Fvck religion, and fvck her. When she apologizes, I'll CONSIDER forgiving, but not until then. I do plan on reading her book, BTW, to see what she has to say about this whole thing. But I will be reading it, pieces at a time, in a B&N. There's no way this b1tch is getting my money.Originally posted by: joecool
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Excellent. He fights for his country, one of its tenets of which is free speech, and then spits in the face of somebody who exercises it. Bravo indeed!
what she did was wrong but it was 37 years ago. personally i think it's time for folks to stop living in the past and move on. my dad (who didn't fight, by the way) turns red in the face every time he hears her name, and who does that hurt? there is a reason why so many religions promote the importance of forgiving those who wrong us....
Originally posted by: Ilmater
Here's an idea: don't talk about sh1t you have no idea about. If I knew nothing about Hitler and someone was posting about how stupid he was and I came in and said, "But seriously, didn't the Jews deserve it?", that would be equally as stupid as what you said. "Oh, but I'm just playing Devil's Advocate on a subject I know nothing about." Then STFU!Originally posted by: Skoorb
Except that's illegal, which is why he was arrested.
I'm being devil's advocate anyway. I know too little about Hanoi Jane to have a real opinion on it I do like when celebrities are down trodden though, so there's a :thumbsup: for that.
Originally posted by: Brackis
Originally posted by: Ilmater
Amazing? If all of your friends were being killed by an enemy, and some stupid Hollywood starlet that thought she was God's gift to earth was parading around in the opposing forces' camps, yeah, I'd hate her to. Until the day I died, I promise.Originally posted by: JoeKing
I help out at the local center once in a while and it's amazing how pissed the vets still are
I wasn't even there and I hate her.
Amazing? Yes. Amazingly biased and false statements in that website. no Biblio. or soucres cited, proven false charges, written by someone with no actually credentials....
If some ditz from Hollywood wants to go parade around with some viet soldiers then that is fine with me. She was not the person firing weapons, drafting soldiers, or causing two countries to fight a war of mindless slaughter for a decade.
If you are going to your grave for hatred towards an innocuous attention whore then you have more serious issues.
Originally posted by: Crazyfool
Originally posted by: Brackis
Originally posted by: Ilmater
Amazing? If all of your friends were being killed by an enemy, and some stupid Hollywood starlet that thought she was God's gift to earth was parading around in the opposing forces' camps, yeah, I'd hate her to. Until the day I died, I promise.Originally posted by: JoeKing
I help out at the local center once in a while and it's amazing how pissed the vets still are
I wasn't even there and I hate her.
Amazing? Yes. Amazingly biased and false statements in that website. no Biblio. or soucres cited, proven false charges, written by someone with no actually credentials....
If some ditz from Hollywood wants to go parade around with some viet soldiers then that is fine with me. She was not the person firing weapons, drafting soldiers, or causing two countries to fight a war of mindless slaughter for a decade.
If you are going to your grave for hatred towards an innocuous attention whore then you have more serious issues.
She was more than just an attention whore. She was responsible for US servicemen being tortured and probably killed. Do your homework on this. That website was more than kind in their treatment of her.
Originally posted by: Stark
Originally posted by: FlyLice
Originally posted by: PanzerIV
Originally posted by: FlyLice
Originally posted by: Stark
Originally posted by: FlyLice
Originally posted by: tec699
so i guess she isn't allowed to have an opinion?
I disagree with her stance on Vietnam by the way.
I don't think going to the enemy and helping out the enemy machine is quite exactly having "an opinion." I would imagine in 1780 she would have been shot for treason. Too bad we live in today's world.
treason for what? we were never at officially at war with anyone.
it was a dumb thing for her to do, but "dumb" pretty much describes the whole vietnam period.
I don't feel that way because if America had not helped S. Korea fend off communist N. Korea, well, let's just say I wouldn't be here today. Too bad hanoi jane prevented US from doing the same for Vietnam.
I would say the NVA and Viet Cong had a hand in that a bit more than Hanoi Jane!
I meant her and the liberal media/idiots/hippies/clinton/commies/etc that made it impossible to win the war
you left out the french. that's who i blame. we're always bailing out the french.
Originally posted by: JeffreyLebowski
Originally posted by: Stark
Originally posted by: FlyLice
Originally posted by: PanzerIV
Originally posted by: FlyLice
Originally posted by: Stark
Originally posted by: FlyLice
Originally posted by: tec699
so i guess she isn't allowed to have an opinion?
I disagree with her stance on Vietnam by the way.
I don't think going to the enemy and helping out the enemy machine is quite exactly having "an opinion." I would imagine in 1780 she would have been shot for treason. Too bad we live in today's world.
I'm pretty sure we can call the debt paid in full.
treason for what? we were never at officially at war with anyone.
it was a dumb thing for her to do, but "dumb" pretty much describes the whole vietnam period.
I don't feel that way because if America had not helped S. Korea fend off communist N. Korea, well, let's just say I wouldn't be here today. Too bad hanoi jane prevented US from doing the same for Vietnam.
I would say the NVA and Viet Cong had a hand in that a bit more than Hanoi Jane!
I meant her and the liberal media/idiots/hippies/clinton/commies/etc that made it impossible to win the war
you left out the french. that's who i blame. we're always bailing out the french.
Well unfortunatly we owe them, since if they hadn't helped us in the Revolutionary War we wouldn't be a country, we would be a British colony.
I agree with you that she didn't actually torture anyone, but let me ask you this:Originally posted by: Brackis
Did Jane Fonda torture soldiers, or did Soldiers torture soldiers?
Both sides committed atrocities, war crimes, tortue, etc... and would have done so regardless.
To blame her worthless ass is an easy way out and a political shot at the "hippy liberals" (ie... anyone remotely left of center who has nothing in common with her)
Exactly how much do you need to know about the subject to realize that what he did was wrong? That war is over and a couple decades behind us. The state will apparently not be prosecuting her. What he did was illegal. That's all you need to know to reach a verdict here. His justification for being pissed doesn't enter into it.Originally posted by: Ilmater
Here's an idea: don't talk about sh1t you have no idea about. If I knew nothing about Hitler and someone was posting about how stupid he was and I came in and said, "But seriously, didn't the Jews deserve it?", that would be equally as stupid as what you said. "Oh, but I'm just playing Devil's Advocate on a subject I know nothing about." Then STFU!Originally posted by: Skoorb
Except that's illegal, which is why he was arrested.
I'm being devil's advocate anyway. I know too little about Hanoi Jane to have a real opinion on it I do like when celebrities are down trodden though, so there's a :thumbsup: for that.
Fvck you both for starting your bullsh1t rants about unrelated subjects. Piss off. Go crap in a different thread.Originally posted by: freakflag
Well unfortunatly we owe them, since if they hadn't helped us in the Revolutionary War we wouldn't be a country, we would be a British colony.Originally posted by: JeffreyLebowski
you left out the french. that's who i blame. we're always bailing out the french.
Originally posted by: Stark
Originally posted by: FlyLice
Originally posted by: tec699
so i guess she isn't allowed to have an opinion?
I disagree with her stance on Vietnam by the way.
I don't think going to the enemy and helping out the enemy machine is quite exactly having "an opinion." I would imagine in 1780 she would have been shot for treason. Too bad we live in today's world.
treason for what? we were never at officially at war with anyone.
it was a dumb thing for her to do, but "dumb" pretty much describes the whole vietnam period.
Fvck you both for starting your bullsh1t rants about unrelated subjects. Piss off. Go crap in a different thread.[/quote]Originally posted by: Ilmater
Originally posted by: freakflag
Well unfortunatly we owe them, since if they hadn't helped us in the Revolutionary War we wouldn't be a country, we would be a British colony.Originally posted by: JeffreyLebowski
you left out the french. that's who i blame. we're always bailing out the french.
I'm glad you can live in a candy-coated world where all is forgotten and forgiven when the children are tucked in at night, but what she did was atrocious and he has every right to do what he did and to hate her for as long as he wishes. While she was living her happy life in America, they were fighting and dying. Then she has the nerve to go over there? She spit in their faces metaphorically years ago; I don't see a problem with doing it for real.Originally posted by: yllus
Exactly how much do you need to know about the subject to realize that what he did was wrong? That war is over and a couple decades behind us. The state will apparently not be prosecuting her. What he did was illegal. That's all you need to know to reach a verdict here. His justification for being pissed doesn't enter into it.
I did. My apologies.Originally posted by: freakflag
Hold on there cowboy! For some reason my comment wasn't included in my post...go back and read what I intended to say!
Yes they were fighting, killing and dying; but is that really her fault? She didn't send them there. I would blame the US government instead of spitting on an ex-anti-war protestor who did something over 30 years ago. Doesn't help that he spit on a woman and ran away.Originally posted by: Ilmater
I'm glad you can live in a candy-coated world where all is forgotten and forgiven when the children are tucked in at night, but what she did was atrocious and he has every right to do what he did and to hate her for as long as he wishes. While she was living her happy life in America, they were fighting and dying. Then she has the nerve to go over there? She spit in their faces metaphorically years ago; I don't see a problem with doing it for real.Originally posted by: yllus
Exactly how much do you need to know about the subject to realize that what he did was wrong? That war is over and a couple decades behind us. The state will apparently not be prosecuting her. What he did was illegal. That's all you need to know to reach a verdict here. His justification for being pissed doesn't enter into it.
And sadly, there are far too many of you that believe you don't have to know anything about a subject before commenting on it. I mean, let's go to the extreme. What if the reality was that she HAD passed a note (I realize this isn't true) and his brother had been shot? What then? Is it still wrong to spit in her face? Oh, I guess he should be Jesus fvcking Christ and turn the other cheek, right? You HAVE to know about the subject before you comment on it, period.
Yes it is. Vietnam was never "officially" our enemy, no matter how ridiculous that sounds.Originally posted by: Phoenix86
"Section 3. Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.
Being at war is not a requirement
She should apologize. Period. If her opinion differs now, then she should apologize. Otherwise, I take that as a tacit agreement to what she said before.Originally posted by: Proletariat
Yes they were fighting, killing and dying but is that her fault. I would blame the US government instead of spitting on an ex-anti-war protestor who did something over 30 years ago. Doesn't help that he spit on a woman and ran away.
Anyways P and N material most likely.
Oh, STFU dumbass. :roll: Did I say that he was required to stop despising her? The fact is he committed an illegal act upon her at the book signing. It's amusing that you condone such an action, but many of us don't.Originally posted by: Ilmater
I'm glad you can live in a candy-coated world where all is forgotten and forgiven when the children are tucked in at night, but what she did was atrocious and he has every right to do what he did and to hate her for as long as he wishes. While she was living her happy life in America, they were fighting and dying. Then she has the nerve to go over there? She spit in their faces metaphorically years ago; I don't see a problem with doing it for real.Originally posted by: yllus
Exactly how much do you need to know about the subject to realize that what he did was wrong? That war is over and a couple decades behind us. The state will apparently not be prosecuting her. What he did was illegal. That's all you need to know to reach a verdict here. His justification for being pissed doesn't enter into it.
And sadly, there are far too many of you that believe you don't have to know anything about a subject before commenting on it.
Originally posted by: Ilmater
I'm glad you can live in a candy-coated world where all is forgotten and forgiven when the children are tucked in at night, but what she did was atrocious and he has every right to do what he did and to hate her for as long as he wishes. While she was living her happy life in America, they were fighting and dying. Then she has the nerve to go over there? She spit in their faces metaphorically years ago; I don't see a problem with doing it for real.Originally posted by: yllus
Exactly how much do you need to know about the subject to realize that what he did was wrong? That war is over and a couple decades behind us. The state will apparently not be prosecuting her. What he did was illegal. That's all you need to know to reach a verdict here. His justification for being pissed doesn't enter into it.
And sadly, there are far too many of you that believe you don't have to know anything about a subject before commenting on it. I mean, let's go to the extreme. What if the reality was that she HAD passed a note (I realize this isn't true) and his brother had been shot? What then? Is it still wrong to spit in her face? Oh, I guess he should be Jesus fvcking Christ and turn the other cheek, right? You HAVE to know about the subject before you comment on it, period.
Originally posted by: yllus
Oh, STFU dumbass. :roll: Did I say that he was required to stop despising her? The fact is he committed an illegal act upon her at the book signing. It's amusing that you condone such an action, but many of us don't.Originally posted by: Ilmater
I'm glad you can live in a candy-coated world where all is forgotten and forgiven when the children are tucked in at night, but what she did was atrocious and he has every right to do what he did and to hate her for as long as he wishes. While she was living her happy life in America, they were fighting and dying. Then she has the nerve to go over there? She spit in their faces metaphorically years ago; I don't see a problem with doing it for real.Originally posted by: yllus
Exactly how much do you need to know about the subject to realize that what he did was wrong? That war is over and a couple decades behind us. The state will apparently not be prosecuting her. What he did was illegal. That's all you need to know to reach a verdict here. His justification for being pissed doesn't enter into it.
And sadly, there are far too many of you that believe you don't have to know anything about a subject before commenting on it.
As for your superior credentials on the topic, let's hear 'em. So far what's saddest is how hysterically emotional you've reacted and the poor grasp of reading comprehension you've displayed.
Originally posted by: tec699
so i guess she isn't allowed to have an opinion?
I disagree with her stance on Vietnam by the way.
Um dude... she did apologize for the photograph. A while back actually.Originally posted by: Ilmater
She should apologize. Period. If her opinion differs now, then she should apologize. Otherwise, I take that as a tacit agreement to what she said before.Originally posted by: Proletariat
Yes they were fighting, killing and dying but is that her fault. I would blame the US government instead of spitting on an ex-anti-war protestor who did something over 30 years ago. Doesn't help that he spit on a woman and ran away.
Anyways P and N material most likely.
[/end of thread]
Originally posted by: Feldenak
Thanks. Just sent the article to my dad. He has a special kind of hatred for Hanoi Jane