| Cleary397 said:
So if you are agreeing that this was not "weeks before he was assassinated" then you must omit the evidence provided as it starts with false claims.
You are misrepresenting JFK by using his words completely out of context. The speech was in response to him feeling his privacy was being violated by the american press, and that privacy needs to be redefined and considered carefully. Maybe include this in your future claims, which is the follow up paragraph to your snippet - "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 time 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. When you include this, it becomes clear he is not talking about some ultra secretive society who somehow feels the need to plant these obvious clues to their existance, but is in fact talking about privacy and the freedom of the press. |
honestly i didn't even notice that myself because i guess the date given seemed unimportant compared to what he actually says but as i said i never spoke of the date because its completely irrelevant
""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 time 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.
When you include this, it becomes clear he is not talking about some ultra secretive society who somehow feels the need to plant these obvious clues to their existance, but is in fact talking about privacy and the freedom of the press."
to be honest my interpretation is that he's calling for the press to not keep any information that they have about this conspiracy he spoke of hidden...
and he goes on to mention a possible motive of the press for keeping this information hidden
"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."
that is privacy in the name of "national security" not for the sake of individuals
now it seems obvious to me that the fact that the general public forms most of their opinions under the influence of information fed to them by the media and given that he's spoken of a powerful conspiracy
that him following his announcement of the conspiracy with comments on the media must mean that he acknowledges that the media must play a part in informing people of this conspiracy that they should do so regards of the constraints that have been placed upon them to not reveal certain information
now how you reduce that entirely to him just talking about the media when he speaks of the gathering of military, political, economic, etc etc etc resources being gathered is beyond me lol
if this were just about freedom of speech how does the gathering of the resources that he speak of factor in? there are obviously other points that undermine what you're saying but i think this is the most obvious place your argument falls flat
