Protesters spit on Veterans

[Rain Monkey]

As so often happens at anti-war protests, a war veteran was spit on at last weeks rally in Washington, D.C.

Or, maybe he was spit near, at his position in the pro-war counter protest. Anyway, he spit back, and went onto Hannity & Colmes show on Fox to talk about it. http://mediamatters.org/items/200701300012?src=item200701300012

But we all know these things happen, it is common knowledge, like most other urban legends: http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/04/30/debunking_a_spitting_image/

And so the legend is referred to as fact: http://www.slate.com/id/2158608/

It would defy logic to claim proof that not once did this ever happen, but the incidence is clearly out of proportion to the perception.

And the enduring myth is politically useful to those who would prefer no dissent.

[Ballard Pimp]

Thank you, Rain Monkey, for getting those links.

Anyone involved with the antiwar movement has always known about this particular lie. It was never mentioned prior to 1980; there was never a single news article reporting such an event. And, as everyone who either served in the military or in the antiwar movement knew, military personnel returning from Vietnam never, ever, even once, landed at a civilian airport. 100% of the time every single returning military person was flown directly to a military base.

The antiwar movement welcomed veterans, many of whom (like John Kerry) became active in the movement. By 1968, the mid-point in the war, polling indicated that more draftees opposed the war than supported it, unlike the general American population, a majority of whom supported American involvement by a shrinking plurality until the war ended. Returned soldiers were, by the time of the second round of mass demonstrations (beginning in 1969) a major force in the antiwar movement.

The irony of the spitting myth is in its psychology: There were many reports of pro-war protesters spitting on anti-war protesters. There is something about the right-wing belief system at that time that made spitting a peculiarly satisfying act. It was almost universal, for example, among segregationist demonstrators.

The other irony of the time, of course, is the myth that antiwar demonstrations were "violent". They very rarely were, as contrasted with virtually 100% of the demonstrations in the South opposing integration. One of the clearest examples were the "police riots" in Chicago in 1968. Portrayed as unruly mobs of war opponents at the time, the Kerner Report, issued after a two-year investigation, revealed the truth: The Chicago Police Department had, at the direction of the mayor and chief of police, planned attacks on the demonstrators. The irony within an irony was that the most conspicuous demonstrators, the "front line" in the famous series of photographs of the police line charging into demonstrators, were almost all undercover police from surrounding communities and the FBI Cointel program, sent in to make sure the demonstration appeared violent.

[Melle]

What about Jane Fonda?

[Rain Monkey]

What about Jane Fonda?

I'm pretty sure more spit has flown onto Jane Fonda's face from pro-war lips than has ever been spat at uniformed heros by those who oppose the use of violence as a means of political change.

"In April 2005, a man named Michael A. Smith from Kansas City, Missouri took advantage of one of Jane Fonda's book signings to spit tobacco juice in her face ..." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Fonda

[Ballard Pimp]

The "Michael Smith" cited in the linked article initially claimed that he had spat on her "just like" people had spat on him when "I returned from Vietnam."

After his arrest it turned out that he had never been to Vietnam and was not a veteran.

[Rain Monkey]

Michelle Malkin has an opinion: "Readers of this blog will remember the name Joshua Sparling. In December 2005, the Iraq war veteran received a disgusting, anti-war death wish card while being treated at Walter Reed Army Hospital in Washington, D.C. for injuries from a bomb explosion in Ramadi. Last month, his right leg was amputated.

And this weekend, while participating in a counter-protest against the moonbat convergence, he was spit at by anti-war demonstrators."

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/006779.htm

Now isn't it astonishing that either: a) this guy has received a truly disproportionate amount of hate from the peace lovers, and been eager and able to go on t.v. immediately to tell of his wrenching humiliation; or b) he is playing a role in a manufactured media moment.

(He is probably not faking the amputation, but is certainly exploiting it.)

Here are the final paragraphs of the New York Times story covering the experience of 350,000 peaceful protesters (wherein one expelled saliva onto the ground):

In Washington, counterprotesters also converged on the mall in smaller numbers, but the antiwar demonstration was largely peaceful.

There were a few tense moments, however, including an encounter involving Joshua Sparling, 25, who was on crutches and who said he was a corporal with the 82nd Airborne Division and lost his right leg below the knee in Ramadi, Iraq. Mr. Sparling spoke at a smaller rally held earlier in the day at the United States Navy Memorial, and voiced his support for the administration’s policies in Iraq.

Later, as antiwar protesters passed where he and his group were standing, words were exchanged and one of the antiwar protestors spit at the ground near Mr. Sparling; he spit back.

Capitol police made the antiwar protestors walk farther away from the counterprotesters.

“These are not Americans as far as I’m concerned,” Mr. Sparling said.

Another counterprotester, Larry Stark, 71, a retired Navy officer who fought in Vietnam for five years and was a prisoner of war, said, “We never lost a battle in Vietnam but we lost the war, and the same is going to be true in Iraq if these protesters have their way.”

The protesters on Saturday were undermining troop morale, Mr. Stark said, and increasing the likelihood of a premature withdrawal.

“It’s like we never learn from the past,” he said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/28/washington/28protest.html?_r=2&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&pagewanted=2&adxnnlx=1170039570-ph+RYDXh0ON25gvKO6enIw

The reporter, Ian Urbina, claims to have personally witnessed the bilious exchange of phlegm.

Here are some other articles by the same reporter: http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/u/ian_urbina/index.html?inline=nyt-per

Conspiracy theorists will note the reporting on electronic voting, etc.

But of course, no sane blogger would ever suggest that by labeling the NYT liberal, and planting reporters on its payroll, the vast right wing conspiracy is able to create and slant stories within the most liberal of the liberal media.

[Ballard Pimp]

A bit of follow-up:

Ms Malkin has a habit of inflating things with her own hot air. It appears that through some miracle (No doubt involving Christianity) Pvt. Sparling's leg has regrown:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joshua_Sparling

On the other hand, the "hate mail" directed to Pvt. Sparling comes from an odd source: A white supremacist with no connection to the anti-war movement:

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/004103.htm

Of course, the fact that there was no connection to the antiwar movement hasn't stopped Malkin or her blogger friends from acting like there is.