- Joined
- Apr 14, 2008
- Messages
- 12,970
- Reaction score
- 5,701
- Location
- Huntsville, AL (USA)
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
In principle, she's no different than a Southern slave owner.
How do you make that connection?
In principle, she's no different than a Southern slave owner.
Fair enough.
Here's something I just found that should be more than enough to really piss people off and cement their impression of her assuming they were on the fence.
OUTRAGEOUS! Jane Fonda Wears ‘Hanoi Jane’ T-Shirt to Plug Nancy Reagan Movie (Photo) | The Gateway Pundit
Hanoi Jane Fonda Activist Black T Shirt
Why she'd wear the T-shirt to an interview for her upcoming movie debut where she is cast in the role of Nancy Reagan is beyond me. But there you go. No further words are necessary.
You obviously don't get how a prosecution works.
The prosecutor establishes the facts and then argues how the elements of the crime have been satisfied by the facts.
The jury then decides if they agree. That's it. The fact pattern does not need to be "codified." (Though the way you use it, I'm not sure you know what "codified" means.)
No one -- NO ONE -- cites "precedent." PRECEDENT DOES NOT MATTER.
That you do not get this is baffling.
That you don't get, after several repetitions now, that precedent is not the only source I would have accepted is even more baffling, but if it amuses you please feel free to post "precedent does not matter" in bold face, underlined and italicized, and be sure to make the font even larger.
As for presenting "the facts," the prosecution would present them, and then there would be a ruling as to whether her actions in this case fit the definition of treason.
You obviously don't get how a prosecution works.
The prosecutor establishes the facts and then argues how the elements of the crime have been satisfied by the facts.
The jury then decides if they agree. That's it. The fact pattern does not need to be "codified." (Though the way you use it, I'm not sure you know what "codified" means.)
No one -- NO ONE -- cites "precedent." PRECEDENT DOES NOT MATTER.
That you do not get this is baffling.
I never had animosity for those who had the balls to go do a job that they could end up losing their life over. Spitters weren't isolated. Isolated suggests that it only happened a few times in a few small cases. I think a YouTube search shows that it happened plenty.
thanks I'll check it out. Spitting was the least of the vets problems, however.
Either way they are subversive.
Sure.
Here's another from the link of her words: ""To the U.S. servicemen who are stationed on the aircraft carriers in the Gulf of Tonkin, those of you who load the bombs on the planes should know that those weapons are illegal. And the use of those bombs or condoning the use of those bombs, makes one a war criminal."
Read more: Hanoi Jane's apology - Washington Times
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
She should have been hung or shot within days of her returning from Vietnam.
Tricky Dick ran in '68 on he had a secret plan to end the war Vietnam, it was a lie. In the end 58,000 of our soldiers died and apparently that's not enough for some people on the Right.
True, leftists try to subvert the goals of the right wingers, and the right wing tries to subvert the goals of the left wingers.
One point of view that seems credible, is that Nixon planned to use nukes on Viet Nam, or at least threaten to do so. The big anti-war March on Washington convinced him that the public would not stomach nuke use and that's when he started winding down the war. Short of a nuke-use or equivalent destruction and death, we could not have won in Viet Nam for the same reasons we can't win in Iraq and Afghanistan, our opposition had too much popular support.
Right. American wars have become political debates while the enemy is able to use any device at hand and is never critical of itself. Some think this appeasement and self loathing is a winning strategy but it doesn't seem to be going that way.
I believe if there is some threat so severe to our national security (same standard as self defense or SYG on a personal level) we have to do to war over it, it should be balls to the wall, pull out the stops, switch over the factories, kick ass and take names and whatever else you want from the country, then come home and give the next country that wants to threaten our security something to contemplate when they think about pulling some stuff. We dont, it is our fault. Neither the Repubs or the Dems really wage a war. I truly think we do it the way we do to fuel the military industrial complex.
What brought on this anger about Jane Fonda. She was the typical rich spoiled kid acting like an ass but as shown in earlier post some of you have really twisted things to maker your point but so be it.
Just where is your god damn anger at how we subjected our men to Agent Orange and now some 40 years later are still treating those affected like 2nd class citizens.
Posing for a picture is worthy of death now?
Hanoi Jane provided aid and comfort to the enemy.eace
we did "carpet bomb", massive amounts dropped from B-52's, in an attempt to wipe out NVA, and North Vietnam targets.One point of view that seems credible, is that Nixon planned to use nukes on Viet Nam, or at least threaten to do so. The big anti-war March on Washington convinced him that the public would not stomach nuke use and that's when he started winding down the war. Short of a nuke-use or equivalent destruction and death, we could not have won in Viet Nam for the same reasons we can't win in Iraq and Afghanistan, our opposition had too much popular support.
we did "carpet bomb", massive amounts dropped from B-52's, in an attempt to wipe out NVA, and North Vietnam targets.
The Viet Cong dug tunnels -underground facilities with medical beds, and supply points.
I suppose a nuke would be yet mmore deveatating, but it's not like we didn't try to "bomb them back to the stone age"
(actual quote from back then)
Hanoi Jane provided aid and comfort to the enemy.eace
I heard once that she gave notes that the prisoners gave her for their families to the enemy too. I don't know how much truth there is to that.
Obama's appointments have not enjoyed much success. You have to wonder what their qualifications might be.
Who was this (actual quote from back then) from?
There was a lot of anti American propaganda going around at that time. still is in fact, so unless you can actually give the name of the person who was in a position of authority who gave the quote, you should dismiss it.