Resolving The Spitting Debate
There’s a growing blog debate going on as regards peace activists spitting on returning veterans during the Vietnam era. It begins here at Slate in an article claiming the charges are false.
The myth of the spat-upon Vietnam veteran refuses to die.
At Volokh, Jim Lindgren points out some weaknesses in search mechanisms that could lead to the stories not showing up in contemporaneous reports, leading to the assumption that it didn’t happen.
Always up for a Google challenge, I decided to take a look and can confirm that spitting and more did in fact take place. Stored on a government server found via advanced Google, there’s this first person account – also available in pdf.
As a young Marine officer Carl Bourne was trying to help recruit University of
Connecticut students into the USMC. Some UConn students responded by spitting at him and throwing ink on his dress uniform, Bourne said about his experience on the Storrs campus.Bourne was the target of spitting and ink throwing in 1973. As a lieutenant he paid for his uniforms, so the ink was not a welcome alteration, especially considering the low pay of the early 1970s. He said he was also called a "baby killer" – right in his own home state.
Another instance is documented in a government fact sheet.
The Legacy of Psychological Trauma from the Vietnam War for American Indian Military Personnel
"I was spit on and called a baby-killer in the mainstream culture when I first came home, and no way any college would accept me or any good job would be open to me. I felt too ashamed and enraged to accept the love and gratitude my family and community showed me. I thought I was going crazy, waking up in a sweat trying to choke my wife, seeing signs of Charley around every corner when the weather was hot and steamy.
Another report covering multiple instances from Cornell that should also be available through the Library of Congress and a Veteran’s History Project.
The Tet Offensive began 37 days after Henschel arrived in Vietnam. His unit was sent into Hue, the old imperial capital.
Henschel’s platoon was almost wiped out and Henschel himself was shot in the head when he tried to rescue a wounded comrade. The unconscious Marine was placed on top of a tank. When a shell hit the tank, Henschel fell off, and the tank apparently ran over his left leg.
"At this point, probably everyone thought I was dead, but I was unconscious for seven weeks. I regained consciousness in San Diego, Calif., at the naval hospital there. I weighed 72 pounds," Henschel said.
Henschel tried to go to college after he recovered, but he had trouble concentrating because of his injury and discovered that many fellow students at Cornell were hostile.
"I can’t count the number of times I was called a murderer," he said. "And actually spit in my face."
Another first person account via a DOD publication:
Back in the 1960s, Cannon graduated from high school and 10 days later was enlisted in the Air Force. He was stationed at Clark Air Base in the Philippines for 17 months beginning in June, 1967. Upon his return to the United States, he was spit on three times while riding the cable cars in San Francisco simply because he was in uniform.
This below from a California Assembly Bill on Public Safety circa 2003:
"Overcome by their hatred, people threw rocks at the returning soldiers. Some spit at them. Others physically attacked them and tormented them. No one should have to endure that kind of hate-related violence for simply agreeing to serve their country."
None of the above reports have a dog in this fight now. But obviously they support reports like this at Black Five:
It happened to me, and I asked my father if it had ever happened to him. If anyone were to be on the receiving end, it would have been him after being involved in the Ohio State riots and Ohio University riots for years.
As The Jawa Report suggests, the notion that returning veterans weren’t abused, particularly by spitting, after Vietnam is simply pathetic revisionism by an increasingly revolting Left that opposes the war, while claiming to support the troops.
Were that so, they would not be so interested in revising history and, by default, calling so many of our troops, both past and present, liars to boot.
So, can we question their patriotism now?
So, can we question their patriotism now?
No you can’t. Cherry pick “first hand” accounts all you want, that doesn’t make it so. Of course now you have Joshua Sparling as your little darling who just happens to find his way to the center of these altercations at every turn.
Just because my patriotism doesn’t match yours doesn’t give you any right to question it. Do I get to question yours? I mean you lay down for this presidents every wish never questioning him or his VP as if you were a dog at their feet. Is that patriotic?
No you can’t. Cherry pick “first hand” accounts all you want”
You’re a worthless piece of garbage.
Why, because I disagree with you? You get ticked at me because I question the validity of these accounts, yet you are more than willing to question the accounts of the accomplishments of John Kerry in Vietnam, how is that any different?
Just human scum, that’s all you are.
That’s all you’ve got Dan? Pathetic. They should take away your commision in the 101st Keyboard Brigade.
Here’s the thing, you can’t recognize sarcasm when you see it. Is it POSSIBLE that a few individuals have been spit on in the past? Yes it’s POSSIBLE. But don’t use that to paint the entire left, it’s mendacious at best. It would be like me saying “A couple of guys in Iraq murdered an entire family and gang raped a 13yo, all Marines and Soldiers are evil”. I don’t think that at all, nor does the vast majority of the left. It is becoming clearer by the minute that more and more of the right believes liberals/progressives are ALL anti-military. Of course that’s to be expected as your numbers dwindle.
Whoaa, Dan – TheSpartan is kicking your ass. Let’s talk about your debating skills, not to mention your record of posting bogus links and relying upon, ahem, questionable sources. And to, say, connect me to someone who MAY have spit on a soldier? By what logic,Dan? I’m not a pacifist, I’m not anti-war, I think World War II was a good war and worked out right, I think Vietnam was a war that should have been won in a matter of months and was dragged out by special interests and profiteers, I belive Afghanistan is slipping back to the Taliban because Bush Blundered into Iraq and, finally, that George W. Bush is so stuck on stupid as to never be able to extricate himself from stupid. But, Dan, I digress – your debating skills – they suck.
“But don’t use that to paint the entire left,”
of course it’s not the ENTIRE left. however, the ENTIRE right never has and never will spit on a soldier.
BTW, Mr. Bourne, in your first account, was never in Vietnam – the spitting you describe was on a college campus; and the one individual quoted as coming back from Vietnam said the only person who met him was his wife.
“ENTIRE right never has and never will spit on a soldier.”
And the ENTIRE left has never blown up an abortion clinic, what’s your point?
Sorry, Dan. It’s pretty clear by now that Sparling, for one, simply makes sh*t up. If you knew a black guy who claimed that he heard “Send ‘em back to Africa!” every time he went to a Republican fundraiser, you’d probably get a little suspicious. And if I called you “worthless garbage” and “human scum” because of it, you’d probably suspect that maybe that was the plan all along.
Spartan 1, Conboy 0. This is shaping up as bad as being laughed at on national tv (on Fox no less) for calling a Macaca victory. Stay the course, conboy!!
Spitting Angry: Dan Riehl Debunks Slate’s Claim That No Vietnam Vets Were Spat Upon
The claim seemed rather stupid from the start. But the “study” purports to have found not a single contemporaneously-reported instance of Vietnam vets being spat upon. Just an urban legend, the amateur webzine Slate claims, seeking to extirpate the bad…
If you think someone not carrying on against crap he’d just as soon wipe off his shoe means you win a debate, feel free to do so. As far as I’m concerned, you and your arguments are just so much dung I’ve scraped off and moved on. And I didn’t even put you in a little save the planet baggie – so choke on that.
The only one spitting on veterans, Dan, is you. Today you spit on Iraq war veterans by supporting the very president that sent them to Iraq based upon his lies. You don’t support veterans, Dan, you use them as props for your agenda.
“Like many stories of the spat-upon veteran genre, Smith’s lacks credulity. GIs landed at military airbases, not civilian airports, and protesters could not have gotten onto the bases and anywhere near deplaning troops. There may have been exceptions, of course, but in those cases how would protesters have known in advance that a plane was being diverted to a civilian site? And even then, returnees would have been immediately bused to nearby military installations and processed for reassignment or discharge.
The exaggerations in Smith’s story are characteristic of those told by others. ”Most Vietnam veterans were spat on when we came back,” he said. That’s not true. A 1971 Harris poll conducted for the Veterans Administration found over 90 percent of Vietnam veterans reporting a friendly homecoming. Far from spitting on veterans, the antiwar movement welcomed them into its ranks and thousands of veterans joined the opposition to the war.”
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/04/30/debunking_a_spitting_image/
Then there’s this, Dan. http://opovet.blogspot.com/
“Coincidentally, as I was composing the previous blog entry, I got a post on my old “spitting on vets” post. Someone who prefers to hide behind anonymity cites a reference to an alleged CBS news story from December 1971 that “proves” that Vietnam vets were spit on. And based on this single citation he claims that “hundreds” of Vietnam vets were victims of expectorant attacks.
Okay, I’ll bite. I looked at the source. Just as I suspected, it is not a documented contemporary account. It’s just some guy saying after the fact that he was spit on at the Seattle airport on his way back from Vietnam. There were no arrests, no incident reports filed by airport security or local police, no contemporary newspaper accounts, nothing. Just one guy’s after-the-fact claim.”
Hmm. Sounds, like some made-up swiftboat bullshit. You cons love making up stories don’t you??
Dan, I had the pleasure in meeting up with a Vietnam vet this past Veterans day. He came into my place of employment and for some reason he caught my eye, not knowing he was a vet something told me to say Happy Veterans day to him. He reached out, took my hands and said to me, I knew there was something special about you, I could see the kindness in your eyes. We stood there talking for close to an hour. He shared with me what brought him to this part of PA. He now lives as a minister in upstate. He came down to visit a dying army pal who lives in town. We got to talking about the protests of the war in Iraq. That is when he started to share with me about his experience and that of so many others on returning from Nam. He claimed to have lived in a community in the back woods of Washington. There were around 30 vets who at first set up living in tents then eventually built homes, raised famalies. He said the vets them selves never went into town due to being treated so badly upon their return. Those that married and had children choose to home school them to limit their contact. I had tears in my eyes as he was telling me these things. Mind you, he did not start the topic, I did. I do not now nor did I at the time think he was trying to bullshit me with a made up story. I tried that night to find something about the story he shared on Google, but wasn’t able to find anything. Not that it’s important, I believed him, mostly because he shared with me of his healing and eventual entry into ministry.
I can remember first hand as a student in high school all the stories of the return of these brave men. First hand I witnessed the protesters lining the road the day my best friends brother who was killed in nam was buried. After the funeral there was a service at our local police department. In anger Mike’s best friend who accompanied his body home to Bucks County was so upset with the protesters, when he attached our Flag to raise it in honor of Mike, he attached it upside down. The local paper the next day showed it as a sign of disrespect and protest by this highly decorated man. Those there who knew Mike and his best friend Len, knew it to be quite the opposite.
Thank you Dan for bringing up this topic once again. This is all I could think about from the very first protest over Iraq. I don’t give a damn what those that say they support our troops and are protesting the war say. You can not protest something you dislike so much and still give respect to the men fighting this war. These men and women in uniform are not stupid and they believe in what they are doing or they sure as hell wouldn’t be doing it!
Protestors like the Westboro Baptist Church, Cindi? The Rev. Fred Phelps, Christian Extraordinaire who protests at the funerals of Iraq War Dead? Those protestors you cite in your post, Cindi, apparently did nothing but line the roads – perhaps in mourning for someone lost. Are you going to tell me they disrespected the casualty? I would certainly love you to provide any proof of your allegation. And I’m betting you cannot and will not.
Q: What the hell kind of loser raises a family in a tent?? A: One that believes in homeschooling. Wow, that guy sounds like a TOTAL kook!!
America does not deserve it’s nobel veterans…..Thank you Dan for exposing the Lefts hatred for troops.They just can’t help it:(
Report phony vets:
http://www.pownetwork.org/phonies/phonies.htm
http://www.miafacts.org/stolenvalor.htm
http://www.sftt.us/roster.html
“You get ticked at me because I question the validity of these accounts”
So let me get this straight. We have the “chickenhawk” argument that says anyone who wasn’t in the military can’t have an opinion on the war’s prosecution. But we also have you saying those in the military are talking shit about the spitting allegations.
Why is it vets testimony about one thing is valid, but about another its not?
Why the double standard here?
Phoney vets???Where??*Lightsaber ignited*
How many ‘Carl Bourne’ vets are there? ” “I can remember being spit on, having ink thrown at me, and being called a baby killer,” said Staff Sgt. Carl Bourne, 53, a National Guardsman from Montville, Conn., who was a Marine stationed in the Philippines during the Vietnam War. “Now it’s a whole different ball game. … It’s so much different than the Vietnam time frame.”" Similar yet inconsistent, hmmm? http://www.washtimes.com/metro/20031211-094853-9442r.htm
On a related topic, how’s the liberation going in Iraq? Word is a lot of hearts and minds are scattered all over the streets of Baghdad today. You cons are utter failures.
Artie you still have not joined your Jihad friends yet???Oh that’s right you are more valuable here for the cause.
Jihad? Ha, you consheep are such laughable turds. Truth hurts, huh? You and your retarded leader are fools.
Maybe the muzzies will get you last Artie.Depends how long they need useful fools.
“How many ‘Carl Bourne’ vets are there?”
The accounts aren’t inconsistent. He went on to recruit and the spitting incident was in 1973. One report may have had the rank wrong, or he could have gotten a field commission to Lt. – which is the basic level. The story I linked was in fact about the CT guard.
‘could have,’ ‘might have,’ ‘if frogs had wings they wouldn’t bump their asses.’ C’mon, Dan!!! The man was 53 in 2003 making him 33 in 1973 making him one of the oldest LTs in the US Army!!! Sheesh!!
It’s possible that Mr. Bourne held a commission at one point, but failed to make rank (and if he has been in the service in some form or another for over 30 years that would seem likely unless he was, by now, a general officer) and went back to the enlisted ranks. I know of several officers who have done just that-they will retire as the highest rank held and continue to accumulate points toward retirement as an enlisted soldier.
Bill Adkins-check your math again.
I don’t peruse the comments here very often, but I gotta ask… why do you guys even engage people like “Artie” and “TheSpartan?
I mean… TheSpartan jumps right in with a blatantly fallacious bit of flamebait–you’re “cherry picking first hand accounts” but he doesn’t provide examples of contradictory “first hand accounts”–and you argue with him? What good does that do? When you stoop to their moronic level of debate it reflects poorly on this side as well.
The left just can’t accept the fact that they were military hating assholes in the sixties. Sorry, talk to the vets I know who were spit on, had paint thrown at them and had the lefty hippies calling them baby killers. Wishing it did not happen because you are now ashamed does not make it so. It just makes you a liar. The left has no credibility on this issue, and they never will.
You can link all the made up bullshit articles you want, but thousands of actual vets who were there know the truth. You can ask them on the mall every Memorial Day.
Kerry’s lies were exposed when he tried to whitewash his Winter Soldier history. He even lied about throwing his medals away in an anti-war protest. He is a liar, period.
I came home in Feb. 1967 and returned to Idlewild(JFK) airport from Treasure Island and into civilian life without incident. I did witness over the years, the people following me home, the abuse and disrespect they endured. The Americans back then that supported Communism and our enemies considered themselves patriots in their own minds. They, and the people that emulate them today are my enemies.
Who cares? What is the point of rehashing the events of 30 years ago if not for more amunition to bash those who are against THIS war?
Everyone knows that Vietnam vets were not treated with the respect they deserved, ESPECIALLY since they went to Vietnam as part of a draft, not voluntarily.
Debated specific incidents that did or did not occur seems pretty sophmoric. Oh yeah, that is what is always on this blog. Never mind.
Nice debunking work, Dan.
Can you believe these assholes who would today spit on a soldier if they could get away with it (I think the current national sentiment is still good enough that it would result in the spitter getting a royal beating), find it inconceivable that Vietnam vets would have been spit on?
Dan is a Master Debator.
Oy god. Since when is being against the invasion of Iraq equate with spitting on troops? Only in your poor deluded mind.
Q: What the hell kind of loser raises a family in a tent?? A: One that believes in homeschooling. Wow, that guy sounds like a TOTAL kook!!
Posted by: Artie | Saturday, February 03, 2007 at 03:12 PM
Artie, if you are going to quote me, at least get it right;
“There were around 30 vets who at first set up living in tents then eventually built homes, raised famalies.”
And I’m betting you cannot and will not.
Posted by: Bill Adkins | Saturday, February 03, 2007 at 03:09 PM
This was 1969 there are no archives online for this story. How about you, can you pull up archived articles from your hometown news paper from the same year?
The man was 53 in 2003 making him 33 in 1973 making him one of the oldest LTs in the US Army!!! Sheesh!!
You need to work on your basic math skills.
(I think the current national sentiment is still good enough that it would result in the spitter getting a royal beating), find it inconceivable that Vietnam vets would have been spit on?
Posted by: Gordon | Saturday, February 03, 2007 at 04:07 PM
Hi Gordon! Yes you are right about a royal beating now a day. I would give anyone the same for even debating if this ever occured. Are you picturing the same thing I am, as these jack offs sit at their computer and type? You know, sitting at their desk in high school, never being invited to the prom, football game? The John Kerry types of the world.
“The man was 53 in 2003 making him 33 in 1973 making him one of the oldest LTs in the US Army!!! Sheesh!!
You need to work on your basic math skills.”
Let him go… he’s on a roll.
“Who cares? What is the point of rehashing the events of 30 years ago if not for more amunition to bash those who are against THIS war?
Everyone knows that Vietnam vets were not treated with the respect they deserved, ESPECIALLY since they went to Vietnam as part of a draft, not voluntarily.
Debated specific incidents that did or did not occur seems pretty sophmoric. Oh yeah, that is what is always on this blog. Never mind.”
You seem to be missing the fact that this post is a RESPONSE to an article stating that mistreatment of Vietnam Vets, which you acknowledge, is a “myth”.
If you have a complaint, take it to the people who wrote the article, not with Dan, who has proven it to be untrue.
Hey Cin! Been a while.
“Are you picturing the same thing I am, as these jack offs sit at their computer and type? You know, sitting at their desk in high school, never being invited to the prom, football game? The John Kerry types of the world.”
Bingo. I wonder if they’ve actually done anything positive with their lives. It’s easy for them to piss and moan about the gov’t, the military-industrial complex, etc. But besides consuming bandwidth and oxygen, I doubt the add anything of value.
What do soldiers want?
“Soldier, what is good in life?”
“To kill your enemies, see them driven before you, and return home with the grateful thanks of your country and free people everywhere!”
What do liberals rely on?
“Civilized men are more discourteous than savages because they know they can be impolite without having their skulls split, as a general thing.”…Robert E. Howard
…not that ‘liberals’ can be mistaken for ‘civilized men’…
Newsflash for the koolaid-drinking sheep. Your brave little fairy tales about WMDs and abused military heros just dont wash. No facts to support any of it. No one believes you or, for that matter, really cares. Sure, a few flat-earth rednecks do, but who the hell cares what they think. Stay the course, keep losing your little Iraq adventure and even more seats in ’08. Irrelevance suits you.
“Stay the course, keep losing your little Iraq adventure and even more seats in ’08. Irrelevance suits you.”
Hey artie, what’s it like to actively root for the defeat of your country and the deaths of its military. You can whine that that isn’t what you said, but in “reality”, that’s exactly what it is. You are actively counting on Iraq being a political liability for the Republicans, and in order for that to happen is for more deaths.
How do you sleep at night?
BTW, who told those “fairy tales” of WMDs? Or, to put a finer point on it, when the “fairy tales” were being told, who was pointing that out? If it was as obvious as you say, there must have been lots of people disputing the fact there were WMDs in Iraq.
Who were they?
They were everywhere. The UN inspectors for one. Our allies told us that many of the intelligence sources for the WMD, nukes program, mobile chemical labs, etc. were NOT CREDIBLE. Out own intelligence agencies had, at one time, told us the sources were not credible, but somehow Dick Cheney’s visits to the CIA changed that.
If you actually have read anything about the specific pieces of “evidence” about WMD and the rest of the imaginary threats it would be crystal clear that it was massaged to get the conclusion that Bush wanted and that any questions within our own agencies were drastically downplayed. If only the liberal media had done its job we might have prevented this waste of lives and money.
I don’t see any evidence that Bush has a plan to improve the Iraq situation, I don’t believe our military believes in the surge idea either. I don’t believe if we h aven’t effectively trained the Iraqi’s in 4 years that another six months is going to work any miracle.
The surge option is bullshit, it is another manifestation of Bush II’s refusal to admit his policy is a failure.
Dan, I posted this at Ace’s. Commenters there suggested commenting here as well. Thank you for resurrecting history the left would prefer to pretend never happened. A lot of us thank John Kerry for giving us the reputation we didn’t earn. I’ve been on the receiving end of the left’s love for those in uniform:
“A woman in the Dallas-Fort Worth airport a few days before Christmas in 1973 didn’t spit on me but the memory of seeing the hate in her eyes for my uniform has never left me.
I know several Vietnam veterans who were spit on. I know of one family who, when their Marine son was killed in 1967, received telephone calls mocking his death. The loving and kind left, may they rot in hell.”
BTW, John Kerry shot himself in the ass to get his third Heart and ticket home. He’s a useless, cowardly POS.
Artie (quite the gay nick, there, bub), the only thing that would suit you besides your male beau would be an unoccupied rosy-tailed sheep (or, lacking that, perhaps a good dose of your own WMD’s (Whacko Mad Democraps), given to you orally by Sadly, No’s own http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i294/serr8d/sadlynots2sm.jpg Retardo Montalban…isn’t that you, there, with your mouth open?
;D
They were everywhere. The UN inspectors for one. Our allies told us that many of the intelligence sources for the WMD, nukes program, mobile chemical labs, etc. were NOT CREDIBLE
Specifics please.
It is interesting that Germany, France and Russia stood to lose Billions of dollars in OFF money if we invaded, yet none of them ever questioned WMDs.
“The man was 53 in 2003 making him 33 in 1973
LOL Nice catch, Gordo. You’d think these idiots couldn’t add and substract, especially as they’re such 0′s. Damn they are pathetic.
The French told us Saddam Hussein didn’t try to buy yellow cake uranium in Niger and that he wouldn’t be able to get any if he wanted it.
The Germans told us several of our eye witness sources, including I think, Chalabi’s nephew were not credible.
More than one scientist said the centrifuges were not for making weapons, can’t remember who he was, some European.
You also have no idea what else they told us that is classified under National Security and never made it into any reports, I wold be the farm that there is a lot more information that should have shown the WMD ‘reports’ were not credible.
Dorkafork and Cindi caught it first. But hey, there is a Greater Truth at work here. Math and facts only serve as distractions.
yyy, you seem to be missing the point. I want links to your assertions. The run up to the Iraq invasion was one of the most covered news stories in history. I’m sure there are plenty of quotes you can come up with to prove your point.
Dan, you have my sympathy for having to deal with these low-level mouth-breathing trolls. Droolers like Artie and Spartan tell volumes about the shallowness of the left side of the gene pool. Apparently, the only way to make these intellectual giants run away and hide is to ask them to do second-grade math, like Bill “53-30=33″ Atkins.
Keep fighting the good fight.
Are you the same guy that wanted “links” to prove that there was a consensus in the scienfific community that global warming was caused by human activity??!! LOL
I will do what Dan does when questioned, I will say Google it. It is ALL public record. It has been covered ad naseum in the NYTimes, Vanity Fair, Washington Post and the New Yorker.
Feel free to say ‘liar liar pants on fire’ but I guarantee you won’t be able to come up with anything to refute what I have said.
The Spitting Myth Again
Dan Riehl calls b.s. on a Slate article which claims that hippies never really spit on returning Vietnam Vets.
Why would they go to such great lengths to revise history when they so obviously would do the same thing today? Ive always been baffl…
**Newsflash for the koolaid-drinking sheep**
Eh, don’t you mean “sheeple”? You people are walking cliches – everyone to the right of you is a redneck, Christian, abortion clinic bombing prude who blindly accepts anything a Republican politician says.
You need to get out more often – I suggest leaving campus once in a while. There’s a big world out there that you won’t hear about on Kos or DU.
By the way, Bill Adkins, pulling the “Fred Phelps” card to embarrass conservatives doesn’t wash. Check out his Wikipedia entry:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Phelps#Political_views
Political views:
“Phelps’ stated political views and activities are primarily driven by his view that the United States of America is “A sodomite nation of flag-worshiping idolators.”[24] Phelps’ voting registration in Kansas is Democratic.[25]”
Phelps has run in various Kansas ***Democratic*** Party primaries in Kansas five times, but has never won. These included races for governor in 1990, 1994, and 1998, receiving about 15% of the vote in 1998.[29]
“***Phelps supported Al Gore in the 1988 and 1992 Democratic Party primary elections***.[30] In his 1984 Senate race, Gore opposed a “gay bill of rights” and stated that homosexuality was not something that “society should affirm”.[31] Phelps has stated that he supported Gore because of these earlier comments.[32] According to Phelps, ***members of the Westboro Baptist Church helped run Gore’s 1988 campaign in Kansas. ****Phelps’ son, Fred Phelps Jr., hosted a Gore fundraiser, which Al and Tipper Gore attended, at his home in Topeka***,[9][32]. ***Fred Phelps, Jr. served as a Gore delegate to the 1988 Democratic National Convention.
woops – yep, I missed it on the math. He was a 23 year old brown bar. That makes him more credible? And in a time where the war was winding down and he was recruiting – but he was a 23 year old sergeant in the Phillipines during the War era”" — and you’re still spinning your wheels. As for you, Cindi, 1969 or not, can you not document your assertion? No, I think the myth serves your agenda, Dan. And your facts, Gordon, appear to be like Dan’s: “One report may have had the rank wrong, or he could have gotten a field commission to Lt.” and “It’s possible that Mr. Bourne held a commission at one point.” What we have here, people, is Dan with an agenda trying to connect opposition to this war on the grounds it was a stupid move with the ‘spitting on Vietnam vets’ lie. Keep trying, Dan – so far we’ve got you on this and Rush’s Nobel Nomination and countless others. Credibility isn’t your strong suit, is it?
“Are you the same guy that wanted “links” to prove that there was a consensus in the scienfific community that global warming was caused by human activity??!! LOL”
Yes, and I’m still waiting. I also posted the names of around 80 scientist who are “sceptics” of AGW.
“I will do what Dan does when questioned, I will say Google it. It is ALL public record. It has been covered ad naseum in the NYTimes, Vanity Fair, Washington Post and the New Yorker.”
Of course. When called on a lie, hide behind google. The reason you can’t post links to anyone of consequence quesitoning WMDs in Iraq is becuase there aren’t any. You prove that beyond a shadow of a doubt by your actions.
Don’t blame these retards for pretending that disrespect of servicemen did not happen. In 30 years the Dems will also be pretending that they were for the Iraq war. In fact, they will say they were the reason it was fought.
Regardless of Phelps politcal affiliation, john, his actions reflect the views of the right wing and the Republican Party.
The Iraq War is Bush’s Legacy, a Blunder of major proportions and nothing to do with retaliation for the World Trade Center Bombings. More use by Bush of the WTC victims as props for his stupidity.
Regardless of Phelps politcal affiliation
haha ha Th reality based community. It doesn’t matter who or what you are, if we don’t like you you must be a right winger. LMAO Not even a clue bat could knock any sense into these idiots. I hope they wear bibs to keep the drool off of their keyboards.
http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/powell-no-wmd.htm
In February 2003, Powell said: “We know that Saddam Hussein is determined to keep his weapons of mass destruction, is determined to make more.”
But two years earlier, Powell said just the opposite. The occasion was a press conference on 24 February 2001 during Powell’s visit to Cairo, Egypt. Answering a question about the US-led sanctions against Iraq, the Secretary of State said:
We had a good discussion, the Foreign Minister and I and the President and I, had a good discussion about the nature of the sanctions — the fact that the sanctions exist — not for the purpose of hurting the Iraqi people, but for the purpose of keeping in check Saddam Hussein’s ambitions toward developing weapons of mass destruction. We should constantly be reviewing our policies, constantly be looking at those sanctions to make sure that they are directed toward that purpose. That purpose is every bit as important now as it was ten years ago when we began it. And frankly they have worked. He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors. So in effect, our policies have strengthened the security of the neighbors of Iraq…
Oh for the LOVE OF GOD.
The United Nations released its report on Global Warming THIS WEEK!!!!!!!!!!! It was reported in EVERY MEDIA OUTLET that I am aware of. It says the probability that global warming is facilitated by human acitvity is NINETY PERCENT. It has been one of the lead stories for the last several days.
There were congressional hearings THIS WEEK where over 40% of government scientists said they had been censured with regard to reports on climate change. THIS WEEK. IN CONGRESS.
Do you really need me to google news this big for you?????????????????????????????????????????????
I could find 80 people who thing the moon landing was faked, so what?
You’ve got the United Nations and every other scientific organization on the freaking planet in accord
A ‘clue bat?” You could only use it if you had a clue, Dan – and that disqualifies you. The anti-gay agenda is all yours, Dan – it’s one of those divisive issues you and yours use in constitutional referendums from state to state, the anti-gay marriage. Wow – wait a minute, Dan!! This is your chance!! Stand up for gay rights now or admit you are Fred Phelps!! This is your opportunity, Dan, to prove you aren’t the numbnutz bigot everyone thinks you are.
In February 2003
SO what> Everyone knows there was more intelligence after that, some from defectors. People may have got it wrong, but it was gotten wrong by everyone around the world. And many suggest weapons were being developed in cooperation with Lybia – which were handed over after we invaded Iraq, as you might recall.
May have got it wrong?
As far as I know “everyone around the world” except for Tony Blair was adamantly opposed to the Iraq War.
Many suggest that Saddam Hussein really had WMD and he failed to use them on our troops and he spirited them out of Iraq but decided he wanted to stay in in a hole.
LOL
The War in Iraq – the Blunder that keeps on giving. What’s that tab up to now? I hear the Moron in Chief asked for another $245,000,000,000. (I know, another math problem).
Regardless of Phelps political affiliation, john, his actions reflect the views of the right wing and the Republican Party.
Posted by: Bill Adkins | Saturday, February 03, 2007 at 05:50 PM
The right wing and the Republican Party are the very ones who protest the Phelps clan. Check out the Bethesda and Walter Reed protests by the Phelps clan and take note of who the only ones were who protested against them.
Perhaps while you are googling, you might want to check out the affiliations of Phelps with Al Gore. You’ll find several references spanning the years, including pictures of Phelps with Al and Tipper.
After you finish that, perhaps you should see the pathetic group of code pink members who march weekly at Walter Reed Medical Center. Anyone who dishonors a disabled veteran by staging an anti-war protest at a military hospital is not only misguided, but evil.
On the WMD’s: WHO CARES? We went in to Iraq, cleaned out a murderous dictator (don’t worry, leftards, you can add Saddam to your Dead Hero’s list, with Cesar Chavez…alive, you still have Hugo Chavez and Castro…for now). We’ve taken the war to the Islamic fundies, there, not here. We’re there to support Israel, to keep moving the free flow of OIL, yes, OIL, and unless you want to join the Ahmish you can’t say a word about OIL, because you use it every day, in our booming economy (another thing you want to destroy, huh? Capitalism? Libs hate capitalism)…although you probably would look good in an oilless economy, fitted to a plow…
On Global Warming, WHO CARES? Stick around a few millenia, whatever is on this earth will be dodging Glaciers. We use oil, we warm the earth. We can move inland, and there will be plenty of species adapting to the changing temperatures. You worry too much, and worry about things that you can’t control. Your short lifespan, compared to the geological or even biological timelines of this planet, is not even a blip. Get over yourselves!
YYYou seem to have some confusion regarding my question. You had made the statement that there was a “consensus” regarding AGW. That is completely untrue. And I posted the names of 80 scientists, many of them climatologists, that disputed AGW. Given that, I have proven that the “consensus” is politically-motivated baloney. You can dispute wether or not those scientists are right, but there is NO CONSENSUS. All your posting above does nothing to dispute that.
Also, if you had been really paying attention, the IPCC report has not been released “THIS WEEK!!!!!!!!!!!”. What was released was the political summary. The actual report (you know, with all the “science” in it) will be release in about three months when “Changes (other than grammatical or minor editorial changes) made after acceptance by the Working Group or the Panel shall be those necessary to ensure consistency with the Summary for Policymakers or the Overview Chapter”. Yes, you read right. They will adjust the report to fit the summary. How’s that for good science?
Why do you believe the UN? What has it done the past decade or longer to earn your trust?
And you didn’t answer my question about WMDs. If France, Germany, Russia, th UN, etc, were all against the war, and they all stood to gain billions of dollars in oil for food kickbacks, why did none of them dispute that Iraq had WMDs?
Vietnam vets were treated so well when they came home that Congress had to enact a whole new set of workplace protections to keep employers from firing them for their service.
If there is one brightside to the number of homeless Vietnam vets, it’s that a disproportionate number seem to be flocking to San Francisco. The vets did what their country told them, they got spit on for it, and went insane trying to cope with it. You spit on them then, now they piss on your lawn.
Live with it.
On the WMD’s: WHO CARES?
Ummm, wasn’t that the reason we went to war? If it was simply to take out a despotic leader weren’t there better choices?
“On Global Warming, WHO CARES? Stick around a few millenia, whatever is on this earth will be dodging Glaciers. We use oil, we warm the earth. We can move inland, and there will be plenty of species adapting to the changing temperatures.”
There’s only one word that comes to mind after a statement like that…fucktard. No seriously, I realize you experience climate change daily when you jam your head into your nice warm ass, but the rest of us realize that we caused it and at the very least we can figure out how to slow it down.
You can always tell when the left is trying to pull one over on you when they don’t give a link to the actual press conference. You know they are leaving things out:
http://www.state.gov/secretary/former/powell/remarks/2001/933.htm
SECRETARY POWELL: Let me agree with the Minister that the talks coming up between the Iraqi leadership and the Secretary General of the United Nations are important. We will see whether they are serious — whether they want to move in the direction that will cause the sanctions to be lifted. Sanctions aren’t something we want to live with forever. They were put in place in order to bring the regime into compliance with the international community and when that has been accomplished to the satisfaction of the international community and we can trust they have been, we will be in good shape.
and:
SECRETARY POWELL: May I just add a p.s. that if I was a Kuwaiti and I heard leaders in Baghdad claiming that Kuwait is still a part of Iraq and it’s going to be included in the flag and the seal, if I knew they were continuing to try to find weapons of mass destruction, I would have no doubt in my mind who those weapons were aimed at. They are being aimed at Arabs, not at the United States or at others. Yes, I think we should…he has to be contained until he realizes the errors of his ways.
With respect to Mr. Ivanov, I don’t expect that my comments alienated them any further. I don’t think they are that alienated to begin with. We are having good conversations. I was very impressed, as is President Bush, impressed by the fact that in the recent proposal they put forward to NATO, they indicated that they understand that there is a danger from missiles that are carrying warheads — that are weapons of mass destruction. So I think we had a good conversation, a candid exchange of views, as is said in the diplomatic world. We have much more to talk about in the months ahead without alienating each other in the process.
Powell was clear that Hussein was STILL, at that late period of time, trying to acquire more WMDs, and that he did still posess yet more.
But thanks for posting this. It is a great reminder for those on the left who continue to screech “Sanctions were working! We had him in a box!”. Well, the truth of the matter is that up until 9-11, support for sanctions were crumbling.
A little simple arithmetic
Number of Iraqis killed in Iraq 150,000
Money spent in Iraq: $500,000,000,000
$500,000,000,000/150,000=$3,333,333 per dead Iraqi
Tom,
I fear you do not know the meaning of “consensus” It does not mean that every single scientist agrees, it means that the overwhelming majority of scientists agree. Perhaps you want me to look up the meaning of consensus and post it here as well?
A list of 80 scientists means nothing when every world body, every report, every major scientific organization says the same thing. That is A CONSENSUS.
The United States signed off on the UN report. I realize that in the flat earther wing nut mythology the United Nations is right up there with the trilateral commission in its question for world domination, but, this is an international body of scientists, why would I disbelieve them? No one has questioned the credibility of this group or its findings in the past, except the oil companies and every oil company except Exxon has finally publicly admitted that global warming is a problem and carbon emissions are exacerbating it.
Hipster you think PTSD might have a little more to do with their mental state than how they were or were no treated when they got home?
As for laws passed to protest them, you think this was the first time Vet’s felt mistreated? I seem to remember a certain march on washington known as the Bonus March. Vet’s marching on DC camped out and demanded payment of bonuses that had been promised them (though not due to be paid out for another 13years), eventually the police tried to move them out, two of the marchers were killed then Hoover called in the infantry led by Gen. MacArthur and then Major George patton. They were driven out and their encampment was burned to the ground.
These guys will never believe or admit global warming, they all think that the earth and everything on it are here for man’s use, god told them so.
The idea of mass extinctions is no big deal. Who needs those stinking polar bears and whales anyway???
They will never admit global warming is the result of human activity because that would be admitting they were wrong and, worse, still, it would be admitting that one of their favorite whipping posts..environmental, tree hugger, vegans…was right.
For the same reason they will never admit that Iraq is a clusterfuck. They will keep on turning the corner forever. They don’t care how much money is spent or how many soldiers die. Should their fearless leaders ever admit that Iraq was not a success it will be blamed on the liberal, Democrat tree hugger, traitors and/or the Arab/Iranian?Iraqi muslim animal terrorists themselves.
It was much, much easier for them back in the day when if you said something they didn’t like they simply accused you of witchcraft or heresy and had you killed. That’s why they hate free speech, the free press and democracy.
Spartan,
You’re a real turd. Do you know that? A class A turd.
When Vietnam vets returned home, they were treated so well by your intellectual forebears that Congress had to pass anti-discrimination laws to keep turds like you from firinig their asses. Do you know that?
When our guys were dying, Jane Fonda–who raised her ugly fucking face up once more last week at one of your hate America rallies–went over and hung out with the Vietcong.
John Kerry came back and called our troops baby killers.
This shit is incontrovertible. Arguing with an idiot like you is like arguing with a member of Sons of Confederate Veterans over whether the civil war was about slavery or the right to secede. You can make up whatever shit you want. That doesn’t make it so.
I don’t know if you personally are a traitor, but a good number of your buddies are. I believe it, and I will continue to believe it if I am the last person on earth to be thinking it. You are vermin. Go to hell.
Relatedly, I love it that San Francisco has one of the highest homeless rates in the nation, and that a disproportionate number of them are made up of Vietnam vets. They are your shame. They are there, in your city, pissing on the lawns and defecating into gutters in your beautiful “tolerant” San Francisco because these bravehearts went to Vietnam to kill for their country, came home, and were spit on by people who think a lot like you. The vets picked the right city to dirty up.
Think about that the next time you’re on your way to your rave with your glow sticks and a vet comes up and tries to wash your windshield with his dirty rag. Look into his eyes. And know that people who think like you put him there.
$3,333,333 per dead Iraqi
Then maybe you need to stop accusing Bush of thinking life is cheap.
Well, um, if we hadn’t gotten bogged down in Vietnam, another stupid move, there wouldn’t be any Vietnam vets who couldn’t adjust back into society whether they were spit on or not.
You might also ask some Vietnam vets how well they think the government has taken care of them…but, well no forget that, they might say something that doesn’t fit your worldview.
The earth is flat I say.
“A list of 80 scientists means nothing when every world body, every report, every major scientific organization says the same thing. That is A CONSENSUS.”
Uh, no. Perhaps it is a political consensus, at least for you. But it is not, in any way, a scientific consensus.
You keep telling me about all these groups who agree. Who are they? What are their membership criteria? Where does their funding come from?
You keep screaming CONSENSUS!!! like it means anything. But science doesn’t work that way. It isn’t a democracy. As we are reminded ad nauseaum, the “consensus” in the 70s was that we were sliding into an ice age. How did that “consensus” work out?
“…global warming is a problem and carbon emissions are exacerbating it.”
So what do you want to do about it, yyy? Shut down the world economy so your batshit ego is assuaged? We have to keep moving forward, or your thin, fragile little civilization will strip away, then who and what will protect you from the harsh reality that exists outside your comfortable living quarters?
I say we have to, at a reasonable pace and not so as to destroy the forward progress we must sustain to maintain a healthy economy, begin to augment technological advances as they become economically feasible. After all, if new technology can’t be developed at profit, it can’t be introduced. We have to make marketable changes, not economy-destroying ‘liberal destructive’ changes.
“I don’t know if you personally are a traitor, but a good number of your buddies are. I believe it, and I will continue to believe it if I am the last person on earth to be thinking it. You are vermin. Go to hell.”
Wow, that really cuts me to the quick hipster.
As for protecting Vets from getting fired for serving, hey that’s a great thing but where in your post do you show any proof that it was libs who were firing them? Isn’t the corporate world run by you guys? Did you ever think that maybe conservatives turned their backs on vets as much as anyone? If the VA had been fully funded during the Reagan era or if PTSD had been taken seriously (it still isn’t) then maybe things would be different. You guys think supporting the troops means supporting whatever action they are involved in no matter how ill-advised while me and my “buddies” think it means getting them home and providing support for them after they leave the military in the form of the GI Bill and other vets benefits that Bushco kept cutting.
“That’s why they hate free speech, the free press and democracy.”
And that is why the Dems are trying to resurrect the “fairness doctrine”, ’cause they love free speech, as long as its regulated.
Who’s the idiot that turned this into a global warming debate?
The topic is liberals and their treason. I can see why libturds would rather talk about icebergs than the fact that their intellectual antecedents treated returning Vietnam veterans like shit.
Icebergs aren’t the topic. Liberals and their treason is.
Please try to stay on point.
Two Devil’s Advocate Questions For You
Two questions I wanted to throw out there for you. I will take the positive side of both questions, and would like for readers or other bloggers to take the negative and give me their arguments. As with all questions in this series, I will not reveal m…
Spartan–
Debating historical revisionists is masturbation. Vietnam vets got spit on. End of story.
You don’t have to go back to ‘Nam to see libturds behaving badly. Just a few months ago, San Francisco banned the JROTC program. But I don’t dare question their patriotism. Oh no.
Meanwhile, that Arkin douchebag is running around squealing about troops currently serving in Iraq wishing the American people would “support them” by “supporting the mission.” How dare these “mercenaries” (yes, the turd used that word) tell the American people what to think! They don’t represent society! Well no shit, Arkin, when libturds avoid military service like the plague and support running ROTC off of college campuses, it is shocking-SHOCKING-that the troops turn out to be more conservative than society at large.
“Vietnam vets got spit on. End of story.”
There’s plenty of evidence to the contrary, but regardless even if you accept that there may have been instances of vets getting spit on does that paint the whole left as spitters? If so, then accepting as fact that there was at least one incident of soldiers in Vietnam killing innocent Women and children does that make all that served in Vietnam as baby killers? Your rules, you make the call.
You see, you can’t paint us all with the same brush. You pretend to know something about my attitude towards vets and you know nothing about it. I have nothing but respect for them. My father, brother and grandfather all served proudly. My father suffered the ill affects of PTSD and an establishment that didn’t understand the illness.
Do we need to turn this into a pissing match? I have lead my students in a food and coat drive for our local vets shelter because I know what some of these guys go through but to think it’s at the hand of the liberal ideology is foolish. They suffer more at the hands of an ungrateful government.
Oh and Hipster, why don’t you go and throw another ribbon magnet on your SUV.
Really the point of this whole thing can be boiled down to this: baggage. Each side (and I am talking left and right of the political spectrum) has things that the fringe (or maybe more than just the fringe) did that they have to carry and deal with. The spitting on vets is a perfect case in point. Did it happen? Yes, it DID. I have an uncle who was spat upon when he got back from overseas in the navy in 1969 and called a baby killer. I am an officer in the Army and while attending a friend’s wedding in Oakland (in which I was in uniform) I was called a baby-killer (and this was in 1997 of all times). So did the hippie who spit on my uncle and the goofball who called me a baby-killer mainstream Demos? Or even a good example of the left as a whole? Nope. But does everyone who is on the left side have to carry the baggage of being associated with these oxygen thieves? Yes. Does that suck? Yep. Is it fair? No.
And that is just tough because that is life.
I am conservative. And I have to be compared to Hitler, or muckheads who bomb abortion clinics, or religious loons who would rather use the bible instead of the Constitution. I hate it, but that’s my sides baggage because we haven’t been able to purge the morons out of the group yet. And the left suffers the same problem. ANd of course the Libertarians have to deal with the whole “let’s legalize pot” crowd and etc, etc.
You get the drift.
Lefties, you are going to have your patriotism questioned and you are going to get grief over treating vets badly. Get over it.
Righties, you are going to be compared to Hitler, reminded of Abu Garabi, My Lai, and Kent State, and called baby-killers. Also get over it.
Ignore the screwballs, and talk to the folks who can at least look past this and have an intelligent debate.
If we wanted reasonable intelligent debate, we wouldn’t talk politics.
Regardless of Phelps politcal affiliation, john, his actions reflect the views of the right wing and the Republican Party.
Posted by: Bill Adkins | Saturday, February 03, 2007 at 05:50 PM
Holy shit, you ditched your shovel and fired up the backhoe. I know more than a few conservatives and Republicans (probably more than you’ve ever spoken to in your life), and to a person every one of them considers Phelps to be a despicable asshole.
But you don’t let facts get in your way – you come here and inform conservatives and Republicans that Phelps’s actions reflect their views. Amazing.
Like I said, try taking a trip off campus some time, you might learn something.
Well, that is true I guess. Oh well.
Looks like the moonbats let up. Must be medication time back at the ward.
Spartan-
When you stop calling me a racist just because I’m a Republican, I’ll stop calling you a traitor just because you’re a Democrat. Until then, guns up.
And I don’t have a yellow ribbon on my SUV. I’ve got an Eagle Globe and Anchor sticker on my hybrid. I do my part. So bite me.
Attention right-leaning folks in this thread: You’ve committed the vital mistake of letting these idiots try to change the subject. They completely and totally changed the debate and you all fell for it.
The response to them should be simple; Did anti-war activists spit on returning Vietnam vets or not? The answer is yes, and even if it only happened once (which we now know is not true), then Slate is guilty of lazy reporting, or at worst outright lying. Anyone who attempts to deny it or downplay it is guilty is trying to rewrite history to further their current-day political goals.
Nothing else matters in this particular debate. Nothing but the truth. I dare you, Bill Adkins, to start telling it. Don’t worry about who else is doing what…can YOU personally hold yourself to a completely truthful standard?
In this particular thread, you have not done so. The point of this post by Dan is to prove that Slate told a falsehood, and it might have been due to lazy reporting, or it might have been because they are trying to rewrite history. Can you admit that before you try to shift the blame or focus?
Dan, here’s my suggestion. If someone spits on a soldier either:
1. The servicemember should kick the shit out of him.
2. If said servicemember is outnumbered(mulitiple sacks of shit), he should be issued an alarm which will alert everyone that he has been spit upon, and any and all good citizens should kick the shit out of the perpetuators.
My father is a Vietnam vet. He told me he was spit at, cursed at, and accused of atrocities upon his return. I believe him, and if I witness anyone spitting on a serviceman, I personally will kick the shit out of him. Or get my ass beat. But one of the two will happen.
What really amazes me about the left in general is that they offer no real-world solutions to the problems they enumerate; other than solutions that will tear the very fabric of our country apart. It does seem at times that they do hate America, and capitalism. One would not exist without the other! Socialism is a drain on whatever economic system is in place; of course we will take care of everyone in need, but if we shut off the engine of capitalism, everyone suffers.
We need Oil at fair market prices, that’s the lifeblood of America, for now. Our middle east policy has to reflect that. Iraq, Afghanistan, and Israel, and any other country that opposes the Islamic fundamentalists, needs our support, and we need their geography. Simplistic, but true. Liberals, and specifically the Democrats who drove Lieberman out of their party, will, if we let them, drive this nation into extinction. And the ones spitting and calling for retreat are the ones that will cry the loudest when we lose…
Just wondering, what’s wrong with legalizing pot?
The “land of the free” now has the highest incarceration rate in the world, bar none.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0818/p02s01-usju.html
This is largely due to the war on drugs. Putting people in prison who have harmed no one doesn’t make any sense at all. Prison should be reserved for those who have harmed others by assaulting them or stealing from them.
Oh, and since I’ve heard so much anecdotal evidence about spitting on troops let me add my own. I was USMC 69-71 and spent considerable time in uniform out in public (you had to be in uniform to fly military standby) and I was never treated with anything but respect. But then I always treat others with respect, even dirty f*cking hippies. I did get snubbed by a couple of WWII vets at American Legion who told me “we won our war” but most of the WWII vets and all the Korean war vets were nothing but supportive.
Frankly, I think that almost any vet who got spit on would have beat the crap out of the spitter, I know I would have.
Just for your information I’m a libertarian leftist on the Political Compass. I have exactly the same political views as the Dalai Lama, something which flat amazed me.
http://www.politicalcompass.org/index
The Political Compass is a really interesting test which determines one’s political leanings more accurately than anything I have seen before. I’d encourage everyone to try it out. You just might find out something you didn’t know about yourself. I know I did.
C’mon, John – don’t bullshit me. You know, the world knows, Fred Phelps is the face of the right wing but for his attitude towards soldiers’ funerals. If it weren’t for that you and Dan would attend every event Fred held.
And, for Templar Knight: If someone spits on a soldier either:
1. . The servicemember should kick the shit out of him.
2. If said servicemember is outnumbered(mulitiple sacks of shit), he should be issued an alarm which will alert everyone that he has been spit upon, and any and all good citizens should kick the shit out of the perpetuators.
Abso-fucking-lutely. (all though, I think the term is ‘perpetrators.’ I may stink at math, but I have english down).
“Do we need to turn this into a pissing match? I have lead my students in a food and coat drive for our local vets shelter because I know what some of these guys go through but to think it’s at the hand of the liberal ideology is foolish. They suffer more at the hands of an ungrateful government.”
Another leftoid sucking at the taxpayers teat. As a public school teacher it must be nice getting a full time salary and full time benefits for part time work.
Don’t bother telling me about lesson plans and grading since many people in the private sector bring work home too. I’m self employed and I work until 4AM sometimes.
“According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, public school teachers earned $34.06 per hour in 2005, 36% more than the hourly wage of the average white-collar worker and 11% more than the average professional specialty or technical worker.”
http://opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110009612
This is really too rich. They had to enact the Vietnam Era Veterans’ Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974 just to keep people from discriminating against Vietnam vets to get a damn job. After years of depicting them as drug addicted psychos.
Here’s a rear admiral lying about being spit on and being called babykillers:
http://www.nationalvnwarmuseum.org/releases/release_7_3_04.htm
Discussion threads at snopes:
http://message.snopes.com/showthread.php?t=2360
Discussion threads for Veterans Alumni groups:
http://groups.msn.com/VeteransAlumniAssociation/general.msnw?action=get_message&mview=0&ID_Message=189
Everybody’s a liar except the lapdog leftist media that covers up for the behavior of the people who now make up their management.
PBS Series on “Days of Protest”
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/asia/vietnam/protests.html
Of course, these stories are really just figments of the imagination. The taunts and jeers were coming from Republicans who had hoped to disenfranchise the drafted poor with “Nixon’s War”.
Stop lying about the hippies you dirty Vietnam vets!
http://www.veteranstoday.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1716
Spartan-
“When you stop calling me a racist just because I’m a Republican, I’ll stop calling you a traitor just because you’re a Democrat. Until then, guns up.”
I missed the part where I called you a racist, but whatever gets you through the night sweetpea. And don’t worry, my gun will be up.
“And I don’t have a yellow ribbon on my SUV. I’ve got an Eagle Globe and Anchor sticker on my hybrid. I do my part. So bite me.”
Geez, wouldn’t you be afraid I’d give you AIDS or something?
Here’s someone admitting to DOING the spitting.
http://dailypundit.com/?p=24230
Bill Adkins, why are you trying to change the subject? Did Vietnam vets get spit on or not? Can you tell the truth?> Are you capable of it?
Jim, Jim, Jim – tsk. Do try to extricate your head from your ass. First, Blackfive cannot be trusted. He’a an unmitigated liar. I’ve dealt with him before. As to my ‘changing the subject,’ you are not coherent. The fake connection made by Dan, an individual who has zero credibility and a short dick, too, according to his significant other, is between the mythical spitter and opposition to the war today. I know it’s difficult for you, Jim, to keep up with the discussion – we hope someday you’ll be normal and develop an IQ around room temperature. Until then, luck to ya.
This is an interesting and heated debate. Holy Cross sociology prof Jerry Lembcke wrote an entire book _The Spitting Image_ devoted to this question. He couldn’t come up with a single VERIFIABLE contemporary report in a newspaper(not years after the fact story)that reported that this happened. He doesn’t say it NEVER did, but it does makes you wonder–if lefties were lobbing spitballs at vets with the regularity righties accuse them of doing so, where are all the photos?
Is that how you pretend to have discussions with people, Bill? You just ignore, lie, misread and then move on, pretending to yourself that you’ve accomplished something?
BTW, My link had nothing to do with Blackfive. For someone who is attacking others based on ability to follow the conversation, you’re doing a piss-poor job of it.
Did anti-war activists *ever* spit on Vietnam vets or not? That’s a yes or a no question, Bill. Do you have it in you to be honest?
“where are all the photos?”
Ridiculous. By that logic, anything that wasn’t photographed never happened. This isn’t Fark. “Pics or it didn’t happen” is fun to say when boobs are involved, but it;s intellectually dishonest – and you know it.
I admit, Jim, it’s hard to distinguish you from the rest of the dipshits. To date, Jim, there is no definitive proof of any such events and certainly no proof that spitting was a prevalent and often used method of disrespecting anyone for their service. Is that your position, Jim? Is it your position there were flying squads of spitters ready to spit in unison upon any uniformed serviceman returning from Vietnam? By the way, Jim, are you old enough to remember the period or were you born about the time US forces overran Grenada? I remember the period personally – the Wonder Years for me in the late ’60s. C’mon, Jim – give me some of your references.
I asked you a yes or no question. Did it happen?
JimK,
These guys are making perfect asses out of themselves arguing the spitting “debate” without any help, so I had no intention of commenting, but the Fred Phelps “conservative” meme is repeated by ignorant assholes like these so often that I thought they might like to know the truth.
Of course, I was mistaken.
My kid used to do the same thing – put his hands over his ears and yell when he didn’t want to hear something. My son grew up – maybe these clowns will some day.
And I’ll give you an answer, Jim – it might have and it might not have happened, there is no ‘yes or no,’ there is a hell of a lot of doubt. Check out Carl Bourne whose service, rank and story are inconsistent. Check out this clown who is obviously lying http://mediamatters.org/items/200701300012 — now, answer mine, Jim, yes or no – even if it happened, was it prevalent, was it the preferred method of disrespecting service people? Jim, Jim – are you 12 or 14?
BTW, I noticed your little trick, Bill, you tried ot build yet another strawman against which to rail. I never said anything about “flying squads of spitters ready to spit in unison upon any uniformed serviceman returning from Vietnam.”
By creating this hyperbole and attributing it to me, you get to position me as saying off-the-wall and outrageous things, then you feel justified at insulting and attacking me based on those statements. Except YOU made them, not me. YOU changed the tone. YOU began the insults.
I asked you a question. Did it happen? Will you be honest and admit it or not?
It seems unlikely that no Vietnam vet in America was ever spit on by any anti war activist at any time. Given the tenor of the debate on Vietnam at the time, it would very doubtful such an “urban legend” would get started without a basis in fact.
It’s irrelevant. I wouldn’t spit on any soldier today unless he was convicted of raping or murdering innocent civilians or his fellow soliders, probably not even then.
Spitting or not spitting on Vietnam vets 30 years ago is just a red herring Dan through out there to give his mob a chance to wax poetic about how lefties hate soldiers and are treasonous slobs who ‘spit on our soldiers’ during Vietnam and are going to do the same thing now in Iraq.
I am surprised so many people took the bait.
Bill, you seem to be saying that EVERY SINGLE serviceman who is saying it happened to them, as well as those who admit to doing the spitting, they are all lying.
That’s the Occam’s Razor explanation in your mind?
The point of all this was Slate was lazy – there are dozens, maybe hundreds of first-person accounts online of servicemen who were spit upon. Simple Google searches would allow a reporter to get in personal contact with many, many servicemen and make an effort to verify the stories.
So, either they were lazy or they are intentionally rewriting history. Which is worse?
“Spitting or not spitting on Vietnam vets 30 years ago is just a red herring Dan through out there”
No, Slate threw it out there and denied it ever happened. Dan commented on a current story.
“was it the preferred method of disrespecting service people?”
No one EVER said it was.
A contemporary account: Thursday, June 10, 1971 – “Vietnam veterans who aren’t afraid to fight back”
The Argus (Fremont, CA), but this article was printed in many newspapers.
“How’s it feel to be a murderer?” asked the faculty adviser of Al Zeller, who was mustering out after a year’s infantry service in Vietnam. Jim Minarik, another infantry veteran of that war, walked out of doors in his uniform and was twice spat upon, was denied restaurant service and called a “war criminal,” all before he had time to buy a civilian suit. Jim Kerns pulled down a Viet Cong flag here and spent nine hours in jail before Judge Halleek dismissed his case. Veterans are advised, one of them said, not to mention Vietnam service when making applications.
http://www.newspaperarchive.com/PdfViewer.aspx?img=47524632&firstvisit=true&src=search¤tResult=2¤tPage=80
Dan, you have a mob? Sweet!
And I’ll give you an answer, Jim – it might have and it might not have happened, there is no ‘yes or no,’ there is a hell of a lot of doubt. Check out Carl Bourne whose service, rank and story are inconsistent. Check out this clown who is obviously lying http://mediamatters.org/items/200701300012 — now, answer mine, Jim, yes or no – even if it happened, was it prevalent, was it the preferred method of disrespecting service people? Jim, Jim – are you 12 or 14?
He does have a point if it’s true that there were no news stories at the time about vets being spit on but there were news stories at the time about protestors being spit on.
The media was still pretty mainstream establishment at that time and their audiences were made up of middle america folks not hippies living down at the local commune.
It does seem odd, doesn’t it? Objectively speawking.
Am I blind, or didn’t Laura just reference a news story reporting a veteran returning from Vietnam being spit upon, and worse?
The real issues here:
1. Did Vietnam vets ever get spit on by anti-war activists?
2. Are there vets that have given first hand accounts of being spit on?
3. Can those vets be contacted in order to verify their stories?
4. Did Slate make any effort to validate or did they simply draw a conclusion then write a piece supporting that conclusion?
5. Given how easy it is to find any number of servicemen – EVEN DISCOUNTING THE NAMES ALREADY LISTED AS NOT TRUSTWORTHY – who are willing to give first hand testimony about being spit on, why was Slate so wrong? Was it just laziness, or do they have an agenda in rewriting history?
6. Who wants to tell the guy who admits to spitting on returning Vietnam vets that he’s a liar too?
Any chance we could discuss these without all the childish insults, avoiding the topic and making up strawmen?
templar knight, your vision is just fine.
Laura’s news story does not mention spit as far as I see it.
He’s not saying he hasn’t heard from vets who say they were spit on, he says he gets these emails all the time, and expects to get them upon publishing the story.
What he says is that no one can offer any contemporary proof like and arrest report or a news story that corroborates it.
And it took me less than ten minutes to find that article, including having to register at Newspaper Archive. So what does that say about Slate?
Can I prove a negative, Jim? Not to you, apparently. Can you prove to me Carl Bourne, be he sergeant or lieutenant, is telling the truth?
Wow – don’t know why that post repeated when I had composed a completely different one. However, I link to these sites to show the myth and the debate, Jim. http://www.pownetwork.org/fonda/fonda_urban_legends.htm
http://www.pownetwork.org/fonda/fonda_urban_legends.htm
and I see a parallel in the urban legend with this example http://www.snopes.com/military/fonda.asp
http://opovet.blogspot.com/2005/08/spitting-on-veterans-persistence-of.html
yyy – “was twice spat upon” spat being used as past tense of spit.
It isn’t a live link and you don’t say from what year it is. If the article is accurate you should send it to the Slate writer.
yyy, reread Laura’s post.
Bill, what are you talking about? Are you incapable of simply being honest?
Nevermind. I already have my answer to that question.
Have a good night, people. Even you, Bill.
Okay, then if it is an accurate representation of an article from 1971 she should email it to Slate. I guess that would end the debate.
Send it if you like, yyy. It’s not my job in life to educate the kids at Slate. If they care to research this topic, they can – but it’s clear they did not do so before publishing the article. I repeat, it took me less than ten minutes to find a contemporary account of a vet being spit upon.
Debate ended. Laura is the winner, Slate is the loser. I have an attaboy for you, Laura. Great work!
I was just a kid at the timeof the Vietnam War, but I recall reading in the Sacramento Union that when the Navy carriers went under the Golden Gate Bridge in S.F., that scummy anti-war activists lined up on the bridge and dumped refuse, excrement, etc. from buckets onto the sailors in their dress whites who were at attention on deck showing respect to the City of San Francisco.
It appears to be that the same America-hating, defeatists cast of losers are on the stage in congress and in the streets trying to undermine this country. Fonda (she should have been put in front of a firing squad long ago), kennedy, etc. Same self-satisfied, smug faces, same strident, screeching voices, same empty hearts and minds.
Despite their denials, the media and the liberals are primarily responsible for the current situation in Iraq, by giving sustenance to the terrorist’s hopes and plans for defeating us. I just hope that the Republicans in Congress wake up and act as Americans and start fighting this like a war and not mollycoddling the liberals and terrorists alike.
Are there any stories about troops beating the crap out of spitters?
That’s what I would have done if someone spit on me.
And I was damn sure capable of it then. I know I was tougher and harder than just about any scuzzy civilian, particularly a dirty f*cking hippie.
Y’all seriously expect us to believe that a trigger puller just back from combat would think twice about taking out some maggot who spit on them? The spitter would be lucky not to take a trip to the hospital to have his teeth removed from the back of his throat.
Thanks, templar!
Phelps is a Dem….Come to think of it the Klan were all Dems….Come to think of it the Blank Panthers are Dems……Come to think of it Jane Fonda is a Dem……Anything that’s vil seems to be DEMOCRATIC!
*evil*
I was thinking “vile”, Darth Malice, but “evil” will do.
How about evil AND vile:)
Y’all really want to know why we are losing in Iraq?
It’s Rummy’s fault.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2006_09/009469.php
“The secretary of defense continued to push on us … that everything we write in our plan has to be the idea that we are going to go in, we’re going to take out the regime, and then we’re going to leave,” Scheid said. “We won’t stay.”
Scheid said the planners continued to try “to write what was called Phase 4,” or the piece of the plan that included post-invasion operations like occupation.
Even if the troops didn’t stay, “at least we have to plan for it,” Scheid said.
“I remember the secretary of defense saying that he would fire the next person that said that,” Scheid said. “We would not do planning for Phase 4 operations, which would require all those additional troops that people talk about today.
“He said we will not do that because the American public will not back us if they think we are going over there for a long war.”
….”In his own mind he thought we could go in and fight and take out the regime and come out. But a lot of us planners were having a real hard time with it because we were also thinking we can’t do this. Once you tear up a country you have to stay and rebuild it. It was very challenging.”
–Brigadier General Mark Scheid, chief of the Logistics War Plans Division after 9/11
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Shinseki
He (Shinseki) is famous for his remarks to the U.S. Senate Armed Services committee before the war in Iraq in which he said “something in the order of several hundred thousand soldiers” would probably be required for post-war Iraq. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz publicly disagreed with his estimate.
On November 15, 2006, in testimony before Congress, USCENTCOM CENTCOM Commander Gen. John Abizaid said that General Shinseki’s estimate had proved correct.
Conservatives like me Templar oppose abortion,but I would turn in any clinic bomber with no hesitation.If you notice Eric Rudoulf got no help and was arrested picking through garbage.Red State America follows the law.The Dems cherry pick theirs.
That’s real interesting, Jonathan, but you’re either on the wrong thread or the wrong blog. I’ll leave it for you to figure out which.
I was just responding to this, templar knight.
Despite their denials, the media and the liberals are primarily responsible for the current situation in Iraq, by giving sustenance to the terrorist’s hopes and plans for defeating us. I just hope that the Republicans in Congress wake up and act as Americans and start fighting this like a war and not mollycoddling the liberals and terrorists alike.
I’m with you on that one too, Darth.
Ok, Jonathan, no offense intended.
I didn’t notice Rudolph got no help, I noticed he was on the run for over a year wasn’t it? I also noticed that its Red States that have higher crime rates than Blue States overall.
If you are supposed to get moral points for agreeing that you would turn in someone who ahd committed a cold blooded terrorist act by bombing a clinic or murdering a licensed physician doing a legal procedure, I can only say, try harder.
We don’t have to go back 30+ years to observe leftist revisionist tactics. Today they use ” swiftboating” as a verb to denote a dishonest political attack.A work in progress to which we all are witnesses right now.
The main post here is missing the point. There’s no doubt that many Vietnam veterans have reported *in recent years* that they were spit upon in the 1960s and 1970s; even the Slate writer admits that such reports exist.
What some leftists are claiming is that no such incidents were reported *at the time* and that any veterans who have been making such claims since the 1980s are either misremembering or lying.
The fallacies with the leftists’ argument are that (1) spitting incidents would not necessarily have generated media coverage, police reports, etc. What was a returning soldier going to do in 1971 — ask for DNA testing of a drop of saliva on his uniform? And (2) there apparently was some contemporaneous media coverage of veterans reporting having been spit upon, as Laura above has indicated.
Joshua, that’s true. The next leftist goalpost will be that the guys listed in the article were lying unless we can prove otherwise. There’s not a lot of use in arguing with people whose minds are made up – I just wanted to prove a point that Slate could have taken ten lousy minutes to research this.
I noticed that the blue-voting areas of the Red States had some of the highest crime rates in the nation, yyy. Now why is that? The counties in the Red States that voted red had the lowest crime rates. Care to explain that. And a number of blue states had high crime rates in the blue areas, with the red-voting areas of the blue states having the lowest rates in the blue states. What’s up with that?
I sure would like to see a response to this:
Y’all seriously expect us to believe that a trigger puller just back from combat would think twice about taking out some maggot who spit on them? The spitter would be lucky not to take a trip to the hospital to have his teeth removed from the back of his throat.
OMFG. I can’t believe that there are actually people out there that don’t believe that vets were spit upon and verbally abused when they came home from Vietnam. This phenomena has been widely discussed, written about and available for anyone to see for 35+ years.
You have to be willfully trying to rewrite history in order to deny it. Either that, or you’re a drooling retard, or you’re still in diapers.
I’m guessing the ones here are just plain retarded.
And by the way, it’s not my intention to slam Dan with my last comment, who obviously DID do more than ten minutes worth of research on this. The burden of proof is on Slate, not on anyone responding to Slate’s false premise. When Slate says this is a myth, and defines evidence as a contemporaneous newspaper article, you would think that they would at least check for that before hitting the publish button.
Google “old newspaper articles” and you get newspaperarchive.com in both the sponsored and organic search results. Then search the archive for articles between 1965 and 1979 for vietnam veteran spit, and the article I found turns up in quite a few papers. If I had not had to dig out a credit card and register at the site, I could have completed this in less than five minutes instead of less than ten.
Jack Schafer should have done this, or gotten someone else at Slate to do it for him. Dishonest, dumb or lazy? You be the judge.
Not retarded, NiceDeb, but worse, brainwashed and indoctrinated. Retardation cannot be helped, the other is the persons own fault. At least here in the US. For now. Although the Left is making pains to change that too.
The case against spitting on veterans rests on Jerry Lembcke’s book and the underlying studies. Lembcke’s evidence that it didn’t happen is, essentially, threefold:
(1) The anti-war movement welcomed veterans with open arms (which is a terribly disingenuous argument. What about guys that didn’t embrace anti-war positions. Lembcke is not an unbiased observer here)
(2) No arrest records or photographs have ever been produced. (which is an idiotic standard of proof. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Give me photographic proof of anti-semitism in country-clubs in the 50′s and 60′s Insisting on this level of proof is bad faith worthy of David Irving.)
and finally
(3) Lembcke’s claim that thorough studies have revealed no contemporary news accounts
This is really the central pillar of the whole argument. It is why people cite Lembcke’s book as “proof” that it is all a legend. Okay.
Here is what Lembcke says in his book (look it up yourself on Google books) pp. 73-74.
“Slightly less but still compelling evidence might be found in news reports from the late 1960′s and early 1970′s” … “The fact that there are no news reports of spitting on veterans raises doubts about whether such incidents ever occurred…If spitting on veterans had occurred all that frequently, surely some veteran or soldier would have called it to the attention of the press at the time.”
Well, Lembcke’s wrong. There is “compelling evidence” of exactly the sort he says doesn’t exist. “Surely some veteran would have called it to the attention of the press”? There it is on the CBS Evening News. A contemporary account from 1971, just like Jerry Lembke says didn’t exist. CBS was the top of the food chain as far as news outlets in 1971. That is surely the tip of the iceberg.
So yes. That destroys Lembcke’s credibility as a researcher. Bear in mind that Lembke absolutely buys into the validity of the Winter Soldier investigations which were no more than first-hand accounts.
After that, you are left with people arguing that the many, many first-hand accounts from vets, who are willing to to give their names, are all lies. Based on what? Some gut instinct that it didn’t happen or a level of proof that is irrational and/or impossible to meet. At that point there is no longer any intellectual respectability to the position.
Maybe T.K. Call me stubbern, but I’m sticking with my original assumption of profoundly low IQ.
That’s just how I roll.
Dan, you have a mob? Sweet!
Yeah, but they have a tendency to chew up liberal argument and “spit” it back at them. tsk tsk.
Turns out there was a whole lot of spitting going on back then – a vet spit on his Congressman for not supporting veterans, protesters spit on (and burned) the flag, cops got spit on… but most articles about the protesters (that I’ve read so far) are very positive, even noting that they picked up their litter. Go figure.
Just go to Google Books and search for “Vietnam” and “spit” and you can find dozens of first-hand accounts from vets.
Here’s one from Time magazine 1979:
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,920248,00.html
Yeah, I noticed. Can I join your mob? Pretty please?
Looks like you already have TK – welcome aboard.
Kevin: The Time magazine article is not going to be good enough for people like Shafer. They’re going to want reports from 1973 or earlier, not from several years after the war ended.
TK,
You posted this:
My father is a Vietnam vet. He told me he was spit at, cursed at, and accused of atrocities upon his return. I believe him, and if I witness anyone spitting on a serviceman, I personally will kick the shit out of him. Or get my ass beat. But one of the two will happen.
******************************************************************
Why would you need to kick the shit out of the spitter when the serviceman would do it himself?
Did your father kick the shit out of those maggots who spit on him?
No, he didn’t, Jonathan. He is a gentleman of the first quality, unlike me. I wish I could be more like him, but alas, I attended public school and there started my resentment against those who sought to brainwash me. I’ve had an attitude ever since. And two older brothers who beat the crap out of me all the time, so I had to learn how to fight, or run really fast. I learned how to fight.
TK,
I wish I could be more like him, but alas, I attended public school and there started my resentment against those who sought to brainwash me.
*******************************************************************
The purpose of any school, public or private is to “brainwash” the students.
Jesuit motto “Give me a child until he is seven and I will give you the man,”
Dan, sheesh! Did you draw the loonies out with this post, or what? You are far more gracious host than I am. I just delete and spam the loons.
Have you noticed that not a single detractor …
NOT
A
SINGLE
ONE
has successfully challenged your facts and data. All they can do is launch ad hominem attacks. What a character portrait of the left!
Case closed.
I posted this at another site in reponse to the current questioning of the spitting meme:
“I was spit on before I went to SEA. November, 1967. Air Force sent me to a graduate communications course for two months at Boston University. We had to wear our uniforms on Thursday. Walking to class one morning, a coed walked straight into my path and spit at me. She was shorter and couldn’t spit very well so I just got a little on my chin and most on my shirt. She turned and ran off, laughing, to a boy standing about 30 feet away and they both ran off together.
Later,at USC grad school for three years, no spitting incidents but lots of worry that I was a narc.
As I recall, we had strict guidance about not responding to provocation.”
I didn’t think too much about it. There was no demonstration going on. Just seemed isolated to me. In a hindsight, that was probably an early example of the behavior. I don’t recall hearing anything about spitting in the media until late ’68 and into ’69. I recall stories about organized gauntlets at SEATAC, SFO, and LAX, but have no personal knowledge of same. Seems to me there was some written command guidance from the Pentagon about not responding and a truth seeker might do some research in the Pentagon archives rather than LexisNexis. That, however, would require a little work instead of cheerily spouting opinions for or against.
I know nothing of Jesuits, and perhaps brainwash was the wrong term. I should have used the term “indoctrinate”, as it more accurately describes the Leftist doctrine I was constantly being force fed. I knew it was phoney, thanks to good parents who were interested in my education. But I knew others whose parents didn’t care, and I saw their minds polluted with the ideology of Marx, Hegel, Kant and Rosseau.
Temp, I am Catholic and brainwashed is the right term. BTW, thanks for your post today, you are a welcome addition
Thanks for sharing Billy and more important, thank you for serving our country.
TK,
I went to public school and the only time I remember hearing of Marx was in the context of “brainwashing” us into the idea that communism was evil.
I guess we were too busy doing duck and cover drills under our desks to have the time to learn about Kant, Hegel and Rousseau.
********************************************************************
Cindi,
I got drafted into the Corps and served two years, do I get thanks for serving too, or is that only for good conservatives?
Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup
And a Happy Sunday to all. Not a clue who did this pinup, have hunted around, cannot find where I originally found itor anyone else that has it. Oh, well.
Funny how the UNs report on global warming which supposedly blames Man comes out duri…
“Why would you need to kick the shit out of the spitter when the serviceman would do it himself?
Did your father kick the shit out of those maggots who spit on him?”
Let me lay it out for you idiot liberals here: people who faced hostile fire and didn’t lose their nerve wouldn’t flinch at some moron spitting. They wouldn’t jeopardize their careers or freedom by knocking some asshole out. This was Jack Shafer’s argument: if vets got spit on, why didn’t anyone get their asses kicked, or why didn’t any military people report it to the police? Because, you dumb fuck, tattling or blowing your career by kicking a hippie’s ass because he spit on you are things undisciplined pussies do.
My father and many of his colleagues were spit on upon returning to the states from Vietnam. They didn’t get mad, and they didn’t run tell Daddy. They were, to a man, saddened by it. But that was it. People like them don’t waste their time with idiots like Jack Shafer, the Spartan and Bill Adkins. They’re insects.
Joshua: I sent Jack Shafer the link to the Vanderbilt archive of the CBS News story from 1971 last week, and he has now ordered a copy of the tape from the archive. That and Laura’s article both meet Jerry Lembcke’s standard of “compelling evidence.” That should win the argument, unless the goalposts are moved.
Kevin, they’ll be moved. Schafer calls it an urban myth in the same sentence where he writes, “Indeed, each time I write about the spit myth, my inbox overflows with e-mail from readers who claim that a spitting protester targeted them while they were in uniform.”
If having someone tell him directly “this happened to ME,” is a myth (i.e. they are telling him a lie), he will certainly find a way to believe that the vets in the articles were telling lies back then too.
Bottom line – Schafer bought what Lembcke is selling, and he’s not going to return it. How they phrase their new set of denials, if they address this new evidence at all, will be entertaining, though.
Don’t kid yourself, the goal posts will move. It’s going to have to be a combat vet in uniform who was spat on while he was descending the boarding ramp on his trip back from ‘Nam, before he changed planes, and the spit will have have to have landed on his face. Film and filed charges required.
I was spat at, not on (he missed, aiming at my shoes.) I was in civies, changing planes in St. Louis. A jerk being a jerk, not a crime and not newsworthy. A Marine assaulting a civilian for being a jerk would be a crime, news, and get me in a heap’o'trouble. Easy to walk away, hard to forget.
That would be my dad’s story, too, htom. He never considered the scum worth his time or effort, I suppose, but he has remembered the vile treatment he received, although he rarely talks about it. I’ve always wanted to beat the crap out of one of these worms, but have never witnessed this treatment, nor am I likely to down here in a rural part of one of the Red States. If such a think happened here, I would have to get in line to see who would get the first punch or kick, whichever seemed the most appropriate at the time.
Uncle Mikey,
Did your father kick the shit out of those maggots who spit on him?”
Let me lay it out for you idiot liberals here: people who faced hostile fire and didn’t lose their nerve wouldn’t flinch at some moron spitting. They wouldn’t jeopardize their careers or freedom by knocking some asshole out. This was Jack Shafer’s argument: if vets got spit on, why didn’t anyone get their asses kicked, or why didn’t any military people report it to the police? Because, you dumb fuck, tattling or blowing your career by kicking a hippie’s ass because he spit on you are things undisciplined pussies do.
**************************************************************************
I was a USMC draftee 69-71, I saw lots of fights between jarheads and dogfaces, jarheads and squids and jarheads and civvies, usually over something far more trivial than getting spit on. I’ve seen a whole bar full of squids and jarheads in a melee which turned into a damn near riot, and everybody got hauled away by the SPs. Why do you think they have SPs and MPs diddybopping around civvy areas near military bases? Because all the troops are saints?
You seem to forget that a large portion of the military back then were draftees, they couldn’t wait to get out of the military and didn’t give the slightest sh*t about their “career”. If you got sent to the brig for a week or two, hell, that was a vacation from having the gunny chew you out ’cause you had an Irish Pennant on your uniform. In the brig you basically got to lay around all day and the food was no worse than normal.
We were basically mostly teens and early twenties and like most folks that age we didn’t necessarily have that much self control. I spent time in the brig a couple of times myself for being drunk and disorderly and I damn sure wasn’t alone. I got punched out right in the squad bay by a dude that was p*ssed because I was sweeping under his rack like the gunny told me to. Not a damn thing was done about it either because if you ran tattling to the gunny over trivial sh*t like that you were going to catch pure hell from everybody else. There are no “Gomer Pyles” in the Corps, anybody who acted like that would be deemed a sh*tbird and their life would be living hell.
A sergeant or an officer might have had more self control, but a private or a pfc or a lance corporal mostly didn’t give a sh*t and definitely would have kicked the living crap out of some maggot that spit on them.
Absolutely, Jonathan – and if someone had spit on a military man then I’d expect a contemporary story of immediate response. This crap about someone being ‘too much of a gentleman’ to slap the shit out of someone who spit on them – that’s a fantasy and a rationalization by someone who wants to believe spitting was a common occurrence.
“people who faced hostile fire and didn’t lose their nerve wouldn’t flinch at some moron spitting” said one poster – what the hell is that poster smoking? Crack tainted with stupid? Sheesh.
BTW, I’ve been unable to post since last night from my other location. Dan, I sent you an email asking if I’d been blocked. No answer. But everyone else has been able to post,makes me feel singled out.
“You seem to forget that a large portion of the military back then were draftees, they couldn’t wait to get out of the military and didn’t give the slightest sh*t about their “career”.”
Two-thirds of Vietnam vets were volunteers. Don’t take my word for it, take Jim Webb’s, D-VA. It’s on his website:
http://www.jameswebb.com/articles/parade/tomandmac.htm
So if by large portion you mean about 33%, fine, but it’s well documented that the majority were volunteers. The draftee myth has been debunked.
As for the spit “myth” several people including me have provided contemporaneous reporting on that, even if you’re unwilling to take the word of men who say it happened to them personally. As for why there are no arrest reports – so far – of soldiers beating up hippies, I don’t rule out two things:
- the idea that someone who just served in Vietnam might decide it’s not worth hanging out in the county lockup for beating the crap out of some hippie, and
- the idea that if he does decide it’s worth it, the local cops called to arrest the soldier just might say the hippie tripped and landed on his face and the soldier was just helping him get up.
There’s already a ‘spit myth” started in this war. See here about Mr. Sparling, someone who apparently studies under Ted Sampley, another liar extraordinaire. http://mediamatters.org/items/200701300012
“On January 28, the Times reported that “one of the antiwar protestors spit at the ground near Mr. Sparling; he spit back,” and quoted Sparling saying of the protesters: “These are not Americans as far as I’m concerned.” As Media Matters noted, Urbina did not cite Sparling as his source on the incident and simply asserted that it occurred, suggesting that he had witnessed it. On Hannity & Colmes, Sparling offered details, claiming that a man wearing an 82nd Airborne badge was one of several people who spit at him, and he asserted, contrary to the Times report, that he did not spit back at the protester. Sparling also “clarif[ied]” his quote from the Times article, claiming that he was referring to just “the vulgar people.”"
And then, there’s this: “Jesus, will it never end. As I’ve said before in this blog, claims of spitting on veterans has become a shorthand way to denigrate anti-war protesters. Only problem is, it never happened to troops coming back from Vietnam and it isn’t happening now. One-legged Iraq War veteran Private Joshua Sparling, however, seems to be proud of the fact that he has been a one-man spittoon. Sparling has claimed that on numerous occasions he’s been spat upon by protesters. At the risk of sounding like a parrot, bullshit bullshit billshit . Sparling is a professional Rethug agitator who hangs out with the likes of Sean Hannity and Ann “Thrax” Coulter. He shows up belligerent and obnoxious at anti-war rallies, actually trying to provoke someone into spitting on him. Trouble is, no one will actually do it, so he’s reduced to just making shit up.”
http://opovet.blogspot.com/atom.xml
———
http://alternet.org/blogs/peek/47361/
“Well, it turns out that Joshua Sparling has conveniently been the victim of many outrageous acts of leftist brutality over the years. So much so, in fact, that he’s become a bit of a celebrity among the wing-nuts.
Digby has the details.
Sparling was featured in rah-rah military PR efforts as far back as 2005.
Then, in December of 2005, while recovering from his wounds at Walter Reed Medical Center, he was victimized by a Christmas card — given to him by the Red Cross — that was wrapped in patriotic fluff on the outside, but inside bore the message: “Have a great time in the war and have a great time dieing in the wor [sic].” It was signed, suspiciously, “Miguel.” Fox, Michelle Malkin and the rest of the wingnuttisphere jumped all over the story. Sparling became an instant darling of the right; he even got a personal visit from war criminal Oliver North! What’s more, the incident got the Sparlings an invitation to the State of the Union address.
A white supremacist named Michael Crook later took credit for sending the card.”
We can talk about this one in about 30 years, ok?
How far you gonna move those goalposts, Bill? It’s no longer good enough to have contemporaneous reporting? Gee, it’s almost – no it’s exactly – like what was predicted further up this thread:
Laura | Saturday, February 03, 2007 at 11:41 PM
Laura | Sunday, February 04, 2007 at 01:56 PM
htom | Sunday, February 04, 2007 at 01:56 PM
I find the “liar liar pants on fire” argument unpersuasive. Do you have a credible witness who says Sparling lied? And is the NY Times in on the vast right wing conspiracy to smack down the anti-war effort?
I find Sparling not credible for the reasons shown in the post, Laura. Obviously, for you Denial is a river with no end.
Johnathan, Bill…
If a servicemember returning from the Nam were to retaliate for being spit on, wouldn’t you think that the headline would read ‘Nam vet assaults civilian’? Maybe ya’ll are looking for the wrong headline.
Damn, Dan…you need a better quality of troll.
And Johnathan? Thanks for serving your country, though I don’t recall the brig as a place where you could lay around all day. I remember making lil chunks of concrete out of biguns.
Heh.
I know this, Laura, Venitari himself couldn’t kick a field goal in Bill’s stadium. His goalposts are out in the parking lot somewhere. And if that’s not far enough, he’ll rent a U-Haul.
TK, it’s your stadium – you set the posts. Other than anecdotal evidence that somewhere sometime someone may have spit on a returning veteran from ‘nam, the proof just isn; there that such events were accepted or common or prevalent. In addition, there is absolutely no evidence an assaulted vet retaliated with overwhelming force by smashing the face of a spitter. That alone is evidence that spitting did not happen. Excuses about punishment if the vet retaliated is bullshit. More likely, in the event such a thing occurred, the vet who cleaned the clock of someone so stupid as to spit on the vet would get a medal and free drinks for life. Stuff that in your U Haul, TK.
Obviously for you there is no persuasive evidence whatsoever, including personal testimony, and past and current news reporting, that veterans have been spit at. They’re just liars, is that it?
Let’s break down what you quoted about Sparling -
- he got a mean card from an anti-military white supremacist
Okay, and? The guy admitted doing it, Sparling told the truth. What’s your problem with this again?
- this got Sparling in the news
Okay, and? It was as newsworthy or more as the other crap networks spend 75% of their airtime on.
- Sparling was at an anti-war protest
And? He is now in the forefront of the opposition to the anti-war movement, and was a speaker at a counter protest earlier in the day.
- Sparling being spit at at the protest was reported by the NY Times, apparently inaccurately
And? It’s not like the first time the NY Times has flubbed something. Like, for example, continuing to insist that Iraq had no serious WMD programs but also reporting that the Bush administration published information about Iraq’s nuclear weapons program that may have helped Iran get nukes. Every newspaper has an area for corrections, and it’s never used as much as it should be.
- Sparling gets on the news and clarifies what happened.
You have nothing except inaccurate reporting on the part of a blatantly liberal paper to contradict Sparling’s account, and even the inaccuracies do not contradict the main part of the story which is that someone spit at Sparling.
As for what allegedly happened in the airport, sounds to me like they were demanding pre-boarding, the guy didn’t want to let them do it, and they ended up arguing with another passenger. This was not contradicted by anyone, so what are your reasons to disbelieve it, other than that it’s inconvenient for your argument? He’s enjoying his 15 minutes, but that doesn’t make him a liar.
Enjoying his 15 minutes? More like exceeding them, milking them and doing what he can to extend them. His victim status is more than questionable. And, again, he’s THE one (1) victim of such activity.
Let me see, Bill, because there is no evidence that hippies had their butts kicked for spitting on vets, then you conclude that no spitting ever occurred. Other than newspaper reports, television reports, first hand accounts, etc. no proof exists.
Uh, Bill, you’re either obtuse or stupid, perhaps just indoctrinated with the ideology of the Left. However, the aforementioned proofs are well accepted standards. You’ve lost this arguement, Bill, but you keep digging. I suppose you’ll get tired of defending the indefensible at some point.
“exceeding them, milking them and doing what he can to extend them”
I won’t worry about him until he at least gets to this point:
http://www.estatevaults.com/lm/%20%20cemetery%20Casey%20Sheehan-1.jpg
http://www.cbsnews.com/images/2006/01/30/imageCAR10201291942.jpg
He’s got the right to speak his piece just like your side does, Bill. The fact that it gets him on the news occasionally, like certain notables who are anti-war, doesn’t make him a liar. Unless you have credible evidence that he has lied, you need to find a better argument.
I saw it happen.
I was born in 1962, which makes me 13 at the end of the war in 1975.I personally witnessed incidents of troops being spat on, assaulted, having animal blood thrown on them, calling them “baby killer” and worse.
My date of birth is 26 April 1962..and I stand as witness that it did happen.
Dispute that, Bill.
durand,
I don’t doubt that spitting happened, I seriously doubt that it happened nearly as much as is claimed today. Of course there are extremists on every side who perform despicable acts, that’s just human nature and am aspect of the bell curve. Don’t forget, Tim McVeigh, who earned a bronze star, was a veteran and what he did was just a smidgen worse than spitting.
I agree that most likely the cops would ignore such an incident as a vet assaulting someone who spit on them.
I’m not the one searching newspaper articles, if you wish to look for assaults by vets on civvies, be my guest.
I can only relate my own experience, I was never disrespected and no one I knew ever told me of being so.
I was in the brig at MCRD San Diego, where I was training in electronics, not a big base and the worst thing I ever heard of any brig rat doing was policing butts.
As far as I can recall, few draftees made it above lance corporal. The lifers were all higher ranks. So I would say that the lower ranks had a greater proportion of draftees than the force over all.
Sparling has claimed that on numerous occasions he’s been spat upon by protesters. At the risk of sounding like a parrot, bullshit bullshit billshit . Sparling is a professional Rethug agitator who hangs out with the likes of Sean Hannity and Ann “Thrax” Coulter. He shows up belligerent and obnoxious at anti-war rallies, actually trying to provoke someone into spitting on him. Trouble is, no one will actually do it, so he’s reduced to just making shit up.”
http://opovet.blogspot.com/atom.xml
“Ann Thrax Coulter”? “Rethug agitator”?
Hey thanks, Bill Adkins for that brilliant and unbiased analysis of Josh Sparling.
More evidence that makes the spitting deniers look more and more like idiots:
http://tinyurl.com/2fmlqq
I know I’m a bit late to the game here, but might as well post my piece as well.
My uncle served 2 tours in Vietnam. Volunteered both times (first time because he was young and naieve; him and his friends figured if they went that would be 5 less hippies that’d be forced to go against their will; second time was to be there to try to keep some of his buddies alive who were still stuck there). After his release from the brig for beating the hell out of his LT, which is a whole different story, the Army threw him on a civie passenger plane back to Missouri. A random guy outside the terminal spat on his chest. He didn’t beat the guy down and didn’t call the police because he just wanted to go home and not get in any more trouble than he’d just been in.
I don’t know about troops being spat on in the current conflict, but I’ve been spat on. I am not, nor have been, an active duty member of the military. I still wear my Woodland M65 field jacket from Civil Air Patrol, and sometimes borrow dad’s old OD M65 (a pattern that was retired from active service totally in 1997, but phase-out began in the 70′s) if I’m at home. Both have been properly decomissioned. The night before an anti-Iraq war rally on campus, a little after the whole Bush/carrier thing, I was wearing the OD one because my sister ganked my cammo one for a project. Two guys, one in his 50′s and a kid around 18, approached me. The kid blocked the path towards my dorm, and the guy kinda circled around to block the path to the Union. The kid spat on me and told me I shouldn’t kill babies for oil. I body-checked him. I then told them if they wanted to push it, I’d drop both of them, place them under citizen’s arrest for assault, and call the cops. I belive self-defense would be a valid argument in a court of law, given it was dark, they outnumbered me, and they approached with clearly hostile actions. Apparently they thought so too, because they both slithered off like the snakes in the grass they were.
Does this mean the entire left does these things? Heck no. One of my best friends leans left, and he wouldn’t allow himself to sink so low as to spit on anyone. I’ve never even seen him make fun of anyone who didn’t start hurling insults first. My Ancient Civilzations teacher from high school was a raging hippie at the time of Vietnam. He says neither he nor anyone he knew spat on anyone. I believe him because he was open about all the rest of the “stupid, youthful, idological things” he did then; up to and including assaulting a cop at a peace rally, which got him shot in the butt with a wood bullet.
It’s not surprising that people like Bill Adkins don’t believe that disciplined men wouldn’t freak out at some hippie spitting on them after they’ve fought in an actual war. It’s hard to imagine things you’ve never experienced. I don’t know what menstruation is like, but I believe it exists. I guess liberalism means never having to understand what people who aren’t like them have experienced.
I tried to post this earlier, sonebend, but couldn’t get it through – better late than never:
Wow, sonnebend – call the papers. Better yet, tell us where you were when all these things happened and we’ll search the local papers. I was 19 that same year. We had different experiences, obviously. I had 5 uncles serving in the ’60s and early ’70s. Four Army, one navy and three of the five served in ‘nam, one of them 3 tours. None of them reported such an event as being spat upon. Nor did any report having heard of or witnessed such events. And I double dog damn guarantee you that if it had occurred the person who did the spitting would be eating his meals through a straw to this date. By the way, the ‘career army helicopter pilot and served 3 tours uncle’ was at one time THE senior CWO-pilot in the Army, stationed at various times at Rucker and Bragg. He was also an instructor.
Obviously, alleging such events did occur would serve someone’s agenda today – and it’s obvious that you and Dan are working your own agenda. I’m not buying it.
just like the swift boat lies
tales of spitting upon are BS
now I can see the idiotic Frisco hippies doing so
but that is not a surpirse
but I wore my uniform in Colorado and never got a bad look!