Added: 2 years ago
From: news1st
Views: 33,069
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (96)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • it says in the Declaration that if a state chooses, they can separate from the united states....

    it also states that if the people are unhappy, we are allowed to overthrow the president if they disobey ANY of our rights stated in the bill of rights.

  • Lawl John F Kennedy was in cod BO?

  • @TheEdward320 in "five" yes...

  • Fuck the iluminati for killing JFK

  • " We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. "

  • turn down the volume on the damn song so I can hear the speech !

  • so annoying with the song playing in the background

  • I don't care....I LOVE his Boston accent! GO LIBERTY!!!!!DOWN WITH THE NEW WORLD ORDER!!!!!!!!!!!

  • this sucks

  • Which JFK speech is this?

  • I DECLARE WAR AGAINST ANYONE WHO TRYS TO TAKE MY FREEDOMS. AS AN AMERICAN AND A FREEMAN I WILL FIGHT AND DEFEND MY FREEDOMS AND LIBERTIES AND THE FREEDOMS OF MY FRIENDS FAMILY AND FELLOW MAN TO THE LEFT AND RIGHT OF ME. I AM WILLING TO FIGHT AND DIE FOR WHAT I BELIEVE. I BELIEVE GOD MADE US FREE. LIFE LIBERTY AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPIENESS. GOD BLESS US ALL IN THE UPCOMMING CIVIL WAR AGAINST THE MEN TRYING TO KILL US AND TAKE OUR FREEDOMS. GOD BLESS ALL OF YOU .. BE FREE. LOVE ONEANOTHER.

  • @ninomorson you said it! Live free or die hard motherfuckers!

  • 10 people were communist and dislike

  • You guys are awesome:) xoxo

  • 8 Illuminati which are afraid of this video and in the closet with their gay lover, Tom Cruise.

  • i love this video!!!! loved it!!!!!!!!

  • this is wierd but the music is fuckin awsome

  • What he speaks of is the illuminati/New World Order!

    Just as Eisenhower warned us as well in his farewell speech in 1961.

  • we can still make new history

  • we casn still make new history

  • best speech (JFK Secret Society Speech) + best song (Too Late To Apologize - A Declaration) = EPIC WIN

  • @notsofinestudent not according to the documents that define our nation.

  • wtf

  • @notsofinestudent no. We're a Constitutional Republic. Like it or not. Go look it up. We aren't a democracy. It isn't about political party. It's about the principles this nation was founded upon. No, it takes Judeo-Christian VALUES to prevent tyranny.

  • @StrengthFromAbove83 Many Judeo-Christian VALUES promote tyranny.

    Leviticus 25 44 You may acquire male & female slaves from pagan nations around you. Out of the sons of the sojourners who live as aliens among you & gain acquisition & out of their families who are with you, whom they will have produced in your land; they also may become your possession. You may even bequeath them to your sons to receive as a possession. You can use them as permanent slaves.

  • @JezebelDecibel oh lovely... taking the Bible out of context just like everyone else jUST LIKE you. Good job. How about you do yourself a favor and look at the context of the verse.

  • @StrengthFromAbove83 Could explain it's context to me PLEASE. & Deuteronomy 22

    28 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married & rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay the girl's father fifty shekels of silver. & He must marry the girl, for he has violated her.

    2"No one of illegitimate birth shall enter the assembly of the LORD; none of his descendants, even to the tenth generation, shall enter the assembly of the LORD.

  • @JezebelDecibel this is not forced marriage - on the girl anyway. The girl has been shamed. After losing her virginity, finding a husband to support her would be a very difficult task. Therefore, the man must pay the price of a bride to her father as he may continue having to care for her. The man also must be willing to marry her if the father of the girl demands it. So, really, it can be forced marriage on the man, but the girl's father also holds the right to refuse his daughter to the man.

  • @JezebelDecibel on top of that... in the ORIGINAL Hebrew, it does nOT say "rape". The word rape was added in some translations. This is why it is important to look at the Hebrew and Greek translations to get the original context.

  • @StrengthFromAbove83 I do have a Strong's Bible Concordance & rape is the meaning.

    The bible has mans work on top of the the words of the Elohim the plural that was changed into a singular god.Were made in their image j& we are starting to make synthetic life ourselves now with DNA science.

    Look at DNA & you will see the serpent in The Tree of Life. The Bible is an old UFO story book.. But like Jesus said: They have eyes but can't see. A virgin birth via artificial insemination is no miracle.

  • @JezebelDecibel DNA is a serpent? lol... gee... not when I took A&P... it's proteins. Its not even shaped like a snake. If you know so much about the Bible, then why are you asking me to explain things to you?

  • @StrengthFromAbove83 You may want to look at representations of DNA again. You mentioned Judeo-Christian VALUES protect against tyranny but that is not completely true. I was interested in hearing your explanations. To me this verse is also hideous. 1 Timothy 2:18 If there is a man who lies with a menstruating woman & uncovers her nakedness, he has laid bare her flow & she has exposed the flow of her blood; thus both of them shall be cut off from among their people.

    Is that gods love?

  • @JezebelDecibel again. taking the Bible OUT of context. Just because you own a Strongs, doesn't mean you know how to use it. Just like if you own an instruction manual... doesn't mean you're an expert on the subject.

  • @JezebelDecibel

    1. Who wrote/spoke the passage and to whom was it addressed? 2. What does the passage say? 3. Are there any words or phrases in the passage that need to be examined? 4. What is the immediate context? 5. What is the broader context in the chapter and book?

  • @JezebelDecibel 6. What are the related verses to the passage’s subject and how do they affect the understanding of this passage? 7. What is the historical and cultural background? 8. What do I conclude about the passage? 9. Do my conclusions agree or disagree with related areas of Scripture and others who have studied the passage? 10. What have I learned and what must I apply to my life?

  • @JezebelDecibel If you'd actually like an explanation of 1Timothy 2:18, I'll be happy to explain that. Again, the context of Deut. is plain since it says THEY WERE FOUND OUT... that obviously signifies it was not rape as we see it today.

  • @StrengthFromAbove83 and again on Deut... the verse is in NO WAY CONDONING RAPE.

  • @StrengthFromAbove83 I guess we may just have to agree to disagree & that is OK in my belief :)

  • @JezebelDecibel that's fine, but I will say this: God does not EVER condone rape or oppression of anyone. Bad things happened during Bible times, but that doesn't mean God condones it. The only times God ever has people put to death is for outright disobedience and sin... AFTER he has given them chances to repent.

  • @JezebelDecibel another thing to remember is that society was VERY different back then. This verse does not condone rape or sex outside of marriage. It is simply saying that the man who took the girl's virginity that wasn't her fiance must now be forced to pay for her needs and take care of her, etc... He basically locked himself into marriage by sleeping with her.

  • @StrengthFromAbove83 And on Deuteronomy 23:2.... That verse is LITERALLY meant for people who are not "born of God".... as in... if you are not a Christian. you are not born of God. To Be "born of God" or "born again" as people call it... you must repent of your sins, be baptized, and live like the Bible says... Love your neighbor, Love God, keep his commands. If Jesus is not the Lord of your life, you will not go to heaven.

  • It is good to see there are still Proud Americans that know how to use a brain and can follow a moral compass to somthing better than themselves, obama represents everthing just the opposite of the constitution. It is very arrogant to want to change something created by great people men women both, who gave everything for this country and have helped countless other because of America's birth. God bless America and God bless the republic and its people...

  • JFK made me become a democrat. 

    Obama made me give up the democrat party.

  • The last Democrat make it to Heaven!

  • Too bad that Kennedy's full speech represented in this video went on to try and justify why despite all his opening rhetoric, the US press would need to operate cautiously and help the government keep things dangerous to national security unpublished.

  • GOOGLE THIS :-)

    GOD SMOKES POT says SUPER GHOST OF ELVIS :-)

    or GOOGLE

    GOD SMOKES POT says SUPER GHOST OF JFK :-)

  • I don't get how those two videos fit together when you played them over each other...

  • "I pledge allegiance, to the flag... and to the REPUBLIC, for which it stands..."

    Sounds pretty clear to me.

    Article IV Section 4 of the Constitution: "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government"

    You won't find the words "democracy" or "democratic" in either the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence. So get it right.

  • Well said

  • Clap! Clap! Clap! Clap! CLAP! CLAP! CLAP! CLAP!

  • Screw the govt and their affiliates/corporations, private investors, the rich corrupt are going down america will not fall.

  • It is a shame that we do not live in times with presidents as great as JFK. So far we've just had shit after shit after shit. We need another great man to act as the head of our great country once more. Not an inexperienced socialist, nor a fool. (Obviously I am referring to Obama and Bush. Clinton wasn't really that great either but he was better than our last two!)

  • "NO REPUBLIC CAN SURVIVE..." that is right!!! we are NOT a democracy, but a CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC!

  • @StrengthFromAbove83

    We are also a democratic republic. Ultimately, even our constitution is subject to our democratic whims.

  • @AndrewDeLong no democratic nation has ever survived nor had any freedoms, learn your history.

  • @shadowfox8284

    History has nothing to do with it. Ultimately, we ARE a democratic republic. Our very constitution is, in the end, subject to the rules of democracy. This is an indisputable fact. I suggest you learn your politics.

  • @AndrewDeLong wrong. Obviously we have become more democratic than our founding fathers initially intended, and where has that landed us?

    Welfare, rampant corruption, a Congress with the lowest approval rating in history passing legislation, raising the costs of doing business for both individuals and companies alike.

    These thugs have been voted into office by merit of their populist logic, elevated by those most ignorant of our real political setup, and the beauty of the Constitution.

  • @beepandbop

    Actually, in terms of the legal process of things, little has changed. All laws abide by the constitution, or are challenged if they don't. I fail to see in what ways we have become "more democratic than our founding fathers initially intended." We vote people into office to represent us. That is the democratic side of it. The Republic side is that the representatives then vote on legislation.

    And it is a firm fact. The constitution IS subject to the whims of democracy.

  • @AndrewDeLong you're sort of right. the constitution in its proper form is NOT subject to the whims of democracy. Case in point: 2000 presidential election. Gore won the popular vote, Bush won the electoral college's vote, which always is prioritized, because the founding father's knew populism is disastrous.

    See the Fall of Roman Republic, and examine Athenian Democracy and Timocracy.

  • @beepandbop

    Actually, the electoral college, in its earliest form, was more designed at an overall representation of the way people in a certain district voted, a tally if you will, due to the limited communications of the times.  It was a sort of summation of the way people voted, only being accurate with lower population numbers. However, as was seen in 2000 the E.C failed to properly represent the voting trend of the country. This has to d more with gerrymandering than...continued next...

  • continued...2

    than the constitution. And still, the way our senators are selected today, or prior to the 17th Amendment, still falls within the bounds of the constitution. The Amendment itself, as will all others, ultimately had to be passed by a popular vote that was left up to the states. While the idea for an Amendment must pass through legislature, it is ultimately passed by popular vote, as the process was designed.

  • @AndrewDeLong furthermore, the original constitution only allowed land owners/aristocrats to vote for house of reps members, while the state legislature actually SELECTED the state's two senators who had to have been of aristocratic background. Jefferson opposed this, and Jackson's administration resulted in landowning qualifications being dropped for voting for house of reps.

    It wasn't until the 17th amendment in 1913 that senators were directly elected by the population.

  • @StrengthFromAbove83 that's why we need a democratic revolution!

  • @VideoFreeMichael democracy="majority" rule... aka... MOB rules... not mafia type of mob... but elites with money.... and THEY speak for the people... A Republic is a government kept in check in size and power by THE LAW... and it leaves the people alone. NO WHERE is the word "democracy" found in the US Consitution, Declaration of Independence, or any of the Constitutions of the states.

  • @StrengthFromAbove83 you're looking at it in a very weird way.. democracy in government and a socialized economy go hand in hand for a free society. in this, the people would have control over the government and the economy without the have/have-not antagonisms. this is why further liberalization and revolution is inevitable in the future development of the United States. Republicanism and capitalism leads to the disorder and inequality we live in now.

  • @VideoFreeMichael what ,if anything, about a socialized economy is free exactly? forcing people to do anything against their will is not freedom. its the opposite, actually. your logic is severely flawed. when you say democracy, do you mean it in the sense of "we the people" rule our government? that is partially true, but not really what a "democracy" is. democracy is majority rule...if 51% of the people say all gays should be put to death, then thats what is done. please research more...

  • @fcockin I really don't think you were worth responding to, being that your points were very (frankly) stupid. If you honestly think there's anyone who supports a totalitarian state which also has anarchy (as you strangely described, as people are forced to work but there are no laws to protect people), you're probably just as unintelligent as you sound.

  • @VideoFreeMichael no sir, it is you who make no sense: "democracy in government and a socialized economy go hand in hand for a free society" I was merely pointing out that a democracy is not a free society. A pure democracy is tyranny of the majority, not freedom. A republic is a system in which all humans are treated equally under the law, regardless of race, gender, etc. Central economic planning doesnt work, history reflects that. also, could you be more respectful? i didnt call YOU stupid

  • @VideoFreeMichael I would be arrested if I stole money from someone. Even if I gave it to a needy person. But somehow if the authorities do the same exact thing, in the name of "general welfare", its ok. That is a socialized economy, and in no way is that part of a "free society" as you claim. Whats wrong with freedom? Making your own decisions for yourself, your family, and your community, without government assistance, is somehow undesirable?

  • @fcockin You sure know how to make a ridiculously stupid argument. "What's wrong with freedom?" You're so delusional, how can you possibly expect to be taken seriously? I don't want government bureaucracy, I want social democracy, i.e. democratic socialism. If you think taking money out of the hands of the people who do nothing but own everything, and using it for the good of the people who create that wealth, i.e. the working class, is 'stealing', you're blind to the REAL theft in this system.

  • @VideoFreeMichael I'm delusional because I like freedom? Tell me this, in your democratic socialist society, what do you do with the people who dont like the system, or think it is wrong? Do you just tell them they are "delusional" b/c they don't believe in the system? If you honestly believe that centralized planning for the economy, education, etc. for 300,000,000 people is better than state and local government, then I can't talk sense to you. Also, please stop insulting me.

  • @fcockin You're delusional because you think that a pyramid scheme of barbarism is 'freedom'. In a social democracy, people will have freedom of dissent, but they wouldn't make much progress in reversing the progress of society, since that would be harmful to the majority of people. No, I don't believe in centralized planning, i believe in systematic planning for the public good in a similar manner to how large retail corporations plan their production levels. It's not as scary as you think.

  • @VideoFreeMichael You could not be more wrong. If you think what we've had is capitalism.. your sooo wrong. The government giving special favors and money to private industry is NOT capitalism.

    and for you to be so ignorant of this, just shows how little you know.

  • @HandyMan101 What you're describing is corporatism, which is the inevitable result of prolonged capitalism. Eventually, the most successful fish will eat up the rest of the pond and will take political power. The government serving the corporations and not the people is the inevitable result of corporatism which develops inevitably from capitalism. You need to open your eyes to the reality of this system.

  • @StrengthFromAbove83 we are a democratic republic

  • @THeReALNaPoleAN according to you.

  • @StrengthFromAbove83 no according to the definition of our government

  • @THeReALNaPoleAN No we are not. We are a representive republic where we elect people to office to vote on stuff foe us

  • @THeReALNaPoleAN Thank you!

  • @StrengthFromAbove83 what good when your politicians ignore the constitution every single day?hear the speech of jfk?it's dead on today about the usa...cheers:D

  • Comment removed

  • @StrengthFromAbove83 Indirect Democracy...YOU MAD BRAH?

  • ñÈW§ ² MÈ LÌKÈР̆

  • this is so true!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Great stuff!

  • Once Again I am blown away. Who ARE these guys? These two videos are the best I have ever seen in my lifetime. Why doesn't shows like MTV and VH1 play these video's, or do they? I don't watch those channels but I sure wish our young ones could see this kind of stuff more often.

    Kennedy said all those good patriotic America loving things, and "no REPUBLIC can survive without them". WE THE PEOPLE are a Republic, always have been, always will be.

  • @moralminority1 the young ones have found this =D

  • @moralminority1 wow your old

  • This video is the best music video about ow our freedom and liberty and America.Then I had watched this video millions of times.

  • This video is the best music video about ow our freedom and liberty and America.Then I had watched this video millions of times.And GOD BLES AMERICA.

  • Great speech, and I love the music video. But I'd rather see one at a time.

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more