How fitting and sickening that Jane Fonda advocated on national television (twice) last week the “murder” of pro-life activists, no smile, no jest, pure vile, pure “Hanoi Jane” at her best. This is the woman who spilled all to the North Vietnamese in 1972, condemned American POWs to death. Now, as if morality still has never swept her, she recommends “murdering” pro-life protestors. Ponder that.

Of course nothing will come of that.  While the Biden Justice Department and bitter Merrick Garland distains and detains, has now decided to intimidate and prosecute genuinely peaceful pro-life protestors, a threat and incitement to murder on national television will come to nothing, count on it.

But what, pray tell, would her patriotic father – the famous Henry Fonda, a WWII veteran and notably “Juror Number 8” in the film “Twelve Angry Men” have to say about that? Remember that film?  Juror Number 8, Fonda’s character, is so concerned about protecting innocence, consumed by the enormity of murder, and the horrific penalty it carries, that he works to convert the jury – and eventually does.

In other words, the ideal in America – the concept that rule of law matters, that Supreme Court decisions and jury decisions are at the very heart of the republic’s survival – was sufficiently important to Fonda, and to the nation, that the mere possibility of getting it wrong should focus us intently.

Now comes self-adulating, never wrong, quick to spout “Hanoi Jane,” in her coiffed hair, glib as she was in 1972, throwing gas on the public fire, recommending to her disoriented, polarized, sadly more violent, under-policed, half-crazy watchers that “murder” is the answer, if you disagree with the Supreme Court.

Miss. Jane, murder of whom? Murder of pro-life protestors? Murder of Supreme Court Justices? Murder of the law? Murder of fellow citizens? And where is the public outrage over the active – watch the clip, no smile, pure vile – advocacy of the killing of fellow Americans.

True to form, this self-worshiping Hollywood nut has not learned a thing since 1972. While she regrets being photographed with communist North Vietnamese soldiers, the ones killing young Americans, even then funded by China and Russia – it is just the photo she regrets, not complicity in their murder.

This is a woman who will leave the planet no less enlightened than she arrived, sure that her immorality is a sign of principle, sure that her glib advocacy for violent death of those she disagrees with is some sort of justice, a disgrace to all the causes she touches, no giving, no grace, no gratitude, all attitude.

She reminds me of an old saw, an old adage that drifts back now and then as the political left gets more aggressive, less interested in what matters, more cocksure with each passing year, as if all the sacrifice that brought this nation to this moment, which makes possible their bold use of the First Amendment, is irrelevant – or of their own making.

The saw it this: “In these days of atheism, it is good to see someone who believes as deeply in herself as Jane Fonda.” If this is what leftism is today, quiet advocacy of power and violence for more power and violence, what better posterchild than Jane Fonda? Here is the know-nothing, hold-over “fellow traveler,” as much a communist sympathizer today as she was fifty years ago.

Here is the perfect symbol of the left, cat out of the bag, a person who cares little for what matters most, life, liberty, and defense of both, just about herself, her hair, floodlights, and the rant. Yes, of course, the Justice Department – and all the world – will care little that “murder” is being pushed.

But what, alas, would Juror Number 8 have to say? What would those American boys who lie in all the military cemeteries that grace this nation and the globe have to say? And what would all those babies who, unlike Fonda, never got the chance to use their God-given First Amendment have to say?

They would have a lot to say, and a lot to her – but they fell, or were deprived of the right, she so glibly abuses. Worse, many fell because of the very attitude and words she now excuses. “Murder,” Hanoi Jane, is not the answer when you disagree with someone, or with your life situation. Ponder that. 

Robert Charles is a former Assistant Secretary of State under Colin Powell, former Reagan and Bush 41 White House staffer, attorney, and naval intelligence officer (USNR). He wrote “Narcotics and Terrorism” (2003), “Eagles and Evergreens” (2018), and is National Spokesman for AMAC.

While you’re here, we have a small favor to ask…

Support Breath of Life Center Inc, an AMAC sponsored 501 (C)(3) charity. We believe in the sanctity of human life and wish to help women through education, support, and direction. Help us in our effort to “be a voice for the voiceless”!

Donate Now

Share This Article by AMAC, Robert B. Charles