Eyewitness to the Kennedy Assassination; In Her Own Words
Don Roberdeau
Eyewitness to the Kennedy Assassination; In Her Own Words
Good Day.... FYI....
<QUOTE>
August 23, 2008
Conspiracy Sunday: Eyewitness to the Kennedy Assassination
"In Her Own Words" by Dodi Smith
The following is a never before told interview featuring a first hand
account of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy on November
22, 1963. The interview was conducted by Daniel Zanoza, Executive
Director, RFFM.org
EDITOR'S NOTE: Dodi Smith is a grandmother who resides somewhere in
Texas. For obvious reasons, which will be revealed in her answers, we
have taken every attempt to respect her wishes for privacy. Mrs.
Smith may consider answering some of the comments that may be posted
after her story on RFFM.org.
Q. In 1963, John F. Kennedy planned a political trip to Texas.
Political advisors told him he needed to shore up his support in Texas
because there were very powerful people who didn't care for his
presidency, to put it lightly. How long before November 22nd did you
know the President was coming to Dallas? And, if you can recall, how
did you learn he would be there? Was it common knowledge?
A. Before we begin answering questions, Dan, let me say this: this
was a day I will remember all of my life. It remains in my mind as
though it happened yesterday. It was a day that began with such joy
and suddenly the whole nation was saddened, not just Dallas and the
Texas civilization.
I first heard the President was coming to Dallas thru the radio, and
then reading the Dallas Morning Star approximately a week before
President Kennedy came. And, like most people, I talked with others
in the east Texas town I was living in at the time. I was overjoyed
to think that our President was coming to Texas, to actually meet the
people and be a part of this state for a day.
Q. What was the political atmosphere in Dallas regarding President
Kennedy? It was common knowledge there was an underlining mistrust
towards the Kennedy administration by some. Was this negative feeling
towards Kennedy palpable or has this been overplayed over the years in
your opinion?
A. You know as well as I do that there is always a mistrust between
the two parties that run this country, there are always rumors of
discourse one way or another in these groups. One trying to out do
and smear the work of the other, but among the people there was very
little discourse. Everyone you came in contact with from east Texas
to far west Texas were talking about how wonderful it was that the
President was coming to Texas and they would be able to see him in
person. I truly think this negative feeling toward the Kennedy
administration had been overplayed to the public and used to further
the discourse between parties.
Q. On the day Kennedy visited Dallas, one of the major Dallas
newspapers featured a full page ad with a "Wanted" poster which
presented John Kennedy as a criminal of the state. Did you see this
ad?
A. I personally did not see this ad, I believe it ran in publication
in the Dallas Morning Star. But it was common knowledge that this
paper was a Republican-orientated paper and, remember, President
Kennedy was a Democrat...so let your imagination run on this. I do
know that people, the common man and woman on the street who saw it
and talked with me, were quite upset that a prominent paper would run
such an ad as this. I believe they ran it under the heading of
"TREASON"...and, Mr., that is going a little too far, even in the
political world, if there is no proof.
Q. You obviously knew the route of the motorcade. This information
has played a significant role in the debate over whether there was a
conspiracy to murder the President. Do you recall how and when you
found out about the motorcade route?
A. I am not sure after 40+ years I remember how or when I learned of
the motorcade route. I do remember that before I left my east Texas
home near Tyler I had learned that the route was to be down Main
Street to the Stemmons Freeway, only when I got there it was common
knowledge that it had been changed and now would be going down Main
Street to Houston, past the Court House, making a right for a short
distance, then a left onto Elm Street and past the Texas Book
Depository Building, right near that turn. I heard some saying they
had decided to re-route the motorcade as you could not get onto
Stemmons Freeway off Main, which amazed us all. Why? Because it was
not true, it was an easy exit off Main to Stemmons. If this was not
common knowledge of the change, then why was there so many people on
Elm Street and the Grassy Knoll...have to use your imagination on this
I would presume.
Q. Where were you waiting in preparation for the arrival of the
Presidential motorcade?
A. I was on the Grassy Knoll to the right of the Book Building, in
front of the Stockyard Fence. Many people were gathered here, it was
like sardines packed in a can, children were playing, adults were
talking, awaiting the time to see the President and the First Lady,
explaining to their children how this would be a day in history, if
only they had known at that time how important a part of our history
it would become, I often wonder what they would have been explaining.
Q. What was the atmosphere in Dealey Plaza? Were people excited
about the President's coming? Was there a big crowd? Did you feel
anything in the air that wasn't positive?
A. You know I am always surprised at that question about the
atmosphere or reading about it in some paper that is recalling the
visit. I saw no negative reaction to this visit, people were smiling,
happy, talking about how wonderful it was to think that the President
was here in Texas. Many had come from far away West Texas, Houston,
The Big Bend country, some from Louisiana and Oklahoma, and each
showed excitement, not unrest. The streets were lined with people,
many shoulder to shoulder. There just was no negative feelings I saw
or felt at the time, just pure joy and happiness.
Q. Tell RFFM.org readers what you thought when you first saw the
presidential motorcade coming down Houston Street before the motorcade
turned down Elm Street, and headed past the Texas School Book
Depository.
A. Through my binoculars I saw the motorcade with the police escort
turn off Houston Street onto Elm Street, knowing it had first come
from Main Street to Houston where it made its first right hand turn,
then left onto Elm from Houston. It came past the Texas School Book
Depository Building, coming to the Grassy Knoll to the right of the
building.
Q. Did anything strike you as unusual, before there were any obvious
problems? If so, please elaborate.
A. I saw no obvious problems, the motorcade was moving along very
nicely, at a slow rate of speed, the President was waving, as was Mrs.
Kennedy and the Governor and Ms. Nell, all smiles on their faces. The
Secret Service car and men were right there with them and a couple or
three cars further down was Vice-President and Mrs. Johnson, smiling
and waving to the many crowds who were whistling and waving.
Q. Some say when Kennedy's motorcade turned left onto Elm Street, the
Secret Service fell behind in their effort to protect the occupants of
the limousine. We know the "bubble top" was off the car. Did the
Secret Service seem to fall away from the Presidential vehicle?
A. Let me answer it this way: If the Secret Service fell behind on
this turn, how was it that they were the first to get to Mrs. Kennedy
as she realized her husband was hurt and we saw her crawl over the
back of the car pulling one of the men into the car, immediately after
the President had been shot. Dan, they were right there where they
were supposed to be. Remember, President Kennedy was not shot at as
he passed the Book Depository Building, he was shot in front of the
Grassy Knoll past the building a good many feet. I have never
understood how "high up" people keep pushing the point he was shot as
he passed the Depository, he was not. He definitely was shot at the
grassy knoll.
Q. What was the first indication you had that something was wrong?
A. I heard screams behind me and sounds like gunshots, then a
whizzing sound as something passed close by me. I turned and look
behind me at the Stockyard Fence where it seemed to becoming from. I
quickly turned back to the motorcade and saw our President jerk his
head backwards and then to the left toward Mrs. Kennedy, and the next
thing I saw was Mrs. Kennedy trying to pull a Secret Service man into
the car from over the back of their car. Then the police escort
pulled away fast and moved the motorcade at a fast rate of speed
towards town. We, on the knoll, just stood there in shock, wandering
what was going on. Why were shots being fired from behind us.
Q. Did you actually see the President take any of the shots that
eventually led to his death?
A. At the time, Dan, I was not sure what I heard or saw. First, it
was the sound of guns being fired, remember, I am a country raised
girl, familiar with guns and rifles, and then the President seeming to
jerk backwards and then to the left, Mrs. Kennedy pulling him down.
Like everyone else I was not sure what was going on, I only know the
motorcade speeded up immediately and was gone, out of site, and Secret
Service men were covering the Vice-President and Mrs. Johnson as they
sped by.
Q. RFFM.org readers know this must be hard on you. But, in our phone
conversation, you told me you saw President Kennedy's wife, Jackie,
doing something as the motorcade was passing directly in front of
you. What was she doing?
A. As the motorcade passed in front of us on the knoll, Mrs. Kennedy
had pulled the president down in the back and was climbing over the
back of the car to help a Secret Service man into it. She was
desperately pulling him.
Q. In general, what was going on in Dealey Plaza directly after the
motorcade started to speed up and head towards Parkland Hospital? Was
there confusion? Were people in fear? Were you in fear? Did those
present know the President had been shot at?
A. As we saw the motorcade speed up and Mrs. Kennedy climbing over
the backseat to help pull the Secret Service man in, we were asking
each other what was going on. Were those shots we heard behind us,
the same we felt and heard whizzing past? Had the President been shot
from what we could see of his head in his wife's lap? I was using my
binoculars and could see that there was blood and something coming
from his head, and Mrs. Kennedy kept trying to push something back
in. There was fear everywhere, you could actually smell it among the
crowd. In my heart, I knew someone had tried to kill our President, I
did not know how true my feelings would become. All I could think in
my fear was why? And I am still asking that question 40 something
years later. And I wonder why our government has turned its head away
from so many of the details, and twisted and turned the event, until
no one who wasn't there knows the truth of that day. It will live
with me forever, and the fear I have of the government knocking on my
door someday if they ever find out who I am. I will not be a part of
the sham they have made of this investigation and their twisted
details. Others who came forward have lived in disbelief of how our
government has worked on this and the decisions they have made, so far
from the truth of the happenings.
Q. Did you hear any shots? And, if you did, could you tell with any
certainty where they were coming from?
A. Oh, yes. I heard two distinctive shots, one whizzing close by me.
Those shots did not come from the depository building which was to the
left of me, they came from behind me, from the Stockyard Fence. If I
remember correctly, one of those shots hit the grassy knoll just in
front of us.
Q. Were people pointing or running to a certain area, after it was
clear something had happened?
A. All around me people had turned and were looking behind us,
pointing toward the fence and were running to the left and right of
the fence, as though they were trying to get out of the site of the
firings. I know one man was injured from flying debris or something
from one of the shots. I never knew who he was, though.
Q. What was the reaction of the police you saw? Did they seem to
have an idea of where the shots came from?
A. The police acted immediately upon notification from the Secret
Service and moved the motorcade out quickly. At the time, no one knew
where the shots came from, but shortly afterwards cameras and film was
being taken from people on that knoll.
Q. Did you hear any more shots besides the ones that came from behind
the fence bordering the grassy knoll?
A. I distinctly heard two shots from behind me and they were not cars
backfiring, there is a difference, if you know your guns, rifles and
cars, and a sound like a third shot, but coming from a different
direction, which I thought was coming directly across from the knoll.
I have never been sure on that one, just that feeling of hearing it.
Q. Were you questioned by any authorities on November 22nd 1963 in
Dallas' Dealey Plaza? Did you see anyone else being questioned?
A. No, Dan, I have never been questioned by the authorities. I have
made myself as little known to them about this as possible, for I do
not trust them or their findings on this matter. I had at one time
thought of coming forward until I saw and read of their negative
reaction to those who did, and how the events were being twisted and
turned, as though they were making a movie and changing the scenario
to fit their screen. I did not see anyone being questioned that day
as I left, but I did see men taking cameras and film from the people.
Q. You said the authorities were confiscating cameras and film from
people around you. Besides your binoculars, did you bring a camera
with you? Many witnesses claim they never got their cameras back and,
if they did, their film was missing. Do you have any first hand
stories about this?
A. I did see the cameras and films being taken, as I stated
previously, but I never had first hand knowledge and what developed
after that. I had failed to take my camera that day, only my
binoculars. No one stopped me as I left the knoll.
Q. How long did you stay in Dealey Center after the shooting of the
President, Governor Connelly and a third man--who was standing
somewhere near the viaduct which led to the expressway?
A. I am not sure how long I did stay, Dan. I know that we milled
around, talking in crowds, trying to figure out what was going on,
then I left. I had to return to my east Texas town, get my children
from school and pick up my three year old who was at the plant that
day with his daddy, playing manager with him. My husband managed a
plant in our town and offered to keep our son with him so I could go
to Dallas for this event.
Q. It was obviously a traumatic day for you and the rest of the
country. Could you sum up your thoughts regarding what you saw on a
day when America's future was changed? And could you add any
information I may have failed to address here?
A. It was indeed a traumatizing day, not only for me, but the whole
world, Dan, and especially the United States. We had read of such
things in history, but it just could not happen again in our world.
Oh, how wrong we can look at things. It took me days to realize the
chaos and confusion of our government in the previous assassinations
that had been taught in history classes. To accept that this kind of
hate, fear or whatever it was that caused this to happen in our
country blew my mind. Where did it come from, what caused it, how did
it start, when did it start and how did it lead to killing the
President kept whirling in my mind. I still find myself asking these
questions even now. WHY? I know in my heart it will happen again and
again if this world continues as it is now. Will we ever know the
truth or will the future accept the government's version as truth and
let it go down in history as such? Why was Oswald murdered by Ruby so
soon? How did Ruby, a known mobster in the Dallas area, get near
enough to Oswald that day to murder him, while he was surrounded by
detectives? Was it to stop the truth from ever being known?
Dan, I wonder about these questions everyday of my life and, like
most, I would like to know the reason our government has put such a
spin on this assassination, so far from the truth of that day and its
happening. My prayer now is that God will never let this happen,
anywhere in the world. But in truth I know it will and nothing we do
will stop it, and nothing we do will keep the government from taking
over and make decisions that are so different than the actions. It
has made me distrust our structure of leadership in this country. The
questions never go away. And I wonder, at the age of 75, will I live
to see this happen again and I pray not.
I have to admit it has not been easy reliving that day like this, even
if I do live it everyday of my life these past 40+ years. I just want
the country to know the truth, but the government is not going to let
it and it makes you wonder why. Was there a conspiracy? We will
never know, but all true facts do point to that, don't they?
<END QUOTE>
Best Regards in Research,
Don
Don Roberdeau
U.S.S. John F. Kennedy, CV-67, "Big John," plank walker
Sooner, or later, The Truth emerges Clearly
Discovery: ROSEMARY WILLIS's Zapruder Film Documented 2nd Headsnap:
West, Ultrafast, & Directly Towards the "Grassy Knoll"
http://members.aol.com/DRoberdeau/JFK/ROSEwillisANNOUNCEMENT.html
Dealey Plaza Professionally-surveyed Map Detailing 11-22-63 Victims
precise locations, Witnesses, Photographers, Evidence, Suspected
bullet trajectories, Important information & Considerations
http://members.aol.com/DRoberdeau/JFK/DP.jpg
President Kennedy "Men of Courage" Speech, & JFK Assassination
Research & Discoveries, Don Roberdeau, 1975 to Present
http://hometown.aol.com/DRoberdeau
T ogether
E veryone
A chieves
M ore
National Terror Alert for the United States:
http://www.nationalterroralert.com/advisory7regional.gif
"Drehm seemed to think the shots came from in FRONT OF or BESIDE the
President." (my EMPHASIS)
CHARLES F. BREHM, a combat gunfire experienced, United States Army
Ranger, World War II, D-day veteran, & very close Dealey Plaza attack
witness, quoted only minutes after the attack, and while he is still
standing within Dealey Plaza (11-22-63 "Dallas Times Herald," fifth &
final daily edition, which mis-spelled his name)
"Another eyewitness, Charles Brehm, said he was 15 feet away from the
President when he was shot.
'He was waving, then the FIRST shot hit him and that awful look
crossed his face.' " (my EMPHASIS)
CHARLES F. BREHM, a combat gunfire experienced, United States Army
Ranger, World War II, D-day veteran, & very close Dealey Plaza attack
witness (quoted to the "Associated Press," 11-22-63)
Don Roberdeau
NOTE: President KENNEDY's last wave started at Z-170-171, while he was
obscurred by the "magic-limbed-ricochet-tree" from *anyone* targeting
him from the warrenatti-apologists, supposed, "lone nut" "sniper
lair."
On Aug 25, 7:34�am, Don Roberdeau <droberd...@aol.com> wrote:
> Eyewitness to the Kennedy Assassination; In Her Own Words
>
> Good Day.... FYI....
>
> http://rffm.typepad.com/republicans_for_fair_medi/2008/08/conspiracy-...
> bullet trajectories, Important information & Considerationshttp://members.aol.com/DRoberdeau/JFK/DP.jpg
>
> President Kennedy "Men of Courage" Speech, & JFK Assassination
> Research & Discoveries, Don Roberdeau, 1975 to Presenthttp://hometown.aol.com/DRoberdeau
curtjester1
> Eyewitness to the Kennedy Assassination; In Her Own Words
>
> Good Day.... FYI....
>
>
> President Kennedy "Men of Courage" Speech, & JFK Assassination
>
> T ogether
> E veryone
> A chieves
> M ore
>
> National Terror Alert for the United States:http://www.nationalterroralert.com/advisory7regional.gif
>
> "Drehm seemed to think the shots came from in FRONT OF or BESIDE the
> President." (my EMPHASIS)
>
> CHARLES F. BREHM, a combat gunfire experienced, United States Army
> Ranger, World War II, D-day veteran, & very close Dealey Plaza attack
> witness, quoted only minutes after the attack, and while he is still
> standing within Dealey Plaza (11-22-63 "Dallas Times Herald," fifth &
> final daily edition, which mis-spelled his name)
>
> "Another eyewitness, Charles Brehm, said he was 15 feet away from the
> President when he was shot.
>
> 'He was waving, then the FIRST shot hit him and that awful look
> crossed his face.' " (my EMPHASIS)
>
> CHARLES F. BREHM, a combat gunfire experienced, United States Army
> Ranger, World War II, D-day veteran, & very close Dealey Plaza attack
> witness (quoted to the "Associated Press," 11-22-63)
Hi, Don. Interesting piece. Who might the "Dan" be doing the
interview? How was she found out, and how was the anonymity
arranged?
TY, CJ
Sam McClung
Even at this late age/stage it seems the proliferation and frenzy of inaccurate information meant to fill in the voids like the one left by Dodi not being able to speak out for so long keeps that fear alive in others many of who will leave this life without having revealed their knowledge.
Dodi's intense grasp on the bane of the two party system in the USA and bullet origination points are things the masses have never seemed to have command of. She, Gordon Arnold, Evelyn King, Jean Hill, Mary Moorman, and others are the heroes of that day and of we the people, of which they were/are. Even under fear they still shared what happened. It is sad an entire industry now exists and has existed since that day with the purpose of steering and exploiting consensus reality for profit.
Quoting Dodi:
<begin quote>
"There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This in my opinion is to be dreaded as the greatest evil under our Constitution."
John Adams, 1780
"Those who would give up essential [internet] Liberty, to purchase a little [moderated] temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Benjamin Franklin
George Washington in his September 17, 1796, Farewell Address:
<begin quote>
I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the State, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally.
This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.
The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.
Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight), the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.
It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.
There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the government and serve to keep alive the spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in governments of a monarchical cast, patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.
It is important, likewise, that the habits of thinking in a free country should inspire caution in those entrusted with its administration, to confine themselves within their respective constitutional spheres, avoiding in the exercise of the powers of one department to encroach upon another. The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one, and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism. A just estimate of that love of power, and proneness to abuse it, which predominates in the human heart, is sufficient to satisfy us of the truth of this position. The necessity of reciprocal checks in the exercise of political power, by dividing and distributing it into different depositaries, and constituting each the guardian of the public weal against invasions by the others, has been evinced by experiments ancient and modern; some of them in our country and under our own eyes. To preserve them must be as necessary as to institute them. If, in the opinion of the people, the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed. The precedent must always greatly overbalance in permanent evil any partial or transient benefit, which the use can at any time yield.
Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.
It is substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who that is a sincere friend to it can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?
Promote then, as an object of primary importance, institutions for the general diffusion of knowledge. In proportion as the structure of a government gives force to public opinion, it is essential that public opinion should be enlightened.
As a very important source of strength and security, cherish public credit. One method of preserving it is to use it as sparingly as possible, avoiding occasions of expense by cultivating peace, but remembering also that timely disbursements to prepare for danger frequently prevent much greater disbursements to repel it, avoiding likewise the accumulation of debt, not only by shunning occasions of expense, but by vigorous exertion in time of peace to discharge the debts which unavoidable wars may have occasioned, not ungenerously throwing upon posterity the burden which we ourselves ought to bear. The execution of these maxims belongs to your representatives, but it is necessary that public opinion should co-operate. To facilitate to them the performance of their duty, it is essential that you should practically bear in mind that towards the payment of debts there must be revenue; that to have revenue there must be taxes; that no taxes can be devised which are not more or less inconvenient and unpleasant; that the intrinsic embarrassment, inseparable from the selection of the proper objects (which is always a choice of difficulties), ought to be a decisive motive for a candid construction of the conduct of the government in making it, and for a spirit of acquiescence in the measures for obtaining revenue, which the public exigencies may at any time dictate.
Observe good faith and justice towards all nations; cultivate peace and harmony with all. Religion and morality enjoin this conduct; and can it be, that good policy does not equally enjoin it - It will be worthy of a free, enlightened, and at no distant period, a great nation, to give to mankind the magnanimous and too novel example of a people always guided by an exalted justice and benevolence. Who can doubt that, in the course of time and things, the fruits of such a plan would richly repay any temporary advantages which might be lost by a steady adherence to it ? Can it be that Providence has not connected the permanent felicity of a nation with its virtue ? The experiment, at least, is recommended by every sentiment which ennobles human nature. Alas! is it rendered impossible by its vices?
In the execution of such a plan, nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations, and passionate attachments for others, should be excluded; and that, in place of them, just and amicable feelings towards all should be cultivated. The nation which indulges towards another a habitual hatred or a habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. Antipathy in one nation against another disposes each more readily to offer insult and injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and to be haughty and intractable, when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur. Hence, frequent collisions, obstinate, envenomed, and bloody contests. The nation, prompted by ill-will and resentment, sometimes impels to war the government, contrary to the best calculations of policy. The government sometimes participates in the national propensity, and adopts through passion what reason would reject; at other times it makes the animosity of the nation subservient to projects of hostility instigated by pride, ambition, and other sinister and pernicious motives. The peace often, sometimes perhaps the liberty, of nations, has been the victim.
So likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others which is apt doubly to injure the nation making the concessions; by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld. And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation), facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.
As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practice the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the public councils. Such an attachment of a small or weak towards a great and powerful nation dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter.
Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government. But that jealousy to be useful must be impartial; else it becomes the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a defense against it. Excessive partiality for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of another cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests.
The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop. Europe has a set of primary interests which to us have none; or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves by artificial ties in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities.
Our detached and distant situation invites and enables us to pursue a different course. If we remain one people under an efficient government. the period is not far off when we may defy material injury from external annoyance; when we may take such an attitude as will cause the neutrality we may at any time resolve upon to be scrupulously respected; when belligerent nations, under the impossibility of making acquisitions upon us, will not lightly hazard the giving us provocation; when we may choose peace or war, as our interest, guided by justice, shall counsel.
Why forego the advantages of so peculiar a situation? Why quit our own to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor or caprice?
It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world; so far, I mean, as we are now at liberty to do it; for let me not be understood as capable of patronizing infidelity to existing engagements. I hold the maxim no less applicable to public than to private affairs, that honesty is always the best policy. I repeat it, therefore, let those engagements be observed in their genuine sense. But, in my opinion, it is unnecessary and would be unwise to extend them.
Taking care always to keep ourselves by suitable establishments on a respectable defensive posture, we may safely trust to temporary alliances for extraordinary emergencies.
Harmony, liberal intercourse with all nations, are recommended by policy, humanity, and interest. But even our commercial policy should hold an equal and impartial hand; neither seeking nor granting exclusive favors or preferences; consulting the natural course of things; diffusing and diversifying by gentle means the streams of commerce, but forcing nothing; establishing (with powers so disposed, in order to give trade a stable course, to define the rights of our merchants, and to enable the government to support them) conventional rules of intercourse, the best that present circumstances and mutual opinion will permit, but temporary, and liable to be from time to time abandoned or varied, as experience and circumstances shall dictate; constantly keeping in view that it is folly in one nation to look for disinterested favors from another; that it must pay with a portion of its independence for whatever it may accept under that character; that, by such acceptance, it may place itself in the condition of having given equivalents for nominal favors, and yet of being reproached with ingratitude for not giving more. There can be no greater error than to expect or calculate upon real favors from nation to nation. It is an illusion, which experience must cure, which a just pride ought to discard.
In offering to you, my countrymen, these counsels of an old and affectionate friend, I dare not hope they will make the strong and lasting impression I could wish; that they will control the usual current of the passions, or prevent our nation from running the course which has hitherto marked the destiny of nations. But, if I may even flatter myself that they may be productive of some partial benefit, some occasional good; that they may now and then recur to moderate the fury of party spirit, to warn against the mischiefs of foreign intrigue, to guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism; this hope will be a full recompense for the solicitude for your welfare, by which they have been dictated.
<end quote>
Sam McClung
<begin quote>
<end quote>
And that is where the USA was in 1797 when George Washington gave his farewell address shown above (and published by a newspaper in September 1796). Gloom-N-Naughty, an old world thing, didn't yet have a foothold in the new old world stolen from the natives who were exterminated.
And that is where the USA was in 1963. Gloom-N-Naughty was there. Insurrection.
And that is where the USA was in 2020 and 2021, with mimicking nations globally protesting all those and more years, causing fear among the global power elite for over a decade now, then came hide in your bunker stay home and don't protest resulting in mass riots then came scripted homegrown riot and insurrection at the capitol by the puppet strings of Gloom-N-Naughty who even controls climate nowadays. Burn the Amazon to take the gold, to heat the planet to melt Greenland so its resources too can be exploited. The poles also though they're supposed to remain untouched (and un-militarized) per treaties. With masks on the masses won't realize the poor air quality.