Did JFK get killed over this speech?

[Freewill]

That is if you believe in conspiracy. But it does raise some interesting points and certainly predicted what we see in the American press today.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

No.

 

[tyroneweaver]

did I tell ya I shot jfk

 

[tinydancer]

I wish I could time travel into the future to witness the day the truth came out about his assassination.

 

[rcfieldz]

Do you have the blood stained manuscript?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I wish I could time travel into the future to witness the day the truth came out about his assassination.

Or time travel to the past to watch.

 

[skye]

 

[Steven_R]

JFK got his head blown open by a complete failure at life. Oswald's politics were just window dressing. He needed to let the world know he actually existed. He could have been a Neo-Nazi or KKK member or a John Bircher. Oswald wanted to make a statement to the world that he was more than a nobody who would be forgotten.

We look for all these half-truths, tenuous connections, and conspiracies because we don't want to face the cold truth that nobodies can kill great men and change the course of history in a heartbeat. The world as we know it can be turned upside down by madmen and who knows what the consequences will be? So it must be a conspiracy, despite the fact that it's happened over and over. JFK gets killed by Oswald, Archduke Franz Ferdinand by Princip, McKinnley by Czolgosz, Ghandi, Marat, MLK, the list goes on and on.

Who foresaw WW1 because a motorcade got lost and a Serb separatist just happened to be leaving a café at just the right time to see his target of opportunity? Could Oswald have possibly foreseen LBJ getting us into Vietnam? Could Corday possibly have known the Terror would grow when she plunged that knife into Marat's chest?

It's unsettling to think the fate of billions and all of history yet to play out hinges on the acts of would-be martyrs, political radicals, and the disaffected. We need conspiracies to somehow rationalize the irrational.

 

[TheOldSchool]

 

[waltky]

The best explanation I've heard is that the CIA was behind the assassination...

... because Kennedy was going to cut back troop levels...

... before our involvement got out of hand...

... which would have stalled many CIA careers...

... after they had invested so much time and effort...

... to build their presence there.

Only the CIA would have had the resources at the time...

... to pull off an assassination and cover their tracks.

 

[Freewill]

JFK got his head blown open by a complete failure at life. Oswald's politics were just window dressing. He needed to let the world know he actually existed. He could have been a Neo-Nazi or KKK member or a John Bircher. Oswald wanted to make a statement to the world that he was more than a nobody who would be forgotten.

We look for all these half-truths, tenuous connections, and conspiracies because we don't want to face the cold truth that nobodies can kill great men and change the course of history in a heartbeat. The world as we know it can be turned upside down by madmen and who knows what the consequences will be? So it must be a conspiracy, despite the fact that it's happened over and over. JFK gets killed by Oswald, Archduke Franz Ferdinand by Princip, McKinnley by Czolgosz, Ghandi, Marat, MLK, the list goes on and on.

Who foresaw WW1 because a motorcade got lost and a Serb separatist just happened to be leaving a café at just the right time to see his target of opportunity? Could Oswald have possibly foreseen LBJ getting us into Vietnam? Could Corday possibly have known the Terror would grow when she plunged that knife into Marat's chest?

It's unsettling to think the fate of billions and all of history yet to play out hinges on the acts of would-be martyrs, political radicals, and the disaffected. We need conspiracies to somehow rationalize the irrational.

A little man with a gun kills the most powerful man in the world, doesn't equal out.

 

[Iceweasel]

Hinkley nearly killed Reagan to impress Jodie Foster. Who knows what the outcome would have been. We got the Brady Bill as a result, although the impact is questionable. The bottom line is we put too much emphasis on a person, it makes them targets for adoration or scorn.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The best explanation I've heard is that the CIA was behind the assassination...

... because Kennedy was going to cut back troop levels...

... before our involvement got out of hand...

... which would have stalled many CIA careers...

... after they had invested so much time and effort...

... to build their presence there.

Only the CIA would have had the resources at the time...

... to pull off an assassination and cover their tracks.

Only the CIA would have had the resources at the time...

... to pull off an assassination

Or a loser who just happened to work in the schoolbook depository.

 

[Votto]

That is if you believe in conspiracy. But it does raise some interesting points and certainly predicted what we see in the American press today.

Executive Order 11110 is all you need to know.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

That is if you believe in conspiracy. But it does raise some interesting points and certainly predicted what we see in the American press today.

Executive Order 11110 is all you need to know.

You mean the EO that was on the books well into the Reagan administration?
What did it do that was so radical?

 

[Freewill]

On June 4, 1963, a little known attempt was made to strip the Federal Reserve Bank of its power to loan money to the government at interest. On that day President John F. Kennedy signed Executive Order No. 11110 that returned to the U.S. government the power to issue currency, without going through the Federal Reserve.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=59049

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

On June 4, 1963, a little known attempt was made to strip the Federal Reserve Bank of its power to loan money to the government at interest. On that day President John F. Kennedy signed Executive Order No. 11110 that returned to the U.S. government the power to issue currency, without going through the Federal Reserve.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=59049

strip the Federal Reserve Bank of its power to loan money to the government at interest.

The Fed doesn't loan money to the government.

Executive Order No. 11110 that returned to the U.S. government the power to issue currency, without going through the Federal Reserve.


This executive order amended Executive Order 10289 (dated September 17, 1951)[1] by delegating to the Secretary of the Treasury the president's authority to issue silver certificates under the Thomas Amendment of the Agricultural Adjustment Act, as amended by the Gold Reserve Act. The order allowed the Secretary to issue silver certificates, if any were needed, during the transition period under President Kennedy's plan to eliminate Silver Certificates and use Federal Reserve Notes.

He planned to eventually issue only Federal Reserve Notes.
Why would that make the Fed angry?

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

JFK was killed by Oswald's opportunity.
That's it.

 

[Freewill]

On June 4, 1963, a little known attempt was made to strip the Federal Reserve Bank of its power to loan money to the government at interest. On that day President John F. Kennedy signed Executive Order No. 11110 that returned to the U.S. government the power to issue currency, without going through the Federal Reserve.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=59049

strip the Federal Reserve Bank of its power to loan money to the government at interest.

The Fed doesn't loan money to the government.

Executive Order No. 11110 that returned to the U.S. government the power to issue currency, without going through the Federal Reserve.


This executive order amended Executive Order 10289 (dated September 17, 1951)[1] by delegating to the Secretary of the Treasury the president's authority to issue silver certificates under the Thomas Amendment of the Agricultural Adjustment Act, as amended by the Gold Reserve Act. The order allowed the Secretary to issue silver certificates, if any were needed, during the transition period under President Kennedy's plan to eliminate Silver Certificates and use Federal Reserve Notes.

He planned to eventually issue only Federal Reserve Notes.
Why would that make the Fed angry?

So what was JFK talking about in the speech?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

On June 4, 1963, a little known attempt was made to strip the Federal Reserve Bank of its power to loan money to the government at interest. On that day President John F. Kennedy signed Executive Order No. 11110 that returned to the U.S. government the power to issue currency, without going through the Federal Reserve.

John F. Kennedy: Executive Order 11110 - Amendment of Executive Order No. 10289 as Amended, Relating to the Performance of Certain Functions Affecting the Department of the Treasury

strip the Federal Reserve Bank of its power to loan money to the government at interest.

The Fed doesn't loan money to the government.

Executive Order No. 11110 that returned to the U.S. government the power to issue currency, without going through the Federal Reserve.


This executive order amended Executive Order 10289 (dated September 17, 1951)[1] by delegating to the Secretary of the Treasury the president's authority to issue silver certificates under the Thomas Amendment of the Agricultural Adjustment Act, as amended by the Gold Reserve Act. The order allowed the Secretary to issue silver certificates, if any were needed, during the transition period under President Kennedy's plan to eliminate Silver Certificates and use Federal Reserve Notes.

He planned to eventually issue only Federal Reserve Notes.
Why would that make the Fed angry?

So what was JFK talking about in the speech?

Communism.