Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: DREDIOCK on July 25, 2005, 06:04:53 PM
-
Some people learn from their mistakes.
Others simply repeat them over and over
Bet she get a huge following...
Among terrorists and insurgents.
Actress Fonda Plans to Speak Out on Iraq
SANTA FE, N.M. (July 25) - Actress and activist Jane Fonda says she intends to take a cross-country bus tour to call for an end to U.S. military operations in Iraq.
"I can't go into any detail except to say that it's going to be pretty exciting,'' she said.
Fonda said her anti-war tour in March will use a bus that runs on "vegetable oil.'' She will be joined by families of Iraq war veterans and her daughter.
They plan to return to the Santa Fe area, where she was promoting her book, "My Life So Far'' on Saturday.
Prompted by a question from the audience, Fonda said war veterans that she has met on a nationwide book tour have encouraged her to break her silence on the Iraq war.
"I've decided I'm coming out,'' she said.
Hundreds of people in the audience cheered loudly when Fonda announced her intentions to join the anti-Iraq war movement.
"I have not taken a stand on any war since Vietnam,'' she said. "I carry a lot of baggage from that.''
Fonda incited controversy in July 1972 when she was photographed sitting on a North Vietnamese anti-aircraft gun while on a tour of the country to drum up support to end the war.
-
Nothing a head shot couldn't fix. Treason is treason.
-
I'm sure Jane Fonda will have a fresh, new and exciting anti-war perspective. You know, like Bono.
-
Funny, you would think if so many veterans supported her, her publishing company (or at least her agent) would be getting camera crews interviewing and getting them on TV as positive publicity. The only veterans I recall in the news when she went on her book-signing tour was the guy who spit in her face.
-
For the record, I assume the 'treason' comment refers to her Vietnam stunt and not this new Iraq thing, right? Your comment, Wolfala, isn't clear on that point.
-
Vietnam, correct.
-
Time for a companion Veterans with Surplus Saliva and Stored Urine Tour.
I'm sure we can arrange a suitable delivery system.
-
Fonda still a commie
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
For the record, I assume the 'treason' comment refers to her Vietnam stunt and not this new Iraq thing, right? Your comment, Wolfala, isn't clear on that point.
I thought that was pretty OBVIOUS myself but hey, that's just me ;)
-
Oy
I guess her ego is too big for her to realize that her supporting the cause does far more harm to the cause than good.
of course, maybe, she just wants a bunch of pissed off people to buy her latest movie DVD release so that they can burn it :)
Charon
-
Originally posted by StarOfAfrica2
Funny, you would think if so many veterans supported her, her publishing company (or at least her agent) would be getting camera crews interviewing and getting them on TV as positive publicity. The only veterans I recall in the news when she went on her book-signing tour was the guy who spit in her face.
Take note the article said "Veterans families" not veterans themselves.
-
Good catch Dreidok. Veterans' families prefer their vets at home, usually.
-
WTG Jane!
I cant wait for her photo op in an Al Qaeda car bomb!
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
WTG Jane!
I cant wait for her photo op in an Al Qaeda car bomb!
why wait...Grun you inspired me!
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/210_1122339563_jane_monster.jpg)
-
How dare she disagree with Bush!
-
She needs to go on a book signing gig in Tikrit Iraq. Perhaps some enterprising Iraqi could drive her to the signing blast. Maybe she would just lose her head in all the excitement of an orange jumpsuit.
-
HEY HEY HEY! Cmon guys, this isn't treason.
It's sedition.
-
What's wrong with protesting the war in Iraq, again?
-
Originally posted by SOB
What's wrong with protesting the war in Iraq, again?
nothing...until she starts taking pictures with AQ and Hamas.....this is all a publicity stunt.
-
I'm sure she's glad to have the publicity, but do you think that she isn't genuinely opposed to the war in Iraq?
-
She's coo coo for Coco Puffs!
-SW
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
Take note the article said "Veterans families" not veterans themselves.
This is the line I was referring to. The "veteran families" she is talking about are the families of Iraq and Afghanistan soldiers. She can still take advantage of them through their fears of losing loved ones.
Prompted by a question from the audience, Fonda said war veterans that she has met on a nationwide book tour have encouraged her to break her silence on the Iraq war.
As I said, I dont remember any vets in the news during her book signing tour, except that one patriotic individual who "shared water" with Ms. Fonda.
-
Originally posted by SOB
What's wrong with protesting the war in Iraq, again?
Because the war in Iraq was over 2 years ago--- whatever you wish to call it, THAT war is water under the bridge. NOONE in Iraq is making war aside from a bunch of nutburgers killing Muslim women and children...but tried and true liberals like Jane blame THAT on us too? And HOW is our leaving going to cure that? I suppose I can see one angle, which is "get our boys home"...but that isnt what she's espousing---what she's espousing is that all the violence over there is our fault, and would magically be cured if we cut and run. That scenario was practiced by Clinton after Somalia---it convinced Bin Laden that if our noses were bloodied we'd cut and run. Will take a LONG time to counter that conclusion, a lot longer if peeps like Jane and some of our elected officials keep giving the world the impression that we are vascillating.
-
Originally posted by Wolfala
Nothing a head shot couldn't fix. Treason is treason.
Nah, Constitutional rights are constitutional rights.
And murdering someone for exercising them is immoral.
-
Thrawn, I'm not too quite sure how it works in canada, but...
Over here, shooting a gun at US Soldiers (especially during war time) is called Treason.
-
Originally posted by SOB
I'm sure she's glad to have the publicity, but do you think that she isn't genuinely opposed to the war in Iraq?
The traitorous POS could give a damn less about the war in Iraq.
It`s MO Money that winds her clock and she has proven that there is no depths to low that she will not go to get it.
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
Nah, Constitutional rights are constitutional rights.
And murdering someone for exercising them is immoral.
Thrawn,
For your records sir:
(http://vikingphoenix.com/photos/curr_album/fondagun.jpg)
-
"If you understood what communism was, you would hope, you would pray on your knees that we would some day become communist."
"I, a socialist, think that we should strive toward a socialist society, all the way to communism. "
-Jane Fonda
-
If you can't tell I REALLY hate this woman:
when American POWs finally began to return home (some of them having been held captive for up to nine years) and describe the tortures they had endured at the hands of the North Vietnamese, Jane Fonda quickly told the country that they should "not hail the POWs as heroes, because they are hypocrites and liars." Fonda said the idea that the POWs she had met in Vietnam had been tortured was "laughable," claiming: "These were not men who had been tortured. These were not men who had been starved. These were not men who had been brainwashed." The POWs who said they had been tortured were "exaggerating, probably for their own self-interest," she asserted. She told audiences that "Never in the history of the United States have POWs come home looking like football players. These football players are no more heroes than Custer was. They're military careerists and professional killers" who are "trying to make themselves look self-righteous, but they are war criminals according to law."
-
And its Hanoi Jane up to her old tricks ...
I'm gonna take up chewing again .
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
If you can't tell I REALLY hate this woman:
Awww come on now, I see that little sparkle in your eye. A slight shimmer that means you have some small spark of love for ja... you're picturing Jane running around the room with her hair on fire, aren't you?
-
Originally posted by bj229r
Because the war in Iraq was over 2 years ago--- whatever you wish to call it, THAT war is water under the bridge. NOONE in Iraq is making war aside from a bunch of nutburgers killing Muslim women and children...but tried and true liberals like Jane blame THAT on us too? And HOW is our leaving going to cure that? I suppose I can see one angle, which is "get our boys home"...but that isnt what she's espousing---what she's espousing is that all the violence over there is our fault, and would magically be cured if we cut and run. That scenario was practiced by Clinton after Somalia---it convinced Bin Laden that if our noses were bloodied we'd cut and run. Will take a LONG time to counter that conclusion, a lot longer if peeps like Jane and some of our elected officials keep giving the world the impression that we are vascillating.
So, our troops aren't over there battling against the nutburgers? We helped create this mess, and now we're obligated to fix it. I think perhaps we shouldn't have dove headfirst into this crap in the first place...but I guess had we not, those scary WMDs would have gotten us by now!
And did I see you blame Bin Laden's actions on Clinton? LOL.
-
Good for her. There is nothing more American than dissent.
-
Every time I take a dump I smile.. 'cause I'm making another masterpiece portrait of Hanoi Jane.
-
LOL...do you at least scratch the litter over her face when yer done so you don't stink up the house?
-
Jane still a commie!
-
Yah know, mebbe I should box it up and take it to the post office and mail it to her.
It should have a note inside...
Dear Hanoi Jane:
Was thinking of you and this came out. So glad to hear you are planning a tour. We'll be sure to come see you. Oh, and thanks again, so much for selling us out in Vietnam. Can't say how happy our veterans group was to hear of your renewed interest in political affairs and service issues.
See you at a rally soon!
You folks can join in.. if it's less than a pound it's only $3.80 to send it to:
Fonda Inc
PO BOX 5840
Atlanta, GA 31107-0840
Remember to not put your OWN return address on the box (i'd suggest J. Kerry or J. McCain)
;)
-
Where was she when the human shields were reporting for duty in Iraq just before the war? Oh wait, thats right, she was doing an exercise video and couldn't get away. She should stick to movies - like On Golden Pond II .
You know something is terribally wrong when Bhagdad Bob is dead, but she's still alive :rolleyes:
-
Muhammad Saeed al-Sahhaf is not dead, he lives in UAE.
-
Originally posted by bj229r
Because the war in Iraq was over 2 years ago--- whatever you wish to call it, THAT war is water under the bridge.
Cheeya. Okay.
Holy smokes.
Go Jane. Yer nutty, but in a good way. Say whatever the hell you want. Let whoever get their panties in a knot. It's the American way. Screw the rest.
-
Hey how is Bin Laden these days? Haven't heard from him in a while.
-
LOL Hang, but the postal employees always ask me if I have anything "Liquid, Fragile, Hazardous, or Perishable" in my package. And while it's probably not all that fragile, it could very possibly be one of the other three. :D
-
Originally posted by SOB
LOL Hang, but the postal employees always ask me if I have anything "Liquid, Fragile, Hazardous, or Perishable" in my package. And while it's probably not all that fragile, it could very possibly be one of the other three. :D
if it's fresh its fairly fragile. My dogs regretebly took a dump in my living room last night and I got to clean it u before my first cup of coffee. If it's fresh it tends to break apart when disturbed.
I'd say that fits ALL the catagories.....
PS is that for real illegal?
-
Just curious...how many of you were actually alive and old enough to know what Jane Fonda did? And did it really affect you?
Other question...If she really did commit "treason" why is she still alive? Or is the use of "treason" just an opinion? I am all for personal opinions...but thats a pretty large statement if not used correctly.
-
Two things you need to understand, Fubar....
Vietnam would have been won were it not for Fonda. She single-handedly wrecked the whole entire thing.
Jane is a perfectly reasonable target. Rational people would conclude (and focus groups attest to) failure in Iraq being the result of Jane Fonda's and Bill Clinton's love child - known to the press only as "Peace baby," with the marking 'WTF' on its head and asking difficult questions.
-
Originally posted by SOB
LOL...do you at least scratch the litter over her face when yer done so you don't stink up the house?
LMAO glad I wasnt drinking anything when I read this
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
nothing...until she starts taking pictures with AQ and Hamas.....this is all a publicity stunt.
You know ummm the most recent photo/video shoots involving Americans and Islamic extremists have ahh been mind blowing, uhhh I mean, head popping, uhhh you know what I mean ;)
-
Using the replies posted so far, her new book should do well
in Europe and Canada...total shocker there.
-
Originally posted by SOB
So, our troops aren't over there battling against the nutburgers? We helped create this mess, and now we're obligated to fix it. I think perhaps we shouldn't have dove headfirst into this crap in the first place...but I guess had we not, those scary WMDs would have gotten us by now!
And did I see you blame Bin Laden's actions on Clinton? LOL.
As I SAID SOB. the war/wmd/UN, etc. is water under the bridge---Did I SAY we should leave? No. Liberals like Jane are saying we should leave. Before the war, one of our generals (or mebbe it was Powell) said.. "you break it, you fix it" , or something to that effect---it holds true. If we leave Iraq, they will probably fall under the onslaught of thousands more of these punks who will bask in our supposed defeat--and Iraq will soon resemble another Afghanistsn. What I'm trying to spit out,, is WHAT is the point of protesting the US now? We arent fighting, some disafeected Sunnis and a buncha mindless Jihad 101 graduates from Saudi Arabia are---and they are mostly making war on women and children, because that's easier.
And I didnt BLAME Bin Ladens' actions on Clinton, merely pointed a conclusion which he came to (HAS been published before) if you show any weakness to these people (like cutting and running), it merely emboldens them.
-
Its not her message...its her. The anti-war crowd needs a different spokes-person. As she said..she carries alot of baggage. Perhaps someone other than a dried-up star or musician.
-
Originally posted by bj229r
What I'm trying to spit out,, is WHAT is the point of protesting the US now?
Not protesting the US, protesting the war...and because the administration who put us there is still in office.
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
if it's fresh its fairly fragile. My dogs regretebly took a dump in my living room last night and I got to clean it u before my first cup of coffee. If it's fresh it tends to break apart when disturbed.
I'd say that fits ALL the catagories.....
PS is that for real illegal?
Hmm, good point, it does indeed! :D I dunno if it's illegal or not, as I've always answered in the negative, but they do always ask that question.
-
Originally posted by FuBaR
Just curious...how many of you were actually alive and old enough to know what Jane Fonda did? And did it really affect you?
Other question...If she really did commit "treason" why is she still alive? Or is the use of "treason" just an opinion? I am all for personal opinions...but thats a pretty large statement if not used correctly.
What she did was pretty damned stupid, and she should be ashamed of herself for doing it. She has come out and said it was a mistake, and hopefully she is sincere.
-
Originally posted by SOB
What she did was pretty damned stupid, and she should be ashamed of herself for doing it. She has come out and said it was a mistake, and hopefully she is sincere.
Perhaps.
But that stupid thing she did last time has cost her any kind of credibility.
I know I certainly wouldnt want her at the forefront of any cause I was involved in
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
Perhaps.
But that stupid thing she did last time has cost her any kind of credibility.
I know I certainly wouldnt want her at the forefront of any cause I was involved in
Unfortunately, BECAUSE she is such a lightning rod, she will be giving more media attention than many other leaders in the anti-war protesting scene would.
Look at these boards.... how many times have WE talked about her here.
Even bad press is good press and she is guaranteed to generate a BUNCH of bad press that will STILL allow her to talk in front of the cameras.
I think that the media will make sure that she is in a lot of faces about this.
-
I think it was Ken Kesey who said 'I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer.' While I have some serious problems with what she did in Vietnam, you can't accuse of her of just sitting on the dock of the bay and watching the tide roll in.
I wish more people got actively involved in the national politics. Otherwise, how representative can it be?
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
if it's fresh its fairly fragile. My dogs regretebly took a dump in my living room last night and I got to clean it u before my first cup of coffee. If it's fresh it tends to break apart when disturbed.
I'd say that fits ALL the catagories.....
PS is that for real illegal?
Guns, it's not 'perishable'.. I've seen petrifed turds layin around. It ain't fragile.. it'll be what it was when it gets there, yah know. It might be flamable, but that depends entirely on what yah ate. And, if it's liquid, then change the brand of beer yah drink till the stuff starts comin out in clumps.
Based on the good old american premise of 'if it's fun, it's gotta be illegal' it might be a good idea if you keep a low profile. It's also probable that engaging in the 'Send Jane a Load For Treason' campaign might just be some kinda health code violation.
On the plus side, the spirit of giving is a healthy one.. makes one glow from the inside out. :D
-
Originally posted by FuBaR
Just curious...how many of you were actually alive and old enough to know what Jane Fonda did? And did it really affect you?
Other question...If she really did commit "treason" why is she still alive? Or is the use of "treason" just an opinion? I am all for personal opinions...but thats a pretty large statement if not used correctly.
Yes, Yes, and YES.
The Constitution of the United States, Art. III, defines treason against the United States to consist in either levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid or comfort.
Hanoi Jane gave 19 radio addresses to US servicemen while in North Vietnam. She encouraged sedition, desertion and openly claimed that the POW's were neither mistreated or POW'S.. she insisted they were 'war criminals' and that they were 'repentant'. She also insisted when they returned that they were 'liars' when they indicated that they had been tortured, and that her statements regarding encounters with the POW's were false.
She willingly gave herself over to the North Vietnamese propaganda machine.. and if that's not giving 'aid and comfort to the enemy', then what is?
-
Vietnam would have been won were it not for Fonda. She single-handedly wrecked the whole entire thing.
Jane is a perfectly reasonable target. Rational people would conclude (and focus groups attest to) failure in Iraq being the result of Jane Fonda's and Bill Clinton's love child - known to the press only as "Peace baby," with the marking 'WTF' on its head and asking difficult questions.
Please nash...
Kerry had a hand in losing us the war too.
-
I suspect there are not too many operational AA guns in and around Bagdad for her to pose sitting upon. Perhaps as a modernized alternative we can get a photo-shoot of her sitting in a car-bomb, or at least wearing a suicide-belt.
-
Laser, we did NOT 'lose' the war. We handed the place over for the political salvation of a criminal.
Every military campaigin launched by the north while we were in the south was broken. Every one.
The 'world' has gotten into the habit of seeing the conflict in a political light rather than judging the conflict on it's military campaigns. Our politicians withdrew our military ground units, and then broke their treaty obligations with the south for logistical and air support of their military. The north then completed it's takeover of the terrain. That happened AFTER we left.
Our political leaders failed. Not our Military.
-
Hang,
Don't go dumping on Nixon for the war. It wasn't lost, it was sold down the river by the one who preceded him. By the time he got it the entire nation was too caught up in the idea of just getting out because of the screwups by lbj and kennedy's wunderkinds.
This was a war brought to you by the demos, screwed royally by the demo pres. and finally ended by nixon.
nixon screwed up other things but viet nam was not his fault, he just inherrited the pile of fecal matter from lbj.
-
So let me make sure I understand this, Lord Haw Haw was a "dissenter" exercising his rights to free speech?
You know, it used to be the case that those who used "Free Speech" to demoralize the troops, and incite the enemy to commit attrocities against civilians were called "fifth columnists" or simply "traitors." When did this catagory become entirely null and void in the West? At this point, I don't see how we could possibly coherently apply it.
In what way will Jane helping to hand the Jihadis yet another victory quell Islamic terrorism? In what way will the world be improved when the preferred place to put an IED to kill Westerners will be in American and European Cities and holiday resorts, rather than the streets of the Suni Triangle and the villages of Afghanistan?
When exactly will people like dear Jane wake up and figure out that there are several million Muslims out there who want us all either dead (preferably) or converted or oppressed by them. This includes Christians, Jews. Atheists, Agnostics, Nominal Catholics, Socialists, Democrats, Republicans, Christians, and yes, even socialist American Actresses.
The very fact that she couldn't "visit one of their training camps" in this particular war without eventually having her head sawn off should tell her there is good possibility she's definitely backing the wrong side.
WTG Jane, support the side that kidnapped and executed this woman:
(http://theaztecclub.blogspirit.com/images/_40199052_hassan_care_203_150.jpg)
Margaret Hassan the Head of CARE in Iraq.
(http://photos1.blogger.com/img/111/2054/640/hassan.jpg)
I'm sure they'll stop once you help to facilitate our surrender. The seem like reasonable people, open to negotiation.
- SEAGOON
-
Originally posted by Maverick
Hang,
Don't go dumping on Nixon for the war. It wasn't lost, it was sold down the river by the one who preceded him. By the time he got it the entire nation was too caught up in the idea of just getting out because of the screwups by lbj and kennedy's wunderkinds.
This was a war brought to you by the demos, screwed royally by the demo pres. and finally ended by nixon.
nixon screwed up other things but viet nam was not his fault, he just inherrited the pile of fecal matter from lbj.
Disagree, Mav.. he ran for his first election of the platform of 'End the War'. While LBJ may have messed up the works, it was still possible for Nixon to have won it.
The re-elcetion, 'Peace with Honor'. What honor?
How about Jerry Fords cold denial of support for the ARVN troops; troops counting on us to survive after we pulled out.
Nope.. sorry; can't buy into exonerating Nixon for the way the war was ended.
-
HHHMMM and exactly how did the war end? We got a treaty with the nv's who violated it later. His hemorhoidness lbj couldn't get them to the table. You know darn well congress wouldn't fund a dime to help the south after we left.
I still say it wasn't nixon who screwed the pooch, it could have been over years before if lbj hadn't decided he was a freaking military genius and master of the "asian mind set" who would bring an end to the war by causing the enemy to stop fighting because we didn't bomb their main harbor etc. through out his "administration".
Like I said nixon is no saint and he screwed up enough but that conflict wasn't his doing. He did what he said and got us out.
-
and I think yer far more intrested in salvaging Nixons (and hence republican) 'honor' than you are in taking a non-partisan look at the war.
No problem.. we won't be changing each others minds in a Hanoi Jane thread. ;)
Cheers, buddy!
-
Originally posted by FuBaR
Just curious...how many of you were actually alive and old enough to know what Jane Fonda did? And did it really affect you?
Other question...If she really did commit "treason" why is she still alive? Or is the use of "treason" just an opinion? I am all for personal opinions...but thats a pretty large statement if not used correctly.
I am. Did it really affect me? I guess it affected me personally no more than Osama bin Laden. But Osama is on the run and Hanoi Jane is doing book tours. She should be in prison.
Why is she still alive? Because she is rich and famous with a rich and famous Dad. If it had been Joe Average in North Vietnam sitting in a North Vietnamese anti aircraft gun saying our flyers were criminals during wartime she wouldn't be, or at least spent a good amount of time in prison.
-
I think there should be some delineation here:
1. Sitting on AA gun, providing succor to North Vietnamese: Sounds like treason.
2. Calling the returning flyers 'criminals' when she's back in the US: Free speech.
Free speech is not the same as popular speech. She's an ass, but let the facts stand on their own without muddying the water (see #1).
Conversation point: Does treason case-law require a formal declaration of war? I don't know the answer, just curious if the 'police action' status might have been part of why she wasn't prosecuted.
-
I just had an epiphany -- Hillary/Fonda 2008 :aok
Charon
-
So Seagoon...
If I were to say that I disagreed with Bush's stupid decision to go to war in Iraq, and that I thought the continuing and growing insurrection was a direct result of that stupid decision and that I thought we should do everything in our power to reverse that stupid decision and get back to the business of tracking down Al Queda.... I would be a fifth columnist or even a traitor?
Seems to me that the real traitors are the folks who want to shut the opposition up. Dissent is part of the freedom we enjoy and part of the freedom our fathers fought and died to protect. Shutting the mouths of dissenters by calling them traitors or fifth columnists is as insidious as any erosion of rights I can think of. Shame on you.
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
I think there should be some delineation here:
1. Sitting on AA gun, providing succor to North Vietnamese: Sounds like treason.
2. Calling the returning flyers 'criminals' when she's back in the US: Free speech.
Free speech is not the same as popular speech. She's an ass, but let the facts stand on their own without muddying the water (see #1).
Conversation point: Does treason case-law require a formal declaration of war? I don't know the answer, just curious if the 'police action' status might have been part of why she wasn't prosecuted.
Item 2.. you may want to review the transcripts of her radio addresses and the transcript of her 'chat' with the POW's at the Hanoi Hilton while in North Vietnam. An interesting read.
Next, lest there be no mistake about 'who's side' she's always been on there's this little missive from Hanoi Jane: "Its my fondest wish, that some day, every American will get down on their knees and pray to God that some day they will have the opportunity to live in a Communist Society."
From another source..
"To get an idea for the extent of Hanoi Jane's obsession with Communism, you have to understand how she chose her son's name. Hanoi Jane returned to Vietnam shortly after the war ended in 1975, with her small son, Troy, to attend a special service being held in her honor. This event was not just to recognize and honor Hanoi Jane. Her newborn son was formally christened and named for the Communist hero Nguyen Van Troi. Troi was a Viet Cong Sapper who was executed by the South Vietnamese in 1963 for attempting to assassinate U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara."
Her behavior can be easily characterised is 'seditious' at best, but treason?
Yah, I think so.
-
Hi Chairboy,
Originally posted by Chairboy
I think there should be some delineation here:
1. Sitting on AA gun, providing succor to North Vietnamese: Sounds like treason.
2. Calling the returning flyers 'criminals' when she's back in the US: Free speech.
Free speech is not the same as popular speech. She's an ass, but let the facts stand on their own without muddying the water (see #1).
Conversation point: Does treason case-law require a formal declaration of war? I don't know the answer, just curious if the 'police action' status might have been part of why she wasn't prosecuted.
Treason is actually covered in the Constitution under Article 3, section 3:
" Section 3. Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open court.
Clause 2. The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted."
Corruption of blood referred to the automatic association of relatives in the crimes of a traitor, while forfeiture was the automatic handing over of all a traitor's real property to the state on his conviction. Both of these were part of English Common Law at the time the Constitution was penned.
Regarding whether or not Congress must declare war for "treason" to take place, the Supreme court has held that a declared state of war need not exist in order for a citizen to give "aid and comfort" to the enemies of the USA. For instance, the Rosenbergs were convicted of treason and sentenced to death for handing over A-Bomb secrets to the USSR despite the fact that the US technically had "friendly relations" with that nation at the time.
Additionally, these enemies, need not be an organized nation, so that it would be treasonous activity to support any organization that has as its declared intent the violent overthrow of the laws, government, and people of the USA. This would include Al-Qaeda, the Taliban, etc.
Legal precedent has determined that for a successful prosecution for treason aid must be direct, in other words, direct assistance rendered to the enemy and its agents, including meeting with them, rather than merely expressing a preference for their cause.
- SEAGOON
-
1) It was a political and military loss in vietnam. Military could not win the war in the manner the politicians demanded of them and the politicians could not take the political fallout that would have been needed to allow the Military to win Vietnam. Both are at fault, though I place larger blame on the politicians for not opening up the North to widespread bombing earlier.
2)Looks like JF going to Iraq could have just been for publicity. So far no information has been brought to light regarding this "trip". Anyone got a link? Surely something this big would be easy to find, yet there is nothing behind the link where she talked about it. I don't believe she is going or has any plans of going.
-
Here is what the judge in the Rosenberg trial said at sentencing.
Judge Kaufman's Statement Upon Sentencing the Rosenbergs
Citizens of this country who betray their fellow-countrymen can be under none of the delusions about the benignity of Soviet power that they might have been prior to World War II. The nature of Russian terrorism is now self-evident. Idealism as a rational dissolves . . .
I consider your crime worse than murder. Plain deliberate contemplated murder is dwarfed in magnitude by comparison with the crime you have committed. In committing the act of murder, the criminal kills only his victim. The immediate family is brought to grief and when justice is meted out the chapter is closed. But in your case, I believe your conduct in putting into the hands of the Russians the A-bomb years before our best scientists predicted Russia would perfect the bomb has already caused, in my opinion, the Communist aggression in Korea, with the resultant casualties exceeding 50,000 and who knows but that millions more of innocent people may pay the price of your treason. Indeed, by your betrayal you undoubtedly have altered the course of history to the disadvantage of our country.
No one can say that we do not live in a constant state of tension. We have evidence of your treachery all around us every day--for the civilian defense activities throughout the nation are aimed at preparing us for an atom bomb attack. Nor can it be said in mitigation of the offense that the power which set the conspiracy in motion and profited from it was not openly hostile to the United States at the time of the conspiracy. If this was your excuse the error of your ways in setting yourselves above our properly constituted authorities and the decision of those authorities not to share the information with Russia must now be obvious . . .
In the light of this, I can only conclude that the defendants entered into this most serious conspiracy against their country with full realization of its implications . . .
The statute of which the defendants at the bar stand convicted is clear. I have previously stated my view that the verdict of guilty was amply justified by the evidence. In the light of the circumstances, I feel that I must pass such sentence upon the principals in this diabolical conspiracy to destroy a God-fearing nation, which will demonstrate with finality that this nation's security must remain inviolate; that traffic in military secrets, whether promoted by slavish devotion to a foreign ideology or by a desire for monetary gains must cease.
The evidence indicated quite clearly that Julius Rosenberg was the prime mover in this conspiracy. However, let no mistake be made about the role which his wife, Ethel Rosenberg, played in this conspiracy. Instead of deterring him from pursuing his ignoble cause, she encouraged and assisted the cause. She was a mature woman--almost three years older than her husband and almost seven years older than her younger brother. She was a full-fledged partner in this crime.
Indeed the defendants Julius and Ethel Rosenberg placed their devotion to their cause above their own personal safety and were conscious that they were sacrificing their own children, should their misdeeds be detected--all of which did not deter them from pursuing their course. Love for their cause dominated their lives--it was even greater than their love for their children."
Sorry but Jane Fonda might have been of slight use to the enemy propaghanda but not on the level that this judge uses in the sentence of death. To me it comes down to whether she actually could have done something to hurt this Country and I gotta say its a big fat No. She only makes herself and those who surround her look bad.
-
Tonight on Fox News...Jane swapped messages with Karl Rove...
-
Rightwing lifeblood is dependent on something to fight against.
It has to be driving them absolutely freaking mental that no in-your-face anti-war movement has sprung up to battle with.
So much so that they gotta dig up one from 30+ years ago. That, ladies and gentlemen, is desperation.
-
Originally posted by Raider179
Sorry but Jane Fonda might have been of slight use to the enemy propaghanda but not on the level that this judge uses in the sentence of death. To me it comes down to whether she actually could have done something to hurt this Country and I gotta say its a big fat No. She only makes herself and those who surround her look bad.
So you're saying the Rosenburgs are the yardstick at wich we measure treason? You have to commit an act as hanus as theirs to be called "treason"?
That sets the bar a little high dont you think?
-
Originally posted by Nash
Rightwing lifeblood is dependent on something to fight against.
You gotta be kidding, right? Just look at all the crazy liberal causes against just about anything and everything...
Guns
Fast Cars
Business
Religion
Men
Globalization
Smoking
Bush
The Military
Hunting
Eating Meat
Milk
Chemicals
GMOs
etc
etc
-
Hmmm.
Good question.
Ask Rove.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
You gotta be kidding, right? Just look at all the crazy liberal causes against just about anything and everything...
Guns
Fast Cars
Business
Religion
Men
Globalization
Smoking
Bush
The Military
Hunting
Eating Meat
Milk
Chemicals
GMOs
etc
etc
Yeah, Dems hate business, meat, and men.
Wotev.
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
So you're saying the Rosenburgs are the yardstick at wich we measure treason? You have to commit an act as hanus as theirs to be called "treason"?
That sets the bar a little high dont you think?
I think it just shows the huge difference between JF and Rosenbergs. Not even in the same category. Giving all this public attention to her washed up life does nothing but encourage her.
As for the bar, Treason is a very serious crime, more serious (IMO) than murder, since it is against one's entire country, instead of just an individual. That being said The bar should be pretty high.
-
Originally posted by Nash
Rightwing lifeblood is dependent on something to fight against.
It has to be driving them absolutely freaking mental that no in-your-face anti-war movement has sprung up to battle with.
So much so that they gotta dig up one from 30+ years ago. That, ladies and gentlemen, is desperation.
Umm if I read correctly and let me go back and check again...ah yes I did read correctly it is HER that is getting back into activism. Many Vets are still sore at her and wouldn't piss on her to put her out if she was on fire.
hard feelings....yes......desperat ion.....no
I could care less if she protests the war....I just hate her for her.
-
Right... okay.
-
Are you saying they don't?
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
You gotta be kidding, right? Just look at all the crazy liberal causes against just about anything and everything...
Guns
Fast Cars
Business
Religion
Men
Globalization
Smoking
Bush
The Military
Hunting
Eating Meat
Milk
Chemicals
GMOs
etc
etc
On the other side you have hardcore conservatives who are against
Science
Reading
Safety
Police
Anyone who isnt white and male
Anyone who thinks differently
Healthcare
Government
Plenty on both sides to complain about
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
Are you saying they don't?
Uhm.... What?
Go ahead Laser.
-
Originally posted by Nash
Yeah, Dems hate business, meat, and men.
Wotev.
Pssstt... she ain't a democrat. She's a ****ing card-carring communist.
!
-
Nah Hang - she's just a chick.
The size of the fuss is only as big as y'all make it.
The only folks who make it huge are the ones who don't like it. So why do they make it huge?
It's because it's something (a distraction) to rally against. Pretty much it.
-
that's a goofy rationalization.. she don't matter because she's just a chick?
Henh.
I like it.
-
"If you understood what communism was, you would hope, you would pray on your knees that we would some day become communist."
"I, a socialist, think that we should strive toward a socialist society, all the way to communism. "
-Jane Fonda
when American POWs finally began to return home (some of them having been held captive for up to nine years) and describe the tortures they had endured at the hands of the North Vietnamese, Jane Fonda quickly told the country that they should "not hail the POWs as heroes, because they are hypocrites and liars." Fonda said the idea that the POWs she had met in Vietnam had been tortured was "laughable," claiming: "These were not men who had been tortured. These were not men who had been starved. These were not men who had been brainwashed." The POWs who said they had been tortured were "exaggerating, probably for their own self-interest," she asserted. She told audiences that "Never in the history of the United States have POWs come home looking like football players. These football players are no more heroes than Custer was. They're military careerists and professional killers" who are "trying to make themselves look self-righteous, but they are war criminals according to law."
Nash she's a contemptuous hatfull person any way you look at her...big deal, I think so.
-
yah. but she's just a chick.
-
Originally posted by Hangtime
Pssstt... she ain't a democrat. She's a ****ing card-carring communist.
!
Amen to that! She's a communist!
-
Originally posted by Hangtime
yah. but she's just a chick.
and karl rove is just an old white guy ;)
-
and Hillary's just an old white chick.
Now, don't we feel better?
;)
-
Originally posted by Rafe35
Amen to that! She's a communist!
No law against being a communist. Ain't freedom wonderful?
-
It's based on a lot of research, empirical data, and focused focus groups. They all said the same thing. :)
Why in the world are we talking about Fonda? For Chrissakes. It makes zero sense... yet it makes complete sense.
It is because the evil left haven't offered up a clearly defined target. I was mistaken when I said that the right needs something to attack. That's not it at all.
The right is in constant need of something to defend against. So much so that they will seek attackers out. So much so that they will dredge up Jane Fonda, as ridiculous as that is.
It only serves to drive the point home. To make the obvious more obvious.
The right is clueless as to how to govern. They don't know how to do it. They only know how to occupy government positions based on all these imaginary threats. Once there, they're screwed. They simply suck at their jobs.
I suppose it's why Jane Fonda all of a sudden becomes a meaningful topic.
-
nope. and apprently no laws against being a treasonous, seditious meddeling communist bad actress in need of a urine and feces shower follwed by exile to Hanoi or a french canadian restaraunt owned by some guy with a pencil dick named jaques.
-
Are you sticking your lower lip out now.... like a little kid?
"Nope"
That's it? Trying to compare your stance to the "pencil dicked French?"
Come on.
-
Originally posted by Nash
It's based on a lot of research, empirical data, and focused focus groups. They all said the same thing. :)
Why in the world are we talking about Fonda? For Chrissakes. It makes zero sense... yet it makes complete sense.
It is because the evil left haven't offered up a clearly defined target. I was mistaken when I said that the right needs something to attack. That's not it at all.
The right is in constant need of something to defend against. So much so that they will seek attackers out. So much so that they will dredge up Jane Fonda, as ridiculous as that is.
It only serves to drive the point home. To make the obvious more obvious.
The right is clueless as to how to govern. They don't know how to do it. They only know how to occupy government positions based on all these imaginary threats. Once there, they're screwed. They simply suck at their jobs.
I suppose it's why Jane Fonda all of a sudden becomes a meaningful topic.
save your Al Franken Air America propaganda. No one here is dredging her up. We have every right to outright hate the woman. I think she is a traitor to her country.
Am I not allowed to hate the rosenburgs? they were brought up previously in this thread and they are in fact CONVICTED traitors?
-
Originally posted by mosgood
Unfortunately, BECAUSE she is such a lightning rod, she will be giving more media attention than many other leaders in the anti-war protesting scene would.
Look at these boards.... how many times have WE talked about her here.
Even bad press is good press and she is guaranteed to generate a BUNCH of bad press that will STILL allow her to talk in front of the cameras.
I think that the media will make sure that she is in a lot of faces about this.
Agreed. But because she is such a lightning rod because of what she did last time she has lost any kind of credibility.
The media may give her alot of attention but in the end because of her past she may very well end up comming off like some kind of joke and could do more to hurt her cause assuming she is sincere, then helping it
-
My "Al Franken propaganda?"
Never heard the show. Sorry to dissapoint. Though, despite the flood of glee on this BBS about their early troubles (and innevitable demise) I am happy to see that they are still motoring.
I'm sure you are too.
Yes, you have every right to hate Jane Fonda. You're right.
Yet you have every right to hate and post about a multitude of people. Jesus - if hate is your bag - you have a lot of options.
Yet you pick Jane Fonda. Excuse me but - laugh out loud. Give me a break.
-
Originally posted by Nash
Are you sticking your lower lip out now.... like a little kid?
"Nope"
That's it? Trying to compare your stance to the "pencil dicked French?"
Come on.
Well, jeeze... are we fighting over a chick?
Take her.
pleeze.
-
Heh, nah I don't fight over chicks. You take her. :D
-
Originally posted by Nash
My "Al Franken propaganda?"
Never heard the show. Sorry to dissapoint. Though, despite the flood of glee on this BBS about their early troubles (and innevitable demise) I am happy to see that they are still motoring.
I'm sure you are too.
Yes, you have every right to hate Jane Fonda. You're right.
Yet you have every right to hate and post about a multitude of people. Jesus - if hate is your bag - you have a lot of options.
Yet you pick Jane Fonda. Excuse me but - laugh out loud. Give me a break.
me Jane Fonda
You Karl Rove
We all have our bags I guess.
-
We do. :)
-
Originally posted by Nash
We do. :)
so what you are saying is you will fight over a guy, but not over a chick?:D