# Bill Ayers vs Timothy McVeigh: Whats the difference????



## bucs90

After seeing MSNBC basically blame the Tea Party for Oklahoma City, it brought me to a conclusion and questions: What is really the difference between Timothy McVeigh and Bill Ayers???

Answer: McVeigh was smarter and built better bombs. Thats it. They both had serious problems with the government. Both built bombs and executed their plans. Both bombed government buildings. 

The ONLY difference is McVeigh had intense military training that enabled him to succeed in his horrendous acts, while Ayers was an amateur and just not smart enough to duplicate it. 

Yet, the media and lefties ignored the fact that Obama started his campaign in the home of who can basically be described as a Dumb McVeigh. Ayers continues to support Obama, and Obama continues to deny his relationship with Ayers. MSNBC has gone out of it's way to link the Tea Party with McVeigh.........yet ignores the glaring and undeniable link between Obama and Ayers (Dumb McVeigh).

So, to MSNBC and all the leftists who are desperate to link the Tea Party with the McVeigh mentality, let me ask you this: How do you explain the absolute link to Obama with Bill "Dumb McVeigh" Ayers???? After all, they taught together, travelled togehter, and Obama's campaign was started in the living room of Bill "Dumb McVeigh" Ayers home. 

Before you start trying to link the Tea Party and McVeigh, how about explain the already well known link between Obama and Ayers.....who wouldve been McVeighs equal had he possessed any knowledge on bomb making. After all, Ayers recently admitted his only regret was "We didn't do more". Too bad he didn't have military training, huh?


----------



## bucs90

I just posted this. Why does it alreayd say "old" next to it? Ayers = a dumber McVeigh. Truth.


----------



## Skull Pilot

The difference is that McVeigh was a much better demolitions technician.

That's the only difference.


----------



## bucs90

Skull Pilot said:


> The difference is that McVeigh was a much better demolitions technician.
> 
> That's the only difference.



Well, let me correct myself. There are TWO differences in McVeigh and Ayers:

1- As you said, McVeigh was a better bomb technician.

2- McVeigh didn't have a presidential campaign started in his living room.


But similarities?

- Both bombed government buildings.
- Both showed no remorse.
- Both wished they had done more.

But, only one is buddies with our beloved President. And only one is recognized by MSNBC as a domestic terrorist.


----------



## JBeukema

bucs90 said:


> After seeing MSNBC basically blame the Tea Party for Oklahoma City





link?



> What is really the difference between Timothy McVeigh and Bill Ayers???



Nothing


> So, to MSNBC and all the leftists who are desperate to link the Tea Party with the McVeigh mentality, let me ask you this: How do you explain the absolute link to Obama with Bill "Dumb McVeigh" Ayers????



The same way I explain the American Taliban's link to any friend he ever had at any time


----------



## bucs90

^^ OK, so you can explain how Obama started his freakin campaign in the living room of a man who would've been, and desired to be, the original Tim McVeigh but simply lacked the bombing and military skills to pull it off?

Are you telling me that if George W. Bush's campaign for governor of Texas had been started in the dining room of Timothy McVeigh, that it would have been anything other than lead story for the following 25 years on MSNBC????


----------



## CrusaderFrank

Ayers was a Progressive trying to destroy American and McVeigh had backing from Al Qaeda.

See the difference?


----------



## Truthmatters

McVeigh Killed 168 United States Americans and was convicted of his crimes.

What ever Ayers did it pales in comparison


----------



## bucs90

CrusaderFrank said:


> Ayers was a Progressive trying to destroy American and McVeigh had backing from Al Qaeda.
> 
> See the difference?



Haha, yeah, if you are a progressive leftie trying to destory America, you get sympathetic support from the left, MSNBC, and even friendship with a president. Hell, he'll even found his campaign in your dining room.

If you are anything other than a leftist, then you are labeled as a domestic terrorist, Tea Party member, racist and shown on the news nightly.

Basically, the Obama campaign was founded in the living room of a Dumb McVeigh.


----------



## JBeukema

Truthmatters said:


> McVeigh Killed 168 United States Americans and was convicted of his crimes.
> 
> What ever Ayers did it pales in comparison


Not for lack of intent


----------



## SpidermanTuba

bucs90 said:


> After seeing MSNBC basically blame the Tea Party for Oklahoma City, it brought me to a conclusion and questions: What is really the difference between Timothy McVeigh and Bill Ayers???




In one case the investigation was full of illegal tactics, and in another, it was clean.


----------



## JBeukema

bucs90 said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ayers was a Progressive trying to destroy American and McVeigh had backing from Al Qaeda.
> 
> See the difference?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Haha, yeah, if you are a progressive leftie trying to destory America, you get sympathetic support from the left, MSNBC, and even friendship with a president. Hell, he'll even found his campaign in your dining room.
> 
> If you are anything other than a leftist, then you are labeled as a domestic terrorist, Tea Party member, racist and shown on the news nightly.
> 
> Basically, the Obama campaign was founded in the living room of a Dumb McVeigh.
Click to expand...



I didn't know you got to use the computer in special ed classes.


----------



## California Girl

bucs90 said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> 
> The difference is that McVeigh was a much better demolitions technician.
> 
> That's the only difference.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, let me correct myself. There are TWO differences in McVeigh and Ayers:
> 
> 1- As you said, McVeigh was a better bomb technician.
> 
> 2- McVeigh didn't have a presidential campaign started in his living room.
> 
> 
> But similarities?
> 
> - Both bombed government buildings.
> - Both showed no remorse.
> - Both wished they had done more.
> 
> But, only one is buddies with our beloved President. And only one is recognized by MSNBC as a domestic terrorist.
Click to expand...


3- Bill Ayers wanted to kill people, but didn't believe his cause was worth dying for.


----------



## bucs90

Truthmatters said:


> McVeigh Killed 168 United States Americans and was convicted of his crimes.
> 
> What ever Ayers did it pales in comparison



WRONG. McVeigh is as bad, or worse, than Bin Laden. Thats a given. But so is Ayers. You likely don't even know what Ayers did, since you probably only watch MSNBC, but Ayers attempted, several times, to be as bad as McVeigh. The only difference is Ayers lacked the military skill and bomb making skill McVeigh had. Ayers bombed several government and police buildings, he was simply a failure in the field of bomb making and military tactics. His INTENT was exactly the same, and he is equally evil for that. 

But somehow, Obama felt fit to found his campaign in Ayers home. Ayers was one good boot camp away from being as horribly effective as McVeigh.


----------



## 007

Truthmatters said:


> McVeigh Killed 168 United States Americans and was convicted of his crimes.
> 
> What ever Ayers did it pales in comparison



I knew it wouldn't take this NUT CASE long to come in here and DEFEND a TERRORIST.

God damn you're a fucking piece of work... something crawled up your ass and DIED when you were young, AND IT'S STILL UP THERE.


----------



## bucs90

California Girl said:


> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> 
> The difference is that McVeigh was a much better demolitions technician.
> 
> That's the only difference.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, let me correct myself. There are TWO differences in McVeigh and Ayers:
> 
> 1- As you said, McVeigh was a better bomb technician.
> 
> 2- McVeigh didn't have a presidential campaign started in his living room.
> 
> 
> But similarities?
> 
> - Both bombed government buildings.
> - Both showed no remorse.
> - Both wished they had done more.
> 
> But, only one is buddies with our beloved President. And only one is recognized by MSNBC as a domestic terrorist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 3- Bill Ayers wanted to kill people, but didn't believe his cause was worth dying for.
Click to expand...


Rephrase: Bill Ayers wanted to kill cops and government employees, but lacked the military training to be effective. Then he allowed Obama to found his presidential campaign in his living room. Followed by the media and lefts complete denial of this relationship.


----------



## JBeukema

I thought the rightwingers loved violence against this oppressive, tyrannical government?


----------



## California Girl

Truthmatters said:


> McVeigh Killed 168 United States Americans and was convicted of his crimes.
> 
> What ever Ayers did it pales in comparison



"My only regret is that I didn't do enough." "I don't regret setting bombs"  William Ayers, 2001.


----------



## 007

California Girl said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> McVeigh Killed 168 United States Americans and was convicted of his crimes.
> 
> What ever Ayers did it pales in comparison
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "My only regret is that I didn't do enough." "I don't regret setting bombs"  William Ayers, 2001.
Click to expand...


The mother fucker should have been put to death, same as McVeigh.


----------



## bucs90

Pale Rider said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> McVeigh Killed 168 United States Americans and was convicted of his crimes.
> 
> What ever Ayers did it pales in comparison
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I knew it wouldn't take this NUT CASE long to come in here and DEFEND a TERRORIST.
> 
> God damn you're a fucking piece of work... something crawled up your ass and DIED when you were young, AND IT'S STILL UP THERE.
Click to expand...


Yeah, amazing isn't it? Lets compare THREE now:

McVeigh: Military training, built massive bomb, killed 168, regretted that it didn't take down entire building.
Bin Laden: Military training, WTC 1993, regretted he didn't take the buildings down, succeeded in 9-11, 4,000 dead.
Ayers: No military training, built pathetic and amateur bombs, killed very few, regretted only that "We didn't do more", befriended by Barack Obama, Obama 08 campaign founded in his home.

Hmmm.......one would think the Ayers-Obama link would be lead story, but no, McVeigh is because they are trying to link Tea Party to him.


----------



## Lonestar_logic

McVeigh was executed for his crimes. Ayers should have been.


----------



## bucs90

Pale Rider said:


> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> McVeigh Killed 168 United States Americans and was convicted of his crimes.
> 
> What ever Ayers did it pales in comparison
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "My only regret is that I didn't do enough." "I don't regret setting bombs"  William Ayers, 2001.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The mother fucker should have been put to death, same as McVeigh.
Click to expand...


Agree, but then where would Obama have founded his campaign????


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

Ayers is still a free man and a confidant of our President.


----------



## California Girl

JBeukema said:


> I thought the rightwingers loved violence against this oppressive, tyrannical government?



And that's why you're an idiot.... because, in fact, you are wrong. Right wingers don't 'love violence'... we are, however, prepared to fight and die for freedom. I think that a lot of left wingers are too cowardly to fight for anything, they want others to fight for them. Of course, being an intelligent person, I also recognize that not all left wingers are like that.


----------



## Truthmatters

JBeukema said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> McVeigh Killed 168 United States Americans and was convicted of his crimes.
> 
> What ever Ayers did it pales in comparison
> 
> 
> 
> Not for lack of intent
Click to expand...


How many people did the weather underground kill?


----------



## Truthmatters

bucs90 said:


> Pale Rider said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> "My only regret is that I didn't do enough." "I don't regret setting bombs"  William Ayers, 2001.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The mother fucker should have been put to death, same as McVeigh.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Agree, but then where would Obama have founded his campaign????
Click to expand...


Obama did not start his campaign in ayers house.


----------



## 007

bucs90 said:


> Pale Rider said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> "My only regret is that I didn't do enough." "I don't regret setting bombs"  William Ayers, 2001.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The mother fucker should have been put to death, same as McVeigh.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Agree, but then where would Obama have founded his campaign????
Click to expand...


Who knows. But then maybe we wouldn't have to suffer through four years of a radical, marxist, Kenyan as President either.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

JBeukema said:


> I thought the rightwingers loved violence against this oppressive, tyrannical government?



That's what you get for thinking.... irrational, ill-founded nonsensical assumptions.

Stick to Xbox.


----------



## bucs90

JBeukema said:


> I thought the rightwingers loved violence against this oppressive, tyrannical government?



No, thats just what MSNBC and the left tells you. We love protest against tyrannical governments. Not violence. Anyone who commits violence against innocent people is worthless. And, if a population finds itself under the rule of a tyrannical government, protest is the first option. The second is peaceful seccession, as we tried to do in 1776. If the tyrannical government takes up arms against the peaceful seccession, then God help us. But initiating violence is never the answer. I wish Obama's friends would see it that way.


----------



## bucs90

Truthmatters said:


> JBeukema said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> McVeigh Killed 168 United States Americans and was convicted of his crimes.
> 
> What ever Ayers did it pales in comparison
> 
> 
> 
> Not for lack of intent
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How many people did the weather underground kill?
Click to expand...


Seriously? Are you honestly going to say body count trumps intent? So, since McVeigh and Bin Laden had far higher body counts, that makes their intent worse than that of Ayers? How many people did the weather underground HOPE to kill? Thats the question.


----------



## geauxtohell

bucs90 said:


> After seeing MSNBC basically blame the Tea Party for Oklahoma City, it brought me to a conclusion and questions: What is really the difference between Timothy McVeigh and Bill Ayers???



168 dead men, women, and children.


----------



## Lonestar_logic

Truthmatters said:


> JBeukema said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> McVeigh Killed 168 United States Americans and was convicted of his crimes.
> 
> What ever Ayers did it pales in comparison
> 
> 
> 
> Not for lack of intent
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How many people did the weather underground kill?
Click to expand...


Does it really matter? Murder is murder whether it's one or one hundred.


----------



## Truthmatters

bucs90 said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JBeukema said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not for lack of intent
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How many people did the weather underground kill?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Seriously? Are you honestly going to say body count trumps intent? So, since McVeigh and Bin Laden had far higher body counts, that makes their intent worse than that of Ayers? How many people did the weather underground HOPE to kill? Thats the question.
Click to expand...


The weather underground were assholes but they blew up statues and things.

The people who died where the weathermen building bombs.


----------



## Sinatra

Ah, see the leftists scramble to defend the 60's era radicalism that now dominates the Democrat Party.

Bill Ayers is scum - and yet, within the progressive world of academia, he is not only tolerated, but supported.

Ayers admits to setting off bombs, and only regrets "not doing more".  

MSNBC would be far better served doing an investigation of how the 60s radicalism has overtaken the nation's current political intent - but that would an investigation far too close to home for them...


----------



## Lonestar_logic

Truthmatters said:


> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pale Rider said:
> 
> 
> 
> The mother fucker should have been put to death, same as McVeigh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Agree, but then where would Obama have founded his campaign????
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Obama did not start his campaign in ayers house.
Click to expand...


In 1995, State Senator Alice Palmer introduced her chosen successor, Barack Obama, to a few of the district's influential liberals *at the home* of two well known figures on the local left: William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn.... 

"I can remember being one of a small group of people who came to Bill Ayers' house to learn that Alice Palmer was stepping down from the senate and running for Congress," said Dr. Quentin Young, a prominent Chicago physician and advocate for single-payer health care, of the informal gathering at the home of Ayers and his wife, Dohrn. *"[Palmer] identified [Obama] as her successor."*

This is from the Huffington Post, so it must be true.


----------



## California Girl

Pale Rider said:


> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> McVeigh Killed 168 United States Americans and was convicted of his crimes.
> 
> What ever Ayers did it pales in comparison
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "My only regret is that I didn't do enough." "I don't regret setting bombs"  William Ayers, 2001.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The mother fucker should have been put to death, same as McVeigh.
Click to expand...


Yea, he should. Instead, he teaches our young people. This is the man who is proud of having told young people to "go home and kill your parents". Go figure.


----------



## Truthmatters

Sinatra said:


> Ah, see the leftists scramble to defend the 60's era radicalism that now dominates the Democrat Party.
> 
> Bill Ayers is scum - and yet, within the progressive world of academia, he is not only tolerated, but supported.
> 
> Ayers admits to setting off bombs, and only regrets "not doing more".
> 
> MSNBC would be far better served doing an investigation of how the 60s radicalism has overtaken the nation's current political intent - but that would an investigation far too close to home for them...



Getting the facts straight is not defending.

I said right in my post they were assholes.


----------



## bucs90

Truthmatters said:


> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> How many people did the weather underground kill?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seriously? Are you honestly going to say body count trumps intent? So, since McVeigh and Bin Laden had far higher body counts, that makes their intent worse than that of Ayers? How many people did the weather underground HOPE to kill? Thats the question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The weather underground were assholes but they blew up statues and things.
> 
> The people who died where the weathermen building bombs.
Click to expand...


Are you an ignorant college student? If "And things" you are referring to several police departments, FBI buildings, etc, then yes, he bombed statues "and things".


----------



## geauxtohell

Sinatra said:


> Ah, see the leftists scramble to defend the 60's era radicalism that now dominates the Democrat Party.
> 
> Bill Ayers is scum - and yet, within the progressive world of academia, he is not only tolerated, but supported.
> 
> Ayers admits to setting off bombs, and only regrets "not doing more".
> 
> MSNBC would be far better served doing an investigation of how the 60s radicalism has overtaken the nation's current political intent - but that would an investigation far too close to home for them...



Here, I'll do what you did, but just reverse it:

"Ah, the righties scramble to defend the 90's era radicalism that now dominates the Republican Party........"

See how easy that was?


----------



## Truthmatters

bucs90 said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Seriously? Are you honestly going to say body count trumps intent? So, since McVeigh and Bin Laden had far higher body counts, that makes their intent worse than that of Ayers? How many people did the weather underground HOPE to kill? Thats the question.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The weather underground were assholes but they blew up statues and things.
> 
> The people who died where the weathermen building bombs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are you an ignorant college student? If "And things" you are referring to several police departments, FBI buildings, etc, then yes, he bombed statues "and things".
Click to expand...


Link?


----------



## California Girl

Lonestar_logic said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Agree, but then where would Obama have founded his campaign????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obama did not start his campaign in ayers house.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In 1995, State Senator Alice Palmer introduced her chosen successor, Barack Obama, to a few of the district's influential liberals *at the home* of two well known figures on the local left: William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn....
> 
> "I can remember being one of a small group of people who came to Bill Ayers' house to learn that Alice Palmer was stepping down from the senate and running for Congress," said Dr. Quentin Young, a prominent Chicago physician and advocate for single-payer health care, of the informal gathering at the home of Ayers and his wife, Dohrn. *"[Palmer] identified [Obama] as her successor."*
> 
> 
> This is from the Huffington Post, so it must be true.
Click to expand...


One only need look at what Obama did to Palmer to know what kind of man he is.


----------



## Sinatra

Truthmatters said:


> Sinatra said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ah, see the leftists scramble to defend the 60's era radicalism that now dominates the Democrat Party.
> 
> Bill Ayers is scum - and yet, within the progressive world of academia, he is not only tolerated, but supported.
> 
> Ayers admits to setting off bombs, and only regrets "not doing more".
> 
> MSNBC would be far better served doing an investigation of how the 60s radicalism has overtaken the nation's current political intent - but that would an investigation far too close to home for them...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Getting the facts straight is not defending.
> 
> I said right in my post they were assholes.
Click to expand...

____

Your stupidity was called out - and you responded to the bell.

Thank you for proving the point...


----------



## Truthmatters

Lonestar_logic said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Agree, but then where would Obama have founded his campaign????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obama did not start his campaign in ayers house.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In 1995, State Senator Alice Palmer introduced her chosen successor, Barack Obama, to a few of the district's influential liberals *at the home* of two well known figures on the local left: William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn....
> 
> "I can remember being one of a small group of people who came to Bill Ayers' house to learn that Alice Palmer was stepping down from the senate and running for Congress," said Dr. Quentin Young, a prominent Chicago physician and advocate for single-payer health care, of the informal gathering at the home of Ayers and his wife, Dohrn. *"[Palmer] identified [Obama] as her successor."*
> 
> This is from the Huffington Post, so it must be true.
Click to expand...



That was not his presidential campaign now was it?


----------



## bucs90

Truthmatters said:


> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> The weather underground were assholes but they blew up statues and things.
> 
> The people who died where the weathermen building bombs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you an ignorant college student? If "And things" you are referring to several police departments, FBI buildings, etc, then yes, he bombed statues "and things".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Link?
Click to expand...


Seriously? You MUST be a college student being brainwashed by mornings of lectures and afternoons watching MSNBC in the campus coffee lounge. How bout just a simple link?  Bill Ayers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Among the list of places Ayers bombed:

The Pentagon
The Capitol Hill Police Department
The New York City Police Department
The FBI building
The San Francisco Police Department
The Chicago Police Department
The University of Wisconsin
US Army Fort Dix

Want me to continue? If he possessed McVeighs military and bomb making skills, he'd have killed thousands. Lucky for him, he didn't, and became a close friend of President Barack Hussein Obama.


----------



## KissMy

bucs90 said:


> WRONG. McVeigh is as bad, or worse, than Bin Laden. Thats a given. But so is Ayers. You likely don't even know what Ayers did, since you probably only watch MSNBC, but Ayers attempted, several times, to be as bad as McVeigh. The only difference is Ayers lacked the military skill and bomb making skill McVeigh had. Ayers bombed several government and police buildings, he was simply a failure in the field of bomb making and military tactics. His INTENT was exactly the same, and he is equally evil for that.
> 
> But somehow, Obama felt fit to found his campaign in Ayers home. Ayers was one good boot camp away from being as horribly effective as McVeigh.



WRONG.  McVeigh attacked the government pawns who were on a killing spree murdering US citizens, in order to stop the tyrannical government from killing more of its own citizens. He did not attack to strike terror & fear in the heart of every American. Osama Bin-Ladin wanted to strike terror & fear in the heart of every American, to draw US into war & kill as many of us as possible. BIG DIFFERENCE


----------



## Lonestar_logic

Truthmatters said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Obama did not start his campaign in ayers house.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In 1995, State Senator Alice Palmer introduced her chosen successor, Barack Obama, to a few of the district's influential liberals *at the home* of two well known figures on the local left: William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn....
> 
> "I can remember being one of a small group of people who came to Bill Ayers' house to learn that Alice Palmer was stepping down from the senate and running for Congress," said Dr. Quentin Young, a prominent Chicago physician and advocate for single-payer health care, of the informal gathering at the home of Ayers and his wife, Dohrn. *"[Palmer] identified [Obama] as her successor."*
> 
> This is from the Huffington Post, so it must be true.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> That was not his presidential campaign now was it?
Click to expand...


No but I didn't see that distinction made when it was stated that Obama started his political campaign in the home of Ayers. Was is stipulated that Obama started his "presidential" bid for office in the home of Ayers?

EDIT:

After going back and looking at what was stated, it appears that you are the one that made that distinction.  You left wing idiots never cease to amaze me. You argue that "That was not his presidential campaign now was it?" when that was never even mentioned. So why argue a point that was never made?


----------



## DiamondDave

LiesMatter... busted yet again


----------



## bucs90

Truthmatters said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Obama did not start his campaign in ayers house.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In 1995, State Senator Alice Palmer introduced her chosen successor, Barack Obama, to a few of the district's influential liberals *at the home* of two well known figures on the local left: William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn....
> 
> "I can remember being one of a small group of people who came to Bill Ayers' house to learn that Alice Palmer was stepping down from the senate and running for Congress," said Dr. Quentin Young, a prominent Chicago physician and advocate for single-payer health care, of the informal gathering at the home of Ayers and his wife, Dohrn. *"[Palmer] identified [Obama] as her successor."*
> 
> This is from the Huffington Post, so it must be true.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> That was not his presidential campaign now was it?
Click to expand...


Oops. Correction on my part. His POLITICAL career was founded there, not his campaign. Thats right, back when he was still just a radical local politician, and his connections with radicals and terrorists were not as harmful politically as they SHOULD have been in 2008. Luckily, he had a stable of ignorant voters like you.

Now, about that list of bombings I provided you. Had Ayers possessed McVeighs military training, is it not safe to say thousands would've died? And would Obama STILL have been friends with him?


----------



## Truthmatters

That is why you state it that way.

So that people think it was his presidential campaign.


 The only reason Obama knows Ayers  AT ALL is Ayers helps the poor of chi town big time.

They are NOT friends or confidants like  the right wing noise machines always claims.


----------



## bucs90

KissMy said:


> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> WRONG. McVeigh is as bad, or worse, than Bin Laden. Thats a given. But so is Ayers. You likely don't even know what Ayers did, since you probably only watch MSNBC, but Ayers attempted, several times, to be as bad as McVeigh. The only difference is Ayers lacked the military skill and bomb making skill McVeigh had. Ayers bombed several government and police buildings, he was simply a failure in the field of bomb making and military tactics. His INTENT was exactly the same, and he is equally evil for that.
> 
> But somehow, Obama felt fit to found his campaign in Ayers home. Ayers was one good boot camp away from being as horribly effective as McVeigh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WRONG.  McVeigh attacked the government pawns who were on a killing spree murdering US citizens in order to stop the tyrannical government from killing more of its own citizens. He did not attack to strike terror & fear in the heart of every American. Osama Bin-Ladin wanted to strike terror & fear in the heart of every American, to draw US into war & kill as many of us as possible. BIG DIFFERENCE
Click to expand...


No, I cannot agree to that. Bin Laden, in his mind, saw the US government as being on a killing spree of Muslims and did what he did to topple the US. Same as McVeigh. Both knew it wouldn't destroy the US, but both wanted to make a strong symbolic statement. Had McVeigh gotten away, he would've struck again.

And Bill Ayers is equal to both of the above in intent. I do not recognize tiers of terror. Intent is intent, regardless of body count.


----------



## bucs90

Truthmatters said:


> That is why you state it that way.
> 
> So that people think it was his presidential campaign.
> 
> 
> The only reason Obama knows Ayers  AT ALL is Ayers helps the poor of chi town big time.
> 
> They are NOT friends or confidants like  the right wing noise machines always claims.



They aren't ? Bill Ayers stated they were, and was quite offended when hearing Obama try to deny it. Oh, and no response to the link or list, long list, of government, military and police buildings Ayers bombed? Thank God Ayers wasn't as tactically and technically smart as McVeigh. Thousands of people are still alive due to Ayers ignorance.


----------



## California Girl

Truthmatters said:


> That is why you state it that way.
> 
> So that people think it was his presidential campaign.
> 
> 
> The only reason Obama knows Ayers  AT ALL is Ayers helps the poor of chi town big time.
> 
> They are NOT friends or confidants like  the right wing noise machines always claims.



Actually, the only person who thought it was his presidential campaign was you. You seem very ignorant of the facts concerning your Messiah. Perhaps that explains why you think he's such a great guy.... because you have no idea who he is.


----------



## geauxtohell

KissMy said:


> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> WRONG. McVeigh is as bad, or worse, than Bin Laden. Thats a given. But so is Ayers. You likely don't even know what Ayers did, since you probably only watch MSNBC, but Ayers attempted, several times, to be as bad as McVeigh. The only difference is Ayers lacked the military skill and bomb making skill McVeigh had. Ayers bombed several government and police buildings, he was simply a failure in the field of bomb making and military tactics. His INTENT was exactly the same, and he is equally evil for that.
> 
> But somehow, Obama felt fit to found his campaign in Ayers home. Ayers was one good boot camp away from being as horribly effective as McVeigh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WRONG.  McVeigh attacked the government pawns who were on a killing spree murdering US citizens in order to stop the tyrannical government from killing more of its own citizens. He did not attack to strike terror & fear in the heart of every American. Osama Bin-Ladin wanted to strike terror & fear in the heart of every American, to draw US into war & kill as many of us as possible. BIG DIFFERENCE
Click to expand...


Wow.   If I didn't know better, I'd say it sounds like you almost support what McVeigh did.

But surely not.


----------



## ElmerMudd

One thing everyone appears to agree with on this thread is that Timothy McVeigh, Bill Ayers, Osama Biin Laden and the Tea partiers do not like the US Government.


----------



## Ravi

bucs90 said:


> After seeing MSNBC basically blame the Tea Party for Oklahoma City, it brought me to a conclusion and questions: What is really the difference between Timothy McVeigh and Bill Ayers???
> 
> Answer: McVeigh was smarter and built better bombs. Thats it. They both had serious problems with the government. Both built bombs and executed their plans. Both bombed government buildings.
> 
> The ONLY difference is McVeigh had intense military training that enabled him to succeed in his horrendous acts, while Ayers was an amateur and just not smart enough to duplicate it.
> 
> Yet, the media and lefties ignored the fact that Obama started his campaign in the home of who can basically be described as a Dumb McVeigh. Ayers continues to support Obama, and Obama continues to deny his relationship with Ayers. MSNBC has gone out of it's way to link the Tea Party with McVeigh.........yet ignores the glaring and undeniable link between Obama and Ayers (Dumb McVeigh).
> 
> So, to MSNBC and all the leftists who are desperate to link the Tea Party with the McVeigh mentality, let me ask you this: How do you explain the absolute link to Obama with Bill "Dumb McVeigh" Ayers???? After all, they taught together, travelled togehter, and Obama's campaign was started in the living room of Bill "Dumb McVeigh" Ayers home.
> 
> Before you start trying to link the Tea Party and McVeigh, how about explain the already well known link between Obama and Ayers.....who wouldve been McVeighs equal had he possessed any knowledge on bomb making. After all, Ayers recently admitted his only regret was "We didn't do more". Too bad he didn't have military training, huh?


I'll guess...McVeigh is your hero and Ayers isn't.


----------



## California Girl

Ravi said:


> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> After seeing MSNBC basically blame the Tea Party for Oklahoma City, it brought me to a conclusion and questions: What is really the difference between Timothy McVeigh and Bill Ayers???
> 
> Answer: McVeigh was smarter and built better bombs. Thats it. They both had serious problems with the government. Both built bombs and executed their plans. Both bombed government buildings.
> 
> The ONLY difference is McVeigh had intense military training that enabled him to succeed in his horrendous acts, while Ayers was an amateur and just not smart enough to duplicate it.
> 
> Yet, the media and lefties ignored the fact that Obama started his campaign in the home of who can basically be described as a Dumb McVeigh. Ayers continues to support Obama, and Obama continues to deny his relationship with Ayers. MSNBC has gone out of it's way to link the Tea Party with McVeigh.........yet ignores the glaring and undeniable link between Obama and Ayers (Dumb McVeigh).
> 
> So, to MSNBC and all the leftists who are desperate to link the Tea Party with the McVeigh mentality, let me ask you this: How do you explain the absolute link to Obama with Bill "Dumb McVeigh" Ayers???? After all, they taught together, travelled togehter, and Obama's campaign was started in the living room of Bill "Dumb McVeigh" Ayers home.
> 
> Before you start trying to link the Tea Party and McVeigh, how about explain the already well known link between Obama and Ayers.....who wouldve been McVeighs equal had he possessed any knowledge on bomb making. After all, Ayers recently admitted his only regret was "We didn't do more". Too bad he didn't have military training, huh?
> 
> 
> 
> I'll guess...McVeigh is your hero and Ayers isn't.
Click to expand...


Rather than guessing, why don't you just consider the outcomes. McVeigh was executed and no one defended his actions. 

Ayers is celebrated... by the left. 

I'd be careful making assumptions if I were you... because you're 'guessing', and I'm stating facts. Fact: Bill Ayers in not just supported by the left, he is celebrated by them. They treat him as a 'hero'... I defy you to find any evidence to suggest that mainstream right wingers treat McVeigh as anything other than a mass murderer.


----------



## Ravi

California Girl said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> After seeing MSNBC basically blame the Tea Party for Oklahoma City, it brought me to a conclusion and questions: What is really the difference between Timothy McVeigh and Bill Ayers???
> 
> Answer: McVeigh was smarter and built better bombs. Thats it. They both had serious problems with the government. Both built bombs and executed their plans. Both bombed government buildings.
> 
> The ONLY difference is McVeigh had intense military training that enabled him to succeed in his horrendous acts, while Ayers was an amateur and just not smart enough to duplicate it.
> 
> Yet, the media and lefties ignored the fact that Obama started his campaign in the home of who can basically be described as a Dumb McVeigh. Ayers continues to support Obama, and Obama continues to deny his relationship with Ayers. MSNBC has gone out of it's way to link the Tea Party with McVeigh.........yet ignores the glaring and undeniable link between Obama and Ayers (Dumb McVeigh).
> 
> So, to MSNBC and all the leftists who are desperate to link the Tea Party with the McVeigh mentality, let me ask you this: How do you explain the absolute link to Obama with Bill "Dumb McVeigh" Ayers???? After all, they taught together, travelled togehter, and Obama's campaign was started in the living room of Bill "Dumb McVeigh" Ayers home.
> 
> Before you start trying to link the Tea Party and McVeigh, how about explain the already well known link between Obama and Ayers.....who wouldve been McVeighs equal had he possessed any knowledge on bomb making. After all, Ayers recently admitted his only regret was "We didn't do more". Too bad he didn't have military training, huh?
> 
> 
> 
> I'll guess...McVeigh is your hero and Ayers isn't.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Rather than guessing, why don't you just consider the outcomes. McVeigh was executed and no one defended his actions.
> 
> *Ayers is celebrated... by the left. *
> 
> I'd be careful making assumptions if I were you... because you're 'guessing', *and I'm stating facts*. Fact: Bill Ayers in not just supported by the left, he is celebrated by them. They treat him as a 'hero'... I defy you to find any evidence to suggest that mainstream right wingers treat McVeigh as anything other than a mass murderer.
Click to expand...

No he isn't. 

No you aren't. You're lying.


----------



## Jarhead

Ravi said:


> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'll guess...McVeigh is your hero and Ayers isn't.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rather than guessing, why don't you just consider the outcomes. McVeigh was executed and no one defended his actions.
> 
> *Ayers is celebrated... by the left. *
> 
> I'd be careful making assumptions if I were you... because you're 'guessing', *and I'm stating facts*. Fact: Bill Ayers in not just supported by the left, he is celebrated by them. They treat him as a 'hero'... I defy you to find any evidence to suggest that mainstream right wingers treat McVeigh as anything other than a mass murderer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No he isn't.
> 
> No you aren't. You're lying.
Click to expand...


Yes he is . He was herlded by many on the left during the campaign when his name was brought up in a negative light.


----------



## Ravi

Jarhead said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> Rather than guessing, why don't you just consider the outcomes. McVeigh was executed and no one defended his actions.
> 
> *Ayers is celebrated... by the left. *
> 
> I'd be careful making assumptions if I were you... because you're 'guessing', *and I'm stating facts*. Fact: Bill Ayers in not just supported by the left, he is celebrated by them. They treat him as a 'hero'... I defy you to find any evidence to suggest that mainstream right wingers treat McVeigh as anything other than a mass murderer.
> 
> 
> 
> No he isn't.
> 
> No you aren't. You're lying.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes he is . He was herlded by many on the left during the campaign when his name was brought up in a negative light.
Click to expand...

No he wasn't.


----------



## California Girl

Ravi said:


> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'll guess...McVeigh is your hero and Ayers isn't.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rather than guessing, why don't you just consider the outcomes. McVeigh was executed and no one defended his actions.
> 
> *Ayers is celebrated... by the left. *
> 
> I'd be careful making assumptions if I were you... because you're 'guessing', *and I'm stating facts*. Fact: Bill Ayers in not just supported by the left, he is celebrated by them. They treat him as a 'hero'... I defy you to find any evidence to suggest that mainstream right wingers treat McVeigh as anything other than a mass murderer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No he isn't.
> 
> No you aren't. You're lying.
Click to expand...


No, I'm not lying. He's a popular guy in left wing circles. He's a cause celebre with left wingers. He's a hero to a lot of left wing organizations. Or, at least, during the previous Administration he certainly was.


----------



## Ravi

California Girl said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> Rather than guessing, why don't you just consider the outcomes. McVeigh was executed and no one defended his actions.
> 
> *Ayers is celebrated... by the left. *
> 
> I'd be careful making assumptions if I were you... because you're 'guessing', *and I'm stating facts*. Fact: Bill Ayers in not just supported by the left, he is celebrated by them. They treat him as a 'hero'... I defy you to find any evidence to suggest that mainstream right wingers treat McVeigh as anything other than a mass murderer.
> 
> 
> 
> No he isn't.
> 
> No you aren't. You're lying.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, I'm not lying. He's a popular guy in left wing circles. He's a cause celebre with left wingers. He's a hero to a lot of left wing organizations. Or, at least, during the previous Administration he certainly was.
Click to expand...

Nope. If you aren't lying you are too apt to take rightwing talking points seriously. You might want to have that checked.


----------



## Jarhead

Ravi said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> No he isn't.
> 
> No you aren't. You're lying.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes he is . He was herlded by many on the left during the campaign when his name was brought up in a negative light.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No he wasn't.
Click to expand...


OK. Go for it. Beleive what you want.


----------



## Ravi

Jarhead said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes he is . He was herlded by many on the left during the campaign when his name was brought up in a negative light.
> 
> 
> 
> No he wasn't.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> OK. Go for it. Beleive what you want.
Click to expand...

I believe what is true.


----------



## Jarhead

"The city gave Ayers its Citizen of the Year award in 1997 for his work on the Annenberg project."

From this CNN link:

Ayers and Obama crossed paths on boards, records show - CNN.com

The city it is referring to is the left leaning Chicago.


----------



## Jarhead

Ravi said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> No he wasn't.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OK. Go for it. Beleive what you want.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I believe what is true.
Click to expand...


No. You believe what you want. You ignore the truth if you wish not to believe it.

That is my take on you based on many of your posts.

But hey, it works well for you so please, go for it.


----------



## JBeukema

California Girl said:


> JBeukema said:
> 
> 
> 
> I thought the rightwingers loved violence against this oppressive, tyrannical government?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And that's why you're an idiot.... because, in fact, you are wrong. Right wingers don't 'love violence'... we are, however, prepared to fight and die for freedom. I think that a lot of left wingers are too cowardly to fight for anything, they want others to fight for them. Of course, being an intelligent person, I also recognize that not all left wingers are like that.
Click to expand...

A great number on the Right think 'tyranny' means losing an election


----------



## JBeukema

Truthmatters said:


> JBeukema said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> McVeigh Killed 168 United States Americans and was convicted of his crimes.
> 
> What ever Ayers did it pales in comparison
> 
> 
> 
> Not for lack of intent
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How many people did the weather underground kill?
Click to expand...

Not as many as they would have liked, same as KSM and McVeigh


----------



## Truthmatters

bucs90 said:


> truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> that is why you state it that way.
> 
> So that people think it was his presidential campaign.
> 
> 
> The only reason obama knows ayers  at all is ayers helps the poor of chi town big time.
> 
> They are not friends or confidants like  the right wing noise machines always claims.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> they aren't ? Bill ayers stated they were, and was quite offended when hearing obama try to deny it. Oh, and no response to the link or list, long list, of government, military and police buildings ayers bombed? Thank god ayers wasn't as tactically and technically smart as mcveigh. Thousands of people are still alive due to ayers ignorance.
Click to expand...


link?


----------



## JBeukema

bucs90 said:


> JBeukema said:
> 
> 
> 
> I thought the rightwingers loved violence against this oppressive, tyrannical government?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, thats just what MSNBC and the left tells you. We love protest against tyrannical governments. Not violence. Anyone who commits violence against innocent people is worthless. And, if a population finds itself under the rule of a tyrannical government, protest is the first option. The second is peaceful seccession, as we tried to do in 1776. If the tyrannical government takes up arms against the peaceful seccession, then God help us. But initiating violence is never the answer. I wish Obama's friends would see it that way.
Click to expand...

Why name themselves after a violent incident of theft and vandalism if they're all about peaeful protest?



> I pray to God that this revolt is one that we can handle with a  ballot.  Because if we can't handle [it] with a ballot, God forbid what  comes  next. If it isn't a ballot, at some point it will be a  bullet.


[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HbKt82tFovE"]YouTube - Mark Lloyd Tax Day Tea Party Lynchburg, VA[/ame]

But they're not advocating violence and their rhetoric's not anything  like the rhetoric of McVeigh and Hutaree....


----------



## Dante

bucs90 said:


> After seeing MSNBC basically blame the Tea Party for Oklahoma City, it brought me to a conclusion and questions: What is really the difference between Timothy McVeigh and Bill Ayers???
> 
> Answer: McVeigh was smarter and built better bombs. Thats it.
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> ...


Here is exactly what is wrong with rthe Right Wing Lunacy @ USMB. 



> The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to bucs90 For This Useful Post:
> Annie (Today), CrusaderFrank (Today), Lonestar_logic (Today), Wicked Jester (Today), xsited1 (Today)


 *sick fucks*

That's it? 

McVeigh killed how many innocent Americans?


----------



## JBeukema

geauxtohell said:


> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> After seeing MSNBC basically blame the Tea Party for Oklahoma City, it brought me to a conclusion and questions: What is really the difference between Timothy McVeigh and Bill Ayers???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 168 dead men, women, and children.
Click to expand...

so... success rate?


----------



## Truthmatters

JBeukema said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JBeukema said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not for lack of intent
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How many people did the weather underground kill?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not as many as they would have liked, same as KSM and McVeigh
Click to expand...


They could have killed people but the  world got lucky that none of their bombs killed people.

They did not aim to kill people they aimed to get attention.

They were fucking idiots and dirtbags to blow anything up.

The facts are that McVeigh targeted people and the asshole underground weatherdicks didnt.

Now the OP asked for differeances and I gave them.


----------



## California Girl

Ravi said:


> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> No he isn't.
> 
> No you aren't. You're lying.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, I'm not lying. He's a popular guy in left wing circles. He's a cause celebre with left wingers. He's a hero to a lot of left wing organizations. Or, at least, during the previous Administration he certainly was.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope. If you aren't lying you are too apt to take rightwing talking points seriously. You might want to have that checked.
Click to expand...


I actually have no idea whether it is a 'right wing talking point', I know about Ayers because, like everyone connected to Obama, I researched him... all by myself.... with no help from political influence from one side or the other. I've read pretty much everything written by him or about him... even stuff that's not on the net!!   And... it took more than 10 minutes reading a wiki page!!


----------



## California Girl

Truthmatters said:


> JBeukema said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> How many people did the weather underground kill?
> 
> 
> 
> Not as many as they would have liked, same as KSM and McVeigh
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They could have killed people but the  world got lucky that none of their bombs killed people.
> 
> They did not aim to kill people they aimed to get attention.
> 
> They were fucking idiots and dirtbags to blow anything up.
> 
> The facts are that McVeigh targeted people and the asshole underground weatherdicks didnt.
> 
> Now the OP asked for differeances and I gave them.
Click to expand...


Liar.


----------



## Truthmatters

Cali could read an entire encylopedia and come away thinking it said "democrats are bad mmmmkay".


----------



## Jarhead

The weather undergound was not a killing machine. It wanted to make statements. If they truly wanted to kill, they would have. However, they went to extremes without much concern that someone may actually get hurt or even die. But they were simply trying to be heard. I dont agree with their tactics, but they were no McVeigh.

Now, that being said, I must remind all of us. They were trying to be heard becuase the government would not listen to them when they protested peacefully. They were called hippies, pot smokers, idiots, dummies, etc. And all they were trying to do was exercise their right to free speech. So they stepped it up to loud bombs and threats.

So I must wonder. Seeing as many in this administration were those hippies and pot smokers who were frustrated by the fact that the government ignored them and called them names....

Why are they doing the same dam thing to the tea partyers?


----------



## Truthmatters

California Girl said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JBeukema said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not as many as they would have liked, same as KSM and McVeigh
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They could have killed people but the  world got lucky that none of their bombs killed people.
> 
> They did not aim to kill people they aimed to get attention.
> 
> They were fucking idiots and dirtbags to blow anything up.
> 
> The facts are that McVeigh targeted people and the asshole underground weatherdicks didnt.
> 
> Now the OP asked for differeances and I gave them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Liar.
Click to expand...



So you dont think they were dirtbags and fucking idiotes?


----------



## Jarhead

California Girl said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JBeukema said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not as many as they would have liked, same as KSM and McVeigh
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They could have killed people but the  world got lucky that none of their bombs killed people.
> 
> They did not aim to kill people they aimed to get attention.
> 
> They were fucking idiots and dirtbags to blow anything up.
> 
> The facts are that McVeigh targeted people and the asshole underground weatherdicks didnt.
> 
> Now the OP asked for differeances and I gave them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Liar.
Click to expand...

LMFAO. 

Funny stuff cal gal!


----------



## JBeukema

A grand jury disagreed with your claims that they had no intention of killing anyone

Sgt McDonnell would also disagree


----------



## JBeukema

S.F. police union accuses Ayers in 1970 bombing


----------



## geauxtohell

Jarhead said:


> The weather undergound was not a killing machine. It wanted to make statements. If they truly wanted to kill, they would have. However, they went to extremes without much concern that someone may actually get hurt or even die. But they were simply trying to be heard. I dont agree with their tactics, but they were no McVeigh.
> 
> Now, that being said, I must remind all of us. They were trying to be heard becuase the government would not listen to them when they protested peacefully. They were called hippies, pot smokers, idiots, dummies, etc. And all they were trying to do was exercise their right to free speech. So they stepped it up to loud bombs and threats.
> 
> So I must wonder. Seeing as many in this administration were those hippies and pot smokers who were frustrated by the fact that the government ignored them and called them names....
> 
> Why are they doing the same dam thing to the tea partyers?



That's a pretty good point right there (and I say that as someone who loves to mock the tea party).


----------



## Truthmatters

Jarhead said:


> The weather undergound was not a killing machine. It wanted to make statements. If they truly wanted to kill, they would have. However, they went to extremes without much concern that someone may actually get hurt or even die. But they were simply trying to be heard. I dont agree with their tactics, but they were no McVeigh.
> 
> Now, that being said, I must remind all of us. They were trying to be heard becuase the government would not listen to them when they protested peacefully. They were called hippies, pot smokers, idiots, dummies, etc. And all they were trying to do was exercise their right to free speech. So they stepped it up to loud bombs and threats.
> 
> So I must wonder. Seeing as many in this administration were those hippies and pot smokers who were frustrated by the fact that the government ignored them and called them names....
> 
> Why are they doing the same dam thing to the tea partyers?



No one is keeping them from speaking.

We are merely asking them to not incite violence.

This happened back in the 90s.

The right wing machine pretended that Clinton was going to take their guns and invented a pack of false bullshit they said Clinton did. Then we got the Waco Wackos and McVeigh.

We really dont want any more dead Americans.

Why cant they  state their case WITHOUT inciting violence?


----------



## California Girl

Truthmatters said:


> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> They could have killed people but the  world got lucky that none of their bombs killed people.
> 
> They did not aim to kill people they aimed to get attention.
> 
> They were fucking idiots and dirtbags to blow anything up.
> 
> The facts are that McVeigh targeted people and the asshole underground weatherdicks didnt.
> 
> Now the OP asked for differeances and I gave them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Liar.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> So you dont think they were dirtbags and fucking idiotes?
Click to expand...


WTF? I call you (as an individual, not as a group.... not one of your stupid "You People" rants)... a liar and you decide that by calling an individual a liar (because you are), that I don't think they were dirtbags and fucking idiots. 

Christ on a bike, truth, how fucking stupid are you? Genuine question.


----------



## geauxtohell

JBeukema said:


> geauxtohell said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> After seeing MSNBC basically blame the Tea Party for Oklahoma City, it brought me to a conclusion and questions: What is really the difference between Timothy McVeigh and Bill Ayers???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 168 dead men, women, and children.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> so... success rate?
Click to expand...


And intent. 

I doubt the WU ever conspired to commit mass murder with their actions.

All that aside, saying Timothy McVeigh is representative of the right is as retarded as saying Ayers is representative of the left.


----------



## Truthmatters

You clearly said what I said was a lie.

In that post I call them a number of bad things.

You disagreed.


----------



## California Girl

Truthmatters said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> The weather undergound was not a killing machine. It wanted to make statements. If they truly wanted to kill, they would have. However, they went to extremes without much concern that someone may actually get hurt or even die. But they were simply trying to be heard. I dont agree with their tactics, but they were no McVeigh.
> 
> Now, that being said, I must remind all of us. They were trying to be heard becuase the government would not listen to them when they protested peacefully. They were called hippies, pot smokers, idiots, dummies, etc. And all they were trying to do was exercise their right to free speech. So they stepped it up to loud bombs and threats.
> 
> So I must wonder. Seeing as many in this administration were those hippies and pot smokers who were frustrated by the fact that the government ignored them and called them names....
> 
> Why are they doing the same dam thing to the tea partyers?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No one is keeping them from speaking.
> 
> We are merely asking them to not incite violence.
> 
> This happened back in the 90s.
> 
> The right wing machine pretended that Clinton was going to take their guns and invented a pack of false bullshit they said Clinton did. Then we got the Waco Wackos and McVeigh.
> 
> We really dont want any more dead Americans.
> 
> Why cant they  state their case WITHOUT inciting violence?
Click to expand...


Your arrogance is impressive. Who the fuck need to 'ask them' not to incite violence? You are being played like a damned fiddle by the media and you either don't know it or don't care. Idiot.


----------



## Jarhead

JBeukema said:


> A grand jury disagreed with your claims that they had no intention of killing anyone
> 
> Sgt McDonnell would also disagree



Do not get me wrong. I despise what the WU did. But they were not killers in my eyes. If they were, he and his family would have died. 
Instead, I saw them as having no concern about ones life in an effort to make a point. That is as bad as being a killer, but by no means the same.


----------



## Truthmatters

geauxtohell said:


> JBeukema said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> geauxtohell said:
> 
> 
> 
> 168 dead men, women, and children.
> 
> 
> 
> so... success rate?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And intent.
> 
> I doubt the WU ever conspired to commit mass murder with their actions.
> 
> All that aside, saying Timothy McVeigh is representative of the right is as retarded as saying Ayers is representative of the left.
Click to expand...


Tim was a product of the right wing slander machine on Clinton.


----------



## California Girl

Truthmatters said:


> You clearly said what I said was a lie.
> 
> In that post I call them a number of bad things.
> 
> You disagreed.



I call you a liar because you are one. You claimed that WU didn't target people. They did. They not only targeted people, they wanted people to die. That they were not very successful is down to their lack of ability, not the lack of intent.


----------



## Jarhead

Truthmatters said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> The weather undergound was not a killing machine. It wanted to make statements. If they truly wanted to kill, they would have. However, they went to extremes without much concern that someone may actually get hurt or even die. But they were simply trying to be heard. I dont agree with their tactics, but they were no McVeigh.
> 
> Now, that being said, I must remind all of us. They were trying to be heard becuase the government would not listen to them when they protested peacefully. They were called hippies, pot smokers, idiots, dummies, etc. And all they were trying to do was exercise their right to free speech. So they stepped it up to loud bombs and threats.
> 
> So I must wonder. Seeing as many in this administration were those hippies and pot smokers who were frustrated by the fact that the government ignored them and called them names....
> 
> Why are they doing the same dam thing to the tea partyers?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No one is keeping them from speaking.
> 
> We are merely asking them to not incite violence.
> 
> This happened back in the 90s.
> 
> The right wing machine pretended that Clinton was going to take their guns and invented a pack of false bullshit they said Clinton did. Then we got the Waco Wackos and McVeigh.
> 
> We really dont want any more dead Americans.
> 
> Why cant they  state their case WITHOUT inciting violence?
Click to expand...


Wrong.
Nancy Pelosi called their movement astroturf. Government called the movement of the late 60's pot smoking hippies.
President Obama ridiculed them when he held his hand up and made fun of them waving "little tea bags"
Government called them pot smoking hippies.

Do you not see the correlation?

If YOU dont want them to incite violence, dont make up crap about them. Such actions have proven to incite violence in the past.

You are out of your league on this board Truthmatters.


----------



## Dante

Dante said:


> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> After seeing MSNBC basically blame the Tea Party for Oklahoma City, it brought me to a conclusion and questions: What is really the difference between Timothy McVeigh and Bill Ayers???
> 
> Answer: McVeigh was smarter and built better bombs. Thats it.
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> ...
> 
> 
> 
> Here is exactly what is wrong with rthe Right Wing Lunacy @ USMB.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to bucs90 For This Useful Post:
> Annie (Today), CrusaderFrank (Today), Lonestar_logic (Today), Wicked Jester (Today), xsited1 (Today)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *sick fucks*
> 
> That's it?
> 
> McVeigh killed how many innocent Americans?
Click to expand...


I was not through.

This shit deserves it's own thread:



> http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/114320-difference-between-liberals-and-conservatives.html
> 
> Conservatives are always going on about how (supposedly) liberals are silent to the excesses of communist regimes, while conservatives stand up for all that is right, true and godly about America.
> 
> Talk. Bullshit.
> 
> In reality conservatives are willing to ignore all excesses of those who follow their screeds to their logical conclusions, while masking the terrible acts of these simpletons who follow the conservative logic with acts of horrifying violence---by using false comparisons and out right bullshit.



How could fellow Americans sink so low as to belittle an act of Terrorism?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/114320-difference-between-liberals-and-conservatives.html


----------



## Jarhead

Truthmatters said:


> geauxtohell said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JBeukema said:
> 
> 
> 
> so... success rate?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And intent.
> 
> I doubt the WU ever conspired to commit mass murder with their actions.
> 
> All that aside, saying Timothy McVeigh is representative of the right is as retarded as saying Ayers is representative of the left.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Tim was a product of the right wing slander machine on Clinton.
Click to expand...


Oh Jeez.

I pity you Truthmatters. You are the ideal pawn in our world of left vs. right. Most of the intelligent people on the left refuse to look like idiots by saying these things, so they have pawns like you say it for them.

I really do pity you. You have no thoughts of your own. It is quite sad.


----------



## KissMy

geauxtohell said:


> KissMy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> WRONG. McVeigh is as bad, or worse, than Bin Laden. Thats a given. But so is Ayers. You likely don't even know what Ayers did, since you probably only watch MSNBC, but Ayers attempted, several times, to be as bad as McVeigh. The only difference is Ayers lacked the military skill and bomb making skill McVeigh had. Ayers bombed several government and police buildings, he was simply a failure in the field of bomb making and military tactics. His INTENT was exactly the same, and he is equally evil for that.
> 
> But somehow, Obama felt fit to found his campaign in Ayers home. Ayers was one good boot camp away from being as horribly effective as McVeigh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WRONG.  McVeigh attacked the government pawns who were on a killing spree murdering US citizens, in order to stop the tyrannical government from killing more of its own citizens. He did not attack to strike terror & fear in the heart of every American. Osama Bin-Ladin wanted to strike terror & fear in the heart of every American, to draw US into war & kill as many of us as possible. BIG DIFFERENCE
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wow.   If I didn't know better, I'd say it sounds like you almost support what McVeigh did.
> 
> But surely not.
Click to expand...

Absolutely not. I do not support what McVeigh did. I am only stating the difference in their motives.

William Ayers goal was to create a clandestine revolutionary party for the violent overthrow of the US government and the establishment of a dictatorship of the proletariat.


----------



## Truthmatters

The right wing noise machine in Clintons time was talking all sorts of crazy assed shit.


----------



## Dante

Jarhead said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> geauxtohell said:
> 
> 
> 
> And intent.
> 
> I doubt the WU ever conspired to commit mass murder with their actions.
> 
> All that aside, saying Timothy McVeigh is representative of the right is as retarded as saying Ayers is representative of the left.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tim was a product of the right wing slander machine on Clinton.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh Jeez.
> 
> I pity you Truthmatters. You are the ideal pawn in our world of left vs. right. Most of the intelligent people on the left refuse to look like idiots by saying these things, so they have pawns like you say it for them.
> 
> I really do pity you. You have no thoughts of your own. It is quite sad.
Click to expand...


Tom McVeigh murdered innocent Americans---men, women and children for god's sake, and you right wing nuts have the unmitigated gall to compare him to a violent student activist from way back in the sixties who murdered no one? 

Belittling the horrific crimes of your fellow conservatives in order to try a comparative schtick and that shows just how bankrupt some people truly are.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/114320-difference-between-liberals-and-conservatives.html


----------



## California Girl

Jarhead said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> The weather undergound was not a killing machine. It wanted to make statements. If they truly wanted to kill, they would have. However, they went to extremes without much concern that someone may actually get hurt or even die. But they were simply trying to be heard. I dont agree with their tactics, but they were no McVeigh.
> 
> Now, that being said, I must remind all of us. They were trying to be heard becuase the government would not listen to them when they protested peacefully. They were called hippies, pot smokers, idiots, dummies, etc. And all they were trying to do was exercise their right to free speech. So they stepped it up to loud bombs and threats.
> 
> So I must wonder. Seeing as many in this administration were those hippies and pot smokers who were frustrated by the fact that the government ignored them and called them names....
> 
> Why are they doing the same dam thing to the tea partyers?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No one is keeping them from speaking.
> 
> We are merely asking them to not incite violence.
> 
> This happened back in the 90s.
> 
> The right wing machine pretended that Clinton was going to take their guns and invented a pack of false bullshit they said Clinton did. Then we got the Waco Wackos and McVeigh.
> 
> We really dont want any more dead Americans.
> 
> Why cant they  state their case WITHOUT inciting violence?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wrong.
> Nancy Pelosi called their movement astroturf. Government called the movement of the late 60's pot smoking hippies.
> President Obama ridiculed them when he held his hand up and made fun of them waving "little tea bags"
> Government called them pot smoking hippies.
> 
> Do you not see the correlation?
> 
> If YOU dont want them to incite violence, dont make up crap about them. Such actions have proven to incite violence in the past.
> 
> You are out of your league on this board Truthmatters.
Click to expand...


Damn Gunny and his 'spread the rep' rules! 

Although, I've always thought of them as more sort of ..... guidelines. 

*Credit: Pirates of the Caribbean.


----------



## Baruch Menachem

So far, the only difference I see between McVeigh and Ayers is one competence.  The difference between John Wilkes Booth and Squeeky Frome.  Ayers didn't kill hundreds through lack of desire, but lack of skill.

Achievement for a monster is not the measure of monstrosity.


----------



## chanel

The only difference is competence. He is now suing the University of Wyoming.  I wonder how he feels about the legal system in Cuba and Venezuela.



> Ayers participated in the Days of Rage riot in Chicago in October 1969, and in December was at the "War Council" meeting in Flint, Michigan. Two major decisions came out of the "War Council." The first was to immediately begin a violent, armed struggle (e.g., bombings and armed robberies) against the state without attempting to organize or mobilize a broad swath of the public. The second was to create underground collectives in major cities throughout the country.[16]  Larry Grathwohl, a Federal Bureau of Investigation  informant in the Weatherman group from the fall of 1969 to the spring of 1970, stated that "Ayers, along with Bernardine Dohrn, probably had the most authority within the Weatherman".[17]



Bill Ayers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



> Larry Grathwohl, an undercover FBI agent who infiltrated The Weather Underground, claimed that Ayers wanted to overthrow the United States government. In an interview in January 2009, Grathwohl stated that:
> 
> "The thing the most bone chilling thing Bill Ayers said to me was that after the revolution succeeded and the government was overthrown, they believed they would have *to eliminate 25 million Americans who would not conform to the new order*."[55]



# ^  Grathwohl, Larry, and Frank, Reagan, Bringing Down America: An FBI Informant in with the Weathermen, Arlington House, 1977, page 110


----------



## hboats

Truthmatters said:


> The right wing noise machine in Clintons time was talking all sorts of crazy assed shit.



Link?  Proof?

Rick


----------



## Jarhead

Dante said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tim was a product of the right wing slander machine on Clinton.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh Jeez.
> 
> I pity you Truthmatters. You are the ideal pawn in our world of left vs. right. Most of the intelligent people on the left refuse to look like idiots by saying these things, so they have pawns like you say it for them.
> 
> I really do pity you. You have no thoughts of your own. It is quite sad.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Tom McVeigh murdered innocent Americans---men, women and children for god's sake, and you right wing nuts have the unmitigated gall to compare him to a violent student activist from way back in the sixties who murdered no one?
> 
> Belittling the horrific crimes of your fellow conservatives in order to try a comparative schtick and that shows just how bankrupt some people truly are.
Click to expand...


Hey Dante. Good to see ya friend. Please scroll back a few and see my stance on this before you dam me to hell

I made it quite clear that I do not see the WU as killers. I saw them as frustrated government protesterts who were sick and tired of government not litening to them and mocking them so they were forced to make louder noises.

And then I questioned why the governemtn fdid not learn from that as they are once again minimizing the tea partyers and mocking them.

And sadly, many of those 60's protesters that were frustrated are now in this administration; yet they are doing to the tea partyers what government did to them.

You find that interesting?


----------



## hboats

Truthmatters said:


> geauxtohell said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JBeukema said:
> 
> 
> 
> so... success rate?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And intent.
> 
> I doubt the WU ever conspired to commit mass murder with their actions.
> 
> All that aside, saying Timothy McVeigh is representative of the right is as retarded as saying Ayers is representative of the left.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Tim was a product of the right wing slander machine on Clinton.
Click to expand...


Link?  Proof?

Rick


----------



## Truthmatters

Limbaugh Flashback: In 1995, Rush predicted "second violent American revolution" | Media Matters for America


----------



## Jarhead

hboats said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> The right wing noise machine in Clintons time was talking all sorts of crazy assed shit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Link?  Proof?
> 
> Rick
Click to expand...


Dont hold your breath


----------



## rdean

Was Ayers targeting women and children?


----------



## hboats

Truthmatters said:


> Limbaugh Flashback: In 1995, Rush predicted "second violent American revolution" | Media Matters for America



Wow, you got one link from Media Matters?  That's it?  Media Matters?  Let me guess, that is the only "news" you read?  It shows.  You're a blathering idiot Truthmatters.  You really do need to do some of your own thinking once in a while and stop letting Media Matters do it for you.

Rick


----------



## Ravi

chanel said:


> The only difference is competence. He is now suing the University of Wyoming.  I wonder how he feels about the legal system in Cuba and Venezuela.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ayers participated in the Days of Rage riot in Chicago in October 1969, and in December was at the "War Council" meeting in Flint, Michigan. Two major decisions came out of the "War Council." The first was to immediately begin a violent, armed struggle (e.g., bombings and armed robberies) against the state without attempting to organize or mobilize a broad swath of the public. The second was to create underground collectives in major cities throughout the country.[16]  Larry Grathwohl, a Federal Bureau of Investigation  informant in the Weatherman group from the fall of 1969 to the spring of 1970, stated that "Ayers, along with Bernardine Dohrn, probably had the most authority within the Weatherman".[17]
> 
> 
> 
> Bill Ayers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Larry Grathwohl, an undercover FBI agent who infiltrated The Weather Underground, claimed that Ayers wanted to overthrow the United States government. In an interview in January 2009, Grathwohl stated that:
> 
> "The thing the most bone chilling thing Bill Ayers said to me was that after the revolution succeeded and the government was overthrown, they believed they would have *to eliminate 25 million Americans who would not conform to the new order*."[55]
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> # ^  Grathwohl, Larry, and Frank, Reagan, Bringing Down America: An FBI Informant in with the Weathermen, Arlington House, 1977, page 110
Click to expand...


----------



## KissMy

Truthmatters said:


> The right wing noise machine in Clintons time was talking all sorts of crazy assed shit.



The tyrannical government actually did kill loads of American citizens. It was more than just crazy talk that caused McVeigh to snap.


----------



## Truthmatters

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=41PShXcq-Fs]YouTube - Inside Anti-Obama Extremist Gun Culture[/ame]


----------



## Dante

Jarhead said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh Jeez.
> 
> I pity you Truthmatters. You are the ideal pawn in our world of left vs. right. Most of the intelligent people on the left refuse to look like idiots by saying these things, so they have pawns like you say it for them.
> 
> I really do pity you. You have no thoughts of your own. It is quite sad.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tom McVeigh murdered innocent Americans---men, women and children for god's sake, and you right wing nuts have the unmitigated gall to compare him to a violent student activist from way back in the sixties who murdered no one?
> 
> Belittling the horrific crimes of your fellow conservatives in order to try a comparative schtick and that shows just how bankrupt some people truly are.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hey Dante. Good to see ya friend. Please scroll back a few and see my stance on this before you dam me to hell
> 
> I made it quite clear that I do not see the WU as killers. I saw them as frustrated government protesterts who were sick and tired of government not litening to them and mocking them so they were forced to make louder noises.
> 
> And then I questioned why the governemtn fdid not learn from that as they are once again minimizing the tea partyers and mocking them.
> 
> And sadly, many of those 60's protesters that were frustrated are now in this administration; yet they are doing to the tea partyers what government did to them.
> 
> You find that interesting?
Click to expand...


I did see that.

But where do you get the info that "many of those 60's protesters that were frustrated are now in this administration?"  and why would there be anything wrong with that if true? You're talking about people as kids...student activists during a time of a very unpopular war, with the draft....many of the activists became libertarian Yuppies. 


Most people change, they mature. This does not mean they can't be leftists, but holding the acts of kids against them as adults ...President W, Bush was a drug addicts and a drunk and his wife killed a young man. See how that works?


Ayers was not a mass murderer. 

many of those 60's protesters that were frustrated are now in this administration google is my friend.


----------



## California Girl

hboats said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Limbaugh Flashback: In 1995, Rush predicted "second violent American revolution" | Media Matters for America
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, you got one link from Media Matters?  That's it?  Media Matters?  Let me guess, that is the only "news" you read?  It shows.  You're a blathering idiot Truthmatters.  You really do need to do some of your own thinking once in a while and stop letting Media Matters do it for you.
> 
> Rick
Click to expand...


You expected some actual proof? That ain't gonna happen. Truthmatters gets her 'truth' from Media Matters. 

Everybody Chant: There is no truth but Media Matters. There is no truth but Media Matters. There is no truth but Media Matters.


----------



## hboats

Truthmatters said:


> YouTube - Inside Anti-Obama Extremist Gun Culture



WOW, you truly can't help showing how utterly stupid you can be, can you?

What exactly does the above link have to do with 





Truthmatters said:


> The right wing noise machine in Clintons time was talking all sorts of crazy assed shit.



I'll give you a little help here, your above link was in what, 2009, 2010?

Clinton and the OKC bombing was in 1995.

Nice try though, I'm sure you're really not this stupid, it must be hard though to try so hard to look like it.

Rick


----------



## LilOlLady

Skull Pilot said:


> The difference is that McVeigh was a much better demolitions technician.
> 
> That's the only difference.



Ayers was protesting the Vietnam war and the killing, and he never killed anyone, except one of his own. There is a big difference. McVeith indended to kill. Much better killer too?


----------



## Jarhead

Dante said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tom McVeigh murdered innocent Americans---men, women and children for god's sake, and you right wing nuts have the unmitigated gall to compare him to a violent student activist from way back in the sixties who murdered no one?
> 
> Belittling the horrific crimes of your fellow conservatives in order to try a comparative schtick and that shows just how bankrupt some people truly are.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hey Dante. Good to see ya friend. Please scroll back a few and see my stance on this before you dam me to hell
> 
> I made it quite clear that I do not see the WU as killers. I saw them as frustrated government protesterts who were sick and tired of government not litening to them and mocking them so they were forced to make louder noises.
> 
> And then I questioned why the governemtn fdid not learn from that as they are once again minimizing the tea partyers and mocking them.
> 
> And sadly, many of those 60's protesters that were frustrated are now in this administration; yet they are doing to the tea partyers what government did to them.
> 
> You find that interesting?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I did see that.
> 
> But where do you get the info that "many of those 60's protesters that were frustrated are now in this administration?"  and why would there be anything wrong with that if true? You're talking about people as kids...student activists during a time of a very unpopular war, with the draft....many of the activists became libertarian Yuppies.
> 
> 
> Most people change, they mature. This does not mean they can't be leftists, but holding the acts of kids against them as adults ...President W, Bush was a drug addicts and a drunk and his wife killed a young man. See how that works?
> 
> 
> Ayers was not a mass murderer.
> 
> many of those 60's protesters that were frustrated are now in this administration google is my friend.
Click to expand...


Jeez. This board is getting old for me. The lack of communication is frustrating.

I did not say there was anything wrong with it. I did not criticize them for being part of the anti war movement of the 60's. There was nothing wrong with it whatsoever. It was America at work. Nothing wrong with Sheeehan, nothing wrong with Tea Party. That is America. And it works.

What I commented on was that many in this administration and congress were hippies in the 60's. Nothing wrong with it. But they saw how frustrating it was for the protesters back then when governemnt ignored them and minimized their statements. They saw how it lead to more violent tactics.

So why are they doing the same thing to the tea partyers?

That was all I was saying Dante.

I dont know. Seems yuou like to pick apart what I say in an effort to make me some right wing lunatic.

Fine. I am a right wing lunatic. Obama is not a citizen, he is a marxist, he is the opffspring of an alien and he is directly related to hitler.
Nancy Pelosi was caught doing Monca Lewinsky and I cant find the link.
Harry Reid is a transvestite. Well, that wasnt fair to say. It was insulting to transvestites.

There. Now have your fun with me Dante. I am giving up.


----------



## rdean

Truthmatters said:


> YouTube - Inside Anti-Obama Extremist Gun Culture



Last year, Obama signed into law, "Expanded Gun Rights".  Could Tea Baggers be any more stupid?  He arms them to fight them?  Is that his "master plan"?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/law-a...ns-and-taxes-and-health-care.html#post2232676


----------



## KissMy

Truthmatters said:


> The right wing noise machine in Clintons time was talking all sorts of crazy assed shit.



The tyrannical government actually did kill loads of American citizens. It was more than just crazy talk that caused McVeigh to snap.

Following the conclusion of the trial of Randy Weaver and Kevin Harris in 1993, the Department of Justice (DOJ) created a "Ruby Ridge Task Force" to investigate allegations made by Weaver's defense attorney Gerry Spence. On June 10, 1994, the Task Force delivered its 542-page report to the DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility. The Report stated: With regard to the shots fired on August 22, concluded that the shots did not satisfy the standard of "objective reasonableness" the Constitution requires for the legal use of deadly force.

The surviving members of the Weaver family received $3.1M in 1995 to settle their civil suit brought against the U.S. government for wrongful deaths of Sammy and Vicki Weaver. In the out-of-court settlement, the government did not admit any wrong-doing. Harris received $380,000 from the government.


----------



## Jarhead

hboats said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> YouTube - Inside Anti-Obama Extremist Gun Culture
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WOW, you truly can't help showing how utterly stupid you can be, can you?
> 
> What exactly does the above link have to do with
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> The right wing noise machine in Clintons time was talking all sorts of crazy assed shit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'll give you a little help here, your above link was in what, 2009, 2010?
> 
> Clinton and the OKC bombing was in 1995.
> 
> Nice try though, I'm sure you're really not this stupid, it must be hard though to try so hard to look like it.
> 
> Rick
Click to expand...


LMAO. I told you not to hold your breath.


----------



## Truthmatters

Who was president when Ruby ridge happened?


----------



## rdean

Jarhead said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hey Dante. Good to see ya friend. Please scroll back a few and see my stance on this before you dam me to hell
> 
> I made it quite clear that I do not see the WU as killers. I saw them as frustrated government protesterts who were sick and tired of government not litening to them and mocking them so they were forced to make louder noises.
> 
> And then I questioned why the governemtn fdid not learn from that as they are once again minimizing the tea partyers and mocking them.
> 
> And sadly, many of those 60's protesters that were frustrated are now in this administration; yet they are doing to the tea partyers what government did to them.
> 
> You find that interesting?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I did see that.
> 
> But where do you get the info that "many of those 60's protesters that were frustrated are now in this administration?"  and why would there be anything wrong with that if true? You're talking about people as kids...student activists during a time of a very unpopular war, with the draft....many of the activists became libertarian Yuppies.
> 
> 
> Most people change, they mature. This does not mean they can't be leftists, but holding the acts of kids against them as adults ...President W, Bush was a drug addicts and a drunk and his wife killed a young man. See how that works?
> 
> 
> Ayers was not a mass murderer.
> 
> many of those 60's protesters that were frustrated are now in this administration google is my friend.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jeez. This board is getting old for me. The lack of communication is frustrating.
> 
> I did not say there was anything wrong with it. I did not criticize them for being part of the anti war movement of the 60's. There was nothing wrong with it whatsoever. It was America at work. Nothing wrong with Sheeehan, nothing wrong with Tea Party. That is America. And it works.
> 
> What I commented on was that many in this administration and congress were hippies in the 60's. Nothing wrong with it. But they saw how frustrating it was for the protesters back then when governemnt ignored them and minimized their statements. They saw how it lead to more violent tactics.
> 
> So why are they doing the same thing to the tea partyers?
> 
> That was all I was saying Dante.
> 
> I dont know. Seems yuou like to pick apart what I say in an effort to make me some right wing lunatic.
> 
> Fine. I am a right wing lunatic. Obama is not a citizen, he is a marxist, he is the opffspring of an alien and he is directly related to hitler.
> Nancy Pelosi was caught doing Monca Lewinsky and I cant find the link.
> Harry Reid is a transvestite. Well, that wasnt fair to say. It was insulting to transvestites.
> 
> There. Now have your fun with me Dante. I am giving up.
Click to expand...


Because Tea Baggers are threatening murder.  And secession.  They don't know that Obama expanded their gun rights and cut their taxes.  Because they hate him so much, they won't listen.  It's all about race.  No one hates to that level where they absolutely refuse to listen to the truth unless there is something else going on.  And the lies are so outrageous and over the top.


----------



## Truthmatters

Ruby Ridge - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bush 41 was president when RR happened




http://www.nytimes.com/1995/07/05/u...report-bomb-suspect-felt-home-riding-gun.html


"It's not a conspiracy so much as a network," the investigator said. "These people are in touch. There's now a national computer network. There are lists of trusted members, safe houses, places where a fugitive would have a sympathetic ear. We know this from previous cases. 

"The gun-show circuit is part of this network," he added, echoing an observation made by several other law-enforcement officials. "When they want a message delivered across the country, they could relay it along, all by word of mouth so there's no trace. We can't even work the gun shows anymore, because these people are so suspicious."


----------



## Jarhead

rdean said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> I did see that.
> 
> But where do you get the info that "many of those 60's protesters that were frustrated are now in this administration?"  and why would there be anything wrong with that if true? You're talking about people as kids...student activists during a time of a very unpopular war, with the draft....many of the activists became libertarian Yuppies.
> 
> 
> Most people change, they mature. This does not mean they can't be leftists, but holding the acts of kids against them as adults ...President W, Bush was a drug addicts and a drunk and his wife killed a young man. See how that works?
> 
> 
> Ayers was not a mass murderer.
> 
> many of those 60's protesters that were frustrated are now in this administration google is my friend.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jeez. This board is getting old for me. The lack of communication is frustrating.
> 
> I did not say there was anything wrong with it. I did not criticize them for being part of the anti war movement of the 60's. There was nothing wrong with it whatsoever. It was America at work. Nothing wrong with Sheeehan, nothing wrong with Tea Party. That is America. And it works.
> 
> What I commented on was that many in this administration and congress were hippies in the 60's. Nothing wrong with it. But they saw how frustrating it was for the protesters back then when governemnt ignored them and minimized their statements. They saw how it lead to more violent tactics.
> 
> So why are they doing the same thing to the tea partyers?
> 
> That was all I was saying Dante.
> 
> I dont know. Seems yuou like to pick apart what I say in an effort to make me some right wing lunatic.
> 
> Fine. I am a right wing lunatic. Obama is not a citizen, he is a marxist, he is the opffspring of an alien and he is directly related to hitler.
> Nancy Pelosi was caught doing Monca Lewinsky and I cant find the link.
> Harry Reid is a transvestite. Well, that wasnt fair to say. It was insulting to transvestites.
> 
> There. Now have your fun with me Dante. I am giving up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because Tea Baggers are threatening murder.  And secession.  They don't know that Obama expanded their gun rights and cut their taxes.  Because they hate him so much, they won't listen.  It's all about race.  No one hates to that level where they absolutely refuse to listen to the truth unless there is something else going on.  And the lies are so outrageous and over the top.
Click to expand...


I appreciate your opinion but it is only your opinion.
You did not state facts as it pertains to the Tea Partyers.
It is not all about race. There is no evidence that suggests this.
They are not threatening murder. There is no evidence that suggests this.

Now, in a group of hundreds of thosuands of people, are there a small minoruity that are racists and want to kill? 

Sure.

Take ANY group of hundreds of thousands of people and there will be a few that are racists and want to kill.

But overall, you stated your opinion as fact and if that works for you go for it.


----------



## Lonestar_logic

Truthmatters said:


> Who was president when Ruby ridge happened?



Who was president when Pearl harbor happened?

Who was president when the seige in Waco happened?

Who was the president when USS Cole Bombing happened? 

What the fuck does any of this have to do with anything?


----------



## Truthmatters

KissMy said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> The right wing noise machine in Clintons time was talking all sorts of crazy assed shit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The tyrannical Clinton actually did kill loads of American citizens. It was more than just crazy talk that caused McVeigh to snap.
> 
> Following the conclusion of the trial of Randy Weaver and Kevin Harris in 1993, the Department of Justice (DOJ) created a "Ruby Ridge Task Force" to investigate allegations made by Weaver's defense attorney Gerry Spence. On June 10, 1994, the Task Force delivered its 542-page report to the DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility. The Report stated: With regard to the shots fired on August 22, concluded that the shots did not satisfy the standard of "objective reasonableness" the Constitution requires for the legal use of deadly force.
> 
> The surviving members of the Weaver family received $3.1M in 1995 to settle their civil suit brought against the U.S. government for wrongful deaths of Sammy and Vicki Weaver. In the out-of-court settlement, the government did not admit any wrong-doing. Harris received $380,000 from the government.
Click to expand...


Bussh 41 was president when ruby ridge happened


----------



## Dante

Lonestar_logic said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who was president when Ruby ridge happened?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who was president when Pearl harbor happened?
> 
> Who was president when the seige in Waco happened?
> 
> Who was the president when USS Cole Bombing happened?
> 
> What the fuck does any of this have to do with anything?
Click to expand...

who sold arms to terrorists, and then lied to the faces of America...and who---who pulled a cut-n-run from Lebanon after causing the highest death toll of US Marines in a single day?  Ronald Reagan.


----------



## Jarhead

Dante said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who was president when Ruby ridge happened?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who was president when Pearl harbor happened?
> 
> Who was president when the seige in Waco happened?
> 
> Who was the president when USS Cole Bombing happened?
> 
> What the fuck does any of this have to do with anything?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> who sold arms to terrorists, and then lied to the faces of America...and who---who pulled a cut-n-run from Lebanon after causing the highest death toll of US Marines in a single day?  Ronald Reagan.
Click to expand...


And who was it that siad "you caufht bin Laden? Nah. We dont want him, you can let him go"


And anyway, who the hell cares about this stuff


----------



## Truthmatters

Did you read my post about gun shows and mcVeigh?


----------



## Jarhead

I gotta say this:

You folks are doing exactly what both parties want you to do for them. Blastr the other party. GOP supporters see no fault in any of the GOP. DEM suppoorters see no wrong in anything the DEMS do.

Both parties are playing you guys like the tools they see you as.

Wake up and smell the coffee. Both parties are all about the party and not about the people. They only use the people for their own agendae. When are you all going to wake up and realize it?


----------



## Truthmatters

Jarhead said:


> hboats said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> YouTube - Inside Anti-Obama Extremist Gun Culture
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WOW, you truly can't help showing how utterly stupid you can be, can you?
> 
> What exactly does the above link have to do with
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> The right wing noise machine in Clintons time was talking all sorts of crazy assed shit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'll give you a little help here, your above link was in what, 2009, 2010?
> 
> Clinton and the OKC bombing was in 1995.
> 
> Nice try though, I'm sure you're really not this stupid, it must be hard though to try so hard to look like it.
> 
> Rick
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> LMAO. I told you not to hold your breath.
Click to expand...


I answered and you ignored


----------



## chanel

Truthmatters said:


> That is why you state it that way.
> 
> So that people think it was his presidential campaign.
> 
> 
> The only reason Obama knows Ayers  AT ALL is Ayers helps the poor of chi town big time.
> 
> They are NOT friends or confidants like  the right wing noise machines always claims.



Oh yes.  Yes they were.


----------



## hboats

Truthmatters said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hboats said:
> 
> 
> 
> WOW, you truly can't help showing how utterly stupid you can be, can you?
> 
> What exactly does the above link have to do with
> 
> I'll give you a little help here, your above link was in what, 2009, 2010?
> 
> Clinton and the OKC bombing was in 1995.
> 
> Nice try though, I'm sure you're really not this stupid, it must be hard though to try so hard to look like it.
> 
> Rick
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LMAO. I told you not to hold your breath.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I answered and you ignored
Click to expand...


I take it back, you really are this stupid.  You didn't answer jack shit.

Rick


----------



## del

Truthmatters said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hboats said:
> 
> 
> 
> WOW, you truly can't help showing how utterly stupid you can be, can you?
> 
> What exactly does the above link have to do with
> 
> I'll give you a little help here, your above link was in what, 2009, 2010?
> 
> Clinton and the OKC bombing was in 1995.
> 
> Nice try though, I'm sure you're really not this stupid, it must be hard though to try so hard to look like it.
> 
> Rick
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LMAO. I told you not to hold your breath.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I answered and you ignored
Click to expand...


you should be used to it


----------



## California Girl

Jarhead said:


> I gotta say this:
> 
> You folks are doing exactly what both parties want you to do for them. Blastr the other party. GOP supporters see no fault in any of the GOP. DEM suppoorters see no wrong in anything the DEMS do.
> 
> Both parties are playing you guys like the tools they see you as.
> 
> Wake up and smell the coffee. Both parties are all about the party and not about the people. They only use the people for their own agendae. When are you all going to wake up and realize it?





Both sides are shit.


----------



## KissMy

Jarhead said:


> I gotta say this:
> 
> You folks are doing exactly what both parties want you to do for them. Blastr the other party. GOP supporters see no fault in any of the GOP. DEM suppoorters see no wrong in anything the DEMS do.
> 
> Both parties are playing you guys like the tools they see you as.
> 
> Wake up and smell the coffee. Both parties are all about the party and not about the people. They only use the people for their own agendae. When are you all going to wake up and realize it?



That is why I am with the TEA Party & voted for Ross Perot.

Lon Tomohisa Horiuchi who worked for Republican & Democrat admins was never sent to prison even though the government was found to be at fault for shots he fired. He was involved in controversial deployments during the 1992 Ruby Ridge standoff and 1993 Waco Siege. In 1997 Horiuchi was charged with manslaughter for the death of Vicki Weaver at Ruby Ridge; the case was dismissed.


----------



## Jarhead

Charlie Rangel is still a congressman.
Enough said on the topic of who the parties are REALLY for.


----------



## Dante

Jarhead said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who was president when Pearl harbor happened?
> 
> Who was president when the seige in Waco happened?
> 
> Who was the president when USS Cole Bombing happened?
> 
> What the fuck does any of this have to do with anything?
> 
> 
> 
> who sold arms to terrorists, and then lied to the faces of America...and who---who pulled a cut-n-run from Lebanon after causing the highest death toll of US Marines in a single day?  Ronald Reagan.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And who was it that siad "you caufht bin Laden? Nah. We dont want him, you can let him go"
> 
> 
> And anyway, who the hell cares about this stuff
Click to expand...


this stuff is a reply to conservatives who live in a fantasy world where liberals are weak on defense and conservatives are tough on defense. when it comes to actions...

many a liberal war hero


----------



## Truthmatters

Truthmatters said:


> Ruby Ridge - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Bush 41 was president when RR happened
> 
> 
> 
> 
> THE GUN NETWORK - McVeigh's World -- A special report. - Bomb Suspect Felt at Home Riding the Gun-Show Circuit - Biography; Special Report - NYTimes.com
> 
> 
> "It's not a conspiracy so much as a network," the investigator said. "These people are in touch. There's now a national computer network. There are lists of trusted members, safe houses, places where a fugitive would have a sympathetic ear. We know this from previous cases.
> 
> "The gun-show circuit is part of this network," he added, echoing an observation made by several other law-enforcement officials. "When they want a message delivered across the country, they could relay it along, all by word of mouth so there's no trace. We can't even work the gun shows anymore, because these people are so suspicious."



here you go


----------



## Dante

California Girl said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> I gotta say this:
> 
> You folks are doing exactly what both parties want you to do for them. Blastr the other party. GOP supporters see no fault in any of the GOP. DEM suppoorters see no wrong in anything the DEMS do.
> 
> Both parties are playing you guys like the tools they see you as.
> 
> Wake up and smell the coffee. Both parties are all about the party and not about the people. They only use the people for their own agendae. When are you all going to wake up and realize it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Both sides are shit.
Click to expand...


you have lots of nerve applauding what you disdain


----------



## Jarhead

Truthmatters said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hboats said:
> 
> 
> 
> WOW, you truly can't help showing how utterly stupid you can be, can you?
> 
> What exactly does the above link have to do with
> 
> I'll give you a little help here, your above link was in what, 2009, 2010?
> 
> Clinton and the OKC bombing was in 1995.
> 
> Nice try though, I'm sure you're really not this stupid, it must be hard though to try so hard to look like it.
> 
> Rick
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LMAO. I told you not to hold your breath.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I answered and you ignored
Click to expand...


Question: What is the theory of limits?
Answer: Coca Cola

That is a question that was answered but not answered.

Sort of what you do Truthmatters.


----------



## Jarhead

Truthmatters said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ruby Ridge - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Bush 41 was president when RR happened
> 
> 
> 
> 
> THE GUN NETWORK - McVeigh's World -- A special report. - Bomb Suspect Felt at Home Riding the Gun-Show Circuit - Biography; Special Report - NYTimes.com
> 
> 
> "It's not a conspiracy so much as a network," the investigator said. "These people are in touch. There's now a national computer network. There are lists of trusted members, safe houses, places where a fugitive would have a sympathetic ear. We know this from previous cases.
> 
> "The gun-show circuit is part of this network," he added, echoing an observation made by several other law-enforcement officials. "When they want a message delivered across the country, they could relay it along, all by word of mouth so there's no trace. We can't even work the gun shows anymore, because these people are so suspicious."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> here you go
Click to expand...


The man had a love for arms. But no indication that he had a love for the right wing; or that the right wing thinks as he did.

You are misguided. Horribly misguided. Dangerously misguided.


----------



## Truthmatters

Jarhead said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> LMAO. I told you not to hold your breath.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I answered and you ignored
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Question: What is the theory of limits?
> Answer: Coca Cola
> 
> That is a question that was answered but not answered.
> 
> Sort of what you do Truthmatters.
Click to expand...


No I gave you an article about the investigation into the gun shows that McVeigh was a part of.

Why do you refuse to accept the information given?


----------



## del

Truthmatters said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> I answered and you ignored
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Question: What is the theory of limits?
> Answer: Coca Cola
> 
> That is a question that was answered but not answered.
> 
> Sort of what you do Truthmatters.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No I gave you an article about the investigation into the gun shows that McVeigh was a part of.
> 
> Why do you refuse to accept the information given?
Click to expand...


why are you dumber than a box of hammers?


----------



## Truthmatters

Jarhead said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ruby Ridge - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Bush 41 was president when RR happened
> 
> 
> 
> 
> THE GUN NETWORK - McVeigh's World -- A special report. - Bomb Suspect Felt at Home Riding the Gun-Show Circuit - Biography; Special Report - NYTimes.com
> 
> 
> "It's not a conspiracy so much as a network," the investigator said. "These people are in touch. There's now a national computer network. There are lists of trusted members, safe houses, places where a fugitive would have a sympathetic ear. We know this from previous cases.
> 
> "The gun-show circuit is part of this network," he added, echoing an observation made by several other law-enforcement officials. "When they want a message delivered across the country, they could relay it along, all by word of mouth so there's no trace. We can't even work the gun shows anymore, because these people are so suspicious."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> here you go
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The man had a love for arms. But no indication that he had a love for the right wing; or that the right wing thinks as he did.
> 
> You are misguided. Horribly misguided. Dangerously misguided.
Click to expand...


Every investigation found he was right wing in his beliefs.


----------



## Jarhead

Truthmatters said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> I answered and you ignored
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Question: What is the theory of limits?
> Answer: Coca Cola
> 
> That is a question that was answered but not answered.
> 
> Sort of what you do Truthmatters.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No I gave you an article about the investigation into the gun shows that McVeigh was a part of.
> 
> Why do you refuse to accept the information given?
Click to expand...


Becuase unlike you I do not assume that just because one person in a stadium throws beer on the people below means that all those in the stadium would likely do the same.

Charlie Rangel has ethics issues. So should I assume all democrats have ethics issues? SHould I assume all NYers have ethics issues? Heck, should I assume all congresspeople have ethics issues? Better yet, should I assume all those named Charlie have ethics issues?

THAT is why I say you are dangerously misguided.


----------



## Jarhead

Truthmatters said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> here you go
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The man had a love for arms. But no indication that he had a love for the right wing; or that the right wing thinks as he did.
> 
> You are misguided. Horribly misguided. Dangerously misguided.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Every investigation found he was right wing in his beliefs.
Click to expand...


And what does that say?
Where are you going with it?
So becuase of one lunatic with right wing beliefs then all right wingers are lunatics?

So how about the guy that killed the pro life protester?

SO I guess it is safe to assume all pro lifers are murderes by nature?

Like I said, you are dangerously misguided. I feel for you.


----------



## Truthmatters

why are you pretending it meanss nothing after we have been discussing his motivations for days now?

You know he was right wing and you denied it a momment ago, now you pretend it doesnt matter?

Its the whole subject of this thread.


----------



## Truthmatters

Jarhead said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> Question: What is the theory of limits?
> Answer: Coca Cola
> 
> That is a question that was answered but not answered.
> 
> Sort of what you do Truthmatters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No I gave you an article about the investigation into the gun shows that McVeigh was a part of.
> 
> Why do you refuse to accept the information given?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Becuase unlike you I do not assume that just because one person in a stadium throws beer on the people below means that all those in the stadium would likely do the same.
> 
> Charlie Rangel has ethics issues. So should I assume all democrats have ethics issues? SHould I assume all NYers have ethics issues? Heck, should I assume all congresspeople have ethics issues? Better yet, should I assume all those named Charlie have ethics issues?
> 
> THAT is why I say you are dangerously misguided.
Click to expand...


Straw man!

Go get my post where I say all tea party people are mcVeighs?


I am and have been saying for MONTHS that if the right does not refrain from the violence inciting we will have another Murrah building.

Do you remember the nut bags who they took imnto custody just a few weeks ago who wanted to kill cops to start the war?


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

Here's about all ya need to know about who and what Bill Ayers was and IS!  McVeigh was no different...

weather underground


----------



## hboats

Truthmatters said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> here you go
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The man had a love for arms. But no indication that he had a love for the right wing; or that the right wing thinks as he did.
> 
> You are misguided. Horribly misguided. Dangerously misguided.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Every investigation found he was right wing in his beliefs.
Click to expand...


Please link for us "every investigation" that you are using to form your misguided opinion.  Thanks in advance.

Rick


----------



## California Girl

Jarhead said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> Question: What is the theory of limits?
> Answer: Coca Cola
> 
> That is a question that was answered but not answered.
> 
> Sort of what you do Truthmatters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No I gave you an article about the investigation into the gun shows that McVeigh was a part of.
> 
> Why do you refuse to accept the information given?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Becuase unlike you I do not assume that just because one person in a stadium throws beer on the people below means that all those in the stadium would likely do the same.
> 
> Charlie Rangel has ethics issues. So should I assume all democrats have ethics issues? SHould I assume all NYers have ethics issues? Heck, should I assume all congresspeople have ethics issues? Better yet, should I assume all those named Charlie have ethics issues?
> 
> THAT is why I say you are dangerously misguided.
Click to expand...


Truthmatters has a habit of providing 'truth' in the form of 'articles' from Media Matters. I think she views it as some bastion of truth instead of an agenda driven media organization. 

*Launched in May 2004, Media Matters for America put in place, for the first time, the means to systematically monitor a cross section of print, broadcast, cable, radio, and Internet media outlets for conservative misinformation  news or commentary that is not accurate, reliable, or credible and that forwards the conservative agenda  every day, in real time*

About Us | Media Matters for America

They are an agenda driven organization. She does not balance their information by seeking the alternative view and seeking facts. She is fed her 'facts' and her 'truth' from a left wing media outlet. 'nuff said.


----------



## Dante

Jarhead said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ruby Ridge - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Bush 41 was president when RR happened
> 
> 
> 
> 
> THE GUN NETWORK - McVeigh's World -- A special report. - Bomb Suspect Felt at Home Riding the Gun-Show Circuit - Biography; Special Report - NYTimes.com
> 
> 
> "It's not a conspiracy so much as a network," the investigator said. "These people are in touch. There's now a national computer network. There are lists of trusted members, safe houses, places where a fugitive would have a sympathetic ear. We know this from previous cases.
> 
> "The gun-show circuit is part of this network," he added, echoing an observation made by several other law-enforcement officials. "When they want a message delivered across the country, they could relay it along, all by word of mouth so there's no trace. We can't even work the gun shows anymore, because these people are so suspicious."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> here you go
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The man had a love for arms. But no indication that he had a love for the right wing; or that the right wing thinks as he did.
> 
> You are misguided. Horribly misguided. Dangerously misguided.
Click to expand...


He was a bit more violent than many of his peers, but other than that---they thought exactly like he did. The militias, the conservative Christians.

like Ayers, McVeigh's views were in line with his peers. Ayers and the WU were disowned by many student activists. McVeigh was later disowned by the groups he hung around. 

In neither case did all the people doing the disowning take a cold hard look at what their beliefs would lead to. Some did. Many many did, but that only proves those beliefs were bankrupt.


----------



## Jarhead

Truthmatters said:


> why are you pretending it meanss nothing after we have been discussing his motivations for days now?
> 
> You know he was right wing and you denied it a momment ago, now you pretend it doesnt matter?
> 
> Its the whole subject of this thread.



You lost me truthmatters. Maybe I lost you.
Whatever. I never comapred Mcveigh to Ayers. 
I dont know where the heck you are coming from and to be frank, I really dont care.
Go play your little game with someone else.
Only one person on thios board got me to lose my cool and that was Dr Gregg.
I will not let it happen to me again.
So long truthmatters. I take it you see this as a victory for you. Good. Have it and enjoy it.


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

Here's about all ya need to know about who and what Bill Ayers was and IS! McVeigh was no different...

weather underground


----------



## Truthmatters

Media matters uses clips of what people say.

how can you trash a site that provides proof of the people actaully sayinbg what they claim they said?

Because your a hack


----------



## Dante

hboats said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> The man had a love for arms. But no indication that he had a love for the right wing; or that the right wing thinks as he did.
> 
> You are misguided. Horribly misguided. Dangerously misguided.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Every investigation found he was right wing in his beliefs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Please link for us "every investigation" that you are using to form your misguided opinion.  Thanks in advance.
> 
> Rick
Click to expand...


The militias McVeigh hung out with were right wing.

McVeigh did not act alone.

McVeigh was a right wing terrorist who scared other right wingers when he only followed their beliefs and words to it's logical conclusion.


----------



## Truthmatters

Jarhead said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> why are you pretending it meanss nothing after we have been discussing his motivations for days now?
> 
> You know he was right wing and you denied it a momment ago, now you pretend it doesnt matter?
> 
> Its the whole subject of this thread.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You lost me truthmatters. Maybe I lost you.
> Whatever. I never comapred Mcveigh to Ayers.
> I dont know where the heck you are coming from and to be frank, I really dont care.
> Go play your little game with someone else.
> Only one person on thios board got me to lose my cool and that was Dr Gregg.
> I will not let it happen to me again.
> So long truthmatters. I take it you see this as a victory for you. Good. Have it and enjoy it.
Click to expand...


Its the title of the thread dude


----------



## hboats

Truthmatters said:


> Media matters uses clips of what people say.
> 
> how can you trash a site that provides proof of the people actaully sayinbg what they claim they said?
> 
> Because your a hack



You really have no idea how much of a fool you are, do you?  Media Matters is a joke and you are falling hook line and sinker for it.

Rick


----------



## bucs90

California Girl said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> Rather than guessing, why don't you just consider the outcomes. McVeigh was executed and no one defended his actions.
> 
> *Ayers is celebrated... by the left. *
> 
> I'd be careful making assumptions if I were you... because you're 'guessing', *and I'm stating facts*. Fact: Bill Ayers in not just supported by the left, he is celebrated by them. They treat him as a 'hero'... I defy you to find any evidence to suggest that mainstream right wingers treat McVeigh as anything other than a mass murderer.
> 
> 
> 
> No he isn't.
> 
> No you aren't. You're lying.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, I'm not lying. He's a popular guy in left wing circles. He's a cause celebre with left wingers. He's a hero to a lot of left wing organizations. Or, at least, during the previous Administration he certainly was.
Click to expand...


You are correct. Ayers is also hired by many left wing college departments to "teach", such as University of Chicago, where he and Obama were pals. And, if Ayers was not admired, why did the Chicago Mafia, er, I mean, the Chicago area politicians select Ayer's home as a place to announce Barack Obama's Senate appointment? Fact is, as you are correct, in 2008 the left strongly defended Bill Ayers, and Obama has been an Ayers allie for quite some time.


----------



## Truthmatters

hboats said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Media matters uses clips of what people say.
> 
> how can you trash a site that provides proof of the people actaully sayinbg what they claim they said?
> 
> Because your a hack
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You really have no idea how much of a fool you are, do you?  Media Matters is a joke and you are falling hook line and sinker for it.
> 
> Rick
Click to expand...


It is ONLY a joke to right wing hacks

They give documentation for everything they say


----------



## Jarhead

Dante said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> here you go
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The man had a love for arms. But no indication that he had a love for the right wing; or that the right wing thinks as he did.
> 
> You are misguided. Horribly misguided. Dangerously misguided.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He was a bit more violent than many of his peers, but other than that---they thought exactly like he did. The militias, the conservative Christians.
> 
> like Ayers, McVeigh's views were in line with his peers. Ayers and the WU were disowned by many student activists. McVeigh was later disowned by the groups he hung around.
> 
> In neither case did all the people doing the disowning take a cold hard look at what their beliefs would lead to. Some did. Many many did, but that only proves those beliefs were bankrupt.
Click to expand...


I am a conservative. A right wing believer if you prefer. I dont have any feelings like McVeigh. None of my conservative friends do either. Most of us simply want to be left alone to live our lives.

Dante, I fear you have no idea how a true conservative thinks, acts and believes.

McVeigh was not a conservative in any way shape of form. A conservative does not believe that his or her actions should affect the way others live OR DIE.

A conservative does not levy his belief system on others. He or she lets others live any way they wish. That is consertvatism.

That is why I always say:

A liberal has great intentions and wants what is good for his fellow man but wants all to live the way he beleives they should live.

A conservative also has good intentions and wishes for the best for his fellow man but in no way does he insist that others believe as he does.

And no. That is not what many who claim to be conservative feel. It is what a trrue conservative feels.


----------



## bucs90

Well, I think my thread was a success. To point out the MASSIVE hypocrisy going on in the left right now concerning McVeigh and their attempts to link him with the Tea Party when compared to the CONFIRMED link of Obama and the left to a man whose intenet was equal to McVeighs, and only differ in that McVeigh committed one act resulting in massive horror, while Ayers committed multiple acts of similar intent  but lacked the training or tools to really do mass damage.

Our president is voluntarily friends with one of these monsters. Yet the left only pays attention to the one who is currently dead.


----------



## Truthmatters

Jarhead said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> The man had a love for arms. But no indication that he had a love for the right wing; or that the right wing thinks as he did.
> 
> You are misguided. Horribly misguided. Dangerously misguided.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He was a bit more violent than many of his peers, but other than that---they thought exactly like he did. The militias, the conservative Christians.
> 
> like Ayers, McVeigh's views were in line with his peers. Ayers and the WU were disowned by many student activists. McVeigh was later disowned by the groups he hung around.
> 
> In neither case did all the people doing the disowning take a cold hard look at what their beliefs would lead to. Some did. Many many did, but that only proves those beliefs were bankrupt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am a conservative. A right wing believer if you prefer. I dont have any feelings like McVeigh. None of my conservative friends do either. Most of us simply want to be left alone to live our lives.
> 
> Dante, I fear you have no idea how a true conservative thinks, acts and believes.
> 
> McVeigh was not a conservative in any way shape of form. A conservative does not believe that his or her actions should affect the way others live OR DIE.
> 
> A conservative does not levy his belief system on others. He or she lets others live any way they wish. That is consertvatism.
> 
> That is why I always say:
> 
> A liberal has great intentions and wants what is good for his fellow man but wants all to live the way he beleives they should live.
> 
> A conservative also has good intentions and wishes for the best for his fellow man but in no way does he insist that others believe as he does.
> 
> And no. That is not what many who claim to be conservative feel. It is what a trrue conservative feels.
Click to expand...


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Abortion

family values crap 

Gay Marriage

Shiavo 


The cons are always telling people how to live


----------



## Truthmatters

bucs90 said:


> Well, I think my thread was a success. To point out the MASSIVE hypocrisy going on in the left right now concerning McVeigh and their attempts to link him with the Tea Party when compared to the CONFIRMED link of Obama and the left to a man whose intenet was equal to McVeighs, and only differ in that McVeigh committed one act resulting in massive horror, while Ayers committed multiple acts of similar intent  but lacked the training or tools to really do mass damage.
> 
> Our president is voluntarily friends with one of these monsters. Yet the left only pays attention to the one who is currently dead.



man are you blind


----------



## Dante

> * We were very careful from the moment of the townhouse on to be sure we weren't going to hurt anybody, and we never did hurt anybody.*
> 
> Whenever we put a bomb in a public space, we had figured out all kinds of ways to put checks and balances on the thing and also to get people away from it, and we were remarkably successful.
> &#8212; Bill Ayers 2003
> 
> [6]Weather Underground (organization) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


  hmmm...

The difference


----------



## bucs90

Jarhead said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> The man had a love for arms. But no indication that he had a love for the right wing; or that the right wing thinks as he did.
> 
> You are misguided. Horribly misguided. Dangerously misguided.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He was a bit more violent than many of his peers, but other than that---they thought exactly like he did. The militias, the conservative Christians.
> 
> like Ayers, McVeigh's views were in line with his peers. Ayers and the WU were disowned by many student activists. McVeigh was later disowned by the groups he hung around.
> 
> In neither case did all the people doing the disowning take a cold hard look at what their beliefs would lead to. Some did. Many many did, but that only proves those beliefs were bankrupt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am a conservative. A right wing believer if you prefer. I dont have any feelings like McVeigh. None of my conservative friends do either. Most of us simply want to be left alone to live our lives.
> 
> Dante, I fear you have no idea how a true conservative thinks, acts and believes.
> 
> McVeigh was not a conservative in any way shape of form. A conservative does not believe that his or her actions should affect the way others live OR DIE.
> 
> A conservative does not levy his belief system on others. He or she lets others live any way they wish. That is consertvatism.
> 
> That is why I always say:
> 
> A liberal has great intentions and wants what is good for his fellow man but wants all to live the way he beleives they should live.
> 
> A conservative also has good intentions and wishes for the best for his fellow man but in no way does he insist that others believe as he does.
> 
> And no. That is not what many who claim to be conservative feel. It is what a trrue conservative feels.
Click to expand...




Very well said. Thats all true conservatives want. To be left alone, and no, we don't mind chipping in some small taxes to fund police, fire, ems, military, roads and to have a small social safety net. 

And we don't condone violence within our ranks, either. And to be fair, 99% of the left is peaceful yet opinionated, just like us. The only difference is I see those peaceful lefties often tolerating the presence of their radicals, while the peaceful right rarely does. McVeigh was a scumbag traitor. So was Ayers. So is anyone who does harm to innocent people in the name of their political beliefs. Hopefully, the left will begin to show no tolerance for the few violent radicals amongst them and both sides can root out anyone who would do evil in the name of their warped politics. Come'on lefties, join us!!!!


----------



## California Girl

Truthmatters said:


> hboats said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Media matters uses clips of what people say.
> 
> how can you trash a site that provides proof of the people actaully sayinbg what they claim they said?
> 
> Because your a hack
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You really have no idea how much of a fool you are, do you?  Media Matters is a joke and you are falling hook line and sinker for it.
> 
> Rick
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is ONLY a joke to right wing hacks
> 
> They give documentation for everything they say
Click to expand...


  You have no idea. Seriously. You're an embarrassment to the left. Even the liberals don't use Media Matters as a source.... it has an AGENDA... it has, time and again, misrepresented FACT in the interest of partisanship. You do exactly the same thing so no wonder you either don't see it or don't care. But.... some of us actually do value the truth.


----------



## Truthmatters

Tell me why there is no Right wing version of media matters?


----------



## Jarhead

Truthmatters said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> He was a bit more violent than many of his peers, but other than that---they thought exactly like he did. The militias, the conservative Christians.
> 
> like Ayers, McVeigh's views were in line with his peers. Ayers and the WU were disowned by many student activists. McVeigh was later disowned by the groups he hung around.
> 
> In neither case did all the people doing the disowning take a cold hard look at what their beliefs would lead to. Some did. Many many did, but that only proves those beliefs were bankrupt.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am a conservative. A right wing believer if you prefer. I dont have any feelings like McVeigh. None of my conservative friends do either. Most of us simply want to be left alone to live our lives.
> 
> Dante, I fear you have no idea how a true conservative thinks, acts and believes.
> 
> McVeigh was not a conservative in any way shape of form. A conservative does not believe that his or her actions should affect the way others live OR DIE.
> 
> A conservative does not levy his belief system on others. He or she lets others live any way they wish. That is consertvatism.
> 
> That is why I always say:
> 
> A liberal has great intentions and wants what is good for his fellow man but wants all to live the way he beleives they should live.
> 
> A conservative also has good intentions and wishes for the best for his fellow man but in no way does he insist that others believe as he does.
> 
> And no. That is not what many who claim to be conservative feel. It is what a trrue conservative feels.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
> 
> Abortion
> 
> family values crap
> 
> Gay Marriage
> 
> Shiavo
> 
> 
> The cons are always telling people how to live
Click to expand...


Abortion: I am against it but will always vote for pro choice. Chopice  is a true conservative value

Family Values: what goes on in your house is none of my business. 

Gay Marriage: I am noit part of the gay lifestyle and I do not try to understand it. Have a vote here in NY and I will vote yes for gay marriage. Live your life as you wish. This is America.

Shiavo: That was a family battle and none of our dam business.

So go to hell with your HAHAHAHA. You do not know what a conservative is. You use the word in anger and hate and you are clueless to what a conservative is.


----------



## Truthmatters

bucs90 said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> He was a bit more violent than many of his peers, but other than that---they thought exactly like he did. The militias, the conservative Christians.
> 
> like Ayers, McVeigh's views were in line with his peers. Ayers and the WU were disowned by many student activists. McVeigh was later disowned by the groups he hung around.
> 
> In neither case did all the people doing the disowning take a cold hard look at what their beliefs would lead to. Some did. Many many did, but that only proves those beliefs were bankrupt.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am a conservative. A right wing believer if you prefer. I dont have any feelings like McVeigh. None of my conservative friends do either. Most of us simply want to be left alone to live our lives.
> 
> Dante, I fear you have no idea how a true conservative thinks, acts and believes.
> 
> McVeigh was not a conservative in any way shape of form. A conservative does not believe that his or her actions should affect the way others live OR DIE.
> 
> A conservative does not levy his belief system on others. He or she lets others live any way they wish. That is consertvatism.
> 
> That is why I always say:
> 
> A liberal has great intentions and wants what is good for his fellow man but wants all to live the way he beleives they should live.
> 
> A conservative also has good intentions and wishes for the best for his fellow man but in no way does he insist that others believe as he does.
> 
> And no. That is not what many who claim to be conservative feel. It is what a trrue conservative feels.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Very well said. Thats all true conservatives want. To be left alone, and no, we don't mind chipping in some small taxes to fund police, fire, ems, military, roads and to have a small social safety net.
> 
> And we don't condone violence within our ranks, either. And to be fair, 99% of the left is peaceful yet opinionated, just like us. The only difference is I see those peaceful lefties often tolerating the presence of their radicals, while the peaceful right rarely does. McVeigh was a scumbag traitor. So was Ayers. So is anyone who does harm to innocent people in the name of their political beliefs. Hopefully, the left will begin to show no tolerance for the few violent radicals amongst them and both sides can root out anyone who would do evil in the name of their warped politics. Come'on lefties, join us!!!!
Click to expand...


That is all anyone has been asking of the right here.

Stop talking violence to the crazies


----------



## California Girl

Dante said:


> * We were very careful from the moment of the townhouse on to be sure we weren't going to hurt anybody, and we never did hurt anybody.*
> 
> Whenever we put a bomb in a public space, we had figured out all kinds of ways to put checks and balances on the thing and also to get people away from it, and we were remarkably successful.
>  Bill Ayers 2003
> 
> [6]Weather Underground (organization) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> hmmm...
> 
> The difference
Click to expand...


Yea, it's not like Billy boy had any agenda in misrepresenting what they did. It only took him until 2003 to come up with an alternative view of what they did. 

Even for you, this is stupid, and you have a PhD in Stupid.


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

Here's about all ya need to know about who and what Bill Ayers was and IS! McVeigh was no different...

weather underground


----------



## Dante

Jarhead said:


> I am a conservative. A right wing believer if you prefer. I dont have any feelings like McVeigh. None of my conservative friends do either. Most of us simply want to be left alone to live our lives.
> 
> Dante, I fear you have no idea how a true conservative thinks, acts and believes.
> 
> McVeigh was not a conservative in any way shape of form. A conservative does not believe that his or her actions should affect the way others live OR DIE.
> 
> A conservative does not levy his belief system on others. He or she lets others live any way they wish. That is consertvatism.
> 
> That is why I always say:
> 
> A liberal has great intentions and wants what is good for his fellow man but wants all to live the way he beleives they should live.
> 
> A conservative also has good intentions and wishes for the best for his fellow man but in no way does he insist that others believe as he does.
> 
> And no. That is not what many who claim to be conservative feel. It is what a trrue conservative feels.



Ideological purity and text book definitions will not suffice. The conservative movement in America may not fit your definition of conservative, but they are surely the poster children for what it means to be a conservative in America today. 

Your argument is not with me...it is with them. And right now it is the stated purpose of certain GOP members within the Tea Party movement to remake the GOP into what they see as a true conservative party. I doubt you will share their view either.


----------



## Truthmatters

Jarhead said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am a conservative. A right wing believer if you prefer. I dont have any feelings like McVeigh. None of my conservative friends do either. Most of us simply want to be left alone to live our lives.
> 
> Dante, I fear you have no idea how a true conservative thinks, acts and believes.
> 
> McVeigh was not a conservative in any way shape of form. A conservative does not believe that his or her actions should affect the way others live OR DIE.
> 
> A conservative does not levy his belief system on others. He or she lets others live any way they wish. That is consertvatism.
> 
> That is why I always say:
> 
> A liberal has great intentions and wants what is good for his fellow man but wants all to live the way he beleives they should live.
> 
> A conservative also has good intentions and wishes for the best for his fellow man but in no way does he insist that others believe as he does.
> 
> And no. That is not what many who claim to be conservative feel. It is what a trrue conservative feels.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
> 
> Abortion
> 
> family values crap
> 
> Gay Marriage
> 
> Shiavo
> 
> 
> The cons are always telling people how to live
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Abortion: I am against it but will always vote for pro choice. Chopice  is a true conservative value
> 
> Family Values: what goes on in your house is none of my business.
> 
> Gay Marriage: I am noit part of the gay lifestyle and I do not try to understand it. Have a vote here in NY and I will vote yes for gay marriage. Live your life as you wish. This is America.
> 
> Shiavo: That was a family battle and none of our dam business.
> 
> So go to hell with your HAHAHAHA. You do not know what a conservative is. You use the word in anger and hate and you are clueless to what a conservative is.
Click to expand...


Now go look at how both the tea part and the republican party stand on these issues.

You would not pass muster with either.

You would be defined as a libertarian


----------



## bucs90

Truthmatters said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> He was a bit more violent than many of his peers, but other than that---they thought exactly like he did. The militias, the conservative Christians.
> 
> like Ayers, McVeigh's views were in line with his peers. Ayers and the WU were disowned by many student activists. McVeigh was later disowned by the groups he hung around.
> 
> In neither case did all the people doing the disowning take a cold hard look at what their beliefs would lead to. Some did. Many many did, but that only proves those beliefs were bankrupt.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am a conservative. A right wing believer if you prefer. I dont have any feelings like McVeigh. None of my conservative friends do either. Most of us simply want to be left alone to live our lives.
> 
> Dante, I fear you have no idea how a true conservative thinks, acts and believes.
> 
> McVeigh was not a conservative in any way shape of form. A conservative does not believe that his or her actions should affect the way others live OR DIE.
> 
> A conservative does not levy his belief system on others. He or she lets others live any way they wish. That is consertvatism.
> 
> That is why I always say:
> 
> A liberal has great intentions and wants what is good for his fellow man but wants all to live the way he beleives they should live.
> 
> A conservative also has good intentions and wishes for the best for his fellow man but in no way does he insist that others believe as he does.
> 
> And no. That is not what many who claim to be conservative feel. It is what a trrue conservative feels.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
> 
> Abortion
> 
> family values crap
> 
> Gay Marriage
> 
> Shiavo
> 
> 
> The cons are always telling people how to live
Click to expand...


You mean by not killing babies, having morality, etc? 

Lets compare to the left:

You MUST purchase insurance or face jail
You WILL NOT eat sugar, salt or trans fats
Ban dog barking
Ban saggy pants
Ban profanity
Cap energy consumption
Force car companies to produce cars that have weaker engines
Ban plastic grocery bags
Ban certain types of firearms
Ban praying (except muslims)
Ban home schooling
Forced community zoning (aka ban certain businesses from existing)
Ban Christmas, Easter, Good Friday
Ban borders
Forced racial hiring bias through affirmative action


Shall I continue....or is the list above consisting of bans or mandates by liberal local, state or federal governments enough? Never bet against freedom.


----------



## Dante

bucs90 said:


> Well, I think my thread was a success. To point out the MASSIVE hypocrisy going on in the left right now concerning McVeigh and their attempts to link him with the Tea Party when compared to the CONFIRMED link of Obama and the left to a man whose intenet was equal to McVeighs, and only differ in that McVeigh committed one act resulting in massive horror, while Ayers committed multiple acts of similar intent  but lacked the training or tools to really do mass damage.
> 
> Our president is voluntarily friends with one of these monsters. Yet the left only pays attention to the one who is currently dead.



*nope. you stated there was no difference between these beliefs below (no proof Ayers planted any bombs)*

 We were very careful from the moment of the townhouse on to be sure we weren't going to hurt anybody, and we never did hurt anybody. Whenever we put a bomb in a public space, we had figured out all kinds of ways to put checks and balances on the thing and also to get people away from it, and we were remarkably successful.
     Bill Ayers 2003[6]

*and what Timothy McVeigh did. *


you belittled right wing terrorism in order to link a sixties radical student to President Obama.

like I said in another post, Ayers wasn't even on the radar until the right wing noise machine resurrected him from political oblivion.


----------



## Dante

Dante said:


> * We were very careful from the moment of the townhouse on to be sure we weren't going to hurt anybody, and we never did hurt anybody.*
> 
> Whenever we put a bomb in a public space, we had figured out all kinds of ways to put checks and balances on the thing and also to get people away from it, and we were remarkably successful.
>  Bill Ayers 2003
> 
> [6]Weather Underground (organization) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> hmmm...
> 
> The difference
Click to expand...


sigh


----------



## Jarhead

Truthmatters said:


> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am a conservative. A right wing believer if you prefer. I dont have any feelings like McVeigh. None of my conservative friends do either. Most of us simply want to be left alone to live our lives.
> 
> Dante, I fear you have no idea how a true conservative thinks, acts and believes.
> 
> McVeigh was not a conservative in any way shape of form. A conservative does not believe that his or her actions should affect the way others live OR DIE.
> 
> A conservative does not levy his belief system on others. He or she lets others live any way they wish. That is consertvatism.
> 
> That is why I always say:
> 
> A liberal has great intentions and wants what is good for his fellow man but wants all to live the way he beleives they should live.
> 
> A conservative also has good intentions and wishes for the best for his fellow man but in no way does he insist that others believe as he does.
> 
> And no. That is not what many who claim to be conservative feel. It is what a trrue conservative feels.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Very well said. Thats all true conservatives want. To be left alone, and no, we don't mind chipping in some small taxes to fund police, fire, ems, military, roads and to have a small social safety net.
> 
> And we don't condone violence within our ranks, either. And to be fair, 99% of the left is peaceful yet opinionated, just like us. The only difference is I see those peaceful lefties often tolerating the presence of their radicals, while the peaceful right rarely does. McVeigh was a scumbag traitor. So was Ayers. So is anyone who does harm to innocent people in the name of their political beliefs. Hopefully, the left will begin to show no tolerance for the few violent radicals amongst them and both sides can root out anyone who would do evil in the name of their warped politics. Come'on lefties, join us!!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is all anyone has been asking of the right here.
> 
> Stop talking violence to the crazies
Click to expand...


tell it to the media Truthmatters.

ten thousand folks and one uses the n WORD and the media makes it a federal case.

Ten thousand folks and one says "kill them" and the media makes it a big deal.

It is not us conservatives talking up the violence. It is the left and the media and one day you will see it.


----------



## bucs90

Truthmatters said:


> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am a conservative. A right wing believer if you prefer. I dont have any feelings like McVeigh. None of my conservative friends do either. Most of us simply want to be left alone to live our lives.
> 
> Dante, I fear you have no idea how a true conservative thinks, acts and believes.
> 
> McVeigh was not a conservative in any way shape of form. A conservative does not believe that his or her actions should affect the way others live OR DIE.
> 
> A conservative does not levy his belief system on others. He or she lets others live any way they wish. That is consertvatism.
> 
> That is why I always say:
> 
> A liberal has great intentions and wants what is good for his fellow man but wants all to live the way he beleives they should live.
> 
> A conservative also has good intentions and wishes for the best for his fellow man but in no way does he insist that others believe as he does.
> 
> And no. That is not what many who claim to be conservative feel. It is what a trrue conservative feels.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Very well said. Thats all true conservatives want. To be left alone, and no, we don't mind chipping in some small taxes to fund police, fire, ems, military, roads and to have a small social safety net.
> 
> And we don't condone violence within our ranks, either. And to be fair, 99% of the left is peaceful yet opinionated, just like us. The only difference is I see those peaceful lefties often tolerating the presence of their radicals, while the peaceful right rarely does. McVeigh was a scumbag traitor. So was Ayers. So is anyone who does harm to innocent people in the name of their political beliefs. Hopefully, the left will begin to show no tolerance for the few violent radicals amongst them and both sides can root out anyone who would do evil in the name of their warped politics. Come'on lefties, join us!!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is all anyone has been asking of the right here.
> 
> Stop talking violence to the crazies
Click to expand...


Huh? We've never condoned violence. Ayers, on the other hand, stated "Peaceful protests weren't working, so we started a violent revolution and war............in protest of the Vietnam War."

Hmmm. Funny. No one on the left worried about the Iraq War protests, which were mostly peaceful, leading to another coming of a Bill Ayers who turned to violence because "Peaceful protests weren't working". Hypocrites.


----------



## California Girl

Jarhead said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am a conservative. A right wing believer if you prefer. I dont have any feelings like McVeigh. None of my conservative friends do either. Most of us simply want to be left alone to live our lives.
> 
> Dante, I fear you have no idea how a true conservative thinks, acts and believes.
> 
> McVeigh was not a conservative in any way shape of form. A conservative does not believe that his or her actions should affect the way others live OR DIE.
> 
> A conservative does not levy his belief system on others. He or she lets others live any way they wish. That is consertvatism.
> 
> That is why I always say:
> 
> A liberal has great intentions and wants what is good for his fellow man but wants all to live the way he beleives they should live.
> 
> A conservative also has good intentions and wishes for the best for his fellow man but in no way does he insist that others believe as he does.
> 
> And no. That is not what many who claim to be conservative feel. It is what a trrue conservative feels.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
> 
> Abortion
> 
> family values crap
> 
> Gay Marriage
> 
> Shiavo
> 
> 
> The cons are always telling people how to live
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Abortion: I am against it but will always vote for pro choice. Chopice  is a true conservative value
> 
> Family Values: what goes on in your house is none of my business.
> 
> Gay Marriage: I am noit part of the gay lifestyle and I do not try to understand it. Have a vote here in NY and I will vote yes for gay marriage. Live your life as you wish. This is America.
> 
> Shiavo: That was a family battle and none of our dam business.
> 
> So go to hell with your HAHAHAHA. You do not know what a conservative is. You use the word in anger and hate and you are clueless to what a conservative is.
Click to expand...


How can anyone know what a conservative is when they are told what to think by Media Matters?


----------



## Truthmatters

So you are going to claim that prochoice is a republican stance?


----------



## bucs90

Truthmatters said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
> 
> Abortion
> 
> family values crap
> 
> Gay Marriage
> 
> Shiavo
> 
> 
> The cons are always telling people how to live
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Abortion: I am against it but will always vote for pro choice. Chopice  is a true conservative value
> 
> Family Values: what goes on in your house is none of my business.
> 
> Gay Marriage: I am noit part of the gay lifestyle and I do not try to understand it. Have a vote here in NY and I will vote yes for gay marriage. Live your life as you wish. This is America.
> 
> Shiavo: That was a family battle and none of our dam business.
> 
> So go to hell with your HAHAHAHA. You do not know what a conservative is. You use the word in anger and hate and you are clueless to what a conservative is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Now go look at how both the tea part and the republican party stand on these issues.
> 
> You would not pass muster with either.
> 
> You would be defined as a libertarian
Click to expand...


Polls who 43% of the Tea Party is made of Democrats and Independents. So.......the comparison of Tea Party vs Rep may not be what you think. Like it or not, this movement is going to destroy modern American leftist progressive liberalism.


----------



## Truthmatters

bucs90 said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Very well said. Thats all true conservatives want. To be left alone, and no, we don't mind chipping in some small taxes to fund police, fire, ems, military, roads and to have a small social safety net.
> 
> And we don't condone violence within our ranks, either. And to be fair, 99% of the left is peaceful yet opinionated, just like us. The only difference is I see those peaceful lefties often tolerating the presence of their radicals, while the peaceful right rarely does. McVeigh was a scumbag traitor. So was Ayers. So is anyone who does harm to innocent people in the name of their political beliefs. Hopefully, the left will begin to show no tolerance for the few violent radicals amongst them and both sides can root out anyone who would do evil in the name of their warped politics. Come'on lefties, join us!!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is all anyone has been asking of the right here.
> 
> Stop talking violence to the crazies
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Huh? We've never condoned violence. Ayers, on the other hand, stated "Peaceful protests weren't working, so we started a violent revolution and war............in protest of the Vietnam War."
> 
> Hmmm. Funny. No one on the left worried about the Iraq War protests, which were mostly peaceful, leading to another coming of a Bill Ayers who turned to violence because "Peaceful protests weren't working". Hypocrites.
Click to expand...


The guy who told peopl eto throw bricks and bricks got thown

The guy who gave the congressmans brothers house address and the gas line got cut.

Yes hey have been inciting violence



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/25/AR2010032501722.html?hpid=topnews


----------



## Jarhead

Truthmatters said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
> 
> Abortion
> 
> family values crap
> 
> Gay Marriage
> 
> Shiavo
> 
> 
> The cons are always telling people how to live
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Abortion: I am against it but will always vote for pro choice. Chopice  is a true conservative value
> 
> Family Values: what goes on in your house is none of my business.
> 
> Gay Marriage: I am noit part of the gay lifestyle and I do not try to understand it. Have a vote here in NY and I will vote yes for gay marriage. Live your life as you wish. This is America.
> 
> Shiavo: That was a family battle and none of our dam business.
> 
> So go to hell with your HAHAHAHA. You do not know what a conservative is. You use the word in anger and hate and you are clueless to what a conservative is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Now go look at how both the tea part and the republican party stand on these issues.
> 
> You would not pass muster with either.
> 
> You would be defined as a libertarian
Click to expand...


I am not defined by the tea party nor the GOP. I am a conservative.

What the hell is so hard for you to understand?

Now you want to label me as a libertarian becuase you can not understand what a conservative?

So now you have the right to define ME? Sort of goes along with my definition of a liberal.

Sadly grossly and dangerously misguided.


----------



## Dante

California Girl said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> * We were very careful from the moment of the townhouse on to be sure we weren't going to hurt anybody, and we never did hurt anybody.*
> 
> Whenever we put a bomb in a public space, we had figured out all kinds of ways to put checks and balances on the thing and also to get people away from it, and we were remarkably successful.
>  Bill Ayers 2003
> 
> [6]Weather Underground (organization) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> hmmm...
> 
> The difference
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yea, it's not like Billy boy had any agenda in misrepresenting what they did. It only took him until 2003 to come up with an alternative view of what they did.
> 
> Even for you, this is stupid, and you have a PhD in Stupid.
Click to expand...


It was an interview in 2003 you dope. What the WU and SDS stood for and how the WU bombed places was always public you fucking wench. 

I never agreed with WU. I do know some other radical group bombed the Court house in Boston, in the 70s---while my younger brother was in it. And they were not the WU

so fuck you you ugly prude.


btw, I met relatives of the radical bombers when I was working in Cambridge MA. We talked. They were far better representatives of America than you are. They were raised by radicals and civil to a fault. Unlike you you wench


----------



## Jarhead

Truthmatters said:


> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is all anyone has been asking of the right here.
> 
> Stop talking violence to the crazies
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Huh? We've never condoned violence. Ayers, on the other hand, stated "Peaceful protests weren't working, so we started a violent revolution and war............in protest of the Vietnam War."
> 
> Hmmm. Funny. No one on the left worried about the Iraq War protests, which were mostly peaceful, leading to another coming of a Bill Ayers who turned to violence because "Peaceful protests weren't working". Hypocrites.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The guy who told peopl eto throw bricks and bricks got thown
> 
> The guy who gave the congressmans brothers house address and the gas line got cut.
> 
> Yes hey have been inciting violence
Click to expand...


You mean a whole TWO people out of tens of thousands?

Jeez. I am done with this crap.


----------



## Truthmatters

Jarhead said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> Abortion: I am against it but will always vote for pro choice. Chopice  is a true conservative value
> 
> Family Values: what goes on in your house is none of my business.
> 
> Gay Marriage: I am noit part of the gay lifestyle and I do not try to understand it. Have a vote here in NY and I will vote yes for gay marriage. Live your life as you wish. This is America.
> 
> Shiavo: That was a family battle and none of our dam business.
> 
> So go to hell with your HAHAHAHA. You do not know what a conservative is. You use the word in anger and hate and you are clueless to what a conservative is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now go look at how both the tea part and the republican party stand on these issues.
> 
> You would not pass muster with either.
> 
> You would be defined as a libertarian
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am not defined by the tea party nor the GOP. I am a conservative.
> 
> What the hell is so hard for you to understand?
> 
> Now you want to label me as a libertarian becuase you can not understand what a conservative?
> 
> So now you have the right to define ME? Sort of goes along with my definition of a liberal.
> 
> Sadly grossly and dangerously misguided.
Click to expand...


Goody for you.

You dont even know what your own views classify as


----------



## Jarhead

Dante said:


> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> hmmm...
> 
> The difference
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yea, it's not like Billy boy had any agenda in misrepresenting what they did. It only took him until 2003 to come up with an alternative view of what they did.
> 
> Even for you, this is stupid, and you have a PhD in Stupid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It was an interview in 2003 you dope. What the WU and SDS stood for and how the WU bombed places was always public you fucking wench.
> 
> I never agreed with WU. I do know some other radical group bombed the Court house in Boston, in the 70s---while my younger brother was in it. And they were not the WU
> 
> so fuck you you ugly prude.
> 
> 
> btw, I met relatives of the radical bombers when I was working in Cambridge MA. We talked. They were far better representatives of America than you are. They were raised by radicals and civil to a fault. Unlike you you wench
Click to expand...


DId that make you feel better Dante?

Try using vaseline next time. It makes it even easier and feel even better.


----------



## California Girl

Truthmatters said:


> So you are going to claim that prochoice is a republican stance?



In order to actually understand anything, you firstly have to realize that a conservative is not necessarily a republican, nor are they necessarily a libertarian. It is only the left that clings to a party.


----------



## Jarhead

Truthmatters said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now go look at how both the tea part and the republican party stand on these issues.
> 
> You would not pass muster with either.
> 
> You would be defined as a libertarian
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am not defined by the tea party nor the GOP. I am a conservative.
> 
> What the hell is so hard for you to understand?
> 
> Now you want to label me as a libertarian becuase you can not understand what a conservative?
> 
> So now you have the right to define ME? Sort of goes along with my definition of a liberal.
> 
> Sadly grossly and dangerously misguided.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Goody for you.
> 
> You dont even know what your own views classify as
Click to expand...


Wrong again.
I know what my values are. I simply do not expect or ask anyone else to have the same values as I do.
You cant comporehend such a thought process, so you wish to define it as something else.

That is not my issue, that is yours. And good luck with it.


----------



## bucs90

Dante said:


> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, I think my thread was a success. To point out the MASSIVE hypocrisy going on in the left right now concerning McVeigh and their attempts to link him with the Tea Party when compared to the CONFIRMED link of Obama and the left to a man whose intenet was equal to McVeighs, and only differ in that McVeigh committed one act resulting in massive horror, while Ayers committed multiple acts of similar intent  but lacked the training or tools to really do mass damage.
> 
> Our president is voluntarily friends with one of these monsters. Yet the left only pays attention to the one who is currently dead.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *nope. you stated there was no difference between these beliefs below (no proof Ayers planted any bombs)*
> 
> We were very careful from the moment of the townhouse on to be sure we weren't going to hurt anybody, and we never did hurt anybody. Whenever we put a bomb in a public space, we had figured out all kinds of ways to put checks and balances on the thing and also to get people away from it, and we were remarkably successful.
>  Bill Ayers 2003[6]
> 
> *and what Timothy McVeigh did. *
> 
> 
> you belittled right wing terrorism in order to link a sixties radical student to President Obama.
> 
> like I said in another post, Ayers wasn't even on the radar until the right wing noise machine resurrected him from political oblivion.
Click to expand...


Wow are you gullable. So, in 2003, 30 years later, the domestic terrorist HIMSELF tells you he purposely tried not to harm anyone, and you BELIEVE it? Isn't it FAR more likely that he just sucked at building bombs, was embarrassed that he was so ineffective, and in retrospect decided to take a moral high ground in his newfound professorship to claim he is an honorable terrorist?

God d**n liberals are gullable. Hey, truthmatters, did you see the new Bin Laden video? He said "We didn't intend to hit the buildings, we intended to fly by, miss them and just scare everyone a lot, but there was a mechanical malfunction in BOTH planes and we lost steering and had a bad accident. Sorry, we didn't mean it."

You'd be first in line to say "Well, they didn't MEAN to hit the towers, he said so himself."

Or better yet, if you were a NYPD detective, interviewing a guy arrested for shooting at people but not hitting anyone, you would take a plea of "I intentionally missed, just to scare everyone, I purposely and carefully aimed around them for effect and did not want to harm anyone." You'd let the guy walk, wouldn't you?


----------



## California Girl

Jarhead said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yea, it's not like Billy boy had any agenda in misrepresenting what they did. It only took him until 2003 to come up with an alternative view of what they did.
> 
> Even for you, this is stupid, and you have a PhD in Stupid.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was an interview in 2003 you dope. What the WU and SDS stood for and how the WU bombed places was always public you fucking wench.
> 
> I never agreed with WU. I do know some other radical group bombed the Court house in Boston, in the 70s---while my younger brother was in it. And they were not the WU
> 
> so fuck you you ugly prude.
> 
> 
> btw, I met relatives of the radical bombers when I was working in Cambridge MA. We talked. They were far better representatives of America than you are. They were raised by radicals and civil to a fault. Unlike you you wench
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> DId that make you feel better Dante?
> 
> Try using vaseline next time. It makes it even easier and feel even better.
Click to expand...


Dainty is a fine one to talk about 'civil'. I doubt he could find it in a dictionary. The guy is a trolling moron. Every thread he starts he ends up talking to himself cuz very few even bother responding. I actually feel sorry for him.


----------



## Philobeado

It wasn't from lack of trying...the word is "Intent".

"McVeigh was smarter and built better bombs. Thats it. They both had serious problems with the government. Both built bombs and executed their plans. Both bombed government buildings. 

The ONLY difference is McVeigh had intense military training that enabled him to succeed in his horrendous acts, while Ayers was an amateur and just not smart enough to duplicate it." 




Truthmatters said:


> McVeigh Killed 168 United States Americans and was convicted of his crimes.
> 
> What ever Ayers did it pales in comparison


----------



## bucs90

Truthmatters said:


> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is all anyone has been asking of the right here.
> 
> Stop talking violence to the crazies
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Huh? We've never condoned violence. Ayers, on the other hand, stated "Peaceful protests weren't working, so we started a violent revolution and war............in protest of the Vietnam War."
> 
> Hmmm. Funny. No one on the left worried about the Iraq War protests, which were mostly peaceful, leading to another coming of a Bill Ayers who turned to violence because "Peaceful protests weren't working". Hypocrites.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The guy who told peopl eto throw bricks and bricks got thown
> 
> The guy who gave the congressmans brothers house address and the gas line got cut.
> 
> Yes hey have been inciting violence
> 
> 
> 
> Former militiaman unapologetic for calls to vandalize offices over health care - washingtonpost.com
Click to expand...


You forgot the SEIU members who lynched a conservative black man at a rally.
And you forgot the DailyKOs-dot-com member, radical leftist, who bit off the finger of a Tea Party member at a rally like some sort of fuc*ing animal.
And you forgot the Obama supporter who fired a bullet through Eric Cantor's window.

Lynching a man, biting appendages off, and firing bullets are a bit more "violent" than what you are saying the right did.


----------



## Truthmatters

the weahter underground never targeted people only property


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

Dante said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am a conservative. A right wing believer if you prefer. I dont have any feelings like McVeigh. None of my conservative friends do either. Most of us simply want to be left alone to live our lives.
> 
> Dante, I fear you have no idea how a true conservative thinks, acts and believes.
> 
> McVeigh was not a conservative in any way shape of form. A conservative does not believe that his or her actions should affect the way others live OR DIE.
> 
> A conservative does not levy his belief system on others. He or she lets others live any way they wish. That is consertvatism.
> 
> That is why I always say:
> 
> A liberal has great intentions and wants what is good for his fellow man but wants all to live the way he beleives they should live.
> 
> A conservative also has good intentions and wishes for the best for his fellow man but in no way does he insist that others believe as he does.
> 
> And no. That is not what many who claim to be conservative feel. It is what a trrue conservative feels.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ideological purity and text book definitions will not suffice. The conservative movement in America may not fit your definition of conservative, but they are surely the poster children for what it means to be a conservative in America today.
> 
> Your argument is not with me...it is with them. And right now it is the stated purpose of certain GOP members within the Tea Party movement to remake the GOP into what they see as a true conservative party. I doubt you will share their view either.
Click to expand...

 

ROFLMNAO...

Dante, you have no argument... All ya have is the obtuse regurgitation of inane drivel.

There is NOTHING Conservative about McVeigh...  McVeigh was a coward, who felt that he was entitled to be accepted into Ranger School and when he couldn't make the cut he got pissed at the world...  which provided the reason to rationalize a means to do something monumentally IMMORAL.

Your reasoning amounts to little more than _off the HOOK_ fallacious caterwauling; a string of specious ad hoc conclusions...


----------



## Dante

Jarhead said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yea, it's not like Billy boy had any agenda in misrepresenting what they did. It only took him until 2003 to come up with an alternative view of what they did.
> 
> Even for you, this is stupid, and you have a PhD in Stupid.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was an interview in 2003 you dope. What the WU and SDS stood for and how the WU bombed places was always public you fucking wench.
> 
> I never agreed with WU. I do know some other radical group bombed the Court house in Boston, in the 70s---while my younger brother was in it. And they were not the WU
> 
> so fuck you you ugly prude.
> 
> 
> btw, I met relatives of the radical bombers when I was working in Cambridge MA. We talked. They were far better representatives of America than you are. They were raised by radicals and civil to a fault. Unlike you you wench
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> DId that make you feel better Dante?
> 
> Try using vaseline next time. It makes it even easier and feel even better.
Click to expand...


really? believe it or not I used to be a safer sex instructor when I did syringe exchange and aids/hiv outreach. That's is how and where I met people raised in communes by the people who bombed the court house...coincidence? These community organizers and activists were taught by people like Ayers.  I applaud the way people like Ayers turned away from violent action.


----------



## bucs90

Truthmatters said:


> the weahter underground never targeted people only property



Couldnt the same be said for the World Trade Center bombings? And Pentagon bombings? And embassy bombings? And USS Cole bombings? WTC towers, Pentagon, US Navy ship.....all symbolic property targets with no specific human target.

Just accept it: Criticizing McVeigh and linking him to the Tea Party is hypocritical when your saviors buddy Bill Ayers committed multiple acts of domestic terror, he just didn't build a big enough bomb to destroy the multiple police departments, Pentagon and military base he targeted. 

And then, of course, you buy his 30 year later explanation that he tactically placed them to do little damage but cause effect. He's embarrassed he "Didn't do more". Thats all. Yet, I can always count on morons like you to defend a domestic terrorist. You must be proud.


----------



## Truthmatters

mcVeigh was right wing by any view


----------



## Truthmatters

bucs90 said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> the weahter underground never targeted people only property
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Couldnt the same be said for the World Trade Center bombings? And Pentagon bombings? And embassy bombings? And USS Cole bombings? WTC towers, Pentagon, US Navy ship.....all symbolic property targets with no specific human target.
> 
> Just accept it: Criticizing McVeigh and linking him to the Tea Party is hypocritical when your saviors buddy Bill Ayers committed multiple acts of domestic terror, he just didn't build a big enough bomb to destroy the multiple police departments, Pentagon and military base he targeted.
> 
> And then, of course, you buy his 30 year later explanation that he tactically placed them to do little damage but cause effect. He's embarrassed he "Didn't do more". Thats all. Yet, I can always count on morons like you to defend a domestic terrorist. You must be proud.
Click to expand...


NOPE they all wanted human casulties


----------



## bucs90

Dante said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> It was an interview in 2003 you dope. What the WU and SDS stood for and how the WU bombed places was always public you fucking wench.
> 
> I never agreed with WU. I do know some other radical group bombed the Court house in Boston, in the 70s---while my younger brother was in it. And they were not the WU
> 
> so fuck you you ugly prude.
> 
> 
> btw, I met relatives of the radical bombers when I was working in Cambridge MA. We talked. They were far better representatives of America than you are. They were raised by radicals and civil to a fault. Unlike you you wench
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DId that make you feel better Dante?
> 
> Try using vaseline next time. It makes it even easier and feel even better.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> really? believe it or not I used to be a safer sex instructor when I did syringe exchange and aids/hiv outreach. That's is how and where I met people raised in communes by the people who bombed the court house...coincidence? These community organizers and activists were taught by people like Ayers.  I applaud the way people like Ayers turned away from violent action.
Click to expand...


Fair enough. But us conservatives would rather applaud those who never turned to violence in the first place. You guys just keep hugging domestic terrorists, and we'll keep supporting the execution of such terrorists.


----------



## Dante

bucs90 said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, I think my thread was a success. To point out the MASSIVE hypocrisy going on in the left right now concerning McVeigh and their attempts to link him with the Tea Party when compared to the CONFIRMED link of Obama and the left to a man whose intenet was equal to McVeighs, and only differ in that McVeigh committed one act resulting in massive horror, while Ayers committed multiple acts of similar intent  but lacked the training or tools to really do mass damage.
> 
> Our president is voluntarily friends with one of these monsters. Yet the left only pays attention to the one who is currently dead.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *nope. you stated there was no difference between these beliefs below (no proof Ayers planted any bombs)*
> 
> We were very careful from the moment of the townhouse on to be sure we weren't going to hurt anybody, and we never did hurt anybody. Whenever we put a bomb in a public space, we had figured out all kinds of ways to put checks and balances on the thing and also to get people away from it, and we were remarkably successful.
>  Bill Ayers 2003[6]
> 
> *and what Timothy McVeigh did. *
> 
> 
> you belittled right wing terrorism in order to link a sixties radical student to President Obama.
> 
> like I said in another post, Ayers wasn't even on the radar until the right wing noise machine resurrected him from political oblivion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wow are you gullable. So, in 2003, 30 years later, the domestic terrorist HIMSELF tells you he purposely tried not to harm anyone, and you BELIEVE it? Isn't it FAR more likely that he just sucked at building bombs, was embarrassed that he was so ineffective, and in retrospect decided to take a moral high ground in his newfound professorship to claim he is an honorable terrorist?
> 
> God d**n liberals are gullable. Hey, truthmatters, did you see the new Bin Laden video? He said "We didn't intend to hit the buildings, we intended to fly by, miss them and just scare everyone a lot, but there was a mechanical malfunction in BOTH planes and we lost steering and had a bad accident. Sorry, we didn't mean it."
> 
> You'd be first in line to say "Well, they didn't MEAN to hit the towers, he said so himself."
> 
> Or better yet, if you were a NYPD detective, interviewing a guy arrested for shooting at people but not hitting anyone, you would take a plea of "I intentionally missed, just to scare everyone, I purposely and carefully aimed around them for effect and did not want to harm anyone." You'd let the guy walk, wouldn't you?
Click to expand...

No it was a recognized fact that the WU went out of the way to avoid killing people. 


please don't link bin laden to this. He's not an American

you have a vivid imagination stepping in where facts do not fit your world view

The WU turned away from violence. Ayers stopped advocating violence. I applaud him for that. I never condoned the WU. 

so you are just talking out of your ass again


good bye


you're bankrupt


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

Truthmatters said:


> the weahter underground never targeted people only property


 

Not true Sis...

The Weather-Underground murdered SF Police Sergeant Brian V. McDonnell .


----------



## Truthmatters

bucs90 said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> DId that make you feel better Dante?
> 
> Try using vaseline next time. It makes it even easier and feel even better.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> really? believe it or not I used to be a safer sex instructor when I did syringe exchange and aids/hiv outreach. That's is how and where I met people raised in communes by the people who bombed the court house...coincidence? These community organizers and activists were taught by people like Ayers.  I applaud the way people like Ayers turned away from violent action.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fair enough. But us conservatives would rather applaud those who never turned to violence in the first place. You guys just keep hugging domestic terrorists, and we'll keep supporting the execution of such terrorists.
Click to expand...


Where is your proof of what you claim?


----------



## Dante

Philobeado said:


> It wasn't from lack of trying...the word is "Intent".
> 
> "McVeigh was smarter and built better bombs. Thats it. They both had serious problems with the government. Both built bombs and executed their plans. Both bombed government buildings.
> 
> The ONLY difference is McVeigh had intense military training that enabled him to succeed in his horrendous acts, while Ayers was an amateur and just not smart enough to duplicate it."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> McVeigh Killed 168 United States Americans and was convicted of his crimes.
> 
> What ever Ayers did it pales in comparison
Click to expand...





I haven't seen a bigger bullshit post than this in a while.  congrats


----------



## bucs90

Truthmatters said:


> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> the weahter underground never targeted people only property
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Couldnt the same be said for the World Trade Center bombings? And Pentagon bombings? And embassy bombings? And USS Cole bombings? WTC towers, Pentagon, US Navy ship.....all symbolic property targets with no specific human target.
> 
> Just accept it: Criticizing McVeigh and linking him to the Tea Party is hypocritical when your saviors buddy Bill Ayers committed multiple acts of domestic terror, he just didn't build a big enough bomb to destroy the multiple police departments, Pentagon and military base he targeted.
> 
> And then, of course, you buy his 30 year later explanation that he tactically placed them to do little damage but cause effect. He's embarrassed he "Didn't do more". Thats all. Yet, I can always count on morons like you to defend a domestic terrorist. You must be proud.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> NOPE they all wanted human casulties
Click to expand...


Says who? You? Bill Ayers? Bill Clinton?

No, no one says it, it's assumed and you finally got something right: The terrorists wanted human casualties.....just like Ayers did. Yet, you'll fall to your knees and bow to him and take his word that he purposely tried not to kill anyone. Are you f-ing serious? Those clowns were so stupid they killed a few of themselves while building the bombs.........and you want me to believe they were so skilled that they could purposely control the crowds and blasts as to cause no deaths? Bullshit. Fact is Ayers and the WU sucked at building bombs.

Let me ask you this: Do you consider Bill Ayers actions to be that of a domestic terrorist?


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

Dante said:


> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> *nope. you stated there was no difference between these beliefs below (no proof Ayers planted any bombs)*
> 
> We were very careful from the moment of the townhouse on to be sure we weren't going to hurt anybody, and we never did hurt anybody. Whenever we put a bomb in a public space, we had figured out all kinds of ways to put checks and balances on the thing and also to get people away from it, and we were remarkably successful.
>  Bill Ayers 2003[6]
> 
> *and what Timothy McVeigh did. *
> 
> 
> you belittled right wing terrorism in order to link a sixties radical student to President Obama.
> 
> like I said in another post, Ayers wasn't even on the radar until the right wing noise machine resurrected him from political oblivion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wow are you gullable. So, in 2003, 30 years later, the domestic terrorist HIMSELF tells you he purposely tried not to harm anyone, and you BELIEVE it? Isn't it FAR more likely that he just sucked at building bombs, was embarrassed that he was so ineffective, and in retrospect decided to take a moral high ground in his newfound professorship to claim he is an honorable terrorist?
> 
> God d**n liberals are gullable. Hey, truthmatters, did you see the new Bin Laden video? He said "We didn't intend to hit the buildings, we intended to fly by, miss them and just scare everyone a lot, but there was a mechanical malfunction in BOTH planes and we lost steering and had a bad accident. Sorry, we didn't mean it."
> 
> You'd be first in line to say "Well, they didn't MEAN to hit the towers, he said so himself."
> 
> Or better yet, if you were a NYPD detective, interviewing a guy arrested for shooting at people but not hitting anyone, you would take a plea of "I intentionally missed, just to scare everyone, I purposely and carefully aimed around them for effect and did not want to harm anyone." You'd let the guy walk, wouldn't you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No it was a recognized fact that the WU went out of the way to avoid killing people.
> 
> 
> please don't link bin laden to this. He's not an American
Click to expand...

 
But then neither were anyone in the Weather Underground, nor yourself or any other Leftist...


----------



## bucs90

Truthmatters said:


> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> really? believe it or not I used to be a safer sex instructor when I did syringe exchange and aids/hiv outreach. That's is how and where I met people raised in communes by the people who bombed the court house...coincidence? These community organizers and activists were taught by people like Ayers.  I applaud the way people like Ayers turned away from violent action.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fair enough. But us conservatives would rather applaud those who never turned to violence in the first place. You guys just keep hugging domestic terrorists, and we'll keep supporting the execution of such terrorists.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Where is your proof of what you claim?
Click to expand...


My proof? Do you need any more than simply reading the responses in this thread? Leftists are actually defending a domestic terrorist. I mean......really?


----------



## Truthmatters

bucs90 said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Couldnt the same be said for the World Trade Center bombings? And Pentagon bombings? And embassy bombings? And USS Cole bombings? WTC towers, Pentagon, US Navy ship.....all symbolic property targets with no specific human target.
> 
> Just accept it: Criticizing McVeigh and linking him to the Tea Party is hypocritical when your saviors buddy Bill Ayers committed multiple acts of domestic terror, he just didn't build a big enough bomb to destroy the multiple police departments, Pentagon and military base he targeted.
> 
> And then, of course, you buy his 30 year later explanation that he tactically placed them to do little damage but cause effect. He's embarrassed he "Didn't do more". Thats all. Yet, I can always count on morons like you to defend a domestic terrorist. You must be proud.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NOPE they all wanted human casulties
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Says who? You? Bill Ayers? Bill Clinton?
> 
> No, no one says it, it's assumed and you finally got something right: The terrorists wanted human casualties.....just like Ayers did. Yet, you'll fall to your knees and bow to him and take his word that he purposely tried not to kill anyone. Are you f-ing serious? Those clowns were so stupid they killed a few of themselves while building the bombs.........and you want me to believe they were so skilled that they could purposely control the crowds and blasts as to cause no deaths? Bullshit. Fact is Ayers and the WU sucked at building bombs.
> 
> Let me ask you this: Do you consider Bill Ayers actions to be that of a domestic terrorist?
Click to expand...


Tim McVeigh Killed 168 people, how many people did the WU kill?


----------



## Dante

PubliusInfinitum said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> the weahter underground never targeted people only property
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not true Sis...
> 
> The Weather-Underground murdered SF Police Sergeant Brian V. McDonnell .
Click to expand...


how did he get hurt and die? what happened? where?


----------



## bucs90

And to the moron who stated Ayers acts pale in comparison to that of McVeigh, I offer you the following flow chart of comparing evilness:

Hitler > Mao > Bin Laden > McVeigh > Ayers

Does scope change the intent or evil of an act?


----------



## California Girl

California Girl said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> It was an interview in 2003 you dope. What the WU and SDS stood for and how the WU bombed places was always public you fucking wench.
> 
> I never agreed with WU. I do know some other radical group bombed the Court house in Boston, in the 70s---while my younger brother was in it. And they were not the WU
> 
> so fuck you you ugly prude.
> 
> 
> btw, I met relatives of the radical bombers when I was working in Cambridge MA. We talked. They were far better representatives of America than you are. They were raised by radicals and civil to a fault. Unlike you you wench
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DId that make you feel better Dante?
> 
> Try using vaseline next time. It makes it even easier and feel even better.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Dainty is a fine one to talk about 'civil'. I doubt he could find it in a dictionary. The guy is a trolling moron. Every thread he starts he ends up talking to himself cuz very few even bother responding. I actually feel sorry for him.
Click to expand...


I don't normally quote my own posts but, this is the response from Dainty to the above....

*Hi, you have received -47 reputation points from Dante.
Reputation was given for this post.

Comment:
fuck off twat

Regards,
Dante*

Thanks for proving my point, Dainty.   That -47 is gonna hurt. Yesssir, it really is.


----------



## bucs90

Truthmatters said:


> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> NOPE they all wanted human casulties
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Says who? You? Bill Ayers? Bill Clinton?
> 
> No, no one says it, it's assumed and you finally got something right: The terrorists wanted human casualties.....just like Ayers did. Yet, you'll fall to your knees and bow to him and take his word that he purposely tried not to kill anyone. Are you f-ing serious? Those clowns were so stupid they killed a few of themselves while building the bombs.........and you want me to believe they were so skilled that they could purposely control the crowds and blasts as to cause no deaths? Bullshit. Fact is Ayers and the WU sucked at building bombs.
> 
> Let me ask you this: Do you consider Bill Ayers actions to be that of a domestic terrorist?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Tim McVeigh Killed 168 people, how many people did the WU kill?
Click to expand...


Again, is evil measured by body count, or intent? Are you lefties really gonna take it there? I'll answer, but first, are you really going to make the argument that the measured evil of a terror attack is weighed only in body count?


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

Truthmatters said:


> the weahter underground never targeted people only property


 

Not true Sis...

The Weather-Underground murdered SF Police Sergeant Brian V. McDonnell .

Here's about all ya need to know about who and what Bill Ayers was and IS! McVeigh was no different...

weather underground


----------



## Truthmatters

Ask the families of the people tim McVeigh killed if they wish McVeigh would have not targeted people?


----------



## JBeukema

Truthmatters said:


> Tell me why there is no Right wing version of media matters?


you mean FNC?


----------



## Truthmatters

San Francisco Police Department Park Station bombing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

They were never charged with that bombing


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

Truthmatters said:


> the weahter underground never targeted people only property


 

Not true Sis...

The Weather-Underground murdered SF Police Sergeant Brian V. McDonnell .

Here's about all ya need to know about who and what Bill Ayers was and IS! McVeigh was no different...

weather underground



Truthmatters said:


> Ask the families of the people tim McVeigh killed if they wish McVeigh would have not targeted people?


 
ROFLMNAO...  

You need to learn that repeating the lie doesn't actually make it true.


----------



## JBeukema

hboats said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Media matters uses clips of what people say.
> 
> how can you trash a site that provides proof of the people actaully sayinbg what they claim they said?
> 
> Because your a hack
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You really have no idea how much of a fool you are, do you?  Media Matters is a joke and you are falling hook line and sinker for it.
> 
> Rick
Click to expand...



If the source is incorrect, attack the incorrect data, not the source


----------



## bucs90

Dante said:


> PubliusInfinitum said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> the weahter underground never targeted people only property
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not true Sis...
> 
> The Weather-Underground murdered SF Police Sergeant Brian V. McDonnell .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> how did he get hurt and die? what happened? where?
Click to expand...


How? Read the link. FLYING SHRAPNEL, including bolts and bullets. Bullets and bolts aren't included in a bomb to hurt property, they're to kill people. In that bomb, by Ayers, NINE cops seriously wounded, 1 Sgt dead. From flying bomb shrapnel. IED style.

MSNBC has lied to you all.


----------



## Truthmatters

The WU was never charged with that bombing guys


----------



## JBeukema

Jarhead said:


> You do not know what a conservative is.


Conservatism (n.) Reactionism; support for the status quo or the status quo ante


----------



## bucs90

Truthmatters said:


> Ask the families of the people tim McVeigh killed if they wish McVeigh would have not targeted people?



I'm 100% certain they would say just that. You are right. McVeigh is an evil monster and I'm glad he's dead. I'm not defending him, I'm criticizing the lefts defense of other domestic terrorists, like Bill Ayers.

BTW, you say the WU didn't target people. Why, then, did their bomb that wounded 9 SF cops and killed 1 included shrapnel, such as metal bolts and bullets? Thats a WAR bomb. An IED, a grenaded. Small metal shrapnel is intended to cause human casualty. Nothing else. And it worked.

Yet, just like a scumbag defense attorney, you STILL defend Ayers and the WU. Another bomb at the University of Wisconsin, killed 1 professor, and the WU denied involvement despite strong evidence.

But you never answered my question: Do you consider Ayers a domestic terrorist?


----------



## JBeukema

California Girl said:


> It is only the left that clings to a party.







How many times have we heard 'conservatives need to take back the republican party' or 'that person's a RiNO'?


----------



## JBeukema

Truthmatters said:


> the weahter underground never targeted people only property


There's a dead police sgt who'd beg to differ


----------



## bucs90

The link also stated where the Weather Underground BEAT A CHICAGO CITY OFFICIAL......SEVERELY AND CRITICALLY WHICH CAUSED HIM TO BE PERMANENTLY CRIPPLED..................but truthmatters will tell you again the WU "never targeted people".


----------



## Truthmatters

bucs90 said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ask the families of the people tim McVeigh killed if they wish McVeigh would have not targeted people?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm 100% certain they would say just that. You are right. McVeigh is an evil monster and I'm glad he's dead. I'm not defending him, I'm criticizing the lefts defense of other domestic terrorists, like Bill Ayers.Whos defending him?
> 
> BTW, you say the WU didn't target people. Why, then, did their bomb that wounded 9 SF cops and killed 1 included shrapnel, such as metal bolts and bullets? Thats a WAR bomb. An IED, a grenaded. Small metal shrapnel is intended to cause human casualty. Nothing else. And it worked.The WU was never charged for that bombing
> 
> Yet, just like a scumbag defense attorney, you STILL defend Ayers and the WU. Another bomb at the University of Wisconsin, killed 1 professor, and the WU denied involvement despite strong evidence.Stating facts is not defending anything but truth
> 
> But you never answered my question: Do you consider Ayers a domestic terrorist?
Click to expand...


Yes, for fucks sake I never even saw you ask that question


----------



## Truthmatters

JBeukema said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> the weahter underground never targeted people only property
> 
> 
> 
> There's a dead police sgt who'd beg to differ
Click to expand...


They were never charged with that bombing.

Damnit people at least read the evidence that you ask me to give.


----------



## California Girl

JBeukema said:


> hboats said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Media matters uses clips of what people say.
> 
> how can you trash a site that provides proof of the people actaully sayinbg what they claim they said?
> 
> Because your a hack
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You really have no idea how much of a fool you are, do you?  Media Matters is a joke and you are falling hook line and sinker for it.
> 
> Rick
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> If the source is incorrect, attack the incorrect data, not the source
Click to expand...


Nope, the source is responsible to ensuring that their data is accurate. Media Matters don't give a shit whether the data or 'facts' are accurate... only that they discredit the right.


----------



## JBeukema

Truthmatters said:


> The WU was never charged with that bombing guys



Gein was only charged with one murder....


----------



## Truthmatters

They give TAPE or FILM of the person saying it CG.


----------



## JBeukema

Truthmatters said:


> JBeukema said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> the weahter underground never targeted people only property
> 
> 
> 
> There's a dead police sgt who'd beg to differ
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They were never charged with that bombing.
> 
> Damnit people at least read the evidence that you ask me to give.
Click to expand...


Again, Gein was only charged in one case, but admitted to two and is believed to have committed a third


----------



## bucs90

FBI informant stated in that link that the Detroit PD was targeted, and he was given orders by Bill Ayers that 2 things occur:

1- Bombs go off at the same time
2- Maximum number of officers killed or wounded as possible.

Ayers made sure these bombs included fence staples, a common ingredient in foreign IED's meant to kill and wound as many enemy troops as possible.

Yet.........the WU never targeted people.


----------



## JBeukema

California Girl said:


> JBeukema said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hboats said:
> 
> 
> 
> You really have no idea how much of a fool you are, do you?  Media Matters is a joke and you are falling hook line and sinker for it.
> 
> Rick
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If the source is incorrect, attack the incorrect data, not the source
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nope, the source is responsible to ensuring that their data is accurate. Media Matters don't give a shit whether the data or 'facts' are accurate... only that they discredit the right.
Click to expand...



so we're back to you blindly attacking the source and not the claims?

google: ad hom


----------



## bucs90

Truthmatters said:


> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ask the families of the people tim McVeigh killed if they wish McVeigh would have not targeted people?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm 100% certain they would say just that. You are right. McVeigh is an evil monster and I'm glad he's dead. I'm not defending him, I'm criticizing the lefts defense of other domestic terrorists, like Bill Ayers.Whos defending him?
> 
> BTW, you say the WU didn't target people. Why, then, did their bomb that wounded 9 SF cops and killed 1 included shrapnel, such as metal bolts and bullets? Thats a WAR bomb. An IED, a grenaded. Small metal shrapnel is intended to cause human casualty. Nothing else. And it worked.The WU was never charged for that bombing
> 
> Yet, just like a scumbag defense attorney, you STILL defend Ayers and the WU. Another bomb at the University of Wisconsin, killed 1 professor, and the WU denied involvement despite strong evidence.Stating facts is not defending anything but truth
> 
> But you never answered my question: Do you consider Ayers a domestic terrorist?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, for fucks sake I never even saw you ask that question
Click to expand...


OK, fair oversight, but you agree he is a domestic terrorist.

Next question, do you agree that putting shrapnel in the form of metal bolts, fence staples and bullets into an explosive device are a common practice of foreign terrorists attempting to wound or kill as many enemy infantry troops as possible???


----------



## Truthmatters

Shes not very good in a debate, she constantly resorts to personal insults and is very thin on information to back what she claims


----------



## Truthmatters

bucs90 said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm 100% certain they would say just that. You are right. McVeigh is an evil monster and I'm glad he's dead. I'm not defending him, I'm criticizing the lefts defense of other domestic terrorists, like Bill Ayers.Whos defending him?
> 
> BTW, you say the WU didn't target people. Why, then, did their bomb that wounded 9 SF cops and killed 1 included shrapnel, such as metal bolts and bullets? Thats a WAR bomb. An IED, a grenaded. Small metal shrapnel is intended to cause human casualty. Nothing else. And it worked.The WU was never charged for that bombing
> 
> Yet, just like a scumbag defense attorney, you STILL defend Ayers and the WU. Another bomb at the University of Wisconsin, killed 1 professor, and the WU denied involvement despite strong evidence.Stating facts is not defending anything but truth
> 
> But you never answered my question: Do you consider Ayers a domestic terrorist?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, for fucks sake I never even saw you ask that question
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> OK, fair oversight, but you agree he is a domestic terrorist.
> 
> Next question, do you agree that putting shrapnel in the form of metal bolts, fence staples and bullets into an explosive device are a common practice of foreign terrorists attempting to wound or kill as many enemy infantry troops as possible???
Click to expand...


COME ON!!!

The WU was not charged with that bombing.

Do facts mean ANYTHING to you?


----------



## Dante

PubliusInfinitum said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> the weahter underground never targeted people only property
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not true Sis...
> 
> The Weather-Underground murdered SF Police Sergeant Brian V. McDonnell .
> 
> Here's about all ya need to know about who and what Bill Ayers was and IS! McVeigh was no different...
> 
> weather underground
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ask the families of the people tim McVeigh killed if they wish McVeigh would have not targeted people?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ROFLMNAO...
> 
> You need to learn that repeating the lie doesn't actually make it true.
Click to expand...


there was a world of difference between the right wing terrorist Timothy McVeigh, and the former student activist...









> Whatever his past, Ayers is now a respected member of the Chicago intelligentsia, and still a member of the Woods Fund Board. The president of the Woods Fund, Deborah Harrington, said he had been selected for the board because of his solid academic credentials and "passion for social justice."
> 
> "This whole connection is a stretch," Harrington told me. "Barack was very well known in Chicago, and a highly respected legislator. It would be difficult to find people round here who never volunteered or contributed money to one of his campaigns."
> 
> Obama's 'Weatherman' Connection - Fact Checker


----------



## bucs90

The evidence is overwhelming.

Bill Ayers built bombs with small metal shrapnel aimed at police officers. They wrote songs about it. He ordered his WU men to kill as many as they could. FBI informant was one of them.

Whenever we see the left claiming the Tea Party produces McVeighs, who we all condemn, never forget they are defending a man who tried to kill cops with IED's on our own soil. Truth is truth.


----------



## Dante

Dante said:


> PubliusInfinitum said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> the weahter underground never targeted people only property
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not true Sis...
> 
> The Weather-Underground murdered SF Police Sergeant Brian V. McDonnell .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> how did he get hurt and die? what happened? where?
Click to expand...


hello?


----------



## Dante

bucs90 said:


> And to the moron who stated Ayers acts pale in comparison to that of McVeigh, I offer you the following flow chart of comparing evilness:
> 
> Hitler > Mao > Bin Laden > McVeigh > Ayers
> 
> Does scope change the intent or evil of an act?



*Ayers: *


> Whatever his past, Ayers is now a respected member of the Chicago intelligentsia, and still a member of the Woods Fund Board. The president of the Woods Fund, Deborah Harrington, said he had been selected for the board because of his solid academic credentials and "passion for social justice."
> 
> "This whole connection is a stretch," Harrington told me. "Barack was very well known in Chicago, and a highly respected legislator. It would be difficult to find people round here who never volunteered or contributed money to one of his campaigns."
> 
> Obama's 'Weatherman' Connection - Fact Checker



vs

*bucs90:*


> blah, blah, blah, Obama sucks. the left  sucks. blah, blah, blah...
> 
> mommy, mommy, FOX News is scaring me!


----------



## JBeukema

Dante said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PubliusInfinitum said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not true Sis...
> 
> The Weather-Underground murdered SF Police Sergeant Brian V. McDonnell .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> how did he get hurt and die? what happened? where?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> hello?
Click to expand...


You got mud in your ears or something?


----------



## bucs90

Truthmatters said:


> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, for fucks sake I never even saw you ask that question
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OK, fair oversight, but you agree he is a domestic terrorist.
> 
> Next question, do you agree that putting shrapnel in the form of metal bolts, fence staples and bullets into an explosive device are a common practice of foreign terrorists attempting to wound or kill as many enemy infantry troops as possible???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> COME ON!!!
> 
> The WU was not charged with that bombing.
> 
> Do facts mean ANYTHING to you?
Click to expand...


Did you even read the link? So them not being charged with it means they didn't do it? Lots of mafia members haven't been charged with crimes the feds KNOW they committed, just can't build the case. Ayers ordered an undercover FBI informant to plant IED's with shrapnel near Detroit cops with orders to "Kill as many as you can" and it never happened obviously b/c the guy was an informant. Bombs with shrapnel are meant to kill humans. Period.

You can believe the overwhelming evidence. OR....you can believe the statements of a man who you have already stated is a domestic terrorist. We know which one Obama picked.


----------



## Ame®icano

California Girl said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> Rather than guessing, why don't you just consider the outcomes. McVeigh was executed and no one defended his actions.
> 
> *Ayers is celebrated... by the left. *
> 
> I'd be careful making assumptions if I were you... because you're 'guessing', *and I'm stating facts*. Fact: Bill Ayers in not just supported by the left, he is celebrated by them. They treat him as a 'hero'... I defy you to find any evidence to suggest that mainstream right wingers treat McVeigh as anything other than a mass murderer.
> 
> 
> 
> No he isn't.
> 
> No you aren't. You're lying.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, I'm not lying. He's a popular guy in left wing circles. He's a cause celebre with left wingers. He's a hero to a lot of left wing organizations. Or, at least, during the previous Administration he certainly was.
Click to expand...


I wonder what makes him so popular?

You can't be popular if someone launch political career from your place, right?


----------



## boedicca

Here's the difference:

Bill Ayers was a spoiled rich kid who was a pet of the Ivy League and got away with his crime, and is now a leftwing darling.

McVeigh came from a middle class background, and served in the miltiary - the type of background the leftwing elite, who protected Ayers, despise.


----------



## bucs90

Dante said:


> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> And to the moron who stated Ayers acts pale in comparison to that of McVeigh, I offer you the following flow chart of comparing evilness:
> 
> Hitler > Mao > Bin Laden > McVeigh > Ayers
> 
> Does scope change the intent or evil of an act?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Ayers: *
> 
> 
> 
> Whatever his past, Ayers is now a respected member of the Chicago intelligentsia, and still a member of the Woods Fund Board. The president of the Woods Fund, Deborah Harrington, said he had been selected for the board because of his solid academic credentials and "passion for social justice."
> 
> "This whole connection is a stretch," Harrington told me. "Barack was very well known in Chicago, and a highly respected legislator. It would be difficult to find people round here who never volunteered or contributed money to one of his campaigns."
> 
> Obama's 'Weatherman' Connection - Fact Checker
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> vs
> 
> *bucs90:*
> 
> 
> 
> blah, blah, blah, Obama sucks. the left  sucks. blah, blah, blah...
> 
> mommy, mommy, FOX News is scaring me!
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


HAHA!!! Read what you are defending. "Whatever his past....Ayers is now a respected..."

Whatever his past huh? SO.......toss aside his bombings of police. So long as he is a respected member of liberal college professors, he's OK with you huh?

So, if Bin Laden cleans his act up and turns liberal, you'll support him with "Whatever his past..."?

I used to wonder how Obama got elected. Now I know.


----------



## bucs90

They just can't grasp the reality: They are defending a domestic terrorist who gave orders to use IED's and try to kill as many cops as possible. He failed, because the WU had no military training and sucked at building bombs. Hell, they sucked so bad they killed 4 of their own trying to build them.

Now, he's a celebrated and well defended liberal icon. Don't believe me? Just read the defenses offered up in just this thread you are looking at.


----------



## Truthmatters

PubliusInfinitum said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> the weahter underground never targeted people only property
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not true Sis...
> 
> The Weather-Underground murdered SF Police Sergeant Brian V. McDonnell .
> 
> Here's about all ya need to know about who and what Bill Ayers was and IS! McVeigh was no different...
> 
> weather underground
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ask the families of the people tim McVeigh killed if they wish McVeigh would have not targeted people?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ROFLMNAO...
> 
> You need to learn that repeating the lie doesn't actually make it true.
Click to expand...


Cliff Kincaid - SourceWatch

The link you gave is written by a right wing hack


----------



## California Girl

JBeukema said:


> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JBeukema said:
> 
> 
> 
> If the source is incorrect, attack the incorrect data, not the source
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nope, the source is responsible to ensuring that their data is accurate. Media Matters don't give a shit whether the data or 'facts' are accurate... only that they discredit the right.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> so we're back to you blindly attacking the source and not the claims?
> 
> google: ad hom
Click to expand...


I don't need to. I know who Media Matters are and I know how they work. So, I dismiss any 'evidence' provided by Media Matters as illegitimate. They are a partisan organization with an agenda to discredit the right. 

I only ever accept information from non partisan organizations that ensure accuracy. That's because I am interested only in actual legitimate information, I don't want a partisan view.


----------



## Truthmatters

bucs90 said:


> They just can't grasp the reality: They are defending a domestic terrorist who gave orders to use IED's and try to kill as many cops as possible. He failed, because the WU had no military training and sucked at building bombs. Hell, they sucked so bad they killed 4 of their own trying to build them.
> 
> Now, he's a celebrated and well defended liberal icon. Don't believe me? Just read the defenses offered up in just this thread you are looking at.



HOW MANY TIMES DO YOU HAVE TO BE TOLD??????

We are not defending we are examining the facts.



The thread is about the differance between McVeigh and Ayers.

The facts are just the facts


----------



## bucs90

Truthmatters said:


> PubliusInfinitum said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> the weahter underground never targeted people only property
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not true Sis...
> 
> The Weather-Underground murdered SF Police Sergeant Brian V. McDonnell .
> 
> Here's about all ya need to know about who and what Bill Ayers was and IS! McVeigh was no different...
> 
> weather underground
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ask the families of the people tim McVeigh killed if they wish McVeigh would have not targeted people?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ROFLMNAO...
> 
> You need to learn that repeating the lie doesn't actually make it true.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Cliff Kincaid - SourceWatch
> 
> The link you gave is written by a right wing hack
Click to expand...


Yep, he is on the right. And thats OK. So long as he never built IED's with metal shrapnel and issued orders to kill as many cops as possible. If he did, I'd never defend him. You, on the other hand...............well, hopefully this thread enlightened you on the true Bill Ayers and not what MSNBC or Obama has told you, and you'll stop defending this domestic terrorist.


----------



## California Girl

Truthmatters said:


> PubliusInfinitum said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> the weahter underground never targeted people only property
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not true Sis...
> 
> The Weather-Underground murdered SF Police Sergeant Brian V. McDonnell .
> 
> Here's about all ya need to know about who and what Bill Ayers was and IS! McVeigh was no different...
> 
> weather underground
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ask the families of the people tim McVeigh killed if they wish McVeigh would have not targeted people?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ROFLMNAO...
> 
> You need to learn that repeating the lie doesn't actually make it true.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Cliff Kincaid - SourceWatch
> 
> The link you gave is written by a right wing hack
Click to expand...


The stuff you link to is written by a bunch of left wing hacks. Your point?


----------



## Truthmatters

California Girl said:


> JBeukema said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nope, the source is responsible to ensuring that their data is accurate. Media Matters don't give a shit whether the data or 'facts' are accurate... only that they discredit the right.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> so we're back to you blindly attacking the source and not the claims?
> 
> google: ad hom
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't need to. I know who Media Matters are and I know how they work. So, I dismiss any 'evidence' provided by Media Matters as illegitimate. They are a partisan organization with an agenda to discredit the right.
> 
> I only ever accept information from non partisan organizations that ensure accuracy. That's because I am interested only in actual legitimate information, I don't want a partisan view.
Click to expand...


Facts jare facts no matter where they come from.

You cant refute the tape of people actually saying what they are saying which is what MM does.

They show people saying things and then comment on them.

you can disagree with the comment but the tape is fact


----------



## California Girl

Truthmatters said:


> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> They just can't grasp the reality: They are defending a domestic terrorist who gave orders to use IED's and try to kill as many cops as possible. He failed, because the WU had no military training and sucked at building bombs. Hell, they sucked so bad they killed 4 of their own trying to build them.
> 
> Now, he's a celebrated and well defended liberal icon. Don't believe me? Just read the defenses offered up in just this thread you are looking at.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HOW MANY TIMES DO YOU HAVE TO BE TOLD??????
> 
> We are not defending we are examining the facts.
> 
> 
> 
> The thread is about the differance between McVeigh and Ayers.
> 
> The facts are just the facts
Click to expand...




Facts?  You? Ohhhhh purleeeeeeeze.


----------



## Truthmatters

You just dont like the fact that they expose the right for what they are saying when they think they are talking to only cons.


----------



## bucs90

Truthmatters said:


> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> They just can't grasp the reality: They are defending a domestic terrorist who gave orders to use IED's and try to kill as many cops as possible. He failed, because the WU had no military training and sucked at building bombs. Hell, they sucked so bad they killed 4 of their own trying to build them.
> 
> Now, he's a celebrated and well defended liberal icon. Don't believe me? Just read the defenses offered up in just this thread you are looking at.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HOW MANY TIMES DO YOU HAVE TO BE TOLD??????
> 
> We are not defending we are examining the facts.
> 
> 
> 
> The thread is about the differance between McVeigh and Ayers.
> 
> The facts are just the facts
Click to expand...


Exactly. And the facts are Ayers planted bombs, IED's, with metal shrapnel targeted at cops. He ordered an undercover FBI informant to plant multiple bombs at Detroit Police and for them to "kill as many cops as possible" (see the original link). He targeted multiple police departments and gov't buildings. His group sucked at building bombs, as evident by the fact 4 of them died trying to build one. Had his group been good at making bombs, they'd have mass cop casualties as they desired and ordered, despite what Ayers claimed in 2003 his true intent was (backpedaling).

The intent of McVeigh and Ayers was the same. I'm pointing out the hypocrisy of the left trying to tie McVeigh to the Tea Party, while denying Ayers was a terrorist and denying his cozy relationship with Obama and the left. BOTH Ayers and McVeigh are extremist minorities within each or any political viewpoint, and both should be treated that way. Unfortunately, they aren't. One is defended, even glamorized, while the other is rightfully demonized, yet labeled as the potential norm for the Tea Party movement.


----------



## bucs90

Truthmatters said:


> You just dont like the fact that they expose the right for what they are saying when they think they are talking to only cons.



As long as they aren't building shrapnel bombs aimed at cops, let them talk.

Join us in condemning ALL terrorists, foreign and domestic. Lets start by including Ayers with other scum like McVeigh and the Una Bomber. Whadya say?


----------



## California Girl

Truthmatters said:


> You just dont like the fact that they expose the right for what they are saying when they think they are talking to only cons.



If they were legitimately just providing fact - in context - I would have no problem with them. The reason I have a problem is because they do not just 'expose'... they take comments out of context and twist facts for their own agenda. That's a fact for you.


----------



## Richard-H

There are two major differences between Ayer and McVeigh.

First is the magnitude of their crimes. Obviously.

The second is the targets of their crimes.

Ayers & the weather underground did not randomly kill civilians. They targeted government para-military personell and government structures. This would make them revolutionaries. It may be that the revolutionary cause for which they fought was not justified, but that doesn't change tha fact the the tactics were the tactics of revolutionaries.

On the other hand, McVeigh intentionally targeted non-military civilian personel including children. His targets were totally random - he did not care who he killed. This qualifies him as a terrorist. He used terrorist tactics therefore he is a terrorist.

I realize that the wingnuts are driven by emotions rather than intellect, but the term 'Terrorist' has a very definite technical definition and refers to the tactics used, not whether you agree with their cause or not.

AL Queda are terrorists.

The vast majority of Taliban and Iraqi insurgents are not terrorists (but some have become terrorists)

The IRA, historically, is a terrorist organization, despite the fact that I agree with their political goals, they have used terrorist tactic, so they are terrorists.

Get it?

Oh yea, I forgot, I'm communicating with wingnuts. Of course they won't see the difference.


----------



## Truthmatters

bucs90 said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> You just dont like the fact that they expose the right for what they are saying when they think they are talking to only cons.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As long as they aren't building shrapnel bombs aimed at cops, let them talk.
> 
> Join us in condemning ALL terrorists, foreign and domestic. Lets start by including Ayers with other scum like McVeigh and the Una Bomber. Whadya say?
Click to expand...


Why are you pretending I havent already done so?

Why are you pretending I have not already said they were scum many times?

Cant you be honest when discussing politics?

The thread title is what is the differeance between Ayers and McVeigh.

one of the differances one targeted people and the other targeted property.

If you are going to continue to refuse any facts I give you just to feel superior to me than I guess its time for me to sign off.


----------



## Dante

bucs90 said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> And to the moron who stated Ayers acts pale in comparison to that of McVeigh, I offer you the following flow chart of comparing evilness:
> 
> Hitler > Mao > Bin Laden > McVeigh > Ayers
> 
> Does scope change the intent or evil of an act?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Ayers: *
> 
> 
> vs
> 
> *bucs90:*
> 
> 
> 
> blah, blah, blah, Obama sucks. the left  sucks. blah, blah, blah...
> 
> mommy, mommy, FOX News is scaring me!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> HAHA!!! Read what you are defending. "Whatever his past....Ayers is now a respected..."
> 
> Whatever his past huh? SO.......toss aside his bombings of police. So long as he is a respected member of liberal college professors, he's OK with you huh?
> 
> So, if Bin Laden cleans his act up and turns liberal, you'll support him with "Whatever his past..."?
> 
> I used to wonder how Obama got elected. Now I know.
Click to expand...


I don't toss anything aside. The thread is not about the merits or defense of Ayers.

Ayers is okay with me only because I have no issue with him .

Like the Confederate Officers and Confederate Politicians of Dixie, he waged revolution against the state. He lost. He then went on to become a good citizen. If he were a southern gentleman the GOP would raise a statue and name a square for him.



---\



Dante said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ayers had charges dropped against him. That doesn't mean he didn't do anything. But he was such an enemy of the state that if he even shit wrong since then he would have been arrested. A few people (police too) got hurt by WU actions (unintentional as far as I know). Ayers changed his tune.
> 
> In America we do not ostracize people because of political beliefs and supposed crimes. Or we used to not do so.
> 
> either way,  am sure Ayers ain't the boogy man FOX and talk radio have made him out to be. It's all about Obama.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Either He was directly involved or He wasn't. This is not a game. If He wasn't directly involved, You are right. If He was directly involved, He escaped Justice. Has he reformed? That is a different argument. It may have merit, would we presume to empty our prisons of all first time offenders? No? Free Pass? Corruption of the system that had him? Puppet Masters Intervened? Was He being protected?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ayers was directly involved in violent revolution. As was the Confederacy.
> 
> Ayers did escape punishment. Justice? Justice is served in many ways. Stop talking like the ghetto people who demand justice when they really mean vengeance or something.
> 
> Empty the prisons because of on case? Stop parroting the children.
> 
> Justice has never been about fairness. We make examples of people every day we prosecute crimes. All cases are judged on their own merits.
> 
> Ayers, has become an asset to the community. There wasn't enough evidence or a technicality arose. He is not guilty. That is what we respect when we say we respect the system. The verdict. The judgment. We are a nation of laws and laws know no emotions.
Click to expand...


----------



## Truthmatters

California Girl said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> You just dont like the fact that they expose the right for what they are saying when they think they are talking to only cons.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If they were legitimately just providing fact - in context - I would have no problem with them. The reason I have a problem is because they do not just 'expose'... they take comments out of context and twist facts for their own agenda. That's a fact for you.
Click to expand...


Nope they give tape and comment.

You just dontlike the results of the right being exposed to all.

Why is there not a like group on the right?


----------



## Dante

Richard-H said:


> There are two major differences between Ayer and McVeigh.
> 
> First is the magnitude of their crimes. Obviously.
> 
> The second is the targets of their crimes.
> 
> Ayers & the weather underground did not randomly kill civilians. They targeted government para-military personell and government structures. This would make them revolutionaries. It may be that the revolutionary cause for which they fought was not justified, but that doesn't change tha fact the the tactics were the tactics of revolutionaries.
> 
> On the other hand, McVeigh intentionally targeted non-military civilian personel including children. His targets were totally random - he did not care who he killed. This qualifies him as a terrorist. He used terrorist tactics therefore he is a terrorist.
> 
> I realize that the wingnuts are driven by emotions rather than intellect, but the term 'Terrorist' has a very definite technical definition and refers to the tactics used, not whether you agree with their cause or not.
> 
> AL Queda are terrorists.
> 
> The vast majority of Taliban and Iraqi insurgents are not terrorists (but some have become terrorists)
> 
> The IRA, historically, is a terrorist organization, despite the fact that I agree with their political goals, they have used terrorist tactic, so they are terrorists.
> 
> Get it?
> 
> Oh yea, I forgot, I'm communicating with wingnuts. Of course they won't see the difference.



they will deflect.

they will make it about defending Ayers and his actions while neglecting how he has lived his life since the sixties.

this isn't about Ayers. It is about getting Obama and saying liberals, Democrats and others support terrorists. Why? Because of McVeigh and the Tea Party and Militias. They are almost admitting to them, two wrongs makes them right.


----------



## rdean

Bill Ayers vs Timothy McVeigh: Whats the difference????

I can think of more than 160 differences.  And many of those "differences" were wearing diapers.


----------



## JBeukema

California Girl said:


> JBeukema said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nope, the source is responsible to ensuring that their data is accurate. Media Matters don't give a shit whether the data or 'facts' are accurate... only that they discredit the right.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> so we're back to you blindly attacking the source and not the claims?
> 
> google: ad hom
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't need to. I know who Media Matters are and I know how they work. So, I dismiss any 'evidence' provided by Media Matters as illegitimate. They are a partisan organization with an agenda to discredit the right.
> 
> I only ever accept information from non partisan organizations that ensure accuracy. That's because I am interested only in actual legitimate information, I don't want a partisan view.
Click to expand...

there's no such thing as neutral media


let the record show that she cares about the source and doesn't bother trying to refute the content


----------



## Truthmatters

Its what she always does


----------



## ihopehefails

Timothy McVeigh got what he deserved while Bill Ayers did not.


----------



## Ravi

Here's the difference: McVeigh is a "misunderstood hero" to the right.

Ayers is a reformed fucktard...but still an historical fucktard.

Amazing to see idiots excusing McVeigh because Ayers existed.


----------



## Yurt

Ravi said:


> Here's the difference: McVeigh is a "misunderstood hero" to the right.
> 
> Ayers is a reformed fucktard...but still an historical fucktard.
> 
> Amazing to see idiots excusing McVeigh because Ayers existed.



bullshit ravi

who on the right calls him a misunderstood hero....the extreme fringe, the same fringe on the left who no doubt calls ayers a hero....

one of your greatest hack posts


----------



## geauxtohell

boedicca said:


> Here's the difference:
> 
> Bill Ayers was a spoiled rich kid who was a pet of the Ivy League and got away with his crime, and is now a leftwing darling.
> 
> McVeigh came from a middle class background, and served in the miltiary - the type of background the leftwing elite, who protected Ayers, despise.



Yeah, I am sure the whole 168 counts of murder didn't factor into McVeigh's prosecution and execution.

It was all an Ivy League conspiracy.


----------



## rdean

Timothy McVeigh - 168

William Ayers - 0

In Republican math, 0=168?


----------



## KissMy

rdean said:


> Timothy McVeigh - 168
> 
> William Ayers - 0
> 
> In Republican math, 0=168?



Ivy League Democrat = To stupid to figure out how to make a bomb that works.


----------



## KissMy

Ravi said:


> Here's the difference: McVeigh is a "misunderstood hero" to the right.
> 
> Ayers is a reformed fucktard...but still an historical fucktard.
> 
> Amazing to see idiots excusing McVeigh because Ayers existed.


McVeigh is not causing us any more problems.

The New York Times Published: September 11, 2001


> William Ayers said "I don't regret setting bombs" and "I feel we didn't do enough", and, when asked if he would "do it all again" he said "I don't want to discount the possibility."



William Ayers sounds really reformed. He is likely warping the minds of students as we speak. Just look how he fucked up the POTUS's head. We will be paying for this asshole for ever.


----------



## MarcATL

Ayers is living the life fat on the hog, teaching, writing books and even getting to hobknob with future Presidents (according to you)

and McVeigh's stinking corpse is rotting in the grave.

WHO'S the dumb one you say?

CLASSIC!!!


----------



## rdean

KissMy said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> 
> Timothy McVeigh - 168
> 
> William Ayers - 0
> 
> In Republican math, 0=168?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ivy League Democrat = To stupid to figure out how to make a bomb that works.
Click to expand...


So you are saying:

0=168?


----------



## Ravi

KissMy said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here's the difference: McVeigh is a "misunderstood hero" to the right.
> 
> Ayers is a reformed fucktard...but still an historical fucktard.
> 
> Amazing to see idiots excusing McVeigh because Ayers existed.
> 
> 
> 
> McVeigh is not causing us any more problems.
> 
> The New York Times Published: September 11, 2001
> 
> 
> 
> William Ayers said "I don't regret setting bombs" and "I feel we didn't do enough", and, when asked if he would "do it all again" he said "I don't want to discount the possibility."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> William Ayers sounds really reformed. He is likely warping the minds of students as we speak. Just look how he fucked up the POTUS's head. We will be paying for this asshole for ever.
Click to expand...

It doesn't help your cause to make him sound worse than he is...his quote about not doing enough meant not doing enough to stop the war, not blow people up. Never fails to amuse me that you people can't even be truthful about someone everyone agrees is an asshole.


----------



## California Girl

Truthmatters said:


> Its what she always does



'She' (I assume you refer to me) questions every source - left or right. 

You accept... blindly and without question whatever Media Matters says.

Which one of us is the fool?


----------



## chanel

Ravi said:


> Here's the difference: McVeigh is a "misunderstood hero" to the right.
> 
> Ayers is a reformed fucktard...but still an historical fucktard.
> 
> Amazing to see idiots excusing McVeigh because Ayers existed.



Really?  Please link to anyone "excusing McVeigh".  Dishonest Ravi.  Very dishonest.


----------



## California Girl

chanel said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here's the difference: McVeigh is a "misunderstood hero" to the right.
> 
> Ayers is a reformed fucktard...but still an historical fucktard.
> 
> Amazing to see idiots excusing McVeigh because Ayers existed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really?  Please link to anyone "excusing McVeigh".  Dishonest Ravi.  Very dishonest.
Click to expand...


Ravi? Dishonest? 








Yep.


----------



## Ravi

If you can claim Ayers is a left wing hero I can claim McVeigh is a right wing hero.


----------



## California Girl

Ravi said:


> If you can claim Ayers is a left wing hero I can claim McVeigh is a right wing hero.



There is actual evidence for one, there is none for the other. But don't let that stop you.


----------



## Ravi

No there isn't.


----------



## California Girl

Ravi said:


> No there isn't.



Denying doesn't change fact, Rav.


----------



## KissMy

Ravi said:


> It doesn't help your cause to make him sound worse than he is...his quote about not doing enough meant not doing enough to stop the war, not blow people up. Never fails to amuse me that you people can't even be truthful about someone everyone agrees is an asshole.





> "Mr. Ayers, who in 1970 was said to have summed up the Weatherman philosophy as: ''Kill all the rich people. Break up their cars and apartments. Bring the revolution home, kill your parents, that's where it's really at,'' is today distinguished professor of education at the University of Illinois at Chicago."



Yea, it sure sounds like Ayers was all about stopping the war. Not!!! Sounds to me like he was in school in Hitlers Natzi Germany & still is clearly a deranged idiot.

In McVeigh's mind he was actually preventing the  killings of more fellow citizens by tyrants that would never be held accountable. He was clearly deranged. I am not Sympathetic, nor do I do not condone McVeigh's response to what he believed was true. He should have went public, campaigned, convinced reporters or organized a huge protest. His actions had the opposite effect what he thought he would achieve & he became the murder's he despised.


----------



## G.T.

lol @ a game of defend your side's bad guy. Ghey


----------



## California Girl

G.T. said:


> lol @ a game of defend your side's bad guy. Ghey



I see no one defending McViegh. Can't say the same for Ayers.


----------



## G.T.

California Girl said:


> G.T. said:
> 
> 
> 
> lol @ a game of defend your side's bad guy. Ghey
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I see no one defending McViegh. Can't say the same for Ayers.
Click to expand...



I'm not seeing the same thread you're seeing.


----------



## jillian

Ame®icano;2233225 said:
			
		

> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> No he isn't.
> 
> No you aren't. You're lying.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, I'm not lying. He's a popular guy in left wing circles. He's a cause celebre with left wingers. He's a hero to a lot of left wing organizations. Or, at least, during the previous Administration he certainly was.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I wonder what makes him so popular?
> 
> You can't be popular if someone launch political career from your place, right?
Click to expand...


he isn't... the only thing that makes him of note is the right's continued discussion about him. 

you need to stop believing your own wingnuts.


----------



## jillian

G.T. said:


> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> G.T. said:
> 
> 
> 
> lol @ a game of defend your side's bad guy. Ghey
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I see no one defending McViegh. Can't say the same for Ayers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not seeing the same thread you're seeing.
Click to expand...


you're not seeing what she's seeing because all they have done is defend McVeigh and talk about how the poor terrorist dear was just 'angry'. 

*sniff*

like that makes a bit of difference in how we see islamic terrorists.


----------



## G.T.

I know. Denial is not a River in Egypt. 

In fact, I'm going to see if there's a Denial River anywhere on Earth. Surely some funny fuck would have named one that by now. *checking*


----------



## hboats

Truthmatters said:


> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JBeukema said:
> 
> 
> 
> so we're back to you blindly attacking the source and not the claims?
> 
> google: ad hom
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't need to. I know who Media Matters are and I know how they work. So, I dismiss any 'evidence' provided by Media Matters as illegitimate. They are a partisan organization with an agenda to discredit the right.
> 
> I only ever accept information from non partisan organizations that ensure accuracy. That's because I am interested only in actual legitimate information, I don't want a partisan view.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Facts jare facts no matter where they come from.
> 
> You cant refute the tape of people actually saying what they are saying which is what MM does.
> 
> They show people saying things and then comment on them.
> 
> you can disagree with the comment but the tape is fact
Click to expand...


Here you go, since you can't be bothered to look it up for yourself I'll give you the FACTS.  The tape you linked to was a FAKE.  It is proven to be a fake.  Yet I'm sure you'll continue to cling to that faked link because it's the only "proof" you have.

 It?s Time For the Black Caucus Race Hustlers to Apologize For Slandering Tea Party Patriots - Big Government

Gateway Pundit

AP Can&#039;t Find Evidence of N-Word Use; Blames Tea Partiers for Posting &#039;Mislabeled&#039; Video | NewsBusters.org

Do you need more?  I'm sure I can find some more proof that this tape was a fake.  It only took me one search and two minutes to find these.

Rick


----------



## hboats

Ravi said:


> Here's the difference: McVeigh is a "misunderstood hero" to the right.
> 
> Ayers is a reformed fucktard...but still an historical fucktard.
> 
> Amazing to see idiots excusing McVeigh because Ayers existed.



So your definition of "reformed" is someone saying "I only wish we'd done more."

And I don't see anyone even close to calling McVeigh a "misunderstood hero" or any kind of a hero.  The only people I see calling anyone a hero are the idiot liberals calling Ayers a hero.

Rick


----------



## Dr Gregg

Skull Pilot said:


> The difference is that McVeigh was a much better demolitions technician.
> 
> That's the only difference.



But ayers group warned of the bombing so not to kill anybody. McVeigh tried to kill people.

Both are assholes for using violence as a form of protest, like some of the teabaggers want to do.


----------



## Dr Gregg

and the hackery of the OP is evident. Obama didn't associated with Ayers when he was anti-government terrorist, but later when Ayers had a non profit group. There were many protesters of the 60's that were young and wild that later realized the error of their ways.   His organization was a public school reform group working with Chicago area schools. THis is when Obama was aboard.

So lame to tie Ayers previous extremist acts with what he was when obama met him, or that Obama is a terrorist sympathizer for having associations with him later in life (long after the terrorist activity).

Plus, working in similar organizations set out to help the community does not mean they were best buds, another disingenuous claim you hear from the hacks


----------



## Dr Gregg

bucs90 said:


> ^^ OK, so you can explain how Obama started his freakin campaign in the living room of a man who would've been, and desired to be, the original Tim McVeigh but simply lacked the bombing and military skills to pull it off?
> 
> Are you telling me that if George W. Bush's campaign for governor of Texas had been started in the dining room of Timothy McVeigh, that it would have been anything other than lead story for the following 25 years on MSNBC????



that's nothing but a lie.



> The New York Times reported that Obama did not have a significant relationship with Ayers.[2] According to several sources, Ayers played no role in starting Obama's career, which was primarily launched when Deborah Leff, then president of the Joyce Foundation, suggested Obama be appointed as chairman of the six-member board that oversaw the distribution of grants in Chicago.[2]


^ a b c d e f g h Shane, Scott (2008-10-03). "Obama and 60s Bomber: A Look Into Crossed Paths". The New York Times. Retrieved 2008-10-12.



> In a November 2008 interview, Ayers said that he knew Obama only slightly: I think my relationship with Obama was probably like that of thousands of others in Chicago and, like millions and millions of others, I wished I knew him better.[20]



^ Remnick, David (2008-11-04). "Mr. Ayerss Neighborhood". The New Yorker. Retrieved 2008-11-05.


----------



## Dr Gregg

JBeukema said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> McVeigh Killed 168 United States Americans and was convicted of his crimes.
> 
> What ever Ayers did it pales in comparison
> 
> 
> 
> Not for lack of intent
Click to expand...


Wait, Ayers groups bombed out of protest and warned of the bombings so there were no victims. McVeigh wanted to kill as many people

slight difference


----------



## Dr Gregg

Truthmatters said:


> JBeukema said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> McVeigh Killed 168 United States Americans and was convicted of his crimes.
> 
> What ever Ayers did it pales in comparison
> 
> 
> 
> Not for lack of intent
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How many people did the weather underground kill?
Click to expand...


3, one of them a member of the weather underground. And these people don't care about the fact that this grouped warned ahead of time so there were no casualties (eventually you bomb enough, there will be casualties, intended or not). Nor care that they bombed out of protest, not to kill as many people as possible. If that were the case, they would not of warned them

Not defending any bombing, but there is a difference between mcveigh and the weather underground


----------



## del

Dr Gregg said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> 
> The difference is that McVeigh was a much better demolitions technician.
> 
> That's the only difference.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *But ayers group warned of the bombing so not to kill anybody*. McVeigh tried to kill people.
> 
> Both are assholes for using violence as a form of protest, like some of the teabaggers want to do.
Click to expand...


of course you've got proof of that, right?


----------



## Dr Gregg

del said:


> Dr Gregg said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> 
> The difference is that McVeigh was a much better demolitions technician.
> 
> That's the only difference.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *But ayers group warned of the bombing so not to kill anybody*. McVeigh tried to kill people.
> 
> Both are assholes for using violence as a form of protest, like some of the teabaggers want to do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> of course you've got proof of that, right?
Click to expand...




> The group intentionally chose its targets to avoid human injury.[11] However, a bomb eventually claimed three lives  members of the group who died during an accidental explosion[11]





> Most were preceded by evacuation warnings, along with communiqués identifying the particular matter that the attack was intended to protest



^ a b The Weather Underground, produced by Carrie Lozano, directed by Bill Siegel and Sam Green, New Video Group, 2003, DVD.

Looking for other sources


----------

