thedrifter
10-29-02, 06:12 PM
Subject: Fwd: vets to campus - you lied then, you're lying now
Part 1 of 2, in from Leonard Magruder
VIETNAM VETERANS FOR ACADEMIC REFORM
the student auxiliary at the University of Kansas
VETS TO CAMPUS - WE DON'T WANT YOUR VIEWS ON WAR - YOU LIED ABOUT VIETNAM
VIETNAM VET ACADEMIC REFORM GROUP SAYS 60'S LIES ABOUT VIETNAM WAR MUST BE
EXPOSED NOW TO DISCREDIT ACADEMIC VIEWS ON FOREIGN POLICY AND THREAT OF
POLARIZATION. - a V.V.A.R. newsnote from Leonard Magruder- President (Part
1 of 2 parts)
( the following is quoted by permission from Dr. Jamie Glazov- noted
historian with a specialty in Soviet Studies. From FrontpageMag. - CSPC)
"The suffering of the Indochinese people under Communism is one of the
most tragic sagas of the 20th century. The terror that Communists perpetrated
in Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos after their victory in l975 defies simple
characterization. The leftists among us, meanwhile, continue to spout their
lies about Southeast Asia and about the horror that Communism brought to that
region. They love erasing the historical memory of the millions of people who
were liquidated on the altar of socialist ideals . And engaging in historical
amnesia is precisely where socialists and neo-nazis share one of their most
sacred common bonds.
And now we have H. Bruce Franklin, a professor of English and American
Studies at Rutgers University, who has stepped forward to tell us that
Communism only brought peace and fraternity to Indochina.
In the March-April edition of “International Socialist Review” Franklin
writes an article glorifying the memory of the anti-war movement in America
during the Vietnam War. He emphasizes that remembering the anti-war movement
is crucial, “since it triumphed in bringing about an American defeat and a
Communist victory in Southeast Asia,” which he means in a positive sense.
Franklin writes that the anti-war movement should be:
“one legitimate source of great national pride about American culture and
behavior during the war. In most wars a nation dehumanizes and demonizes the
people on the other side. Almost the opposite happened during the Vietnam
War. Countless Americans came to see the people of Vietnam fighting against
U.S. forces as anything but an enemy to be feared and hated.”
It is precisely an interpretation like this that reflects one of the most
putrid lies of the Left … the assumption that the U.S. was somehow fighting
the people of Vietnam, when it in fact it was actually fighting the
Communists who were seeking to imprison them. The fact of the matter is that
it was the North Vietnamese and the Vietcong, as well as the anti-war
demonstrations in America, who were the enemies of the Vietnamese people -
not the American government which sacrificed 58,000 of its young men in an
effort to save them.
Franklin is very proud in remembering the “outrage” which he says served
as a key emotion behind anti-war demonstrations. When the Communists started
liqidating people en masse and setting up concentration camps, where was the
“outrage” of the Left then ? Franklin isn’t interested in such questions.
Sorry Franklin, you got it twisted. It was the American effort to save
Indochina from Communism that was admirable. And it was the anti-war
movement, of which you are so proud , that was the shameful - and shameless
- abomination.
While Franklin boasts about what he thinks are the anti-war movement’s
great accomplishments, history reminds us that this movement helped spawn a
blood bath in Indochina. David Horowitz, who helped to organize the first
campus demonstration against the war at the University of California,
Berkeley in l962, has reflected on this tragedy .
“Every testimony by North Vietnamese generals in the postwar years has
affirmed that they knew they could not defeat the United States on the
battlefield, and that they counted on the division of our people at home to
win the war for them. This is what happened. The blood of hundreds of
thousands of Vietnamese, and tens of thousands of Americans, is on the hands
of the anti-war activists who prolonged the struggle and gave victory to the
Communists...and we wanted them to win."
After Saigon fell to North Vietnam in l975, the summary executions of
tens of thousands of innocent South Vietnamese began. There were to be two
million refugees and more than a million people thrown into the new Communist
gulags and “re-education camps.” Tens of thousands of South Vietnamese boat
people perished in the Gulf of Thailand and in the South China Sea in their
attempt to escape what the likes of H. Bruce Franklin had helped to create.
The anti-war movement in America also facilitated the Communist takeovers of
Laos and Cambodia … the Khmer Rouge victory in Cambodia led to a killing
field in which some 3 million Cambodians were exterminated .
Franklin wants us to remember the anti-war movement in America during the
Vietnam War. We do remember it. And we remember it for what it was: a
shameful and shameless abomination, which saw tens of thousands of spoiled
moral degenerates betray the lives and freedoms of the Indochinese people -
as they offered themselves for an association with tyranny and a complicity
with evil."
End of the Glazov article
Right. As I have often written, “There is no question but what the
campus war protestors were on the side of genocide and tyranny in Southeast
Asia”.
Or, as I said in a speech to 600 Vietnam vets at the Vietnam Symposium at
New York State University (Stony Brook) in 1985, for which I served as
National Co-ordinator, “The campus “peace” movement, which said that the war
was “immoral”, that the motive was “imperialistic”, that the war was only a
“civil war”, that Ho Chi Minh was only a"nationalist," and that America had
engaged in “aggression” and “genocide”, lied to the nation. Although it
cloaked itself in an aura of great moral purpose , the “peace” movement in
fact gave supplies and comfort to the enemy, marched under the flag of the
Viet Cong, allowed Hanoi to dictate its agenda, and turned its back on the
American soldier when he returned.” David Horowitz had made a speech right
before mine. By that time I was a great admirer of Horowitz. He had had
“second thoughts” and now looks back on the anti-war movement as “treason.”
In material I handed out in protest during the years of the Vietnam War I
said of the movement’s “outrage” that so impressed Dr. Franklin, “Nothing
more enrages the academic proponents of a naturalistic and therefore
“value-free” world view that the incurable moralism of the American people.
To combat the fact that the average citizen sees the Vietnam war in terms of
morality, (that is, to save the people of South Vietnam from Communist
tyranny), the university has conceived the ultimate hypocrisy , it has
projected absolute judgements (the war is immoral) from nihilistic or
relativistic foundations. Faculties and students are engaged in a vast
hypocrisy, pretending to a moral critique of the war after decades of
debunking morality, values, and religion. The “outrage” of the anti-war
movement flows from the need to mask that hypocrisy, hoping the public will
confuse the outrage for certainty and go along. But adult America, all of
whom are for genuine peace in this world, has not fallen for it. It has
conspicuously not joined the marches because it correctly senses the true
underlying message of the anti-war movement, which is, we don’t believe in
truth or morals, we will not sacrifice for freedom, we do not care if
millions are slaughtered or enslaved, we only want to be left in peace, to
pursue our sloth, our sex games, and our drugs. Certainly if South Vietnam
falls to Communist aggression and slavery , the guilt will lie forever with
the cowardly conspiracy between faculty and student hypocrisy that blunted
U.S. efforts to stop that aggression."
True, it is unfair to indict the entire peace movement. Many of the
youngsters within it had nothing more in mind than halting a war they never
understood, singing songs that evoked a hunger for a tranquil world where
they need not shiver with the fear of fire storms and radiation. But as
someone wrote at the time ,"They were the sensitive and the kind, Christian
and Jews, and all mixed up with an unholy alliance of leftist radicals,
diabolists, drug cultists, and polemicists. But even these innocents were
soon spattered with the Amerika-hatred of the others as the movement spread
like the dark of a moonless night and by the end of the war the night was
black, and the movement began a goblin dance on the grave of America. Sincere
pacifists changed into werewolves whose true goal was to see the republic
suffer boundless humiliations. "
During the years when Horowitz was organizing anti-war demonstrations at
Berkeley, I was engaging in one-man protests following every demostration I
could find, showing where the protestors were lying. And the biggest and most
incredible lie was exactly the one Glazov focuses on, they said that America
was fighting the Vietnamese, they never mentioned that North Vietnam and an
auxiliary, the Viet Cong, were fighting against South Vietnam which did not
want Communism. I own a unique book that contains copies of all the material
distributed by the anti-war movement at 115 demonstrations. Not a single one
mentions that America was helping South Vietnam to fight Communist aggression.
continued.........
Part 1 of 2, in from Leonard Magruder
VIETNAM VETERANS FOR ACADEMIC REFORM
the student auxiliary at the University of Kansas
VETS TO CAMPUS - WE DON'T WANT YOUR VIEWS ON WAR - YOU LIED ABOUT VIETNAM
VIETNAM VET ACADEMIC REFORM GROUP SAYS 60'S LIES ABOUT VIETNAM WAR MUST BE
EXPOSED NOW TO DISCREDIT ACADEMIC VIEWS ON FOREIGN POLICY AND THREAT OF
POLARIZATION. - a V.V.A.R. newsnote from Leonard Magruder- President (Part
1 of 2 parts)
( the following is quoted by permission from Dr. Jamie Glazov- noted
historian with a specialty in Soviet Studies. From FrontpageMag. - CSPC)
"The suffering of the Indochinese people under Communism is one of the
most tragic sagas of the 20th century. The terror that Communists perpetrated
in Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos after their victory in l975 defies simple
characterization. The leftists among us, meanwhile, continue to spout their
lies about Southeast Asia and about the horror that Communism brought to that
region. They love erasing the historical memory of the millions of people who
were liquidated on the altar of socialist ideals . And engaging in historical
amnesia is precisely where socialists and neo-nazis share one of their most
sacred common bonds.
And now we have H. Bruce Franklin, a professor of English and American
Studies at Rutgers University, who has stepped forward to tell us that
Communism only brought peace and fraternity to Indochina.
In the March-April edition of “International Socialist Review” Franklin
writes an article glorifying the memory of the anti-war movement in America
during the Vietnam War. He emphasizes that remembering the anti-war movement
is crucial, “since it triumphed in bringing about an American defeat and a
Communist victory in Southeast Asia,” which he means in a positive sense.
Franklin writes that the anti-war movement should be:
“one legitimate source of great national pride about American culture and
behavior during the war. In most wars a nation dehumanizes and demonizes the
people on the other side. Almost the opposite happened during the Vietnam
War. Countless Americans came to see the people of Vietnam fighting against
U.S. forces as anything but an enemy to be feared and hated.”
It is precisely an interpretation like this that reflects one of the most
putrid lies of the Left … the assumption that the U.S. was somehow fighting
the people of Vietnam, when it in fact it was actually fighting the
Communists who were seeking to imprison them. The fact of the matter is that
it was the North Vietnamese and the Vietcong, as well as the anti-war
demonstrations in America, who were the enemies of the Vietnamese people -
not the American government which sacrificed 58,000 of its young men in an
effort to save them.
Franklin is very proud in remembering the “outrage” which he says served
as a key emotion behind anti-war demonstrations. When the Communists started
liqidating people en masse and setting up concentration camps, where was the
“outrage” of the Left then ? Franklin isn’t interested in such questions.
Sorry Franklin, you got it twisted. It was the American effort to save
Indochina from Communism that was admirable. And it was the anti-war
movement, of which you are so proud , that was the shameful - and shameless
- abomination.
While Franklin boasts about what he thinks are the anti-war movement’s
great accomplishments, history reminds us that this movement helped spawn a
blood bath in Indochina. David Horowitz, who helped to organize the first
campus demonstration against the war at the University of California,
Berkeley in l962, has reflected on this tragedy .
“Every testimony by North Vietnamese generals in the postwar years has
affirmed that they knew they could not defeat the United States on the
battlefield, and that they counted on the division of our people at home to
win the war for them. This is what happened. The blood of hundreds of
thousands of Vietnamese, and tens of thousands of Americans, is on the hands
of the anti-war activists who prolonged the struggle and gave victory to the
Communists...and we wanted them to win."
After Saigon fell to North Vietnam in l975, the summary executions of
tens of thousands of innocent South Vietnamese began. There were to be two
million refugees and more than a million people thrown into the new Communist
gulags and “re-education camps.” Tens of thousands of South Vietnamese boat
people perished in the Gulf of Thailand and in the South China Sea in their
attempt to escape what the likes of H. Bruce Franklin had helped to create.
The anti-war movement in America also facilitated the Communist takeovers of
Laos and Cambodia … the Khmer Rouge victory in Cambodia led to a killing
field in which some 3 million Cambodians were exterminated .
Franklin wants us to remember the anti-war movement in America during the
Vietnam War. We do remember it. And we remember it for what it was: a
shameful and shameless abomination, which saw tens of thousands of spoiled
moral degenerates betray the lives and freedoms of the Indochinese people -
as they offered themselves for an association with tyranny and a complicity
with evil."
End of the Glazov article
Right. As I have often written, “There is no question but what the
campus war protestors were on the side of genocide and tyranny in Southeast
Asia”.
Or, as I said in a speech to 600 Vietnam vets at the Vietnam Symposium at
New York State University (Stony Brook) in 1985, for which I served as
National Co-ordinator, “The campus “peace” movement, which said that the war
was “immoral”, that the motive was “imperialistic”, that the war was only a
“civil war”, that Ho Chi Minh was only a"nationalist," and that America had
engaged in “aggression” and “genocide”, lied to the nation. Although it
cloaked itself in an aura of great moral purpose , the “peace” movement in
fact gave supplies and comfort to the enemy, marched under the flag of the
Viet Cong, allowed Hanoi to dictate its agenda, and turned its back on the
American soldier when he returned.” David Horowitz had made a speech right
before mine. By that time I was a great admirer of Horowitz. He had had
“second thoughts” and now looks back on the anti-war movement as “treason.”
In material I handed out in protest during the years of the Vietnam War I
said of the movement’s “outrage” that so impressed Dr. Franklin, “Nothing
more enrages the academic proponents of a naturalistic and therefore
“value-free” world view that the incurable moralism of the American people.
To combat the fact that the average citizen sees the Vietnam war in terms of
morality, (that is, to save the people of South Vietnam from Communist
tyranny), the university has conceived the ultimate hypocrisy , it has
projected absolute judgements (the war is immoral) from nihilistic or
relativistic foundations. Faculties and students are engaged in a vast
hypocrisy, pretending to a moral critique of the war after decades of
debunking morality, values, and religion. The “outrage” of the anti-war
movement flows from the need to mask that hypocrisy, hoping the public will
confuse the outrage for certainty and go along. But adult America, all of
whom are for genuine peace in this world, has not fallen for it. It has
conspicuously not joined the marches because it correctly senses the true
underlying message of the anti-war movement, which is, we don’t believe in
truth or morals, we will not sacrifice for freedom, we do not care if
millions are slaughtered or enslaved, we only want to be left in peace, to
pursue our sloth, our sex games, and our drugs. Certainly if South Vietnam
falls to Communist aggression and slavery , the guilt will lie forever with
the cowardly conspiracy between faculty and student hypocrisy that blunted
U.S. efforts to stop that aggression."
True, it is unfair to indict the entire peace movement. Many of the
youngsters within it had nothing more in mind than halting a war they never
understood, singing songs that evoked a hunger for a tranquil world where
they need not shiver with the fear of fire storms and radiation. But as
someone wrote at the time ,"They were the sensitive and the kind, Christian
and Jews, and all mixed up with an unholy alliance of leftist radicals,
diabolists, drug cultists, and polemicists. But even these innocents were
soon spattered with the Amerika-hatred of the others as the movement spread
like the dark of a moonless night and by the end of the war the night was
black, and the movement began a goblin dance on the grave of America. Sincere
pacifists changed into werewolves whose true goal was to see the republic
suffer boundless humiliations. "
During the years when Horowitz was organizing anti-war demonstrations at
Berkeley, I was engaging in one-man protests following every demostration I
could find, showing where the protestors were lying. And the biggest and most
incredible lie was exactly the one Glazov focuses on, they said that America
was fighting the Vietnamese, they never mentioned that North Vietnam and an
auxiliary, the Viet Cong, were fighting against South Vietnam which did not
want Communism. I own a unique book that contains copies of all the material
distributed by the anti-war movement at 115 demonstrations. Not a single one
mentions that America was helping South Vietnam to fight Communist aggression.
continued.........