JFK’s Complicity in Establishing the American Police State Through Disarmament


Listen to the audio version of this article.

Download a PDF version of the article.


By: Shane Radliff

April 30th, 2015

In the times we live in today, it seems that there are endless amounts of grievances that have been inflicted upon the American people; and every day, that list continues to grow and grow. With this government we currently have in place, it will continue until the climax, otherwise known as complete enslavement.

It is an easy observation to see these tyrannical powers sucking away every ounce of freedom that we have left. Government is a leech that will not stop until there is no blood left. The American people are nearly tapped dry.

Most are unaware that this isn’t a new occurrence. It didn’t start with Obama and it won’t stop with him. For one clear cut example in the history of abuse, I recommend you check out Kyle Rearden’s article, A History of Dragnet Wiretapping. For other examples, I recommend you continue reading.

There exists a sort of “hero-worship” within the alternative media of an assassinated President, known as John. F. Kennedy. I will admit, I used to somewhat fall into that category but, as with most of my other previous held beliefs, further research has lead me to the real JFK—the one not discussed by most of the alternative media.

There has been a meme floating around on Facebook (propagated by big alternative media pages), that says something along the lines of, “4 out of 5 of these Presidents prefer world government,” and JFK is the only one un-checked that supposedly didn’t. I intend to squash that myth with his own words and with the legislation he foisted on us and even advocated for in front of the United Nations.

A good place to begin is the current state of America, particularly in terms of gun control. We’ve seen over the years how the mainstream media blow these school shootings out of proportion. A dozen or so dead school children seems to be the major reason to disarm Americans. Let me ask one question though: what about the 500,000 children that were killed by Western sanctions in Iraq? Shouldn’t that be reason enough to “disarm” this genocidal government in its tracks?

I’m sure you can sense my sarcasm here. Yet, this is a deadly serious matter (disarmament even more). Once the people are disarmed and defenseless, the democide starts. Democide is by definition, death by government (not including causalities of war). We’ve seen it too many times over history.

Examples:

  • Feudal Russia (possibly 1,066,000 murdered)
  • Mexico, 1900 – 1920 (some 1,400,000 murdered)
  • North Korea, creation to present day (some 1,600,000 murdered)
  • Yugoslavia, 1944 – 1987 (1,072,000 murdered)
  • Pakistan, 1969 – 1971 (1,503,000 murdered)
  • Poland, 1945 – 1950 (1,585,000 murdered)
  • Vietnam, 1945 – 1987 (1,670,000 murdered)
  • Turkey, 1900 – 1923 (1,883,000 murdered)
  • Cambodia, 1970 – 1980 (2,035,000 murdered)
  • Japan, 1937 – 1945 (5,964,000 murdered)
  • Chinese nationalists, 1927 – 1949 (10,214,000 murdered)
  • German national socialists, 1939 – 1945 (20,946,000 murdered)
  • Chinese communists, 1949 – 1987 (35,236,000 murdered)
  • Russian communists, 1917 – 1987 (61,911,000 murdered)

The first major step towards democide in all of these examples is universal disarmament of the people. That is one objective of the Global Disarmament bill signed by John F. Kennedy. Only his proposition is worldwide: democide on a much larger scale, by a world government.

Maybe then, statists can achieve their goal that they have literally set in stone. Of course, I’m referring to the Georgia Guidestones where the declared goal is to maintain humanity at 500,000,000 “in perpetual balance with nature.”

 

Part 1: Global Disarmament is the Plan: PL 87-297 is PROOF

The first place to start is in 1957, when the U.S Disarmament Agency was created and Congress adopted the disarmament plan. The U.S Disarmament Agency was a part of the State Department.

Just a few short years later, on September 26th, 1961, Public Law 87-297 (HR 9118) was signed into existence by President John F. Kennedy. This bill established the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency (ACDA), which replaced the U.S Disarmament Agency. The updated version is known as Public Law 101-216, signed on December 11th, 1989, but we will focus on JFK’s treason.

The title of PL 87-297 states, “Freedom From War: The United States Program for General and Complete Disarmament in a Peaceful World.” It is a Department of State Publication (7277) and number five in the disarmament series and it has been added to and updated 18 times and none of its provisions have been deleted.

Let me say this, before I go any further. If JFK was strictly advocating for peace and the reduction in the number of nuclear weapons, then that would be an admirable act. The major issue with this bill is that the government entity at the head is the United Nations.

The introduction begins by saying, “First, there must be immediate disarmament action… Second, all disarmament obligations must be subject to effective international controls… Third, adequate peace-keeping machinery must be established [the United Nations]… Nations are unlikely to shed their means of self-protection in the absence of alternative ways to safeguard their legitimate interests. This can only be achieved through the progressive strengthening of INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTIONS UNDER THE UNITED NATIONS AND BY CREATING A UNITED NATIONS PEACE FORCE TO ENFORCE THE PEACE AS THE DISARMAMENT PROCESS PROCEEDS.” {EMPHASIS ADDED}

The first question that arises is, can peace actually be enforced? The word “enforce” implies that there has to be some entity using force or coercion to achieve the goal, whereas peace is… well, peaceful, and anytime there is the threat of force, it is NOT peaceful.

In the “Disarmament Goal and Objectives” section, it says, “In order to make possible the achievement of that goal, the program sets forth the following specific objectives toward which nations should direct their efforts: the disbanding of ALL NATIONAL ARMED FORCES AND THE PROHIBITION OF THEIR REESTABLISHMENT in any form whatsoever other than those required to preserve internal order and for CONTRIBUTIONS TO A UNTIED NATIONS PEACE FORCE… The elimination from NATIONAL ARSENALS OF ALL ARMAMENTS

 

La Times 2LA Times 1

 

 

The document continues on stating, “The institution of effective means for the enforcement of international agreements, and for the maintenance of peace in accordance with the PRINCIPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS.” {EMPHASIS ADDED}

As it is easy to tell, this bill places the United Nations at the head of the disarmament process and is also in conjunction with the principles of the United Nations. I think it’s blatantly obvious that any person who would sign this piece of legislation would have to be in favor of world government; if they weren’t, why would they turn over control of disarmament to an international agency?

The next important aspect of this is the section titled, “Governing Principles”. It discusses ways in which to ensure security in trust among nations so that they can safely and comfortably disarm, knowing that the other nation will as well. This section states that, “As states relinquish their arms, the United Nations must be progressively strengthened in order to improve its capacity to assure international security and the peaceful settlement of disputes.”

The first aspect mentioned is that, “Disarmament must proceed as rapidly as possible…” Next, it discusses inspection and verification techniques to be used: “Inspection and verification must establish both that nations carry out scheduled limitations or reductions and that they do not retain armed forces and armaments in excess of those permitted at any stage of the disarmament process…”

This will take us into part two of this article, but before we move forward, let’s first take a look at one other crucial piece of this legislation.

This will be an excerpt from the “Second Stage”. It says, “…The dismantling or the conversion to peaceful uses of certain military bases and facilities wherever located…”

This will also be important when we move onto part two of this article, but let’s summarize. It only makes sense when looking at the rest of the bill, that military bases must be closed or converted to peaceful uses.

There are two things worth mentioning, one from the 1990’s and one from 2015.

On April 21st, 1993, in the San Jose Mercury News, it discusses the inauguration of the Gorbachev Foundation in the USA, which is headquartered in San Francisco. Mikhail Gorbachev was the last president of the Soviet Union. Later on in this article, it says: “Gorbachev announced that the foundation is creating a national task force on US military base closings… The group will call for a national conference of the 36 US communities that the base closings affect.”

 

Gorbachev Closing Military Bases

Click for a larger image.

 

 

So, not only are military bases being closed down to lift up the United Nations Peace Force, but is being done in America by a former Russian president.

Next, let’s fast forward to an article by Rare, posted on April 22, 2015 (exactly 22 years and one day after the previous article), with the headline, “The Pentagon wants to close military bases; Congress says no.”

The article continues to say, “The Pentagon has argued for years that multiple bases inside the United States are completely unnecessary, but the concern about losing a lucrative base in their own district has kept much of Congress averse to any talk of closures. The last such closures were in 2005…”

Note that base closings are being discussed in the mainstream media.

This again leads us into part two, but let’s first take a look at John F. Kennedy’s own words, when he addressed the United Nations General Assembly, on September 25th, 1961, to advocate for this bill to be implemented. If you click here, you can watch the video and hear him say these words himself, or you can read the full transcript. For those “JFK worshippers”, I recommend you watch the video.

Kennedy starts by saying, “Dag Hammarskjold is dead. But the United Nations lives…”

He continues to say, “This will require new strength and new roles for the United Nations. For disarmament without checks is but a shadow–and a community without law is but a shell. Already the United Nations has become both the measure and the vehicle of man’s most generous impulses. Already it has provided–in the Middle East, in Asia, in Africa this year in the Congo–a means of holding man’s violence within bounds. But the great question which confronted this body in 1945 is still before us: whether man’s cherished hopes for progress and peace are to be destroyed by terror and disruption, whether the “foul winds of war” can be tamed in time to free the cooling winds of reason, and whether the pledges of our Charter are to be fulfilled or defied–pledges to secure peace, progress, human rights and WORLD LAW.”

Well, there is the first admittance that JFK has taken a “pledge to world law”. Let’s hear another, shall we?”

Kennedy continues, “Whatever advantages such a plan may hold out to my own country, as one of the great powers, we reject it. For we far prefer world law, in the age of self-determination, to world war, in the age of mass extermination.”

Now, step back for a moment, to the meme being circulated by major alternative media pages on Facebook: “4 out of 5 Presidents prefer world law,” and JFK’s name is unchecked. His own words debunk that. Let’s move forward.

Later on in his speech, he says, “The weapons of war must be abolished before they abolish us.”

Now, I don’t disagree with him at all on that point. I believe in the non-aggression principle, which is the ethical stance that initiatory force is always immoral. What I have a major issue with is that he is FOR world government and throughout this speech, he praises the United Nations for their “great work” in upholding “peace”, which is complete and utter nonsense.

Although, with the State, it will be nothing more than a monopoly on violence and unlimited corruption, but only so long we tolerate this most dangerous of superstitions. Hell, the United States has been at war for 222 out of its 239 years of existence. If that’s not telling, I don’t know what is. Unless the concept of the State is totally abandoned, mankind will suffer forever.

Continuing on, he shows his trust and reliance on the United Nations: “It would create machinery to keep the peace as it destroys the machinery of war. It would proceed through balanced and safeguarded stages designed to give no state a military advantage over another. It would place the final responsibility for verification and control where it belongs, not with the big powers alone, not with one’s adversary or one’s self, but in an international organization within the framework of the United Nations… It would achieve under the eyes of an international disarmament organization {IDO}, a steady reduction in force, both nuclear and conventional, until it has abolished all armies and all weapons except those needed for internal order and a new United Nations Peace Force. And it starts that process now, today, even as the talks begin.”

You’ve read aspects of the bill that Kennedy signed, so you already at least had an idea that he was for world government. Now, you’ve read his own words. These are his own admissions.

Kennedy continues, offering his support for PL 87-297: “I therefore propose on the basis of this Plan, that disarmament negotiations resume promptly, and continue without interruption until an entire program for general and complete disarmament has not only been agreed but has actually been achieved.”

He continues, “To destroy arms, however, is not enough. We must create even as we destroy–CREATING WORLDWIDE LAW AND LAW ENFORCEMENT as we outlaw worldwide war and weapons. In the world we seek, the United Nations Emergency Forces which have been hastily assembled, uncertainly supplied, and inadequately financed, will never be enough.” {Emphasis added}

This next part is one that should raise some eyebrows. Read carefully.

Kennedy continues, “…The new horizons of outer space must not be driven by the old bitter concepts of imperialism and sovereign claims…”

Imperialism is a terrible thing, of course. The United States’ attempt at imperialism is what has caused so much death, destruction, and turmoil all over the world, in utter and complete violation of its own federal constitution that requires a declaration of war from the U.S. Congress. What’s wrong with sovereignty though? Only someone that is for world government, would see sovereignty as “bitter” (as JFK implied).

He continues, “…We shall propose further cooperative efforts between all nations in weather prediction and eventually in weather control. We shall propose, finally, a global system of communications satellites linking the whole world in telegraph and telephone and radio and television…”

That was quite a proposal. Does that mean JFK is a conspiracy theorist?

That is enough out of the Global Disarmament bill (PL 87-297) and from JFK’s speech. You should now understand JFK’s admiration for the United Nations and strive for world government. It was in his own words.

It is time to stop worshipping or even thinking that any one President had the people’s best interests at heart. That is a ludicrous idea, and to think there was “only one President” that did, is a naïve thought. There are only two arguments I’ve really ever heard from people. One is that JFK was the only President that looked out for the people, or Ronald Reagan. The JFK one has been debunked and Reagan’s treason will be discussed in the 2nd installment of this article, which will be titled, “The Planned Police State”.

 

Part 2: The Open Skies Treaty

In Part One, you saw some excerpts from PL 87-297 and from JFK’s speech to the United Nations. This bill and JFK’s words advocate for a world government to uphold world peace by the mechanism known as a United Nations Peace Force. In conjunction with the reduction of armaments, it began the process for military base closings and a way to ensure that all nations are upholding their oath to at least begin the disarmament process.

In this installment, we will discuss the Open Skies Treaty, which is the way to ensure all nations are upholding their oath to disarmament and to world “peace.”

The Open Skies Treaty was first proposed by President Dwight Eisenhower in July 1955 to allow the United States and the Soviet Union to conduct aerial reconnaissance flights over each other’s territory. Moscow rejected the proposal, because they assumed it would be used for extensive spying.

President George H.W. Bush revived the idea in 1989 and it was signed into being on March 24, 1992. The Open Skies Treaty permits each state-party to conduct short-notice, unarmed, reconnaissance flights over the others’ entire territories to collect data on armaments, military forces, and military bases. This is consistent with what H.G. Wells advocated for in his non-fiction work, The New World Order, published in 1940:

“It is not unreasonable to anticipate the development of an ad hoc disarmament police which will have its greatest strength in the air. How easily the spirit of an air police can be denationalized is shown by the instance of the air patrols on the United States-Canadian border, to which President Roosevelt drew my attention…an ad hoc disarmament police with its main strength in the air would necessarily fall into close co-operation with the various other world police activities.”

Among nations that signed are: Canada, the United Kingdom, the Russian Federation, Spain, Turkey, Ukraine, and an additional 28 state-parties. In 2008, the states-parties celebrated the 500th overflight and since then, the number of flights exceeds 800.

Worth a mention, is in 2009, the United States flew a total of thirteen flights, twelve over Russia and one over Ukraine.

In addition to that, our “sworn enemy”, Russia, has conducted over 38 overflights in US airspace as well; to be more specific, Russia flies over the US four times a year.

One of those mentioned by the mainstream media, took place from December 8th-13th, 2014.

In the article, US Navy Commander Chris Nelson, who oversaw the flight, was quoted as saying, “Most of the world has no idea this treaty even exists. Whenever I mention that Russians fly aircraft over the US taking pictures, it blows people’s minds.”

You certainly are correct Mr. Nelson. The majority of folks don’t even know this treaty exists. Hell, if you mention that Russian planes fly over the US, you may even be labeled as a conspiracy theorist.

Now how does this tie into the Global Disarmament bill discussed in Part One? Well, the answer is quite clear.

The Open Skies Treaty is the “inspection and verification” aspect, referenced in the Global Disarmament bill. It is, quite simply, a way to ensure that the United States is disarming and that Russia is disarming, for example, in conjunction with the Global Disarmament bill. It is also an instrument of “trust” by making all nation-states feel more comfortable in disarming, by knowing the other nation is as well.

Another way to ensure disarmament is by war if a nation that didn’t adopt the disarmament policy doesn’t want to disarm. President George Bush, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of State Colin Powell, and White House spokesman Ari Fleischer have ALL said that, “Disarmament is the reason for going to war with Iraq.”

I wonder if Bush Jr.’s inaccurate assessment of the “WMD’s in Iraq” was “substantiated” by an Open Skies Treaty over-flight or if disarmament was only one of the excuses used? Your guess is as good as mine, and I won’t speculate.

To conclude, John F. Kennedy wanted the entire world disarmed, except for the United Nations Peace Force and the minimal amount needed internally to provide support to the UN Peace Force. The Open Skies Treaty is the inspection and verification method used to ensure all nations are in fact, disarming.

The major question left is this: how do they plan to disarm Americans?

The answer: gun control and the warrantless surveillance police state apparatus, concomitant with an “Internet of Things” where all produced commodities will be tracked, traced, and scanned throughout the production cycle from raw material extraction to the retail shelf, the customer’s home, and eventually the landfill.

The final installment of this three part article will be completed and posted soon. It will be posted in article and audio form soon. Stay tuned.

Play
{"cart_token":"","hash":"","cart_data":""}