Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Excerpt: "It is unconscionable that extremist groups circulate letters which accuse me of horrific things, saying that I am a traitor. These lies have circulated for almost 40 years, continually reopening the wound of the Vietnam War."

Jane Fonda talks with Vietnamese people during a trip to Hanoi in 1972. (photo: Joseph Kraft/L'Express)
Jane Fonda talks with Vietnamese people during a trip to Hanoi in 1972. (photo: Joseph Kraft/L'Express)



The Truth About My Trip to Hanoi

By Jane Fonda, Reader Supported News

23 July 11

 

grew up during World War II. My childhood was influenced by the roles my father played in his movies. Whether Abraham Lincoln or Tom Joad in the Grapes of Wrath, his characters communicated certain values which I try to carry with me to this day. I remember saying goodbye to my father the night he left to join the Navy. He didn't have to. He was older than other servicemen and had a family to support but he wanted to be a part of the fight against fascism, not just make movies about it. I admired this about him. I grew up with a deep belief that wherever our troops fought, they were on the side of the angels.

For the first eight years of the Vietnam War I lived in France. I was married to the French film director, Roger Vadim and had my first child. The French had been defeated in their own war against Vietnam a decade before our country went to war there, so when I heard, over and over, French people criticizing our country for our Vietnam War I hated it. I viewed it as sour grapes. I refused to believe we could be doing anything wrong there.

It wasn't until I began to meet American servicemen who had been in Vietnam and had come to Paris as resisters that I realized I needed to learn more. I took every chance I could to meet with US soldiers. I talked with them and read the books they gave me about the war. I decided I needed to return to my country and join with them - active duty soldiers and Vietnam Veterans in particular - to try and end the war. I drove around the country visiting military bases, spending time in the G.I. coffee houses that had sprung up outside many bases - places where G.I.s could gather. I met with Army psychiatrists who were concerned about the type of training our men were receiving ... quite different, they said, from the trainings during WWII and Korea. The doctors felt this training was having a damaging effect on the psyches of the young men, effects they might not recover from. I raised money and hired a former Green Beret, Donald Duncan, to open and run the G.I. Office in Washington D.C. to try and get legal and congressional help for soldiers who were being denied their rights under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. I talked for hours with US pilots about their training, and what they were told about Vietnam. I met with the wives of servicemen. I visited V.A. hospitals. Later in 1978, wanting to share with other Americans some of what I had learned about the experiences of returning soldiers and their families, I made the movie Coming Home. I was the one who would be asked to speak at large anti-war rallies to tell people that the men in uniform were not the enemy, that they did not start the war, that they were, in growing numbers our allies. I knew as much about military law as any layperson. I knew more than most civilians about the realities on the ground for men in combat. I lived and breathed this stuff for two years before I went to North Vietnam. I cared deeply for the men and boys who had been put in harm's way. I wanted to stop the killing and bring our servicemen home. I was infuriated as I learned just how much our soldiers were being lied to about why we were fighting in Vietnam and I was anguished each time I would be with a young man who was traumatized by his experiences. Some boys shook constantly and were unable to speak above a whisper.

It is unconscionable that extremist groups circulate letters which accuse me of horrific things, saying that I am a traitor, that POWs in Hanoi were tied up and in chains and marched past me while I spat at them and called them 'baby killers.' These letters also say that when the POWs were brought into the room for a meeting I had with them, we shook hands and they passed me tiny slips of paper on which they had written their social security numbers. Supposedly, this was so that I could bring back proof to the US military that they were alive. The story goes on to say that I handed these slips of paper over to the North Vietnamese guards and, as a result, at least one of the men was tortured to death. That these stories could be given credence shows how little people know of the realities in North Vietnam prisons at the time. The US government and the POW families didn't need me to tell them who the prisoners were. They had all their names. Moreover, according to even the most hardcore senior officers, torture stopped late in 1969, two and a half years before I got there. And, most importantly, I would never say such things to our servicemen, whom I respect, whether or not I agree with the mission they have been sent to perform, which is not of their choosing.

But these lies have circulated for almost 40 years, continually reopening the wound of the Vietnam War and causing pain to families of American servicemen. The lies distort the truth of why I went to North Vietnam and they perpetuate the myth that being anti-war means being anti-soldier.

Little known is the fact that almost 300 Americans - journalists, diplomats, peace activists, professors, religious leaders and Vietnam Veterans themselves - had been traveling to North Vietnam over a number of years in an effort to try and find ways to end the war. (By the way, those trips generated little if any media attention.) I brought with me to Hanoi a thick package of letters from families of POWs. Since 1969, mail for the POWs had been brought in and out of North Vietnam every month by American visitors. The Committee of Liaison With Families coordinated this effort. I took the letters to the POWs and brought a packet of letters from them back to their families.


Here is the link to the petition to stand with Jane.

To read the full post, please go to janefonda.com.

 

Comments  

We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.

General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.

Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.

- The RSN Team

 
+153 # Capn Canard 2011-07-23 16:46
It has always puzzled me that Fonda was vilified for the visit to Vietnam. At that time I was a child of 10 and I knew that Vietnam was a failure. And war is always a no win situation for soldiers.
 
 
-153 # XLIB 2011-07-23 21:07
"And war is always a no win situation for soldiers."

I imagine you think the brave soldiers who won our independence in the Revolutionary War, and the heroes who won the Civil War and put an end to slavery, and the Greatest Generation who gave their all to defeat Nazism and Fascism were losers? Yes, war is ugly, but we would be infinitely worse off if our forefathers had gone at it with your attitude.
 
 
+124 # billy bob 2011-07-23 23:00
The trouble is that comparing Vietnam to any of those other wars is dishonest.
 
 
-7 # XLIB 2011-07-24 20:31
Hey,it was Capn Canard who said "war is always a no win situation for soldiers."
 
 
+85 # Ralph Averill 2011-07-24 02:04
See Clint Eastwood's "Flags of Our Fathers". There are no heroes in war. Heroes are invented for the folks at home.
 
 
-81 # D Peach 2011-07-24 08:20
Ralph, Though a good movie, "Flags of Our Fathers" has nothing to do with the treasonous acts of Jane Fonda. And yes there are really heroic acts in war, which you obviously have never experienced. If you are living life, or believing what you see in the movies as life, you are not living in the real world. Educate yourself by visiting a VA Hospital as a volunteer or speaking to veterans at the Memorials in Washington D.C. Watching movies is not the way to go...it's Hollywoods version of life.
 
 
-21 # John Talbutt 2011-07-24 09:39
And be sure your history leaves out the Missouri Compromise, the Kansas Nebraska Act, the proclomations endorsing slavery by the secessesionist states and, most importantly, the Emancipation Proclomation which only an imbecile might believe was not a result of the Civil War.
 
 
+4 # Toby Blome 2011-07-27 10:49
John,

I find that people who resort to name calling, as in "imbecile" are usually the least educated. Dear John, I encourage you to read more from diverse opinions. As Howard Zinn, the great historian and one of my heroes, pointed out: Europe ended slavery without a civil war. Think about it......wasn't it over 600,000 killed in the Civil War? We all need to think more independently. Not just accept the rubbish that allows justification for killing more and more innocent people in war.

No, the Civil War was not needed to end slavery!!!!!!
 
 
+78 # billy bob 2011-07-24 11:17
Funny you should mention that. I was thinking about how much of the "hero" image comes from movies and not reality.

You obviously have never experienced the reality that war leaves a scar on everyone who experiences it first hand, which all the hollywood talk about "heroism" won't clear away. As a matter of fact, many veterans I've known who've experienced serious combat are sickened by that whole image and everything that comes with it.

Many of the first protesters of Vietnam were WWII veterans who knew what they were talking about, only to have their patriotism questioned for going against the politicians and profiteers who supported the war. The same thing happened again going in to Oil War II in 2003. The fact is that the right will always insult the patriotism of anyone who stands in the way of its agenda.
 
 
+70 # Ralph Averill 2011-07-24 12:59
There are heroic acts in life; some in war, some, like Jane Fonda's, in protest of an illegal, immoral, beast of a war foisted onto the people of Southeast Asia, paid for with the wasted blood of 56,000 Americans and 3 million Asians, all to make a few war profiteers rich. They were the traitors then, they are the traitors now. I applaud Jane Fonda's heroism. She never should have apologized.
 
 
+14 # klondikekitty 2011-07-24 16:29
Amen, brother, amen!!! i agree with you.
 
 
+55 # mike/ 2011-07-24 17:01
if what she did, though never proved beyond just going to Hanoi, was treasonous, then what would you call the words of my father, in the Army air corps during WWII, & my uncle, injured twice in the Battle of the Bulge, who separately came to me and told me they would give me the money to go to Canada if my Draft # came up? They called Vietnam "that 'dirty' liitle war" before it was fashionable. Were they treasonous also?
 
 
+30 # Texan 4 Peace 2011-07-24 17:45
Quoting
Educate yourself by visiting a VA Hospital as a volunteer or speaking to veterans at the Memorials in Washington D.C.


Right -- like "treasonous" Jane Fonda did! Did you even read the article?
 
 
+19 # WarrenM 2011-07-25 10:39
Why do you call the act of reaching out and connecting to American prisoners of war a treasonous act, unless you yourself are un-american or Anti-American. Many of these young men, a number of them were my friends and contemporaries, were there because the were drafted. A great number were killed or received serious physical and psychological injuries; while people like George Bush, Dick Chenay and probably you found 'other prioritis'. And you call Jane Fonda's acts treasonous. You have a serious logic problem or some kind of denial issue.
 
 
+3 # Kirk Bruner 2011-07-26 21:19
D Peach- You didn't read the above article, did you? There were no treasonous acts. SHE visited VA hospitals, talking to soldiers to get the truth about what was happening on the ground for two years before she went there. READ THE ARTICLE before commenting.
 
 
-8 # XLIB 2011-07-24 20:32
See what happens when people get their history from Clint Eastwood?
 
 
+30 # reality check 2011-07-24 02:04
if you think the civil was about slavery then you need to pick up a history book, preferably a real one that isn't used to teach little kids in public schools.
 
 
+10 # XLIB 2011-07-24 20:34
Point is that the Civil War did end slavery. Had the south won, it would not have ended for a long, long time afterwards.
 
 
+5 # Bryan 2011-07-27 00:40
Quoting
Point is that the Civil War did end slavery. Had the south won, it would not have ended for a long, long time afterwards.

The emancipation proclamation only freed the slaves in the rebel states. Don't believe it then read it. I'm sure you can Google it. The largest slave trading port in the US after the war was in Rhode Island same as before the war. There is apparently a lot of misinformation about the causes and effects of the civil war so I guess its true that the victors write the history books.
 
 
+1 # Never Again 2011-07-27 13:48
It would've eventually ended. Slavery is infeasible for long-term, and while slaves were necessary for EARLY stages of the Industrial Revolution, "mature" capitalism required intelligent, motivated workers who had a stake in the success of the enterprise, not living property working because they were told to! (Which we seem to be going back to, between illegals and underpaid Americans?)

The labor-shortage engendered by the end of slavery, though, was necessary for unionization, and McCormick's Miracle Machines, AKA the "Agricultural Revolution"!

If it's not too cliche, and you have the money to spare, "Read All About It"!
http://www.amazon.com/Sugar-Industry-Abolition-Slave-1775-1810/dp/081302742X
The local library won't stock it, this is WAY too controversial for them!
 
 
0 # Jose 2011-08-05 17:09
Sorry, dude, but slavery never was or is "necessary."
 
 
+4 # DurangoKid 2011-07-27 11:39
Lincoln's emphasis was on preserving the Union. If he could have ended the Civl War without abolishing slavery, he would have. Lincoln did not believe he had the right as president to end slavery. Of course session change all that. The Emancipation Proclamation was a tactic to win the war, not a matter of policy.
 
 
+94 # Glen 2011-07-24 03:30
You, XLIB, appear to be laboring under the mythology perpetrated by the government and whoever has the need to feel the winner in every war. That is a crippling aspect of much of U.S. citizenry: little or no real history taught in schools and little or no real interest in historical facts. Soldiers ALWAYS lose.

To paraphrase: "If any ask why we died, tell them because our fathers lied."
 
 
-14 # XLIB 2011-07-24 20:36
Well, if you insist on calling soldiers losers, that is your right, but speaking of no real history taught, how do you think we won our independence and defeated the slaveocracy and Hitler?
 
 
+21 # Glen 2011-07-25 06:54
LSIB, you are arguing semantics rather than reality. Twisting the intent of a word is not debate. What it indicates is you don't want to learn, you just want to win.

Saying soldiers always lose is not the same as saying they are losers. It means they suffer and die. War has been carried out for those who profit the most, not for ideals worth fighting for. As I said, if you had learned serious history, you would understand the reasons for even the War Between the States.
 
 
+81 # sfreeman 2011-07-24 04:57
I think you have misunderstood her intent. She is referring to the conditions of battle for individual soldiers, not a war itself. The best a soldier can hope for in war--as a soldier, not in terms of a war's outcome--is to come home alive, in one piece, and not so screwed up there s/he has significant difficulties readjusting to life at home; to have the wife/husband or girl/boyfriend still there, "the farm" still there.
 
 
-5 # XLIB 2011-07-24 20:38
Capn Canard is a "she?"
 
 
+13 # TrueAmericanPatriot 2011-07-25 06:48
Quoting
Capn Canard is a "she?"

You are NOT an "ex-lib." You are the same rethuglibagger under a different post. A regular viewer of Faux Nooz, as well. Your rhetoric is boring. Be off with you! Go hop aboard the "S.S. Murdoch" and sink with it!
 
 
+4 # X Dane 2011-07-26 13:20
Boy are you behind the times XLIB.??? There ar even female generals and admiral.
WOW
 
 
+4 # minkdumink 2011-07-26 14:40
and a female General now runs parris island Marine recruit depot, the toughest place in the world.Semper Fi Mac!
 
 
+45 # granny 2011-07-24 06:21
XLIB - Did you read the article? Or do you just criticize because you need to criticize Jane Fonda?
 
 
-73 # D Peach 2011-07-24 08:28
Granny, The article is like her books...she is the best, honorable, never really intended to hurt anyone, egotistical, dense,...should I go on? If you believe everything you read you are learning nothing but what the writer wrote. There are multiple layers to a story and to historical events. This nutty lady is a traitor who loves herself and continuously promotes herself and has always disregarded what she did as just, "being young". Let her do that today and see if she would get away with it.
 
 
+16 # Robert ODonnell 2011-07-24 13:27
How about the stuff you read? well rounded. A real investigator seeking truth!
 
 
+7 # TrueAmericanPatriot 2011-07-25 06:51
Quoting
How about the stuff you read? well rounded. A real investigator seeking truth!


You must realize, Robert, D Peach "has been assimilated." Lies = truth, and truth=lies, his/her mind.
 
 
+49 # in deo veritas 2011-07-24 06:32
In light of our country and government going into a fascist state day by day, it is obvious that the rulers of our country have always used us for cannon fodder to enrich themselves.That is what the "civil war" was really about. If we do not end the "wars" we have been dragged into all this b.s. about the drficit, etc. will be irrelevant and never end. If we do not stand up to these fascists then we have desecrated the graves of our brave and honored dead and made their sacrifices in vain. If we do not stop them we do not deserve to survive and will end up like Nazi Germany and militarist Japan but without anyone to save or rebuild us. The rich start the wars, force the rest to risk their lives, and then reap the profits. What about agent orange-still denying its effects. delibewrately exposing soldiers to radiation after nuclear testing? What decent government would do these things? BTW the "civil war" did not end slavery-it expanded it beyond the boundaries of race alone.
 
 
-56 # Jimmy L. Shirley Jr. 2011-07-24 07:18
And the lie/myth continues. "the heroes who won the Civil War and put an end to slavery," - First of all, by definition it was not a civil war. Second, the HEROES were the soldiers of the South - the Southern States, the States militias, the soldiers of the CSA - not the soldiers of the USA for they were the invaders. Third, their efforts were to subjugate the CSA, not to free anyone, let alone the Negro of whom almost all White yankee soldiers had nothing but revulsion for.
 
 
+11 # billy bob 2011-07-24 11:20
Why did the South secede from the Union? Wasn't it something about "property rights"?
 
 
+4 # heraldmage 2011-07-26 15:44
Congress passed protectionist legislation whose purpose was to build domestic manufacturing and end foreign reliance. The law cancelled all foreign trade agreements & required goods & raw materials to be sold domestically. Northern manufactures benefited by the eliminating foreign competition were able to purchase the South's cotton & other raw materials below market & already contracted levels. Since under the law products that could be produced domestically could not be imported Northern manufacturers had a monopoly & made enormous profits while the South was reduced to poverty. English manufacturer were the largest purchasers of the South produce which is why they supported the South in the civil war. Ending slavery was the propaganda, brainwashing, for public consumption to gain public support for war to force the South back into the union. The Industrialist knew the people would not support war that limited trade & profit & created new feudal lords that they just finished fighting 2 wars to be free of.
 
 
+2 # billy bob 2011-07-27 10:14
Interesting. Do you know of any good online resources I could read about that? I'd be interested in what Southerners said at the time about the subject you're refering to. I lived in the South for over a decade and all I ever heard was about "state's rights" and "property rights".
 
 
0 # Jose 2011-08-05 17:24
The only problem with yur argument is that "King Cotton" produced more millionaires than anywhere else in the world at the time.
 
 
+10 # minkdumink 2011-07-24 12:02
the war was fought to save the union. Slaves being freed came after, and the south being the ignorant hero's they were (are) picked a fight with the worlds most powerful industrial machine and quite simply, were stomped.
 
 
+18 # rockon53 2011-07-24 14:59
The civil war was about slave labor over pay labor. After the Mexican American war the Unites States was about to double in size. If America were to continue with free slave labor. Why would anyone be willing to hirer whites when they could have slave labor at a much lower cost. This was the real reason for the civil war. As far as Jane Fonda goes she had every right to question her country when it came to spilling American blood and is just as patriotic for questioning, as those who didn't.
 
 
+22 # RSJ 2011-07-25 02:03
You should read your history, Jimmy L. Shirley Jr. -- the CSA started the Civil War (not the War of Northern Aggression as you rednecks like to call it) by shelling Ft. Sumter, SC, in April of 1861, and killing two American soldiers. By starting an all-out war, and invading the north -- Gettysburg was in Pennsylvania, for instance -- the south opened itself up to a counter invasion. These days, if a group, no matter what the cause, bombed a US Army post, we'd call it a terrorist act.

You should put down that copy of Southern Partisan and recognize the unvarnished truth: a small number of wealthy white plantation owners in the south gulled poor whites into fighting and dying for their continued prosperity, which included the owning of slaves. There would have been no devastation in the south had not these wealthy men decided to secede to protect their economic interests; certainly Lincoln had no desire to start a war and said so. In a situation similar to the Vietnam War, some soldiers may have been heroic in the field, but the cause itself was unjust, illegal, and without moral imperative.
 
 
+3 # TrueAmericanPatriot 2011-07-25 06:57
Quoting
You should read your history, Jimmy L. Shirley Jr. -- the CSA started the Civil War (not the War of Northern Aggression as you rednecks like to call it) by shelling Ft. Sumter, SC, in April of 1861, and killing two American soldiers. By starting an all-out war, and invading the north -- Gettysburg was in Pennsylvania, for instance -- the south opened itself up to a counter invasion. These days, if a group, no matter what the cause, bombed a US Army post, we'd call it a terrorist act.

You should put down that copy of Southern Partisan and recognize the unvarnished truth: a small number of wealthy white plantation owners in the south gulled poor whites into fighting and dying for their continued prosperity, which included the owning of slaves. There would have been no devastation in the south had not these wealthy men decided to secede to protect their economic interests; certainly Lincoln had no desire to start a war and said so. In a situation similar to the Vietnam War, some soldiers may have been heroic in the field, but the cause itself was unjust, illegal, and without moral imperative.

Highly unlikely, RSJ. These "faux news fools" only read what "Vannity," "Bill-O the clown," "Limbum," and "Little Rupert" tells them to.
 
 
0 # Nanner 2011-07-25 05:16
Really? You know HOW that the Yankee soldiers efforts were to subjugate the CSA and had revulsion for Blacks?
 
 
+38 # EDTHEREDPILL 2011-07-24 08:10
Quoting
"And war is always a no win situation for soldiers."

I imagine you think the brave soldiers who won our independence in the Revolutionary War, and the heroes who won the Civil War and put an end to slavery, and the Greatest Generation who gave their all to defeat Nazism and Fascism were losers? Yes, war is ugly, but we would be infinitely worse off if our forefathers had gone at it with your attitude.


XLIB, it is sad that you assume the writer meant soldiers were "losers" when what s/he actually wrote was that "war is always a no win situation for soldiers." These statements are NOT the same. Most psychologically healthy people who experience combat and its horrors are NOT the same afterward. Only sociopaths remain unaffected by the traumas of war. In that sense, war IS always a no win situation for soldiers, whether or not the cause was just.
 
 
+7 # Bob Griffin 2011-07-25 12:10
To underscore that, reference English literature from the 1920s where frequently the veterans are suffering from 'shell shock'.
 
 
+31 # wfalco 2011-07-24 08:26
Quoting
"And war is always a no win situation for soldiers."

I imagine you think the brave soldiers who won our independence in the Revolutionary War, and the heroes who won the Civil War and put an end to slavery, and the Greatest Generation who gave their all to defeat Nazism and Fascism were losers? Yes, war is ugly, but we would be infinitely worse off if our forefathers had gone at it with your attitude.

I believe you are looking at War as strictly winning and losing through the eyes of pure nationalism. I perceive the "no win situation" quote quite differently. Everyone loses in War based purely on its barbarity at a humanistic level.
Yes the U.S. defeated the NAZIS. Overtly a good thing for us. It was, arguably, necesarry. But this is not the philosophical point.
Case example-my now deceased father lost two brothers in WW II. Heroes in their home town? I suppose. But what of the family? My father, for example, was not a well man emotionally for his adult life.
My Uncle's(my Mom's brother)ship in the South Pacific (WW II)was blown up. He was not a well man after the War (states he was "lost" for 10 years afterward.)Was he a winner? Were their families winners? Is a nation (or the world) a winner when murder and mayhem continues due to nationalistic and economic matters?
 
 
+19 # Merschrod 2011-07-24 08:51
XLIB you are net getting the point. For a good look at how individual soldiers lose out (not the war) see the New Documentary "To Hell and Back" directed and filmed by DAnfung Dennis. It is about the preent war in Afghanistan.

"Ours is not to ask why,
Ours is to do and die"

Sort of sums up the GI's losing situation.
 
 
+45 # foxtrottango 2011-07-24 08:59
I usually don't respond to drivel such as yours, but you touched something that is very dear to me, even if won't do any good since your mind is made up.

First of all, I served in Vietnam War back in 1968-69 and I consider Jane Fonda my friend and admire her for what she is and what she did to bring a sense of justice and credibility to a nation basking in ignorance, arrogance racism and confusion during that era. She is a true American patriot and one of the most talented American beauty unmatched in the world. That is something the right wing conservative propagandists will never achieved!

She had more raw courage than you and me put together, let alone the right wing conservative warmongers, war profiteers and when most of them avoided the war by deserting it like GW Bush, multiple draft dodgers like Cheney, Rumfled, Rove and just about everyone who served in the Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan and the GWH and GWB Administrations !

She was, is, and will always be a humanist who believe in fair play, fair justice and truth. Truth is something the Right will never accept.

In all, she was a bright star in a dark night and something special in our heart to many of those who fought and died needlessly for a war that was based on profiteering, political corruption and lies.

She is exacty what we need now!
 
 
+26 # billy bob 2011-07-24 11:28
Thank you. You're a perfect example of why we don't draft people any more. When you draft someone, you never know what you'll get. You might accidentally draft someone who can think for themself and has a sense of morality. If you have an all volunteer army you can attract the very people who will think nothing of committing any war crime necessary to further your ends.

I hate what happened in Vietnam. I hate that good people were drafted to fight in a war that served no purpose. I'm glad, however, that good people like you were there to witness, first hand, what was going on, and to remind the rest of this country about reality.

Thank you for not losing sight of who you are to accomplish someone else's political aims.
 
 
+12 # rockon53 2011-07-24 16:28
I think there is a great deal of young people who join the service today because there isn't many opportunity for them today. Is there more blind nationalism today on the part of most Americans, the anwser is yes.
 
 
+10 # naomi pinson 2011-07-26 04:40
[quote name="billy bob"]"Thank you. You're a perfect example of why we don't draft people any more. When you draft someone, you never know what you'll get. volunteer army you can attract the very people who will think nothing of committing any war crime necessary to further your ends."
did anyone actually read Fonda's article? Todays troops are young mena and women who are prisoners of the econmonic draft. What does it matter if you can't feed your kids, or house them or make a living wage? They are part and parcal of the grouwing internal colonney of America and have already been devalued to the max. I have nothing but love and compasssion for our soldiers, and respect.
 
 
+21 # You made her case 2011-07-24 13:24
She didn't say that the soldiers were losers. She said it was a "no win situation" for the soldiers. It's a figure of speech that best describes what it is to be a grunt...to be a soldier. Every soldier I've known from WWII to today has said the same.

You inadvertently made Ms. Fonda's case for her with your own distortion.
 
 
-3 # XLIB 2011-07-24 20:41
Ditto. DId you read my comments? I was responding to Capn C.
 
 
+16 # OM 2011-07-24 19:02
The Neo-nazis & neo-facists are running the country. For one, Koch has "good old nazi roots!"
 
 
+14 # Bill c 2011-07-24 19:37
How ironic, for the Vietnam war was their own fight for independence; Ho Chi Minh their own George Washington. Sorry but you picked a poor analogy. Read her letter again and this time, note her support for the effort to fight fascism in WWII.
 
 
+15 # RSJ 2011-07-25 02:17
Not to mention, Bill c, that Ho Chi Minh's original national constitution was based on our own. During WWII, the Allies promised Ho and his army we would support them in making Vietnam independent from the French after the war, if they agreed to fight against the Japanese. They did, and then we reneged and handed the country back to France. That was the true beginning of the Vietnam War and we should have been smart enough to let the Vietnamese run the place after they defeated the French at Dien Bien Phu and the French pulled out in 1954. We also should have stayed out of the civil war between the north and south that commenced in 1959. Ho supposedly had no love for either the Chinese nor the Russians; he only used them to get weaponry and financial support. It wouldn't make sense for him to fight a long war against the French and the US only to become a colony of Moscow or Beijing. But the MIC made a fortune from the Vietnam War, as did the off-the-books budget of the CIA from importing drugs into this country via the infamous Air America.
 
 
+7 # RebelRab 2011-07-26 04:41
Funny you should mention the "off-the-books budget of the CIA", RSJ. The same is going on today in Afghanistan. How else can you really explain how hundreds of tons of opium/heroine can be exported from a country which our military is in control of every road point-of-entry/ exit and the airspace? Does anyone really believe that the anti-drug Taliban is smuggling hundreds of tons of drugs out in about six months a year through mountain passes by mules? Seriously?? There have been at least two mysterious deaths (assasinations) of US military personnel at the main airbase at Bagram--one in logistics and the other in finance. While I was there from '03-'04 there were numerous unmarked cargo planes, C-130s and Ilyushins that were routinely loaded up on our runways, yet we were told that they were officially "not there".
 
 
+7 # RebelRab 2011-07-26 05:10
Another interesting point is that the wealthy industrial/banking elite that are at the economic top today were against our involvement in WWII because they were doing good business with Hitler. Additionally, it was American Euginisists who gave Hitler the idea and racist justification for the Holocaust. Hitler was their European experiment. They even conspired to lead a coup against FDR and establish a military dictatorship here in the US, headed up by former Marine Corps General Smedley Butler. A congressional investigation found substantial evidence supporting Butler's accusation against these Americna Fascists, yet nothing happend to them other than a reprimand. The only reason HW Bush served in WWII was to clear the family name after the fallout of Prescott's involvement with Hitler. The ugly reality is that unrestricted capitalism naturally tends toward fascism, whether government run as in the case of Nazi Germany or corporate run as in the case of the modern United States. All hail the United States of ALEC! Makes me sick to think that I laid my life on the line for this God-forsaken nation of "evildoers and antichrists". And, yes, it is true: NO ONE RETURNS FROM WAR UNAFFECTED WHO DEPARTED AS SANE, COMPASSIONATE, HUMAN BEINGS!
 
 
+2 # Liberty Belle 2011-07-25 21:06
Quoting
"And war is always a no win situation for soldiers."

I imagine you think the brave soldiers who won our independence in the Revolutionary War, and the heroes who won the Civil War and put an end to slavery, and the Greatest Generation who gave their all to defeat Nazism and Fascism were losers? Yes, war is ugly, but we would be infinitely worse off if our forefathers had gone at it with your attitude.


You need to read the book "War Is A Lie".
 
 
+7 # Reynolds 2011-07-26 07:08
That's a highly illogical response. My grandfather 12 times removed was Colonel Ebenezer Reynolds. He fought and died in the Revolution. My family were abolitionists even in colonial times, and strongly supported (and fought in) the Civil War.

The cause doesn't matter -- the fact is that no soldier I've known (and I've known many) and certainly no historic member of my family felt that they were "winners" because they were in war. I also very much doubt I could find one that thinks (or thought) that war was other than a no-win situation.

Yes, we are free because of the founders and the soldiers who fought - and died. Was his death a winning situation for my many times great grandfather? How about for his wife and children? How about for those British teenage boys he had to kill? Their families?

War is sacrifice and horror - and to believe it to be anything else dishonors the bravery and willingness of those who fight our wars to make certain that we are free.

War is a no win situation. That doesn't mean that sometimes it isn't necessary - and its necessity doesn't mean it is anything other than being no win for the soldiers.

Regards,

Reyn
 
 
-26 # roger guffey 2011-07-24 07:14
Seeing her sitting in an anti-aircraft gun laughing gleefully while pretending to shoot down US planes had a lot to with it.
 
 
+1 # Janice 2011-07-24 08:06
AMEN to Roger's comment: My family was living in Laos at that time. My father was a pilot for CASI. I think this article puts an interesting (different) spin on things. Believe me, it did not look at all as though Ms Fonda had any respect whatsoever for our side. I am glad she apologized (I do not recall the date - but I do recall the event). And I accepted her apology. I figured she was young and had no idea that her "visit" seemed to be a slap at the USA not an effort to bring dialogue and comfort to the POW's and their families. Silly me.
 
 
+7 # karenvista 2011-07-25 14:00
[quote name="Janice"]AMEN to Roger's comment: My family was living in Laos at that time. My father was a pilot for CASI.

I can find no reference to CASI by Googling it. Do you mean CACI-a mercenary defense company that was started during the Vietnam war? If I were you I wouldn't brag about your father being a pilot in "The Secret War." All they did was kill at least a half million peasants by dropping 3 million tons of bombs and napalm and then leave the Hmong behind to face the retribution for what the U.S./CIA did. If your father worked for CACI let me remind you that they were sued for torture during interrogations at Abu Ghraib. What is "Our Side?" If what I just recounted is "Our Side" I don't know who would want to be on it unless they are a sociopath.
 
 
+11 # foxtrottango 2011-07-24 10:07
She faced the might of American air power falling on her. What would you be willing to face other than that fat face of yours chomping on the sweat, blood and tears that your country's young men and women faced just so you could sit on the dinner table and disregarded all the carnage especially on women and children!

Hell, you sound more like a war mongering wanna-be rambo hero and most likely the first one to cut and run at the first sound gun fire!

Yeah, we know your type. The Dick Cheney and Rumsfeld type!
 
 
-43 # D Peach 2011-07-24 08:24
If you were puzzled at the age of 10 that is understandable. Maybe you might want to educate yourself at what this traitor really did, rather than what she says she did. She used her fame and her fathers name and military service as reasons. Isn't it rather bizarre that there were photographers there capturing every moment? Jane Fonda has a big ego and will never admit she just did it for the publicity. She does not get it.
 
 
+8 # karenvista 2011-07-25 14:03
Quoting
If you were puzzled at the age of 10 that is understandable. Maybe you might want to educate yourself at what this traitor really did, rather than what she says she did. She used her fame and her fathers name and military service as reasons. Isn't it rather bizarre that there were photographers there capturing every moment? Jane Fonda has a big ego and will never admit she just did it for the publicity. She does not get it.


Since you are such a hater of Jane Fonda and a supporter of the Vietnam and Laotian wars maybe you can explain something to me since my husband got killed there. Why were we there?
 
 
-2 # lin96 2011-07-24 16:31
Read the excerp from her book at....
http://janefonda.com/the-truth-about-my-trip-to-hanoi/
 
 
+105 # J.Lindsley 2011-07-23 19:54
The massive ignorance of that era was the beginning of the far larger ignorance still being promoted daily by any number of propagandistry elements still being funded by the descendants of that older crew of liars and disinformants that spread the virus that plagued Miss Fonda.

Do the work of finding the truth of those times and the follow up is the work that interested citizens wanting to spread THAT truth to the ignorant of today.

The ones spreading today's viruses are far more sophisticated that the "Old School" were.
 
 
-149 # gene Walsh 2011-07-23 20:06
Ms Fonda needs a savvy PR representative. The most damaging comment in the prisoners' claims is that Ms. Fonda received the tiny pieces of paper with social security numbers on them and she declined to help, handing them instead to a Vietnamese guard.
In this e-mail mia culpa, to crudely try to reestablish her reputation, all Ms Fonda needed to do is state /swear/vow the entire prisoner scene is fictional and that she would never participate in such a sham.
But she did not. She dodged. She blamed prisoners' ignorance (The U.S. government had all their names;"torture stopped in '69)")
She perpetuated the claim. She's lying...again. This is not as disgraceful as the prisoners' claim, but it is right up there.)
 
 
+82 # BlacqueJacque 2011-07-23 20:27
If you would go and read the prisoner's statements - you will find that the ones present at this alleged incident support Ms. Fonda's claims.

Quoting
Ms Fonda needs a savvy PR representative. The most damaging comment in the prisoners' claims is that Ms. Fonda received the tiny pieces of paper with social security numbers on them and she declined to help, handing them instead to a Vietnamese guard.
In this e-mail mia culpa, to crudely try to reestablish her reputation, all Ms Fonda needed to do is state /swear/vow the entire prisoner scene is fictional and that she would never participate in such a sham.
But she did not. She dodged. She blamed prisoners' ignorance (The U.S. government had all their names;"torture stopped in '69)")
She perpetuated the claim. She's lying...again. This is not as disgraceful as the prisoners' claim, but it is right up there.)
 
 
+38 # Euell Neverno 2011-07-23 21:27
Seems like you might be the liar, friend.
 
 
+36 # Keith Barrand 2011-07-23 22:54
You're mind's made up. You don't need facts anymore.
 
 
+130 # billy bob 2011-07-23 20:09
It's hard to believe she was EVER allowed to tell the truth. The truth is that it never mattered what she actually did. When the right-wing needs an enemy to galvanize its troops it will find one, no matter how many lies it has to concoct to acheive its objective.

Ask the people of Norway what they think of right-wing propaganda.
 
 
-31 # Janice 2011-07-24 08:17
Quoting
It's hard to believe she was EVER allowed to tell the truth. The truth is that it never mattered what she actually did. When the right-wing needs an enemy to galvanize its troops it will find one, no matter how many lies it has to concoct to acheive its objective.

Ask the people of Norway what they think of right-wing propaganda.

Wow. This is really amazing! "Right-wing" propaganda? I do not identify with the perpetrator/s of the horrible events in Norway. This is not in any way a representation of my conservative (what you apparently call "right-wing")views, though that seems to be your interpretation. Your mind is made up. That is unfortunate. I guess this is what the LEFT does to achieve its objectives?
 
 
+8 # billy bob 2011-07-24 11:35
What are my objectives?

Apparently, you haven't heard the same talk the latest right-wing (deal with it) psychopath was using to justify his mass murder? You haven't heard rallies going on in this very country filled with people shouting the exact language he used? THAT is amazing!

How do you feel about right-wing views of Muslims in America? What do you think of the right-wing views of unions in this country? Either you agree with other right-wingers, or maybe you're not as "conservative" as you think you are.
 
 
+12 # RSJ 2011-07-25 02:24
The facts are the murderer in Norway was a self-professed Christian conservative who hated Muslims and wanted to end immigration of foreigners to his country, as many right-wingers in this country do. As things stand now, the word 'conservative' represents the extreme right-wing political thinking that led that idiot in Norway to the killing of innocent people. If you don't want to be identified with that, perhaps you should call yourself something else.
 
 
+5 # billy bob 2011-07-25 06:16
Thank you for puting it much better than I did. Great response.
 
 
-99 # gene Walsh 2011-07-23 20:22
Jane Fonda needs a realistic PR representative. Not only poor judgement to rehash a 40-year old negative story.
If anything should have been said by Ms. Fonda, all it should have been is a simple: "Reports of my visiting POWs in Vietnam are inaccurate and ridiculous."
Trying to justify her actions with claims "They (US Govt) had all their names; and "Torture stopped in late 1969" are extremely weak and without reasonable merit.
The bottom line is this e-mail mia culpa by Ms Fonda only served to further document her unbelievable, anti-American, behavior in Vietnam.
That she is getting an Award is ridiculous and that she is trying to justify her actions underscore that fact.
 
 
+29 # Ralph Averill 2011-07-24 02:09
It is not anti-American to stand up and act on what you believe, right or wrong. In fact, that is the most "American" thing a person can do.
 
 
+19 # billy bob 2011-07-24 06:16
Absolutely! It's ANTI-American to challenge someone's patriotism every time they disagree with your agenda. When people start waving flags and mindlessly shouting "U.S.A.!" over and over is when we have to fear for the destruction of our country from the inside.
 
 
+14 # granny 2011-07-24 06:24
"Don 't try to confuse me with the facts. My mind is made up."
 
 
+1 # Janice 2011-07-24 08:19
Quoting
"Don 't try to confuse me with the facts. My mind is made up."

Apparently it is, "Granny."
 
 
+6 # billy bob 2011-07-24 11:35
Granny was joking. You actually seem to feel that way.
 
 
-20 # randyjet 2011-07-23 20:24
I have always been a fan of yours, but the problem with your visit to Hanoi was NOT the lies that were told. It was the photo of you manning an anti-aircraft gun that got the attention and condemnation. THAT was NOT a good idea to make like you were a participant in shooting GIs down.
 
 
+27 # Keith Barrand 2011-07-23 22:56
I believe I have heard her say that that was the biggest mistake she made. She has apologized
 
 
-18 # BMosley288 2011-07-24 09:24
Wouldn't it be rational to assume that if Jane is screwing up with seeming to fire at her countrymen whe would be screwing up other ways. And it seems to me she has half apologized and half not apologized with a lot of double talk for all she did during that time. She supported the enemy, and should stay out of the lime light.
 
 
+8 # billy bob 2011-07-24 11:37
Who was the enemy and why?
 
 
-1 # Never Again 2011-07-26 19:09
I don't know about you, but I'd go with a common-sense answer, whoever is killing American soldiers, in this case, Chinese-backed swamp terrorists.
Posing with an ENEMY gun and "pretending" to shoot down American planes is just as bad taste as "pretending" to operate Nazi Death Ovens or fire AK rifles at Americans, and for about the same reasons!
It's important to note, she HAS NEVER apologized, she just blamed her actions on "youth", and hoped we'd all forget--until she brought it up AGAIN!
 
 
0 # billy bob 2011-07-27 10:25
Were we invaded by North Vietnam, or did we do the invading? Was the Gulf of Tonkin resolution based on an honest account, or a lie? What was the objective of bombing another country into the stone age? Did it have something to do with "communism", or did it have something to do with "promoting democracy"? Because it couldn't be both. The majority of Vietnamese wanted the communism we were killing them to prevent.

I also asked, "why". Why were they killing Americans? Could it be because Americans invaded their country? I personally believe the North was in the wrong, because I'm against the philosophy of communism. Then again, Vietnam is not my country, nor is a civil war in that country any of my business, especially, considering that our government invaded to stifle the will of the people.

When you compare Vietnam to WWII you're being dishonest. We were fighting for our own survival in WWII. Vietnam was fighting for its survival during our invasion of it.

I don't see anything for her to apologize about, other than the fact that her actions were twisted in a way that had no relationship to what actually happened.

I would say the "enemy" was the faction of the U.S. government that perpetrated a war to prevent a democracy and that did so, against the wishes of the majority of Americans at home.
 
 
+82 # Virginia 2011-07-23 20:34
Nearly a decade ago I sat in the Hawaii Democratic Convention hall and listened to "my sisters" one after another standing in line to state their detailed concern and disagreement with the wars of the Bush administration. As I listened I remembered how we sat in high school and swore to ourselves and to each other that we would never let Viet Nam happened again...that our sons, nephews, cousins, husbands would never see another unnecessary political war like that again. None of us back then thought there was any basis to the right-wing rhetoric about Jane... and frankly, it was their war, lies and hatred that turned many of us young Republicans into Indpendents and eventually into more compassionate Democrats.

Republicans are shooting themselves in the foot with their negativity nearly every day... Let 'em go. They eat their own anyway. Ho'oponopono, Jane - you are loved by the ones that count.
 
 
+115 # Robert Borden 2011-07-23 20:37
I was a Marine in Vietnam, and almost got killed more times than I could count. And you know what? I have the greatest respect for Jane Fonda. A great woman, and a great patriot. Have you ever seen "Coming Home"? She didn't make that film by accident.
 
 
+22 # Susan Fitch 2011-07-24 11:08
You are so right, Robert. All she did was want to stop a war, save some lies and bring about the truth.

Truth sayers very often get the raw end of the deal and Jane Fonda is truth sayer.

'And the truth shall set you free."
 
 
+91 # stephen w carson 2011-07-23 20:39
thank you jane from a resisting member of the 101st ABN DVN '63-'65.
 
 
+60 # lark3650 2011-07-23 20:48
I just finished reading L. Fletcher Prouty's book and I believe he gives a pretty accurate account of the tragedy of the Vietnam war. What they did to the people of Vietnam and our courageous young men is a crime....I mean a crime! Jane was used!
 
 
+16 # melody johnson 2011-07-24 09:24
Although coming from a staunch Republican background (in the day), I too believed she was used. Though not my favorite headline grabber, Jane Fonda did something most of us have NOT done-- following passion-- right or wrong-- not a bright light-bulb moment for her. That was then. Time to let go of the name calling pointing fingers and move forward... with a challenge for any of us to get involved and make a difference!
 
 
+15 # lin96 2011-07-24 15:40
Absolutely! Jane Fonda was one of the people who worked diligently to stop the war in Vietnam. She was outspoken and the establishment wanted to get rid of her. They found a way. More people than not were speaking out against the war. Many of which were killed like John Lennon, and many they said died of drug abuse, which has always remained questionable. Jane was an easy target to thwart the anti-war effort. There are lots of people out there who know this is the truth, just as there are those who were working for the establishment to ruin her. Look at the propanda the swiftboat vets put out to ruin John Kerry. Eisenhower warned us to watch out for the military complex. He wasn't kidding. They are the ones who kept that war going and did whatever they had to to to keep it going.
 
 
+6 # heraldmage 2011-07-26 16:07
and are now continuing to run our country into the ground with unpayable debt over $1 billion/day/war and foreign investment. All based on lies, all to keep building their wealth while driving the USA population into poverty, The 60 yrs of brainwashing has kept enemies around every corner preventing the people from realizing their are other economic policy that serve the interest of the people rather than maintain the feudal system, keeping wealth & power in the hands of the privileged
 
 
-28 # Stephen Bailey 2011-07-23 21:02
Jane, you were right but you played it wrong. You appeared to be giving comfort to the enemy. Wrong move. Stop whining. Let it go. We all screw up. Take consolation in history proved that you were right. Let go of the need for approval.
 
 
+48 # vitobonespur 2011-07-24 01:30
I beg your pardon...??? You're telling Jane Fonda to "Stop whining. Let it go..."??? It isn't she who has made this issue fester like a carbuncle on the GOP's ass. I suspect she "let it go" decades ago. The vitriolic right-wing veterans, who are pissed because they weren't allowed to win, are the ones who periodically, yet repeatedly, remind the public of (their version) of the events of 40 years ago. They are the ones who refuse to recognize that, as you say, "We all screw up." Whether or not Jane was in error at that particular point in history, only she can judge. So aim your criticism at the people who continually regurgitate their misplaced anger, not at Ms. Fonda.
 
 
+12 # NancyH 2011-07-24 07:12
Stephen Bailey gives sound advice. Jane can't control how people use and misuse her actions, only her response. I agree that long justifications only draw more fire. They won't convert her critics.
 
 
+2 # Bob Griffin 2011-07-25 12:22
While her responses won't 'convert her critics' they may give younger folk a chance to make up their own minds, with charges and countercharges by both sides available.
 
 
+29 # Ralph Averill 2011-07-24 02:53
The North Vietnamese and Viet Cong were not our enemies. The young Ho Chi Minh was an admirer of western democratic ideals until they wouldn't even let him in the building during the negotiations for the Treaty of Versaille at the end of World War I, the war to protect democracy. Except there would be no democracy for little yellow subjects of French colonial rule. Ho Chi Minh became a communist when he realized that the western democracies were racist hypocrits.
We invaded their country! The Gulf of Tonkin incident, used to justify the landing of US troops, was a lie! It never happened! It was all a great shining lie! 56,000 American dead. Over 3 million Asian dead in Viet Nam, Cambodia and Laos. More bombs dropped than all sides in both theaters in WW II! The intentional, systematic application of dioxin, (Agent Orange), on the forests of Southeast Asia, the greatest environmental crime in history! All of it so American war profiteers could make coffin-loads of money trying out new tools and methods of war. All of it based on lies, lies that continue to this day! The Vietnamese were not our enemies. But we sure were theirs!
 
 
+14 # goodsensecynic 2011-07-24 06:36
It is often forgotten that Ho Chi Minh was a "spy" for the OSS (later to become the CIA) behind enemy lines. Of course, the enemy were the Japanese at the time.

Ho's mistake (like that of the Arabs in WWI) was to believe Western promises that, when the Allies were victorious, they'd be rewarded with a free and independent Vietnamese/Palestinian state.

No such luck!

The British and French imperialists have much to explain and admit.
 
 
+3 # Doctoretty 2011-07-26 17:34
So-called Palestinians did not exist at that time. The promise was made to the Arabians.
 
 
-2 # billy bob 2011-07-27 17:33
The people who were invaded to create the country of Israel were Palestinians.
 
 
+10 # in deo veritas 2011-07-24 06:50
I spent 36 years teaching American and world History in high school and used every source of information including real history books to provide my students with facts rather than fiction. The textbooks that were foistered on us were a travesty. They were so lousy that my students were able to find innacuracies and downright lies in them. What a waste of the taxpeyers money! If those running the educational systems really cared they would provide the incentives to employ teachers who care and would go the extra mile instead of expecting more investment in buildings and technology to do the job. Textbooks are a big business for those who care only about profit and not about the damage they do. Also "teacher's editions" should be banned. If the individual is worth holding the job they should not need this crutch.
 
 
+11 # karenvista 2011-07-25 14:38
[quote name="in deo veritas"]I spent 36 years teaching American and world History in high school and used every source of information including real history books to provide my students with facts rather than fiction. The textbooks that were foistered on us were a travesty.

What an appropriate time to discuss this!

I am firmly convinced that the powers that be saw what happened when they actually allowed students to be educated and how they were affected by journalistic freedom. And they won't make those mistakes again.

I'm from Texas and we have the most reactionary textbooks in the country. Science and history are outlawed. You only need to know what the morons on the SBOE can agree to. Vietnam is why you have to "teach to the test" (cause there is only one right answer! No Discussion!! and all journalists have to be embedded with the troops so all we get are the official government stories. We're in the "no fact zone."
 
 
+2 # Never Again 2011-07-26 19:13
FANTASTIC post! My niece has a thoroughly abridged history book that leaves out all the "unpleasant" parts and teaches that there were no LOSERS in history, only people who "didn't win"!
Doesn't help, of course, that the book is less than a quarter-inch thick!
 
 
+8 # in deo veritas 2011-07-24 06:54
Great post! You know your history. Alesson that should have saved us from our present debacles if we had learned from it. Too many people, too many times, have been lied to by the military-industrial complex that Ike warned us about and we were too stupid to pay attention to. We have paid too much in blood and dollars already but unless the Pentagram is de-fanged and the corporate fascist war profiteers put away there will never be a moment's peace for any of us.
 
 
+4 # X Dane 2011-07-26 14:07
in deo veritas.
The truth is that it is "the military industrial, CONGRESSIONAL" complex Was that what Ike said in his farewell address?? Certainly the congress is guilty as hell. They want to keep the wars going because weapons are produced in their districts, so to hell with "the American people" as they love to proclaim.
IT IS ALL ABOUT MONEY.
 
 
+9 # karenvista 2011-07-25 14:27
Quoting
The North Vietnamese and Viet Cong were not our enemies. The young Ho Chi Minh was an admirer of western democratic ideals until they wouldn't even let him in the building during the negotiations for the Treaty of Versaille at the end of World War I, the war to protect democracy. Except there would be no democracy for little yellow subjects of French colonial rule.


Thank you for the absolute truth and what appears to be a much needed history lesson for a lot of people here. Ho Chi Minh absolutely believed in the American constitution and Bill of Rights and thought that WE believed that "All men are created equal." He did offer many times to collaborate with us but, as you say, we didn't believe that he and his people were equal so we supported the French and returned his country to colonial status (or tried to.) That was Vietnam.

All wars are begun as economic enterprises, period! The aggressor ALWAYS does it for economic reasons. Why would any young man or woman want to provide additional income, raw material or territory to another rich person or corporation? Think about it! Why would you give up life, or limb or your sanity to profit some greedy sack of $%&+?
 
 
-48 # lotuslover 2011-07-23 21:05
I have great respect for Ms Fonda's work as an actor and humanist. It was a big mistake for her to travel to North Vietnam and allow herself to be documented. It should be no surprise that after that horrific period in our history, she continues to be vilified by people whose lives were so changed by the conflict. Jane, you perhaps allowed yourself to be used by the North in furtherance of their goals. You weren't exactly a politican virgin and you were "choosing sides". Live with it. And know that many of us who thought the conflict was wrong, still had great respect for those who were asked or forced to fight it. And it was one thing to protest here in the streets --and quite another to travel to the heart of the country that was seen as our enemy. Let alone sit on an anti-aircraft wheapon, clapping and smiling. So sorry, your body of film work is wonderful and your awards rightly deserved. Your politics, in that period, sucked!
 
 
+23 # in deo veritas 2011-07-24 07:00
Sadly the politics of far too many people in this country then and still indeed suck! If that wasn't the case we wouldn't be in the mess we are in, morally and financially. Trust in government and the "American way of life" has led us to this day of reckoning. So has the deception of the public by the "news media" as exemplified by Murdoch and his scurvy crew. God gave us minds and souls and free will. If those are not used for the greater good we are doomed to a fate richly deserved.
 
 
+68 # Ken Hall 2011-07-23 21:09
Jane Fonda fought the MIC machine. She tried to better the lives of returning soldiers. She questioned authority in the name of democracy. She resisted the expansion of the US empire by military force. For these things, and the caring and grace she displayed while doing them, I respect her. A true patriot does not love his country, right or wrong, a true patriot loves his country when it is right and tries to change its course when it is wrong.
 
 
-1 # Never Again 2011-07-26 19:15
She may have done all that, but she did it in the wrong way, namely, basically playing at being an enemy soldier, and she should not be surprised if people reacted as if she WERE an enemy soldier/propagandist/etc.
 
 
+49 # Dapo 2011-07-23 21:13
She would always be my heroine. Her father was my hero. She is a true American, bold and kind-hearted. Her trip to Vietnam was the best thing any human being with good heart, compassionate, and loving should do. The war was the most criminal act of aggression towards poor nation. Jane Fonda wanted her beloved nation-the US to be a just loving nation. I welcome your courage my dear sister. May the Lord vindicate you amid evil men. I love you.
 
 
+62 # Peter Reagan 2011-07-23 21:41
Dear Jane. I was a draft resister during the VietNam war and thus a felon. I will never forget how grateful I was at the time that you took it on yourself to take the trip to Hanoi and I and my family will never forget your courage and forthrightness during this other horrible time in our history . We welcome your statement now, send you our undying appreciation and hope that in some small way we can all move this millstone together. You are so right that the barriers to true democracy and freedom of information are as challenging as they ever were and its great to be reminded of the true heroism you showed to truly support our troups and to support our truth. Best wishes out there.
 
 
+31 # billy bob 2011-07-23 22:55
Thank you for doing the right thing and TRULY fighting for your country.
 
 
+64 # Rick Levy 2011-07-23 21:45
Fonda was "swift boated" long before Kerry.
 
 
+25 # in deo veritas 2011-07-24 07:02
If anyone should be treated as the enemy it should be the lying bastard pawns of the Repugs-the swift-boaters!
 
 
+68 # Sully747 2011-07-23 21:55
NOW.. everybody knows the war was wrong. It took some a long time to figure it all out. jls USMC 1961-1965
 
 
-61 # Davidson Loehr 2011-07-23 22:05
Forty years before offering an explanation? Letting the story all veterans know -- about turning the soldiers' slips of paper to the North Vietnamese, resulting in the torture/death of at least one POW? I don't buy it. Jane Fonda had all the money and connections she needed to try and sell this story forty years ago, instead letting it fester and fuel hatred, and the belief that she was a traitor who should have been tried for it. If this story were true that she's now peddling -- for some reason -- she could have brought it out in the trial, so the prosecution could challenge it. Then she could have been either acquitted or imprisoned. Veterans would have hoped for the second verdict, but if she really had any proof to match this new story, her acquittal could have -- would have, I think -- cleared the air in some important ways no longer possible.
 
 
+7 # Florianne Wild 2011-07-24 01:43
Interesting to see that photo again. It is cropped differently from the image to which filmmakers Jean-Luc Godard and Jean-Pierre Gorin devoted an entire documentary film, "Letter to Jane" in the early 1970's, intended as a critique of the Hollywood star system. Lots of info about this via Google.
 
 
+37 # Glen 2011-07-24 03:43
Fonda has been interviewed and made statements all through the years about this anti-war episode in her life. As was commented on earlier in this thread, she was up against the U.S. government, which has far more power than you evidently recognize. The U.S. government and those associated have destroyed a lot of lives.
 
 
+37 # sfreeman 2011-07-24 05:07
Sir, you have not been paying attention. She HAS said these things before, numerous times. She may have "pulled it all together" for the first time in this article, but there is nothing in her article I had not heard her say on multiple occasions going back many years. You are going to believe what you are going to believe. No one but you can change that. But neither can you change the facts, and the documentation of her previous statements is there.
 
 
+26 # Homer Peters 2011-07-24 05:30
Mr. Loehr, great comment!

As in all wars I don't believe we knew the truth about Vietnam, then....or now.

History is filled with war hawks, those who are personally never in harm's way but will gladly send the sons and daughters of their countrymen to do the "job" while they fill their pocketbooks with the bloody profits of war.

Mr. Levy's comment above, "Fonda was 'swift boated' long before Kerry" is the best contemporary summary I've seen of this sad page in US history.
 
 
+12 # in deo veritas 2011-07-24 07:06
With the Pentagram (not misspelling but what iot actually is)running the government for decades they never would let the truth out. Still don't. They lied to get us into the war-that says it all.
 
 
+33 # RFBeltran 2011-07-23 23:06
What trial? If there was any evidence to support the stories against her, she would have been brought to trial. Making this statement then would not have brought a trial about. You look for her to provide proof she did nothing wrong. Sorry, it doesn't work that way. It is impossible to prove a negative. it is only possible to prove false evidence to be false. Where's the evidence? No one can bring charges because there is none -only phony allegations and shadowy witnesses that disappear when the light shies on them. Just like the Swiftboat Veterans for "Truth."
 
 
+6 # billy bob 2011-07-24 06:25
Thank you for that response. It was the best one I've heard yet.
 
 
+28 # Dion Giles 2011-07-23 23:12
Anti-American? America and its few allies were committing a war crime, not all that long after Germany and Japan committed a war crime for which the ring-leaders were tried and punished. The crime is aggression: going armed into a country which has attacked nobody, and killing to suppress resistance. I was the wrong age to be drafted for Vietnam, but had I been ordered to serve I would probably have done so - and thus been complicit in a war crime - because I wouldn't have had the moral courage to say no. Ms Fonda did, and like everyone else who resisted the rape of Vietnam instead of participating in it has just cause for pride.
 
 
+24 # Monty Gee 2011-07-23 23:22
Some of these letters show how prejudice always trumps fact!
 
 
+28 # Dr. Amy L. Beam 2011-07-24 00:23
Jane, I supported you then and I support you even more now. Thank you for spending a lifetime speaking out against war and in behalf of vets. Amy L. Beam, Ed.D.
 
 
+32 # Romesh Bhattacharji 2011-07-24 00:30
I was old enough and close enough to Vietnam to feel the hope Jane Fonda (then derisively called by some wolves as Hanoi Jane) had raised with her tour of Vietnam. How she was hounded by ill informed US propagandists.

Expectedly her contributions will be still angering the new breed of neo cons in the US.

I hope Americans will not take another 40 years to understand her. People like her and Joan Baez are diamonds in a pig stye.
 
 
+48 # itchyvet 2011-07-24 00:35
Jane had it dead to rights. How many Americans know it was thanks to the Viet Cong, and specificaly, Ho Chi Minh, that thousands of U.S. air men's lives were saved from the Japanese ?
How many Americans KNOW, the U.S. supplied Ho with everything he needed to combat the Japanese and rescue the downed U.S. fliers ?
How many Americans KNOW, Ho believed the U.S. would support him in the League Of Nations (pre U.N.) in his efforts to kick the French out and self determination ?
How many Americans KNOW their country STABBED old Ho in the back, handed Vietnam back to the French after WW 2, and the murdering French increased their rate of murdering the Vietnamese ?
Clearly, even today after 40 years, there's still a hell of a lot, Americans are ignorant of their Govt's complicity in their murderous rampage thru an innocent country.
Talk about War Crimes, what the U.S. did in Vietnam was one MAJOR WAR CRIME.
And I'm a Vietnam vet. 69-70
 
 
+14 # in deo veritas 2011-07-24 07:16
And as was mentioned in another post we stabbned Ho and the Vietnamese in the back way back in 1919. The versailles Conference in addition to guaranteeing another war thanks to the french and Brits creating intolerable conditions for Germany to indure-also expanded their colonial ambitions through the mandate syatem in the Middle east. Look what that has given us! The racist Woodrow Wilson helped them defeat any hope for racial equality for groups like the Vietnamese being included in the Versailles treaty. Those who were victims of this US-UK FR conspiracy whould not have been expected to forgive or forget.
 
 
+30 # Debbie Watson 2011-07-24 01:11
Being the wife of a combat wounded 100% disabled vietnam veteran, I have to admit I am deeply conflicted about this subject since I am also a fan of Ms. Fonda's. My husband was also with the 101st airborne division, I believe he said it was called the "screaming eagles" from 68 through 69 till he was wounded. His number one complaint was always that picture of Jane sitting on the anti-aircraft gun. He said imagine how you would feel if you saw someone doing that and had a son killed by that same weapon. I remember that video and photo, and it always was the point of contention for me as well. That was the one mistake she did make. So I do understand both sides of the argument. I don't believe this article will change anything for Ms Fonda, the people who misjudge her will continue to do so, and likewise those who support her will continue to do that as well. It hasn't changed my mind, I think she tried to do a good thing, but being human, made some mistakes along the way.
 
 
+30 # rblee 2011-07-24 01:41
Mr. Loehr exhibits the kind of confusion that seems to afflict many people these days. The propaganda merchants have so fouled the air that it’s almost impossible to make out any truth in the media atmosphere. Jane is responding to the latest attacks on her which are really aimed at President Obama. She has dealt with this issue many times over the years, but you can’t just spend your life defending against this kind of ugliness. What was ugly and criminal was the war and the leaders who pushed it. Our fight “against Communism” killed about 3 million SE Asians. Nixon’s bombing of Cambodia so weakened the society that the maniac Pol Pot was able to take over and institute an even larger massacre. (BTW, the Vietnamese invaded Cambodia to STOP this insanity.) All of this was for WHAT? At this moment I’m wearing underwear made in Vietnam. Maybe that was the reason for the war: cheaper labor for jockey shorts manufacturers! As a Vietnam vet myself, I applaud Jane for her involvement. The swift-boaters, Obama haters and self-proclaimed patriots can all go to hell.
 
 
+6 # in deo veritas 2011-07-24 07:19
And it is up to all REAL Americans to work for the day when they can be sent there instead of being willing accomplices through apathy or cowardice to let them continue to drag us into their slimy corrupt world.
 
 
+22 # Peacedragon 2011-07-24 02:40
Thank you for all you did back then. I turned in my draft card, but all it got me was an optional interview with a couple of FBI guys.
 
 
+3 # silenus 2011-07-24 03:57
After her zero-gravity strip in Barbarella, I can forgive her anything.
 
 
+1 # billy bob 2011-07-24 06:33
So you can forgive her for being a peace monger and using her First Amendment rights because she looks great naked?
 
 
+42 # Stephan Kass 2011-07-24 04:02
Americans killed over one million Vietnamese in a war the U.S. government started to prevent democratic elections in Vietnam. The average age of the American soldiers who fought in this war was 19. They were manipulated by the leadership of both parties and the senior commanders of the U.S. military into committing war crimes on a wholesale basis. The bombing of civilian populations by U.S. pilots was completely unjustifiable under the Geneva Conventions. Does anyone think that a Vietnamese farmer feels any differently about the murder of his family than an American would? Is there any greater intrinsic worth to an American life than there is to a Vietnamese life? Jane Fonda supported our troops by trying to put an end to a war that was murdering their souls. And she supported fellow human beings in Vietnam by trying to end a war that was murdering their people. Shooting down a warplane that was wreaking death on women, children, the elderly and male non-combattants is not criminal behaviour. Under the circumstances, I have no problem with Ms. Fonda showing solidarity with the people of Vietnam by posing at a Vietnamese anti-aircraft battery. By doing so, she put these moral issues squarely in the face of the American people. It took great moral courage- the same kind of moral courage that ended slavery and segregation and is the real glory of our nation.
 
 
+7 # billy bob 2011-07-24 06:35
WOW! That was an awesome comment! You put it beautifully. I never thought of it quite like that.
 
 
+16 # in deo veritas 2011-07-24 07:23
It is to our shame that over the past decade there has been no REAL public outcry against the war crimes of the Bush regime and a DEMAND to get the hell out of Iraq and Afghanistan. Instead of defusing Al-Quaeda our continued presence has added to it's adherents. We are willing accomplices to whatever happens now.
 
 
+5 # billy bob 2011-07-24 11:41
There HAS been a public outcry, at least as big as the protest to Vietnam. The difference is that it isn't reported.
 
 
0 # Never Again 2011-07-26 19:19
Well, if a terrorist sympathizer decides to pose with terrorists THESE days, an Apache helicopter will take the lot of them out!
 
 
0 # billy bob 2011-07-27 10:31
Sometimes those helicopters shoot entire hotels filled with journalists brave enough not to be embedded.

Also, while we're at it, Jane Fonda was a "sympathizer" of the troops. Many of the troops were against the war as well. I guess our government should have shot them too, right?

What is it about America that you hate the most? The fact that many Americans suffer from the delusion that they are free to think for themselves and actually challenge our government?
 
 
+1 # billy bob 2011-07-27 10:45
Please read "Hardy's" comment below. What would you say to him about his "sympathies"? Is it possible that your attempt to brand everyone who disagrees with you as a "terrorist sympathizer" was shallow and un-American?
 
 
+11 # Lee Black 2011-07-24 07:45
Stephan, Valid points. I remember one of the propaganda motto's at the time was, "they just don't feel the same about their children as we do." There is so much propaganda in 'selling a war'. Each generation seems to have to learn all over again. The boys (and now girls) take off to cheers, drums and horns and come back shattered or in body bags.

And again we see the devastation of millions of innocents in those war torn countries.

War should be a last choice, too often it is not.
 
 
+8 # billy bob 2011-07-24 11:43
This is why the Pentagon spends so much of our tax dollars funding the video game industry, and why so much of our tax money is spent on commercials for the military.
 
 
+12 # sfreeman 2011-07-24 08:53
Sir, while the number of Viet Namese killed is correct in one sense, it is incorrect in another. IF we include, as we should, the Viet Namese killed by the French because we backed them over the Viet Namese people and paid over 75% of the monetary cost of that war, plus those who died in the interim because we forced a partitioning of Viet Nam into 2 countries, plus the Viet Namese who died during the war, plus the Cambodians and Laotians who died, along with the Americans, Thai, Filipino, South Koreans, New Zealanders and Australians, the total body count is around 6 million. Six million Jews died in Hitler's concentration camps (along with 4 million "undesirables" who usually are overlooked in that body count). What does the world say of Adolph Hitler. With 6 million dead in the Southeast Asian wars, what should the world say of the United States. For the record, I am a combat veteran of the Viet Nam war, serving as an advisor to the South Viet Namese Airborne division, 1969-1970.
 
 
+29 # lcarrier 2011-07-24 04:11
It's been proven that once people get beliefs stuck in their heads, even when there is credible counter-evidence, they resist that evidence even more fiercely. For years right-wing war mongers have spread the tale about Fonda's "treason," the same as they spread the tales about John Kerry's "swift-boat" cowardice.

The reason Fonda is again denying these stories is that the right-wingers are at it again. They are the lying traitors.
 
 
-26 # pprrospero 2011-07-24 04:15
What about the antiaircraft gun, Jane?
 
 
+1 # lin96 2011-07-24 15:45
She addressed that in her autobiography and I'm sure she's mentions it again in this book. She was used.
 
 
-24 # Randall VanValkenbur 2011-07-24 04:46
If it's true, I'm sorry. However, I would question it because she has taken all these years to come out with it and because I remember her making some lame apologies about ten years ago which she wouldn't have done. I don't, at this point, believe her. Maybe I'll change my mind if she comes out with more information or proof.
 
 
+15 # granny 2011-07-24 06:31
And what proof would you need? Do you also deny the Holocaust? And the Holocaust against Native Americans, an the very soil we now call America? "My mind is made up. Don't confuse me with the truth." Poor Randall!
 
 
+5 # lin96 2011-07-24 15:49
Did you ever try to fight the government? She wrote about it in her autobiography that is worth reading. John Kerry had no luck going against the swiftboat ads that were competely a lie, which means this is how long you can be villafied if the government wants to keep you in your place.
 
 
+1 # Never Again 2011-07-26 19:22
If they don't like you, they won't discredit you, they'll just blackball you.
Chuck Baldwin said he'd close the border and MEANT it, and was never heard again. Thoroughly disillusioned, he went from a Presidential candidate to a preacher.
 
 
+1 # billy bob 2011-07-27 10:32
What do you think of the people who swiftboated John Kerry?
 
 
-3 # Never Again 2011-07-27 12:59
Fake veterans are everywhere. Desperate vets sell their medals, any idiot can buy them, and if you go on base, you can buy most badges WITHOUT the credentials to.
I don't like that Kerry was swiftboated, but he inflated his own credentials, too, so...Would saying "SOMETIMES Two Wrongs DO Make A Right" be too cliche?

Think of it: If I tell you right now, "I'm a Vietnam Vet", then you'd look up my age, and feel so disgusted about being lied to, you'd never believe a damn thing I tell you ever again, past, present, or future!
I know "everyone inflates credentials" on resumes, but that still doesn't make it right nor trustworthy!
 
 
-1 # billy bob 2011-07-27 17:38
I had a feeling you felt that way. So, to you, republican veterans are real veterans, and Democratic veterans are fake ones.

It's good that you gave us some insight into why you make your comments. Just as I expected, they're nothing more than thinly veiled partisan attacks against anyone deemed too liberal to fit your requirements. You'd HATE my veteran relatives, just like you hate many of the veterans who've commented on this thread.

That's ok. We know where you stand. Keep towing the party line!!!!
 
 
+1 # Foxtrottango 2011-07-31 08:08
The fact that he did not respond to those war criminal swiftboaters on the payroll of the Republican Party only gave the American People the notion that he perhaps had something to hide!

I, myself was surprised and angered to a relucntness to respond on the accusations those swiftboaters hurled at him.

The outcome of the election were the results of not defending himself.
 
 
+47 # Jill of York 2011-07-24 04:56
In 1968 my father was in Military Intelligence, Saigon and I was a freshman in college. I learned about the Gulf of Tonkin, My Lai Massacre and a myriad of other lies and atrocities our government perpetrated to get their message front and center to carry out their misdeeds. When Americans discovered the truth and turned against the war our government scapegoated our soldiers. Vietnam and its aftermath destroyed my family. We divided along political lines from which we never fully recovered.

War destroys families. So for me war is personal. I learned to look beneath the lies and propaganda fostered on us by corporate media and the Chickenhawks in Washington.

I thought we’d learned the lessons of Vietnam but we have not. Americans now turn a blind eye to our illegal immoral imperial wars and allow the slaughter of thousands of civilians fought by the few for the benefit of Halliburton, KBR and other corporations.

Many Americans glorify war. This is because they have never served, never had any experience with it. As for you Ms. Fonda, I have always admired you and your bravery. You are an American patriot and I honor your service.
 
 
+25 # Ken Hall 2011-07-24 07:00
Jill: Wonderful comment! I came of age during the buildup to the VN war and my life was changed in the same way yours was. In my youth I had been an unthinking, uncritical citizen, and thus an unwitting tool of US imperialism. The examples of people such as Jane Fonda, Staughton Lynd, the Berrigans, and the many other principled, committed protesters helped open my eyes to US imperialism and the anti-democratic influence of the MIC on the US gov't. Millions of Vietnamese and Cambodians, and 58,000 US citizens were killed in a war of colonial aggression. I, too, thought US citizens had learned to be more skeptical of the motives of the US gov't/MIC but there's been an unfortunate failure of democracy in the US.
 
 
+14 # Interested Observer 2011-07-24 08:14
All that was learned from Vietnam is to abandon the draft and embed the press. Remove the compelling and selfish motive for protest of an otherwise self-indulgent and apathetic people, and control the media as much as possible. That was the lesson of Vietnam as it appears to me today. As to the media I have seen no better example as the cascade of affirmations of the last 10 years of U.S. war policy streaming from the death of Osama Bin Laden, not on Fox, but on the so-called liberal channels, as if this one minor outcome fully and unconditionally justified all the rest.

Is it a failure of democracy if in fact a majority of the people do crave their material comforts, or fear for them in the continuing globalization, that they sincerely, if erroneously, embrace the rhetoric and policies of exceptionalism, triumphalism, fear and, at the fringe, a critical role in a coming apocalypse? It is a failure of mind and spirit but not of democracy when all it means is we have been outvoted after being out-Foxed. The virtues of democracy unfortunately do not include virtue itself nor does it endow its citizens with any special collective intelligence. It was a pure democracy that condemned Socrates to death.
 
 
+36 # fredboy 2011-07-24 05:18
Thank you, Jane.

I am still waiting for a clear and valid explanation that justifies our invasion of Vietnam. And Iraq.
 
 
+7 # minkdumink 2011-07-24 17:53
money.
 
 
+3 # DurangoKid 2011-07-27 11:46
War is itself a profit center, whether or not the objective attained. The objective is usually the labor, resources, capital, markets, strategic territory, etc. that has attracted the attention of the moneyed elites.
 
 
-23 # Interested Observer 2011-07-24 05:28
Even assuming the best about the intentions and ideology of Jane Fonda and others since, it was a mistake then to do what she did, and remains a mistake today to emulate it as did Sean Penn. A high profile politicized visit to a hostile capital can serve only to undercut or entirely obliterate the intended message message and possibly generate new support for proponents of the war. It had the additional disadvantage of putting Fonda in a position to used for propaganda by both sides, if as she claims she was maneuvered to that anti-aircraft battery photo op while the uses by the right are obvious and continue to serve them to this day. There are ways and places to express the right of free speech and it is never on the home ground of people, or in the company of leaders, that the people one is trying reach probably regard as "the enemy" in the midst of a conflict or war hysteria. Doing so is both counter-productive and is more likely to provoke and justify actual suppression of rights and create public support for it, than accomplish anything else. Such stunts are a lose-lose proposition, then and now, if the intent is to inform and broaden opposition to unsound and immoral war policies.
 
 
+23 # granny 2011-07-24 06:34
Interested Observer would probably have us all be VERY cautious. Don't do ANYTHING that might be misinterpreted, might now work out as planned, and might possibly cost us time, money, comfort, reputation. . . .To quote the philosopher, "The only thing necessary for the triumph of EVIL is for good men (and women) to do nothing.

OK, IO, do nothing, and see where that gets you!
 
 
-5 # Interested Observer 2011-07-24 07:17
I don't quite see that taking the discussion to "enemy" territory and standing side by side with bloody tyrants in a photo op is required to doing "something". The liars will deliberately misinterpret and distort anyway. Why make it so easy? Unlimited exercise of free speech mainly on US territory is sufficient to do all that can be constructively done. Photo ops in Baghdad and Hanoi are great service to those you claim to oppose. Self-swift-boating is just stupid.
 
 
+7 # billy bob 2011-07-24 11:46
Speaking of bloody tyrants, who were the "good guys" in the Vietnam War?
 
 
+11 # Texan 4 Peace 2011-07-24 18:44
IO, visiting the country of the so-called "enemy" is probably one of the most useful things peace activists can do in time of war. There's little doubt that the constant stream of "unembedded" observers, journalists and peace activists to Central America helped prevent a U.S. invasion of that region in the 80's. It certainly wasn't Reagan's moral scruples.
 
 
+1 # Never Again 2011-07-26 19:23
Isn't that the idea of Political Correctness? NEVER take a stand that could offend someone, or lose your career?
 
 
+1 # billy bob 2011-07-27 10:34
"Political Correctness" is a term that has no meaning. The right defines it one way, and the left defines it the opposite.

You're the one suggesting we should have shot Jane Fonda for speaking her mind and posing for a picture.

Isn't THAT the perfect definition of "political correctness"?
 
 
-2 # Never Again 2011-07-27 13:03
When I was a kid, my Dad told me NEVER to point a gun, even a toy gun, at cops. I would hope to God (Or whatever you believe in) that our soldiers merit at LEAST that much respect!

I'm not mentioning "Political Correctness", I never called her racist (In fact, a few other posters here called the SOLDIERS racist!)

I'm talking about acting like it's fun to be an enemy soldier. Great! Be an enemy, see how far that gets you!
She has never APOLOGIZED, even this rambling article is not an apology, it MIGHT be a defense of her actions, but it's so meandering, I can't tell. She only brings it up again to bury it, usually just before she's about to star in a movie she wants people to see, like "Monster-in-Law"?
 
 
+9 # billy bob 2011-07-24 06:39
You're right that she was used to further the dishonest aims of propagandists. Are you aware that some propaganda has been going on in the United States for the past few decades?
 
 
-3 # Interested Observer 2011-07-24 07:18
No, I completely missed it, obviously.
 
 
+6 # billy bob 2011-07-24 11:49
Obviously.

Well let me ask, why did we invade Iraq? Why are we still there? Why did we invade Afghanistan? Why are we still there? Why didn't we invade Saudi Arabia? Why are they one of our closest allies? Why don't we invade all countries with ruthless dictators, but no oil?

Obviously, you completely missed it. Obviously, you didn't bother to look.
 
 
+3 # Interested Observer 2011-07-24 14:35
A dull non-sequitur on your part missing the obvious sarcasm. We were not discussing Iraq or neo-cons, but the folly of exercising free-speech in a worse than useless way like Fonda and Penn. We invaded Iraq because PNAC wanted it, and had since the end of the first gulf war. They their born-again stooge hungering to look historic as president and one of their leaders as vice president, had packed the cabinet with corrupt fellow ideologues when 9/11 dropped into their laps like manna from heaven enabling their outside man, Roger Ailes, to do the rest. It was a stupid and expensive idea but there it is. As I recall there was a significant Al-Qaeda presence in a rigid fundamentalist ruled Afghanistan not withstanding that war may not be a very good answer but at least it had superficial justification in facts not blatant lies. No oil in North Korea, and evidence that they might not be the pushovers that Iraqi forces were, and there is that nasty old problem of China, that has taken a dim view of U.S. operations in bordering states since 1950. It is actually all quite dirty and quite complicated, and most Americans are not ready to make the sacrifices necessary to get by on a cleaner program, and so China and the Saudis and whoever else is holding our paper virtually own us today. There isn't space to hit all your favorite talking points every post.
 
 
+6 # Interested Observer 2011-07-24 14:58
America is only interested in wars that it thinks it can win quickly, easily (if not cheaply) with a very low U.S. loss of life (the loss of other life is of no apparent matter), preferably also promoting some economic advantage in the bargain. Anything close to a even fight would require broad based sacrifice, a draft and facing the reality of war honestly. Can't have that. All rhetoric about advancing freedom is pure hogwash, as the U.S. has repeatedly overthrown freely chosen governments in favor of despots whenever expedient, usually to suit the desires of large corporate of financial interests (and in the case of the Marshall plan, nearly a singular exception to the rule, created two strong democratic republics when that was also expedient. Aren't you glad the cold war killed the Morgenthau Plan, the war crime as answer to war crimes?) and that includes Saddam Hussein ("the presentable young man") until he fell out of favor or got too far out of line, or the right wing just got too crazy. The old dirty work was at least a credible sort of realpolitik, neo-con thinking seems to be surrealpolitik. Our current presence in Afghanistan seems to be the old "hearts and minds" bad habit not fully kicked in 1975. No oil, so what is it? I don't see them coming around for us any more than for previous uninvited guests, they will outlast us. A grotesque show.
 
 
+3 # karenvista 2011-07-25 17:27
[quote name="Interested Observer"] The old dirty work was at least a credible sort of realpolitik, neo-con thinking seems to be surrealpolitik. Our current presence in Afghanistan seems to be the old "hearts and minds" bad habit not fully kicked in 1975. No oil, so what is it?

Supposedly Afghanistan has trillions in mineral wealth, but while we weren't paying attention, which is most of the time, they have signed a contract with the Chinese to mine gigantic finds of copper and other minerals.

Our success in the "hearts and minds" operation is about as successful as it was in Vietnam.

I agree with everything you said in this last post and I LOVE surrealpolitik! That's the best description of our foreign policy delusions I've ever heard.

I did want to mention though that all our madness since the CIA's overthrow of Salvador Allende's democratically elected government in Chile has been accompanied by right-wing Chicago School of Economics, Milton Freidman directed attacks on the people of every country through the destruction and privatization of their economies and thus, the destruction of their communities. It is usually implemented by violence, imprisonment, torture and murder as in Chile, Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay, etc. It's part of surrealpolitik.
 
 
+1 # billy bob 2011-07-26 06:02
Karen, I hope you continue posting on RSN.
 
 
+3 # Interested Observer 2011-07-24 06:59
I expect to receive net negative on this from the "St. Jane" audience of this thread. Note it says "mistake" not moral wrong, treason etc. Merely an ill-conceived blunder, a self-made PR disaster, a non-starter in any useful opposition to bad policy. Kerry, for example, made his protest on US soil, and after his voluntary service. He was swift-boated by a lying right, not self-swift-boated as is the case with Fonda and Penn. Assuming the goal to GAIN support and change minds, such PR stunts are worse than useless.
 
 
+2 # billy bob 2011-07-24 11:50
Maybe it wasn't a p.r. stunt at all.
 
 
+3 # Interested Observer 2011-07-24 13:43
It was still an impulsive, naive and counter-productive exercise, and the latter might have been guessed before hand. Penn, at least should have known better, assuming he has a grip on reality. There is also the aspect of sheer narcissistic overestimation of one's importance, a trait not exactly unknown in show biz (or corporate, or political life for that matter). But answer this, did Jane Fonda's event help or hurt the anti-war movement at the time. It seemed to me at the time (age 19), that it did no good and probably did harm. Walter Cronkite ultimately had more impact than she did where it mattered. The admiration of the choir does not bring in the new converts. Isn't radical nostalgia a lovely thing?
 
 
+4 # Dion Giles 2011-07-25 07:58
Ms Fonda may have alienated opinion among Americans who regard America as special, not bound by the rules applying to everyone else, but anyone aware of the much bigger world outside the USA may be interested to know that Ms Fonda, associating herself with the brave people defending Vietnam - including AA artillery aimed at airborne murderers - was a major PR success outside US borders.
 
 
+28 # minkdumink 2011-07-24 05:33
not much as changed,most americans love war and they are the ones who never had to fight one.I was a Marine in Vietnam,it was a total waste.My son was a force recon marine,the baddest of the bad,Iraq,and 2 tours in afghanistan.He said it was'' a waste of time money and lives,that we arent doing anything to help anyone and was all geared to keep it going''he said''remember what you told me about vietnam? same thing here''. People dont want to hear that,they want parades ,and the flag, and fireworks.They want to hear ''we are winning'' We know the truth of it.
 
 
+7 # Lulie 2011-07-24 09:56
It seems like these days, people don't even care to hear "we are winning" -- they just don't want to hear about it all. Let "other people go fight the senseless wars; we'll go to the mall."
The Iraq and Afghanistan wars probably would have gone a lot differently if we still had the draft. I suspect they would've ended long before this.
 
 
+17 # Linda S 2011-07-24 05:58
I first learned about this story from my brother who served in the military stationed in Korea DMZ but during Bush II's Iraq War. He is filled with hatred of Jane Fonda due to this account and nearly spat out the story to me, blaming me as much as Jane for the torture of the soldiers. My response was that if she did that, it was wrong, but that I found it highly unlikely that a peace activist would ever intentionally cause anyone to be tortured. In my brother's mind, the story justifies his hatred of those who are critical of U.S. military policy. It also fuels damaging anger in his soul. I'm glad to read of her account. I find it credible and have forwarded it to my bro. I hope it helps him but more likely he will just reject it, preferring to keep the anger.
 
 
+8 # Lee Black 2011-07-24 07:54
Linda, I can feel your pain. I hope you and your brother can find your way to the underlying family feeling.
 
 
+8 # lin96 2011-07-24 15:58
Many soldiers were brainwashed as a result of that war and most likely other wars as well. (Re: Movie - The Manchurian Candidate) I'm told Vietnam is like a resort today with heavy US investments. It would be interesting to see who really benefited from that war and how much money they have made since.
 
 
+9 # jls 2011-07-24 06:00
Ms. Fonda...Jane: You are cool. Always have been cool and always will be cool. Idiots have always been idiots and always will be idiots. Stay cool ;)
 
 
+16 # SchoonerScotty 2011-07-24 06:02
I was a teenager during our Vietnam War. Yes, the French had been there first, when Vietnam was an early French Colony, to provide raw materials to the mother country, mostly natural resources. While a high school student, I picked up some information flyers from anti-Vietnam protesters and brought them in to our high school government teacher. He said, "Yes, many of the points of the protestors are right! Western Petroleum companies and other organizations that wanted to control and capitalize on the natural resources wanted control of the country. Approximately one million Christian Vietnamese emigrated from the North to the South, and more would have followed, had Ho Chi Minh allowed them.
Ho Chi Minh wanted a united country, under Communism so our leaders, subscribers of the domino theory, believed that if Vietnam fell to Communism so would surrounding countries.
Jane Fonda and hundreds of thousands of anti-war protestors wanted us out since the war (police action) was nothing like WWII. The protestors were always against the war, NOT against the troops! The right winged extremists, who perpetuate these hateful lies, are the same ilk as the anti-John Kerry swiftboat liars. Studies reveal that overall, the conservatives tend towards out-right lying much more than liberals. Many right-winger politicians live hypocritical double lives, lambasting others!
 
 
+8 # Lee Black 2011-07-24 07:56
It's my understanding that Ho Chi Minh even wrote a constitution based on the U.S. constitution.
 
 
+4 # Ronald Christopher 2011-07-24 11:49
Not true. However he did visit our governent to get help in forming a constitution resembling ours, but when he was turned down, he turned toward the communist and formed his government based on theirs.
 
 
-7 # JSF 2011-07-24 06:12
"trainings " with an "s" is not a word - it is uncountable noun. Luv Ya Jane, but where's the editor?
 
 
-16 # gerald williams 2011-07-24 06:24
Fonda, more effective as a shameless opportunist than as an actor, hams it up on any political or social "stage" in a frantic attempt to gain the kind of recognition that her talented father deservedly enjoyed. She can neither act nor lie convincingly. Give it a rest, Jane.
 
 
+14 # options_plus@hotmail.com 2011-07-24 07:15
I remember Jane Fonda very well from that period in the early 1970's. I never understood why she allowed those lies and distortions about her conduct to have credence by her silence. I can only assume bad advice. I was within 20 feet of Jane Fonda when she gave her imassioned speech at a huge Washington rally and detracted from her message by being strident and inappropriately dressed (her braless t-shirt was a significant distraction. again, poor judgement.

In everything else all of what Ms. Fonda has said here rings true to what I know and experienced. Its a bit late, but about time she speak out.I

made my own trip to South Vietnam and would have gone to the North if I had had the opportunity. Viet Nam was always a losing war for the United States, even some of our leaders (notably McNamara) of that era acknowledged this well after the fact.

I started to serve Viet Era Veterans in the early 1970's in response to our despicable treatment of our returning soldiers and continue toserve veterans damaged by that war.
 
 
+11 # Don Thomann 2011-07-24 07:20
ALL wars are "wrong" (evil, stupid, inexcusable - take your pick)
And, ALL who stand up and say so, will be discredited. That's the way the U.S. military-industrial complex has decided to handle it. IF ever enough U.S. citizens stand up to this barbarian complex THEN they will bring out the guns, in the sanctimonious name of "freedom!"
 
 
+2 # roger guffey 2011-07-24 07:20
I grew up in the Vietnam era and I remember hundreds of thousands of protestors condemning the war in many different ways. While Fonda’s intention may have been well-intentioned, the image of her sitting in an anti-aircraft gun laughing gleefully while pretending to shoot down US planes with their pilots is the one that stuck with people. I notice that she does not want to talk about that as it shows her as a traitor giving support and assistance to US forces. All I can say is what the hell was she thinking?
 
 
+3 # lin96 2011-07-24 16:00
That was their plan. To use her and thwart the efforts of the anti-war movement which many associated Jane Fonda because of her celebrity status.
 
 
+18 # gussie1 2011-07-24 07:23
There are 10's of thousands of Vietnam veterans in VA hospitals,livin g in apartments and living homeless nearby these treatment facilities. Most are now in their late 50's and 60's. How about getting up and out for an hour and paying a visit, handing out a $10 bill, or bringing a wildflower to these mostly abandoned folks who lost their freedom to live as they hoped in America. We can all be part of the healing process even now -- for soliers, for ourselves.
 
 
+3 # Gary in Midwest 2011-07-24 07:31
Jane, you still don't get it. You didn't then in 1969 and you're no closer o the truth even today. The wars since World War II were against the American taxpayer, plain and simple, as said so well earlier, for the benefit of Haliburton and KBR which had different names then but the same identical purpose. You should have mobilized opinion against war profiteering and not the silly on-the-surface reasons of imperialism which is just a means to an end -- enhancing the bottom line!
 
 
+14 # michael herrick 2011-07-24 07:39
Nobody seems to remember Ike telling us don't oil the war machine. since there was no oil in Vietnam, they used the commie card to reap giant profits. You know there is something past the end of your nose. 1600 people lived in the little town of Chester Ca., eight of the boys from there went down including my cousin, most were stoned at the time of their deaths. I don't think in the current conficts there is as much dope being used as in Vietnam. Not much sex available in the sand. But in Vietnam there was plenty sex-drugs-rock n roll. What better way to occupy the minds of the Kids fighting. Todays soldiers are more mature got kids and wives back home so they are more grounded. So we are wasting our time upping or downing Jane. We shud be focusing our attention on the Assholes that are pushing these wars. Now this is only my opinion. Mike from gold creek
 
 
-4 # bigkahuna671 2011-07-24 07:50
Why did Fonda wait until now to present her reasons for going to Vietnam and for opposing the war? Her opposition I can understand, but going over? What did she expect to find? Did she really think the North Vietnamese were going to be upfront and honest with her? Could it be she was used just as the troops in 'Nam were? If so, why wasn't she smart enough to see it? My problem with this whole appeal by her is that it seems too slick, too contrived. After all this time, I feel little emotion over my 21 months in Vietnam, other than the emptiness over my fallen friends. That we, the Marines (I was one - 1/5 all the way), soldiers, sailors, and airmen, were used by our govt is a fact. Why couldn't she do a better job of organizing back home if she was so sickened by the war? Surely, someone with her contacts could have done that, but no, doesn't seem so. I find this whole thing nothing more than a blatant attempt at making herself a bigger victim than the men and women who served. Oh, and by the way, her daddy didn't land at Normandy or hop any islands. Great actor - right on! War hero - give me a break. Jane, you can't rewrite the past, although it seems you're trying to cloud what you did. It's over and done with. Who cares now? Get more botox or whatever you former celebs do and quit trying to use us, the vets, to get back in the public limelight!
 
 
+2 # lin96 2011-07-24 16:03
She wasn't the only one going there. She explains that she was going there to take mail and bring mail home from the POW's. She addressed that in her autobiography and I'm sure she does in this book too.
 
 
+6 # Beth Sager 2011-07-24 08:17
Back in the 80s we had a speaker at a professional women's club who had been a POW in Vietnam. One arm was shorter than the other due to being shot down but having no medical care for the two years he was held in Hanoi. He recounted the story of the scrap of papers which Fonda had allegedly passed to the Vietcong. He had not been there, but was merely repeating an urban legend. During the Vietnam war I was a teen in high school. My hobby was writing to vets and I eventually became engaged to one (First Cav) when he returned home. Two of our next door neighbors sons were killed in Vietnam. I ended up marrying a Vietnam vet (not the same one), and we have been married for 41 years. He has a cap he wears, "Vietnam vets against the war."
 
 
+9 # Charlie W 2011-07-24 08:33
While serving in the U.S. Navy in 1954 we made a stop in French Algeries and I picked up an english news paper with the headline that the French were pulling out of the war in Vietnam after 15 years and many loses. I never thought much about it until I noticed the U.S. was getting involved supporting South Vietman military
leaders and inching towards the eventual mistaken war we were lured into. We should all remember the military lied to our then President Johnson to get us involved and Nixon who replaced him expanded the conflict to other countries but later did the right thing and got the hell out like the French before us. I say leave Jane Fonda alone, she loves America more than most of her critics.
 
 
+17 # Progressive Texas Democrat 2011-07-24 09:19
Speaking as one who served in Vietnam, was awarded a Purple Heart, and lives to this day with the scares, both physical and emotional, from that service, any activities in which Ms Fonda partook pale in comparison to the betrayal the Republicans are about to exercise with regards to meeting the obligations promised to wounded and disabled veterans of that war. Mr. Boehner stop playing politics with our compensation checks you traitorous bastard!
 
 
-12 # ditorac1 2011-07-24 09:25
while reading the comments about Jane Fonda,I could only think of what it was like to be there when she was so engaged with our enemy. To see her sitting on that AAA seat and after having been shot at by one of those thousands of times, I only wanted to be in the plane aimed at her with a 2000 lb bomb. In reading all the comments I came to realize why America cannot win another war. We left our desire to win after WWII. The enemy we face today has no fear of dying for what they sadly beleieve is right and we sure know they know they have the right to kill anyone in their path. Until we take the war to them with the intent to win at all cost our future generations will suffer much worse than what we have. Jane Fonda, due to her actions along with others, caused the death of thousands more than she saved. Just read the history of Vietnam, Cambodia and Loas after we pulled out
 
 
-10 # ditorac1 2011-07-24 09:26
while reading the comments about Jane Fonda,I could only think of what it was like to be there when she was so engaged with our enemy. To see her sitting on that AAA seat and after having been shot at by one of those thousands of times, I only wanted to be in the plane aimed at her with a 2000 lb bomb. In reading all the comments I came to realize why America cannot win another war. We left our desire to win after WWII. The enemy we face today has no fear of dying for what they sadly beleieve is right and we sure know they know they have the right to kill anyone in their path. Until we take the war to them with the intent to win at all cost our future generations will suffer much worse than what we have. Jane Fonda, due to her actions along with others, caused the death of thousands more than she saved. Just read the history of Vietnam, Cambodia and Loas after we pulled out
 
 
+3 # Susanne Triner 2011-07-24 09:31
Jane Fonda has been my heroine during my teenage years. She was so courageous! Everyone with a compassionate eye can see how compassionate she was and is.
I am sorry for her, that she still has to fight her right to stand up against destruction. March on Jane, we love and admire you!
 
 
+20 # RedLeaf 2011-07-24 09:33
Unreasoning patriotism because of an accident of birth [e.g. my country, always] is the greatest dereliction of citizenship. Dissent is not treason, just as blind allegiance is not patriotism. We have done many things as a nation that are just and admirable - we have done many things as a nation that are crimes against humanity. When you can't see the difference, you are just a tool of the system. They can use you to their advantage no matter which side you adhere to with strict unerring fanaticism. It is the thinking, reasoning and discerning people that threaten their agenda.
 
 
+11 # chris connolly 2011-07-24 09:47
Its seems so much easier for people to not think and to just find an easy scapegoat. If my parents want to insult me they call me Hanoi Jane because I ask critical questions about their reasons for supporting all the wars we Americans wage. From my exceedingly small corner I understand just how much backbone it takes to stand up to a mindless war mongering crowd. We should be so thankful for the handful of people who have the guts and the means to question out out loud our government's motives. Jane Fonda is absolutely one of our heroes and that she is being used again against those of us who question should give us pause. What do they want to inflict upon us next?
 
 
+9 # RSN rocks 2011-07-24 10:03
Jane Fonda was right back then and she's still right now. The Vietnam War was a useless waste of lives, both American and Vietnamese, and lots of money. America was blinded by its fear of communism. And we're still repeating the same mistakes today in the "war on terror", blinded by our fear of militant Islam. We need someone today with balls like Jane Fonda who would visit the Taliban and al-Qaeda and let the American public know why so many people around the world hate us -- the so-called liberal media isn't going to tell you! Sure, I understand 3000 people died in 9-11, I get that. But how about the thousands of innocent civilians killed by the American military, CIA, and American-supported dictators in the developing world/Middle East in the name of protecting American interests over the past 50 years?!?!? Guess they don't count since their skin isn't white. Doesn't anybody remember we supported the Taliban when they were "freedom fighters" killing Soviet soldiers? We stabbed the Vietnamese in the back and keep stabbing others in the back to this day. The Vietnamese have gotten over the Vietnam War -- America needs to get over it as well, apologize for past crimes, and focus on not screwing over any more countries. That's the way to "fight" terrorism.
 
 
-2 # KittatinyHawk 2011-07-24 10:34
Guilty conscious perhaps has jane? Most of us had sent goodies, wrote letters, even prepared bandages to be sent yet I questioned and protested as it was the first time I was seeing my friends come back in body bags. I was angry that we would superimpose our children into a war no one won in a hundred years but my friends and many of yours were expendable.
It was not acceptable by my Faith supposedly yet I saw them not Marching to Stop. I joined the Marches against the government to get our friends and Family back. I marched a long time, cried more.
Then they started coming home. Most of my friends were ill both physically and mentally drained. Most are not with me as they ended their lives. Most for not being able to accept Friendly Fire. They could not reason the Military defrag.
Others nightmares could not go away of smell of burning bodies be they enemy or the women and children left behind. They took to drugs, and alcohol.
Many married my friends. My friends had families and then came home to pieces in their homes, blood splatter on the walls.
Children they were not prepared to give explanations of why Daddy was not there anymore.
Jane a product of her own ego, apology? I do not believe as she married Turner and he is not a hero, he is a Corporate User who takes. Ask the Buffalo
 
 
+3 # Texan 4 Peace 2011-07-24 18:56
Quoting
she married Turner and he is not a hero, he is a Corporate User who takes. Ask the Buffalo


I'm no expert on Ted Turner but he did give $1 BILLION to the United Nations. He seems to be one who wants to further the cause of peace in the way he knows best.
 
 
+12 # Leo R.Sandy 2011-07-24 10:35
The hatred toward Jane Fonda is greatly misplaced. She didn't sent 50,000 Americans to their deaths - the politicians and their defense industry backers did. Two million people were killed in Vietnam and most of those civilians. Jane was only the messenger of this terrible, illegal and immoral war. As a veteran, I salute her.
 
 
+2 # Lorna Doone 2011-07-24 12:09
It is very easy for all to sit in their armchairs and judge the actions of another. "She shouldn't have done that or she should have done this. It was a mistake. It was treasonous," etc.

The photos of "hanoi jane" mock shooting against our troops was probably done simply to appease and loosen up the "enemy" and make them see that she was against the war. It was a visual way that they could understand she was not an enemy to them. Lighten up and see it for what it was. What would you have done in that situation, started a knife fight? Really?
 
 
+9 # mjc 2011-07-24 13:30
I was a young teenager during WWII and my father was a doctor in the Air Force by the time that war ended. I know there were some 'good old boys' who hated Jane Fonda during the Vietnam era, guys who just couldn't get passed the fact that she went into enemy territory. People...of any gender...who oppose war in this country, once our nation decides to make it a crusade...and most of them begin that way... are treated as anti-patriots, anti-American, fatally flawed individuals. We are still doing that in this country. Private Manning is held incognito, in isolation, because there were documents uncovered that make our foreign policy and military policy look like it was born in a circus.
 
 
+7 # IRVING SARNOFF 2011-07-24 13:51
In forming ENTERTAINMENT INDUSRY FOR PEACE AND JUSTICE and then touring military bases throuout the Pacific, Jane Fonda made a major contribution to ending the illegal war and in support of U.S. service men and women. JANE FONDA, A TRUE AMERICAN HEROINE
 
 
+18 # Frank Richardson 2011-07-24 13:55
I spent a lot of time reading all of the comments. I, too, served in Vietnam...on the DM...for 16 months. As for Jane Fonda I continue to hear one side of the political spectrum wash their hands of a stupid war (Ho Chi Minh died while I was on the DMZ and I watch thousands of 'South Vietnamese' cross the Ben Hai River into the north to pay their respects, all of whom returned 3 days later so I knew then Vietnam was one nation and we had little reason to be there) by saying bad things about someone who, right or wrong, had the nerve to say the war was wrong for the troops and for the nation. She might not have known all she should have but her leanings were on the mark. I never thought I'd say that because for so long I listened to the 'patriotic' drivel and almost believed it. When I returned from Vietnam the piss on my clothing convinced me something was amiss. I just pray that we'll never get into the abyss of another stupid war although we've managed to do so several times since Vietnam. I got the urine out of my clothing but never out of my mind.
 
 
+9 # Margaret Morris 2011-07-24 14:03
I don't believe it was our Constitution that was the model for Ho but Jefferson's opening words of our Declaration of Independence for theirs.

A lot of talk about wars long gone by proving I suppose that the meaning of any struggle depends on who's defining it. In retrospect Vietnam, defined by our government one way, many of our young people another and the Vietnamese their own way, seems to have been essentially a war of national liberation just as they said. The Vietnamese have a long history of strong national feeling and have fought invaders and/or occupiers for their independence from the Mongols, the Chinese, the French, the Japanese, the French again and then us until finally they succeeded.

Now we have a trading relationship with them, which we could have had before over 50,000 or our people died and several million of theirs.

Next time politicians blather about winning the war, we need to ask winning what exactly?
 
 
-8 # Benito 2011-07-24 14:32
In other words JANE it has taken you 40 yrs. to come up with this "reason".Duh
 
 
+7 # lin96 2011-07-24 16:10
No, she has always been clear about what happened. Read her autobiography. She was found guilty without representation.
That's the way the government was able to silence her. She's in hr 70's. It's time she puts her story into history, or someone else with write some false version and pass it off as history. Look at how the political candidates are trying to re-write history with their lack of knowledge about it and then people who know nothing of history believe it.
 
 
+8 # lcarrier 2011-07-24 15:21
It seems to me that "interested observer" is just that--an observer. Instead of just whining about how terrible our foreign policy is, and about how Jane Fonda made mistakes, why doesn't he show a little moral fiber? At least Jane did that; she didn't hide behind verbiage. Did he at the time protest the Viet Nam war? I doubt it. He seems to be just "an observer." And that sums up why it is that our foreign policy is a disaster--too many observers and too few actors.
 
 
+10 # Margaret Morris 2011-07-24 16:20
Ine more thing in a way irrelevant except that one commenter dinged Fonda for lack of acting talent.

In her day, she was among our finest actresses, her performance in "Klute" being a sterling example. Even in some clinkers, her talent shone through. "Coming Home", which she was instrumental in getting produced, was perhaps the only positive portrayal of American soldiers of the period, showing them as decent men caught in a moral quagmire. Serious films I mean, not Rambo silliness. Brando's crazed renegade commander in Apocalypse Now, the PTSD ravaged soldier with a compulsion for Russian Roulette in "Deer Hunter," and many more show us as demoralized wrecks. Her film, in which her performance was sensitive and convincing, showed the cost and the continuing victimization of the returning vets in VA hospitals and suggested a full life for those paralyzed in combat.

Finally the organization for resisters of which she was a part, provided the disillusioned and unwilling a means to halt the war. Please see documentary "Sir! No Sir!" for particulars.
 
 
0 # Never Again 2011-07-26 19:36
My Dad was one of those Vietnam Vets who was a "Total wreck" when he came back...Why didn't she pose in the VA hospitals instead of an enemy AA gun?
Would've been a lot less controversial and done just as much good, if not more!
 
 
+2 # billy bob 2011-07-27 10:37
Actually, she not only "posed" in the VA hospitals. She visited them many times. You didn't read the article, did you?

My brother was also a Vietnam vet. My dad was a WWII vet and my uncle is a retired major who was a Vietnam and Korea vet. We ALL have the credentials to speak our mind here. Most of us are Americans.
 
 
+5 # Marise Cherin 2011-07-24 17:43
The same people who didn't know, or didn't want to know, why we were fighting in Viet Nam are the ones who vilified you, Jane; the rest of us understood and admired you for standing up and taking that risk.
 
 
+14 # maxx 2011-07-24 21:33
I was drafted and served in the U.S. Army during Vietnam, unlike the 'patriotic' draft-dodgers Richard Cheney and George Bush Jr. among other 'patriots' of my age group who talk about Vietnam.

Most enlisted men back then knew that Vietnam was total B.S. Only a few of the dense ones (mostly from the South in my experience) were in denial, at first anyway, about the B.S. of Vietnam.

Jane Fonda seems to me to be despised by the mostly 'paper patriots'. E.g. the American Legion, seems to be down on her and the American Legions to which I have been are thinly veiled fascists, mostly populated by the REMFs (look it up) or those wanting to use the flag for business. Oh yeah, use the flag for business is a definition of a fascist.

Eff-them, Jane Fonda was right then and they were wrong. That is objective fact and THAT is why they really hate her. She had and has bigger cajones than they did/do.
 
 
+10 # Louis H. Pumphrey 2011-07-25 06:05
I, too, am a traitor--and gladly and eagerly admit such--a traitor to fear-mongering politicians interested only in furthering their careers who care not a whit about the wasting of human life nor the squandering of billions of dollars. I proudly admit to also being a traitor to war profiteers who are every bit the sociopaths as the politicians who exploit fear and insecurity.
 
 
+1 # billy bob 2011-07-27 10:38
You're also a patriot, fighting against those who are traitors to this country and everything it stands for.
 
 
+10 # Jeff Palmer 2011-07-25 07:15
The right wing is masterful at demonizing anyone they choose - look at the hatchet job they have done on Jimmy Carter for 40 plus years, all to elevate the status of Ronald Reagan. The country is sick and getting sicker with each election, each news cycle, each affront to its citizens in the form of stolen elections, reduced civil liberties and further kowtowing to the rich and powerful.
 
 
+2 # billy bob 2011-07-27 10:40
You're right. That's why Reagan has been in office for the past 30 years. The Democratic Party, itself, has bought into most of the right-wing framing and has become repugnican light, just to distance itself from anyone who might accuse it of taking a principled stance.
 
 
+9 # Hardy 2011-07-25 07:18
I'm a Vietnam vet who was wounded in Vietnam. (I served in Vietnam 1968 and 69 USMC). I now volunteer at a VA hospital in PGH. PA. While in Vietnam I supported the anti-war movement. When I returned from Vietnam I joined the protest movement. I did it to support my brothers and sisters still dying and getting wounded in Vietnam. That war was just wrong. We were told that the world would end if Vietnam fell to the communist. 58,000 of my brothers and sisters paid for that lie with their lives. Now Vietnam is a major trading partner of the U S. (Was Jane Fonda really wrong)? I mentioned that I volunteer at a VA hospital and the place is full of Korean war and Vietnam vets. The Korean war ended in 1952 and people are still suffering from physical and mental wounds received 60 years ago. (Wars are costly in so many ways) Now we are dealing with new victims of the two ongoing wars arriving everyday.
It seems to me that the most hawkish people amoung us don't bother serve. Just look at our current congress. None of the previous administration who started the current wars bothered to serve and none of their kids bother serve. Why is that? It is the hawks who are still hating on Jane Fonda. Why is that?
 
 
+11 # stonecutter 2011-07-25 07:28
The people who still vilify Jane Fonda are the same people who thought we could really win in Viet Nam if only we'd sent in many more thousands of troops and dropped some nukes on Hanoi, pre-emptively attacking Iraq was justified (and thrilling...to them), staying in Afghanistan for the next 50 years is a must, bombing Libya was absolutely necessary, Grenada and Panama and overthrowing Allende in Chile and supporting the Contras even if it meant breaking federal laws were all in America's best interests.

This same American reactionary mindset (google WWII icon General Curtis LeMay) would have invaded Cuba and/or dropped nukes on that tiny island in a heartbeat, if JFK had not stood his heroic ground between blind reactionary nationalism and likely nuclear annihilation.

Fonda should've avoided the anti-aircraft gun photo-op...it sent the wrong message, and she appears sincerely contrite about that error in judgment. Her larger purpose, however, was heroic in itself, especially after the horrors of the MLK and RFK assassinations, the TET Offensive, the Chicago riots, Kent State, the D.C. sit-ins and so many other political upheavals of the time.

I served in the Air Force for 4 years during the Viet Nam era. I resisted efforts to re-enlist me, and after discharge, protested against the war many times. It was a monstrous tragedy.
 
 
0 # Never Again 2011-07-26 19:41
You know, all these wars are "limited"?
Our own Government prevents our soldiers from fighting to win. From not giving enough ammo to substandard Armor, to punishing them when they actually hurt terrorists!
(I'm not making this up, 3 SEALS were hauled up on inflated charges for punching a terrorist leader in the face to silence him!)
So apparently, Fonda POSED with the enemy, but our leaders might have some secret deals with the enemy!
 
 
+1 # billy bob 2011-07-27 17:46
What, exactly would "winning" in Iraq and Afghanistan look like to you?
 
 
+3 # SFC Retired CJT 2011-07-25 10:08
I reacted wrongly to Texan 4 Peace, until going up, further to read the reference to which it referes. Here, here! There IS intelligent life in Texas. YAY.
 
 
-2 # Viet Nam 68 Vet 2011-07-25 12:53
Jane commented on the statement about her getting notes from the POW's but she NEVER said what she did with them.She never denied that she did not pass them on to the VC. Cudos I guess to her activities that she stated she has done on behalf of the VietNam war and Vets but I have still not heard word one from her explaining the smiling face she had while sitting on the Russian made ack ack gun that might have shot down some of the very POW's she met with. I for one still believe that she was more of a problem than she was helpful during the Viet Nam war.
 
 
+6 # tarscampbell 2011-07-25 14:02
Assuming Jane fonda actually did write the article, what does it matter?

We are now in two ground wars, which I do not and never did support. The 9-11 hijackers were Saudis and we invade Iraq and Afghanistan?

We are in a air to ground war which I do support in Libya.

War seems to enrich a certain class of people, i.e. the industrialist rich, bankers, and lobbiest just for a start.

We should be looking for a way to get out of this horrible mess that many Presidents, past and present, and many members of Congress, past and present, have put us in.

We now have a government for the government, by the government that protects the government and the rich that bought it no matter what the cost in lives or human suffering. They, the government and its owners are fully insulated and protected from us poor dumb voters. Then those same bastards in power screw us, the little people that pay for it.

We, little people, are just like the proverbial mushroom, kept in the dark and fed horse pucky.

I have had just a glimpse of real power in high places, I don't like what I saw..
 
 
-2 # Ted 2011-07-26 22:31
I've always regarded Jane Fonda as a hero. She had it all, yet she put it on the line to try to bring an end to a worthless war that took 58,000 of our finest and maimed countless more, both mentally and physically.

I didn't have to go, but I vowed I never would, and I had to expend much effort and resources to avoid it, but I wouldn't let our government kill me for nothing. And because of Jane Fonda, whom I defended any number of times, many American lives were saved... and futures lived.

Unfortunately, Ms. Fonda chose to again "speak out" during Iraq and while she did no damage, she was completely wrong. I'll never forget what she did for her country, but it's tainted a bit now.

Nevertheless, thank you, Jane Fonda,from the bottom of my heart. My life was irrevocably altered by trying to avoid the war I never had to fight, and I really never recovered. But at least I lived a life, had a reasonable amount of happiness, and am here to talk about it... and I'm as conservative as they come.
 
 
0 # spiritcallsus 2011-07-27 03:23
I understand completely and have always understood ...

Those who have spoken out against you just do not understand ...

It is their loss ... and a real shame that you have been made to suffer so wrongly.

Your compassion and empathy scares the hell out of those who have none.
 
 
+5 # papabird 2011-07-27 05:19
Vietnam: two tours burned with 14 others friendly napalm, 4 Jan 1968; Aviator 1970. Never disliked Jane, a brave woman. Never hated the enemy. As my friend Jack Brady, a POW survivor of the Battaan Death March replied when I asked him who he hated and why (he drove a Nissan), Jack replied, "the VA...trying to hold on to our benefits" JQ
 
 
+2 # George Percival 2011-07-27 07:43
I believe that giving aid & comfort to the enemy WAS considered to be treasonous; being photographed on that AA gun was used to great length by the NVA in their propaganda campaign. If jane doesn't see it that way ( which is quite apparent ) that is on her. If it was just a case of " bad judgement " on her part , that does not change anything. About the war being illegal etc. that also does not change anything , we WERE there , and the troops were doing what the government was COMPELLING them to do ( war crimes being committed are another topic ). How this turned into the Civil War is anybodies guess -- but that is how these sites go I suppose .
 
 
+1 # Stone 2011-07-27 09:11
Sorry Jane, your complaints are falling on deaf ears, here. While I give no credence to the stories about "slips of paper" or you calling POW's "baby killers", allow me to remind you that YOU STILL VISITED WITH OUR ENEMY! You were not a dignitary or politician...if you wanted to work against the war, fine! BUT YOU VISITED WITH OUR ENEMY! Even now, you cannot fathom just how offensive that is....I pity you.
 
 
+2 # Glen 2011-07-27 16:22
Stone, the north Vietnamese did not attack the U.S. If you will but study the history of the territory, you will understand that Vietnam was attempting unification, just as Korea was when the U.S. attacked them. The U.S. government declared the north the enemy of the U.S. when in truth they were not.

Do you entertain the thoughts that the north Vietnamese might possibly have made the trek over here to attack the U.S.? Was our government's assertion of the enemy worth 4 million lives there and 50,000 lives of the U.S. military?
 
 
+4 # papabird 2011-07-27 18:52
During US involvement there were a dozen coups before Ky took final command of South Vietnam. Diem, our first choice was a brutal corrupt dictator, a Catholic, who persecuted the Buddists (remember the scene of immolation of the monk who poured gas on himself in protest. The US was backing the wrong men. Uncle Ho who studied in the US and pleaded with the UN to give his country free elections after WW2 and the occupation of the Vichi French and the Japanese, was sold out by the western powers. Ho's only "fault" was that he was a communist. The Vietnamese would have been independent from China whom the Vietnamese never trusted. The domino theory was not valid. Check Robert McNamara hindsight in the documentary: The Fog of War.
 
 
-1 # jaylak 2011-08-13 10:36
jane unfortnately people don' change you used poor judgement--it hurt millions--and other times in your life-poor judgement--but we spent many hours of being entertained-your acting superb--do you suppose writing a new book and opening old wounds was good judgement? have fun with the rest of your life:::
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.