Quote:

---

I suspect that in large part the whole notion of hippies, and other war protesters, degrading our soldiers during the Vietnam Era, was nothing more than propaganda peddled by pro war parties. These parties probably acquired a few soldiers to mouth this lie, but I sincerely doubt this to be true, or I at least am suspicious of how pervasive this phenomenon was, if it existed at all.

If one examines history, all the way back to ancient Rome, one will always see how the parties that are for war, will always try to vilify those who call from more temperance, and one of the primary ways they will demonize the dissenters to war, is by propounding the myth that they are against the troops. By creating this artificial line of demarcation that pits soldiers against peace activists, you effectively marginalize the peace movement.

You still see deception going on till this day. Those who seek to cut funding for the Iraqi occupation, or question what we are doing at Guantanamo or Abu Graib, are immediately labeled as anti-American, troop haters, or demoralizers.

Again, our impoverished sense of history is our greatest downfall. Only in a country, where people are so ignorant of how historically, such techniques have been used by every dictator to subdue moral efforts to end unjustified aggression, can such lies be sustained. http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071110110729AASCOjZ] And

Quote:

---

I know this issue has been covered here before, and some people recall that either they or an immediate acquaintance can recall spitting incidents. Even if it did happen somewhere at some point, it sounds like the issue has achieved official urban-legend status in that a lot of people claim to have witnessed it when they almost certainly didn't.

---

Per Wikipedia:

Quote:

---

A persistent criticism leveled against those who protested the United States's involvement in the Vietnam War is that protesters spat upon and otherwise derided returning soldiers, calling them "baby-killers", etc. Lembcke says he found no evidence to suggest this ever happened and suggests it may have come in part from the common chant by protesters aimed at President Lyndon Baines Johnson, "Hey, hey, LBJ, how many kids did you kill today?" One of the hallmarks of the period's anti-war movement was its stated support for the troops in the field and the affiliation of many returning veterans with it. At the time he wrote The Spitting Image he had not found a single media report to support the claims of spitting. He theorizes that the reported "spitting on soldiers" scenario was a mythical projection by those who felt "spat upon" and was meant to discredit future anti-war activism. He suggests that the images of pro-war antipathy against anti-war protesters helped contribute to the myth. Lembcke argues that memories of being verbally and physically assaulted by anti-war protesters were largely conjured, arguing that not even one case could be documented.

However, some news accounts that mention spitting do exist, although there has been no evidence to support those accounts. After a review of contemporary news sources, Northwestern Law School professor James Lindgren claimed to have found news accounts that discussed spitting incidents. Lembcke provided an 18-point response to Lindgren at http://www.slate.com/id/2159470/sidebar/2159648/ expressing interest in one of Lindgren's claims. A December 27, 1971 CBS Evening News report on veteran Delmar Pickett who said he was spat at in Seattle appears to also have some validity as a claim, but not as evidence that the incident reported actually happened.[2][3]

Covering this same topic is author and columnist Bob Greene's 1989 book Homecoming in which Greene prints several letters he had solicited from veterans, asking to hear from them if they had been spat upon and focuses on firsthand accounts of their treatment.[4] Greene's book includes 63 accounts involving spitting, and 69 accounts from veterans that did not believe anyone was spat upon after returning from Vietnam. Like Lembke, Greene questions whether the spitting stories even made sense, noting "Even during the most fervent days of anti-war protest, it seemed that it was not the soldiers whom protesters were maligning. It was the leaders of government, and the top generals—at least, that is how it seemed in memory. One of the most popular chants during the anti-war marches was, “Stop the war in Vietnam, bring the boys home.” You heard that at every peace rally in America. “Bring the boys home.” That was the message. Also, when one thought realistically about the image of what was supposed to have happened, it seemed questionable. So-called “hippies,” no matter what else one may have felt about them, were not the most macho people in the world. Picture a burly member of the Green Berets, in full uniform, walking through an airport. Now think of a “hippie” crossing his path. Would the hippie have the nerve to spit on the soldier? And if the hippie did, would the soldier—fresh from facing enemy troops in the jungles of Vietnam—just stand there and take it?" While Greene admits he couldn't validate the authenticity of the accounts in the letters he received, he did believe spitting occurred, stating,"There were simply too many letters, going into too fine a detail, to deny the fact." Greene concluded, "I think you will agree, after reading the letters, that even if several should prove to be not what they appear to be, that does not detract from the overall story that is being told."[5] Lembke claims that some of the stories that Green published "have elements of such exaggeration that one has to question the veracity of the entire account." He also points out that there were several newspaper accounts of pro-war demonstrators spitting on anti-war demonstrators and suggests that these accounts may have been reinterpreted over the years.[6] In The Spitting Image Lembcke acknowledges that he cannot prove the negative—that no Vietnam veteran was spat on—saying (p. 68) it is hard to imagine there not being expressions of hostility between veterans and activists.

The Spitting Image asserts that the claims of abuse of soldiers by antiwar demonstrators became ingrained in the American consciousness only some years after the war had come to a close; Lembcke attributes the legend's growth to films relating to Vietnam, notably Rambo. He writes that these claims were used by President George H. W. Bush as a way to help sell the Gulf War to the American people. Lembcke believes that the myth is currently useful in promoting the yellow ribbon campaign; it has led some to think that for one to support troops, one must also support the war, because it ties together the ideas of anti-war sentiment and anti-troop sentiment, although a common chant has been "Support the Troops: Bring them Home!"

---

That's what those of us against the wars chanted then; that's what we chant today, hippie or not.

By the way, a goodly number of "hippies" were actually Vietnam Vets, protesting right along with us.