Does "The Butler" get Ronald Reagan Wrong?

[Jack Hays]

There's nothing anywhere to show anything remotely close to that.

Really?

[h=4]"Hanoi Jane" controversy[/h]
Jane Fonda on the NVA anti-aircraft gun


Fonda visited Hanoi in July 1972. Among other statements, she said the United States had been intentionally targeting the dike system along the Red River. The columnist Joseph Kraft, who was also touring North Vietnam, said he believed the damage to the dikes was incidental and was being used as propaganda by Hanoi, and that, if the U.S. Air Force were "truly going after the dikes, it would do so in a methodical, not a harum-scarum way".[SUP][34][/SUP]
In North Vietnam, Fonda was photographed seated on an anti-aircraft battery; the controversial photo outraged a number of Americans.[SUP][35][/SUP] In her 2005 autobiography, she writes that she was manipulated into sitting on the battery; she had been horrified at the implications of the pictures and regretted they were taken. In a recent entry at her official website, Fonda explained:

It happened on my last day in Hanoi. I was exhausted and an emotional wreck after the 2-week visit ... The translator told me that the soldiers wanted to sing me a song. He translated as they sung. It was a song about the day 'Uncle Ho' declared their country's independence in Hanoi's Ba Dinh Square. I heard these words: "All men are created equal; they are given certain rights; among these are life, Liberty and Happiness." These are the words Ho pronounced at the historic ceremony. I began to cry and clap. These young men should not be our enemy. They celebrate the same words Americans do. The soldiers asked me to sing for them in return ... I memorized a song called Day Ma Di, written by anti-war South Vietnamese students. I knew I was slaughtering it, but everyone seemed delighted that I was making the attempt. I finished. Everyone was laughing and clapping, including me ... Here is my best, honest recollection of what happened: someone (I don't remember who) led me towards the gun, and I sat down, still laughing, still applauding. It all had nothing to do with where I was sitting. I hardly even thought about where I was sitting. The cameras flashed ... It is possible that it was a set up, that the Vietnamese had it all planned. I will never know. But if they did I can't blame them. The buck stops here. If I was used, I allowed it to happen ... a two-minute lapse of sanity that will haunt me forever ... But the photo exists, delivering its message regardless of what I was doing or feeling. I carry this heavy in my heart. I have apologized numerous times for any pain I may have caused servicemen and their families because of this photograph. It was never my intention to cause harm.[SUP][36][/SUP]
​

During her trip, Fonda made ten radio broadcasts in which she denounced American political and military leaders as "war criminals". Fonda has defended her decision to travel to North Vietnam and her radio broadcasts.[SUP][37][/SUP][SUP][38][/SUP] Also during the course of her visit, Fonda visited American prisoners of war (POWs), and brought back messages from them to their families. When cases of torture began to emerge among POWs returning to the United States, Fonda called the returning POWs "hypocrites and liars". She added, "These were not men who had been tortured. These were not men who had been starved. These were not men who had been brainwashed."[SUP][39][/SUP] Later, on the subject of torture used during the Vietnam War, Fonda 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."[SUP][40][/SUP] Fonda said the POWs were "military careerists and professional killers" who are "trying to make themselves look self-righteous, but they are war criminals according to the law".[SUP][38][/SUP]
Her visits to the POW camp led to persistent and exaggerated[SUP][38][/SUP] rumors repeated widely in the press, and decades later have continued to circulate on the Internet. Fonda has personally denied the rumors.[SUP][36][/SUP] Interviews with two of the alleged victims specifically named in the emails found these allegations to be false as they had never met Fonda.[SUP][38][/SUP]
In 1972, Fonda helped fund and organize the Indochina Peace Campaign.[SUP][41][/SUP] It continued to mobilize antiwar activists across the nation after the 1973 Paris Peace Agreement, through 1975, when the United States withdrew from Vietnam.[SUP][42][/SUP]
Because of her time in North Vietnam, the ensuing circulated rumors regarding the visit, and statements made following her return, resentment against her among veterans and those currently serving in the U.S. military still exists. For example, for many years at the U.S. Naval Academy, when a plebe shouted out "Goodnight, Jane Fonda!", the entire company replied "Goodnight, bitch!"[SUP][43][/SUP] This practice has since been prohibited by the academy's Plebe Summer Standard Operating Procedures.[SUP][44][/SUP] In 2005, Michael A. Smith, a U.S. Navy veteran, was arrested for disorderly conduct in Kansas City, Missouri, after he spat chewing tobacco in Fonda's face during a book-signing event for her autobiography, My Life So Far. He told reporters that he "consider[ed] it a debt of honor" and further stated "she spit in our faces for 37 years. It was absolutely worth it. There are a lot of veterans who would love to do what I did."[SUP][27][/SUP][SUP][45][/SUP]
[h=4]Regrets[/h] In a 1988 interview with Barbara Walters, Fonda expressed regret for some of her comments and actions, stating:

I would like to say something, not just to Vietnam veterans in New England, but to men who were in Vietnam, who I hurt, or whose pain I caused to deepen because of things that I said or did. I was trying to help end the killing and the war, but there were times when I was thoughtless and careless about it and I'm very sorry that I hurt them. And I want to apologize to them and their families. [...] 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.[SUP][46][/SUP]
​

Critics responded that her apology came at a time when a group of New England Veterans had launched a campaign to disrupt a film project she was working on, leading to the charge that her apology was motivated at least partly by self-interest.[SUP][38][/SUP][SUP][47][/SUP]
In a 60 Minutes interview on March 31, 2005, Fonda reiterated that she had no regrets about her trip to North Vietnam in 1972, with the exception of the anti-aircraft-gun photo. She stated that the incident was a "betrayal" of American forces and of the "country that gave me privilege". Fonda said, "The image of Jane Fonda, Barbarella, Henry Fonda's daughter ... sitting on an enemy aircraft gun was a betrayal ... the largest lapse of judgment that I can even imagine." She later distinguished between regret over the use of her image as propaganda and pride for her anti-war activism: "There are hundreds of American delegations that had met with the POWs. Both sides were using the POWs for propaganda ... It's not something that I will apologize for." Fonda said she had no regrets about the broadcasts she made on Radio Hanoi, something she asked the North Vietnamese to do: "Our government was lying to us and men were dying because of it, and I felt I had to do anything that I could to expose the lies and help end the war."[SUP][48][/SUP]
In its review of Lee Daniels' The Butler, New Orleans' The Times-Picayune opined that "the controversial casting of actress and liberal activist Jane Fonda as Nancy Reagan" constituted "a head-shaking bit of stunt casting if ever there was one".[SUP][49][/SUP] The New York Post reported that during one interview promoting the film, "actress Jane Fonda wears 'Hanoi Jane' T-shirt".[SUP][50][/SUP]eace

[h=3][/h]

 

[solletica]

Of course you don't, you're fine with cozying up to the traitor.

Nope, no traitor in those pics, either. Please cite the traitor in the following pics. . .

Images of Jane Fonda « Images of Sexy Women

The hypocrisy of your liberal attitude is showing. You don't care how rotten the contents are as long as you find the package sexually appealling. Disgusting.

I wasn't born in time to take advantage of the package, so it's irrelevant. Though you've yet to cite the portion of it that's "rotten."

 

[solletica]

Really?

[h=4]"Hanoi Jane" controversy[/h]
Jane Fonda on the NVA anti-aircraft gun


Fonda visited Hanoi in July 1972. Among other statements, she said the United States had been intentionally targeting the dike system along the Red River. The columnist Joseph Kraft, who was also touring North Vietnam, said he believed the damage to the dikes was incidental and was being used as propaganda by Hanoi, and that, if the U.S. Air Force were "truly going after the dikes, it would do so in a methodical, not a harum-scarum way".[SUP][34][/SUP]
In North Vietnam, Fonda was photographed seated on an anti-aircraft battery; the controversial photo outraged a number of Americans.[SUP][35][/SUP] In her 2005 autobiography, she writes that she was manipulated into sitting on the battery; she had been horrified at the implications of the pictures and regretted they were taken. In a recent entry at her official website, Fonda explained:

It happened on my last day in Hanoi. I was exhausted and an emotional wreck after the 2-week visit ... The translator told me that the soldiers wanted to sing me a song. He translated as they sung. It was a song about the day 'Uncle Ho' declared their country's independence in Hanoi's Ba Dinh Square. I heard these words: "All men are created equal; they are given certain rights; among these are life, Liberty and Happiness." These are the words Ho pronounced at the historic ceremony. I began to cry and clap. These young men should not be our enemy. They celebrate the same words Americans do. The soldiers asked me to sing for them in return ... I memorized a song called Day Ma Di, written by anti-war South Vietnamese students. I knew I was slaughtering it, but everyone seemed delighted that I was making the attempt. I finished. Everyone was laughing and clapping, including me ... Here is my best, honest recollection of what happened: someone (I don't remember who) led me towards the gun, and I sat down, still laughing, still applauding. It all had nothing to do with where I was sitting. I hardly even thought about where I was sitting. The cameras flashed ... It is possible that it was a set up, that the Vietnamese had it all planned. I will never know. But if they did I can't blame them. The buck stops here. If I was used, I allowed it to happen ... a two-minute lapse of sanity that will haunt me forever ... But the photo exists, delivering its message regardless of what I was doing or feeling. I carry this heavy in my heart. I have apologized numerous times for any pain I may have caused servicemen and their families because of this photograph. It was never my intention to cause harm.[SUP][36][/SUP]
​

During her trip, Fonda made ten radio broadcasts in which she denounced American political and military leaders as "war criminals". Fonda has defended her decision to travel to North Vietnam and her radio broadcasts.[SUP][37][/SUP][SUP][38][/SUP] Also during the course of her visit, Fonda visited American prisoners of war (POWs), and brought back messages from them to their families. When cases of torture began to emerge among POWs returning to the United States, Fonda called the returning POWs "hypocrites and liars". She added, "These were not men who had been tortured. These were not men who had been starved. These were not men who had been brainwashed."[SUP][39][/SUP] Later, on the subject of torture used during the Vietnam War, Fonda 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."[SUP][40][/SUP] Fonda said the POWs were "military careerists and professional killers" who are "trying to make themselves look self-righteous, but they are war criminals according to the law".[SUP][38][/SUP]
Her visits to the POW camp led to persistent and exaggerated[SUP][38][/SUP] rumors repeated widely in the press, and decades later have continued to circulate on the Internet. Fonda has personally denied the rumors.[SUP][36][/SUP] Interviews with two of the alleged victims specifically named in the emails found these allegations to be false as they had never met Fonda.[SUP][38][/SUP]
In 1972, Fonda helped fund and organize the Indochina Peace Campaign.[SUP][41][/SUP] It continued to mobilize antiwar activists across the nation after the 1973 Paris Peace Agreement, through 1975, when the United States withdrew from Vietnam.[SUP][42][/SUP]
Because of her time in North Vietnam, the ensuing circulated rumors regarding the visit, and statements made following her return, resentment against her among veterans and those currently serving in the U.S. military still exists. For example, for many years at the U.S. Naval Academy, when a plebe shouted out "Goodnight, Jane Fonda!", the entire company replied "Goodnight, bitch!"[SUP][43][/SUP] This practice has since been prohibited by the academy's Plebe Summer Standard Operating Procedures.[SUP][44][/SUP] In 2005, Michael A. Smith, a U.S. Navy veteran, was arrested for disorderly conduct in Kansas City, Missouri, after he spat chewing tobacco in Fonda's face during a book-signing event for her autobiography, My Life So Far. He told reporters that he "consider[ed] it a debt of honor" and further stated "she spit in our faces for 37 years. It was absolutely worth it. There are a lot of veterans who would love to do what I did."[SUP][27][/SUP][SUP][45][/SUP]
[h=4]Regrets[/h] In a 1988 interview with Barbara Walters, Fonda expressed regret for some of her comments and actions, stating:

I would like to say something, not just to Vietnam veterans in New England, but to men who were in Vietnam, who I hurt, or whose pain I caused to deepen because of things that I said or did. I was trying to help end the killing and the war, but there were times when I was thoughtless and careless about it and I'm very sorry that I hurt them. And I want to apologize to them and their families. [...] 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.[SUP][46][/SUP]
​

Critics responded that her apology came at a time when a group of New England Veterans had launched a campaign to disrupt a film project she was working on, leading to the charge that her apology was motivated at least partly by self-interest.[SUP][38][/SUP][SUP][47][/SUP]
In a 60 Minutes interview on March 31, 2005, Fonda reiterated that she had no regrets about her trip to North Vietnam in 1972, with the exception of the anti-aircraft-gun photo. She stated that the incident was a "betrayal" of American forces and of the "country that gave me privilege". Fonda said, "The image of Jane Fonda, Barbarella, Henry Fonda's daughter ... sitting on an enemy aircraft gun was a betrayal ... the largest lapse of judgment that I can even imagine." She later distinguished between regret over the use of her image as propaganda and pride for her anti-war activism: "There are hundreds of American delegations that had met with the POWs. Both sides were using the POWs for propaganda ... It's not something that I will apologize for." Fonda said she had no regrets about the broadcasts she made on Radio Hanoi, something she asked the North Vietnamese to do: "Our government was lying to us and men were dying because of it, and I felt I had to do anything that I could to expose the lies and help end the war."[SUP][48][/SUP]
In its review of Lee Daniels' The Butler, New Orleans' The Times-Picayune opined that "the controversial casting of actress and liberal activist Jane Fonda as Nancy Reagan" constituted "a head-shaking bit of stunt casting if ever there was one".[SUP][49][/SUP] The New York Post reported that during one interview promoting the film, "actress Jane Fonda wears 'Hanoi Jane' T-shirt".[SUP][50][/SUP]eace

[h=3][/h]

Yes, nowhere is there any information on treasonous activity committed by Fonda. Seems like she was just denouncing the war a like good patriotic American and chillin' out w/a bunch of NVA dudes.

 

[VanceMack]

ANY movie that cast Jane Fonda as Nancy Reagan is going to 'get it wrong'.

 

[Jack Hays]

Yes, nowhere is there any information on treasonous activity committed by Fonda. Seems like she was just denouncing the war a like good patriotic American and chillin' out w/a bunch of NVA dudes.

Really?:lamo
Remind me not to count on you when our country needs patriots.:lamo

"When cases of torture began to emerge among POWs returning to the United States, Fonda called the returning POWs "hypocrites and liars". She added, "These were not men who had been tortured. These were not men who had been starved. These were not men who had been brainwashed."[39] Later, on the subject of torture used during the Vietnam War, Fonda 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."[40] Fonda said the POWs were "military careerists and professional killers" who are "trying to make themselves look self-righteous, but they are war criminals according to the law".[38]

She behaved dishonorably and the stain will never go away.eace

 

[clownboy]

Yes, nowhere is there any information on treasonous activity committed by Fonda. Seems like she was just denouncing the war a like good patriotic American and chillin' out w/a bunch of NVA dudes.

You do realise that the very definition of traitor - consorting with the enemy during a time of war. No, of course you don't. You haven't clue one what you're talking about in this regard.

 

[solletica]

Really?:lamo

Yes, nothing in that article mentioning treasonous activity.

Remind me not to count on you when our country needs patriots.:lamo

You're the one making false accusations against a patriotic woman. What does that make you?

"When cases of torture began to emerge among POWs returning to the United States, Fonda called the returning POWs "hypocrites and liars". She added, "These were not men who had been tortured. These were not men who had been starved. These were not men who had been brainwashed."[39] Later, on the subject of torture used during the Vietnam War, Fonda 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."[40] Fonda said the POWs were "military careerists and professional killers" who are "trying to make themselves look self-righteous, but they are war criminals according to the law".[38]

Whoa, expressing an opinion--how terrible. FYI, according to the 1st Amendment, an honest political statement, including an inaccurate or misleading one, is not a crime, nor is it treason.

If it were, all pols would be in jail.

She behaved dishonorably and the stain will never go away.eace

We're still waiting to see when/where any dishonorable behavior took place.

 

[solletica]

You do realise that the very definition of traitor - consorting with the enemy during a time of war. No, of course you don't. You haven't clue one what you're talking about in this regard.

She was just consorting w/NVA soldiers, not enemies.

 

[Jack Hays]

We're still waiting to see when/where any dishonorable behavior took place.

If you do not believe her behavior was dishonorable then I fear you have no conception of honor. And that is unfortunate for you. You have my sympathy.eace

 

[solletica]

If you do not believe her behavior was dishonorable then I fear you have no conception of honor.

An honorable person is one who stands up for his/her country. And she did by denouncing the war. Whatever misleading comments she made about POWs when she was young and stupid is irrelevant--her heart was in the right place--w/her country, not her government.

It appears, by your assertions, that you are the one without honor, i. e. favoring the side of the government (i. e. the enemy over the people. Why do you hate America?

 

[Jack Hays]

An honorable person is one who stands up for his/her country. And she did by denouncing the war. Whatever misleading comments she made about POWs when she was young and stupid is irrelevant--her heart was in the right place--w/her country, not her government.

It appears, by your assertions, that you are the one without honor, i. e. favoring the side of the government (i. e. the enemy over the people. Why do you hate America?

She remains responsible for her dishonorable statements regardless of what place her heart was in, and there's no compelling reason to believe her later excuses. They coincided comfortably with her career interests. I served our government for nearly 34 years before retiring in 2009, so I don't think that's the enemy. As for Vietnam, I generally don't take sides because it was such a different time. I had friends who served, friends who dodged the draft, friends who resisted and friends who were killed. I still regard them all as friends. I draw the line at actively aiding the enemy, which is what Jane Fonda did.eace

 

[clownboy]

She was just consorting w/NVA soldiers, not enemies.

Who were our enemies. You can play all the games you wish to minimize what she did, but it won't work. She became a poster girl for our enemies of the time and she did so willingly. That you're okay with that, want so desparately to defend that, is NOT okay.

 

[solletica]

She remains responsible for her dishonorable statements regardless of what place her heart was in, and there's no compelling reason to believe her later excuses.

They're just words. True, they were hurtful words, but words don't actually kill/injure anyone.

They coincided comfortably with her career interests.

No it hurt her career.

I served our government for nearly 34 years before retiring in 2009, so I don't think that's the enemy.

It is. This is the same govt. that routinely lies to the public, that sucks up to oil cos. to shield them liabilities for damages, that violates the 4th Amendment at every opportunity (including during Vietnam), that violated individual liberties by instituting forced conscription, and you fought for that? ?

That makes you a traitor. Even if you didn't mean it, you're actions were treasonous.

As for Vietnam, I generally don't take sides because it was such a different time. I had friends who served, friends who dodged the draft, friends who resisted and friends who were killed. I still regard them all as friends. I draw the line at actively aiding the enemy, which is what Jane Fonda

We're still waiting for some information documenting that she aided any enemy. She certainly did not fight for or aid the government, like you. All she was chill out w/NVA troops, and they were never an enemy of the country, or else cite when/where the NVA invaded the US.

 

[solletica]

Who were our enemies.

Elementary School Propoganda Resistance 101: the enemies of one's government aren't necessarily the enemies of the people.

 

[Jack Hays]

They're just words. True, they were hurtful words, but words don't actually kill/injure anyone.



No it hurt her career.



It is. This is the same govt. that routinely lies to the public, that sucks up to oil cos. to shield them liabilities for damages, that violates the 4th Amendment at every opportunity (including during Vietnam), that violated individual liberties by instituting forced conscription, and you fought for that? ?

That makes you a traitor. Even if you didn't mean it, you're actions were treasonous.



We're still waiting for some information documenting that she aided any enemy. She certainly did not fight for or aid the government, like you. All she was chill out w/NVA troops, and they were never an enemy of the country, or else cite when/where the NVA invaded the US.

Well, at this point I'm afraid I can no longer take you seriously. Despite her dishonor, Jane Fonda has had a highly successful career. Her words encouraged our enemies and certainly helped them. Like most reasonable people, I don't agree with your characterization of our government. Good luck to you. You'll need it.:2wave:

 

[solletica]

Well, at this point I'm afraid I can no longer take you seriously. Despite her dishonor, Jane Fonda has had a highly successful career. Her words encouraged our enemies and certainly helped them.

Her words mostly did the opposite of what you're saying. They hurt the enemy-the US government. That means they were patriotic

 

[Jack Hays]

Who are these enemies you keep mentioning? Cite, for once.

In Vietnam, it would have been the armed forces of North Vietnam and the Viet Cong insurgents in South Vietnam.

 

[solletica]

In Vietnam, it would have been the armed forces of North Vietnam and the Viet Cong insurgents in South Vietnam.

When/where in history did they initiate any form of unprovoked aggression against the American people? Cite.

 

[Jack Hays]

When/where in history did they initiate any form of unprovoked aggression against the American people? Cite.

They initiated aggression against South Vietnam, a US ally.

​

"Aid And Comfort": Jane Fonda In North Vietnam" By: Henry Mark Holzer & Erika Holzer Price: $39.95 Foreword by Col. George “Bud” Day Format: Hardback (7 x 10) Pages: 216 ISBN: 0-7864-1247-X Publication Date: 2002 Buy from Amazon.com Buy from McFarland Publishers

Jane Fonda’s visit to Hanoi in July 1972 and her pro–North Vietnamese, anti–American conduct, especially her pose with an anti-aircraft gun used to shoot down American planes and her propaganda broadcasts directed toward American troops, angered many Americans. In their eyes, she was guilty of treason, but she was never charged by the American legal system. Instead, she has made millions, been the recipient of countless awards, and remained an honored American icon.
This work investigates Fonda’s activities in North Vietnam and argues that she could have been indicted for treason, that there would have been enough evidence to take the case to a jury, that she could have been convicted, and that a conviction probably would have been upheld on appeal. It also considers Fonda’s early life and the effect it had on her behavior and beliefs in her later years, her audience of American pows who were forced by the Vietnamese to listen to her broadcasts condemning them as war criminals, her arrival in Vietnam and how it was viewed by American servicemen and civilians, the crime of treason throughout history, and the only Congressional inquiry into her actions, which resulted in the government’s decision to take no legal action against her. Texts of Fonda’s radio broadcasts to American servicemen comprise the appendix.
Henry Mark Holzer is professor emeritus at Brooklyn Law School. Erika Holzer is a lawyer, novelist and essayist.

Reviews and other praise for "Aid and Comfort": Jane Fonda in North Vietnam​

The ca

The case of Robert Walker Lindh, the so-called “American Taliban,” has resurrected the issue of treason. What constitutes treason? What are the precedents? Why wasn't Lindh, who was captured early in the war in Afghanistan, charged with treason? The answers to these and many other questions can be found in a very useful new book about another high-profile case involving an American citizen, who like Lindh, arguably “adher[ed] to [America's] enemies, giving them aid and comfort”—Jane Fonda.

“Aid and Comfort”: Jane Fonda in North Vietnam" by Henry Mark Holzer and Erika Holzer is a veritable sourcebook on treason. While the book is fairly short, it contains a great deal of documentation, including transcripts of Miss Fonda's propaganda broadcasts and other interviews, long passages from court decisions, and congressional testimony.

But the Holzers, both attorneys (Mr. Holzer is also professor emeritus at Brooklyn Law School) succeed remarkably well in making a notoriously difficult topic understandable to the non-lawyer.

The first part of the book, while interesting, is probably the least useful. Based on the work of other writers, it provides a summary of the evolution of Jane Fonda from young starlet to left-wing radical. The second part of the book examines the treatment of U.S. prisoners of war (POWs) by the North Vietnamese and Viet Cong and Miss Fonda's actions during her visit to North Vietnam in July 1972. The evidence against her is to be found in this section.

In the third and by far the most important section of "Aid and Comfort," the Holzers provide a history of the concept of treason and its place in constitutional law. This part is very helpful in thinking about the case of Lindh. Here the Holzers also make a very strong case that Miss Fonda should have been indicted on the charge of treason for her actions in North Vietnam. Indeed, the case against her is actually stronger than the one against Lindh.

As the Holzers point out, the constitutional and legal foundation for the crime of treason was laid in England nearly seven centuries ago during the reign of Edward III. The wording of the Statute of Edward served as the basis for treason legislation passed during the American Revolution and the text of Article III, Section 3 of the Constitution, which defines treason as “levying war” against the United States, or in “adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.”

Miss Fonda's defenders claim that her propaganda broadcasts on behalf of the North Vietnamese did not constitute treason against the United States because Congress did not declare war in the case of Vietnam. Besides, they claim, she was only exercising her right to free speech. The Holzers make mincemeat of these defenses.

They point out that Aaron Burr was indicted for the “levying war” prong of treason even though the United States was not at war with anyone at the time. This principle was reinforced in United States vs. Greathouse (1863). In this case, Justice Stephen Field made the point that “the term ‘enemies,’ as used in [the treason clause of Art. III, Sec. 3], according to its settled meaning, at the time the constitution was adopted, applies only to the subjects of a foreign power in open hostility with us.” As the authors observe, “if . . . [Justice Field] meant to refer to ‘war,’ he certainly would have done so. Instead, he chose the word ‘hostility,” denoting a very different relationship: one not of war.”

The Holzers could also have made the point that the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution constituted a contingent declaration of war. In retrospect we may say that the resolution was an abdication of congressional responsibility, but it did give the president the authority to use force against a state in open hostility to the United States. According to the principle established by Greathouse, the charge of treason was appropriate during the Vietnam War.

No one accuses Miss Fonda of “levying war” against the United States, but they do contend that she adhered to America's enemies during the Vietnam War and gave them “aid and comfort.” Most of the treason cases arising from World War II were of this nature---involving Americans who broadcast propaganda for the enemy—and the courts routinely rejected the “free speech” defense.

These cases were decided in federal Courts of Appeal according to certain principles established by the Supreme Court in Cramer vs. United States and Haupt vs. United States: a charge of treason requires proof, which can be circumstantial, of treasonable intent and at least one overt act of betrayal; and that the overt act, proved by two witnesses, must provide actual aid and comfort to the enemy.

The Holzers demonstrate beyond the shadow of a doubt that, based on cases that included the United States vs. “Tokyo Rose” and “Axis Sally,” Jane Fonda could have been indicted for treason and that the government might well have won its case. For reasons the Holzers show to be very weak, the government chose not to proceed against her.

The Holzers conclude with the observation that there will never be a legal indictment of Jane Fonda for treason. “But there is another kind of indictment: a moral one. And that one, too, has no statute of limitations. Nor should it.”

The Holzers need not worry. For most Americans, the name of Jane Fonda is infamous, conveying the image of a dim bulb, an empty vessel filled with the half-baked ideas of the closest alpha male, who lent her celebrity and wealth to the cause of America's enemies. But her fate may be even worse than infamy - she is an object of ridicule. ---------Mackubin Thomas Owens, Professor of Strategy and Force Planning, Naval War College, in The Washington Times.

"We former POWs will never forget being forced to listen to the propaganda broadcasts of Jane Fonda from Hanoi. "Aid and Comfort": Jane Fonda in North Vietnam is 'must reading' for those who want irrefutable proof of Hanoi Jane's treachery, and its legal significance." Mike McGrath, Capt. USN (Ret.), President, NAM-POW.​

​

"No American who loves their country will fail to be sickened by the story Professor and Mrs. Holzer have told in this book. They are owed a debt of gratitude by those who cherish liberty and continue to defend it." David Horowitz, President, David Horowitz Freedom Center.​

​

"Using [Fonda's] own speeches . . . Professor and Mrs. Holzer cleverly connect her eagerly delivered statements to the law of treason, and lead you through a thicket of law and evidence with incontrovertible logic. Follow them through this remarkable book as they prove that there was enough evidence to indict and convict her of the grandfather of all crimes. You, too, can review that evidence and then cast a 'guilty' ballot." George E. "Bud" Day, Col. USAF (Ret.), Recipient of the Medal of Honor.​

​

"Axis Sally, Tokyo Rose, Lord Haw Haw--all of whom were punished as traitors--would have been amazed to read "Aid and Comfort": Jane Fonda in North Vietnam. The sum fo their acts of treason equals a small fraction of the acts of aid and comfort Jane Fonda gave our Communist enemies. This book will shock many Americans. That Fonda committed many acts of aid and comfort documented here is astonishing. That the American government looked the other way is astounding. This book provides the indictment that the government oculd have handed to a jury--if it had the wil to do so in those days. A 'must read'!" Fred Kiley, Col. USAF (Ret.), Co-author, Honor Bound, American Prisoners of War in Southeast Asia, 1961-1973.​

​

“ Aid and Comfort": Jane Fonda in North Vietnam is not a potboiler; it is a blood boiler, and your blood will surely boil when you read the Holzer's description of Jane Fonda's treachery during the Vietnam War. As a combat infantry officer in Vietnam, I can attest to the fact that Jane Fonda, and people like her, succeeded very well in lowering troop morale, and as any combat vet will tell you, low morale leads to lowered effectiveness, and that leads to battlefield deaths. Henry Mark Holzer and Erika Holzer present a well written, well researched, and very logical indictment for treason against Jane Fonda. This book is not only about the past, it is about the post-September 11, 2001, present; it is about people who can find nothing good about their country, people who see no moral justification in national defense, people who make excuses for and who aid and abet repressive and hostile regimes. For those of us who answered the call of duty, and who put their lives on the line for this country, Jane Fonda will forever be a symbol of treachery, divisiveness, and cowardness. In a way, she got away with treason, but the Holzer's book goes a long way in righting a terrible wrong. ” Nelson DeMille, Author, Up Country.

“This excellent and meticulously researched book indisputably makes the case that Jane Fonda could have and should have been indicted for treason for her unconscionable activities on behalf of our nation's enemy during the Vietnam War.
Contrary to what other reviewers have opined, this is NOT 'ancient history.'
With our troops once again in harm's way in a shooting war, Ms. Fonda's despicable activities need to be kept clearly in mind by those who would cross the line separating robust discourse from the giving of aid and comfort to the enemy.
Disagreeing with our nation's foreign policy does not give one license to commit treason. Ms. Fonda's treasonous actions, and our government's weak-kneed failure to prosecute her for her crime, also need to be kept in mind by our current leaders. When the government makes the decision to commit our armed forces to war and (for some) death, it has an obligation to prosecute those who cast in their lot with the enemy our troops have been ordered to defeat. Like it or not, wartime is different; not everything goes. And any government who, in the name of "freedom," fails or is afraid to prosecute the treasonous, itself betrays our nation and its armed forces. The tale of Jane Fonda — and what she did, and what the government didn't do — is indeed a timely one." Pierce Haveko, Lawyer.eace

 

[solletica]

They initiated aggression against South Vietnam, a US ally.

South Vietnam was never an ally of the American people. Cite when/where the people ever signed a treaty formailizing such an alliance or any informal agreement between the American People and the South Vietnam.

The US government (not the American people) merely chose to stupidly wage war against the NVA claiming it was in defense of South Vietnam. That's it. The American people were not involved in that decision--they were mostly against it.

Looks like you need another lesson in history.

 

[Jack Hays]

South Vietnam was never an ally of the American people. Cite when/where the people ever signed a treaty formailizing such an alliance or any informal agreement between the American People and the South Vietnam.

The US government (not the American people) merely chose to stupidly wage war against the NVA claiming it was in defense of South Vietnam. That's it. The American people were not involved in that decision--they were mostly against it.

Looks like you need another lesson in history.

[h=3]South East Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO)[/h]

​

The South East Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO), or the Manila Pact, was formed in Manila on September 8, 1954, by the United States, Great Britain, France, Australia, New Zealand, Pakistan, Thailand, and the Philippines.

A special protocol added Cambodia, Laos, and South Vietnam to the protection of SEATO. The main reason behind the formation of a collective defense treaty in Southeast Asia was the containment of communism. The United States in the cold war period wanted to prevent communism from spreading. eace

I await your apology.:waiting:

 

[solletica]

[h=3]South East Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO)[/h]

​

The South East Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO), or the Manila Pact, was formed in Manila on September 8, 1954, by the United States, Great Britain, France, Australia, New Zealand, Pakistan, Thailand, and the Philippines.

A special protocol added Cambodia, Laos, and South Vietnam to the protection of SEATO. The main reason behind the formation of a collective defense treaty in Southeast Asia was the containment of communism. The United States in the cold war period wanted to prevent communism from spreading. eace

I await your apology.:waiting:

No need for an apology, because in fact not one of those countries ever signed any treaty w/the American people.

The Manila pact was between governments only; not once did the American People have a chance to vote in favor of such a treaty (or against it) nor did they have any say in determining whether South Vietnam would be under SEATO protection.

I asked whether South Vietnam was ever an ally of the American people, not the US government. I await your apology.

 

[Jack Hays]

No need for an apology, because in fact not one of those countries ever signed any treaty w/the American people.

The Manila pact was between governments only; not once did the American People have a chance to vote in favor of such a treaty (or against it) nor did they have any say in determining whether South Vietnam would be under SEATO protection.

I asked whether South Vietnam was ever an ally of the American people, not the US government. I await your apology.

All treaties are between governments. You are now just ducking and dodging.

 

[solletica]

All treaties are between governments.

False. It's possible for a nation's people or even a subset of its people to sign a treaty w/foreigners or their government. Like when Hezbollah signs a treaty w/Iran. Hezbollah, FYI, is not a government. It's an organization of individuals based in Lebanon.

And at no time did the American people or even a subset ever sign a treaty w/South Vietnam, which is precisely what I asked in the cite.

Since no such alliance existed, the NVA's actions in South Vietnam did not constitute aggression against the American people.

Looks like you made the ridiculous (Limbaugh-like) assumption that governments and people are one and the same.

 

[Jack Hays]

False. It's possible for a nation's people or even a subset of its people to sign a treaty w/foreigners or their government. Like when Hezbollah signs a treaty w/Iran. Hezbollah, FYI, is not a government. It's an organization of individuals based in Lebanon.

And at no time did the American people or even a subset ever sign a treaty w/South Vietnam, which is precisely what I asked in the cite.

Since no such alliance existed, the NVA's actions in South Vietnam did not constitute aggression against the American people.

Looks like you made the ridiculous (Limbaugh-like) assumption that governments and people are one and the same.

A treaty is an express agreement under international law entered into by actors in international law, namely sovereign states and international organizations. A treaty may also be known as an (international) agreement, protocol, covenant, contract,convention, pact, or exchange of letters, among other terms. Regardless of terminology, all of these forms of agreements are, under international law, equally considered treaties and the rules are the same.[SUP][1][/SUP]
Treaties can be loosely compared to contracts: both are means of willing parties assuming obligations among themselves, and a party to either that fails to live up to their obligations can be held liable under international law.eace