Author Topic: Edward Kennedy has brain tumour  (Read 5499 times)

J70

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11057
    • View Profile
Re: Edward Kennedy has brain tumour
« Reply #30 on: May 26, 2008, 09:15:41 PM »
he has spent the last 40 odd years doing his best to help other people (as both sides of the US house would acknowledge)

Perhaps his fellow senators, who know him personally and have co-sponsored bills and worked on committees with him might have time for him, but the US right wing in general despises him, both for stuff like Chappaquidick and the general perception of above-the-law, reckless entitlement that many have of the Kennedys, and for the fact that he is a proud, unapologetic, formidable and very influential liberal.

Yeah, I would see that as a good thing (though Bush and McCain have paid tribute).  I hope he makes a recovery however it doesnt look very likely.  I've said on here before I am a massive fan of the three brothers.  Ted's private life may have been far from perfect (maybe a lot of it had to do with the relatives he buried) but he was an excellent senator and poltician and, like his brothers, he used his wealth and his power to fight for those that hadnt the means to do it themselves. 
Hopefully it'll be of some comfort to the family to be able to spend some time with him rather than to have him snapped from them like the others.

Bobby was the best of them all, by a long way. The Kennedy's did want to help the underpriviliged and that will form part of their legacy but Teddy will be judged for the cowardice he displayed on the cape, and it should haunt him, he should have been charged for the crime of leaving the scene and allowing a young woman to drown.

He pled guilty to leaving the accident scene and got a two month suspended sentence.

pintsofguinness

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13227
  • C'mon the 'Bridge!
    • View Profile
Re: Edward Kennedy has brain tumour
« Reply #31 on: May 26, 2008, 09:49:05 PM »
he has spent the last 40 odd years doing his best to help other people (as both sides of the US house would acknowledge)

Perhaps his fellow senators, who know him personally and have co-sponsored bills and worked on committees with him might have time for him, but the US right wing in general despises him, both for stuff like Chappaquidick and the general perception of above-the-law, reckless entitlement that many have of the Kennedys, and for the fact that he is a proud, unapologetic, formidable and very influential liberal.

Yeah, I would see that as a good thing (though Bush and McCain have paid tribute).  I hope he makes a recovery however it doesnt look very likely.  I've said on here before I am a massive fan of the three brothers.  Ted's private life may have been far from perfect (maybe a lot of it had to do with the relatives he buried) but he was an excellent senator and poltician and, like his brothers, he used his wealth and his power to fight for those that hadnt the means to do it themselves. 
Hopefully it'll be of some comfort to the family to be able to spend some time with him rather than to have him snapped from them like the others.

Bobby was the best of them all, by a long way. The Kennedy's did want to help the underpriviliged and that will form part of their legacy but Teddy will be judged for the cowardice he displayed on the cape, and it should haunt him, he should have been charged for the crime of leaving the scene and allowing a young woman to drown.

His cowardice?  Is he a bigger coward than George Bush? 
After Bobby's death he was urged by all who knew him to leave public office, in case he met the same faith and he wouldnt.  Considering his money he easily could have, he could easily have sat on his arse and done nothing and made a few pound here and there speaking about his brothers (to my knowledge he has never commented on the record about his brother's assassinations).

If he was driving the car - he made a mistake, a terrible and, in his own words, an indefensible one.  Then he went and held his hands up and accepted responsibility when, i would imagine, he could have easily denied he was driving or covered up.  He pleaded guilty to the charge he faced, some may say he should have been charged with manslaughter but was this Ted Kennedy's fault?  I dont think so.  More importantly he seemingly made his peace with the girl's family and has spent the last 40 years making up for his mistake. 
Ok it can be argued he caused a girl's death due to his negligence, how many lives has he improved?  I've read various stuff on him since the news about his tumour broke and it's been said several times that there is hardly an american who hasnt benefited from his work. 

I don't think the man is the devil he is made out to be.
Which one of you bitches wants to dance?

Main Street

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11003
    • View Profile
Re: Edward Kennedy has brain tumour
« Reply #32 on: May 26, 2008, 09:49:36 PM »
I didnt read too much of that site - it's widely reported to have been established as Republican propoganda -

That site appears to be selective and partisan in what it chooses to display, as one who hasn't read much about it I could not trust it's objectivity.
But is there anybody that has looked at the available evidence believe in Kennedy's statement? or even that it comes close enough?

I am not one for conspiracies. I'd have no problem with the obvious story of a very drunk driver leaving the scene of an accident, if it made sense,
followed by a rich powerful family pulling strings.

The evidence of Hotel witnesses does not support Kennedy being drunk.
Strange not calling the ferry boat to cross the channel.

A guilty person can claim innocence and get stuck with a poorly thought out statement but even that scenario is not supported by the events.



 

pintsofguinness

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13227
  • C'mon the 'Bridge!
    • View Profile
Re: Edward Kennedy has brain tumour
« Reply #33 on: May 26, 2008, 10:01:52 PM »
Quote
Strange not calling the ferry boat to cross the channel.

He couldnt, the ferrys didn't sale that late at night so he, being so drunk that he couldnt tell one road from another - even though he knew them well, he swam 500ft after almost drowning in a submerged car. 
And what's more strange! his two closest friends stood and watched him while he dived into the water and they didn't bother to try and contact him until 8am the next morning - not knowing if he'd survived the swim or not. 

Ted Kennedy's story makes as much sense as the conspiracy theories. 
« Last Edit: May 26, 2008, 10:13:47 PM by pintsofguinness »
Which one of you bitches wants to dance?

Main Street

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11003
    • View Profile
Re: Edward Kennedy has brain tumour
« Reply #34 on: May 26, 2008, 10:15:23 PM »
Quote
Strange not calling the ferry boat to cross the channel.

He couldnt, the ferrys didn't sale that late at night so he, being so drunk that he couldnt tell one road from another - even though he knew them well, he swam 500ft after almost drowning in a submerged car.

I read this in Time magazine account from 1970 maybe it doesn't amount to much.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,878212-3,00.html

'Kennedy instructed Markham and Gargan not to alarm them, said that he would take care of reporting the accident, then plunged alone into the channel and swam across to Edgartown. This despite the fact that the ferry could have been summoned by telephone. Gargan acknowledged that earlier in the day he had discussed post-midnight ferry service with the boat operators. Also, a sign giving instructions about the service was at the landing.'



pintsofguinness

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13227
  • C'mon the 'Bridge!
    • View Profile
Re: Edward Kennedy has brain tumour
« Reply #35 on: May 26, 2008, 10:22:28 PM »
I've never read that until now main street.  Interesting.

Personally I'd let my close friend, under the influence of alcholol and after being in a car accident jump in to a channel for a 500ft swim in strong currents, return to my cottage and only think of checking on him the next morning.  Wouldnt everyone?

Meanwhile he, dripping wet, slips into his hotel room without being seen until quarter to 3 in the mornign when he complains to one of the hotel staff that the noise of some party woke him.

What the f**k?

As you said does anyone who has actually read anything about the incident think Kennedy drove the car?  How could you?


*Just read the whole of that link you put up mainstreet, it probably confuses things even more. 
« Last Edit: May 26, 2008, 10:36:50 PM by pintsofguinness »
Which one of you bitches wants to dance?

Rav67

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1626
  • Status: Hanging out the back of it
    • View Profile
Re: Edward Kennedy has brain tumour
« Reply #36 on: May 27, 2008, 01:32:26 PM »
What would his motivation be for these lies?  Why would someone admit to being responsible for someone's death and leaving the scene if they didn't do it?

feetofflames

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 530
  • "You dont scare me, that could be anyones ass"
    • View Profile
Re: Edward Kennedy has brain tumour
« Reply #37 on: May 27, 2008, 01:38:45 PM »
a methodical wipe out of the entire top to bottom kennedy clan.  Dont forget Bobby loved his women and drink so he was an easy target.  He is an easy target the fact that no kennedy speaks of the conspiratorial assassinations of the two brothers they are not going to speak about the political assassination of Teddy.  He was framed and whatever it was it will probably die with him.   
Chief Wiggum

pintsofguinness

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13227
  • C'mon the 'Bridge!
    • View Profile
Re: Edward Kennedy has brain tumour
« Reply #38 on: May 27, 2008, 01:40:40 PM »
Threats? Blackmail?
Why have none of the kennedy's ever spoke about about the conspiracy theories?
Which one of you bitches wants to dance?

Rav67

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1626
  • Status: Hanging out the back of it
    • View Profile
Re: Edward Kennedy has brain tumour
« Reply #39 on: May 27, 2008, 01:57:45 PM »
There's not much worse you could use to blackmail a man that what he admitted to doing.  And if you wanted to 'politically assassinate' someone would it not be easier to just assassinate them rather than kill their friend and try to pin on it them?

Main Street

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11003
    • View Profile
Re: Edward Kennedy has brain tumour
« Reply #40 on: May 27, 2008, 02:18:56 PM »
Just because Kennedy's statement is full of bunkers , does not make the other scenario real - Kennedy was a very drunk driver or a callously sober driver - the aftermath was a botched cover up of Kennedy's actions.

In fact, some of the conspiracies have more credibility.

How about EK's wife in a jealous rage killed MJK?

No chance of libel here, is there?


magickingdom

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2793
    • View Profile
Re: Edward Kennedy has brain tumour
« Reply #41 on: May 27, 2008, 07:08:31 PM »
Just because Kennedy's statement is full of bunkers , does not make the other scenario real - Kennedy was a very drunk driver or a callously sober driver - the aftermath was a botched cover up of Kennedy's actions.

In fact, some of the conspiracies have more credibility.

How about EK's wife in a jealous rage killed MJK?

No chance of libel here, is there?



get a fockin grip main st..

pintsofguinness

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13227
  • C'mon the 'Bridge!
    • View Profile
Re: Edward Kennedy has brain tumour
« Reply #42 on: May 27, 2008, 07:28:47 PM »
There's not much worse you could use to blackmail a man that what he admitted to doing.  And if you wanted to 'politically assassinate' someone would it not be easier to just assassinate them rather than kill their friend and try to pin on it them?

Well they done that twice, killing Kennedy would have only added to the whole Kennedy image - they couldnt kill every Kennedy that came along so the best tactic was probably to destroy their image. 

Main street
Quote
Just because Kennedy's statement is full of bunkers , does not make the other scenario real - Kennedy was a very drunk driver or a callously sober driver - the aftermath was a botched cover up of Kennedy's actions.
How so? 
The ones at the party said he'd only two drinks - if they were going to lie about that why wouldn't they lie that he was there the whole night and the girl stormed off or something?
Why would he have went back to his hotel - dripping wet after swimming 500ft - if he was going to cover up how would he explain those actions?  Surely he would have stayed where he was and could easily have been provided with an alibi? 
I would have thought that if he wanted to cover up he could easily have done it. 

As for his wife killing her - a  pregnant woman drives a car off a bridge and escapes?  Doesnt sound quite right either.
Especially considering she never seemed too bothered about the rest of his affairs.
Which one of you bitches wants to dance?

Main Street

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11003
    • View Profile
Re: Edward Kennedy has brain tumour
« Reply #43 on: May 27, 2008, 10:17:02 PM »
I meant to say about one of the serious and obvious alternative versions expressed on this thread, that believe Kennedy was drunk and guilty of manslaughter and what followed was his family/connections doing their upmost to get him off the hook,
that that version is as unsupported as a (crazy) example of someone else doing it.

From reading a few bits here and there in the last few days I am a bit surprised that there is no story which comes close to satisfying the known facts.
Is there no reputable journalistic investigation into the incident?








































MW

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1506
    • View Profile
Re: Edward Kennedy has brain tumour
« Reply #44 on: May 27, 2008, 11:20:20 PM »
he has spent the last 40 odd years doing his best to help other people (as both sides of the US house would acknowledge)

Perhaps his fellow senators, who know him personally and have co-sponsored bills and worked on committees with him might have time for him, but the US right wing in general despises him, both for stuff like Chappaquidick and the general perception of above-the-law, reckless entitlement that many have of the Kennedys, and for the fact that he is a proud, unapologetic, formidable and very influential liberal.

Yeah, I would see that as a good thing (though Bush and McCain have paid tribute).  I hope he makes a recovery however it doesnt look very likely.  I've said on here before I am a massive fan of the three brothers.  Ted's private life may have been far from perfect (maybe a lot of it had to do with the relatives he buried) but he was an excellent senator and poltician and, like his brothers, he used his wealth and his power to fight for those that hadnt the means to do it themselves. 
Hopefully it'll be of some comfort to the family to be able to spend some time with him rather than to have him snapped from them like the others.

Quote
Bobby was the best of them all, by a long way
. The Kennedy's did want to help the underpriviliged and that will form part of their legacy but Teddy will be judged for the cowardice he displayed on the cape, and it should haunt him, he should have been charged for the crime of leaving the scene and allowing a young woman to drown.

Funny I was going to type the same thing about RFK, didn't expect antone else to have voiced the same opinion...never mind finding myself agreeing with you, stew ;) :P

RFK was a radical among American mainstream politics, come the 1968 presidential campaign (cut tragically short, of course) especially.

Went to the John F Kennedy presidential museum and library last year while taking a programme in the JFK School, was pleased to pick up an original of one of RFK books and a Kennedy for President sticker from the 1968 campaign. I'm not given to 'JFK worship' was some might be but have an admiration for Bobby's work.