Powered by TypePad

« Al Qaeda Arrest In Pakistan - A Big Deal?! | Main | She's Got You, Babe »

May 06, 2005

Comments

Mike

The reason these people, after all these years are saying they didn't harm vets is either because they were not born yet or they sympathize with the spitters/trashers, or more likely, they were the spitters. Now forty percent of the American population was not even born during Vietnam and eighty percent of Vietnam Vets are dead already (census)probably from agent orange.The number of people that strongly opposed those soldiers, is estimated at over fifty million people.Fifty million people that got rich , fat then lazy , never risking a hair on their heads while sitting on their duffs stateside smoking a joint and getting a degree.They will rewrite history and tell their grandchildren about the glorious days of their youth.They will tell them they had strong moral opposition to the war but always treated the troops kindly.In reality being too scared to risk their precious ass, they avoided service at all costs. Their moral objection was they didn't want to take the chance they might get hurt , it was better if some young black man took their place. The new "truth" will be distorted and a pack of lies. Lies are not new to these people, soon there will be nobody left who knows otherwise.

kim

I don't know, Mike. John O'Neill and the Swifties have changed a lot of veterans. I can't thank Kerry for much, but I do thank him for the opportunity to re-visit the war. It's done a lot of good.
===========================================

a reader

I think the author of this article needs to read Lembcke's book instead of writing tangents from glimpsed excerpts! I think he'd find reading the book would particularly help add substance to his review and foundation for a thoughtful critique.
Also, reading Lembcke's book might encourage writer of this article to be more careful in
how he frames and represents someone's words. Lembcke's book shows great attention to how images and words are taken out of context; reframed; and then told how to interpret them. This article's snide snippet of Kerry's speech provides a marvelous case in point: Not only did the author not provide enough context (for example the extent and substance of Kerry's involvement in the anti-war movement) and thus Kerry was speaking to the experience of returning vietvets to an abstract hostility that is embodied in the government- not the anti-war community. The political potency of Kerry's speech is lost in the framing and interpretation by this author. A more accurate interpretation than the one the author espouses is that Kerry is engaged in a scathing critique of the government's arbitrainess of battle; death; violence-- and how the government and media created an environment of hostility resulting in the depoliticized subject.

kim

Kerry could stand to undergo a scathing critique of himself.
====================================

SpinBoldak

I was spit on in 1969. I honestly believe that the America of 2007 would still spit on me.

Terry W. Smith

Sometime in 1974 I made the mistake of flying to home from Ellsworth AFB South Dakota in my Air Force Captain's uniform. It had something to do with getting a discount fare I believe. At a long layover in Chicago's O'Hare Airport, I was spit upon in the face by a smiling hippie-looking creep. I didn't realize what had happened to me. I was temporarily blinded as well. No further activity ensued by the time I cleaned my face.

fiesta online money

I gain a lot of fiesta online money and harvest in life.

mabinogi gold

When you have mabinogi gold, you can get more!

The comments to this entry are closed.

Wilson/Plame