Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a “troll” by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldn’t be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg “It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill,” is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points – Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

How do Presidents compare to the JFK Standard?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • How do Presidents compare to the JFK Standard?

    Something bfgrn wrote in the "CIA" thread caught my eye:
    Originally posted by Bfgrn
    Were you able to read what actually happened? Thank God for the Bay of Pigs. Kennedy was a fast learner. Without the knowledge he gained about the CIA, and the Joint Chiefs in 1961, American cities would have been smoking holes in 1962.

    Did you loose respect for JFK when he didn't invade Cuba in 1962 during the Cuban Missile Crisis, and instead forged a peaceful resolution? Because what we NOW know is that the Joint Chiefs lied to the President.

    Kennedy was particularly alarmed by his trigger-happy Air Force chief, cigar-chomping General Curtis LeMay, who firmly believed the U.S. should unleash a pre-emptive nuclear broadside against Russia while America still enjoyed massive arms superiority. Throughout the 13-day Cuban missile crisis, Kennedy was under relentless pressure from LeMay and nearly his entire national-security circle to "fry" Cuba, in the Air Force chief's memorable language. But J.F.K., whose only key support in the increasingly tense Cabinet Room meetings came from his brother Bobby and Defense Secretary Robert McNamara, kept searching for a nonmilitary solution. When Kennedy, assiduously working the back channels to the Kremlin, finally succeeded in cutting a deal with Khrushchev, the world survived "the most dangerous moment in human history," in Schlesinger's words. But no one at the time knew just how dangerous. Years later, attending the 40th anniversary of the crisis at a conference in Havana, Schlesinger, Sorensen and McNamara were stunned to learn that if U.S. forces had attacked Cuba, Russian commanders on the island were authorized to respond with tactical and strategic nuclear missiles. The Joint Chiefs had assured Kennedy during the crisis that "no nuclear warheads were in Cuba at the time," Sorensen grimly noted. "They were wrong." If Kennedy had bowed to his military advisers' pressure, a vast swath of the urban U.S. within missile range of the Soviet installations in Cuba could have been reduced to radioactive rubble.

    Read more: Warrior For Peace - The Lessons of J.F.K. - TIME
    It strikes me that a true leader will do what he believes is the right thing, despite any (and all ... most times) pressure to the contrary. JFK faced, as the article piece posted by bfgrn says, "...relentless pressure from LeMay and nearly his entire national security circle to "fry" Cuba..." yet ye maintained his position and sought out a "negotiated" solution, supported ONLY by RFK and Robert McNamara.

    Maybe I'm just getting old, but I don't recall another president who would stand up to that kind of pressure. IN fact, the two or three most recent presidents seem to cave in to their "inner circles" and handlers with alarming regularity.

    What are your thoughts about a president who will select all of those voices and, then, ignore them ... and what do you think about a president who lacks the integrity and/or strength to stand up to that kind of pressure to abrogate his values?

  • #2
    Re: How do Presidents compare to the JFK Standard?

    Originally posted by Good1 View Post
    Something bfgrn wrote in the "CIA" thread caught my eye:


    It strikes me that a true leader will do what he believes is the right thing, despite any (and all ... most times) pressure to the contrary. JFK faced, as the article piece posted by bfgrn says, "...relentless pressure from LeMay and nearly his entire national security circle to "fry" Cuba..." yet ye maintained his position and sought out a "negotiated" solution, supported ONLY by RFK and Robert McNamara.

    Maybe I'm just getting old, but I don't recall another president who would stand up to that kind of pressure. IN fact, the two or three most recent presidents seem to cave in to their "inner circles" and handlers with alarming regularity.

    What are your thoughts about a president who will select all of those voices and, then, ignore them ... and what do you think about a president who lacks the integrity and/or strength to stand up to that kind of pressure to abrogate his values?
    I think the biggest pressures JFK chose to follow was his penchant for womanizing. I believe he had good advice from many of his key military and intelligence advisers and chose to go a different direction. I believe the CIA and Military advisers had lots of savvy about what would happen if we did not support the overthrow of Castro "balls to the wall." Then of course, worse case scenario did happen and Russian missiles and nukes were put into Cuba. I believe that was totally on JFK.

    As to how his successors stood up to his myth, several surpassed him in quality of leadership.

    מה מכילות החדשות?


    • #3
      Re: How do Presidents compare to the JFK Standard?

      Originally posted by CalifornCracker View Post
      I think the biggest pressures JFK chose to follow was his penchant for womanizing. I believe he had good advice from many of his key military and intelligence advisers and chose to go a different direction. I believe the CIA and Military advisers had lots of savvy about what would happen if we did not support the overthrow of Castro "balls to the wall." Then of course, worse case scenario did happen and Russian missiles and nukes were put into Cuba. I believe that was totally on JFK.
      I'm sure you can make that argument ... but he also stonewalled Kruschev and ultimately stared HIM down and the missiles were removed. The blockade was a bold step, too.

      Also, his womanizing was pretty well documented, so no arguments there.

      מה מכילות החדשות?


      • #4
        Re: How do Presidents compare to the JFK Standard?

        Maybe JFK figured out how big of douchebags the Joint Chiefs of Staff were when they drafted, and approved, a false flag attack on our own country so we could blame it on Cuba in order to go to war. I know, if I was president, I would not only have not listened to a single word those filthy pieces of human feces those people were but I would have fired them and removed their pension because they were traitorous bastards.

        מה מכילות החדשות?


        • #5
          Re: How do Presidents compare to the JFK Standard?

          Originally posted by Good1 View Post
          I'm sure you can make that argument ... but he also stonewalled Kruschev and ultimately stared HIM down and the missiles were removed. The blockade was a bold step, too.

          Also, his womanizing was pretty well documented, so no arguments there.
          Actually, Russia didn't cave like people thought they did. They had nukes on Cuba for a little bit after they were supposed to have all been removed. As far as womanizing...JFK couldn't hold a candle to the womanizing that Benjamin Franklin pulled off.

          מה מכילות החדשות?


          • #6
            Re: How do Presidents compare to the JFK Standard?

            Originally posted by fishjoel View Post
            As far as womanizing...JFK couldn't hold a candle to the womanizing that Benjamin Franklin pulled off.
            Assuming that's true... Benjamin Franklin, was never president.

            As far as presidents go, the only one that comes close (and it wasn't all that close in either sheer volume or quality) is Bill Clinton.

            מה מכילות החדשות?


            • #7
              Re: How do Presidents compare to the JFK Standard?

              I am not so sure JFK sets a leadership standard just because he stood up to "relentless pressure from LeMay and nearly his entire national security circle." There may be many things we can credit to JFK, but not sure this is one of them.

              מה מכילות החדשות?


              • #8
                Re: How do Presidents compare to the JFK Standard?

                JFK went in and was cleaning the cess pool up, and it got him mudered. The same thing happened to Bobby. JFK was the last president that when he came into office and the power behind the curtain tried to dictate to JFK, he basically said forget about it. So, JFK was the last great american president, the ones that get that office today know before they get there how the corrupt systems works and they of course go along with it. That is why obama looks like Bush and Bush looked like Clinton and so on.

                He who has the gold, makes the rules.

                מה מכילות החדשות?


                • #9
                  Re: How do Presidents compare to the JFK Standard?

                  Originally posted by CalifornCracker View Post
                  I think the biggest pressures JFK chose to follow was his penchant for womanizing. I believe he had good advice from many of his key military and intelligence advisers and chose to go a different direction. I believe the CIA and Military advisers had lots of savvy about what would happen if we did not support the overthrow of Castro "balls to the wall." Then of course, worse case scenario did happen and Russian missiles and nukes were put into Cuba. I believe that was totally on JFK.

                  As to how his successors stood up to his myth, several surpassed him in quality of leadership.
                  President Kennedy had a completely different view. He believed in 'peace'. It is what got him assassinated IMO.

                  Today's hawks like to claim J.F.K. as one of their heroes by pointing to his steep increase in defense spending and to defiant speeches like his June 1963 denunciation of communist tyranny in the shadow of the Berlin Wall. It is certainly true that Kennedy brought a new vigor to the global duel with the Soviet Union and its client governments. But it is also clear that Kennedy preferred to compete ideologically and economically with the communist system than engage with the enemy militarily. He was supremely confident that the advantages of the capitalist system would ultimately prevail, as long as a nuclear catastrophe could be avoided. In the final months of his Administration, J.F.K. even opened a secret peace channel to Castro, led by U.N. diplomat William Attwood. "He would have recognized Cuba," Milt Ebbins, a Hollywood crony of J.F.K.'s, says today. "He told me that if we recognize Cuba, they'll buy our refrigerators and toasters, and they'll end up kicking Castro out."

                  Kennedy often said he wanted his epitaph to be "He kept the peace." Even Khrushchev and Castro, Kennedy's toughest foreign adversaries, came to appreciate J.F.K.'s commitment to that goal. The roly-poly Soviet leader, clowning and growling, had thrown the young President off his game when they met at the Vienna summit in 1961. But after weathering storms like the Cuban missile crisis, the two leaders had settled into a mutually respectful quest for dיtente. When Khrushchev got the news from Dallas in November 1963, he broke down and sobbed in the Kremlin, unable to perform his duties for days. Despite his youth, Kennedy was a "real statesman," Khrushchev later wrote in his memoir, after he was pushed from power less than a year following J.F.K.'s death. If Kennedy had lived, he wrote, the two men could have brought peace to the world.

                  Castro too had come to see J.F.K. as an agent of change, despite their long and bitter jousting, declaring that Kennedy had the potential to become "the greatest President" in U.S. history. Tellingly, the Cuban leader never blamed the Kennedys for the numerous assassination attempts on him. Years later, when Bobby Kennedy's widow Ethel made a trip to Havana, she assured Castro that "Jack and Bobby had nothing to do with the plots to kill you." The tall, graying leader—who had survived so long in part because of his network of informers in the U.S.—looked down at her and said, "I know."

                  Read more: Warrior For Peace - The Lessons of J.F.K. - TIME

                  מה מכילות החדשות?


                  • #10
                    Re: How do Presidents compare to the JFK Standard?

                    As for as I am concerned the day JFK was murdered, a conspiracy, was the day America died.

                    When Pres. Bush Sr was asked once where he was when JFK was killed, he said he could not remember. I don't believe it. Who doesn't recall where they were when that happened?

                    מה מכילות החדשות?


                    • #11
                      Re: How do Presidents compare to the JFK Standard?

                      JFK came closer than any other President in history to incinerating hundreds of thousands of people. We were at the stage in the launch sequence where the only thing left to do was push the button and unleash unfathomable destruction.

                      Hardly something to revere.

                      מה מכילות החדשות?


                      • #12
                        Re: How do Presidents compare to the JFK Standard?

                        Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post
                        As for as I am concerned the day JFK was murdered, a conspiracy, was the day America died.

                        When Pres. Bush Sr was asked once where he was when JFK was killed, he said he could not remember. I don't believe it. Who doesn't recall where they were when that happened?
                        That must mean Bush Sr. was involved in the conspiracy! Well done!

                        מה מכילות החדשות?


                        • #13
                          Re: How do Presidents compare to the JFK Standard?

                          Originally posted by MattInFla View Post
                          JFK came closer than any other President in history to incinerating hundreds of thousands of people. We were at the stage in the launch sequence where the only thing left to do was push the button and unleash unfathomable destruction.

                          Hardly something to revere.
                          Well, those were the times. A different man very well might have made a different decision. Do you think he is responsible for the global political climate of the times?

                          מה מכילות החדשות?


                          • #14
                            Re: How do Presidents compare to the JFK Standard?

                            Originally posted by MattInFla View Post
                            JFK came closer than any other President in history to incinerating hundreds of thousands of people. We were at the stage in the launch sequence where the only thing left to do was push the button and unleash unfathomable destruction.

                            Hardly something to revere.
                            Link, context, event, circumstance??? I have studied JFK for decades...this is new to me Matt.

                            מה מכילות החדשות?


                            • #15
                              Re: How do Presidents compare to the JFK Standard?

                              Originally posted by MattInFla View Post
                              Hardly something to revere.
                              W/O having been shot and killed, JFK would have been seen, at best, a middling president

                              מה מכילות החדשות?

                              Working...
                              X