From: russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence)
Subject: Re: Anti-AR movie goers - Please read
Organization: WP Group
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 00:06:57 GMT

Russell Lawrence writes:
rl> Along these same lines, was it ok for a people like Jane Fonda 
rl> and Bill Clinton to protest US involvement in the Vietnam War?  
rl> Or, would you agree with Scott that such actions constitute 
rl> treason?  

From article <1992Nov10.182933.6448@icd.ab.com>, by kdw@icd.ab.com (Kenneth D. Whitehead):
kw> What Bill Clinton did was legal, (although in my opinion, it made it
kw> impossible for me to vote for him for Commander-in-Chief), but Jane
kw> Fonda went to North Viet Nam and made propaganda broadcasts on the
kw> behalf of an enemy with which her country was engaged in military
kw> hostilities.  She also posed for propaganda pictures which were widely
kw> published at the time, and publicly urged Americans fighting in South
kw> Viet Nam to refuse to fight.
kw> 
kw> She also encouraged the North Vietnamese, telling the Communists that 
kw> the "people" in the US were behind them. US prisoners in Hanoi reported
kw> increased torture and other forms of poor treatment after Fonda's visit,
kw> and there were reports of a prisoner being executed for refusing to see 
kw> Fonda. 

I don't understand how/why you think Jane Fonda was somehow 
responsible for the alleged mistreatment of US prisoners.  Be 
that as it may, I'd like to explore a couple of related points.  

It's been my experience that people who don't appreciate the 
concept of non-human animal rights are often equally 
disrespectful of human rights.  Perhaps you'd be willing to share 
your views on a couple of human rights questions: 

1) Do you favor the right of individuals to select their own form of
   government.  If so, do you agree that the US violated the rights
   of the vietnamese people by subverting the plans for an all-vietnam
   election, as embodied in the terms of the geneva peace accord that
   was signed after the french loss at Dien Bien Phu?  Or, would you
   say that it's acceptable for the United States to violate democratic
   principles elsewhere in the world if it suits her economic and 
   political objectives?

2) Do you disapprove of torture?  If so, would you have agreed with
   critics like Jane Fonda that the participants in the CIA's 
   "phoenix" project ought to be tried for war crimes?

kw> It's not the same thing as merely protesting the war;  Fonda 
kw> actively gave aid and comfort to the enemy (the legal definition 
kw> of treason, I believe), no two ways about it.  

The generals who attempted to kill Hitler in the closing months 
of WWII were tried, convicted, and executed for treason, yet some 
germans later viewed them as patriotic heros.  Perhaps the 
definition of patriotism and treason ought to depend on our 
definition of "home and country" and the values that we hold 
dear.  

Was Vietnam your home?  If not, was it "patriotic" for the US to
use her military muscle to "protect" the vietnamese people from 
their desire to control their own political and economic future?

kw> ...
kw> And can you imagine the moral quandry poor President Clinton is going
kw> to find himself in if he ever needs to send troops into combat?  You 
kw> almost have to feel sorry for the guy.  (I'm even going to resist the
kw> temptation to  make a sarcastic remark about that.)  ;-)

I don't envision any moral quandaries here.  If you're the sort of
"good german" who does what he's told, and never asks questions, I
suppose that any particular war would seem like every other war.
You'd simply do what you're told, regardless of the situation.

On the other hand, if you're the sort of person who likes to asks
questions, I'm sure you'll realize that some wars may be totally
unjust.

-- 
Russell Lawrence, WP Group, New Orleans (504) 443-5000
russ@wpg.com   uunet!wpg!russ