Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: LarryLied
I read an article in the Reader's Digest some years ago, that the VERY active activists of the 1960s have put themselves in positions that would lead to positions of power and pursuasion, i.e., churches, journalism, politics, education in the lower and higher levels of learning. These are the "fish" who bit the bait of Lenin and Stalin of the 1930s. In the 1930s and 1940s the communist/socialist party of the US would not allow any foreign born citizen to be a card carrying communist, because the leaders of the USSR did not want the American public to know that the Communist Party of the US was receiving orders and direction directly from Mother Russia. The schools of journalism were the first to be "invaded" by professors educated in the communist way, but who had graduated from American universities and colleges, so we have now many journalists who spout the communist/socialist jargon. CNN is a very good example, and another, Dan Blather, who says, paraphrase, "No journalist should be a Patriot". Good, then he should go to a country that will allow him to be a journalist for that country, telling the "real poop", even when it gives that country a black eye. Peter Jennings, a canadian, who blames America for the war in the Pacific. Tom Browkrow who rides his father's WWII military coattails on the road to patriatism, but spouts the communist line. i.e., defending the traitor/rapist-in-chief by not telling what this scumbug had done to Juanita Broderick.

Ted Turner who loves the UN so much he has given millions of dollars, in increments, for their anti-American verbage, let him live in the Sudan, Africa, Indonesia, VietNam, China or one of the other "nations" who allow him to buy millions of acrage for his baronship.

Jane Fonda, who lived as a very privileged child and teenager (no fault of her own) then during the VietName conflict, claimed to own only two dresses,(to show her socialist/communist love of non-ownership)then went to VietNam, in front of our Prisoners of War, claimed they were criminals, and today,lives the life of a privileged American because of our laws protecting freedom of speech and laws governing War vs Conflict.

Korea was not a WAR it was a conflict, VietNam was not a war, but a conflict, so American born people who do not love this country and it's many freedoms, can be traitors against our cause and not pay for the treachory they have caused. Afoeganistan has not been declared a war. WHY? Where is the courage of our fathers who, as representatives and senators declared war in 1941? Have we raised up wimps who do not have this kind of stand up and be counted courage?

If we are to put American military personnel in a battle situation, where bombs drop, bullets fly, our people die, are maimed, then that situation should be called a WAR. During a war if treason is done by word and deed, as was done in VietNam, we can then discharge, to the fullest, an obligation to prevent any further harm to our cause and country.

54 posted on 11/13/2001 7:01:23 PM PST by tillacum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]


To: tillacum
Bush did not want a declaration of war for because of much of what you just wrote. He doesn't want Democrat traitors involved anymore than necessary. Imagine Tom Daschle using his vote for war as a political weapon. Something goes wrong (as it will now and then) and little Tommy is out in front of cameras whining about how Bush lied to him and if he had his vote to cast over again. . .blah...blah...blah. Plus, Democrats, once they declared war, could also declare the war over. You want Daschle and Gephardt up there taking credit on V day? A V day which may not even be that?
55 posted on 11/13/2001 7:13:32 PM PST by LarryLied
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson