JFK's Secret Societies Speech -- Infiltration Instead of Invasion
(media.greatawakening.win)
Comments (25)
sorted by:
terrific as always. I feel blessed to be part of this and fulfilled that it's been what I was put on this earth for.
Stickied this!
Excellent sticky :)
I believe the entire cabal is just secret societies. No militaries conventionally fighting. No borders remain unreached however
God bless President Donald Trump, his wife, family, legal team, friends, Q followers, the Voters that support Trump, the Military that supports the Constitution and Trump, Law Enforcement that too supports the Constitution and Trump, most of all Trumps security team and their families too, God Bless America, Bless the missing children and you the reader Too.🙏
Gives us a really good starting point for the beginning of this phase in the war against tyranny.
Secret societies have been running the world for millennia - it will take a massive truth bomb to bring them down. I am praying hard and waiting expectantly.
The first two lines are the most important, imo.
I really like the way he says "...covet means...".
He is talking about evil. Some people in this thread seem to be confused if it was Cabal or USSR Communist. It's all evil, they have the same playbook. Doesn't matter which one he was talking about because they are the same thing, evil.
You might be right, fren…My thought is, JFK started the defense intelligence agency because he knew there was something very wrong with the CIA. There was a hidden influence on the CIAs actions (see the RFK Jr. interview with Joe Rogan).
Insurgency
That's the best speech there ever was.
It's clear that he's talking about communism and the cold war, as you say, but the special insight of his speech is that he goes deeper into the unseen cause to expose it.
The communist governments' threat was the backdrop of his speech, but he highlights that they are the poisonous outgrowth, whereas the root was already active in our country, already being waged in secret by the cabal.
I think this is a good comment, but I'm not certain that this is his actual focus here.
Edit:
Note this:
So here he is talking directly about the monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that opposes the US AROUND the world, and then goes to describe THAT conspiracy, which is clearly the USSR global operations. They used covert means and infiltration in EVERY country around the world. Every one. He's not talking simply about infiltration inside the USA.
Q's important drop notwithstanding, I think its possible to misread the real meaning and import of this speech by superimposing a preconceived notion on top of it.
But like I said, not a popular opinion.
Edit Edit: It seems pretty clear that JFK is alluding to secret societies here, but that's where the tricky thing is. Is what he describes here about those secret societies, or the soviet conspiracy. Or is it perhaps a comm? a veiled reference? I like questioning what seem like 'obvious' answers...
Depending on timing, I may do a text analysis of the speech. For example, consider the "It" that Kennedy refers to so often. Anons might jump to the conclusion that he's talking about the Cabal as the "it", but from a textual reading, I think that he is referring to the USSR's global operations.
I think it's a purely academic point, as today we realize that the forces behind communism in Russia / USSR are the same as what we now call the cabal. Whether he internally identified them as such is impossible to know without further explanation from JFK himself. But Q implies that he did see beyond the surface level, even if the Soviet apparatus was the focus of the time.
Will read the full speech, but to note my current opinion is that the USSR was an outgrowth and operational hub, or “wicked flower” if you will, of the mentioned poisonous root.
Where we were attacked through infiltration and secret societies, Russia seems to have been hit more directly.
I.e. I don’t necessarily see how what you’re saying falsifies the other claim. Seems like they could both be true.
It's from the official US archives which also contains a video link to the speech.
https://archive.org/details/jfk_secret_societies
Q even points out the JFK reference to secret societies. JFK spells it out that in very plain language.
It did not say anything about those specific names. It only talks about a highly organized conspiracy that is using covert means to expand its sphere of influence. It lines up with many things Q said as well. Q highlights many lines from this speech.
It's also critical thinking to say this is JFK highlighting the cabal. Q also may have highlighted the speech to use it to describe the cabal. Whether or not you think that was what JFK meant (which is how I see it), it is very clear Q posts on insurgency and the shadow government were using it to talk about the cabal.
A cabal that uses communism and various "isms" as a means to control humanity.
If you wanted to see the whole thing you can just go find the full context.
I have provided the archive website, but here is an additional link. The whole speech is available:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgHGg8PiAqo
Thank you. I've read and reviewed the whole speech, quite a few years ago.
Is this actually correct? This is not an "official US archive". It's a post/compilation written by "American President John F. Kennedy" The speech is certain available in its entirety, but if this edited version is part of some official US archive, I've yet to see it. (Archive.org doesn't qualify)
Correct. I gave these as examples of secret societies that many anons are familiar with.
Well, flesh it out and make the argument. By the way, I don't think what you say here is true; "Critical thinking is saying X". Critical thinking is not saying or making an assertion. It's a methodology about HOW we review information that we have at hand. You might assert that critical thinking leads to the conclusion that JKF is highlighting the Cabal, but not that it is equivalent to saying that. As far as I can see.
Yes, I know that Q references the secret societies, and specifically in relation to JFK.
Actually, I have done this in the past. What I am saying is, anons need to review the whole speech in its full textual and historical context. Do you disagree?
In an edited version of my comment above, I've added a link to the speech. I know well that Q referenced secret societies, but this speech is what it is, in full context.
I don't think your reply here is much of a rebuttal. I'd be interested to read a serious rebuttal of why this speech COULD NOT BE about the Soviet conspiracy, and MUST be about secret societies aka the Cabal. I'm all ears. But I'm wary of prejudice and bias, and when we anons ride short drift with what appear to be foregone conclusions, it raises red flags for me.
It's OK to disagree, but surely our collective aim should be to apply as rigorous a self-examination and review of our own approaches as possible.
Is it a debate your want or an argument about how you don't like the way I said something? If you just want to get into that discussion then we should take it to pm.
I find arguing with someone's tone just derails a thread.
Thanks. When I comment, I tend to write out fast, throw up the discussion, and then edit back. Probably not the best approach, but due to time zone issues, usually, I'm not engaging with someone who responds within 10 minutes!!!!
I edited out the section you quote here, because, as you rightly point out, its unproductive. Derails is the right word, and you are right to point it out. mea culpa.
I'm glad to hear that. I understand that sometimes we write things hastily and it can read in a way we didn't mean or intend for it to read.
I try my best to write in a neutral way, but I also tend to write fast. For example, I realized that I wrote four times in my comment the same phrase. I didn't even realize I had done it until after the comment went live.