31-07-2018, 07:50 PM
Now I'm totally confused.
Definition found on the internet:
Troll
trÅl/Submit
verb
gerund or present participle: trolling
1.
Informal definition
"make a deliberately offensive or provocative online post with the aim of upsetting someone or eliciting an angry response from them." Example
"if people are obviously trolling then I'll delete your posts and do my best to ban you"
I have never posted anything on this site for the purpose of upsetting someone or eliciting anger from anybody. I am interested in provoking thought about any issue, not anger or upset.
Both Kennedy brothers were assassinated within 5 years, their older brother died after volunteering for a "suicide mission" in World War II, and their sister died in a light plane crash. And the fourth brother was both injured in a small plane crash and also was involved in a fatal car crash for which he was blamed. It's not out of line to question the Kennedy attitude toward personal security or risk-taking.
That's not to say they deserved to be hurt or be killed. If they had a problem, then it would be some sort of psychological tendency within the extended family. They may have had a problem. That doesn't imply, to me, that they deserved to be hurt or to die.
Ironically, according to CNN, Rose Kennedy thought her daughter Kathleen deserved to die and that it was "divine retribution" when her plan crashed (because she had married outside the faith).
The following is a quote from the memoirs of Hale Boggs' widow, Lindy Boggs at page 178:
[[[[[[[[["lt's fair to say that any president may be under threat wherever he goes, but many people were excessively, even uncontrollably, angry at President Kennedy about civil rights at home and entangling alliances abroad. Such troublesome groups as the radical right and anti-civil-rights and anti - UN organizations were noisily active everywhere.]]]]]]]]]]
When Lindy called the anger against JFK as "uncontrollable", I took that to be her BLAMING JFK for his own assassination (and absolving herself in the process). So I'm both sensitive to victim-blaming and I am against victim-blaming.
People are more interested in the more thought-provoking issues regarding Presidents and in general. Thought-provoking is not the same as anger-provoking (or trying to upset someone).
It's funny how certain people seem to carry their feelings on their sleeve when it comes to the truth or falsehood of facts about the JFK assassination. Not to point to anyone in particular, but it seems that some people who have adopted an exclusively pro-JFK posture and who have profited from this posture, are the same people who have to resort to the "hurt feelings" argument or the preposterous "libel" argument to try and suppress certain negative facts about the Kennedys.
This is, to me, just the "lone gunman" approach in another guise. If your approach to JFK and his history is to idolize him or to present him as nearly faultless, or put him on a pedestal, then fine. But the "debate" which Ms. Johnson suggested should occur may not involve only adulation of JFK or the Kennedys. It might even involve strong criticism of the Kennedys.
There is another legitimate point which should be mentioned. Some people have volunteered for the military and taken incredible risks for America. Personally, I was classed as "1-A" for Vietam. But then the Nixon draft lottery intervened and I was exempted. I was glad that I didn't have to serve, only because I didn't believe in the Vietnam cause, but also I would not have wanted to be killed. But I do feel that those who volunteered are probably better citizens than I am. I will admit that to anybody.
So to some, JFK's and the Kennedys' "bravery" is considered by others to be "risk prone" or "careless". That is merely an interesting and thought-provoking topic, to me, and not an opportunity to insult, anger, hurt or insult anyone here on this website or elsewhere.
As Shakespeare put it:
"Falstaff:
To die is to be a counterfeit, for he is but the counterfeit of
a man who hath not the life of a man; but to counterfeit dying,
when a man thereby liveth, is to be no counterfeit, but the true
and perfect image of life indeed. The better part of valor is
discretion, in the which better part I have sav'd my life."
Henry The Fourth, Part 1 Act 5, scene 4, 115121
James Lateer
Definition found on the internet:
Troll
trÅl/Submit
verb
gerund or present participle: trolling
1.
Informal definition
"make a deliberately offensive or provocative online post with the aim of upsetting someone or eliciting an angry response from them." Example
"if people are obviously trolling then I'll delete your posts and do my best to ban you"
I have never posted anything on this site for the purpose of upsetting someone or eliciting anger from anybody. I am interested in provoking thought about any issue, not anger or upset.
Both Kennedy brothers were assassinated within 5 years, their older brother died after volunteering for a "suicide mission" in World War II, and their sister died in a light plane crash. And the fourth brother was both injured in a small plane crash and also was involved in a fatal car crash for which he was blamed. It's not out of line to question the Kennedy attitude toward personal security or risk-taking.
That's not to say they deserved to be hurt or be killed. If they had a problem, then it would be some sort of psychological tendency within the extended family. They may have had a problem. That doesn't imply, to me, that they deserved to be hurt or to die.
Ironically, according to CNN, Rose Kennedy thought her daughter Kathleen deserved to die and that it was "divine retribution" when her plan crashed (because she had married outside the faith).
The following is a quote from the memoirs of Hale Boggs' widow, Lindy Boggs at page 178:
[[[[[[[[["lt's fair to say that any president may be under threat wherever he goes, but many people were excessively, even uncontrollably, angry at President Kennedy about civil rights at home and entangling alliances abroad. Such troublesome groups as the radical right and anti-civil-rights and anti - UN organizations were noisily active everywhere.]]]]]]]]]]
When Lindy called the anger against JFK as "uncontrollable", I took that to be her BLAMING JFK for his own assassination (and absolving herself in the process). So I'm both sensitive to victim-blaming and I am against victim-blaming.
People are more interested in the more thought-provoking issues regarding Presidents and in general. Thought-provoking is not the same as anger-provoking (or trying to upset someone).
It's funny how certain people seem to carry their feelings on their sleeve when it comes to the truth or falsehood of facts about the JFK assassination. Not to point to anyone in particular, but it seems that some people who have adopted an exclusively pro-JFK posture and who have profited from this posture, are the same people who have to resort to the "hurt feelings" argument or the preposterous "libel" argument to try and suppress certain negative facts about the Kennedys.
This is, to me, just the "lone gunman" approach in another guise. If your approach to JFK and his history is to idolize him or to present him as nearly faultless, or put him on a pedestal, then fine. But the "debate" which Ms. Johnson suggested should occur may not involve only adulation of JFK or the Kennedys. It might even involve strong criticism of the Kennedys.
There is another legitimate point which should be mentioned. Some people have volunteered for the military and taken incredible risks for America. Personally, I was classed as "1-A" for Vietam. But then the Nixon draft lottery intervened and I was exempted. I was glad that I didn't have to serve, only because I didn't believe in the Vietnam cause, but also I would not have wanted to be killed. But I do feel that those who volunteered are probably better citizens than I am. I will admit that to anybody.
So to some, JFK's and the Kennedys' "bravery" is considered by others to be "risk prone" or "careless". That is merely an interesting and thought-provoking topic, to me, and not an opportunity to insult, anger, hurt or insult anyone here on this website or elsewhere.
As Shakespeare put it:
"Falstaff:
To die is to be a counterfeit, for he is but the counterfeit of
a man who hath not the life of a man; but to counterfeit dying,
when a man thereby liveth, is to be no counterfeit, but the true
and perfect image of life indeed. The better part of valor is
discretion, in the which better part I have sav'd my life."
Henry The Fourth, Part 1 Act 5, scene 4, 115121
James Lateer