Glasgow Guide Home

Whats On Glasgow Guide
  Glasgow What's On


    Glasgow Reviews


    Glasgow Gallery


      Glasgow Links
Discuss | Guestbook | Postcard | News | Weather | Feedback | Search | About | What's New
Glasgow Guide Discussion Boards

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )                >> View Today's Topics <<

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> This Man Kennedy.
dugald_old
post 22nd Nov 2013, 07:59pm
Post #1

Mega City Key Holder
******
Posts: 1,571
Joined: 29th Oct 2005
Member No.: 2,553
There is no doubt at all from the responses on the "Where Were You When JFK Was Shot?" thread here, that this man Kennedy was a popular president among GGers. Not only here, but all over a large part of the western world he appears to have enjoyed much popularity. This infamous anniversary for example, is not passing without a great deal of mention among the media in Canada. It's hard to imagine though, that when he won the vote to become president it was only by the slimmest of margins. What was it then that happened during his presidency that made him so popular? I'm not an American, and don't really see the moon landing as something that belongs exclusively to him; in fact, off the top of my head I think I could probably count just as many negatives about his presidency as positives.

There is one thing though, which for me will forever be something he did which marks him as special, and this was even before he became president. I'm thinking here of the fact that JFK never pinned the "appeaser" label on Neville Chamberlain. In his university graduating thesis the future president argued that Chamberlain's Münich Agreement with Adolph Hitler in 1938, was something for which the British Prime Minister had no alternative. Now, true enough, there were originally countless supporters of Chamberlain's paper-waving "Peace in our time", but they dwindled, in a very short space of time, to none at all that I knew of. Kennedy is the only one I came across who saw old Neville as a hero, rather than the old fool which has been his lot in Hisory.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
angel
post 23rd Nov 2013, 04:28am
Post #2


Mega City Key Holder
******
Posts: 14,372
Joined: 27th Mar 2007
Member No.: 4,675


Kennedy is the only one I came across who saw old Neville as a hero, rather than the old fool which has been his lot in Hisory.

Dugald , these are just my thoughts on this topic because I truly know very little about it , only that my parents and others also thought chamberlain a fool . but I think what he said after talking with Hitler
was just , maybe ! what G.B. wanted , and thats was more time .

Regarding J.F.K., because we are supposed to be products of our invironment , could it be that the president thought Chamberlain a hero because of his fathers' friendly relationship with the man .
Just some of my musings , Goodnight smile.gif







--------------------
donate to your local food bank .
Pat.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dave Grieve
post 23rd Nov 2013, 06:37am
Post #3


Mega City Key Holder
******
Posts: 3,454
Joined: 22nd Sep 2010
From: Umhlanga Rocks South Africa
Member No.: 9,005
I think the main reason Kennedy is remembered is because his assassination was such a shock, something totally unexpected not because he was popular. Politically he was not a success with the American people with America heading economically into a mini recession at the time of his killing and its not certain he would have been reelected.
The missile crisis was to me not a brave decision for him to make as I believe even Carter or Ford would have done the same thing, that leaves the desegregation of the education system as the sole high point of his term of office and that would have cost him the southern vote at the next election.

No without the assassination he would have gone down as just another president.

As for Chamberlain history has painted him as a silly old fart that was bullied and tricked by Hitler but with the hindsight of so many years to realise how ill prepared Britain was for a war he probably did the best he could.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
carmella
post 23rd Nov 2013, 09:13am
Post #4


Mega City Key Holder
******
Posts: 4,965
Joined: 28th Jul 2003
From: South Ayrshire
Member No.: 58
I couldn't have put it better myself Dugald, I think your opinion is totally correct. I don't believe that before or since JFK has anyone else ever gone to the rescue, so to speak, of Neville Chamberlain who was not a fool as we all know.

We are very lucky in some respects these days with having some fascinating documentaries regarding both the First and Second World Wars, hindsight is a great thing and I often wonder what people in the 40s 50s and 60s would have thought had they been given the benefit of some great documentaries.

I think another reason we remember Kennedy fondly is because he was cut down when he was still young, and we will never know what might have been. I, and thousands of others, thought he would have been a very good President. As always when someone is cut down young, they remain forever young because that's how we remember them.

I think it is no great mystery either, that it was not long after that his brother Robert F. Kennedy was assassinated, also by a bullet!!


--------------------
Silence is a true friend who never betrays.

Confucius - Chinese Philosopher - [551bc-479bc]
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dugald_old
post 23rd Nov 2013, 09:08pm
Post #5

Mega City Key Holder
******
Posts: 1,571
Joined: 29th Oct 2005
Member No.: 2,553
Interesting musings Angel. It could well be that the fruit of Chamberlain's effort was, as you mention, a much needed bit more time. In this regard, it's hard to believe that in 1938 Rolls Royce were still selling Rolls Royce engines all round the world--- and that includes Nazi Germany! This engine, probably the best in the world at this time, was what made Britain's Spitfire at least on par with the best in the world.

No, I don't think JFK's thoughts about Neville had anything to do with Joseph Kennedy's friendly relationship with Chamberlain. I'd guess Kennedy senior wasn't friendly with any of the parliamentarians in the U.K., on the contrary, he was an archenemy of Britain--- and that's why Roosevelt eventually sacked him.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dugald_old
post 23rd Nov 2013, 09:22pm
Post #6

Mega City Key Holder
******
Posts: 1,571
Joined: 29th Oct 2005
Member No.: 2,553
Aye Dave, one wonders if JFK would have gone down as just another president if it hadn't been for his assassination. I tend to agree with you too about him politically, not having been a success--- more of an uncertain future I think--- I'd guess he wouldn't have won again with much of a majority if, he ever won again. The desegregation of education was undoubtedly a very worthy feather in his cap. On the other hand, the Bay of Pigs together with his continued bombing in Vietnam were disasters. Ach, there's just too any speculative pondering, answers to which we'll never know.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dugald_old
post 23rd Nov 2013, 09:59pm
Post #7

Mega City Key Holder
******
Posts: 1,571
Joined: 29th Oct 2005
Member No.: 2,553
Ah Carmella, great feeling to see us in agreement! You know, one of the biggest complaints about Chamberlain's Münich Agreement was that he threw away the German Sudetenland and left Czechoslovakia to face Hitler alone. This of course was true, but it was not the great disaster that it was later portrayed as. Czechoslovakia itself was simply a makeshift piece of European land thrown together at the end of the Great War by a bunch of politicians who knew very little about it. They could have called it Lower Slobovia because the parts had little in common. Indeed, it wasn't long after WWII that the so-called Czechoslovakia fell apart of its own volition. Would this have been worth going to war over in 1938? not al all!

You know, I have never given any thought about the lack of really good documentaries back in the 40s 50s and 60s. The closest thing to documentaries I recall, were the news reels at the cinema. If we'd had them perhaps there just wouldn't have been as many decisions leading to the likes of war. I mean, if we'd had for example a good documentary describing President Wilson's messing about with a Europe about which he barely had a clue, things might have been different regarding the meeting with Hitler.

Yes, Kennedy's young age at the time of the Dallas tragedy made it seen a lot worse. Hey, but it really was a helluva thing to happen. Geez, at the time I just could not imagine this happening in the USA, with their super Secret Service, it was simply, stunning. Then the Oswald assassination so closely on top of that in view of millions just made it all seem so unreal to me.

Poor Robert, he just never had a chance and he might well have been a better man that his brother. For one thing, I don't think he would have been involved with any extramarital affairs in which his brother allegedly participated. Interesting stuff.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Noonan McKane
post 24th Nov 2013, 01:18am
Post #8


Super Resident
****
Posts: 166
Joined: 1st Apr 2008
Member No.: 5,552
Kennedy wasn't the first US President to be assassinated. He wasn't even the first to die whilst in office; but he was definitely the first to have been 'removed'.

On taking office, JFK made a number of very clear statements: the most significant of these were that he was not interested in making war in SE Asia, and that he was even less interested in an invasion of Cuba (to 'liberate' it from the 'communist foe'). These signals of intent effectively sealed his fate. A fairly small, but inestimably powerful group of people had far too much to lose if there was to be no Vietnam war. This was far too serious a situation to be left to the 'democratic process', and JFK couldn't be impeached on the grounds that he had failed to properly serve the US arms industry.....

The plot to kill JFK is so glaringly apparent that I still find it hard to believe that it is not the generally accepted 'version of events'. Although it can become an incredibly tangled and confusing story to follow, surely it can be taken as a FACT that there was more than one shooter that afternoon? Look at the Zapruder film. The fatal shot is obviously fired from ahead and to the right of JFK, causing him to slump "back, and to the left", as Jim Garrison famously pointed out. "Back, and to the left." Christ, the footage even shows us a piece of JFK's skull flying backwards. This, taken with the fact that Lee Harvey Oswald was known to be "the worst shot in the Navy" (which led many to wonder why he hadn't taken a shot when JFK's car was almost beneath him, and moving toward him, rather than 100 yards away from him and moving away.) must surely make people wonder how it was all concluded so neatly, so finally. Practically all tidied away by the following day when Oswald was removed by Jack Ruby. Ruby died of cancer in prison in 1974, and never spoke a word of a 'conspiracy'. I bet his family were glad of that, don't you?

The 'Oswald as lone shooter' theory is like the book of Genesis, and the 'conspiracy theory' is like the big bang theory: We can't definitively prove either of them, but our reason and our instincts strongly favour the one over the other, surely?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TeeHeeHee
post 24th Nov 2013, 01:26am
Post #9


Mega City Key Holder
******
Posts: 14,138
Joined: 25th Jan 2009
From: German/French/Swiss border town on the River Rhein
Member No.: 6,448
QUOTE (dugald @ 22nd Nov 2013, 09:16pm) *
. . . What was it then that happened during his presidency that made him so popular?

What, don't you know? biggrin.gif
Hi Dugald, I was 19 when he was taken out and remember the feeling of sheer disbelief that ran through me while sat with my mate on that bus on our way to his granny's place in Dollar.
How could anyone in the good ol' US of A, these days, assassinate their President?
Well, of course there were a few good reasons for a would-be assassin or even a group of People who might wish to conspire to have JFK removed ... rather than wait to see if he lost the next election. My guess at the time; which hasn't changed much since then, was that he was popular enough among the American People ... and might just win another term to the dismay of others ... because he made the Kind of promises that American Folks back then liked to hear and; first off, JFK was a President with that missing ingredient, Charisma and he was a war hero to boot.
Kennedy put Kruschof in his place once and for all and the Americans loved that ... although it was a bit of brinkmanship; on both sides, which had a few of us Holding our breath.
Kennedy and his brother Bobby were trying their best to help the downtrodden blacks and a new Generation of Americans loved that.
Kennedy went to The Wall and said, Ich bin Berliner and a lot of Folks loved that, me included. (Actually he said "Ich bin ein Berliner" which in German means I'm a doughnut but the Germans understood what he meant biggrin.gif )
And of course he promised that an American would set foot on the moon by the end of the decade which went down well because the Americans love to be winners, or hate being losers; which ever way you want to see it.
But he built a lot of enemies on his way, including that nasty Piece of work J.Edgar Hoover who hated having a philandering Catholic in the White house. Even without his philandering, a Catholic in the White house was too much not only for Hoover (who must have been turning in his grave faster than a Neutron star when Obama stretched his legs under the table in the Oval Office laugh.gif )
So there you are Dugald, my tuppence worth - including all the extra capital letters which is down to this German Computer and me not being bothered to Change them cos it's half-two in the mornin'.

PS I second Noonan's post entirely.


--------------------
Wait a minute ... I've got my eye on a burd.

... Some try to tell me thoughts they cannot defend ...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Noonan McKane
post 24th Nov 2013, 02:22am
Post #10


Super Resident
****
Posts: 166
Joined: 1st Apr 2008
Member No.: 5,552
The 1960 US Presidential election was so close, almost as close as the 2000 election (do you know how many votes GW Bush won Florida by? Some people say 7. SEVEN!!) and many who dispute the 'conspiracy' contend: 'if it was so important that the ultra right wing Nixon defeated the young, inexperienced and, yes, Roman Catholic Kennedy, then why didn't they simply rig the election? The fact is that JFK winning in '60 came completely out of the blue. After the situation had been 'rectified' on 22 November 63, LB Johnson saw out the JFK 'era', and normal service was presumed when RM Nixon took office, finally, in 1968. The machine also took this opportunity to remove Bobby Kennedy.

Richard Nixon, of course, was a liar and a cheat, but was too stupid to realise the massiveness of the gravy train he was the driver of, and was removed from office in 1974. He died in 1994. Many people believe he was a key figure, perhaps even the instigator, of the JFK plot, but I think someone who couldn't even tape record his opponents conversations in a hotel without being caught might have struggled to hatch a plot to kill the President. (Although, to be fair, there are elements of the JFK plot which are definitely Nixon-esque) Nixon was a horrible man. A grotesque. Hunter S Thompson described him as "barely human".
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
*Dante*
post 24th Nov 2013, 08:12am
Post #11






Kennedy like his family before him was a plutocrat and a racist. Racist that is because after having Sammmy Davis Jnr. A black and ostensibly Jewish, fight to get him elected, he excluded him from the inaugural ceremony in a despicable underhand way, by getting another actor to inform him as he was coward to do so himself. His antecedents were pro Hitler and strove valiantly to stop America entering the war in the Allies' favour. What did he accomplish, apart from vague inspirational speeches?

An escalation of the Vietnam war that cost the lives tens of thousands of young Americans. "Ask not what my country can do for me" Yeah right it can do Khe Sanh.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Samantha
post 24th Nov 2013, 09:24am
Post #12

Super Resident
****
Posts: 180
Joined: 23rd Feb 2013
Member No.: 18,635
I also concur with post number 8.


--------------------
Dum excusare credis, accusas
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Betsy2009
post 24th Nov 2013, 10:38am
Post #13

Mega City Key Holder
******
Posts: 3,292
Joined: 21st Jun 2013
Member No.: 25,701
Given the number of attacks on presidents, including present day, why is Kennedy 'special'? If he hadn't been so young and popular, would we have been so shocked? Why were we not so shocked when the attempt was made on, say, Reagan?

1 Presidents assassinated
1.1 Abraham Lincoln
1.2 James A. Garfield
1.3 William McKinley
1.4 John F. Kennedy
2 Failed assassination attempts
2.1 Andrew Jackson
2.2 Abraham Lincoln
2.3 Theodore Roosevelt
2.4 Herbert Hoover
2.5 Franklin D. Roosevelt
2.6 Harry S Truman
2.7 John F. Kennedy
2.8 Richard Nixon
2.9 Gerald Ford
2.10 Jimmy Carter
2.11 Ronald Reagan
2.12 George H. W. Bush
2.13 Bill Clinton
2.14 George W. Bush
2.15 Barack Obama
3 Presidential deaths rumored to be assassinations
3.1 Zachary Taylor
3.2 Warren G. Harding
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Samantha
post 24th Nov 2013, 11:23am
Post #14

Super Resident
****
Posts: 180
Joined: 23rd Feb 2013
Member No.: 18,635
Those two things right there, young and popular not to mention the come the moment come the man thing...right time right place it seemed. The times they were a changing and he seemed the man for the job. Hindsight, of course, can alter views.

Also the live televised gunning down of a human being affected people profusely....the sight of a young woman, his wife, scrambling over the back of the car to try and retrieve particles of his brain/skull. The whole broad day light scenario shocked people to the core. I don't recall televised events of this nature. This, of course, was pre Sopranos.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHRTCVwSKMs

The man was also very charismatic, a word often misused.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LaqgQcvLO_o

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utYcFf93Srs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdMbmdFOvTs


--------------------
Dum excusare credis, accusas
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dugald_old
post 24th Nov 2013, 01:29pm
Post #15

Mega City Key Holder
******
Posts: 1,571
Joined: 29th Oct 2005
Member No.: 2,553
You have some powerful postings there Noonen, and while I must remind myself that they are essentially nothing more than speculations, I hasten to let it be known that I would not use "wild", as is often the case, to describe these speculations. At one time I too, had a whole list of my own speculations, but they have long past, fallen by the wayside of time. I just don't know, and beyond admitting there is room for doubt regarding the official explanation, I'm content to let it be. We are knee-deep in motives for many of these 'speculations', but motives are not sufficient proof. I want to take a look at one of your motives mentioned. You say:

"A fairly small, but inestimably powerful group of people had far too much to lose if there was to be no Vietnam war.".

A very sound motive for getting rid of Kennedy. I think it is worth drawing attention to the fact that President Eisenhower himself warned the nation about this very same thing although Vietnam wasn't specifically mentioned. In his 1950 farewell presidential address, Eisenhower famously warned the U.S. about the "military–industrial complex". It was some thing which he felt required very careful attention. Here is a definition of what exactly Eisenhower's "military–industrial complex" really meant:

It can be defined as, "an informal and changing coalition of groups with vested psychological, moral, and material interests in the continuous development and maintenance of high levels of weaponry, in preservation of colonial markets and in military-strategic conceptions of internal affairs". ( I am not the author of this)
This subscribes forcefully to what you say, but again it's not proof of anything, it merely substantiates another motive regarding those involved in the murder of JFK.

Very interesting postings Noonen.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Fast ReplyReply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 21st Sep 2017

All material in the site Glasgow Guide is copyright of the Glasgow Guide Organisation. This material is for your own private use only, and no part of the site may be reproduced, amended, modified, copied, or transmitted to third parties, by any means whatsoever without the prior written permission of the copyright owner. All rights reserved.

Glasgow Hotels: book cheap hotels in Glasgow online now.