Kirk Gallaway

I don't think I'd go that far to compare the speeches. But people here might read the entire text of the American University speech instead of just watching the snippets "Pax Americana" and "After all, we all breathe the same air." But it was a great speech and those will always be great aspirational snippets for generations to come as well. . But I was also very surprised at the time when I first saw JFK's speech in Fort Worth about how hawkish the last speech of JFK's life was. And Michael has shown quotes of this here as well . As I said earlier and some here threw a conniption fit, politicians play to the audiences they're addressing and JFK wasn't exempt. Notice how in his final line when JFK talks about the U.S. keeping the peace and promoting it's interest, he says, "To that great cause, Texas and the United States is committed". The body of the speech is between 3:10 and 13:10. https://youtu.be/nTFqG64Oqac I might disagree with that but maybe a tad left leaning of the center. And being left of center was the right place to be during the Civil Rights movement, as the nation was polarizing but middle class whites could now see the virulent American style of racism being played out on their tv's and watch the progress of MLK and the Civil Rights marches. And when confronted, JFK took the lead. without a doubt and massive tax cuts for the wealthy, but not near what it is now. A lot of times here when we hear about JFK concerning the unions, it's about the steel crisis which was really more JFK railing against the steel magnates for raising the price of steel 6 more dollars per ton, than it was really pro labor. But earlier as a Senator JFK did sponsor a labor act to clean up the unions. He was no Hubert Humphrey, but I'd say he's just a tad left leaning of center there. Yes, but he almost didn't have a choice on that. But after going to the brink of an abyss with the Cuban Missile Crisis, he was going to seize the unique opportunity for peace as he was in the rare position of being a foreign policy liberal who had shown his mettle in dealing with the Soviets. I'm no expert. But I've never believed JFK was going to be completely out of Vietnam by the end of 1965. But I know he would never have made near the commitment to Vietnam LBJ made. I think probably in the first year of his new term, he would have started disengaging, just like Joe Biden did, but more gradually to mitigate his political embarrassment. The only factor that could have modified that slightly would be how the war went in the 18 months following his assassination. IMO

Putin's invasion of Ukraine is "the unspeakable" act of the 21st century. All of our hopes of decreasing spending toward the war machine are dashed. Our best hope now is that it's a 5-10 year detour of increased defense spending. But it looks like there will be some areas of damage that may not get better. And guess what, the complete release of the JFKA files is not going to make a dent in that. So whatever fantasies you have about that, you might as well start trying to deal with the world as it is. But by that, I don't mean to advocate and can understand why people would be against U.S. funding of the war. It's interesting that Jim trots out Jeffrey Sachs and just to give you another viewpoint. I read a Socialist leaning publication a few years back that was dealing with the question of what happened to Russia after the Soviet Union dissolved and they attacked Jeffrey Sachs as making a number of economic proposals in the 90's that the Russians adopted with disastrous results! While conceding that the Russians didn't necessarily follow all the recommendations of the Western economists. Anyway, I just thought it was worth mentioning.

So you haven't seen the video that is the topic of this thread? I gave you my source. It's Talbot himself at 4:44. I'll say it again Ron, Talbot credits himself in 2004 with being the first one to set RK straight about his Father suspecting a conspiracy. What you should have got , if you hadn't risen to defend to check every book source you could find, is that there is a conflict between Talbot's opinion of Sheridan being a reputable source that Bobby was going to use to re open his brother's murder case when he became President, and Jim who claims that Sheridan is NSA, CIa because Sheridan investigated Garrison and told Bobby that Garrison's case was a fraud and was a producer of an NBC documentary on the assassination. . As far as Sheridan's connections to intelligence, I already laid that out for you and none of those connections were any secret. If you're so incensed to be Jim's point man in this conflict, be my guest, but leave me out of it! All these issues I tried to spell out for you but you become too emotional to really read. Try watching Talbot's video and calmly read what I said again.

Lots of blurriness, obstruction and counter claims. Sheridan's ties to intelligence don't appear to be a great secret. From Wiki Sheridan joined the Federal Bureau of Investigation, resigning after four years over J. Edgar Hoover's focus on anti-Communism.[4] As Sheridan later put it, "Hoover was more interested in guys who were Communists for 15 minutes in 1931 than he was in guys who were stealing New Jersey."[1] He was then a National Security Agency investigator for three years.[1][4] Sheridan was an investigator for the United States Senate Select Committee on Improper Activities in Labor and Management, recruited to its staff by Robert F. Kennedy in 1957.[1][2] He was a regional coordinator for John F. Kennedy's 1960 presidential campaign, and a coordinator for the Robert F. Kennedy presidential campaign, 1968.[4] After Robert Kennedy was appointed Attorney General in 1961, Sheridan became a special assistant to Kennedy working as the effective chief of a team investigating Hoffa and the Teamsters.[3] From 1965 to 1970, he was an NBC News special correspondent, producing documentaries on crime and gun control among other issues;[4] his unit received a Peabody Award for work on the 1967 Detroit riot.[3] Sheridan also covered the 1967 prosecution of Clay Shaw by Jim Garrison, and in 1967 produced an hour-long special for NBC on the assassination of John F. Kennedy.[6] Ok, since we're talking about Talbot. Let's drop Jim Di's Sheridan's "clandestine" claims just for now. The Sheridan interview is at the very earliest a year after RFK's assassination, because he talks of Clay Shaw's acquittal. and his official story about the Garrison investigation is that it's a fraud. So Talbot first informed RK about his father's investigation into the death of his brother using Sheridan whose official statement well after RFK's death is that he looked into Garrison's ongoing investigation and thought it was a fraud. And then in 1967 produced an hour-long special for NBC on the JFK assassination essentially promoting the WC findings. But he was then knowingly retained by RFK to be a major coordinator of his Presidential campaign in 1968! And Talbot cites his source as an interview with Sheridan''s widow after Sheridan's death in 1995. But why cite that source at all if it Talbot had had knowledge that Bobby had sent Sheridan to look into the Garrison investigation. So he apparently didn't? So to believe Talbot, the only explanation would be that Sheridan secretly continued his own investigation that produced such great results, that Bobby was encouraged to want to open a new investigation into his brother's death when he became President. But if Bobby were to become President and execute this plan, wouldn't he look bad for quashing Garrrison's investigation earlier? And there are no files. What am I missing? None of RK's initiation into the JFKA adds up well.

Ron, We already did the background with Sheridan and Garrison So Ron, to clarify, This is your quote from Jim below . Whose here and undoubtedly reading this. And yet apparently Talbot, who used Sheridan's wife as a source, doesn't know this or he would have told RK this, and told us this in the interview, because after all there's no point in keeping it silent, if Sheridan is in fact, NSA and interfaces with Angleton, as Jim alleges. Right?

Yeah, but he's never offered any specifics and really doesn't allude to having any special knowledge. And if those files existed, and were of any value that they could be used to buttress his campaign, why wouldn't he use them? It would be big news here!.

That's assuming his Father conducted a detailed investigation and there are files. That's what I've said. I don't think RK has any special knowledge or any specifics at all. But he is impressionable. He was initiated by Talbot and groomed into the Dulles -Did-It authors, including Jim Di. I should say I tend to hold a CIA involvement in a plurality among existing theories. Then when he finally outed his thinking that the CIA killed his Father and Uncle, and launched his campaign, many here saw that as further validation that they'd always been right, but that isn't necessarily the case at all.

When a asked a simple question to clarify his own statement. John first manufacturers a question he never asked with a question mark. ? He's accommodated in good faith. Still no answer, and he's still 48 hours out. What a charade! Stop trying to B. S. us John.

No, please tell me about it. What did he uncover?

This interview was first posted by Doug in the Water Cooler thread. I enjoyed "Devil chessboard" a lot and consider Talbot a good author who IMO, didn't get caught lunging at a lot of other low hanging fruit in the JFKA. The issue as to how RK first became curious as to his father and uncle's death has always been a curiosity for me as the Kennedy family, by their silence, has been so obstructionist to the the investigation of the JFKA. How did RK find out, and become converted? Talbot credits himself as having first informed RK in 2004. At the time, he says RK was barely able to look him in the eye and said the family always told the siblings to "look ahead", and besides RK said his father was content not to further investigate his brother's assassination. Talbot then corrected him and told RK that Bobby indeed was going to open up an investigation into his brother's death when he became President. The source of Talbot's claim was the widow of Walter Sheridan, who was the effective chief of Bobby's team investigating Jimmy Hoffa and the Teamsters, who died in 1995 and apparently was silent about it for the next 27 years! Does anyone here know of any other witnesses to this fact? This is the same Walter Sheridan who RFK sent down to look into Garrison's investigation, which upon Sheridan's investigation, later concluded that Garrison's investigation was a fraud and then Garrison became convinced that Bobby was trying to stop his investigation into the murder of his brother, and accused Sheridan of "public bribery". ? I read an interview with Sheridan from the JFK Library where he talks mostly of the RFK campaign in California in 1968 and goes briefly into the night of the assassination, but makes no reference to Bobby saying he was going to open an investigation into his brother's death when he became President. Why is so much of the Kennedy past enshrouded in secrecy? There's so much conjecture! It is remarkable that RK and the 13 siblings of RFK and JFK spent the entire 20th century silent about the assassination of JFK and RFK, and RK apparently never talked to anyone or even entertained this idea until he was 50 years old! And the reason RK gave Talbot is that they were instructed by their family back in the 60's. Whew!

Hey, Didn't Glenn Greenwald say that free speech in the West was a real bitch!

Oh come Roger , You were too lazy to even take the time to find out what this thread is about. This not remotely connected to JFK's speech. By that scrimpy criterion, the RK spamming would go on like it did a month ago on this forum. This is like a Ron de Santis journal burning Ben Cole diatribe against freelance writers who don't agree with him, and painting all their actions as Operation Mockingbird and you were too lazy to even go there and see what was going on, and now you're just continuing your months long filibuster to the mods for front billing, because you want attention but are not prepared to give the commensurate substance. But if you are, go to "Political discussions". It's that simple! How To Find "Political Discussions"? That's not to mention that this is a silly needless thread that could have been done with a simple PM to the mods, but that wouldn't suck enough attention..

Not so fast? John You've had 24 hours to come up with "Not so fast"? Where have you been? But OK, RK was refuted for making the tired argument that some African nations for example have lower covid rates than the U.S. He was refuted by one of moderators who said that with country to country comparisons, you have to take in account factors such as demographics, such as age ,(Africa is a younger continent.) health status, and I'll add the fact that people are outdoors more in hotter climates, and RK conceded that fact. Ok, You made this statement. John: RK is the only US presidential candidate who could possibly save the US from the dire straits it’s now in. Ok, and what are those dire straits? And how does RK save us from them? Can you understand that anyone would ask. What are you talking about?

i agree, Of course JFK was a cold warrior. It's pretty naive to think JFK was much different than any politician, talking out of both sides of his mouth depending on his audience. Michael has produced a number of other excerpts from speeches of the period and he's met with the stunned silence of a rather tribal consciousness that posits JFK was infallible Catholic saint, which IMO has really been a very obstructionist element on this forum for years. By hearing historic accounts from people around of JFK, they are so glowing so as not to seem real, at least to me. I don't think anybody really knew JFK. By saying that I don't mean to get in any embroiled conversation about his personal life, but that includes his wife and i would suspect the person who knows him best is his brother, who was still 8 years younger, and I've personally never uncovered any evidence that he ever tried to penetrated many of the deeper motivations behind what JFK did, but of course, how can we know?

When this silly thread was placed in the "Political discussions" forum. It actually spawned another Ben "How to find political discussions "thread", Roger then injected himself into the discussion and defended this thread here, while never even reading it. i pointed this out, yesterday and unembarrassed,Roger actually posted the completely irrelevant post below, this morning. Sandy then wisely shut the thread down just 2 minutes before I responded. Here is my response below. And Ben and Roger probably still haven't been able to find their their way to this thread! Roger: Following the RFK campaign as he tries to revive the point of JFK's peace speech and reopen the JFKA is not about opposition to Joe Biden, Sandy. In other words to do so is not merely "political", though of course politics has to be involved. It's about the purpose of this forum. Whether or not Junior makes it to the White House is not the point. The interest in the JFKA that Junior has stirred up is obvious. For one thing, people are actually discovering the peace speech and maybe even starting to connect the dots. Few things are more important to this forum than that. Oh come Roger , You were too lazy to even take the time to find out what this thread is about. This not remotely connected to JFK's speech. By that scrimpy criterion, the RK spamming would go on like it did a month ago on this forum. This thread is like a Ron de Santis journal burning Ben Cole diatribe against freelance writers who don't agree with him, and painting all their actions as Operation Mockingbird and you were too lazy to even come here and see what was going on, and now you're just continuing your months long filibuster to the mods for front billing, because you want attention but are not prepared to give the commensurate substance. But if you are,come here to the "Political discussions". It's that simple! How To Find "Political Discussions"? That's not to mention that this is a silly needless thread that could have been done with a simple PM to the mods, but that wouldn't suck enough attention!. ---K ****

Now how about some cool Trump in jail memes!

Right on Steve!

John: RK is the only US presidential candidate who could possibly save the US from the dire straits it’s now in. Ok, and what are those dire straits? And how does RK save us from them?

Apparently that decision is made by the Judge of that district. That's good news! Though apparently John Roberts can overrule and make it televised. Yeah, fat chance of that! Mark Meadows knows everything , and he's been quiet for a couple of months which has fueled speculation that he's cooperating!

Leslie first posted this info in the Political Discussions thread , and I confirmed it with this NYT article published yesterday. Patrick Byrne has contributed $100,000 to RK's campaign. Patrick Byrne, with Michael Flynn and Sydney Powell were part of the plan to seize the voting machines in the key states and to have Trump declare martial law. Then later, were part of the group, to put pressure on Pence to declare a delay one week so they, in a coordinated attack could have the time to influence those key state legislators. I assume RK hasn't been asked this yet is because this story was released yesterday. Watch how cagey Byrne is in this episode of Frontline before he is exposed as the kingpin! @26:45 through 35:00! https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/02/us/politics/rfk-jr-donors.html

Leslie first posted this info in the Political Discussions thread , and I confirmed it with this NYT article published yesterday. Patrick Byrne has contributed $100,000 to Rk's campaign. Patrick Byrne, with Michael Flynn and Sydney Powell were part of the plan to seize the voting machines in the key states and to have Trump declare martial law. Then later to put pressure on Pence to declare a delay one week so they, in a coordinated attack could try to influence those key state legislators. I assume RK hasn't been asked this yet is because this story was released yesterday.It would be interesting to see how many people here would still insist that RK is being picked on by the "Deep State"! Watch how cagey Byrne is in this episode of Frontline before he is exposed as the kingpin! @26:45 through 35:00! https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/02/us/politics/rfk-jr-donors.html .

Yup here it is! Byrne has contributed $100,000 to Rk's campaign. It was released yesterday in the NY times! I know who Kate Kelly is. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/02/us/politics/rfk-jr-donors.html

Great find, Leslie! Wish i could read it but I don't want to subscribe. Patrick Byrne, with Michael Flynn ans Sydney Powell were part of the plan to seize the voting machines in the key states and to have Trump declare martial law. Then later to put pressure on Pence to declare a delay one week so they, in a coordinated attack could try to influence those key state legislators. If they are contributors to RK's campaign. I wonder why he hasn't been asked about them yet? It would be interesting to see how many people here would still insist that RK is being picked on by the "Deep State"! Watch how cagey Byrne is in this episode of Frontline before he is exposed as the kingpin! @26:45 through 35:00!

Ok, I try to put in some laughs just to let you know I can do this with love. But your fluffy presentation interview that you've used now 3 times between Ellen Vargas and RK. is really superficial. And the list of donors to the Rk/ Hotez debate on Joe Rogan includes a pimp misogynist. Did you check out my recommended clip in the Reason interview with RK? The difference between the Vargas interview is night and day. Even if you're an RK worshipper, he spends so much time rambling, back pedaling and off on diversions. I know something about holding an audience, and he takes way too long. But more importantly, he provides no sense of closure. Is it any surprise that his campaign has stalled?. It doesn't look good. Unfortunately this topic has dominated his campaign. But it is important, and he has only himself to blame.

I didn't switch anything. Roger, this is what happens when you parachute into the middle of a conversation without any preparation. Ben started this thread to complain about the mods pulling his thread entitled "Op Mock New Republic Rfk Womanizer" that featured a specific article from the New Republic about RK, that the mods wisely chose to move to the "political discussions" thread, and Ben said he was having a hard time finding the thread.. So yes Roger, we are talking about a specific thread. Both Sandy,Mark and I have now given you and Ben several ways to get to the thread. Go to the thread, read it carefully and all the responses and get back to me if you feel like it. This forum is for the JFKA.