PDA

View Full Version : Vietnam Vet Spits in Jane Fonda's Face


apoet29
Apr 20th, 2005, 09:14 PM
Vietnam vet spits in Jane Fonda's face
Man waits 90 minutes in line, calls her a ‘traitor’


http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/ap/nydb10604051747.hmedium.jpg Diane Bondareff / AP


Jane Fonda signs a copy of her autobiography for her editor, Kate Medina, center, during a book signing earlier this month in New York. She recently said she regretted some of her antiwar activities, but many veterans haven't forgiven her.

http://media.msnbc.msn.com/i/msnbc/Components/Sources/sourceReuters.gif (http://www.reuters.com/) Updated: 3:48 p.m. ET April 20, 2005

KANSAS CITY, Mo. - A man who said he was a Vietnam veteran spat tobacco juice in Jane Fonda’s face at a Kansas City book signing, police said Wednesday.

The man, 54-year-old Michael Smith, waited in line for about 90 minutes before spitting a “large amount” of tobacco juice into Fonda’s face, according to Kansas City police.

Smith was arrested and charged with disorderly conduct.

The 67-year-old Oscar-winning actress was in town as part of a book-signing tour for her newly released autobiography titled “My Life So Far.”



http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/ap/mokas10404201914.cmug.jpgByline Title: Ho / AP


Michael Smith, who spat in Fonda's face, is seen in this photo released by the Kansas City, Mo. police
In the book, she addresses her position as a polarizing figure for many Vietnam veterans and others who were outraged when Fonda made a highly publicized trip to Hanoi to oppose the Vietnam war in 1972.

During that trip she was photographed laughing as she sat on a North Vietnamese anti-aircraft tank.

In an interview with the Kansas City Star, Smith said Fonda was a “traitor” who had been spitting in the faces of war veterans for years.

“There are a lot of veterans who would love to do what I did,” the Star quoted Smith as saying.

Copyright 2005 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters

jbone_0307
Apr 20th, 2005, 09:39 PM
But she didn't spit in your face physically, did she? This guy looks and sounds like he needs to go back to elementary school. :lol: What a fuckin retard :lol: :haha:

Justeenium
Apr 20th, 2005, 09:42 PM
But she didn't spit in your face physically, did she? This guy looks and sounds like he needs to go back to elementary school. :lol: What a fuckin retard :lol: :haha:

:retard:

harloo
Apr 20th, 2005, 09:49 PM
Ewww...who chews tobacco? This man looks fucked up. Jane Fonda should know that any anti-war stance gets the nut jobs upset.

Justeenium
Apr 20th, 2005, 09:55 PM
Ewww...who chews tobacco? This man looks fucked up. Jane Fonda should know that any anti-war stance gets the nut jobs upset.

just "any anti-war stance" try again.

:retard:

moon
Apr 20th, 2005, 11:08 PM
I hope she presses charges against him. :(
I certainly would.

darren cahill
Apr 20th, 2005, 11:24 PM
Janes book was really great. well i mean what i've read is great. I'm about 1/2 way through. I just love the woman and her acting is superb. i'm glad shes back (somewhat) in the spotlight.:worship:

Scotso
Apr 21st, 2005, 04:14 AM
There was nothing wrong with what she did. The fact that we basically went to war with a people just because we didn't like that they wouldn't accept our version of capitalism (or really because we couldn't exploit them anymore) is just pathetic.

SelesFan70
Apr 21st, 2005, 04:28 AM
But she didn't spit in your face physically, did she? This guy looks and sounds like he needs to go back to elementary school. :lol: What a fuckin retard :lol: :haha:

You need to re-read your history books. :rolleyes: Mizz Fonda posed with the enemy on a tank and therefore spat in the face of soldiers doing their job. :mad:

Wigglytuff
Apr 21st, 2005, 04:41 AM
whatever.

this guy is clearly a nut job. firstly the woman said she was sorry and really regretted what she did, secondly its clear to day that what was going on in vietman was fucked up, so i dont understand people who didnt have the sense to see THEN how fucked it was, getting irate at those who did :confused: . and lastly, in america vengance crimes are still crimes. period.

what he did was wrong and illegal, what she did was not illegal and she regrets it. end of story.

--
as an aside, why doesnt this man spit in the face tobacco in the face of those who sent him to vietman in the first place.

Wigglytuff
Apr 21st, 2005, 04:48 AM
You need to re-read your history books. :rolleyes: Mizz Fonda posed with the enemy on a tank and therefore spat in the face of soldiers doing their job. :mad:

i dont know what country you are in, but in america, its illegal and fucked up to spit nasty ass shit in peoples faces because they hurt your feelings (mind you she said she was sorry and regretted what she had done).

decemberlove
Apr 21st, 2005, 05:03 AM
i dont know what country you are in, but in america, its illegal and fucked up to spit nasty ass shit in peoples faces because they hurt your feelings (mind you she said she was sorry and regretted what she had done).

yeah, but it's also very easy to say "i'm sorry" and not mean it when you have a book out and a crappy movie with j.lo coming out, cos you want people to like you and put more money in your pocket.

i think what he did was terrible, but her actions were certainly no better.

SelesFan70
Apr 21st, 2005, 05:18 AM
i dont know what country you are in, but in america, its illegal and fucked up to spit nasty ass shit in peoples faces because they hurt your feelings (mind you she said she was sorry and regretted what she had done).

I am in The USA (check my flag in my avatar). And while it's disrespectful for sure to spit in someone's face (not sure about illegal), perhaps you should direct that comment to all the people who spat in the face of the soldiers returning home from Viet Nam. :wavey:

Zummi
Apr 21st, 2005, 05:47 AM
It's amazing to see people act like this is the first time that Jane has apologized for posing in the aircraft gun photo in 1972. When the fact is that she has apologized for that many times before. There's only so much a person can do and as Jane said, her critics are so blinded by their hate that nothing she says or does will make them change their minds.

This idiot spitting on Jane is no different from the silly liberals who throw cream pies at the likes of Ann Coulter & Pat Buchanan. And yet I didn't see the right-wingers trying to excuse that sort of behavior...

Philbo
Apr 21st, 2005, 05:52 AM
I am in The USA (check my flag in my avatar). And while it's disrespectful for sure to spit in someone's face (not sure about illegal), perhaps you should direct that comment to all the people who spat in the face of the soldiers returning home from Viet Nam. :wavey:

The anti vietnam war demonstrators judged by history were correct in their stance.
The USA LOST the war, thousands of americans (and many other nationalities) died needlessly..it broke the american army to the point where it took a decade or more to rebuild and many lessons were learned about not repeating the same mistake - until Bush took power that is..

Where is the anger from the Vets towards the people who decided they should go to war needlessly??

This is misplaced anger at its worst.

Scotso
Apr 21st, 2005, 06:01 AM
I am in The USA (check my flag in my avatar). And while it's disrespectful for sure to spit in someone's face (not sure about illegal), perhaps you should direct that comment to all the people who spat in the face of the soldiers returning home from Viet Nam. :wavey:

Of course it's illegal to spit in someone's face, that is why he was arrested.

ginger_fish668
Apr 21st, 2005, 07:52 AM
Viet vet spits into Fonda's face



By Associated Press

A man spit tobacco juice into the face of Jane Fonda after waiting in line to have her sign her new memoir.
Capt. Rich Lockhart of the Kansas City Police Department said Michael A. Smith, 54, was arrested Tuesday night on a municipal charge of disorderly conduct. He was released on bond and is due to appear in court on May 27.

Fonda covers a wide range of topics in "My Life So Far," including her 1972 visit to Hanoi to protest the Vietnam War, during which she was photographed on a North Vietnamese anti-aircraft gun. She has apologized for the photo, but not for opposing the war.

Smith, a Vietnam veteran, told The Kansas City Star on Wednesday that Fonda was a "traitor" and that her protests against the Vietnam War were unforgivable. He said he doesn't chew tobacco but did so Tuesday solely to spit juice on the actress.

"I consider it a debt of honor," he told The Star for a story on its Web site. "She spit in our faces for 37 years. It was absolutely worth it. There are a lot of veterans who would love to do what I did."

Fonda, who flew to Minneapolis on Wednesday for another appearance on her book tour, issued a statement through Jynne Martin of Random House.

"In spite of the incident, my experience in Kansas City was wonderful and I thank all the warm and supportive people, including so many veterans, who came to welcome me last night," she said.

Fonda drew a crowd of about 900 at Unity Temple, said Vivian Jennings, whose Rainy Day Books of suburban Fairway, Kan., sponsored the event.

Jennings said the 67-year-old actress never got up from her seat and continued autographing books after the tobacco juice was wiped off.

"The important thing is that she was so calm and so gracious about it," Jennings said. "She was wonderful."


That man is messed up. :fiery:

I admire the way Jane Fonda handled the situation. That's class. :worship:

Lord Nelson
Apr 21st, 2005, 12:09 PM
What I would like to know is why the Vietnam war is any different to the Korean one? If the U.S. shouold not have intervened in Vietnam than they should not have intervened in Korea either. Let Kim Il Sung control Seoul. Both situations you had communist north invade capitalist south. The problem with Vietnam is that the Americans should have fought with the French and not have fought in Vietnam after French left after 20 years of fighting. The Americans lost the war because the U.S. army also was not professional and soldiers consisted of young conscripts who were basically given a gun and told to fight. The U.S. also lost because of Vietnam's topography-jungle. I supported the war but not the way it was fought. I certainly did not approve of agent orange. Vietnam war should have ended in 1969 for U.S. not in 1973.

JonBcn
Apr 21st, 2005, 12:14 PM
Tobacco juice? Does that come in cans, and is it carbonated? Is there a one-calorie Tobacco Juice Lite?

~ The Leopard ~
Apr 21st, 2005, 12:40 PM
What I've never been able to understand is why Americans use the word "spit" as a past-tense verb, as in: "He spit at me as I was approaching him." At least in my hearing, everyone else says "spat" for past tense and "spit" for present tense. This has bothered me for years. :D :scratch:

Wigglytuff
Apr 21st, 2005, 02:38 PM
I am in The USA (check my flag in my avatar). And while it's disrespectful for sure to spit in someone's face (not sure about illegal), perhaps you should direct that comment to all the people who spat in the face of the soldiers returning home from Viet Nam. :wavey:

no, i think its easier to think that you are not in the us, this way, i can just say that you are not familiar with the American legal system. otherwise, i would be forced to think of you as one of the stoooopedist Americans out there.

1-any half wit, should know that spiting in people faces is illegal. :wavey:
2-as someone else said, why would he get arrested if it weren't illegal. :retard: :retard: :retard: :retard:
3-finally, don't put words in my mouth. it makes you look even stooopidar, what he did was illegal. period. in America, when something is against the law, it is against the law for all residents (if its a local or state law, than its applies to all residents of the county/city or state.) so if anyone spit one other personal for any (non consensual) reason, its illegal. period. there i am done with you.
---------
it sounds to me like people who think what this guy did is not criminal, support some sort of state where there is no true rule of law. people can go around doing what they like when they get hurt feelings....so long as you agree with them. that's not only sick and demented. its also un-American and juvenile. :(

Wigglytuff
Apr 21st, 2005, 02:46 PM
yeah, but it's also very easy to say "i'm sorry" and not mean it when you have a book out and a crappy movie with j.lo coming out, cos you want people to like you and put more money in your pocket.

i think what he did was terrible, but her actions were certainly no better.

i think its completely fair for people to disagree with her and even continue to be pissed at her. hell they have a RIGHT to feel whatever feelings towards her they like.

what i was trying to say was that difference, and it is a big difference, is that what she did was not illegal, certainly uncomfortable and regretable, but not illegal. what he did was illegal.

Wigglytuff
Apr 21st, 2005, 03:01 PM
The anti vietnam war demonstrators judged by history were correct in their stance.
The USA LOST the war, thousands of americans (and many other nationalities) died needlessly..it broke the american army to the point where it took a decade or more to rebuild and many lessons were learned about not repeating the same mistake - until Bush took power that is..

Where is the anger from the Vets towards the people who decided they should go to war needlessly??

This is misplaced anger at its worst.

:worship: :worship: :worship: :worship:

Justeenium
Apr 21st, 2005, 03:04 PM
It's amazing to see people act like this is the first time that Jane has apologized for posing in the aircraft gun photo in 1972. When the fact is that she has apologized for that many times before. There's only so much a person can do and as Jane said, her critics are so blinded by their hate that nothing she says or does will make them change their minds.

...


I'm sorry but if someone committs murder and then apologizes it doesn't mean you get your normal life back

This idiot spitting on Jane is no different from the silly liberals who throw cream pies at the likes of Ann Coulter & Pat Buchanan. And yet I didn't see the right-wingers trying to excuse that sort of behavior

Did Buchanan and Coulter committ treason?

Justeenium
Apr 21st, 2005, 03:05 PM
There was nothing wrong with what she did. The fact that we basically went to war with a people just because we didn't like that they wouldn't accept our version of capitalism (or really because we couldn't exploit them anymore) is just pathetic.

nothing wrong what she did? I'll give you a comparison. Say if someone were to be filmed smiling in a house in Iraq that is used to make IEDs, and then lies about the treatment of coalition hostages.

tell me, do you not see anything wrong with that?

Justeenium
Apr 21st, 2005, 03:08 PM
what he did was wrong and illegal, what she did was not illegal and she regrets it. end of story.

--
.

it's up to the court of law to determine whether her actions were illegal or not. a court of law that never got that chance.

Justeenium
Apr 21st, 2005, 03:11 PM
What I would like to know is why the Vietnam war is any different to the Korean one? If the U.S. shouold not have intervened in Vietnam than they should not have intervened in Korea either. Let Kim Il Sung control Seoul. Both situations you had communist north invade capitalist south. The problem with Vietnam is that the Americans should have fought with the French and not have fought in Vietnam after French left after 20 years of fighting. The Americans lost the war because the U.S. army also was not professional and soldiers consisted of young conscripts who were basically given a gun and told to fight. The U.S. also lost because of Vietnam's topography-jungle. I supported the war but not the way it was fought. I certainly did not approve of agent orange. Vietnam war should have ended in 1969 for U.S. not in 1973.

the Korean war was not publicized as much. There were no headlines about it and it was mainly described as just a conflict. The country went on as if there were no war.

Wigglytuff
Apr 21st, 2005, 04:52 PM
it's up to the court of law to determine whether her actions were illegal or not. a court of law that never got that chance.
:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

he spit. he was arrested. he confessed.

is it suddenly not illegal anymore when you confess? :confused:

apoet29
Apr 21st, 2005, 05:16 PM
My problem is that Vietnam vets have made her a scapgoat for the entire war. What she did was wrong. I believe that, and she has admitted that. But it seems to me that the Vets solely blame her. She did not start the war, and as an American, she had a right to protest it. I believe that she went about it in the wrong way, and as a celebrity, that was her mistake, but to hold a grudge this long is stupid.

lizchris
Apr 21st, 2005, 05:34 PM
I am in The USA (check my flag in my avatar). And while it's disrespectful for sure to spit in someone's face (not sure about illegal), perhaps you should direct that comment to all the people who spat in the face of the soldiers returning home from Viet Nam. :wavey:


Transmissoin of one's bodily fluids on another human being with the express purprose to commit a crime is illegal. At best it is disoredrly conduct at worst it is misdemeanor assult.

K.U.C.W-R.V
Apr 21st, 2005, 05:36 PM
Disgusting behaviour...but I agree with the sentiment. Jane Fonda was a complete disgrace.

Lord Nelson
Apr 21st, 2005, 06:47 PM
But Jane Fonda apologized for this. It's funny to see that she comes from a non-religious family but decided to become a Christian. Normally many kids become less religious than their parents, with her it was the opposite.

darren cahill
Apr 21st, 2005, 08:31 PM
yeah, but it's also very easy to say "i'm sorry" and not mean it when you have a book out and a crappy movie with j.lo coming out, cos you want people to like you and put more money in your pocket.

i think what he did was terrible, but her actions were certainly no better.

do you think she really is only saying this stuff because of a book and a movie? shes been saying sorry for years, way before this recent publicity stuff. this post of yours just seems to attack her for no reason. no one can prove how she feels. its easy to look at the negative and say shes only saying it to pump her book and movie. i chose to believe that maybe some people do have regrets and have grown as time goes on. I certainly hope i can say the same one day for myself. what she did was pretty flicted, but she was a lot younger than the guy who did his shit to her. he should know better than she did then.

by the way, i tried to call you over the weekend. futile attempt as always!:angel:

Justeenium
Apr 21st, 2005, 09:09 PM
:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

he spit. he was arrested. he confessed.

is it suddenly not illegal anymore when you confess? :confused:

key word: her

JustineTime
Apr 21st, 2005, 09:28 PM
The guy is understandably upset, but misguided, IMO.

Jane Fonda got less than she deserved. She should be rotting in jail for giving aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States...but then so should John Kerry, and he was considered a viable candidate for our nation's highest office. :shrug: :rolleyes:

harloo
Apr 21st, 2005, 10:01 PM
The guy is understandably upset, but misguided, IMO.

Jane Fonda got less than she deserved. She should be rotting in jail for giving aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States...but then so should John Kerry, and he was considered a viable candidate for our nation's highest office. :shrug: :rolleyes:

Ah yes, Kerry should be stoned for serving his country in combat(unlike YOUR President). :lol:

apoet29
Apr 21st, 2005, 10:15 PM
The guy is understandably upset, but misguided, IMO.

Jane Fonda got less than she deserved. She should be rotting in jail for giving aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States...but then so should John Kerry, and he was considered a viable candidate for our nation's highest office. :shrug: :rolleyes:

If that is the case, then let's stone aid workers who work in countries we are currently at war with. Let's stone Angelina Jolie who has given millions to help people in Afghanistan and Iraq. Let's stone Sean Penn for going to Iraq on a fact-finding mission. There are plenty of people who object to war and specifically object to wars that their countries engage in. I think we need to get rid of the us or them attitude and really address why the US has to engage in war at all.

The US has always been about freedom. As such, people should have the freedom to express themselves even if it goes against current policy. Once we start denying people that freedom based on their political beliefs, then we have lost what has made us great to begin with.

Philbo
Apr 22nd, 2005, 02:27 AM
The guy is understandably upset, but misguided, IMO.

Jane Fonda got less than she deserved. She should be rotting in jail for giving aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States...but then so should John Kerry, and he was considered a viable candidate for our nation's highest office. :shrug: :rolleyes:

The DUTY of a patriotic citizen is not to accept anything and everthing from the people in power without question or challenge - thats not a democracy, its a dictatorship...

So funny to see you label 'dissenters' as horrible traitors. They are doing their patriotic duty to create the kind of nation they want. Thats democrasy you fool.

Cosmopolitan
Apr 22nd, 2005, 02:38 AM
Wow, I cannot believe that.
I wonder what the bastard'll get for that? Hopefully not just a slap on the wrist.

Cosmopolitan
Apr 22nd, 2005, 02:42 AM
The guy is understandably upset, but misguided, IMO.

Jane Fonda got less than she deserved. She should be rotting in jail for giving aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States...but then so should John Kerry, and he was considered a viable candidate for our nation's highest office. :shrug: :rolleyes:

Enemies of the United States. And whose fault is that? The victims here are the Vietnamese and the US was the aggressor. Sure everyone doesn't have the same views but just because everyone doesn't agree doesn't mean the minority has to be jailed. Ridiculous.

Cosmopolitan
Apr 22nd, 2005, 02:46 AM
The anti vietnam war demonstrators judged by history were correct in their stance.
The USA LOST the war, thousands of americans (and many other nationalities) died needlessly..it broke the american army to the point where it took a decade or more to rebuild and many lessons were learned about not repeating the same mistake - until Bush took power that is..

Where is the anger from the Vets towards the people who decided they should go to war needlessly??

This is misplaced anger at its worst.

very true!

Wigglytuff
Apr 22nd, 2005, 02:51 AM
key word: her
who her? i thought it was a typo

jane fonda? are you stupid enough to be saying that jane fonda commited a crime by writing her book? if now i dont understand what you are saying. i dont remember jane getting arrested but hey.

MinnyGophers
Apr 22nd, 2005, 02:57 AM
The guy is understandably upset, but misguided, IMO.

Jane Fonda got less than she deserved. She should be rotting in jail for giving aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States...but then so should John Kerry, and he was considered a viable candidate for our nation's highest office. :shrug: :rolleyes:

:rolleyes:
one word: stupid.

Justeenium
Apr 22nd, 2005, 05:06 AM
who her? i thought it was a typo

jane fonda? are you stupid enough to be saying that jane fonda commited a crime by writing her book? if now i dont understand what you are saying. i dont remember jane getting arrested but hey.

I'm talking about what she did in Vietnam :retard:

Wigglytuff
Apr 22nd, 2005, 05:27 AM
I'm talking about what she did in Vietnam :retard:

i was afraid of that. personally i think, you looked smarter when it seemed you meant committing a crime for writing a book. at least the book was written on US soil.


your word of the day is jurisdiction.
get someone to explain it to you.

~ The Leopard ~
Apr 22nd, 2005, 06:08 AM
Oh well, she looked awfully cute in Barbarella. :drool:

BUBI
Apr 22nd, 2005, 07:25 AM
Looks like Michael Smith got his 15 minutes of fame...luckily he has so original name that people will remember him for a loong time :tape: :lol:

Barbarella did the right thing in 1972. She was trying to save the universum. :angel:

decemberlove
Apr 22nd, 2005, 10:52 PM
do you think she really is only saying this stuff because of a book and a movie? shes been saying sorry for years, way before this recent publicity stuff. this post of yours just seems to attack her for no reason. no one can prove how she feels. its easy to look at the negative and say shes only saying it to pump her book and movie. i chose to believe that maybe some people do have regrets and have grown as time goes on. I certainly hope i can say the same one day for myself. what she did was pretty flicted, but she was a lot younger than the guy who did his shit to her. he should know better than she did then.

by the way, i tried to call you over the weekend. futile attempt as always!:angel:

no, i don't. i actually don't give a fuck whether she means it or not [and i don't mean that in a harsh way]. i just wanted to throw out another possibility, since the rest of the thread was kissing her ass. if the thread was going the other way, i would've defended her. :devil:

the vets were REALLY fucked by many people, and maybe it IS misplaced anger, but who are we to say what that guy feels? maybe he was genuinely hurt by her actions or maybe it's been a bit of brainwashing by some of the more conservative media. i don't know, but what i do know is that we're humans and sometimes it's hard to forgive and forget when somebody just says "i'm sorry". i know i'm guilty of it.

oh and was that you who called? i have two other numbers listed under your name on my cell. can you please tell me your real number so i actually KNOW when you are calling? :p

Justeenium
Apr 24th, 2005, 04:34 AM
i was afraid of that. personally i think, you looked smarter when it seemed you meant committing a crime for writing a book. at least the book was written on US soil.


your word of the day is jurisdiction.
get someone to explain it to you.

right, and John Walker wasn't put in prison either since he did it all off US soil

....

:retard:

Justeenium
Apr 24th, 2005, 04:40 AM
To the rest of you morons:

"she apologized, blah blah blah." an apology doesn't mean you get off scot free.

Robert Hansen isn't getting out of prison if he apologizes. An apology isn't good enough.

to the others who said "oh but she had the correct viewpoint on Vietnam." well-back to Hansen, maybe we shouldn't have been spying on Russia in the first place? maybe he did a good thing by revealing our spies to them because we shouldn't be spying on them. He still ain't getting off.


For once would you leftist eurotwats try thinking????

just once? or is it still gonna be OMG AMERICA BUSH WARHAWKS BALALALALLALLALAL
crap that you always do

Justeenium
Apr 24th, 2005, 04:41 AM
How many of you lefties were calling the guys who threw the pies at Ann Coulter "nut jobs"

yep, that's right.

Wigglytuff
Apr 24th, 2005, 03:24 PM
right, and John Walker wasn't put in prison either since he did it all off US soil

....

:retard:

you are comparing oranges and ipods. even then you are still wrong.


here what is what you think is the same as taking a picture, here are the general facts about John Walker Lindh

Youth, conversion and travels

Walker was born in Washington, DC to parents Marilyn Walker and Frank Lindh. He was baptized Catholic and grew up in Silver Spring, Maryland, until he was ten years old and his family moved to San Anselmo, California in Marin County. In 1997, at age 16, Walker converted to Islam. In 1998, he traveled to Yemen for about ten months, to learn Arabic so that he would be able to read the Qur'an in its original language. He returned to the United States in 1999, living with his family for about eight months before returning to Yemen in February 2000, whence he left for Pakistan to study at an austere madrassa (Islamic school). He is believed to have entered Afghanistan in the spring of 2001.

Capture and interrogation

Walker was first captured on November 25, 2001, by Northern Alliance forces and questioned by CIA agent Mike Spann and another agent at a prison near Mazar-e Sharif. Later that day, the prison was the scene of a violent uprising, in which Spann was killed along with hundreds of Taliban fighters. Walker took refuge in a basement bunker after taking a bullet in the upper-right thigh, hiding with other Taliban members. He was found seven days later on December 2, 2001, when Northern Alliance forces diverted an irrigation stream, flushing out Walker and the other survivors. Walker initially gave his name as "Abdul Hamid" but later gave his real name.

Upon capture, Walker signed confession documents while he was held by the United States Marine Corps on USS Peleliu and informed his interrogators that he was not merely Taliban but al Qaeda. John Ashcroft, on January 16, 2002, announced that Lindh would be tried in the US.

His defense attorney claimed to the press that he asked for a lawyer repeatedly before being interviewed but he didn't get one, and that "highly coercive" prison conditions forced Walker to waive his right to remain silent. Although the FBI asked Jesselyn Radack, a Justice Department ethics advisor, whether Walker could be questioned without a lawyer present, her advice that this should not be done was not followed.

Trial

On February 5, 2002, Walker was indicted by a federal grand jury on ten charges, including conspiring to support terrorist organizations and conspiring to murder Americans. The charges carried three life terms and 90 additional years in prison. On February 13, 2002, he pleaded "not guilty" to all ten charges.

Complicating the prosecution was the nature of the confession. Photos emerged from Lindh's captivity of him being held naked and trussed up like a trophy deer wearing an obscenity-covered blindfold. When details of the conditions of his captivity began to emerge, it was discovered that he had initially been wounded and hid for a week with limited food, water, and minimal sleep in conditions of freezing water before being captured. After being captured and taken to a room with the only window blocked off, Lindh had his clothes cut off him and was duct taped to a stretcher and placed in a metal shipping container for transportation. When interrogated, he was denied a lawyer despite several requests, and was threatened with denial of medical aid if he didn't cooperate.

The court scheduled an evidence suppression hearing, at which Walker would be able to testify about the details of the torture to which he was subjected. The government faced the problem that a key piece of evidence -- Walker's confession -- might be excluded from evidence as having been forced under duress. Furthermore, the hearing would turn a spotlight on the way that U.S. soldiers had conducted the interrogation.

To forestall this possibility, Michael Chertoff, the head of the criminal division of the Justice Department, directed the prosecutors to offer Walker a plea bargain: He would plead guilty to two charges — serving in the Taliban army and carrying weapons. He would also have to consent to a gag order that would prevent him from making any public statements on the matter for the duration of his twenty-year sentence, and he would have to drop claims that he had been mistreated or tortured by U.S. military personnel in Afghanistan and aboard two military ships during December 2001 and January 2002. In return, all the other charges would be dropped.

Walker accepted this offer. On July 15, 2002, he entered his plea of guilty to the two remaining charges. The judge asked Walker to say, in his own words, what he was admitting to. "I plead guilty," he said. "I provided my services as a soldier to the Taliban last year from about August to December. In the course of doing so, I carried a rifle and two grenades. I did so knowingly and willingly knowing that it was illegal." On October 4, 2002, Judge T.S. Ellis formally imposed the sentence: 20 years without parole.

Walker's attorney, James Brosnahan, said Walker would be eligible for release in 17 years, with good behavior. This is because, although there is no parole under federal law, his sentence could be reduced by 15 percent, or three years, for good behavior. In addition, Walker agreed to cooperate "fully, truthfully and completely" with both military intelligence and law enforcement agencies in the terrorism investigation, and any profits Walker might make from telling his story will be taken by the government.

what i find interesting and missing here, well, what did JWL do to land him in jail for 20 years. because it doesnt really say.

* The government grossly overstated its case when JWL was first arrested. Consequently, the government dismissed nine out of ten of its original charges.

* Lindh pled to the two least serious charges.

* Lindh began to fight the Northern Alliance before the United States became involved in the conflict.

* The indictment states that Lindh declined the offer to participate in terror operations against Israel and the United States and chose instead to go to the front lines to fight the Northern Alliance.

There is no evidence that Lindh intended to murder Americans or to assist terrorists in doing so. His sole purpose all along was to prevent the Northern Alliance from regaining control of the country that had given them the boot in 1997.

Lindh was given 20 years in federal prison simply for participating in another country's civil war. Ironically, Americans have a long history of doing just that. Thousands joined the Lincoln Brigade during the Spanish civil war. Thousands have fought in Israel's army and continue to do so. Others fought for Bosnia's Muslim-led government against Serb forces. Some fought with the Contras in Nicaragua. Others have joined the French Foreign Legion.

its interesting that you use JWL as an example, because based on the released facts, it doesnt look like the US had any real jurisdiction in your "example" case.

another interesting case, again all of these are for things that go FAR beyond mere photo taking (however offensive or uncomfortable those photos may be):

Supreme Court decision "Hamdi v. Rumsfeld"

The other American captured in Afghanistan in 2001 and detained by the U.S. military on the orders of the U.S. administration was Yaser Hamdi. To explain the detention the U.S. administration announced that Yaser Hamdi was an illegal enemy combatant. He was taken to Camp X-Ray at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, but was transferred to jails in Virginia and South Carolina after it became known that he was a U.S. citizen. On September 23, 2004, the United States Justice Department agreed to release Hamdi to Saudi Arabia, where he is also a citizen, on the condition that he gave up his U.S. citizenship. The deal also bars Hamdi from visiting certain countries and to inform Saudi officials if he plans to leave the kingdom. He was a party to a Supreme Court decision Hamdi v. Rumsfeld which issued a decision on June 28, 2004, repudiating the U.S. government's unilateral assertion of executive authority to suspend the constitutional protections of individual liberty of a U.S. citizen.

U.S. Supreme Court Decision

On June 28, 2004, the Supreme Court issued a decision repudiating the U.S. government's unilateral assertion of executive authority to suspend constitutional protections of individual liberty.

"An interrogation by one's captor, however effective an intelligence-gathering tool, hardly constitutes a constitutionally adequate fact-finding before a neutral decision-maker," wrote Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.

The U.S. Supreme Court opinion reasserted the rule of law in American society: "It is during our most challenging and uncertain moments that our nation's commitment to due process is most severely tested; and it is in those times that we must preserve our commitment at home to the principles for which we fight abroad."

Justice O'Connor added, "We have long since made clear that a state of war is not a blank check for the president when it comes to the rights of the nation's citizens."

Legal significance

The Hamdi case supported an unprecedented separation of powers between the executive branch and the judiciary. During the American Civil War, the Supreme Court prohibited military detention of noncombatant Americans without appeal or writ of habeas corpus, as long as the courts were functioning. A 1971 law condemned the detention of Japanese-Americans without legal recourse during World War II and prohibited the imprisonment of American citizens except pursuant to an act of Congress.

The Bush administration claimed that U.S. law does not apply to "illegal enemy combatants" and, furthermore, the Bush administration asserted the right to decide which U.S. citizens are "enemy combatants," ineligible for protection of their rights as enshrined in the United States Constitution.

Legal scholars hailed the Supreme Court decision as the most important civil rights opinion in a half-century and a dramatic reversal of the sweeping authority asserted by the White House after the September 11, 2001 attacks.

"illegal enemy combatants"
Unlawful combatant (also illegal combatant or unprivileged combatant) describes a person who engages in combat without meeting the requirements for a lawful combatant according to the laws of war as specified in the Third Geneva Convention.

Belligerents that identify such unlawful enemy combatants may not necessarily accord them the rights of prisoners of war as described in the Third Geneva Convention. Unlawful combatants may retain rights under the Fourth Geneva Convention in that they must be "treated with humanity and, in case of trial, shall not be deprived of the rights of fair and regular trial".

The United States administration uses the term illegal enemy combatant to describe people detained by the United States under some Presidential military orders. However as the United States' courts have not yet ruled that any of the detainees have faced a "competent [military] tribunal", this phrase is not a legal description of the detainees status.



i am not saying that JWL was just or that he should be freed or making any comment on his guilt. i am saying that you justeem are comparing oranges and ipods. even then you are still wrong.

EDIT: most of the quotes are from wikipedia

darren cahill
Apr 24th, 2005, 05:21 PM
no, i don't. i actually don't give a fuck whether she means it or not [and i don't mean that in a harsh way]. i just wanted to throw out another possibility, since the rest of the thread was kissing her ass. if the thread was going the other way, i would've defended her. :devil:

the vets were REALLY fucked by many people, and maybe it IS misplaced anger, but who are we to say what that guy feels? maybe he was genuinely hurt by her actions or maybe it's been a bit of brainwashing by some of the more conservative media. i don't know, but what i do know is that we're humans and sometimes it's hard to forgive and forget when somebody just says "i'm sorry". i know i'm guilty of it.

oh and was that you who called? i have two other numbers listed under your name on my cell. can you please tell me your real number so i actually KNOW when you are calling? :p

Hey there:wavey: I guess thats what confused me cause i wouldnt even bother to post a message if i 'didnt give a fuck'.:confused: I'm either too busy or too stupid to play devils advocate all the time. My bf kevin ALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLWAYS does that and i tell ya girl, its gonna be the straw that breaks the camels back one day cause i cant stand that. Its not really a big whoop though, its just that post really stood out and reminded me of you know who....:fiery: :lol:

so when i said it was Mike from wtaworld on your cell phone message, that wasnt clear? how many Mikes from wtaworld call you?:lol: ;) you mean i'm not the ONLY one???:mad: :p

anyhow, i left a PM with all my #'s. :kiss:

decemberlove
Apr 24th, 2005, 05:37 PM
Hey there:wavey: I guess thats what confused me cause i wouldnt even bother to post a message if i 'didnt give a fuck'.:confused: I'm either too busy or too stupid to play devils advocate all the time. My bf kevin ALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLWAYS does that and i tell ya girl, its gonna be the straw that breaks the camels back one day cause i cant stand that. Its not really a big whoop though, its just that post really stood out and reminded me of you know who....:fiery: :lol:

i was bored, what can i say? fighting with jake for the 1000th time this week, so i had to get away and just sit on the computer and pretend like im doing something important.

i know who it reminded you of... sorry for that :lol:

i do like jane's acting. i don't know why she chose to come back with a j.lo movie, thou. :confused:

jane was on real time with bell maher on friday. did you see it? it was actually a really good interview. a good show overall.

so when i said it was Mike from wtaworld on your cell phone message, that wasnt clear? how many Mikes from wtaworld call you?:lol: ;) you mean i'm not the ONLY one???:mad: :p

i didn't check my messages yet. im notorious for just letting them fill up until my box is full, and my friends complain enough that i fix it. then i always make the promise that i'll keep up with them... and somehow never do.

JustineTime
Apr 24th, 2005, 09:27 PM
WOW! :eek: Lotta response to that one post! :lol: :) :bigclap: I guess my reputation proceeds me! :lol:

I just love the way people started saying things like "let's stone Angelina Jolie", as if that was apropos of one word I said! :lol: :shrug: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :tape:

There's a vast difference between being a "conscientious objector" and cavorting with the enemy and boosting their morale, as Hanoi Jane Fonda did, and collaborating with them and aligning yourself with communist anti-war groups, both of which John Kerry did, while still an active duty officer in the US Navy. Both of those are CLEAR and undeniable examples of "adhering to their[the United States'] enemies, giving them aid and comfort" whether you rabid liberals like it or not! :shrug: :rolleyes:

"YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!" :lol: :tape:

darren cahill
Apr 24th, 2005, 10:54 PM
i was bored, what can i say? fighting with jake for the 1000th time this week, so i had to get away and just sit on the computer and pretend like im doing something important.

i know who it reminded you of... sorry for that :lol:

i do like jane's acting. i don't know why she chose to come back with a j.lo movie, thou. :confused:

jane was on real time with bell maher on friday. did you see it? it was actually a really good interview. a good show overall.



i didn't check my messages yet. im notorious for just letting them fill up until my box is full, and my friends complain enough that i fix it. then i always make the promise that i'll keep up with them... and somehow never do.

hey honey!:kiss: so jake is still around? Seems like i need a new PM or email to catch up! is 'anything' else still around???????

as for jane, maybe she picked that movie cause shes been gone so long no one offers her work? could be the only thing that came around and god knows it will get publicity, put her name and face back out there. Shes on the actors studio at 7 tonight which i am about to watch, maybe she'll explain why she did it? if for no other reason to watch, we'll get to see some of her awesome acting like in Coming Home and Julia. "Julia" was an awesome awesome movie. She talks in her book about meeting Meryl Streep for the first time during JULIA and how blown away she was by her. She tried to talk her into taking a role in Janes follow-up (Coming Home, which won Jane her 2nd Oscar) but Meryl had already committed to another movie. Funny stuff about Kate Hepburn in the book too.

But no, i didnt see her on Real TIme. I wasnt home at all Friday to have caught it....:devil:

Jakeev
Apr 25th, 2005, 07:48 AM
You need to re-read your history books. :rolleyes: Mizz Fonda posed with the enemy on a tank and therefore spat in the face of soldiers doing their job. :mad:

It's a major mistake that she has apologized constantly for many years now. I'm sorry a-holes like that one that spat in her face can't find the common decency to forgive and forget.

Nobody is perfect. And I bet he has done is own share of crappy things in his life besides the cowardly act of spitting in a woman's face and then running away like a schoolkid.

Jane is an amazing woman who has faced a lot of adversity in her life. I only have immense respect for her and I am sure this incident is just one more she will brilliantly shrug off.

~ The Leopard ~
Apr 25th, 2005, 07:59 AM
i didn't check my messages yet. im notorious for just letting them fill up until my box is full, and my friends complain enough that i fix it. then i always make the promise that i'll keep up with them... and somehow never do.

That's my li'l Lolita. Some things never change. :p :kiss:

Joan Rivers
Apr 25th, 2005, 08:49 PM
Oh sure - a Vietnam Vet spits in Fonda's face and people defend it. When I spat in her face I got a restraining order!

Hell, well done to the Vet - I hope the spit dissolved a facelift suture!

decemberlove
May 1st, 2005, 02:46 AM
That's my li'l Lolita. Some things never change. :p :kiss:

i know, i need some discipline in my life to change my habits.

hint . hint

decemberlove
May 1st, 2005, 02:56 AM
hey honey!:kiss: so jake is still around? Seems like i need a new PM or email to catch up! is 'anything' else still around???????

as for jane, maybe she picked that movie cause shes been gone so long no one offers her work? could be the only thing that came around and god knows it will get publicity, put her name and face back out there. Shes on the actors studio at 7 tonight which i am about to watch, maybe she'll explain why she did it? if for no other reason to watch, we'll get to see some of her awesome acting like in Coming Home and Julia. "Julia" was an awesome awesome movie. She talks in her book about meeting Meryl Streep for the first time during JULIA and how blown away she was by her. She tried to talk her into taking a role in Janes follow-up (Coming Home, which won Jane her 2nd Oscar) but Meryl had already committed to another movie. Funny stuff about Kate Hepburn in the book too.

But no, i didnt see her on Real TIme. I wasnt home at all Friday to have caught it....:devil:

yeah, jake is still around... unfortunately.

'anything' had been gone for a lil over a month now.

i do totally owe you an email.

i hope you eventually caught jane on real time. i saw the actor's studio with her, well most of it. i give her credit for admitting she did monster-in-law for money. :lol: most actors would've made up some bullshit excuse, but atleast she was real about the reason. i always thought she was kind of hollywood flakey, but she seemed very "clear" on real time.

i have issues with kate hepburn. jake says when i get angry i sound like her.

im guessing youre "not home" tonight enough either. i was supposed to go out with damon tonight but i chickened out. im such a pussy now.