iran. No one of these countries possesses on its own the resources to maintain the forces which our own Chiefs of Staff think needed in the common interest. Reducing our efforts to train, equip, and assist their armies can only encourage Communist penetration and require in time the increased overseas deployment of American combat forces. And reducing the economic help needed to bolster these nations that undertake to help defend freedom can have the same disastrous result. In short, the $50 billion we spend each year on our own defense could well be ineffective without the $4 billion required for military and economic assistance.
Our foreign aid program is not growing in size, it is, on the contrary, smaller now than in previous years. It has had its weaknesses, but we have undertaken to correct them. And the proper way of treating weaknesses is to replace them with strength, not to increase those weaknesses by emasculating essential programs. Dollar for dollar, in or out of government, there is no better form of investment in our national security than our much-abused foreign aid program. We cannot afford to lose it. We can afford to maintain it. We can surely afford, for example, to do as much for our 19 needy neighbors of Latin America as the Communist bloc is sending to the island of Cuba alone.
First, as Secretary McNamara made clear in his address last Monday, the strategic nuclear power of the United States has been so greatly modernized and expanded in the last 1,000 days, by the rapid production and deployment of the most modern missile systems, that any and all potential aggressors are clearly confronted now with the impossibility of strategic victory--and the certainty of total destruction – if by reckless attack they should ever force upon us the necessity of a strategic reply.
In less than 3 years, we have increased by 50 percent the number of Polaris submarines scheduled to be in force by the next fiscal year, increased by more than 70 percent our total Polaris purchase program, increased by more than 75 percent our Minuteman purchase program, increased by 50 percent the portion of our strategic bombers on 15-minute alert, and increased by 100 percent the total number of nuclear weapons available in our strategic alert forces. Our security is further enhanced by the steps we have taken regarding these weapons to improve the speed and certainty of their response, their readiness at all times to respond, their ability to survive an attack, and their ability to be carefully controlled and directed through secure command operations.
II.
But the lessons of the last decade have taught us that freedom cannot be defended by strategic nuclear power alone. We have, therefore, in the last 3 years accelerated the development and deployment of tactical nuclear weapons, and increased by 60 percent the tactical nuclear forces deployed in Western Europe.
Nor can Europe or any other continent rely on nuclear forces alone, whether they are strategic or tactical. We have radically improved the readiness of our conventional forces – increased by 45 percent the number of combat ready Army divisions, increased by 100 percent the procurement of modern Army weapons and equipment, increased by 100 percent our ship construction, conversion, and modernization program, increased by 100 percent our procurement of tactical aircraft, increased by 30 percent the number of tactical air squadrons, and increased the strength of the Marines. As last month's "Operation Big Lift" – which originated here in Texas – showed so clearly, this Nation is prepared as never before to move substantial numbers of men in surprisingly little time to advanced positions anywhere in the world. We have increased by 175 percent the procurement of airlift aircraft, and we have already achieved a 75 percent increase in our existing strategic airlift capability. Finally, moving beyond the traditional roles of our military forces, we have achieved an increase of nearly 600 percent in our special forces – those forces that are prepared to work with our allies and friends against the guerrillas, saboteurs, insurgents and assassins who threaten freedom in a less direct but equally dangerous manner.
III.
But American military might should not and need not stand alone against the ambitions of international communism. Our security and strength, in the last analysis, directly depend on the security and strength of others, and that is why our military and economic assistance plays such a key role in enabling those who live on the periphery of the Communist world to maintain their independence of choice. Our assistance to these nations can be painful, risky and costly, as is true in Southeast Asia today. But we dare not weary of the task. For our assistance makes possible the stationing of 3-5 million allied troops along the Communist frontier at one-tenth the cost of maintaining a comparable number of American soldiers. A successful Communist breakthrough in these areas, necessitating direct United States intervention, would cost us several times as much as our entire foreign aid program, and might cost us heavily in American lives as well.
About 70 percent of our military assistance goes to nine key countries located on or near the borders of the Communist bloc – nine countries confronted directly or indirectly with the threat of Communist aggression – Viet-Nam, Free China, Korea, India, Pakistan, Thailand, Greece, Turkey, and Iran. No one of these countries possesses on its own the resources to maintain the forces which our own Chiefs of Staff think needed in the common interest. Reducing our efforts to train, equip, and assist their armies can only encourage Communist penetration and require in time the increased overseas deployment of American combat forces. And reducing the economic help needed to bolster these nations that undertake to help defend freedom can have the same disastrous result. In short, the $50 billion we spend each year on our own defense could well be ineffective without the $4 billion required for military and economic assistance.
Our foreign aid program is not growing in size, it is, on the contrary, smaller now than in previous years. It has had its weaknesses, but we have undertaken to correct them. And the proper way of treating weaknesses is to replace them with strength, not to increase those weaknesses by emasculating essential programs. Dollar for dollar, in or out of government, there is no better form of investment in our national security than our much-abused foreign aid program. We cannot afford to lose it. We can afford to maintain it. We can surely afford, for example, to do as much for our 19 needy neighbors of Latin America as the Communist bloc is sending to the island of Cuba alone.