WHY JANE FONDA MATTERS: Hollywood Radicals Threaten National Security
|
by Richard Poe Monday, August 1, 2005 11:59 am Eastern Time |
Archives 47 Comments |
Many conservative bloggers greeted with scorn and derision Jane Fonda’s announcement last week that she will embark on a nationwide bus tour to protest US intervention in Iraq. This is a mistake.
“Ignore Jane Fonda,” advises military veteran Larry Scott on his VA Watchdog blog. “She’s not worth the time or energy.”
Unfortunately, ignoring Jane Fonda will not make her go away. Those conservatives who dismiss radical celebrities with a yawn or a shrug fail to understand the impact hostile propaganda may have on our war effort.
A more realistic and professional assessment of the importance of Hollywood radicals comes from the Cuban foreign intelligence agency DGI (Dirección General de Inteligencia (DGI) or General Intelligence Directorate). DGI spymasters believe that radical celebs such as Jane Fonda play an important role in shaping public opinion. Through the years, Cuban intelligence has devoted enormous resources to cultivating and recruiting Hollywood lefties as agents of influence.
The list of Tinseltown glitterati whom Cuban dictator Fidel Castro has personally entertained includes Francis Ford Coppola, Kevin Costner, Steven Spielberg, Woody Harrelson, Kate Moss, Naomi Campbell, Leonardo DiCaprio, Chevy Chase, Robert Redford and many more… including Jane Fonda. Former Cuban intelligence officer Delfin Fernandez – now a defector – used to work the Hollywood star detail, monitoring celebrity visitors to Cuba. He recently told a Madrid TV show:
“My job was to bug their rooms with both cameras and listening devices. Most people have no idea they are being watched while they are in Cuba. But their personal activities are filmed under orders from Castro himself. Child sex, drug use, orgies, those are the sort of things they want to tape, anything – shall we say–‘ethically incorrect.’ And Castro’s undercover agents don’t wait around hoping the famous visitors might randomly engage in these things. They tempt them, bait them with offers. …
“Fidel Castro is a special connoisseur of these tapings and videos. Especially of the really famous. … [F]amous Americans are the priority objectives of Castro’s intelligence. When word came down that models Naomi Campbell and Kate Moss were coming to Cuba the order was a routine one: 24-hour-a-day vigilance. Then we got a PRIORITY alert because there was a rumor that they would be sharing a room with Leonardo Di Caprio. The rumor set off a flurry of activity and we set up the most sophisticated devices we had. The American actor Jack Nicholson was another celebrity who was bugged and taped thoroughly during his stay in the hotel Melia Cohiba.” (via Human Events)
Armed with compromising videos, DGI can manipulate celebs, using threats of blackmail to keep them in line.
Following his 1998 visit with Castro, Jack Nicholson proclaimed, “Fidel Castro is a genius! We spoke about everything. Castro is a humanist like President Clinton. Cuba is simply a paradise!”
We can only speculate to what extent foreign intelligence services – Cuban or otherwise – have sunk their hooks into Madam Fonda. After a lifetime spent cozying up to America’s enemies, she has certainly provided foreign spymasters with more than ample opportunity to probe her weaknesses and discover her most guarded secrets.
The importance which foreign spy agencies attach to recruiting Hollywood stars should give pause to those Americans tempted to dismiss Tinseltown radicals with a contemptuous chortle. Escapades such as Madam Fonda’s bus tour undermine US morale. They merit closer scrutiny.
by Richard Poe
August 1, 2005 11:59 AM ET
Cross-posted from MoonbatCentral.com 08.01.05
Comments
47 Responses to “WHY JANE FONDA MATTERS: Hollywood Radicals Threaten National Security”Trackbacks
Check out what others are saying about this post...My response is the same as it has always been: Jane Fonda is a traitor. We should all be more vigilant of the drivel that comes out of the Hollywood Talking Heads and come up with new, interesting and effective ways to counteract their treasonous, misguided “opinion,” which they so freely spew out on the public that pays to see them.
This is old hat, as we know the Soviet Union ran their agent Yasser Arafat through the blackmail of compromising videos they had of him practicing Islam with prepubescent male children in Romania.
Although I’m not sure how Cuba would play the blackmail game without implicating its own role in making the catch – “We have video of Danny Glover sodomizing a goat in Fidel’s guest house” – perhaps we could just enforce our own laws. It is illegal for an American citizen to visit Cuba. Any American citizen caught doing so should lose his citizenship and be denied entry back into the United States.
But I know I’m dreaming of a time when the United States was a sovereign nation that enforced its own laws and protected its own borders.
It is common enough now that traitors are given a platform for spouting their vitriol against a government that protects their rights. It has gone beyond the pale in the UK and we are allowing it to happen in our country as well. I agree with RightWinger in his comment about the drivel spewing from the Hollywood Loonies. Unfortunately, too many Americans are influenced by the uninformed blather that these Hollywood geniuses pay someone to write for them. It is time to forget political correctness and stand for freedom.
As I got my american passport I asked the INS guys whether I could travel to Cuba (I lived in Central America for quiete a while) and they told me certainly not, it is against the law.
My question is did they break the law by going to Cuba?
I heard cuban immigration official don’t stamp american passports so they wouldn’t have trouble going back to the US.
If the celebs violated the law why isn’t anybody sueing them?
I wonder what Jack Nicholson did at the hotel Melia Cohiba…
Hollywood needs more Robert Duvalls. Unfortunately the narcissistic nature of acting attracts lefties like cheese draws rats.
sycophants and admirers follow the actions and words of all manner of celebrities very closely. What’s more, people can become celebrities for the stupidest reasons imaginable. Paris Hilton is living proof of that.
actors act in a dreamworld they don’t stop when the movie is over.
Here my question:
If they did violate the law by going to Cuba (or did they get government permission?) how do I sue them? What action can I take?
Werner,
Getting in and out of Cuba for Americans is easier than you would think. You just have to travel to a third country first. Any American can get to Cuba if they go to Canada or Mexico or anywhere else first.
Mr. Beamish writes: “…Danny Glover sodomizing a goat in Fidel’s guest house…”
LOL
Many of the compromising videos which the Soviet KGB made of prominent Americans can now be purchased on the black market.
I suppose the same will happen with these Cuban videos, after Castro dies. The Hollywood leftists will no doubt swoop in and try to buy all the masters, but a few copies are bound to leak out.
What a terrible disillusionment their fans will suffer.
There are a few good conservative/moderate actors in Hollywood, most of whom won’t speak out for fear of being blacklisted. I’ll post something on the subject in my blog soon. Keep a watch for it.
Mr. Beamish,
I’ve heard more than a few rumors and inuendos about Arafat and his little boys. I’d love to get links reporting on this, do you know of any?
-MZ
BTW, updated my blog. Today’s entry is regarding the Bolton nomination being good for Israel.
-MZ
Mad Zionist –
here ya go…
Look at the writings of former Romanian KGB deputy chief Ion Pacepa on Arafat, particularly his book Red Horizons. He knows of video of Arafat’s gay sex with various people because he and his underlings took the pictures.
Thanks, Mr. B. Arafat was perhaps the most disgusting, putrid, vile human being the world has seen since mohammed.
MZ
So far this year, Arafat = dead, Sontag = dead, Hunter thompson = dead, Who is the next one to go?
Fidel, Teddy kennedy, or someone else?
My money’s on Ted.
We know that all the Hollywood leftist whackos are traitors who continually bad mouth Bush, our country and our troops. I think more serious and damaging are the ex-presidents (you know who I mean!!) and congress critters that do the same.
Jane Fonda should have been arrested and tried for treason as soon as she returned to the United States. The person with the authority to do thaat who did not should be punished for dereliction of duty.
the best way to deal with Hanoi Jane is to point her out to be the squishy airhead she is, all the while recounting her history of sedition. Passed by a theatre showing her current movie where she plays a mother in law – was temped to graffitti – “talent for convening threesomes – invite Hanoi Jane to your next doo” Desisted. She is a traitor.
Thats all nice and wishful thinking but what do you really do?
Th exhibit of ‘Art’ in Sacramento by Buckley was countered with a patriotic Art exhibition which was countered by a counter patriotic art exhibition which finally led to brawls between lefties and the good ones (Don’t ask me who won I wasn’t there).
So that seems to be one way (I wouldn’t mind to be in a brawl with her because I am sure I would win). To have counter agitation right in front of her bus.
Susan Sontag? Wasn’t she the “intellectual” who argued on 9-12-2001 that we deserved the September 11th attacks for bombing Iraq (not that Iraq has anything to do with 9-11).
Talk about dying from cognitive dissonance.
Can we add Andrea Dworkin to the necrology of people that died not knowing they were stupid?
There definitely are conservatives/moderates in Hollywood. Mel Gibson, Chuck Norris, James Woods, Bruce Willis, Tom Selleck. Even Jessica Simpson is apparently a fan of the right. But the loud and obnoxious wackos on the left far outnumber Republicans. Fortunately, the general public has began to tune out the incoherent drivel from the Susan Sarandon’s and Tim Robbins. It still doesn’t excuse traitors like Hanoi Jane who insists on supporting the enemies of the United States.
Sometimes I get the impression that the Democratic Party establishment and their left-wing cohorts are itching for a rematch of the American Civil War. They’d better remember who lost last time.
I know Vietnam vets who openly fantasize about dropping mortar fire on Hollywood. The only thing stopping them from doing so is… their saintly patience.
Those guys have more saintly patience than should be expected of them.
Mainstream Hollywood has long been out of touch with America. See anything by Michael Medved if you want to know more about it. And unfortunately Jane Fonda is one of the worst. I used to love her movie Barbarella, but ever since I learned about her political life, I can’t look at it the same way again.
Mr. Richard Poe Says:
“I wonder what Jack Nicholson did at the hotel Melia Cohiba…”
To my way of thinking it was more harmful to his career then proclaiming, “Fidel Castro is a genius! We spoke about everything. Castro is a humanist like President Clinton. Cuba is simply a paradise!”
To a pervert, who I would guess, is hiding his homosexuality, or his need to have sex with children, Cuba IS a paradise. Prostitution, adult and child, is probably the only flourishing industry left on the pathetic island.
Look for Jacko to holiday there soon, once he returns from, ahem, R&R in Saudi Arabia!–ROLL CAMERA! CUT! THAT’S A RAP!–“Son, I now own your perverted arse!”
“Please to meet you, hope you guessed my name? What’s confusing you, is just the nature of my game!”–Ahahaha! MUahahaha!–these fools do not even know I exist!
There you go again! Once and for all: conservatives and supporters of Iraqi war are not synonymous terms. This war stands in implicit contradiction to all that’s great in american conservatism. Cf. Buchanan, Craig Roberts, WF Buckley et al.
Hmmm! Detox, directly north of here, does not use the majuscule “A” when writing America.
Detox the buchananite moonbat posing as a conservative. How quaint. Did you get lost Mr. isolationist or were you just tired of playing with yourself?
-MZ
Did someone forget to inform Orthotox that Pat Buchanan is not a conservative, American or otherwise?
Now here’s a Hollywood story that might bring the crowds back, and improve profitability: a squishy but attractive airhead troll, searching for fame and recognition, becomes putty in the hands of characters similar to Vadim, Hayden, Turner – what they force her (the poor heroine) to do, what she does herself – kind of like a modern morality play or tale – one can imagine her gut wrenching soliloquay at the end so we can feel sorry for the poor waif, as at the end she recants and promises to henceforth lead a life of good sense and virtue.Might even pay to see the flick.(Did this already appear on Oprah ?)
With respect to Mr. Dipippo’s post, “Carter Condemns Guantanamo Camp and Iraq War,” just a few clicks south of here. Could Mr. firing squad ringing out day and night, have something on Mr. I’ve lusted in my mind?
I do not even want to contemplate Jimmy Carter, on tape, getting busy with anyone, or anything!–I’ll donate some pesos to keep that in Castro’s library, and off the net!
It is now “Jihadist Jane” and here we have a poem from one of Americas finest, pertaining to a old, harpy broad, that has more plastic in her mangy hide then Barbie!
orthotox writes: “There you go again! Once and for all: conservatives and supporters of Iraqi war are not synonymous terms. This war stands in implicit contradiction to all that’s great in american conservatism. Cf. Buchanan, Craig Roberts, WF Buckley et al.”
Dear orthotox:
As Rightminded noted, you managed to capitalize the “R” in Roberts and the “B” in Buchanan and Buckley – but not the “A” in American. A Freudian slip?
Buchanan’s manifesto A Republic, Not an Empire makes an interesting read. While I heartily applaud Buchanan’s proposal to annex Greenland and western Canada, I couldn’t make heads or tails of his argument against exerting US force in the Persian Gulf.
According to Buchanan, it was perfectly all right for Thomas Jefferson to send our fledgling Navy halfway around the world to defend US shipping interests from the Barbary pirates, but, for some reason, it is not all right to defend US interests in today’s Middle East.
Had Buchanan taken a principled stand against imperialism, I could have credited him, at least, with being an impractical idealist. But he took no such stand. On the contrary, he defended expansionism and Manifest Destiny.
Buchanan’s book drips with the sort of gooey sophistry that results when an intelligent man seeks to invent rational arguments after the fact in order to justify a position which he originally adopted for irrational reasons.
Before reading Buchanan’s book, I was willing to concede, in the interests of civility and fair play, that Buchanan was a patriot, albeit a misguided one. After reading his book, I can no longer make that concession.
Actually, Richard, taking it to the logical conclusion of your observations, replace the void left from your removal of Buchanan’s “patriot” moniker with his true identity, “anti-Semite”. The difference in his twisted logic revolves around Israel, and his dripping, palpable hatred for the Jewish State.
MZ Blogoff
Mad Zionist writes: “…Buchanan’s… true identity, `anti-Semite.’�?
Dear Mad Zionist:
As you know, I am disinclined to hurl such loaded and overused epithets as “anti-Semite” loosely. In Buchanan’s case, it seems appropriate, though.
Buchanan is so determined to thwart what he regards as Jewish interests, that he will sacrifice US interests in pursuit of that goal. His absurd claim that the US had nothing to gain by toppling Saddam speaks for itself.
That said, I do think Buchanan’s proposal to annex Greenland and western Canada has much to commend it. Imagine what a lovely American city Vancouver would make after we have occupied it and deported all the leftists to places like Ontario and “Free” Quebec.
If we could just get Buchanan’s mind off the Middle East and get him focused on constructive endeavors such as expanding US territories in the north, he might prove downright useful.
Personally, I’d offer Buchanan the governorship of British Columbia if he could get the job done. Heck, I’d even throw in a few hunting lodges in the Canadian Rockies, lordly estates overlooking the Pacific Ocean and the right of prima nocte, if he could handle it. That would keep him out of trouble!
Richard,
If Pat Buchanan was made governor of annexed Greenland he’d immediately blame its bad economy on internationalism, set up a maximum tariff state, normalize relations with the islamic world and fully embargo Israel – who’s lobby he’d blame for corrupting Greenland’s political financial institutions.
Buchanan’s Party would be known as “Greenland First Party”, there would be a Zionist Tax imposed on all Jews to compensate for all the money Greenland loses from their dual loyalty donations to the Jewish State, and the official maps would all have “Israel” replaced with “Palestine” to reveal Greenlands official rejection of the Balfour Declaration and the UN Resolution of 1947 giving Israel Statehood.
Next, Buchanan would insist that Democracy in Greenland was actually harmful to the State’s future and he would immediately declare himself
“Governor for life”. His next decree would be that all non 100% pure Greenlandians would be held in special camps for questioning in order to protect the real Greenlandians from potential sedition. Jews, even those born in Greenland, would also be rounded up and put in seperate DP camps under suspicion of Zionist collaboration.
The press would be run by the Greenland First Party, as would the television and radio stations. Buchanan would build a baracade around the Island, which the State would pay for with the employof free labor provided by those detained in camps as a test of their loyalty to Greenland. Jews in particular would be singled out for the hardest work as their Zionist leanings make them the most suspicious of disloyalty to mother Greenland.
The new anthem of Greenland would be “Greenland, Greenland, Over All”, which would be accompanied by a mandatory stiff armed solute.
The new flag of Greenland would be a black circle slash over a red Star of David, symbolizing the establishment of the 4th Vike. The 4th Vike is Buchanan’s resurrection the Viking greatness and superiority Greenland enjoyed before the inferior races conspired against them with treacherous lies.
Ahhhh…Pat has so much to offer it’s hard to imagine why he’s been disgraced into the dung heap of poltical irrelevence.
-MZ
Mad Zionist writes: “Ahhhh…Pat has so much to offer it’s hard to imagine why he’s been disgraced into the dung heap of poltical irrelevence.”
Dear Mad Zionist:
I don’t think you’re treating my proposal with the seriousness it deserves. Consider the benefits of placing Buchanan in charge of, uh, let’s call it the Northern Frontier.
With Buchanan leading the charge, his followers could no longer pretend that they oppose US expansion on the grounds of anti-imperialist scruples. They would have to follow Buchanan’s lead.
Every Buchananite from Justin Raimondo and Taki Theodoracopoulos to Scott McConnell and Lenora Fulani would have to put up or shut up. No more Bush-bashing over cocktails at their swank urban soirées. They’d have to suit up in buckskins and Bowie knives and join their fearless leader in slogging northward through the pine bogs of Canada, re-enacting in real life the saga of Manifest Destiny which Buchanan lauds so eloquently in his book.
Why, I’ll bet even our friend orthotox would join them. What excuse could he offer to stay behind?
Richard, I do admit I LOL at these visuals, and do think they’re funny because it parodies many of the twisted Buchananite realities, but I don’t believe this comic relief has real life possibilities.
BTW, the visual of Buchanan alone with gay Raimondo “behind” him in the Pine bogs, wearing only his buckskin, is disturbing enough to be worthy of a Castro blackmail video.
-MZ
“This war stands in implicit contradiction to all that’s great in american conservatism. Cf. Buchanan, Craig Roberts, WF Buckley et al”
Buchanan is firmly against the war, but he is against the war because he is a paleo-conservative isolationist – his evaluation of it was 80% completed before we ever set foot here.
But Buchanan is hazy about the alternatives to fighting Islamic terrorism. And his agenda for US isolationism is impossible in the jet and internet age, and any attempt build castle walls and confirm the loyalty of all citizens within cannot be done without putting a severe cramp on the freedom of We the People – precisely the aim of the terrorists.
But WFB? He seems to me to have taken a critical, but open-minded approach. He’s shared reservations, fears, and doubts, but to say that he represents wise ‘anti-war’ conservatism seems to misrepresent his views as stated in articles such as this..
WFB’s take on the war seems to be very cautious and reasoned as fact present themselves. And well it should be, since our reasons for invasion, our execution of the occupation, and our objectives for success have all been certainly less than clear-cut every step of the way.
The Iraq war should rightfully be subject to legitimate debate (provided it does not give aid and comfort to the enemy, Jane).
But I warn everyone: Brace yourselves for the possibility of failure in Iraq, folks. Iraq’s people are a thoroughly messed up lot. Saddam’s rule was merely the roof built on top oof a fouse of Islam, supported by the foundation of Arab ‘culture’.
Our efforts here are well intended and have generated a lot of positive results in a strategic sense, and that is how I justify our presence here.
But in Iraq itself, the basis for constitutional government, for gratitude of services and sacrifices rendered, and for civil order and rule of law, is thoroughly absent from the core existance of these people, past and present.
Furthermore, our government cannot find its feet as it tries to strike a balance between the realities they must confront here, and the apparent political requirement to operate only under antiseptic, non-judgmental, 21st Century Western values.
You cannot get people of a hostile culture to adopt your values without either convincing them or defeating them. And you must keep in mind that regardless of which you choose, both must be done in a language that everyone understands clearly.
Members of the US State Department are insisting that Iraq’s constution provides for equal treatment of women under all laws. Think of how that impacts a Muslim society in matters such as marriage, divorce, etc. The United States gave women full protection only in the mid 1960’s. And this latest American development is now a requirement for Iraqis? Where’s the magic wand and fairy dust?
Such a demand shows the bubble in which the DOS often operates, and indicates a clear lack of appreciation for magnitude of what is being attempted here.
The Iraqis are blinded by their impervious, raw, and inflexible culture. And we are blinded by our mealy-mouthed, carefully considered, and politically correct culture.
Iraqis are not like Americans, but it is un-American for Americans to acknowledge that in either word or deed. And all here suffer because of it.
orangeducks
Baghdad
I’m often flabbergasted at the Buckleys on the paleo-right and the Buchanans on the neo-left that continue to offer some variant of a “Why doesn’t President Bush tell the world his intentions” soliloquy.
Offer them Bush’s Sept. 12, 2002 address to the United Nations General Assembly.
And a hearing aid.
Just udated my weblog for those interested. This entry is entitled “Expulsion celebrations, protests and beastiality.”
-MZ
orangeducks writes: “Buchanan is firmly against the war, but he is against the war because he is a paleo-conservative isolationist…”
That’s what I thought before I read A Republic, Not an Empire. But Buchanan is no isolationist. He writes approvingly of Thomas Jefferson’s war on the Barbary Pirates, which was plainly not an isolationist venture.
Moreover, Buchanan does not call for a hands-off policy in the Middle East. On the contrary, he acknowledges that the US has a strategic interest in maintaining its access to Middle Eastern oil, for which reason he recommends that we ingratiate ourselves with the Muslims.
Buchanan is selectively isolationist: He believes America must act internationally if it negatively impacts Israel. Aside from that, he desires no free trade, no immigration, no shared technology or resources, and a total end to foreign investment in America.
Barbary Pirates attacked American property, that’s why he endorsed taking action against them. If it were up to him, however, Nazi Germany would still be in power over Europe and beyond and America would remain completely neutral in all affairs regardless of the human implications, with of course the one caveat: He would actively support the destruction of the Jewish State even if it NEGATIVELY impacted American interests.
Where Jewish persecution is concerned, Buchanan always seems to be a softy.
MZ
Mad Zionist writes: “Barbary Pirates attacked American property, that’s why he endorsed taking action against them.”
Yes, but Saddam attacked American property too. He colluded with the European Union in an effort to undermine the US dollar.
Saddam did this by breaking ranks with other oil exporters and demanding that his customers pay euros for oil instead of US dollars. He was trying to get other oil-exporting states to follow his example. Had Saddam succeeded, the euro might well have become the new petro-currency, and the dollar would have plummeted through the floor, triggering a wholesale collapse of dollar-denominated assets.
The reason Buchanan didn’t want to go after Hussein for what he’d done is he deflected the blame on…drumroll please…ISRAEL!! Naturally everything comes back to being the fault of the vast zionist conspiracy in Buchananville.
If the Jews had their own state at the time of the Barbary pirates Buchanan would have blamed them for the pirates actions and recommended attacking the Jews instead.
-MZ
I stand by my characterization of Buchanan as an isolationist, his opinions on Jefferson-era ventures notwithstanding. I speak of any modern definition of the term, and he is consistently there on war, trade, immigration, diplomacy, and foreign aid.
And his criticism of US-Israel policy is constant, although it’s hard for me to judge whether that’s from being isolationist or maybe anti-semitic. I know his Jewish critics have made up their minds, but I don’t know.
As for US support of Israel?
-M16 Rifle: $700.00
-F15E Strike Eagle: $30,000,000.00
-Reminding Arab countries everyday of Arab incompetence and cultural inferiority compared to the West: priceless
orangeducks
Orangeducks, in Buchanan’s case he is both an isolationist and an anti-Semite. He is clearly all the things you described him to be in the isolationist realm, except for with Israel, where he abandons his isolationism and actively supports the “Palestinian” cause.
His obsession with the Zionists and Jews, which is made even clearer in his musings of admiration for Adolph Hitler, indicate he has combined a xenophobia for the advancement of the American white race, poltical isolationism, a dislike for democracy, and, of course, deep loathing for the Jews, whom he views as the greatest saboteur of his “America First” utopia.
-MZ
[…] Cross-posted from MoonbatCentral.com 08.01.05 […]