Showing posts with label KENNEDY. Show all posts
Showing posts with label KENNEDY. Show all posts
Monday, September 15, 2025
Thursday, December 21, 2023
Wednesday, November 22, 2023
Saturday, October 06, 2018
Sunday, July 01, 2018
How Justice Kennedy's 30 years helped and hurt religious freedom
ByKelsey Dallas@kelsey_dallas
Published: June 30, 2018 8:00 am
Charles Dharapak, AP
Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy arrives for a roundtable discussion titled "Making Law Work for Everyone", Friday, June 13, 2008, at the Organization of American (OAS) in Washington. In writing for the court majority on the Supreme Court's decision on Guantanamo Bay on Thursday, Kennedy acknowledged the terrorism threat the country faces and the administration's justification for the detentions, but he declared, "The laws and Constitution are designed to survive, and remain in force, in extraordinary times." (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)
SALT LAKE CITY — Justice Anthony Kennedy spent three decades on the Supreme Court, playing a pivotal role in rulings that expanded LGBT rights, protected religion in the public square and ensured access to abortions.
But when it comes to his religious freedom legacy, he may be remembered most for the questions he never answered, according to legal experts.
In his opinions legalizing same-sex marriage and condemning anti-religion bias, Kennedy advocated for tolerating religious beliefs. However, his rulings rarely gave a clear picture of how to legislate tolerance through state and federal policies, said Thomas Berg, a professor of law and public policy at the University of St. Thomas.
Kennedy's rulings "are partly responsible for religious freedom being such a political hot potato," he said.
By retiring this year, Kennedy creates the possibility for a justice to join the Supreme Court who may be more willing to directly address public policy but less willing to work with liberal colleagues. Kennedy may come to regret not taking stronger positions when he had the chance, said Fred Gedicks, a law professor at Brigham Young University.
"It's almost as if he lost the courage of his convictions in the last few years," he said.
Matt Slocum, APFILE - In this Oct. 3, 2013, file photo, Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy speaks to faculty members at the University of Pennsylvania law school in Philadelphia. The 81-year-old Kennedy said Tuesday, June 27, 2018, that he is retiring after more than 30 years on the court.(AP Photo/Matt Slocum, File)
Hot-button issues
Kennedy was then-President Ronald Reagan's third choice for the Supreme Court when he was nominated in 1987. A Democrat-led Senate had rejected the Republican president's first choice, and the second nominee withdrew from the process after previous marijuana use came to light.
Monday, September 21, 2015
Pope to the White House -- a scene once unthinkable
11 hours ago
.
View gallery
.
.
.
.
Washington (AFP) - This week's Oval Office meeting between Barack Obama and Pope Francis will be the 29th encounter between a Catholic pontiff and a US president. But for decades such a meeting was improbable.
Related Stories
Why Evangelicals Are Attacking Pope Francis on Abortion Huffington Post
For GOP candidates, better to be with pope than against him Associated Press
Francis Follows His Own Script The Wall Street Journal
American Catholics -- largely of Irish, Italian, Polish and Hispanic extraction -- have been accused of having more loyalty to Rome than their homeland.
- Long-time fears -
"The United States had a long history of anti-Catholicism since the first settlers were mostly Protestants who brought with them their disdain for Catholicism," said Thomas Reese, a senior analyst for National Catholic Reporter.
"They also feared that if Catholics ever got power, they would impose their religion on the country. The Know Nothings, the KKK, and anti-immigrant movements were all anti-Catholic."
When Democratic governor Al Smith ran in the 1928 presidential election, he came under withering attack.
Roman Catholics make up 20 percent of the population in the United States (AFP Photo/Brian Kersey)
"Some critics said that if he won, he would build a tunnel from the White House to the Vatican," said Reese.
The first meeting between a pope and a president did not come until 1919, until after World War I — when Woodrow Wilson held an audience with Pope Benedict XV.
The next meeting would not be for 40 years, between Dwight Eisenhower and Pope John XXIII.
"Post WWII, American Catholics began to become more integrated into American culture and society,” said Chester Gillis, a professor of theology at Georgetown University.
Many Catholics gained access to university, thanks to the “GI Bill” which helped troops get a university education and enter the middle class.
Mixed-religion marriages became more and more common.
Pope Benedict XVI became only the second pontiff to visit the White House in 2008 where thousands of …
In 1961, John F. Kennedy became the first Roman Catholic president, and the only one to date.
But his path to the White House was not without difficulty.
- Changing times -
"Many thought if you elect a Catholic, then the pope will have an influence on political policy in America,” said Gillis.
"There was a fear the president's first loyalty would be to his church and Kennedy assured people he would not do that. And he did not do that."
JFK strongly and repeatedly stressed that he was president and not a papal puppet.
Pope John Paul II and then US leader Ronald Reagan both shared a deep distrust of Communism which le …
"I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute; where no Catholic prelate would tell the President -- should he be Catholic -- how to act,” he said in one 1960 speech when still a presidential candidate.
"I am not the Catholic candidate for President. I am the Democratic Party's candidate for President who happens also to be a Catholic,” he said.
"I do not speak for my church on public matters; and the church does not speak for me."
After Kennedy there was a burst of presidential-papal pow-wows. Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford all meet their Vatican counterparts.
The Second Vatican Council, which began in 1961, made it clearer that any future Catholic presidents may not face the same doubts Kennedy did.
The church "no longer required Catholics if they came into power to make Catholicism the state religion. The church became a supporter of religious freedom and freedom of conscience,” said Reese.
Pope John-Paul II became the first pontiff to visit the White House after an invite from then presid …
But in a country where 20 percent of the population is Catholic, it still was not until Jimmy Carter’s presidency in 1979 that a pope — John Paul II — would come to the White House for the first time.
Many of these meetings were little more than symbolic gestures, with little political substance.
But the relationship between Ronald Reagan and John Paul II marked a shift; both were vehemently anti-Communist.
Obama has already met Pope Francis once and it has been a meeting of minds.
Both have urged action to tackle climate change and Obama’s efforts to restore ties with Cuba has gelled with the current pope’s efforts to see Havana open up politically.
That has irked Obama’s Republican foes, who oppose the perceived papal blessing for Obama’s political agenda.
In a sign of just how deep the anger is, Paul Gosar a Republican Catholic from Arizona, has stated that he will boycott the Pope’s historic speech to Congress.
“When the Pope chooses to act and talk like a leftist politician, then he can expect to be treated like one,” he said.
He accused Francis of adopting "the false science being propagated by the Left."
"If the Pope wants to devote his life to fighting climate change then he can do so in his personal time. But to promote questionable science as Catholic dogma is ridiculous.”
Gosar and others may take some comforting in the fact that on issues like abortion and same sex marriage there is still a vast distance between Obama and the head of the Catholic church.
Pope Francis' upcoming visit to Cuba has prompted Cuban American faithfuls like Frances Gomez and Martha Lidia Serra Mohr to travel to the island for the first time in decades, with hopes that the pope will bring change to Cuba.
Many of these meetings were little more than symbolic gestures, with little political substance.
But the relationship between Ronald Reagan and John Paul II marked a shift; both were vehemently anti-Communist.
Obama has already met Pope Francis once and it has been a meeting of minds.
Both have urged action to tackle climate change and Obama’s efforts to restore ties with Cuba has gelled with the current pope’s efforts to see Havana open up politically.
That has irked Obama’s Republican foes, who oppose the perceived papal blessing for Obama’s political agenda.
In a sign of just how deep the anger is, Paul Gosar a Republican Catholic from Arizona, has stated that he will boycott the Pope’s historic speech to Congress.
“When the Pope chooses to act and talk like a leftist politician, then he can expect to be treated like one,” he said.
He accused Francis of adopting "the false science being propagated by the Left."
"If the Pope wants to devote his life to fighting climate change then he can do so in his personal time. But to promote questionable science as Catholic dogma is ridiculous.”
Gosar and others may take some comforting in the fact that on issues like abortion and same sex marriage there is still a vast distance between Obama and the head of the Catholic church.
Pope Francis' upcoming visit to Cuba has prompted Cuban American faithfuls like Frances Gomez and Martha Lidia Serra Mohr to travel to the island for the first time in decades, with hopes that the pope will bring change to Cuba.
.
Friday, May 29, 2015
JFK on 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… Our way of life is under attack. Those who make themselves our enemy are advancing around the globe…
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 saythat the danger has never been more clear and its presence has never been more imminent…
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.”
John F Kennedy, 35th President of the United States.
.
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 saythat the danger has never been more clear and its presence has never been more imminent…
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.”
John F Kennedy, 35th President of the United States.
.
Wednesday, March 11, 2015
The President and the Press - John F. Kennedy
The President and the Press: Address before the American Newspaper Publishers Association,
April 27, 1961
Listen to speech here:
Listen to speech here:
View related documents here: 
President John F. KennedyWaldorf-Astoria Hotel, New York City
April 27, 1961
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 Dana for an increase in his munificent salary of $5 per installment, a salary which he and Engels ungratefully labeled as the "lousiest petty bourgeois cheating."
But when all his financial appeals were refused, Marx looked around for other means of livelihood and fame, eventually terminating his relationship with the Tribune and devoting his talents full time to the cause that would bequeath 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 newspaper man.
I have selected as the 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 20,000,000 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 that 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 a far greater public information; and, second, to the need for far greater official secrecy.
I
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 outweighed 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 insuring 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 is 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 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.
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.
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; that 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 strategy 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 in 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 journalism and not the tests of national security. And my question tonight is whether additional tests should not now be adopted.
The 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 any new types of security classifications. I have no easy answer to the dilemma that I have posed, 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 reexamine 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 add the question: "Is it in the interest of the 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 endeavors, and subject their actions to the same exacting tests.
And should the press of America consider and recommend the voluntary assumption of specific new steps or machinery, I can assure you that we will cooperate whole-heartedly with those recommendations.
Perhaps there will be no recommendations. Perhaps there is no answer to the dilemma 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.
II
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 am not asking your newspapers to support the 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 does not 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 emphasize 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.
III
It was early in the Seventeenth 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. In that one world's efforts 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.
President John F. KennedyWaldorf-Astoria Hotel, New York City
April 27, 1961
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 Dana for an increase in his munificent salary of $5 per installment, a salary which he and Engels ungratefully labeled as the "lousiest petty bourgeois cheating."
But when all his financial appeals were refused, Marx looked around for other means of livelihood and fame, eventually terminating his relationship with the Tribune and devoting his talents full time to the cause that would bequeath 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 newspaper man.
I have selected as the 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 20,000,000 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 that 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 a far greater public information; and, second, to the need for far greater official secrecy.
I
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 outweighed 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 insuring 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 is 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 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.
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.
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; that 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 strategy 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 in 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 journalism and not the tests of national security. And my question tonight is whether additional tests should not now be adopted.
The 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 any new types of security classifications. I have no easy answer to the dilemma that I have posed, 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 reexamine 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 add the question: "Is it in the interest of the 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 endeavors, and subject their actions to the same exacting tests.
And should the press of America consider and recommend the voluntary assumption of specific new steps or machinery, I can assure you that we will cooperate whole-heartedly with those recommendations.
Perhaps there will be no recommendations. Perhaps there is no answer to the dilemma 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.
II
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 am not asking your newspapers to support the 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 does not 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 emphasize 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.
III
It was early in the Seventeenth 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. In that one world's efforts 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.
Friday, November 22, 2013
Who killed JFK?
daweil
Uploaded on Apr 6, 2007
Ex-Jesuit priest Alberto Rivera revealed that JFK assassination was planned by the Jesuits of Rome who are beyond the Freemasons, CFR, TLC, knights of Malta, CIA...
.
.
Friday, June 21, 2013
Ceremony marks 50th anniversary of Kennedy's historic visit to Ireland
KENNEDY Jun-20-2013 (970 words) With photos posted June 19. xxxn
By Christiana Elgin
Catholic News Service
ARLINGTON, Va. (CNS) -- In 1963, Dunganstown in County Wexford, Ireland, welcomed one of its own back to his ancestral birthplace.
June 27 marks 50 years since President John F. Kennedy's historic visit to Ireland. Kennedy was the first Catholic to become U.S. president.
On June 18, a commemorative ceremony honoring the president's Irish heritage was held at Arlington National Cemetery. Fire from Kennedy's graveside eternal flame was used to light a torch that was being transported to the quayside Kennedy Monument in the town of New Ross in Wexford. In a June 22 ceremony, it was also to be used to light a flame in memory of all Irish emigrants.
Kevin Conmy of the Embassy of Ireland presided over the ceremony. He said the flame will be transported using Olympic technology and be delivered by an escort detail from the Irish Naval Service.
"In Ireland, we like our commemorations," Conmy said in an interview with Catholic News Service. "Commemorations are very important in terms of passing on our culture and our experiences and the visit from President Kennedy in 1963 was a historic event and so that's why we're celebrating it."
Charge d'affaires Conmy said it is important for such a historic visit to transcend generations. "The election of President Kennedy, that third generation Irish elected to the highest office in the world, was a real inspiration to Irish people everywhere, but particularly in Ireland."
Colors of both Ireland and the U.S. were presented by respective members of the military, including a bagpipe performance by Irish Defense Forces Cpl. Anthony Kelly of a hymn that was also performed at the late president's state funeral.
Members of the Kennedy and Shriver families were recognized at the ceremony. Representatives of the Peace Corps and the Special Olympics also were present, including about 10 Special Olympics athletes greeted by the movement's CEO, Timothy Shriver. His late mother, Eunice Kennedy Shriver, founded the Special Olympics in 1968.
Emmy-nominated singer and Wexford man Michael Londra performed a rendition of Ireland's national anthem "Amhran na bhFiann" ("The Soldiers' Song") in Gaelic. Londra, according to his website, has played the role of the late Bobby Kennedy in a performance of "JFK: A Musical Drama," at the invitation of U.S. director and choreographer Larry Fuller.
Award-winning Irish tenor Anthony Kearns performed "The Star Spangled Banner." Kearns opened the 2013 National Memorial Day Parade in Washington and among the many other events where he has performed was a bipartisan Friends of Ireland lunch in March, invited by House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio.
Kearns told CNS following the Arlington ceremony that he tries to stay outside the political fray.
"Music transcends all boundaries, I'm in the middle of it all," said Kearns, who also hails from County Wexford. "It's a great opportunity to be here and I lend my voice to various occasions."
Freshman U.S. Rep. Joseph Kennedy III, D-Mass., spoke at the Arlington memorial, applauding Ireland's unwavering spirit. He is the grandson of Bobby Kennedy, who was a U.S. senator and served as attorney general in his brother's administration.
In a reflection related to his great uncle's words to a joint session of the Irish Parliament during his presidential visit, Congressman Kennedy said he thought of the president's journey as the story of a young man returning home.
"Fifty years ago, speaking in Cork, President Kennedy said most countries send out oil or iron, steel or gold or some other crop, but Ireland has only one export, and that is its people," Congressman Kennedy said. "While this country imports raw material and finished goods to feed our economy, we welcome the stranger to strengthen our spirit. For almost a full generation, they were mostly Irish.
"Now they come from every corner of the world. We light this torch today as a symbol of the bond that was forged when a young American president found his way home."
A 1963 story on President Kennedy's visit by the National Catholic Welfare Conference News Service, the predecessor to CNS, reported that he said no larger nation ever did more than Ireland to keep Christianity and Western culture alive in the darkest centuries.
Minister Paul Kehoe, the Irish government's chief whip, laid a wreath of assorted flowers in the colors of the Irish flag on the Kennedy family grave.
A Catholic priest closed the ceremony with a prayer.
"All throughout Scripture, the flame represents presence of the spirit of God," said Father Timothy Hubbs, a lieutenant colonel and senior Army chaplain at Arlington National Cemetery.
"From the fire of the burning bush, God commissioned Moses to leave his home and seek the freedom of his people. By a pillar of a flame, the angel of the Lord led the Israelites through the desert to the promise land. By tongues of fire, the Holy Spirit indwelled the apostles and empowered them to go into the world and proclaim the Gospel to all creation."
The same Spirit "enlivens our hearts" and "leads us out of darkness and into the light of Christ," he continued. "Therefore, as we call down God's blessing, on this torch and these lamps and all that the flame represents, our foremost concern must be that our Christian lives bare out the kind of witness we are called to live as the people of Christ in this generation."
Father Hubbs prayed that the "love and affection of the angels and saints" would be with those taking the torch lit with the flame from the Kennedy grave in Arlington "to kindle a memorial in the Irish homeland."
"May God shield you on every step, may he aid you in every path," he prayed, "and may he keep you safe on every slope, on ever hill, and on every plane, in the air or on sea, until you are home again. Amen."
END
By Christiana Elgin
Catholic News Service
ARLINGTON, Va. (CNS) -- In 1963, Dunganstown in County Wexford, Ireland, welcomed one of its own back to his ancestral birthplace.
June 27 marks 50 years since President John F. Kennedy's historic visit to Ireland. Kennedy was the first Catholic to become U.S. president.
On June 18, a commemorative ceremony honoring the president's Irish heritage was held at Arlington National Cemetery. Fire from Kennedy's graveside eternal flame was used to light a torch that was being transported to the quayside Kennedy Monument in the town of New Ross in Wexford. In a June 22 ceremony, it was also to be used to light a flame in memory of all Irish emigrants.
Kevin Conmy of the Embassy of Ireland presided over the ceremony. He said the flame will be transported using Olympic technology and be delivered by an escort detail from the Irish Naval Service.
"In Ireland, we like our commemorations," Conmy said in an interview with Catholic News Service. "Commemorations are very important in terms of passing on our culture and our experiences and the visit from President Kennedy in 1963 was a historic event and so that's why we're celebrating it."
Charge d'affaires Conmy said it is important for such a historic visit to transcend generations. "The election of President Kennedy, that third generation Irish elected to the highest office in the world, was a real inspiration to Irish people everywhere, but particularly in Ireland."
Colors of both Ireland and the U.S. were presented by respective members of the military, including a bagpipe performance by Irish Defense Forces Cpl. Anthony Kelly of a hymn that was also performed at the late president's state funeral.
Members of the Kennedy and Shriver families were recognized at the ceremony. Representatives of the Peace Corps and the Special Olympics also were present, including about 10 Special Olympics athletes greeted by the movement's CEO, Timothy Shriver. His late mother, Eunice Kennedy Shriver, founded the Special Olympics in 1968.
Emmy-nominated singer and Wexford man Michael Londra performed a rendition of Ireland's national anthem "Amhran na bhFiann" ("The Soldiers' Song") in Gaelic. Londra, according to his website, has played the role of the late Bobby Kennedy in a performance of "JFK: A Musical Drama," at the invitation of U.S. director and choreographer Larry Fuller.
Award-winning Irish tenor Anthony Kearns performed "The Star Spangled Banner." Kearns opened the 2013 National Memorial Day Parade in Washington and among the many other events where he has performed was a bipartisan Friends of Ireland lunch in March, invited by House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio.
Kearns told CNS following the Arlington ceremony that he tries to stay outside the political fray.
"Music transcends all boundaries, I'm in the middle of it all," said Kearns, who also hails from County Wexford. "It's a great opportunity to be here and I lend my voice to various occasions."
Freshman U.S. Rep. Joseph Kennedy III, D-Mass., spoke at the Arlington memorial, applauding Ireland's unwavering spirit. He is the grandson of Bobby Kennedy, who was a U.S. senator and served as attorney general in his brother's administration.
In a reflection related to his great uncle's words to a joint session of the Irish Parliament during his presidential visit, Congressman Kennedy said he thought of the president's journey as the story of a young man returning home.
"Fifty years ago, speaking in Cork, President Kennedy said most countries send out oil or iron, steel or gold or some other crop, but Ireland has only one export, and that is its people," Congressman Kennedy said. "While this country imports raw material and finished goods to feed our economy, we welcome the stranger to strengthen our spirit. For almost a full generation, they were mostly Irish.
"Now they come from every corner of the world. We light this torch today as a symbol of the bond that was forged when a young American president found his way home."
A 1963 story on President Kennedy's visit by the National Catholic Welfare Conference News Service, the predecessor to CNS, reported that he said no larger nation ever did more than Ireland to keep Christianity and Western culture alive in the darkest centuries.
Minister Paul Kehoe, the Irish government's chief whip, laid a wreath of assorted flowers in the colors of the Irish flag on the Kennedy family grave.
A Catholic priest closed the ceremony with a prayer.
"All throughout Scripture, the flame represents presence of the spirit of God," said Father Timothy Hubbs, a lieutenant colonel and senior Army chaplain at Arlington National Cemetery.
"From the fire of the burning bush, God commissioned Moses to leave his home and seek the freedom of his people. By a pillar of a flame, the angel of the Lord led the Israelites through the desert to the promise land. By tongues of fire, the Holy Spirit indwelled the apostles and empowered them to go into the world and proclaim the Gospel to all creation."
The same Spirit "enlivens our hearts" and "leads us out of darkness and into the light of Christ," he continued. "Therefore, as we call down God's blessing, on this torch and these lamps and all that the flame represents, our foremost concern must be that our Christian lives bare out the kind of witness we are called to live as the people of Christ in this generation."
Father Hubbs prayed that the "love and affection of the angels and saints" would be with those taking the torch lit with the flame from the Kennedy grave in Arlington "to kindle a memorial in the Irish homeland."
"May God shield you on every step, may he aid you in every path," he prayed, "and may he keep you safe on every slope, on ever hill, and on every plane, in the air or on sea, until you are home again. Amen."
END
.
Monday, June 10, 2013
"The very word ‘secrecy’ is repugnant in a free and open society"
JFK Blows The Whistle on Secret Societies!
seandulac
Uploaded on Oct 29, 2006
-- believeyourowneyes.com -- President John F. Kennedy warned us about the danger posed by tolerating excessive secrecy, and permitting members of "secret societies" and the military-industrial(-intelligence-media) complex to slowly covertly subvert our Constitutional Republic from within, right before our eyes.
....
P.S.
"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 outweighed 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 insuring 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 is 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.
"The President and the Press: Address before the American Newspaper Publishers Association", given by US President John F. Kennedy at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel in New York City, April 27, 1961. (For the full text, click here; for the audio file, click here).
/////
Wednesday, May 29, 2013
Deaths of Witnesses Connected to the assassination of John F. Kennedy
v Primary Sources v
Some writers who have investigated the assassination of John F. Kennedy have claimed that a large number of witnesses to the event have died in mysterious circumstances. The Sunday Times reported that "the odds against these witnesses being dead by February, 1967, were one hundred thousand trillion to one." When the Select Committee on Assassinations questioned the newspaper reporter who wrote the article, he admitted he had made a "careless journalistic mistake".
In his book Crossfire, the author Jim Marrs, provided a list of 103 people who he claims died in mysterious circumstances between 1963 and 1976. In reality, most of these people died of natural causes. Some of these people did die in accidents. Others were murdered or committed suicide. However, these people rarely had information that would have been important in helping investigators discover if there was a conspiracy to kill Kennedy.
The first person to die linked to the case was Karyn Kupcinet. In his book, Forgive My Grief, W. Penn Jonesreports that "a few days before the assassination, Karyn Kupcinet, 23, was trying to place a long distance telephone call from the Los Angeles area. According to reports, the long distance operator heard Miss Kupcinet scream into the telephone that President Kennedy was going to be killed." Karyn's body was discovered on 30th November, 1963. Police estimated that she had been dead for two days. The New York Times reported that she had been strangled. Her actor boyfriend, Andrew Prine was the main suspect but he was never charged with the murder and the crime remains unsolved.
Some researchers claimed that there was a link between the death of Kupcinet and the assassination ofJohn F. Kennedy. It was argued that the conspirators were trying to frighten off her father and journalist, Irv Kupcinet from telling what he knew.
Grant Stockdale, a close friend of John F. Kennedy died on 2nd December, 1963 when he fell (or was pushed) from his office on the thirteenth story of the Dupont Building in Miami. Stockdale did not leave a suicide note but his friend, George Smathers, claimed that he had become depressed as a result of the death of the president. However, it later became known that four days after the assassination Stockdale flew to Washington and talked with Robert Kennedy and Edward Kennedy. On his return Stockdale told several of his friends that "the world was closing in." On 1st December, he spoke to his attorney, William Frates who later recalled: "He started talking. It didn't make much sense. He said something about 'those guys' trying to get him. Then about the assassination."
After the assassination of President Kennedy, Gary Underhill told his friend, Charlene Fitsimmons, that he was convinced that he had been killed by members of the CIA. He also said: "Oswald is a patsy. They set him up. It's too much. The bastards have done something outrageous. They've killed the President! I've been listening and hearing things. I couldn't believe they'd get away with it, but they did!"
Underhill believed there was a connection between Executive Action, Fidel Castro and the death of John F. Kennedy: "They tried it in Cuba and they couldn't get away with it. Right after the Bay of Pigs. But Kennedy wouldn't let them do it. And now he'd gotten wind of this and he was really going to blow the whistle on them. And they killed him!"
Gary Underhill told friends that he feared for his life: "I know who they are. That's the problem. They know I know. That's why I'm here. I can't stay in New York." Underhill was found dead on 8th May 1964. He had been shot in the head and it was officially ruled that he had committed suicide. However, in his book, Destiny Betrayed (1992), James DiEugenio claimed that the bullet entered the right-handed Underhill's head behind the left ear.
There has been a significant number of people who have died who did appear to have important information about the case. This includes several journalists investigating the murder. On 24th November, 1963, Bill Hunter of the Long Beach Press Telegram and Jim Koethe of the Dallas Times Herald interviewed George Senator. Also there was the attorney Tom Howard. Earlier that day Senator and Howard had both visitedJack Ruby in jail. That evening Senator arranged for Koethe, Hunter and Howard to search Ruby's apartment.
It is not known what the journalists found but on 23rd April 1964, Hunter was shot dead by Creighton Wiggins, a policeman in the pressroom of a Long Beach police station. Wiggins initially claimed that his gun fired when he dropped it and tried to pick it up. In court this was discovered that this was impossible and it was decided that Hunter had been murdered. Wiggins finally admitted he was playing a game of quick draw with his fellow officer. The other officer, Errol F. Greenleaf, testified he had his back turned when the shooting took place. In January 1965, both were convicted and sentenced to three years probation.
Jim Koethe decided to write a book about the assassination of Kennedy. However, he died on 21st September, 1964. It seems that a man broke into his Dallas apartment and killed him by a karate chop to the throat. Tom Howard died of a heart-attack, aged 48, in March, 1965.
On 21st July, 1964, Dr. Mary Sherman was murdered in New Orleans. She had been stabbed in the heart, arm, leg and stomach. Her laboratory was also set on fire. The crime has never been sold. Later Edward T. Haslam published Mary, Ferrie & the Monkey Virus : The Story of an Underground Medical Laboratory. In the book he argued that Sherman was working with David Ferrie. Haslam believed that this Central Intelligence Agency backed research involved disease intelligence gathering and cancer research using laboratory-made biological weapons. Haslam claimed this biological weapon was to be used against Cuba’s Fidel Castro.
Judyth Baker later began giving interviews aboout involvement in an anti-Castro conspiracy. She claims that in 1963 she was recruited by Dr. Canute Michaelson to work with Dr. Alton Ochsner and Dr. Mary Shermanin a CIA secret project. This involved creating the means to insure Fidel Castro developed cancer.
In 1963 Judyth moved to New Orleans where she worked closely with others involved in this plot. This included Lee Harvey Oswald, David Ferrie, Clay Shaw and Guy Bannister. Later she claimed she began an affair with Oswald. The research into this biological weapon was carried out in the homes of Ferrie and Sherman. Oswald role in this conspiracy was to work as a courier. However, the project was abandoned in September, 1963, and Oswald was ordered to Dallas.
Oswald kept in touch with Baker and in November, 1963, he had been forced to join a plot to kill John F. Kennedy. Oswald believed that the conspiracy was being organized by Mafia leader, Carlos Marcello and aCIA agent, David Atlee Phillips. Oswald told her he would do what he could to ensure that Kennedy was not killed. After the assassination of Kennedy and the arrest of Oswald, Baker received a phone-call from David Ferrie warning her that she would be killed if she told anyone about her knowledge of these events.
On 12th October, 1964, Mary Pinchot Meyer was shot dead as she walked along the Chesapeake and Ohio towpath in Georgetown. Henry Wiggins, a car mechanic, was working on a vehicle on Canal Road, when he heard a woman shout out: "Someone help me, someone help me". He then heard two gunshots. Wiggins ran to the edge of the wall overlooking the towpath. He later told police he saw "a black man in a light jacket, dark slacks, and a dark cap standing over the body of a white woman."
Soon afterwards Raymond Crump, a black man, was found not far from the murder scene. He was arrested and charged with Mary's murder. The towpath and the river were searched but no murder weapon was ever found.
The media did not report at the time that Mary Pinchot Meyer had been having an affair with John F. Kennedy. Nor did it reveal that her former husband, Cord Meyer, was a senior figure in CIA's covert operations. As a result, there was little public interest in the case.
During the trial Wiggins was unable to identify Raymond Crump as the man standing over Meyer's body. The prosecution was also handicapped by the fact that the police had been unable to find the murder weapon at the scene of the crime. On 29th July, 1965, Crump was acquitted of murdering Mary Meyer. The case remains unsolved.
In March, 1976, James Truitt gave an interview to the National Enquirer. Truitt told the newspaper that Mary Pinchot Meyer was having an affair with John F. Kennedy. He also claimed that Meyer had told his wife, Ann Truitt, that she was keeping an account of this relationship in her diary. Meyer asked Truitt to take possession of a private diary "if anything ever happened to me".
Ann Truitt was living in Tokyo at the time of the murder. She phoned Ben Bradlee at his home and asked him if he had found the diary. Bradlee, who claimed he was unaware of his sister-in-law's affair with Kennedy, knew nothing about the diary. He later recalled what he did after Truitt's phone-call: "We didn't start looking until the next morning, when Tony and I walked around the corner a few blocks to Mary's house. It was locked, as we had expected, but when we got inside, we found Jim Angleton, and to our complete surprise he told us he, too, was looking for Mary's diary."
James Angleton, CIA counterintelligence chief, admitted that he knew of Mary's relationship with John F. Kennedy and was searching her home looking for her diary and any letters that would reveal details of the affair. According to Ben Bradlee, it was Mary's sister, Antoinette Bradlee, who found the diary and letters a few days later. It was claimed that the diary was in a metal box in Mary's studio. The contents of the box were given to Angleton who claimed he burnt the diary. Angleton later admitted that Mary recorded in her diary that she had taken LSD with Kennedy before "they made love".
Leo Damore claimed in an article that appeared in the New York Post that the reason Angleton and Bradlee were looking for the diary was that: "She (Meyer) had access to the highest levels. She was involved in illegal drug activity. What do you think it would do to the beatification of Kennedy if this woman said, 'It wasn't Camelot, it was Caligula's court'?" Damore also said that a figure close to the CIA had told him that Mary's death had been a professional "hit".
There is another possible reason why both Angleton and Bradlee were searching for documents in Meyer's house. Were they looking for material that Meyer had been collecting on CIA's covert activities?
In 1963 Desmond FitzGerald was in charge of the CIA's Cuban Task Force. In this post he personally organized three different plots to assassinate Fidel Castro. According to Dick Russell, FitzGerald had a meeting in France with a Cuban code-named AM/LASH, finalising a plan to eliminate Castro, at the same time John F. Kennedy was assassinated. FitzGerald died of a heart attack while playing tennis in Virginia on 23rd July, 1967.
Lisa Howard died at East Hampton, Long Island, on 4th July, 1965. It was officially reported that she had committed suicide. Apparently, she had taken one hundred phenobarbitols. It was claimed she was depressed as a result of losing her job and suffering a miscarriage. At first no one associated Howard's death with the Kennedy assassination. However, it has recently emerged that Howard was involved in secret negotiations with Fidel Castro on behalf of John F. Kennedy.
Winston Scott was the CIA's station chief in Mexico. Scott retired in 1969 and wrote a memoir about his time in the FBI, OSS and the CIA. He completed the manuscript, It Came To Late, and made plans to discuss the contents of the book with CIA director, Richard Helms, in Washington on 30th April, 1971. Four days before the agreed meeting Scott died of a heart attack.
Michael Scott told Dick Russell that James Angleton took away his father's manuscript. Angleton also confiscated three large cartons of files including a tape-recording of the voice of Lee Harvey Oswald. Michael Scott was also told by a CIA source that his father had not died from natural causes. Scott eventually got his father's manuscript back from the CIA. However, 150 pages were missing. Chapters 13 to 16 were deleted in their entirety. In fact, everything about his life after 1947 had been removed on grounds of national security.
Nancy Carole Tyler worked as secretary to Bobby Baker. At the time of the assassination she was living with Mary Jo Kopechne, who worked for George Smathers (she later became secretary to Robert Kennedy). According to W. Penn Jones Jr, it was Tyler and Kopechne who told Baker that John F. Kennedy planned to replace Lyndon B. Johnson as vice president. Tyler died in a plane crash, near Ocean City, Maryland, on 10th May, 1965. Kopechne was later to die in the car of Edward Kennedy on 18th July, 1969.
Dorothy Kilgallen, a crime reporter of the New York Journal, obtained a private interview with Jack Ruby. She told friends that she had information that would "break the case wide open". Aware of what had happened toBill Hunter and Jim Koethe, she handed her interview notes to her friend Margaret Smith. On 8th November, 1965, Kilgallen, was found dead. It was reported she had committed suicide. Her friend, Margaret Smith, died two days later.
Two of the men that Jim Garrison believed were involved in the conspiracy to kill Kennedy, Guy Bannister(June, 1964), David Ferrie ( February, 1967) and Eladio del Valle (February, 1967) died before they could be brought to court.
Roger D. Craig was on duty in Dallas on 22nd November, 1963. After hearing the firing at President John F. Kennedy he ran towards the Grassy Knoll where he interviewed witnesses to the shooting. About 15 minutes later he saw a man running from the back door of the Texas Book Depository down the slope to Elm Street. He then got into a Nash station wagon.
Craig saw the man again in the office of Captain Will Fitz. It was the recently arrested Lee Harvey Oswald. When Craig told his story about the man being picked up by the station wagon, Oswald replied: "That station wagon belongs to Mrs. Paine... Don't try to tie her into this. She had nothing to do with it."
Craig was also with Seymour Weitzman when the rifle was found on the sixth floor of the Texas Book Depository. He insisted that the rifle was a 7.65 Mauser and not a Mannlicher-Carcano.
Craig became unpopular with senior police officers in Dallas when he testified before the Warren Commission. He insisted he had seen Lee Harvey Oswald get into the station wagon 15 minutes after the shooting. This was ignored by Earl Warren and his team because it showed that at least two people were involved in the assassination. Craig, unlike Seymour Weitzman, refused to change his mind about finding a Mauser rather than a Mannlicher-Carcano in the Texas Book Depository. Craig was fired from the police department in 1967 after he was found to have discussed his evidence with a journalist.
In 1967 Roger D. Craig went to New Orleans and was a prosecution witness at the trial of Clay Shaw. Later that year he was shot at while walking to a car park. The bullet only grazed his head. In 1973 a car forced Craig's car off a mountain road. He was badly injured but he survived the accident. In 1974 he surviving another shooting in Waxahachie, Texas. The following year he was seriously wounded when his car engine exploded. Craig told friends that the Mafia had decided to kill him. Craig was found dead from on 15th May, 1975. It was later decided he had died as a result of self-inflicted gunshot wounds.
When the Select Committee on Intelligence Activities and Select Committee on Assassinations began investigating Kennedy's death in the 1970s the deaths of potential witnesses increased dramatically. This included several criminals with possible links to the assassination of John F. Kennedy. Those who were killed or who died in suspicious circumstances during this period included Malcolm Wallace (1971), Lucien Sarti (1972), Charles Willoughby (1972), Thomas Davis (1973), Richard Cain (1973), Dave Yarras (1974),Sam Giancana (1975), Jimmy Hoffa (1975), Roland Masferrer (1975), Johnny Roselli (1976), George De Mohrenschildt (1977), Charlie Nicoletti (1977) and Carlos Prio (1977).
William Sullivan, the main figure in the FBI involved in the Executive Action project, was shot dead near his home in Sugar Hill, New Hampshire, on 9th November, 1977. Sullivan had been scheduled to testify before the House Select Committee on Assassinations.
Sullivan was one of six top FBI officials who died in a six month period in 1977. Others who were due to appear before the committee who died included Louis Nicholas, special assistant to J. Edgar Hoover and his liaison with the Warren Commission; Alan H. Belmont, special assistant to Hoover; James Cadigan, document expert with access to documents that related to death of John F. Kennedy; J. M. English, former head of FBI Forensic Sciences Laboratory where Oswald's rifle and pistol were tested and Donald Kaylor, FBI fingerprint chemist who examined prints found at the assassination scene.
Several important figures in the Central Intelligence Agency died before they could give evidence to theHouse Select Committee on Assassinations investigations. Sheffield Edwards, the CIA official who attempted to organize the assassination of Fidel Castro, died in July, 1975. William Harvey, head of theZR/RIFLE project, died as a result of complications from heart surgery in June, 1976. William Pawley, who took part in Operation Tilt, died of gunshot wounds in January, 1977. David Morales, who some believe organized the assassination, died aged 53, on 8th May, 1978. Another important figure in CIA covert operations, Thomas Karamessines died of a heart attack on 4th September, 1978.
John Paisley was deputy director of the Office of Strategic Research. On 24th September, 1978, John Paisley, took a trip on his motorized sailboat on Chesapeake Bay. Two days later his boat was found moored in Solomons, Maryland. Paisley's body was found in Maryland's Patuxent River. The body was fixed to diving weights. He had been shot in the head. Police investigators described it as "an execution-type murder". However, officially Paisley's death was recorded as a suicide.
According to the journalist, Victor Marchetti, Paisley was a close friend of Yuri Nosenko. Marchetti also claimed that Paisley knew a great deal about the assassination of John F. Kennedy and was murdered during the House Select Committee on Assassinations investigation because he was "about to blow the whistle".
.
Wednesday, February 20, 2013
Was JFK wrong?
...............................
Without debate, without criticism, no Administration and no country can succeed—and no republic can survive. That is why the Athenian law-maker 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 emphasize 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.
John F. Kennedy
(Extract from speech on April 27th 1961 at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel in New York City before the American Newspaper Publishers Association).
(Extract from speech on April 27th 1961 at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel in New York City before the American Newspaper Publishers Association).
Read more
.
.
Sunday, May 20, 2012
JFK Secret Society Speech
Uploaded by n400ark on Feb 18, 2009
JFK The speech that got him killed
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 outweighed 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 insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it.
.
Monday, June 13, 2011
Obama's Upcoming Puerto Rico Visit Draws Scrutiny
06/13/2011 08:11 PM
Obama's Upcoming Puerto Rico Visit Draws Scrutiny
By: Josh Robin
President Obama will pay a visit to Puerto Rico Tuesday, forcing some to make the comparison between him and John F. Kennedy, who made a memorable impression on the island. NY1’s Josh Robin filed the following report.
President John F. Kennedy was tall and handsome, but it was Jacqueline Kennedy who really drew Rebecca Palacio's attention.
"Her voice was so sweet and she spoke to me in Spanish, said my name,” said Rebecca Palacios, the granddaughter of Puerto Rico’s former first lady. “And she was so beautiful."
Memories are rushing back to Palacios, granddaughter of Inéz Muñoz Marin.
She was eight when she met the first couple at the governor's mansion, La Fortaleza. The Kennedys were on a Latin American swing to promote ties with the United States during the Cold War.
It's meticulously recorded at the foundation dedicated to her grandmother's husband, Luis Muñoz Marín, the island's first democratically elected governor.
Still, there are many differences between 1961 and today.
For one, Martín and Kennedy were close. No such chemistry exists between President Barack Obama, a Democrat, and the island's Republican governor, Luis Fortuño.
Further, while Kennedy spent the night, Obama will be gone in five hours.
"There was a state dinner, there was a concert, and there was a long time to talk between them,” said Palacios. “But this time, it’s not going to be that way."
The White House is playing up the links to Kennedy, but also stresses talk over economics.
"What’s important is that the president’s visit, while it is historic, exciting and really important, it isn’t the only thing going on,” said Cecilia Muñoz, White House director of intergovernmental affairs.
Still, while Kennedy drew cheers, much of Puerto Rico seems to be collectively shrugging with some protests also expected from those wanting independence.
"Why does Obama come to Puerto Rico? Because he needs a photograph for Orlando, Florida, for New York for the next election,” said Rubén Berríos of the Puerto Rican Independence Party. “He needs to collect money. Whenever you see an American president in Puerto Rico, he's looking for something."
Obama touches down at about 11:00 a.m., after which he has a couple of events, including a Democratic fundraiser. He plans to depart by nightfall.
Source
.
Obama's Upcoming Puerto Rico Visit Draws Scrutiny
By: Josh Robin
President Obama will pay a visit to Puerto Rico Tuesday, forcing some to make the comparison between him and John F. Kennedy, who made a memorable impression on the island. NY1’s Josh Robin filed the following report.
President John F. Kennedy was tall and handsome, but it was Jacqueline Kennedy who really drew Rebecca Palacio's attention.
"Her voice was so sweet and she spoke to me in Spanish, said my name,” said Rebecca Palacios, the granddaughter of Puerto Rico’s former first lady. “And she was so beautiful."
Memories are rushing back to Palacios, granddaughter of Inéz Muñoz Marin.
She was eight when she met the first couple at the governor's mansion, La Fortaleza. The Kennedys were on a Latin American swing to promote ties with the United States during the Cold War.
It's meticulously recorded at the foundation dedicated to her grandmother's husband, Luis Muñoz Marín, the island's first democratically elected governor.
Still, there are many differences between 1961 and today.
For one, Martín and Kennedy were close. No such chemistry exists between President Barack Obama, a Democrat, and the island's Republican governor, Luis Fortuño.
Further, while Kennedy spent the night, Obama will be gone in five hours.
"There was a state dinner, there was a concert, and there was a long time to talk between them,” said Palacios. “But this time, it’s not going to be that way."
The White House is playing up the links to Kennedy, but also stresses talk over economics.
"What’s important is that the president’s visit, while it is historic, exciting and really important, it isn’t the only thing going on,” said Cecilia Muñoz, White House director of intergovernmental affairs.
Still, while Kennedy drew cheers, much of Puerto Rico seems to be collectively shrugging with some protests also expected from those wanting independence.
"Why does Obama come to Puerto Rico? Because he needs a photograph for Orlando, Florida, for New York for the next election,” said Rubén Berríos of the Puerto Rican Independence Party. “He needs to collect money. Whenever you see an American president in Puerto Rico, he's looking for something."
Obama touches down at about 11:00 a.m., after which he has a couple of events, including a Democratic fundraiser. He plans to depart by nightfall.
Source
.
Wednesday, March 02, 2011
Sirhan, The Manchurian Candidate, & CIA Mind Control Experiments (Part 1 of 3)
StevenM818 Apr 4, 2009
Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwWXsqSE01c...
These are video excerpts from "Evidence of Revision", a 6-DVD, 10 hour long documentary series that presents suppressed historical audio, video, and film recordings largely unseen by the public concerning the assassination of the Kennedy brothers and Martin Luther King Jr., the war in Vietnam, CIA mind control programs and their involvement in the RFK assassination and the Jonestown massacre. The complete series "Evidence of Revision" can be viewed for free on Google Video, or can be purchased online (Google it).
Excerpts for this video "Sirhan, The Manchurian Candidate, & CIA Mind Control Experiments" are borrowed from "Evidence of Revision, Part 5".
Assassin Sirhan Sirhan says he can't remember shooting RFK
LINDA DEUTSCH • AP Special Correspondent • February 28, 2011
This Oct. 29, 2009 photo from the California Department of Corrections shows Sirhan Sirhan, convicted of the murder of presidential candidate Sen. Robert F. Kennedy in 1968. More than four decades after Sen. Robert F. Kennedy was assassinated, Sirhan wants to go free for a crime he says he can’t remember. (AP)
Now a new lawyer is on the case and he says his efforts have also failed.
"There is no doubt he does not remember the critical events," said William F. Pepper, the attorney who will argue for Sirhan's parole Wednesday. "He is not feigning it. It's not an act. He does not remember it."
Sirhan may not remember much about the night of June 4, 1968, but the world remembers.
They have heard how Sirhan was grabbed as he emptied a pistol in the crowded kitchen of the Ambassador Hotel here where Kennedy stood moments after claiming victory in the California presidential primary. They heard how he kept firing even as his hand was pinned to a table. They heard how Kennedy, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, was shot and died, changing the course of American history.
Parole Board members are bound to review those facts, but they won't consider the many conspiracy theories floated over the years.
Pepper, a New York-based lawyer who also is a British barrister, is the latest advocate of a second gunman theory. Believers claim 13 shots were fired while Sirhan's gun held only eight bullets and that the fatal shot appeared to come from behind Kennedy while Sirhan faced him.
Pepper also suggests Sirhan was "hypno-programmed," turning him into a virtual "Manchurian Candidate," acting robot-like at the behest of evil forces who then wiped his memory clean. It's the stuff of science fiction and Hollywood movies, but some believe it is the key.
How Pepper plans to use any of this to his client's advantage remains to be seen because it will have little bearing on the decision of the panel that must determine if Sirhan is suitable for parole. The board is not being asked to retry the case and lawyers may not present evidence relating to guilt or innocence.
FILE - In this June 5, 1968 file photo, Sen. Robert F. Kennedy awaits medical assistance as he lies on the floor of the Ambassador hotel in Los Angeles moments after he was shot. (AP)
LOS ANGELES (AP) -- More than four decades after Sen. Robert F. Kennedy was assassinated, his convicted murderer wants to go free for a crime he says he can't remember.
It is not old age or some memory-snatching disease that has erased an act Sirhan Bishara Sirhan once said he committed "with 20 years of malice aforethought." It's been this way almost from the beginning. Hypnotists and psychologists, lawyers and investigators have tried to jog his memory with no useful result.
LOS ANGELES (AP) -- More than four decades after Sen. Robert F. Kennedy was assassinated, his convicted murderer wants to go free for a crime he says he can't remember.
It is not old age or some memory-snatching disease that has erased an act Sirhan Bishara Sirhan once said he committed "with 20 years of malice aforethought." It's been this way almost from the beginning. Hypnotists and psychologists, lawyers and investigators have tried to jog his memory with no useful result.
Now a new lawyer is on the case and he says his efforts have also failed.
"There is no doubt he does not remember the critical events," said William F. Pepper, the attorney who will argue for Sirhan's parole Wednesday. "He is not feigning it. It's not an act. He does not remember it."
Sirhan may not remember much about the night of June 4, 1968, but the world remembers.
They have heard how Sirhan was grabbed as he emptied a pistol in the crowded kitchen of the Ambassador Hotel here where Kennedy stood moments after claiming victory in the California presidential primary. They heard how he kept firing even as his hand was pinned to a table. They heard how Kennedy, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, was shot and died, changing the course of American history.
Parole Board members are bound to review those facts, but they won't consider the many conspiracy theories floated over the years.
Pepper, a New York-based lawyer who also is a British barrister, is the latest advocate of a second gunman theory. Believers claim 13 shots were fired while Sirhan's gun held only eight bullets and that the fatal shot appeared to come from behind Kennedy while Sirhan faced him.
Pepper also suggests Sirhan was "hypno-programmed," turning him into a virtual "Manchurian Candidate," acting robot-like at the behest of evil forces who then wiped his memory clean. It's the stuff of science fiction and Hollywood movies, but some believe it is the key.
How Pepper plans to use any of this to his client's advantage remains to be seen because it will have little bearing on the decision of the panel that must determine if Sirhan is suitable for parole. The board is not being asked to retry the case and lawyers may not present evidence relating to guilt or innocence.
.
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
Executive Order 10998
Executive Order 10998
ASSIGNING EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FUNCTIONS TO THE SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE
By virtue of the authority vested in me as President of the United States, including authority vested in me by Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 1958 (72 Stat. 1799), it is hereby ordered as follows:
SECTION 1. Scope. The Secretary of Agriculture (hereinafter referred to as the Secretary) shall prepare national emergency plans and develop preparedness programs covering: Food resources, farm equipment, fertilizer, and food resource facilities, as defined below; rural fire control; defense against biological warfare, chemical warfare, and radiological fallout pertaining to agricultural activities; and rural defense information and education. These plans and programs shall be designed to develop a state of readiness in these areas with respect to all conditions of national emergency, including attack upon the United States.
SEC. 2. Definitions. As used in this order:
(a) "Food resources" means all commodities and products, simple, mixed or compound, or complements to such commodities or products, that are capable of being eaten or drunk, by either human beings or animals' irrespective of other uses to which such commodities or products may be. put, at all stages of processing from the raw commodity to the products thereof in vendible form for human or animal consumption. For the purposes of this order the term "food resources" shall also include all starches, sugars, vegetable and animal fats and oils, cotton, tobacco, wool, mohair, hemp, flax fiber, and naval stores, but shall not include any such material after it loses its identity as an agricultural commodity or agricultural product.
(b) "Farm equipment" means machinery, equipment and repair parts manufactured primarily for use on farms in connection with the production or preparation for market or use of "food resources."
(c) "Fertilizer" means any product or combination of products for plant nutrition in form for distribution to the users thereof.
(d) "Food resource facilities" means plants, machinery, vehicles (including on farm) and other facilities for the production, processing, distribution and storage (including cold storage) of food resources, and for domestic distribution of farm equipment and fertilizer.
SEC. 3. Food Function. With respect to food resources, food resource facilities, farm equipment, and fertilizer the Secretary shall:
(a) Resources. Periodically assess assigned resources available from all sources in order to estimate availability under an emergency situation, analyze resource estimates in relation to estimated requirements in order to identify problem areas, and develop appropriate recommendations and programs including those necessary for the maintenance of an adequate mobilization base. Provide data and assistance before and after attack for national resource evaluation purposes of the Office of Emergency Planning.
(b) Requirements. Periodically assemble, develop as appropriate, and evaluate requirements for assigned resources and service, taking into account the estimated needs for military, civilian, and foreign purposes. Such evaluation shall take into consideration the geographical distribution of requirements under emergency conditions.
(c) Priorities and allocations. Develop priorities, allocations and distribution control systems and related plans to insure that available food resources are properly apportioned among and distributed to civilian, military and foreign claimants in an emergency and develop priorities, allocations and distribution control systems and related plans for the domestic distribution of farm equipment and fertilizer.
(d) Production and processing. Develop control systems and related plans including control of use of facilities designed to provide adequate and continuing production, processing and storage of essential food resources in an emergency.
(e) Salvage and rehabilitation. Develop plans for salvage of food resources after determination by proper authorities having the responsibility for this function, of their safety for human or animal consumption anti develop plans for the rehabilitation of food resource facilities after attack.
(f) Economic stabilization. Cooperate with the Office of Emergency Planning in the development of stabilization policies as they might affect agricultural production, processing, distribution, and storage, and in tile development of policies for consumer rationing of food resources.
(g) Financial aid. Develop plans and procedures for financial and credit assistance for farmers who might need such assistance under various mobilization conditions, and provide assistance to food industries in obtaining necessry financing and credit in an emergency.
SEC. 4. Cooperation with Department of Defense. In consonance with national civil defense plans, programs and operations of the Department of Defense, under Executive Order No. 10952, the Secretary shall:
(a) Facilities protection. Provide industry protection guidance materials adapted to the needs of assigned food resources facilities and promote a national program to stimulate disaster preparedness and control in order to minimize the effects of overt or covert attack, and to maintain continuity of production and capacity to serve essential users in an emergency. Guidance shall include, but not be limited to, organizing and training facility personnel shelter, evacuation plans, records protection, continuity of management, emergency repair, deconcentration or dispersal of facilities, and industrial mutual :lid associations for an emergency.
(b) Rural fire functions. In cooperation with Federal, State and local agencies, develop plans for a national program and direct activities in relationship to the prevention and control of fires in the rural areas in the United States caused by the effects of enemy attack.
(c) Biological, chemical, and radiological warfare defense functions. Develop plans for a national program, direct Federal activities, and furnish technical guidance to State and local authorities concerning
(1) diagnosis and strengthening of defensive barriers and control or eradication of diseases, pests, or chemicals introduced as agents of biological or chemical warfare against animals, crops or products thereof;
(2) protective measures, treatment and handling of livestock, including poultry, agricultural commodities on farms or ranches, agricultural lands, forest lands, and water for agricultural purposes, any of which have been exposed to or affected by radiation. Plans shall be developed for a national program and direction of Federal activities to assure the safety and wholesomeness and to minimize losses from biological and chemical warfare radiological effects, and other emergency hazards of livestock, meat and meat products, poultry and poultry products in establishments under the continuous inspection of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and agricultural commodities and products owned by the Commodity Credit Corporation or by the Secretary.
(d) Rural flefense information and education. Conduct a rural defense information and education program to advise farmers that they will have a responsibility to produce food of the kind and quantity needed in an emergency and shall work with farmers and others in rural areas to reduce the vulnerability of hollies, crops, livestock, and forests, to either overt or covert attack.
(e) Damage assessment. Maintain a capability to assess the effects of attack on assigned resource areas and departmental installations, both at national and field levels, and provide data to the Department of Defense.
SEC. 5. Claimancy. The Secretary shall prepare plans to claim materials, manpower, equipment, supplies and services which would be needed to carry out assigned responsibilities and other essential functions of the Department from the appropriate agency and work with such agencies in developing programs to insure availability of such resources Ill an emergency.
SEC. 6. Stockpiles. The Secretary shall assist the Office of Emergency Planning in formulating and carrying out plans for stockpiling strategic and critical materials. In the administration of Commodity Credit Corporation inventories of food resources shall take all possible measures to assure the availability of such inventories when and where needed in an emergency. The secretary shall also develop plans and procedures for the proper utilization of agriculture items stockpiled for survival purposes.
SEC. 7. National Program Guidance. The Secretary shall provide technical guidance to State and local governments to the end that all planning concerned with functions assigned herein will be effectively coordinated. He shall also maintain relations with the appropriate industries to foster mutual understanding of Federal emergency plans.
SEC. 8. Research. Within the framework of over-all Federal research objectives, the Secretary shall supervise or conduct research directly concerned with carrying out emergency preparedness responsibilities, designate representatives for necessary ad hoc or task force groups' and provide advice and assistance to other agencies in planning for research in areas involving the interests of the Department of Agriculture.
SEC. 9. Functional Guidance. The Secretary, in carrying out the functions assigned in this order, shall be guided by the following:
(a) Interagency cooperation. The Secretary shall assume the initiative in developing joint plans for the coordination of emergency food resources of those departments and agencies which have the responsibility for any segment of such activities. He shall utilize to the maximum those capabilities of other agencies qualified to perform or assist in the performance of assigned functions by contractual or other agreements.
(b) Presidential coordination. The Director of the Office of Emergency Planning shall advise and assist the President in determining policy for, and assist him in coordinating the performance of functions under this order with the total national preparedness program.
(c) Emergency planning. Emergency plans and programs and emergency or organization structure required thereby, shall be developed as an integral part of the continuing activities of the Department of Agriculture and the basis that it will have the responsibility for carrying out such programs during an emergency. The Secretary shall be prepared to implement all appropriate plans developed under this order. Modifications and-temporary organizational changes, based on emergency conditions, will be in accordance with policy determination by the President.
SEC. 10. Emergency Functions. Nothing in this order shall be construed as conferring authority under Title III of the Federal Civil Defense Act of 1950, as amended, or otherwise, to put into effect any emergency plan, procedure, policy, program, or course of action prepared or developed pursuant to this order. Such authority is reserved to the President.
SEC. 11. Redelegation. The Secretary is hereby authorized to redelegate within the Department of Agriculture the functions hereinabove assigned to him.
SEC. 12. Prior Actions. To the extent of any inconsistency between the provisions of ,any prior order and the provisions of this order, the latter shall control. Emergency Preparedness Order No. 1 (hereto issued by the Director, Office of Civil and Defense Mobilization) (26 F.R. 651-652). is hereby revoked.
JOHN F. KENNEDY
THE WHITE HOUSE, February 16, 1962.
.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)