the truth?
Posted on 05/05/2018 8:52:15 AM PDT by MarvinStinson
I NEVER watch Ken Burns stuff. He’s is supposedly fair, but his bias is really glaring. But Lefties always subscribe to the meme ‘if you say it enough times, it becomes the truth’.
Bottom line....the American Left labeled the Vietnamese Commies the good guys and us the bad guys.It wasn’t our Armed Forces that lost it...it was Jane Fonda,Abbie Hoffman and many,*many* of their pals who did.
...anything that makes America look good?
the truth?
BFL
Ken Burns: Student of History—or Left-Wing Gasbag?
Accuracy in Media ^ | December 16, 2016 | Arne Steinberg
Posted on 12/17/2016, 2:22:41 PM by MarvinStinson
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3505720/posts
Ken Burns claims, “For nearly forty years now, I have diligently practiced a conscious neutrality in my work.” This “neutrality” includes the following: In 2008, the Democratic National Committee chose Burns to produce the introductory video for Senator Edward Kennedy’s Democratic National Convention speech, which, according to Politico, presented Kennedy as “the modern Ulysses bringing his party home to port.” When Burns endorsed Barack Obama for the U.S. presidency in December 2007, he compared Obama to Abraham Lincoln. In 2012, Burns wrote, “Like FDR, Obama has walked us back from the brink. He averted a depression, ended one war and put us on the path ending the other, rescued the auto industry…Obama has deployed the shrewd combination of speaking softly and using a big stick. Ask Bin Laden.”
Burns hammers at left-wing mantras in his documentaries, using standard and easily recognizable left-wing media techniques. He omits the long racist history of Democrat politicians in his documentary “Congress,” presenting the period just before the Civil War to the post-Reconstruction era without ever identifying a single pro-slavery congressman or senator as a Democrat. He omits the strong anti-abortion views of Susan B. Anthony in his suffrage movement documentary “Not For Ourselves Alone,” since that did not fit the left-wing ideology he was pushing. When a white shooter killed black churchgoers in 2015, Burns said, “As most Americans were, I was stunned, shocked, reduced to tears by what had happened in Charleston and felt like all the old ghosts were all still present in American life.” But when a Muslim terrorist killed 50 gays in Orlando, Florida, in the deadliest mass shooting in U.S. history, Burns said of Donald Trump’s advocating a temporary halt to Muslim immigration to America: “Do not think that the tragedy in Orlando underscores his points. It does not.”
(Excerpt) Read more at aim.org ...
No analysis of Viet Nam is complete that totally omits the fact that it was a war between Catholics and Communists.
Great article. It’s a shame most Americans who watch this tripe will never read the rebuttal. Hell, Oliver Stone is considered an historian by the general population. 50 years of indoctrination is hard to overcome—I hear the same “facts” presented by many who should know better.
Most Freepers would be truly astounded by what is taught as fact to their children and grandchildren. History is written by the victors—and sometimes by their subversive allies.
I watched about 10 minutes of the series. Then I wondered how accurate the Civil War series was.
Documentaries on the WWII Pacific theater elide so much information they should be called Dummy guides by anyone familiar with events there. A Vietnam documentary would be no different, even if approached non-politically.
Ken Burns specializes in skipping what doesn’t fit his narrative. I wouldn’t accuse him of outright lying, but he selects what bolsters his leftist viewpoint and is not interested in material that refutes it.
Ken Burns is a Marxist propagandist and a left wing hack. It seeps into everything he does.
His Civil War stuff was almost 100% Commager’s Blue and Grey so it was pretty good.
I watched his Vietnam series and thought it was good. Are you saying the NVA were the bad guys? Now I feel deceived!
You are off target 100%. This was not one religion vs commies. I had Montagnards and my friends had incense burners. Neither were Catholic. The truth is we had that war won until we quit BOMBING. The north was ready to surrender. In 69-70 the damn pot smokers and druggies were everywhere.
Kerry joined the VC in Paris. He is a POS.
And a pretend heterosexual.
Perhaps you're right.
However, the problem with the "just war" concept is that mere men have to figure out what "justice" is in order to launch a "just war."
Eisenhower was certainly a good man, and undoubtedly a great man, but the civil war between North and South Vietnam wasn't a good enough reason to sacrifice what turned out to be 58,000+ American lives for.
The problem is that a man sitting behind a big desk in Washington DC can get the idea that he can press a button on his telephone and save the world, and that's just not the case, especially from 12,000 miles away from the facts on the ground.
Eisenhower, Kennedy and Johnson were advised by men who had been taught that Communism would win, that Communism was a more efficient economic system than Capitalism, that Capitalism had to fight an unequal fight to maintain itself against the onslaught of the next level of human evolution, the stupid pseudo-scientific claptrap drivel theory of a loser and con-man named Karl Marx.
In a way, I don't blame them for deciding as they did, in the post-WWII era, that America should carry on against the Communist world by fighting them in every corner of the world, the domino theory and all that.
But in hindsight it's clear, at least to me: we should have said to Vietnam "fine, go communist, knock yourselves out, but remember that we'll still be here when you finally figure out hour mistake, and we'll be ready to help you rebuild when that day comes."
That would have been the correct response, because the enthralled victim of a con-man and a con-ideology can only save his or herself. All the outsider can do is offer aid and comfort when the scales finally fall from their eyes.
If we had taken that approach, we would have got where we are today anyway, and all those daddies and boyfriends and fiancés would have come home and added to America.
At first he was pasteing demoncrats as much as Republicans. He even played recordings of telephone conversations from JFK and LBJ, both admitting they were making strategic decisions in Vietnam based on how it would affect the vote. First-hand admissions from the both of them that they were willing to let American soldiers die to improve their chances of re-election.
So I thought he might actually be playing it down the middle. Then about Episode 3 he starts trying to rehabilitate the reputation of Uncle Ho. And that did me in.
I shared articles from this site following the weekly airing of episodes of the Burns documentary. Link here:
https://www.vvfh.org/index.php/news-and-events/burns-documentary-commentary
Catholics?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.