countdown boutiques-francophones Learn more vpcflyout Furniture All-New Kindle Music Deals Store sports Tools

Customer Reviews

3.3 out of 5 stars
3.3 out of 5 stars
Your rating(Clear)Rate this item

There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

on February 23, 2012
I did not know what to expect when I bought this book, but it is very informative. The authors, the husband-and-wife team of Henry Mark Holzer and Erika Holzer, were friends of novelist/philosopher Ayn Rand. And, like Rand, they didn't think the US should have been involved in the Vietnam war (neither do I), but also like her, they were appalled at actress/activist Jane Fonda's visits to North Vietnam that they felt were treasonous. In this book they; 1-detail Fonda's words and actions when she made several trips to North Vietnam in 1972; 2-explore whether under the US constitution, her actions could be considered treasonous and; 3-why the Nixon Administration did not act on this matter. By any standards, they conclude and prove that her actions in making broadcasts on behalf of the North Vietnamese could be giving aid and comfort to the enemy during wartime, citing other cases in American History. What is special about this book is the painstaking detail the authors go into. And, while they took from the best side of their friend and mentor, Ayn Rand, they did not take from her worst side. They learned from her ability to use reason and moral clarity to debunk an opponent's wrong-headed arguments and actions, but without getting into her trademark over-the-top rancour and moralizing. The subject matter is serious, but their treatment is light.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on April 6, 2004
The law is there for a reason, and there's no good reason that Jane escaped it. 30 years is nothing, and whether she's sorry or not is meaningless in the shadow of facts. Letting go because of time elapsed is not justice and not a sufficient argument for disdain of this well written book.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on December 11, 2003
It was stupid of Jane Fonda to make a statement against the war from the seat of an anti-aircraft gun. The authors make a good case for treason, but the United States was not officially at war, which questions the validity of the charges.
I served in Vietnam from 1970-71 and can tell you that the troops would have welcomed Jane Fonda as a performer in a USO show much more than her eventual 1972 performance.
For all who now say that the events of 1972 are immaterial, what would be the consequence today of a Hollywood personality appearing in Bhagdad in support of the Baathist Party?
Never forget that after the fall of South Vietnam, over 80,000 of their people were systematically murdered by the communists that Jane Fonda supported.
For those who really care, we would love to hear Jane Fonda say that she made a mistake. Afterall, Jimmy Carter granted amnesty to thousands of draft dodgers.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on December 1, 2003
As a young and idealistic man in the mid sixties I had strongly opposed the Vietnam War particularly after reports of attrocities committed by US troops started to trickle in. As the war dragged on I felt that there was no act of civil disobedience or non-violent public protest strong enough to convey the anti-war message to the Government. In that respect I felt an admiration and a form of kinship for Jane Fonda. Her broadcast highlighted the contrast of the realities of Vietnam, the determination of the 'enemy' and the ongoing assertions by the Government that victory was just around the corner. The claim that her actions lengthened the war and, thus, amounted to a betrayal of the US soldiers is aburd because it totally ignores the timeline. Her visit took place in August 1972, while US troop withdrawals demanded by Congress started in January of 1973. If her visit to Vietnam represented in some way a final nail in the coffin of the pro-war sentiment than I say: More power to her.
In view of the attrocities committed in Vietnam, the massive bombing campaigns against rural civilians, the use of noxcious chemicals that have created over one million birth defects it would seem that there is ample room for bringing legal actions against those who have perpetrated these acts and have brought shame on this country. But Mr. Holzer's picking on Jane Fonda typically represents the corporate mentality of punishing whistle blowers rather than wrong doers. Mr. Holzer with all his credentials in jurisprudence should seriously reexamine his sense of justice.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on October 21, 2003
This book concentrates on Jane Fonda's trip to Hanoi to protest the Vietnamise American war. Though they appear to create a fair argument, there are many things they fail to consider or mention.
What some of the American army did to Vietnamise people which was revealed last year in a court hearing after 1970 US files were finally released, that some army members did play games such as throwing out Vietnamise people from chopers, betting the sex of an unborn child, then cutting the pregnant women open to see who was right(this had two reported instances), drowning them, cutting off their ears, etc, it makes you realize that this was a different time the response from the ones involved? "It was a different time"
Exactly, it was a different time.
Hanoi Jane's protesting seems pale in comparrison to what others did 30 years ago. It was a different time, we have so much to consider with what is going on now-a-days, that this book is just irelevant tattle in today's world.
If you are one of those prople beleive that fwd'd email that has been floating around the net claiming she did much worst but was proven to be false, then is book is for you.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on June 8, 2003
Where have the authors been for the past 30 years?
Times have moved on. Yet the writers seem to be stuck in this time warp where this matter is still relevant. Like it or not, Jane Fonda's visit happend - end of story.
The US goverment have bigger fish to fry than a 65 year old actress living in Georgia.
-- This book is great for Vets and patriots that just wont move on, or atlease feel the world still owes them some thing.
Though I disagree with the book's conclusions, in fairness, the authors set a clear argument with their reasons why Jane Fonda should be tried for treason and use as many facts as possible (instead of lies)
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on December 8, 2002
This text is a superbly written and seriously scholarly product that provides the fundamental basis, based on a foundation of thorough legal analysis of documented events, for formulating what amounts to an indictment of the behaviors of a traitor. The text is fascinating but nevertheless maintains a rigorous adherence to analyses of various data bases, and provides the reader with a fine example of integrated logic and reasoning in what could easily have been be a purely emotional treatise which typically characterizes much of the published articles concerning Ms. Fonda's behaviors in time of war.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on September 25, 2002
...A lot of US soldiers were betrayed by what Ms Fonda said and did during her trip to Vietnam. Many of her ilk (for example Bill Clinton)protested our involvement in Vietnam because it was fashionable. Unfortunately, Vietnam vets weren't allowed to be fashionable as they were dying overseas to the tune of 58 thousand over 10 years.The purpose of the book as I see it is "He who forgets history is doomed to repeat it"...
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on September 23, 2002
This book should be read by everyone like myself who, at one time, felt that Jane Fonda was an American idol. The revelations described here, with the irrefutable primary source evidence, will convince even the most diehard supporters that Jane Fonda committed treason as defined by the U.S. Constitution. Instead of being deified by women's groups and opponents of the Vietnam War ( of which I number myself) she should be indicted for treason. The treachery and malevolence of this woman is a revelation.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on September 16, 2002
I don't know where the Holzers have been living since the Seventies but America and the world have a whole new set of problems and responsibilities without harping on ancient history. This mountain-from-a-molehill--from its arcane "reasoning" to its surgical slicing and dicing of quotes--is a diatribe by some sad old zealots unable to accept that time and public opinon have left them behind in the ash pile of cultural irrelevance. Published by a vanity press--what more do you need to say? Move on.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse