JFKs Complicity in Establishing the American Police State Through

Disarmament
Published on April 30th, 2015
By Shane Radliff
In the times we live in today, it seems that there are endless amounts of grievances that have
been inflicted upon the American people; and every day, that list continues to grow and grow.
With this government we currently have in place, it will continue until the climax, otherwise
known as complete enslavement.
It is an easy observation to see these tyrannical powers sucking away every ounce of freedom
that we have left. Government is a leech that will not stop until there is no blood left. The
American people are nearly tapped dry.
Most are unaware that this isnt a new occurrence. It didnt start with Obama and it wont stop
with him. For one clear cut example in the history of abuse, I recommend you check out Kyle
Reardens article, A History of Dragnet Wiretapping. For other examples, I recommend you
continue reading.
There exists a sort of hero-worship within the alternative media of an assassinated President,
known as John. F. Kennedy. I will admit, I used to somewhat fall into that category but, as with
most of my other previous held beliefs, further research has lead me to the real JFKthe one not
discussed by most of the alternative media.
There has been a meme floating around on Facebook (propagated by big alternative media
pages), that says something along the lines of, 4 out of 5 of these Presidents prefer world
government, and JFK is the only one un-checked that supposedly didnt. I intend to squash that
myth with his own words and with the legislation he foisted on us and even advocated for in
front of the United Nations.
A good place to begin is the current state of America, particularly in terms of gun control. Weve
seen over the years how the mainstream media blow these school shootings out of proportion. A
dozen or so dead school children seems to be the major reason to disarm Americans. Let me ask
one question though: what about the 500,000 children that were killed by Western sanctions in
Iraq? Shouldnt that be reason enough to disarm this genocidal government in its tracks?
Im sure you can sense my sarcasm here. Yet, this is a deadly serious matter (disarmament even
more). Once the people are disarmed and defenseless, the democide starts. Democide is by
definition, death by government (not including causalities of war). Weve seen it too many times
over history.
Examples:

Feudal Russia (possibly 1,066,000 murdered)

Mexico, 1900 1920 (some 1,400,000 murdered)
North Korea, creation to present day (some 1,600,000 murdered)

Yugoslavia, 1944 1987 (1,072,000 murdered)

Pakistan, 1969 1971 (1,503,000 murdered)
Poland, 1945 1950 (1,585,000 murdered)
Vietnam, 1945 1987 (1,670,000 murdered)
Turkey, 1900 1923 (1,883,000 murdered)
Cambodia, 1970 1980 (2,035,000 murdered)
Japan, 1937 1945 (5,964,000 murdered)
Chinese nationalists, 1927 1949 (10,214,000 murdered)
German national socialists, 1939 1945 (20,946,000 murdered)
Chinese communists, 1949 1987 (35,236,000 murdered)
Russian communists, 1917 1987 (61,911,000 murdered)

The first major step towards democide in all of these examples is universal disarmament of the
people. That is one objective of the Global Disarmament bill signed by John F. Kennedy. Only
his proposition is worldwide: democide on a much larger scale, by a world government.
Maybe then, statists can achieve their goal that they have literally set in stone. Of course, Im
referring to the Georgia Guidestones where the declared goal is to maintain humanity at
500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.

Part 1: Global Disarmament is the Plan: PL 87-297 is PROOF

The first place to start is in 1957, when the U.S Disarmament Agency was created and Congress
adopted the disarmament plan. The U.S Disarmament Agency was a part of the State
Department.
Just a few short years later, on September 26th, 1961, Public Law 87-297 (HR 9118) was signed
into existence by President John F. Kennedy. This bill established the Arms Control and
Disarmament Agency (ACDA), which replaced the U.S Disarmament Agency. The updated
version is known as Public Law 101-216, signed on December 11th, 1989, but we will focus on
JFKs treason.
The title of PL 87-297 states, Freedom From War: The United States Program for General and
Complete Disarmament in a Peaceful World. It is a Department of State Publication (7277) and
number five in the disarmament series and it has been added to and updated 18 times and none of
its provisions have been deleted.
Let me say this, before I go any further. If JFK was strictly advocating for peace and the
reduction in the number of nuclear weapons, then that would be an admirable act. The major
issue with this bill is that the government entity at the head is the United Nations.
The introduction begins by saying, First, there must be immediate disarmament action
Second, all disarmament obligations must be subject to effective international controls Third,
adequate peace-keeping machinery must be established [the United Nations] Nations are
unlikely to shed their means of self-protection in the absence of alternative ways to safeguard

their legitimate interests. This can only be achieved through the progressive strengthening of
INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTIONS UNDER THE UNITED NATIONS AND BY CREATING A
UNITED NATIONS PEACE FORCE TO ENFORCE THE PEACE AS THE DISARMAMENT
PROCESS PROCEEDS. {EMPHASIS ADDED}
The first question that arises is, can peace actually be enforced? The word enforce implies that
there has to be some entity using force or coercion to achieve the goal, whereas peace is well,
peaceful, and anytime there is the threat of force, it is NOT peaceful.
In the Disarmament Goal and Objectives section, it says, In order to make possible the
achievement of that goal, the program sets forth the following specific objectives toward which
nations should direct their efforts: the disbanding of ALL NATIONAL ARMED FORCES AND
THE PROHIBITION OF THEIR REESTABLISHMENT in any form whatsoever other than
those required to preserve internal order and for CONTRIBUTIONS TO A UNTIED NATIONS
PEACE FORCE The elimination from NATIONAL ARSENALS OF ALL ARMAMENTS

The document continues on stating, The institution of effective means for the enforcement of
international agreements, and for the maintenance of peace in accordance with the PRINCIPLES
OF THE UNITED NATIONS. {EMPHASIS ADDED}
As it is easy to tell, this bill places the United Nations at the head of the disarmament process and
is also in conjunction with the principles of the United Nations. I think its blatantly obvious that
any person who would sign this piece of legislation would have to be in favor of world

government; if they werent, why would they turn over control of disarmament to an
international agency?
The next important aspect of this is the section titled, Governing Principles. It discusses ways
in which to ensure security in trust among nations so that they can safely and comfortably
disarm, knowing that the other nation will as well. This section states that, As states relinquish
their arms, the United Nations must be progressively strengthened in order to improve its
capacity to assure international security and the peaceful settlement of disputes.
The first aspect mentioned is that, Disarmament must proceed as rapidly as possible Next, it
discusses inspection and verification techniques to be used: Inspection and verification must
establish both that nations carry out scheduled limitations or reductions and that they do not
retain armed forces and armaments in excess of those permitted at any stage of the disarmament
process
This will take us into part two of this article, but before we move forward, lets first take a look
at one other crucial piece of this legislation.
This will be an excerpt from the Second Stage. It says, The dismantling or the conversion
to peaceful uses of certain military bases and facilities wherever located
This will also be important when we move onto part two of this article, but lets summarize. It
only makes sense when looking at the rest of the bill, that military bases must be closed or
converted to peaceful uses.
There are two things worth mentioning, one from the 1990s and one from 2015.
On April 21st, 1993, in the San Jose Mercury News, it discusses the inauguration of the
Gorbachev Foundation in the USA, which is headquartered in San Francisco. Mikhail Gorbachev
was the last president of the Soviet Union. Later on in this article, it says: Gorbachev announced
that the foundation is creating a national task force on US military base closings The group
will call for a national conference of the 36 US communities that the base closings affect.

Link to above image.

So, not only are military bases being closed down to lift up the United Nations Peace Force, but
is being done in America by a former Russian president.
Next, lets fast forward to an article by Rare, posted on April 22, 2015 (exactly 22 years and one
day after the previous article), with the headline, The Pentagon wants to close military bases;
Congress says no.
The article continues to say, The Pentagon has argued for years that multiple bases inside the
United States are completely unnecessary, but the concern about losing a lucrative base in their
own district has kept much of Congress averse to any talk of closures. The last such closures
were in 2005
Note that base closings are being discussed in the mainstream media.
This again leads us into part two, but lets first take a look at John F. Kennedys own words,
when he addressed the United Nations General Assembly, on September 25th, 1961, to advocate
for this bill to be implemented. If you click here, you can watch the video and hear him say these
words himself, or you can read the full transcript. For those JFK worshippers, I recommend
you watch the video.
Kennedy starts by saying, Dag Hammarskjold is dead. But the United Nations lives
He continues to say, This will require new strength and new roles for the United Nations. For
disarmament without checks is but a shadow--and a community without law is but a shell.
Already the United Nations has become both the measure and the vehicle of man's most
generous impulses. Already it has provided--in the Middle East, in Asia, in Africa this year in the
Congo--a means of holding man's violence within bounds. But the great question which
confronted this body in 1945 is still before us: whether man's cherished hopes for progress and
peace are to be destroyed by terror and disruption, whether the "foul winds of war" can be tamed

in time to free the cooling winds of reason, and whether the pledges of our Charter are to be
fulfilled or defied--pledges to secure peace, progress, human rights and WORLD LAW.
Well, there is the first admittance that JFK has taken a pledge to world law. Lets hear another,
shall we?
Kennedy continues, Whatever advantages such a plan may hold out to my own country, as one
of the great powers, we reject it. For we far prefer world law, in the age of self-determination,
to world war, in the age of mass extermination.
Now, step back for a moment, to the meme being circulated by major alternative media pages on
Facebook: 4 out of 5 Presidents prefer world law, and JFKs name is unchecked. His own
words debunk that. Lets move forward.
Later on in his speech, he says, The weapons of war must be abolished before they abolish us.
Now, I dont disagree with him at all on that point. I believe in the non-aggression principle,
which is the ethical stance that initiatory force is always immoral. What I have a major issue with
is that he is FOR world government and throughout this speech, he praises the United Nations
for their great work in upholding peace, which is complete and utter nonsense.
Although, with the State, it will be nothing more than a monopoly on violence and unlimited
corruption, but only so long we tolerate this most dangerous of superstitions. Hell, the United
States has been at war for 222 out of its 239 years of existence. If thats not telling, I dont know
what is. Unless the concept of the State is totally abandoned, mankind will suffer forever.
Continuing on, he shows his trust and reliance on the United Nations: It would create machinery
to keep the peace as it destroys the machinery of war. It would proceed through balanced and
safeguarded stages designed to give no state a military advantage over another. It would place the
final responsibility for verification and control where it belongs, not with the big powers alone,
not with one's adversary or one's self, but in an international organization within the
framework of the United Nations It would achieve under the eyes of an international
disarmament organization {IDO}, a steady reduction in force, both nuclear and conventional,
until it has abolished all armies and all weapons except those needed for internal order and a
new United Nations Peace Force. And it starts that process now, today, even as the talks begin.
Youve read aspects of the bill that Kennedy signed, so you already at least had an idea that he
was for world government. Now, youve read his own words. These are his own admissions.
Kennedy continues, offering his support for PL 87-297: I therefore propose on the basis of this
Plan, that disarmament negotiations resume promptly, and continue without interruption until an
entire program for general and complete disarmament has not only been agreed but has actually
been achieved.
He continues, To destroy arms, however, is not enough. We must create even as we destroy-CREATING WORLDWIDE LAW AND LAW ENFORCEMENT as we outlaw worldwide
war and weapons. In the world we seek, the United Nations Emergency Forces which have been

hastily assembled, uncertainly supplied, and inadequately financed, will never be enough.
{Emphasis added}
This next part is one that should raise some eyebrows. Read carefully.
Kennedy continues, The new horizons of outer space must not be driven by the old bitter
concepts of imperialism and sovereign claims
Imperialism is a terrible thing, of course. The United States attempt at imperialism is what has
caused so much death, destruction, and turmoil all over the world, in utter and complete violation
of its own federal constitution that requires a declaration of war from the U.S. Congress. Whats
wrong with sovereignty though? Only someone that is for world government, would see
sovereignty as bitter (as JFK implied).
He continues, We shall propose further cooperative efforts between all nations in weather
prediction and eventually in weather control. We shall propose, finally, a global system of
communications satellites linking the whole world in telegraph and telephone and radio and
television
That was quite a proposal. Does that mean JFK is a conspiracy theorist?
That is enough out of the Global Disarmament bill (PL 87-297) and from JFKs speech. You
should now understand JFKs admiration for the United Nations and strive for world
government. It was in his own words.
It is time to stop worshipping or even thinking that any one President had the peoples best
interests at heart. That is a ludicrous idea, and to think there was only one President that did, is
a nave thought. There are only two arguments Ive really ever heard from people. One is that
JFK was the only President that looked out for the people, or Ronald Reagan. The JFK one has
been debunked and Reagans treason will be discussed in the 2nd installment of this article, which
will be titled, The Planned Police State.

Part 2: The Open Skies Treaty

In Part One, you saw some excerpts from PL 87-297 and from JFKs speech to the United
Nations. This bill and JFKs words advocate for a world government to uphold world peace by
the mechanism known as a United Nations Peace Force. In conjunction with the reduction of
armaments, it began the process for military base closings and a way to ensure that all nations are
upholding their oath to at least begin the disarmament process.
In this installment, we will discuss the Open Skies Treaty, which is the way to ensure all nations
are upholding their oath to disarmament and to world peace.
The Open Skies Treaty was first proposed by President Dwight Eisenhower in July 1955 to allow
the United States and the Soviet Union to conduct aerial reconnaissance flights over each others
territory. Moscow rejected the proposal, because they assumed it would be used for extensive
spying.

President George H.W. Bush revived the idea in 1989 and it was signed into being on March 24,
1992. The Open Skies Treaty permits each state-party to conduct short-notice, unarmed,
reconnaissance flights over the others entire territories to collect data on armaments, military
forces, and military bases. This is consistent with what H.G. Wells advocated for in his nonfiction work, The New World Order, published in 1940:
It is not unreasonable to anticipate the development of an ad hoc
disarmament police which will have its greatest strength in the air. How easily
the spirit of an air police can be denationalized is shown by the instance of
the air patrols on the United States-Canadian border, to which President
Roosevelt drew my attentionan ad hoc disarmament police with its main
strength in the air would necessarily fall into close co-operation with the
various other world police activities.

Among nations that signed are: Canada, the United Kingdom, the Russian Federation, Spain,
Turkey, Ukraine, and an additional 28 state-parties. In 2008, the states-parties celebrated the
500th overflight and since then, the number of flights exceeds 800.
Worth a mention, is in 2009, the United States flew a total of thirteen flights, twelve over Russia
and one over Ukraine.
In addition to that, our sworn enemy, Russia, has conducted over 38 overflights in US airspace
as well; to be more specific, Russia flies over the US four times a year.
One of those mentioned by the mainstream media, took place from December 8th-13th, 2014.
In the article, US Navy Commander Chris Nelson, who oversaw the flight, was quoted as saying,
Most of the world has no idea this treaty even exists. Whenever I mention that Russians fly
aircraft over the US taking pictures, it blows peoples minds.
You certainly are correct Mr. Nelson. The majority of folks dont even know this treaty exists.
Hell, if you mention that Russian planes fly over the US, you may even be labeled as a
conspiracy theorist.
Now how does this tie into the Global Disarmament bill discussed in Part One? Well, the answer
is quite clear.
The Open Skies Treaty is the inspection and verification aspect, referenced in the Global
Disarmament bill. It is, quite simply, a way to ensure that the United States is disarming and that
Russia is disarming, for example, in conjunction with the Global Disarmament bill. It is also an
instrument of trust by making all nation-states feel more comfortable in disarming, by knowing
the other nation is as well.
Another way to ensure disarmament is by war if a nation that didnt adopt the disarmament
policy doesnt want to disarm. President George Bush, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld,
Secretary of State Colin Powell, and White House spokesman Ari Fleischer have ALL said that,
Disarmament is the reason for going to war with Iraq.

I wonder if Bush Jr.s inaccurate assessment of the WMDs in Iraq was substantiated by an
Open Skies Treaty over-flight or if disarmament was only one of the excuses used? Your guess is
as good as mine, and I wont speculate.
To conclude, John F. Kennedy wanted the entire world disarmed, except for the United Nations
Peace Force and the minimal amount needed internally to provide support to the UN Peace
Force. The Open Skies Treaty is the inspection and verification method used to ensure all nations
are in fact, disarming.
The major question left is this: how do they plan to disarm Americans?
The answer: gun control and the warrantless surveillance police state apparatus, concomitant
with an Internet of Things where all produced commodities will be tracked, traced, and
scanned throughout the production cycle from raw material extraction to the retail shelf, the
customers home, and eventually the landfill.
The final installment of this three part article will be completed and posted soon. It will be posted
in article and audio form soon. Stay tuned.