Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community  

Go Back   Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community > The Academy > Tilted Politics


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 10-11-2004, 10:49 AM   #1 (permalink)
Psycho
 
iccky's Avatar
 
Location: Princeton, NJ
Sinclair Strikes Again

Suprised no one has posted this already

Quote:
October 11, 2004
TELEVISION
TV Group to Show Anti- Kerry Film on 62 Stations
By JIM RUTENBERG

Up to 62 television stations owned or managed by the Sinclair Broadcasting Group - many of them in swing states - will show a documentary highly critical of Senator John Kerry's antiwar activities 30 years ago within the next two weeks, Sinclair officials said yesterday.

Those officials said the documentary would pre-empt regular night programming, including prime time, on its stations, which include affiliates for all six of the major broadcast networks in the swing states of Florida, Ohio, Wisconsin, Nevada and Pennsylvania.

Called "Stolen Honor: Wounds That Never Heal," the documentary features Vietnam veterans who say their Vietnamese captors used Mr. Kerry's 1971 Senate testimony, in which he recounted stories of American atrocities, prolonging their torture and betraying and demoralizing them. Similar claims were made by prisoners of war in a commercial that ran during the summer from an anti-Kerry veterans group, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

Two of the former prisoners who appeared in the Swift Boat advertisement were interviewed for the movie, including Ken Cordier, who had to resign as a volunteer in the Bush campaign after the advertisement came out.

Sinclair's plan to show the documentary was first made public by The Los Angeles Times on Saturday.

Mark Hyman, Sinclair's vice president for corporate relations, who doubles as a conservative commentator on its news stations, said the film would be shown because Sinclair deemed it newsworthy.

"Clearly John Kerry has made his Vietnam service the foundation of his presidential run; this is an issue that is certainly topical," he said. Asked what defined something as newsworthy, Mr. Hyman said, "In that it hasn't been out in the marketplace, and the news marketplace."

Because Sinclair is defining the documentary - which will run commercial free - as news, it is unclear if it will be required by federal regulations to provide Mr. Kerry's campaign with equal time to respond.

But acknowledging that news standards call for fairness, Mr. Hyman said an invitation has been extended to Mr. Kerry to respond after the documentary is shown. "There are certainly serious allegations that are leveled; we would very much like to get his response," he said.

Asked if Sinclair would consider running a documentary of similar length either lauding Mr. Kerry, responding to the charges in "Stolen Honor" or criticizing Mr. Bush, Mr. Hyman said, "We'd just have to take a look at it."

Aides to Mr. Kerry said he would not accept Sinclair's invitation.

"It's hard to take an offer seriously from a group that is hellbent on doing anything to help elect President Bush even if that means violating basic journalism standards," said Chad Clanton, a Kerry spokesman.

Sinclair's plans put Mr. Kerry's campaign in an awkward position similar to the one in which it found itself in August, when the Swift Boat group first began running commercials against him containing unsubstantiated charges that he lied to get his war medals. Mr. Kerry's aides at first held back from responding, so as not to give the group and its charges more attention - a decision that some Kerry aides now acknowledge cost him in public opinion polls.

Mr. Clanton said Mr. Kerry's campaign would call on supporters to stage advertiser boycotts and demonstrations against Sinclair's stations.

A group of Democratic senators, including Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts and Dianne Feinstein of California, readied a letter calling for the Federal Communications Commission to investigate the move, arguing that the documentary was not news but a prolonged political advertisement from Mr. Bush and, as such, violated fairness rules.

Andrew Jay Schwartzman, president of the Media Access Project, an advocacy group promoting greater media regulation, said he did not think the film would qualify for a news exemption. And, he said, even if it did fall under equal time provisions, those are based on candidate appearances and in this case, since it is Mr. Kerry who appears, "albeit disparagingly," stations would be required to show Mr. Bush or possibly the independent candidate Ralph Nader, if they requested it.

Sinclair was already a galvanizing force for Democrats. The political donations of its executives have gone overwhelmingly to Republicans, according to a review of donations on Politicalmoneyline.com. In April Sinclair refused to run an episode of "Nightline" on its stations in which the anchor Ted Koppel spent the entire program reading the names of American soldiers killed in Iraq.

"Stolen Honor" was produced by Carlton Sherwood, formerly a reporter with The Washington Times. His Web site says he received no money from any political party or campaign but got initial funding from Pennsylvania veterans.

The documentary has been distributed by mail order and via streaming Internet connections. Mr. Hyman said Sinclair was not paying for the right to broadcast it.
I don't have enough time to really put into detail everything that is wrong with this, but I thought I should get it out there for discussion. I think that whatever your political slant you can agree that this is an outrageous abuse of the public airwaves by a corporation intent on pushing its political agenda.

Just imagine if a TV station agreed to put Michael Moore's movie on, in prime time, with no commercial interruptions, and called it a news item. All hell would break loose.
iccky is offline  
Old 10-11-2004, 10:53 AM   #2 (permalink)
Banned
 
Location: BFE
Hey, how many CBS affiliates ran the 60 Minutes hatchetjob on Bush that was based upon forged documents?

What's good for the goose is good for the gander, as they say...
daswig is offline  
Old 10-17-2004, 03:56 PM   #3 (permalink)
 
trickyy's Avatar
 
i guess this is as good of place as any to discuss the content of the movie. i have not seen it, as it is only available as pay-per-view on www.stolenhonor.com.

from what i have found, much of the movie shows POWs disgusted with kerry for his senate testimony. this article seems to detail some of their words.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles...e.asp?ID=15108

Quote:
I’m sorry I can’t quote them, but essentially [Kerry] accused all of us in Vietnam of being criminals, that everything we had done was criminal. The North Vietnamese had told us from the time that we got their hands on us that we were criminals, that we were not covered by the Geneva Convention, so It was okay for them to do whatever they wanted to do to us. And they told us that they were going to put us on trial and some of us would be executed.
...
...[Kerry] starts talking about war crimes and the atrocities we’re committing. He’s putting them in dire jeopardy. Every military combat guy I’ve talked to from Vietnam said their greatest fear was not being killed; it was becoming a POW. As you know, there were people captured in South Vietnam who were literally skinned alive…And Kerry’s giving the captors ammunition to treat people like that if they’re captured. And these are people he knew. Where in the world is his loyalty to the people in the military?

...
i've seen parts of it kerry's testimony on tv, but here is the transcript:

http://www.nationalreview.com/docume...0404231047.asp
audio here: http://www.democracynow.org/article..../02/20/1535232

Quote:
I am not here as John Kerry. I am here as one member of the group of one thousand, which is a small representation of a very much larger group of veterans in this country.
...
I would like to talk, representing all those veterans, and say that several months ago in Detroit, we had an investigation at which over 150 honorably discharged and many very highly decorated veterans testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia, not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command.

It is impossible to describe to you exactly what did happen in Detroit, the emotions in the room, the feelings of the men who were reliving their experiences in Vietnam, but they did. They relived the absolute horror of what this country, in a sense, made them do.

They told the stories at times they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, tape wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the country side of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war, and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country.
...
We are here in Washington also to say that the problem of this war is not just a question of war and diplomacy. It is part and parcel of everything that we are trying as human beings to communicate to people in this country, the question of racism, which is rampant in the military, and so many other questions also, the use of weapons, the hypocrisy in our taking umbrage in the Geneva Conventions and using that as justification for a continuation of this war, when we are more guilty than any other body of violations of those Geneva Conventions, in the use of free fire zones, harassment interdiction fire, search and destroy missions, the bombings, the torture of prisoners, the killing of prisoners, accepted policy by many units in South Vietnam. That is what we are trying to say. It is party and parcel of everything.
...
now i omitted much of his testimony. these are a just few areas where he is particularly hard on certain soldiers, and likely some of the cause of contention.

i'd be pretty pissed if his testimony was used against me in a POW camp. i doubt these camps would be nice anyway, but his words may have caused some additional suffering. his position seems to have been oversimplified, though. kerry doesn't condemn all soldiers. he points out the alleged deeds of the worst, indicating moral decay in many units. unless he is lying, why is this wrong? there seemed to be serious problems to be addressed, and i'm not sure he can be held responsible for the actions of our "enemy."

just wondering what you think. this is scheduled to air right before the election, so it could tip the scales redder.
trickyy is offline  
Old 10-17-2004, 04:23 PM   #4 (permalink)
Dubya
 
Location: VA
It comes down to a basic question of fairness. These airwaves Sinclair plans to broadcast on do not belong to Sinclair, they belong to all of us, but are they offering the Kerry campaign equal time to rebut these allegations? Nope. What is the FCC Chairman (Colin Powell's son) doing about it? Nothing, he's much too busy fining Fox stations for some indecent marriage show.

I'd like to ask all the progressives on this board (and all fair-minded individuals of all political stripes) to protest this action by Sinclair. Check out what you can do here:

http://www.boycottsbg.com/
__________________
"In Iraq, no doubt about it, it's tough. It's hard work. It's incredibly hard. It's - and it's hard work. I understand how hard it is. I get the casualty reports every day. I see on the TV screens how hard it is. But it's necessary work. We're making progress. It is hard work."
Sparhawk is offline  
Old 10-17-2004, 05:07 PM   #5 (permalink)
Muffled
 
Kadath's Avatar
 
Location: Camazotz
Quote:
Originally Posted by daswig
Hey, how many CBS affiliates ran the 60 Minutes hatchetjob on Bush that was based upon forged documents?

What's good for the goose is good for the gander, as they say...
Well, that's a bit different. They were affiliates of CBS running the network CBS programming. This is going to pre-empt normal programming. Sinclair is using its large soapbox to attempt to modify the outcome of the election -- the affiliates were just playing what they were sent.
__________________
it's quiet in here
Kadath is offline  
Old 10-17-2004, 05:49 PM   #6 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: Chicago
Actually, I think this stunt might backfire. Most voters - the undecideds included - have made it clear that they find rehashing both Kerry's and Bush's Vietnam-era activities as unimportant to this election.

By seeming to harp on what Kerry did 30+ years ago, Sinclair may in fact be alienating people. This documentary will be nothing more than singing to the choir, just as is the case with Michael Moore.
__________________
"I can normally tell how intelligent a man is by how stupid he thinks I am" - Cormac McCarthy, All The Pretty Horses
JumpinJesus is offline  
Old 10-17-2004, 05:51 PM   #7 (permalink)
Insane
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by daswig
Hey, how many CBS affiliates ran the 60 Minutes hatchetjob on Bush that was based upon forged documents?

What's good for the goose is good for the gander, as they say...
IIRC, those documents were only a supplement. The underlying story of Bush skipping his guard duty was and is still true.
hammer4all is offline  
Old 10-17-2004, 06:53 PM   #8 (permalink)
Banned
 
Location: BFE
Quote:
Originally Posted by hammer4all
IIRC, those documents were only a supplement. The underlying story of Bush skipping his guard duty was and is still true.
And the story about the effects of Kerry's speech before the Fulbright Commission isn't true???

Both are equally newsworthy. The Democrats have used the media to bash Bush relentlessly. Payback's a bitch...
daswig is offline  
Old 10-17-2004, 07:39 PM   #9 (permalink)
Banned
 
cthulu23's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by daswig
Both are equally newsworthy. The Democrats have used the media to bash Bush relentlessly. Payback's a bitch...
Sure, there's been no media aligned against or parroting charges against Kerry....except for those books, movies, websites, tv commercials, flyers, signs, etc., etc. Payback, indeed.
cthulu23 is offline  
Old 10-17-2004, 08:12 PM   #10 (permalink)
Banned
 
Location: BFE
Quote:
Originally Posted by cthulu23
Sure, there's been no media aligned against or parroting charges against Kerry....except for those books, movies, websites, tv commercials, flyers, signs, etc., etc. Payback, indeed.
The 60 minutes hitpiece had been in the works for FOUR years. It just HAPPENED to be ready shortly before the election, right? What kerry slam has been in the works for four years?

Which existed first? Moveon.org or the swiftvets 527?
daswig is offline  
Old 10-17-2004, 08:28 PM   #11 (permalink)
Insane
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by daswig
And the story about the effects of Kerry's speech before the Fulbright Commission isn't true???

Both are equally newsworthy. The Democrats have used the media to bash Bush relentlessly. Payback's a bitch...
What is your point? Everything Kerry said was true.

http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0438/turse.php

http://www.democracynow.org/article..../08/25/1410215

http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs...y=SRTIGERFORCE

Did you want him lie or something? Have you even listened to his testimony yourself? It's highly moving. He probably helped save thousands of lives by getting us out of Vietnam sooner.
hammer4all is offline  
Old 10-17-2004, 08:33 PM   #12 (permalink)
Banned
 
cthulu23's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by daswig
The 60 minutes hitpiece had been in the works for FOUR years. It just HAPPENED to be ready shortly before the election, right? What kerry slam has been in the works for four years?

Which existed first? Moveon.org or the swiftvets 527?
One of the Swiftboat Leaders plotted against John Kerry in the NIXON White House. When was Moveon.org founded?
cthulu23 is offline  
Old 10-17-2004, 08:38 PM   #13 (permalink)
Banned
 
Location: BFE
"plotted" against Kerry? Dude, break out the tinfoil....you're slipping over the edge.

BTW, why hasn't Kerry released ALL of his military records? And what to you make of the "less than honorable" discharge that it appears he received in 1972, before it was "corrected" in 1978 under the Carter regime???
daswig is offline  
Old 10-17-2004, 08:41 PM   #14 (permalink)
Banned
 
Location: BFE
Quote:
Originally Posted by hammer4all
He probably helped save thousands of lives by getting us out of Vietnam sooner.
And Neville Chamberlaine saved thousands of allied lives when he agreed to the partitioning of Czechoslavakia. "Peace in our time", and all that shit. Appeasement is appeasement, and what Kerry did constitutes an act of treason, in giving aid and comfort to the enemy in time of war.

"Treason is Patriotic!" is one hell of a catchy campaign slogan for the Dems to be using...
daswig is offline  
Old 10-17-2004, 08:48 PM   #15 (permalink)
Banned
 
cthulu23's Avatar
 
I'm not going over John Kerry's record again....suffice it to say that we'll interpret it in different ways. When your guy can prove that he actually completed his National guard duty, maybe we'll talk.

As for the "tin foil" comment:

Quote:
After returning from Vietnam, Kerry became a leader in the group Vietnam Veterans Against the War. In 1971, he testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, accusing President Nixon of prolonging the war and charging that fellow service members had committed war crimes.

Among the charges he lodged were that troops had committed rapes; cut off ears, limbs and heads; taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals; blown up bodies; and randomly fired at civilians.

An incensed Nixon encouraged O'Neill, who was awarded two Bronze Stars in Vietnam, to challenge Kerry, which he did in a debate on the "Dick Cavett Show."
O'Neil and Nixon had a famous meeting in the Oval Office to discuss bringing down Kerry...couldn't that be characterized as "plotting?"
cthulu23 is offline  
Old 10-17-2004, 08:51 PM   #16 (permalink)
Banned
 
Location: BFE
Quote:
Originally Posted by cthulu23
O'Neil and Nixon had a famous meeting in the Oval Office to discuss bringing down Kerry...couldn't that be characterized as "plotting?"

I dunno...does privately meeting with the leadership of the enemy your country is in a shooting war with, and then coming home and advocating their plan for your country's surrender qualify as giving "aid and comfort" to said enemy?
daswig is offline  
Old 10-17-2004, 08:58 PM   #17 (permalink)
Banned
 
cthulu23's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by daswig
I dunno...does privately meeting with the leadership of the enemy your country is in a shooting war with, and then coming home and advocating their plan for your country's surrender qualify as giving "aid and comfort" to said enemy?
Did we surrender in Vietnam? I didn't realize that it was our country. Who was it that needs the tin foil hat?

Last edited by cthulu23; 10-17-2004 at 09:02 PM..
cthulu23 is offline  
Old 10-17-2004, 09:02 PM   #18 (permalink)
Banned
 
Location: BFE
cthulu, didn't Kerry admit to just that, with his "I've been to Paris" comments?
daswig is offline  
Old 10-17-2004, 09:04 PM   #19 (permalink)
Banned
 
cthulu23's Avatar
 
There is a difference between agitating for the end of a war and treason. Most Americans understand that.
cthulu23 is offline  
Old 10-17-2004, 09:27 PM   #20 (permalink)
Banned
 
Location: BFE
Cthulu, read up on what happened to Vallandigham during the American Civil War, and ask yourself if you want to revise that comment. Pushing the agenda of the enemy CERTAINLY DOES qualify as treason.
daswig is offline  
Old 10-17-2004, 10:33 PM   #21 (permalink)
Banned
 
cthulu23's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by daswig
Cthulu, read up on what happened to Vallandigham during the American Civil War, and ask yourself if you want to revise that comment. Pushing the agenda of the enemy CERTAINLY DOES qualify as treason.
Then why wasn't John Kerry tried on charges of aiding and abetting the enemy?

There are more constructive ways to criticize Kerry than to repeat the same charges that were refuted thirty years ago. Luckily, as I mentioned before, most of the American people know that this issue is so much partisan noise.
cthulu23 is offline  
Old 10-18-2004, 01:26 AM   #22 (permalink)
Banned
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by daswig
I dunno...does privately meeting with the leadership of the enemy your country is in a shooting war with, and then coming home and advocating their plan for your country's surrender qualify as giving "aid and comfort" to said enemy?
daswig, your posts contain no linked sources. They appear to contain only unsubstantiated, accusatory statements. The information I am posting is intended for those who might confuse the "things" that you post, for facts. If I can provide a referenced alternative opinion or conclusion to one person who visits these threads with the intention of becoming more informed, it will be worth the effort. I expect that most people appreciate the option to use the web the way it was intended; as a web of connected information, with the info in my post as a starting point, or a stepping stone; a "strand" in the web. Posts that don't contain linked sources are dead ends. They distract from efficient use of the web. Notice that I am countering your "points" with info from web sources..... in contrast to the content of your posts, which appear to consist only of your opinion.
Quote:
Ad Says Kerry 'Secretly' Met With Enemy; But He Told Congress of It

By Paul Farhi
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, September 22, 2004; Page A08

The veterans organization that sparked controversy last month when it questioned John F. Kerry's military service in Vietnam plans to launch a new commercial today that equates Kerry with Vietnam War protester Jane Fonda and accuses the Democratic presidential nominee of secretly meeting with "enemy leaders" during the conflict.

The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth said it will spend $1.3 million to air its advertisement in five battleground states and on national cable television networks over the next week. The ad, titled "Friends," makes no assertion of any direct link between Kerry and Fonda, but it suggests that their contacts with North Vietnamese leaders during the war were equally dishonorable.

"Even before Jane Fonda went to Hanoi to meet with the enemy and mock America, John Kerry secretly met with enemy leaders in Paris," begins the spot, with grainy footage of the actress and a young Kerry. ". . . Then he returned and accused American troops of committing war crimes on a daily basis. Eventually, Jane Fonda apologized for her activities, but John Kerry refuses to."

The group, whose members served in the Navy at the same time as Kerry, is referring to a meeting Kerry had in early 1971 with leaders of the communist delegation that was negotiating with U.S. representatives at the Paris peace talks. The meeting, however, was not a secret. Kerry, a leading antiwar activist at the time, mentioned it in testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in April of that year. "I have been to Paris," he testified. "I have talked with both delegations at the peace talks, that is to say the Democratic Republic of Vietnam and Provisional Revolutionary Government," the latter a South Vietnamese communist group with ties to the Viet Cong.

Kerry's campaign said earlier this year that he met on the trip with Nguyen Thi Binh, then foreign minister of the PRG and a top negotiator at the talks. Kerry acknowledged in that testimony that even going to the peace talks as a private citizen was at the "borderline" of what was permissible under U.S. law, which forbids citizens from negotiating treaties with foreign governments. But his campaign said he never engaged in negotiations or attended any formal sessions of the talks.

"This is more trash from a group that's doing the Bush campaign's dirty work," Kerry spokesman Chad Clanton said. "Their charges are as credible as a supermarket rag."

In an interview yesterday, John O'Neill, an organizer of the Swift boat group and co-author of the anti-Kerry book "Unfit for Command," said it would be "unprecedented" for a future commander in chief to have met with enemy leaders. "It would be like an American today meeting with the heads of al Qaeda," he said.

Historian Douglas Brinkley said Kerry's trip to Paris, after his honeymoon with his first wife, Julia Thorne, was part of Kerry's extensive fact-finding efforts on the war. "He was on the fringes," said Brinkley, the author of "Tour of Duty," a book about Kerry's military service. "But he was proud of it. . . . He wanted to make his own evaluation of the situation."

The Swift boat group's first ad gained widespread exposure last month through talk-radio programs, cable television talk shows and newspaper articles because of its assertions that Kerry had exaggerated his war record as the commander of a Navy Swift boat in Vietnam.

Some of the independent organization's assertions were refuted, and several links between it and President Bush's campaign subsequently came to light. But the media storm created by the ad put Kerry and his campaign on the defensive.
<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A39744-2004Sep21.html">http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A39744-2004Sep21.html</a>
Quote:
<a href="http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761581713_2/John_Kerry.html">http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761581713_2/John_Kerry.html</a> VI Senate Years

Kerry arrived in Washington, D.C., in 1985, returning to the forum where he had first come to fame in 1971 as an antiwar leader. Now Kerry was leading the fight against another war: the Reagan administration’s effort to overthrow the Sandinista regime in Nicaragua. Kerry flew to Nicaragua and met with the Sandinista leader, Daniel Ortega. Ortega shortly thereafter flew to Moscow, then still the capital of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), to pick up a $200-million loan. The Reagan White House mocked Kerry for dealing with Ortega, calling him a Soviet ally, but Kerry kept a close eye on the Reagan administration’s dealings with the small Central American country.

Soon, Kerry began to hear stories about secret U.S. assistance to a group known as the contras that was trying to overthrow the Sandinista government. Although President Reagan viewed the contras as “freedom fighters,” Kerry called them a “mercenary army” financed by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). In an echo of his accusations about U.S. actions in Vietnam, Kerry charged that< the contras had been “guilty of atrocities against civilians.” Kerry’s investigations helped lead to revelations of what became known as the Iran-contra scandal, in which profits from secret U.S. arms sales to Iran were illegally diverted to help finance the contras.

As a former prosecutor, and with his war experience providing him with a skeptical view of U.S. foreign policies, Kerry became known more as an investigator than a legislator. Kerry’s investigations included an examination of a banking scandal involving the Bank of Commerce and Credit International (BCCI), which engaged in fraud and laundered money from illegal drug trafficking. Some of Kerry’s critics charge that his Senate career lacked distinction because of his failure to draft and sponsor the passage of major legislation. But his defenders answer that Kerry was not known for authoring bills because that task was left to his senior colleague, Democratic senator Edward Kennedy. Nevertheless, Kerry did help write and support many key pieces of legislation. Not all of the bills fit the liberal mold that Kerry is known for. Kerry, for instance, joined Republicans in backing a deficit-reduction bill. He was a fierce critic of the abuse of illegal narcotics, working on antidrug issues with some of the most conservative Republicans, including former senator Jesse Helms of North Carolina.

Kerry also earned a reputation as a publicity seeker. He was given the nickname Liveshot for his ability to attract news coverage. But he also won many admirers who believed that Kerry was willing to tackle difficult issues. For example, Kerry worked with Senator John McCain, an Arizona Republican and fellow Vietnam veteran, on an investigation into whether American soldiers were still being held in Vietnam. The pair determined there was no proof that Americans were still imprisoned, and they stood by President Bill Clinton’s side in 1995 when the United States announced it was normalizing relations with Vietnam.
Quote:
<a name="Opposition_to_the_Vietnam_War"></a><h3> Opposition to the Vietnam War </h3>

<p>In April 1970, Fred Gardner, Fonda and <a href="http://www.all-science-fair-projects.com/science_fair_projects_encyclopedia/Donald_Sutherland">Donald Sutherland</a> formed *FTA* ("Free The Army" or sometimes referred to by servicemen as "Fuck The Army"), an antiwar road show designed as an answer to <a href="http://http://www.all-science-fair-projects.com/science_fair_projects_encyclopedia/Bob_Hope">Bob Hope</a>'s <a href="http://www.all-science-fair-projects.com/science_fair_projects_encyclopedia/USO">USO</a> tour. The tour, referred to as "political vaudeville" by Fonda, visited military towns along the West Coast, with the goal of establishing a dialog with soldiers to get their throughts on their upcoming deployments (which were later made into a movie).
</p><p>Also in 1970, Fonda spoke out against the war at a rally organized by <a href="http://www.all-science-fair-projects.com/science_fair_projects_encyclopedia/Vietnam_Veterans_Against_the_War">Vietnam Veterans Against the War</a>, in Valley Forge, Pennsylvania. She offered to help raise funds for VVAW, and was bestowed the title of Honorary National Coordinator for her efforts. Beginning <a href="http://www.all-science-fair-projects.com/science_fair_projects_encyclopedia/November_3">November 3</a>, she toured college campuses and raised funds for the organization. As noted by the <em>New York Times</em>, Fonda was a "major patron" of the VVAW.
</p><p>In March 1971 , Fonda travelled to Paris (some claim alone, some claim with an unnamed VVAW representative) to meet with NLF foreign minister Madam Nguyen Thi Binh . According to a transcript in which she was translated to Vietnamese and back to English, she told Binh at one point "Many of us have seen evidence proving the Nixon administration has escalated the war causing death and destruction perhaps as serious as the, bombing of Hiroshima.". Afterwards, she travelled to London. A speech that she gave in London was criticized for her discussion of the US use of torture in Vietnam. Her financial support to VVAW at this time was apparently not significant, as within a month VVAW was broke and Kerry raised the needed funds.

</p><p>Sixteen months later, Fonda went on her well-known trip to Hanoi.
</p>
<a name="Hanoi_Jane"></a><h3> Hanoi Jane </h3>
<p>Although the war was largely protested at home by this time, and many Americans were against the war, her actions in 1972 were widely perceived as over the top. The anti-war movement of the time was not characterized by a single motivation: some, such as Quakers and other traditionally <a href="http://www.all-science-fair-projects.com/science_fair_projects_encyclopedia/Pacifism">pacifist</a> groups were opposed to <a href="http://www.all-science-fair-projects.com/science_fair_projects_encyclopedia/War">war</a> in any circumstances; some felt that the war was not an American responsibility or concern, arguing especially that it was a <a href="http://www.all-science-fair-projects.com/science_fair_projects_encyclopedia/Civil_war">civil war</a> in which the <a href="http://www.all-science-fair-projects.com/science_fair_projects_encyclopedia/United_States">US</a> was choosing sides; some, such as young men of <a href="http://www.all-science-fair-projects.com/science_fair_projects_encyclopedia/Conscription">draft age</a>, their parents and friends, didn't want their lives risked in an unpopular war; but some expressed a partisanship for the opposing side in the war, including Jane Fonda - and this made her a polarizing figure.

</p><p>She became the target of hatred from many Americans because of her visit to <a href="http://www.all-science-fair-projects.com/science_fair_projects_encyclopedia/Hanoi%2C_Vietnam">Hanoi</a> where she advocated opposition to the war. Because of this visit she acquired the nickname <em>Hanoi Jane</em>, comparing her to war propagandists <a href="http://www.all-science-fair-projects.com/science_fair_projects_encyclopedia/Tokyo_Rose">Tokyo Rose</a> and Hanoi Hannah . She has often been associated with contributing to a perceived anti-soldier sentiment among Vietnam War protesters, such as <a href="http://www.all-science-fair-projects.com/science_fair_projects_encyclopedia/Spitting_on_soldiers_during_the_Vietnam_War">spitting on soldiers</a>. Because of her actions, John Wayne cut off all contact with her, in spite of the fact that he was a close friend of her father Henry Fonda.
</p><p>When Jane Fonda was honored by <a href="http://www.all-science-fair-projects.com/science_fair_projects_encyclopedia/Barbara_Walters">Barbara Walters</a> in 1999 as one of the 100 great women of the century, sentiments regarding Fonda's actions in Vietnam were rekindled. Rumors that Fonda handed over information about U.S. soldiers to <a href="http://www.all-science-fair-projects.com/science_fair_projects_encyclopedia/National_Front_for_the_Liberation_of_Vietnam">National Liberation Front</a> (NLF) insurgents (better known in the U.S. as the "<a href="http://www.all-science-fair-projects.com/science_fair_projects_encyclopedia/Viet_Cong">Viet Cong</a>") are provably untrue, as are reports that a pilot spat at Fonda and was beaten for it and that one POW was beaten to death for refusing to meet with her. The latter story, though, may be an exaggeration of the true account of Michael Benge, a civilian advisor captured by the NLF in 1968 and held as a POW for 5 years. He wrote "When Jane Fonda was in Hanoi, I was asked by the camp communist political officer if I would be willing to meet with her. I said yes, for I would like to tell her about the real treatment we POWs were receiving, which was far different from the treatment purported by the North Vietnamese, and parroted by Jane Fonda, as 'humane and lenient.' Because of this, I spent three days on a rocky floor on my knees with outstretched arms with a piece of steel re-bar placed on my hands, and beaten with a bamboo cane every time my arms dipped." <span class='hidext'>[1]</span> <span class='txlink'>http://www.snopes.com/military/fonda.htm</span> <span class='hidext'>[2]</span> <span class='txlink'>http://www.pownetwork.org/fonda/fonda_benge_letter.htm</span>

</p>
<div style="width: 250px; float:right; margin:0 0 1em 1em; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.all-science-fair-projects.com/science_fair_projects_encyclopedia/Image:Fonda-Hanoi1.jpg" class="image"><img src="http://www.all-science-fair-projects.com/science_fair_projects_encyclopedia/Fonda-Hanoi1.jpg" alt="Jane Fonda in Hanoi, 1971" /></a><br />Jane Fonda
<p>in Hanoi, 1971
</p>
</div >
<p>Fonda posed for a picture at an anti-aircraft battery and participated in several radio broadcasts. She also visited American <a href="http://www.all-science-fair-projects.com/science_fair_projects_encyclopedia/Prisoners_of_war">prisoners of war</a> who assured her that they had neither been tortured nor brainwashed. Fonda believed these claims and relayed them to the American public. When cases of torture began to emerge among POWs returning to the United States, Fonda called them liars. She also added, concerning the POWs she met, "These were not men who had been tortured. These were not men who had been starved. These were not men who had been brainwashed." Concerning torture in general, Fonda told the <em><a href="http://www.all-science-fair-projects.com/science_fair_projects_encyclopedia/New_York_Times">New York Times</a></em> in 1973, "I'm quite sure that there were incidents of torture...but the pilots who were saying it was the policy of the Vietnamese and that it was systematic, I believe that's a lie.". Her stance has some backing, as former vice presidential candidate and POW <a href="http://www.all-science-fair-projects.com/science_fair_projects_encyclopedia/James_Stockdale">James Stockdale</a> wrote that no more than 10% of US pilots in captivity received more than 90% of the torture, usually for acts of resistance. Additionally, John Hubbel's research into the conflict indicates that the majority (but certainly not all) of the torture occurred before 1969 (Fonda's visit was in 1973).
</p><p>To her credit, Fonda did deliver home letters from many American POWs in Vietnam. She also is often credited with publicly exposing the strategy of <a href="http://www.all-science-fair-projects.com/science_fair_projects_encyclopedia/Bombing_of_Vietnam%27s_Dikes"> bombing the dikes in Vietnam</a>, for which she was at the time called a liar by then-UN ambassador <a href="http://www.all-science-fair-projects.com/science_fair_projects_encyclopedia/George_H._W._Bush">George H. W. Bush</a>. In <a href="http://www.all-science-fair-projects.com/science_fair_projects_encyclopedia/1988">1988</a>, Fonda apologized for her actions to the American POWs and their families. She has also stated:

</p><p>"I will go to my grave regretting the photograph of me in an anti-aircraft gun, which looks like I was trying to shoot at American planes. It hurt so many soldiers. It galvanized such hostility. It was the most horrible thing I could possibly have done. It was just thoughtless."
</p><p>In <a href="http://www.all-science-fair-projects.com/science_fair_projects_encyclopedia/U.S._presidential_election%2C_2004">2004</a>, her name was used as a disparaging epithet against <a href="http://www.all-science-fair-projects.com/science_fair_projects_encyclopedia/United_States_Democratic_Party">Democratic Party</a> presidential candidate <a href="http://www.all-science-fair-projects.com/science_fair_projects_encyclopedia/John_Kerry">John Kerry</a> by <a href="a/../Republican_Party_of_the_United_States">Republican National Committee</a> Chairman <a href="http://www.all-science-fair-projects.com/science_fair_projects_encyclopedia/Ed_Gillespie">Ed Gillespie</a>, who called Kerry a "Jane Fonda Democrat". In addition, a photograph was circulated showing Fonda and Kerry in the same large crowd at a 1970 anti-war rally, although they were sitting several rows apart.
</p><p>She funded and organized the Indochina Peace Campaign which continued to mobilize antiwar activists across the nation after the 1973 Paris Peace Agreement when most other antiwar organizations closed down.
</p><a href="http://www.all-science-fair-projects.com/science_fair_projects_encyclopedia/Jane_Fonda">http://www.all-science-fair-projects.com/science_fair_projects_encyclopedia/Jane_Fonda</a>
Quote:
<p> The case of Jane Fonda reveals the double standards and hypocrisies afflicting
our memories. In Tour of Duty, the Kerry historian Douglas Brinkley describes
the 1971 winter soldier investigation, which Fonda supported and Kerry attended,
where Vietnam veterans spilled their guts about "killing gooks for sport,
sadistically torturing captured VC by cutting off ears and heads, raping
women and burning villages." Brinkley then recounts how Kerry later told
Meet the Press that "I committed the same kinds of atrocities as thousands
of others," specifically taking responsibility for shooting in free-fire
zones, search-and-destroy missions, and burning villages. Brinkley describes
these testimonies in tepid and judicious terms, calling them "quite unsettling."
By contrast, Brinkley condemns Fonda's 1972 visit to Hanoi as "unconscionable,"
without feeling any need for further explanation. </p>
<p> Why should American atrocities be merely unsettling, but a trip to Hanoi
unconscionable? </p>

<p> In fact, Fonda was neither wrong nor unconscionable in what she said and
did in North Vietnam. She told the New York Times in 1973, "I'm quite sure
that there were incidents of torture...but the pilots who were saying it
was the policy of the Vietnamese and that it was systematic, I believe that's
a lie." Research by John Hubbell, as well as 1973 interviews with POWs,
shows that Vietnamese behavior meeting any recognized definition of torture
had ceased by 1969, three years before the Fonda visit. James Stockdale,
the POW who emerged as Ross Perot's running mate in 1992, wrote that no
more than 10 percent of the US pilots received at least 90 percent of the
Vietnamese punishment, often for deliberate acts of resistance. Yet the
legends of widespread, sinister Oriental torture have been accepted as fact
by millions of Americans. </p>
<p> Erased from public memory is the fact that Fonda's purpose was to use
her celebrity to put a spotlight on the possible bombing of Vietnam's system
of dikes. Her charges were dismissed at the time by George H.W. Bush, then
America's ambassador to the United Nations, who complained of a "carefully
planned campaign by the North Vietnamese and their supporters to give worldwide
circulation to this falsehood." But Fonda was right and Bush was lying,
as revealed by the April-May 1972 White House transcripts of Richard Nixon
talking to Henry Kissinger about "this shit-ass little country": </p>
<p> NIXON: We've got to be thinking in terms of an all-out bombing attack....
I'm thinking of the dikes. </p>
<p> KISSINGER: I agree with you. </p>
<p> NIXON: ...Will that drown people? </p>

<p> KISSINGER: About two hundred thousand people. </p>
<p> It was in order to try to avert this catastrophe that Fonda, whose popular
"FTA" road show (either "Fun, Travel, Adventure" or "Fuck the Army") was
blocked from access to military bases, gave interviews on Hanoi radio describing
the human consequences of all-out bombing by B-52 pilots five miles above
her. After her visit, the US bombing of the dike areas slowed down, "allowing
the Vietnamese at last to repair damage and avert massive flooding," according
to Mary Hershberger. </p>
<p> The now legendary Fonda photo shows her with diminutive Vietnamese women
examining an antiaircraft weapon, implying in the rightist imagination that
she relished the thought of killing those American pilots innocently flying
overhead. To deconstruct this image and what it has come to represent, it
might be helpful to look further back in our history. </p>
<p> Imagine a nineteenth-century Jane Fonda visiting the Oglala Sioux in the
Black Hills before the battle at Little Big Horn. Imagine her examining
Crazy Horse's arrows or climbing upon Sitting Bull's horse. Such behavior
by a well-known actress no doubt would have infuriated Gen. George Armstrong
Custer, but what would the rest of us feel today? </p>
<p> In Dances With Wolves, Kevin Costner played an American soldier who went
"native" and, as a result, was attacked and brutalized as a traitor by his
own men. But we in the modern audience are supposed to respect and idealize
the Costner "traitor," perhaps because his heroism assuages our historical
guilt. Will it take another century for certain Americans to see the Fonda
trip to Hanoi in a similar light? </p>

<p> The popular delusions about Fonda are a window into many other dangerous
hallucinations that pass for historical memory in this country. Among the
most difficult to contest are claims that antiwar activists persistently
spit on returning Vietnam veterans. So universal is the consensus on "spitting"
that I once gave up trying to refute it, although I had never heard of a
single episode in a decade of antiwar experiences. Then came the startling
historical research of a Vietnam veteran named Jerry Lembcke, who demonstrated
in The Spitting Image (1998) that not a single case of such abuse had ever
been convincingly documented. In fact, Lembcke's search of the local press
throughout the Vietnam decade revealed no reports of spitting at all. It
was a mythical projection by those who felt "spat-upon," Lembcke concluded,
and meant politically to discredit future antiwar activism. </p>
<p> The Rambo movies not only popularized the spitting image but also the
equally incredible claim that hundreds of American soldiers missing in action
were being held by the Vietnamese Communists for unspecified purposes. John
Kerry's most noted achievement in the Senate was gaining bipartisan support,
including that of all the Senate's Vietnam veterans, for a report declaring
the MIA legend unfounded, which led to normalized relations. Yet millions
of Americans remain captives of this legend. </p>
<p> It will be easier, I am afraid, for those Americans to believe that Jane
Fonda helped torture our POWs than to accept the testimony by American GIs
that they sliced ears, burned hooches, raped women and poisoned Vietnam's
children with deadly chemicals. Just two years ago many of the same people
in Georgia voted out of office a Vietnam War triple-amputee, Senator Max
Cleland, for being "soft on national defense." </p>
<a href="http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml%3Fi=20040322&s=hayden">Tom Hayden - March 4, 2004</a>

Last edited by host; 10-18-2004 at 01:33 AM..
host is offline  
Old 10-18-2004, 09:33 AM   #23 (permalink)
Banned
 
Location: BFE
Quote:
Originally Posted by cthulu23
Then why wasn't John Kerry tried on charges of aiding and abetting the enemy?
For the same exact reason that Jane Fonda wasn't tried: political expediency. You MUST admit that what Jane Fonda did constituted giving aid and comfort to the enemy, yes? So why wasn't SHE tried?
daswig is offline  
Old 10-18-2004, 09:44 AM   #24 (permalink)
Banned
 
Location: BFE
Host: From your link:
Quote:
The group, whose members served in the Navy at the same time as Kerry, is referring to a meeting Kerry had in early 1971 with leaders of the communist delegation that was negotiating with U.S. representatives at the Paris peace talks. The meeting, however, was not a secret. Kerry, a leading antiwar activist at the time, mentioned it in testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in April of that year. "I have been to Paris," he testified. "I have talked with both delegations at the peace talks, that is to say the Democratic Republic of Vietnam and Provisional Revolutionary Government," the latter a South Vietnamese communist group with ties to the Viet Cong.

Kerry's campaign said earlier this year that he met on the trip with Nguyen Thi Binh, then foreign minister of the PRG and a top negotiator at the talks. Kerry acknowledged in that testimony that even going to the peace talks as a private citizen was at the "borderline" of what was permissible under U.S. law, which forbids citizens from negotiating treaties with foreign governments. But his campaign said he never engaged in negotiations or attended any formal sessions of the talks.
OK, let's see if I have this right. Kerry admits that simply attending the thing in Paris was "borderline" legally. Then he admits that he did more than just approach the legal boundary by going there, he crossed it by meeting with Nguyen Thi Binh. On top of that, add his advocation of the NVA's peace plan upon his return, and there is NO DOUBT that Kerry committed treason, he literally ADMITS it, and ADMITS that he knew it was wrong.
daswig is offline  
Old 10-20-2004, 10:49 AM   #25 (permalink)
Muffled
 
Kadath's Avatar
 
Location: Camazotz
http://tv.zap2it.com/tveditorial/tve...317|1|,00.html

Quote:
Sinclair Group Won't Air Full Anti-Kerry Doc
(Tuesday, October 19 03:54 PM)
LOS ANGELES (Zap2it.com) In a snidely worded press release, the Sinclair Broadcast Group announced Tuesday (Oct. 19) that not only will Sinclair stations not air the John Kerry documentary "Stolen Honor: Wounds that Never Heal" in its entirety, but that it never had any plans to air the doc in the first place. Denouncing "numerous inaccurate political and press accounts" the Sinclair Group explained that a one-hour special called "A POW Story: Politics, Pressure and the Media" will air on certain stations instead.
The Baltimore-based company says that the new special will "focus in part on the use of documentaries and other media to influence voting, which emerged during the 2004 political campaigns, as well as on the content of certain of these documentaries." Although "Stolen Honor," a documentary harshly critical of Sen. Kerry's post-Vietnam activities, will still appear in clips, it will only be a small portion of "A POW Story," at least according to Sinclair.

Sinclair adds, "the program will also examine the role of the media in filtering the information contained in these documentaries, allegations of media bias by media organizations that ignore or filter legitimate news and the attempts by candidates and other organizations to influence media coverage." It's unclear what that means.

"The company and many of its executives have endured personal attacks of the vilest nature, as well as calls on our advertisers and our viewers to boycott our stations and on our shareholders to sell their stock," says Sinclair CEO David Smith.
Late last week FCC Chairman Michael Powell refused to set the precedent of blocking the program, saying that the First Amendment had to hold sway in the matter.

In the week since the alleged "numerous inaccurate political and press accounts" claiming that Sinclair planned to air "Stolen Honor" on 62 stations from Oct. 21-24, the company's stock prices fell around 15 percent. The stock drop came in response to charges from the Kerry campaign and from Democratic leaders arguing that Sinclair's decision to force stations to air the politically weighted "Stolen Honor" because of purported violations of campaign finance laws.

Sinclair owns station in 39 markets. The group earned the ire of media organizations and politicians including John McCain for refusing to air an April "Nightline" special honoring American service men and women killed in the Iraq war.
Money talks. Stock price dropping 15% = bad.
__________________
it's quiet in here
Kadath is offline  
 

Tags
sinclair, strikes


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:30 PM.

Tilted Forum Project

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360