dChan - Q Origins Project Archive

I am so extraordinarily grateful to Q (or the Q team, if more than one person is involved) because whenever I need research help, or technical consultation, or I just want to shitpost some ideas by you guys, I have a place to come and do that. I come here. I freaking love this Board and appreciate the good guys here so much.

You've all been unwittingly helping me with a project that I really think will become my life's work, and for that I am extremely grateful. You will love it.

Why bother telling you that?

Because I took a break from my work to mow the grass this evening, and out of the blue out of nowhere the phraseFIFTH COLUMNpopped into my head.

What the heck? How did I go from mowing to thinking about the phrase "FIFTH COLUMN"? I think it was a message from God.

After I finished mowing I checked to see if there had ever been any Q posts mentioning the Fifth Column and, in fact, there were two. I'll post them in a post linked to this message, but for now I'm posing a video containing an ominous but prescient warning about the FIFTH COLUMN that Franklin Delano Roosevelt gave to the country on May 27, 1949.

It seems to me that President Roosevelt's speech was something of a precursor to President John F. Kennedy's April 27, 1961 speech to the American Newspaper Publishers Association (in which President Kennedy warned us of the "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."

President Roosevelt's speech can be found on YouTube at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZZ2k5pXFOU.

I'll follow up with the video of President Kennedy's speech, and then another post with the images of Q's posts about the FIFTH COLUMN.

Not sure why all this crossed my mind today while I was taking a break from my work to mow the grass, but I'm sure glad that it did, especially given that one of Q's two posts mentioning "FIFTH COLUMN" was posted on August 20, 2020.

Gosh, I love this place.

_______

TEXT OF PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT’S SPEECH

Today's threat to our national security is not a matter of military weapons alone. We know of new methods of attack: the Trojan horse, the 5th column that betrays a nation unprepared for treachery. Spies, saboteurs, and traitors are the actors in this new strategy.

These dividing forces are undiluted poison. They must not be allowed to spread in the new world, as they had in the old.

Our moral and our mental defenses must be raised up as never before against those who would cast a smokescreen across our vision.

>>19444346

President John F. Kennedy

Waldorf-Astoria Hotel, New York City

April 27, 1961

LINK - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wXf08-42x4

Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen:

I appreciate very much your generous invitation to be here tonight.

You bear heavy responsibilities these days and an article I read some time ago reminded me of how particularly heavily the burdens of present day events bear upon your profession.

You may remember that in 1851 the New York Herald Tribune under the sponsorship and publishing of Horace Greeley, employed as its London correspondent an obscure journalist by the name of Karl Marx.

We are told that foreign correspondent Marx, stone broke, and with a family ill and undernourished, constantly appealed to Greeley and managing editor Charles Dana for an increase in his munificent salary of $5 per installment, a salary which he and Engels ungratefully labeled as the "lousiest petty bourgeois cheating."

[TO BE CONTINUED. . . ]

>>19444346

>>19444380

[CONTINUATION OF PRESIDENT KENNEDY'S APRIL 27, 1961 SPEECH]

But when all his financial appeals were refused, Marx looked around for other means of livelihood and fame, eventually terminating his relationship with the Tribune and devoting his talents full time to the cause that would bequeath the world the seeds of Leninism, Stalinism, revolution and the cold war.

If only this capitalistic New York newspaper had treated him more kindly; if only Marx had remained a foreign correspondent, history might have been different. And I hope all publishers will bear this lesson in mind the next time they receive a poverty-stricken appeal for a small increase in the expense account from an obscure newspaper man.

I have selected as the title of my remarks tonight "The President and the Press." Some may suggest that this would be more naturally worded "The President Versus the Press." But those are not my sentiments tonight.

It is true, however, that when a well-known diplomat from another country demanded recently that our State Department repudiate certain newspaper attacks on his colleague it was unnecessary for us to reply that this Administration was not responsible for the press, for the press had already made it clear that it was not responsible for this Administration.

[CONTINUED…]

>>19444346

>>19444380

>>19444399

[CONTINUATION]

Nevertheless, my purpose here tonight is not to deliver the usual assault on the so-called one party press. On the contrary, in recent months I have rarely heard any complaints about political bias in the press except from a few Republicans. Nor is it my purpose tonight to discuss or defend the televising of Presidential press conferences. I think it is highly beneficial to have some 20,000,000 Americans regularly sit in on these conferences to observe, if I may say so, the incisive, the intelligent and the courteous qualities displayed by your Washington correspondents.

Nor, finally, are these remarks intended to examine the proper degree of privacy which the press should allow to any President and his family.

If in the last few months your White House reporters and photographers have been attending church services with regularity, that has surely done them no harm.

On the other hand, I realize that your staff and wire service photographers may be complaining that they do not enjoy the same green privileges at the local golf courses that they once did.

[CONTINUED…]

[CONTINUATION]

It is true that my predecessor did not object as I do to pictures of one's golfing skill in action. But neither on the other hand did he ever bean a Secret Service man.

My topic tonight is a more sober one of concern to publishers as well as editors.

I want to talk about our common responsibilities in the face of a common danger. The events of recent weeks may have helped to illuminate that challenge for some; but the dimensions of its threat have loomed large on the horizon for many years. Whatever our hopes may be for the futurefor reducing this threat or living with itthere is no escaping either the gravity or the totality of its challenge to our survival and to our security–a challenge that confronts us in unaccustomed ways in every sphere of human activity.

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 a far greater public information; and, second, to the need for far greater official secrecy.

I

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.

But I do ask every publisher, every editor, and every newsman in the nation to reexamine his own standards, and to recognize the nature of our country's peril. In time of war, the government and the press have customarily joined in an effort based largely on self-discipline, to prevent unauthorized disclosures to the enemy. In time of "clear and present danger," the courts have held that even the privileged rights of the First Amendment must yield to the public's need for national security.

Today no war has been declared–and however fierce the struggle may be, it may never be declared in the traditional fashion. Our way of life is under attack. Those who make themselves our enemy are advancing around the globe. The survival of our friends is in danger. And yet no war has been declared, no borders have been crossed by marching troops, no missiles have been fired.

If the press is awaiting a declaration of war before it imposes the self-discipline of combat conditions, then I can only say that no war ever posed a greater threat to our security. If you are awaiting a finding of "clear and present danger," then I can only say that the danger has never been more clear and its presence has never been more imminent.

It requires a change in outlook, a change in tactics, a change in missionsby 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 influenceon 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.