Talk:John F. Kennedy/Archive 3

message: The 'Criticism' section on this article is still an absurdity and is in fact growing exponenially in size. There is little justification for hardly any of it, and it amounts to little more than eccentric over-egging of minor squabbles - Kennedy's presidency is by no means anywhere near as controversial as that of, say, Clinton or either of the Bushs or Nixon's. It is small wonder this article fails to reach a level of quality to be regarded as a valuable piece of writing. The entire section should either be scrapped or rewritten to include no more than 3 sentences. The section is laughably immature. Get rid of it or rewrite it.Iamlondon 19:24, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Criticism Section

message: I am a teacher at a private school in Indonesia who received a lot of incoming students from a nearby Catholic school operated by a congregation of nuns. One of the parents whose son used to attend the Catholic school claimed that the head of the school, a very old nun, wrote in her biography that she was one of the favourite students of JFK. As far as I could remember, JFK did not have any sort of teaching experience whether it is in elementary, secondary or tertiary level. Could anybody confirm that JFK did ever teach? I probably will investigate further into her biography. Pboy2k5 16:33, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Did JFK ever teach/become a teacher?

message: A silouette that appears to be a person with a rifle can be seen from frames 420 to 485 of the Zapruder film. The silouette moves similarly to the way the human body moves; at one point it appears to hunch its shoulders. The silouette is in a portion of the frame the does not move with the background. This suggests that it is a reflection. Possibly from light entering through the eye piece and onto the film. This happens on Aaton 16mm cameras if you leave the eye peice oncovered (i.e. take your eye away from it). I don't know weather anyone has looked into this before, but I think it should be concidered for entry into the wiki article on JFK.
Every frame of the film can be found here - http://www.assassinationresearch.com/v2n2/zfilm/zframe485.html. Ethoen 02:51, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  This belongs in the JFK Assassination page, not the JFK page.JettaMann 16:22, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Zapruder film

message: I've noticed, with some amusement, that this trivia line is one of the most edited. Why people don't understand it I'll never know...it's quite straightforward: Kennedy was the first president of the 20th century presidents who was himself born in the 20th century. I,e Eisenhower and all preceding presidents of the 20th century were born in the 19th century but Kennedy was born in 1917. That Trivia line must have been edited 10 times by now! :o) Iamlondon 17:17, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've made the point clear to avoid disambiguation and confusion: Kennedy was the first 20th century born U.S. president and LBJ was the first president born in the 20th century (chronologically). SNIyer12 21:38, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Born in 20th Century - Trivia

message: The entire section is far too long and detailed. It all belongs (and indeed already exists in) the JFK Assassination article. It ought to read no more than two sentences - 1. That he was shot, and 2. That there is great controversy as to who the culprits were. As it stands it doesn't really have much to do with the life and career of JFKIamlondon 16:31, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not inordinately long, considering the traumatic effect his assassination had on the nation, & is in large part responsible for the sentimental way he is remembered. It has been pared down considerably from what it once was. Achilles2006 17:39, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough. I don't feel inordinately strongly either way...my personal opinion is that it is distractive. But hey...people may indeed come here looking for info on his death. Though as a POV, I think it's more sorrow than sentiment at his death. But that's irrelevant.Iamlondon 02:39, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Assassination

message: Readers / Editors - I'm in the process of reporting 'Achilles2006' and his / her IPN to Wiki for subtle and blatant acts of vandalism to all pages relating to President Kennedy. I urge you to pay specific attention to this individual's contributions (easily attainable by reference to DSN Search at Google). Their DSN result doesn't change, hence their access to these articles can be banned. If you spot further abuses please report them to Wiki's staff as I have done. They will ban all such members.
:At least you could have signed your complaint.  Achilles2006 20:36, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, and guys, Achilles2006 is now also trying to have the line about the Kennedy men sleeping with Monroe added to an article on the said woman.Just another FYIIamlondon 00:29, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Making things up now, I see. I added one question in the Monroe talk section- in response to an unsigned defense of RFK-- must have been from you. Achilles2006 10:54, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Trust me, the omission was an accident. So here, it's signed, people are fed up enough already. Iamlondon 23:58, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: People?  Achilles2006 11:18, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Vandalism

message: We wish to advise everyone that we (the Living Trust Network) have a copy of John F. Kennedy's Last Will and Testament posted on our website, which we believe is of interest to anyone seeking information about the life of John F. Kennedy. We have also discussed our desire to post a link to John F. Kennedy's Last Will and Testament with Wikipedia administrators [See User talk:Livingtrust], either under "references" or "external links." Last Will and Testament of John F. Kennedy. Wikipedia does not object to the link but has requested that we not put the link up ourselves since we are a commercial website. Instead, it has requested that we make it known that the Last Will and Testament is available, and anyone who wishes to add the link to the "reference" section or the "external links" section may do so. So, we solicite your help in adding the link set forth above. Thanks. Livingtrust 02:45, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Last Will and Testament of John F. Kennedy 

message: I just wanted to note that I reverted an anonymous edit that changed the list of movies such that one on the list named the director instead of the actor who played Kennedy, when every other entry lists Kennedy's actor.  To preserve consistency, I've reverted. Cheers! Chuchunezumi 23:44, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Movie reverts

message: In the 'assasination' section we read: ' Texas Governor John Conally survived the bullet he received. ' . This is a bit unclear, Why was Conally there, where did the bullet come from, where was Conally located, who shot it. Marminnetje 03:44, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conally 

message: :Image:JFKmotorcade.jpg may be automatically deleted due to not having source info. I've searched and so far have only come up with http://www.cyberpoems.com/9-2/grassyknoll.htm which identifies it as a Bettman/Corbis file, but I haven't been able to verify it, nor identify the photographer. I believe http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:HistoricPhoto can be asserted, but it needs source info first. TransUtopian 01:17, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for researching the photo.  Hopefully someone will be able to to provide a source.  It would be a shame to lose this photo from Wikipedia.  Mytwocents 04:38, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! I believe I've found the copyright holder and photographer, and have added fair use reasoning (the same as in another photo on the JFK assassination page), so hopefully that'll suss it. OrphanBot tags pics without source info and the like for auto-removal several times an hour, so if anyone likes doing research like that, bookmark Special:Contributions/OrphanBot. --TransUtopian 12:46, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  motorcade pic source? 

message: At the end, it mentions individuals, with little or no evidence. And it also brings in the Mossad. All speculation.  I don't think it should be here. Achilles2006 13:31, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Can we just agree to keep the details of the assassination in the JFK assassination page? We hsould only state: 1) An assassination occurred (date, time, etc...). 2) The facts are disputed by many (then point to the assassination page via link in the same sentence).JettaMann 16:28, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Assassinations section 

message: I'd like to argue that when most people type in JFK to WP's search box, they're looking for this article, and not the film, the airport, etc. Granted, those two things are pretty popular, but I still advocate having JFK point here, adding the following at the top of the page
moving JFK to JFK (disambiguation). It'd be like a WP shortcut here, though one in extensive use outside WP, as long as there's a consensus that most searching for the other meanings don't mind an extra click. It's hard to get a reliable source on my argument without a straw poll or before discussion. 
Ghits for JFK -airport -movie = 13.4 million
JFK airport = 12.9 million
JFK movie = 4.9 million
However, there are many articles about the president which also mention the airport named for him, so up that first number by a bit. 
I didn't find discussion in the edit summary for JFK, its talk page or this talk page, so rather than a potentially time-wasting revert (I wouldn't war), I'd like to bring it up here. TransUtopian 15:24, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirect JFK here? 

message: Why so little about JFK's early career?  The Joe McCarthy/Civil Rights Act of 1957 sections keep getting reverted? Why ? They were 2 of the biggest issues of the 1950s, & affected the way he was perceived by the public, & other politicians.  Achilles2006 23:08, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  That is major, so I'm not sure why some misguided JFK protector is reverting your changes. I would add them and put a direct, reliable web reference next to the information. JettaMann 16:29, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Early Political Career 

message: The US military incursions into South Vietnam did not represent a cause for lack of trust in American politics and Government by the time of Kennedy's death in 1963. Hence the removal of the line concerning Kennedy and Johnson. That much is clear and so the suggestion that people had already begun to despair of government on the massive scale of the years immediately succeeding Kennedy's death is erroneous and possibly misleading. The President who stands out, in the minds of those who were anti-Vietnam, was Johnson. Please refer to Vietnam War for further discussion of this, and Kennedy's limited contribution to the scale the Vietnam War was to take in the succeeding years. By the time of Kennedy's death the situation in South Vietnam had not escalated. Timing is thus very much part of the reason the American electorate still sees the Kennedy administration's legacy in such positive light (whether it be justified or otherwise).Iamlondon 15:11, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fact remains that Kennedy is the President that sent in 18,000 advisors, napalm, etc. Kennedy brought the U.S. deeper into the conflict.  Kennedy is part of the Vietnam story.--Getaway 16:23, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you're missing the point...let's not turn this into a pointless ego war - you can easily put your remark in another section - it is completely out of place in the paragraph it currently sits in.Iamlondon 00:32, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The country only hadn't lost trust because Kennedy had lied to them and gotten away with it, as the Pentagon Papers prove.  Ellsberg makes clear in subsequent interviews that he was aware of government deception as far back as the Kennedy administration, and in retrospect wishes he had leaked the Pentagon Papers much earlier. This seems pretty well established by now---deception started with Kennedy, and continued through Johnson and Nixon.  In conventional histories of the Vietnam War it is said to have started under Kennedy, so this certainly seems to be well-established as part of his legacy. --Delirium 03:19, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Vietnam War in Legacy Section

message: After reading through this article, I only have two complaints.  The entire introductions was ripped word for word from this site  without attribution, and there are some citations that need to be added.  I'll be adding the tags where they are needed over the next day or so.  However, I don't think the article is overly POV in any direction.  It is positive, but that doesn't mean it's POV. Ramsquire 21:58, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Seconded. Some citations needed but a good article nonetheless.Iamlondon 22:10, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

text: No objection. Though I suggest you watch for frequent, wholesale, & widespread, deletions. From Griot, in particular.  Achilles2006 22:18, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Oooh, I needed my reading glasses to notice what that link said.  I stand corrected.  Ramsquire 22:56, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: POV?

message: Is it just me,or does this paragraph seem quite unclear?
"it came to be known that Kennedy carried on numerous extra-marital dalliances throughout his presidency, all connived at by those members of the presidential staff and members of the press who were aware of them at the time"
in particular "it came to be known","extra-marital dalliances " and  "all connived at by ".
I'd rather not rewrite these paragraphs because I don't know much about John F Kennedy or his life.Serenacw 03:04, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unclear? 

message: The issue in the 1950s was birth control (not abortion) and Kennedy always refused to discuss his position on birth control(he was never asked about abortion).  Many Protestants thought he was controlled by the bishops, but he vigorously denied that--so much so that Martin Marty concluded JFK was "spiritually rootless and disturbingly secular."  That is, JFK's thinking and actions were less motivated by religion than other presidents (though he did attend Mass every sunday) See O'brien bio pp 417ff quote p 419 Rjensen 00:53, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  abortion & birth control 

message: urrent revision (21:23, 22 September 2006) (edit)
Ramsquire (Talk | contribs)
(rv please stop inserting this unsourced opinion piece into the article.)
 
Line 251: 	Line 251:
			
	Source: 		Source:
- 		 
- 	No fewer than 43 raters, consider him overrated. An essay by Akhil Reed Amar of Yale Law School faults JFK for appeasing Southern Democrats by stocking the lower federal bench with "notorious segregationists"; the best civil rights judges were Eisenhower appointees. And with the appointment of his brother as attorney general, he tried to found a political dynasty, abhorred by the Founding Fathers. "The metaphor of Camelot, after all, is ultimately un-American and undemocratic, conjuring up images of crowns and dashing young princes and noble birth." 	 
- 		 
- 	His callowness and amorality got us into Vietnam. Or to be more precise, his blunders turned a limited commitment into an open-ended one. One of the few specific pieces of advice Gen. Eisenhower gave his young successor was to put American troops in Laos, that is, astride what later became the Ho Chi Minh Trail. Instead, Kennedy sent Averell Harriman and Roger Hilsman out to negotiate an agreement on Laos, which of course gave Ho the access he wanted. 	 
- 		 
- 	Infiltration and subversion increased in South Vietnam. With Buddhist bonzes committing self-immolation, the best and brightest argued the problem was the Catholic recalcitrance of our ally, Ngo Dinh Diem. President Kennedy authorized a coup against Diem; the generals who took over killed him on Nov. 2, 1963. On Nov. 22, Kennedy was assassinated; his martyrdom fixed his reputation. 	 
- 		 
- 	Yet the pieces, and much of the blame, fell to Lyndon B. Johnson. Just before moving into the White House, Ellen Hammer has reported, the new president showed Hubert Humphrey a picture of Diem. "We had a hand in killing him," LBJ said. "Now it's happening here." Johnson of course made his own errors, but the die was already cast. In overthrowing an ally in the name of winning the war, the U.S. had made a commitment from which it could scarcely walk away. Many of Kennedy's admirers later became war protesters, of course, chanting that American society was immoral. 	 
- 		 
- 	These two presidential images are reflected in today's debates over economic policy, foreign interventions, the role of morality in politics. Not least, they raise far broader questions about whatever other myths are propagated today by the conventional wisdom that rates Kennedy a hero.
::Very little of it because of WP:RS.  Rob Bartley's article is a reliable source for his opinion.  However, it is not a reliable source to state as fact, that Kennedy's "callowness and amorality got us into Vietnam" as well as other portions of this passage.  As Bartley didn't state his sources for his opinion, they can't be reprinted here as fact. Ramsquire 18:29, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  anything salvageable from this?

message: ::Kudos to you, Catheryn, for a wonderful photograph. I followed Pres. Kennedy's administration very closely as a boy and adolescent, and I've never seen a photo that captures his persona as well as your uncle's. It is a great portrait. Thank you for allowing everyone to share your legacy.  BTW---Does anyone happen to know what is draped around Kennedy's neck? It looks like some sort of medal or decoration. 66.108.4.183 01:40, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Can anyone identify the decoration?

message: needs a little work70.243.228.101 19:08, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Any problems in particular? Please clarify --WikiSlasher 12:34, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  needs a little work