I was told JFK was a piece of shit by somebody who is usually in the know about what is going on. If he was, I wonder why his relative Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is now fighting the Covid-19 hoax against the elite.
Comments (23)
sorted by:
It's an interesting topic. My thoughts: 1st, I wouldn't say RFK Jr. Is "going against the covid hoax" - he believes the virus is real, just not a big deal. From his book he tries not to take a side, but delivers the side of the story that's been censored.
As to his family - it's Grandpa Kennedy that has the worst rep - depending on your point of view. He openly thought Hitler was a great man even during WW2, so now he's considered a controversial figure, although many in elite and military circles somewhat agreed with him at least before WW2.
It is said he imbued his sons with his own "antisemitism" - and JFK got accused of that a lot. Israel is likely the main instigator in his and his brother's assassinations, although no Kennedy has come out and said that. RFK Jr. ascribes blame for both murders to the CIA.
He does however say that Sirhan Sirhan was not his father's murderer, but Eugene Thane Cesar, the bodyguard behind RFK at the time. This, and his views on vaccines developed later in life, have made him a pariah within his own family, with siblings and relatives publicly denouncing him in specially written articles.
I find it interesting that the Kennedy family are not from the same stock as the majority of so-called elite. They are not WASPs or Jews. They're Catholic, so it sets them out a bit. Traditionally WASPs would hate Catholics, and Jews would obviously hate all Christians but tend to get along and share power with the WASPs.
So how did they become "elites"? I'm not to clear on that and there may be something interesting. But having said that we are all seeing controlled opposition in almost everyone who openly speaks up to some degree against the current bio-security state stuff... even if suspicious, "our side" would be in a much worse off place without these people speaking up.
Personally I've never seen any major criticisms stick or evidence of being a controlled-op stand up against RFK Jr. The most anyone has on him are just things he has said himself, or about himself, in the past, which are hardly any big gothchas. The guy is a relative normie Democrat after all, despite the vaccine thing. I still see him refer to climate change casually like it's a big thing. He appears to have flown on Epstein's plane at least once. But since Epstein was a major democrat donor I don't even think this is the gotcha some believe it to be.
I don't know any outspoken, well-known activist of Kennedy's ilk who is correct on every aspect of every major conspiracy as I have come to understand them. Most usually they are only onto the truth of one major thing and reveal that they are completely blue pilled about almost everything else. Gets pretty fucking tiresome.
I’d like to know how they became “elite” too. That question pops up in my head a lot when reading Jr.’s book.
Bootlegging during prohibition, no?
Damn. Good luck proving "insider trading" in the 1920s.
Biggest complaints I know against JFK are:
I dislike that Robert is promoting Amazon, one of the people's big enemies.
What are his positions in his book?
That’s really bad.
"into pieces" aka an alleged sodomite. https://pic8.co/sh/uchGWG.jpg
He is used for protesting aka PROTEST', verb intransitive [Latin protestor; pro and testor, to affirm it.] The few make a suggestion (coronavirus); the many consent by either wanting or not wanting it; which puts both into the conflict of reason (want vs not want) against each other. Division by suggestion.
RFK Jr. is used as a cult of personality for the "not want" side versus the "want" side. The parasitic few only require the consent of the many towards suggested; which puts them into a controlled environment (aka environ/to sourround + ment; form mens/mind) aka the conflict of reason. Which side one chooses within reasoning is irrelevant; since both sides consent to the same suggestion; just from a different side.
To keep these conflicts of reason going; the parasitic few are suggesting contradictions to both sides as fodder; which is called "talmudic reasoning".
"elite" from French élite "selection, choice" implies each of the many ignoring their free will of choice when consenting to representative government (aka govern/to control + ment; from mens/mind) by the few, and mass ignorance of being one with free will of choice makes the few the "chosen ones".
"against" is caused by consenting to any suggestion, hence causing the conflict of reason between wanting versus not wanting the suggested. Meanwhile under natural law...choice represents the response to perceived balance (need/want); not to the suggested choices of others (want vs not want). All imbalance is caused by ignorance to adapt to balance (choice of want over need).
In short...the many aren't against the parasitic few; the parasitic few represent the response to the ignorance of the many. Majority ignorance causes minority insolence; believers of truth (want) are causing exploiters of lies (not want) and so on.
JFK was the last decent democrat.
im talking about policy, not his personal life.
him publicly "threatening" to break up the CIA is what got him shot in the head
Don't forget the Irishman movie, they shit on JFK the whole time.
I don't remember. Can you make any example?
I just happened to watch it, it happens throughout the movie.
It happened 20 years ago. All he said was "he was a piece of shit". I don't talk to him anymore. All I know he is a somebody in the know. I recalled this because another Kennedy is against TPTB apparently.
its probable that youre somebody is the piece of shit.
He stole the election from Nixon with the dead voting in Chicago, that was fairly shitty of JFK to do.