Comments on: Jane Fonda has No Apologies

By: stayoffthemoors

stayoffthemoors — Sat, 01 Mar 2008 14:37:23 +0000

At least she isn’t a soulless murderer.
She was protesting against a war that couldn’t be won, that was being fought for no good reason. A bit like Iraq.
Come on!!! Do you really believe what Bush tells you.
Are you all that dumb?
Idiot!!

By: david

david — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 16:00:45 +0000

I can’t believe that 35 years later there is still some people thinking that Jane Fonda was a traitor. It’s absurd to talk about Hitler, the vietnamese didn’t invade any country, they were fighting to be free in their own country.
The war killed dozen of thousands of poor US soldiers ( and many more vietnamese ) and the war was not legitimate, just like Irak invasion now is not legitimate, too.
Jane did the right thing, really. America finally lost the war, as the US always do when they do a war for unlegitimate reasons.

By: Glynn M. Lapeyrouse

Glynn M. Lapeyrouse — Sat, 14 Jul 2007 19:21:03 +0000

Jane Fonda is a very attractive woman and a pretty good actrice . Problem is, she is a traitor. I’m sure what I have to say will mean nothing to her. Going to the enemy, —– I have a hard time with this. When the time comes and you are laying on your death bed remember me. I am the guy you shit on. I wish you a peacefull death, just remember the guys you shit on. And know they know who and what you are

Rest in Peace

By: Sajarac

Sajarac — Sat, 07 May 2005 14:11:05 +0000

Lets judge Jane Fonda’s actions fairly, i.e. not by our current standards of relativism where, under the right circumsatances, anything is OK. We need to judge her actions by 1972 standards of conduct. We were a war-weary country and angry at our government. We saw no point to the war. So what did Jane do? As a U.S. citizen empowered by her popularity and wealth, she did not merely exercise her American right to free speech, she physically went to the enemy and demonstrated her support–even to the point of doing direct actions that she knew would endanger individual US persons, i.e. the POWs. By the standards of the time, and by the standards of conduct throughout US history on which she could draw for guidance, she had to have known that her actions were TREASONOUS. Imagine if she had done the same with Hitler. I recall a certain British royalty who merely had wavering feelings toward the Nazis and was forever condemned. So lets be fair and judge Jane by the standards of her time and the perspective that she had available to her. If we do so we still find her guilty. Guilty then, guilty now, guilty in the eyes of history. And sometimes, even in America, one is held responsible for ones actions. Guilty.