It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: KSigMason
a reply to: All Seeing Eye
Now show the part of that speech where he calls for greater secrecy.
This deadly challenge imposes upon our society two requirements of direct concern both to the press and to the President—two requirements that may seem almost contradictory in tone, but which must be reconciled and fulfilled if we are to meet this national peril. I refer, first, to the need for far greater public information; and, second, to the need for far greater official secrecy.
originally posted by: KSigMason
a reply to: All Seeing Eye
I'm saying that you are taking his speech out of context.
Literally right before the "secrecy is repugnant" paragraph, JFK states:
This deadly challenge imposes upon our society two requirements of direct concern both to the press and to the President—two requirements that may seem almost contradictory in tone, but which must be reconciled and fulfilled if we are to meet this national peril. I refer, first, to the need for far greater public information; and, second, to the need for far greater official secrecy.
originally posted by: Compendium
originally posted by: KSigMason
a reply to: All Seeing Eye
I'm saying that you are taking his speech out of context.
Literally right before the "secrecy is repugnant" paragraph, JFK states:
This deadly challenge imposes upon our society two requirements of direct concern both to the press and to the President—two requirements that may seem almost contradictory in tone, but which must be reconciled and fulfilled if we are to meet this national peril. I refer, first, to the need for far greater public information; and, second, to the need for far greater official secrecy.
You seem to be taking it out of context too
He's not calling for it, he is saying that a balance needs be found to reconcile it with the need for far greater public information
He's saying, yes, some things need to be kept secret, but there are some things being kept secret, that need be exposed
originally posted by: Compendium
a reply to: All Seeing Eye
You must be referring to something else then
The ones I know in the water aren't the enemy
They are the exact opposite
Did you die by any chance?
I know this stuff is impossible to rationalise in any way it can be normally discussed
originally posted by: KSigMason
a reply to: randomtangentsrme
There's nothing wrong with being secret or private. Secrecy is a universal sociological form that has nothing to do with your moral valuations. Everyone keeps secrets and practice secrecy, even you.