Comment: well, I provided the original...did you listen to it?

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: JFK Speech (see in situ)

Joη's picture

well, I provided the original...did you listen to it?

allow me to include some phrases that were cut out:

~@6:10 in the above provided mp3: "I refer first to the need for far greater public information, and second, to the need for far greater official secrecy."

[what follows should sound familiar, until...]

~@7:40: "...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."

"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."

"...For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy "...[should sound familiar, until]: "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."
...
"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?"



He wanted more secrecy.  Not less.  I didn't bring up Eisenhower.

"You underestimate the character of man." | "So be off now, and set about it." | Up for a game?