acrylic on canvas, 70 x 100 cm, 2017
JOHN F. KENNEDY APRIL 27 , 1961 SPEECH
The very word "secrecy" is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it. Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment. That I do not intend to permit to the extent that it is in my control. And no official of my Administration, whether his rank is high or low, civilian or military, should interpret my words here tonight as an excuse to censor the news, to stifle dissent, to cover up our mistakes or to withhold from the press and the public the facts they deserve to know. * We are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy. That relies on primarily on covet means for expanding its fear of influence. On infiltration instead of invasion. On subversion instead of elections. On intimidation instead of free choice, on guerillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted, vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly nit highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific, and political operations. Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed. * It requires a change in outlook, a change in tactics, a change in missions--by the government, by the people, by every businessman or labor leader, and by every newspaper. For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence--on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations. * Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed. 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. * And so it is to the printing press--to the recorder of man's deeds, the keeper of his conscience, the courier of his news--that we look for strength and assistance, confident that with your help man will be what he was born to be: free and independent.
John F.Kennedy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Jb8KqaerhQ
Le déni de la réalité est devenu le cadre de vie de nos dirigeants (Jan Theuninck, 17.01.2017)
Europarat-Chef warnt vor staatlicher Zensur:
Im Kampf gegen Fake News hat der Generalsekretär des Europarats vor zu großem Aktionismus gewarnt. Es bestehe die Gefahr, unliebsame Meinungen verbieten zu können.
https://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/europarat-chef-warnt-vor-staatlichen-massnahmen-gegen-fake-news-14684961.html
Politik mit der Macht der Bilder
The very word "secrecy" is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it. Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment. That I do not intend to permit to the extent that it is in my control. And no official of my Administration, whether his rank is high or low, civilian or military, should interpret my words here tonight as an excuse to censor the news, to stifle dissent, to cover up our mistakes or to withhold from the press and the public the facts they deserve to know. * We are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy. That relies on primarily on covet means for expanding its fear of influence. On infiltration instead of invasion. On subversion instead of elections. On intimidation instead of free choice, on guerillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted, vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly nit highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific, and political operations. Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed. * It requires a change in outlook, a change in tactics, a change in missions--by the government, by the people, by every businessman or labor leader, and by every newspaper. For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence--on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations. * Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed. 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. * And so it is to the printing press--to the recorder of man's deeds, the keeper of his conscience, the courier of his news--that we look for strength and assistance, confident that with your help man will be what he was born to be: free and independent.
John F.Kennedy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Jb8KqaerhQ
Le déni de la réalité est devenu le cadre de vie de nos dirigeants (Jan Theuninck, 17.01.2017)
Europarat-Chef warnt vor staatlicher Zensur:
Im Kampf gegen Fake News hat der Generalsekretär des Europarats vor zu großem Aktionismus gewarnt. Es bestehe die Gefahr, unliebsame Meinungen verbieten zu können.
https://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/europarat-chef-warnt-vor-staatlichen-massnahmen-gegen-fake-news-14684961.html
Politik mit der Macht der Bilder
Is er een enorm verschil tussen wat de burger in het dagdagelijkse leven ervaart en wat er in de "vrije" pers wordt meegedeeld?Zijn de journalisten hondjes die aan een korte ketting liggen en alleen blaffen op bevel van hun baasje: zijn zij de promotors van het politieke "correct" denken? Is dit een symptoom van wat men een geleide democratie (of zachte dictatuur) noemt? Dient de pers om de aandacht van de burgers af te leiden van nog erger? (Jan Theuninck in Poetrylifeandtimes, begin 21ste eeuw)
