Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Yes, you're too busy mischaracterizing what most liberals feel.You are, at best, merely an example of an outlying statistic.
So, no. It's accurate, but I accept your apology.
And no. It's not at all a matter of being too "sensitive." That cheap ass attempt of yours at rhetoric is completely unpersuasive.
I'm always tickled when non liberals tell us how "all" liberals feel. And yes, it's a matter of being overly sensitive if you're still hung up on Ayers. Persuasive or not, it's the truth...much like poll numbers from last November; I remember more than one conservative poster here not believing them...you'll never guessed what happened to them. Those numbers weren't "persuasive either" but they were the truth.
I am always amused by pompous irrelevant bleatings from some silly liberal like you.
I did not say anything about what "all" liberals feel.
To be bothered 40 years later is silly....no matter how much impotent profanity you spew.And you remain wrong, no matter how often you repeat yourself.
The liberal scumbag piece of shit, Bill Ayers, good pal of The ONE, was a domestic terrorist. He should have been sent to prison long ago. I'd be pleased if he spent every last minute of his worthless life there.
Mindless liberal idiots call that being too "sensitive" to him, but that's only because so many of you mindless liberal idiots either forget what he did or just don't care.
It is your rhetoric that is unpersuasive and your cheese dick rhetoric is not remotely akin to poll numbers. But I enjoy your many fails.
One man's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter.
The Weathermen turned to violence in response to an unjust war that was robbing America of its young men and endangering the republic.
I am surprised that Dorhn and Ayers were not killed like members of the Symbionese Liberation Front and the Black Panther Party.
They were communist revolutionaries. Plain and simple.
Anything else fuck off on.
One man's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter.
Reagan called the Mujahideen "Freedom fighters" when the US trained and financed them to fight the Russians in Afghanistan. The Mujahideen later morphed into Al Qaeda, having been made much more powerful by Reagan. Reagan also sold weapons to Iran, increased aid to Saudi Arabia, and removed Hussein's Iraq from the list of Terrorist Nations.
Bush Sr. and Jim Baker were in the Carlyle Group with members of the Bin Laden Family.
These things are never reported because the mainstream media is owned by large corporations who want lower taxes and fewer regulations - therefore, we know who they support.
Point is: there are some very questionable partnerships on both sides of the aisle. If the Right stood up to their own party, they'd have more credibility on the Ayers issue.
CaféAuLait;7128661 said:[
Wait, are you serious? You said:
The term domestic terrorism is simply a label extremists hang on people they wish to destroy.
So their plotting to blow up Fort Dix and blowing up houses along half a city block and killing three of their own did not terrorize anyone? Their setting off bombs in police cars, the Pentagon and Capitol did not terrorize anyone? Them being convicted of murder and killing did not terrorize anyone? Ayers still proclaims he is not sorry and would do it all over again.
Maybe if Kathy Boudin had been looked at as a TERRORIST instead of only being seriously injured in that explosion she may have not have been involved in the murder of two police officers and one security guard years later and convicted of murder. As it stands she was convicted of murder BUT is now teaching in our colleges and given prestigious titles.
How 1960s Radicals Ended Up Teaching Your Kids - The Daily Beast
One man's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter.
When Bin Laden was killing Russians in Afghanistan for the horrible crime of teaching girls to read, Ronald Reagan called him a "Freedom Fighter".
When he flew planes into buildings full of rich Americans, he was a "terrorist".
See the difference?
There is none.
He's a guy willing to use violence to acheive his goals. So was Ayers.
Terrorist is one of those words we need to retire.
One man's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter.
Reagan called the Mujahideen "Freedom fighters" when the US trained and financed them to fight the Russians in Afghanistan. The Mujahideen later morphed into Al Qaeda, having been made much more powerful by Reagan. Reagan also sold weapons to Iran, increased aid to Saudi Arabia, and removed Hussein's Iraq from the list of Terrorist Nations.
Bush Sr. and Jim Baker were in the Carlyle Group with members of the Bin Laden Family.
These things are never reported because the mainstream media is owned by large corporations who want lower taxes and fewer regulations - therefore, we know who they support.
You watched one too many movies. Sly was your hero truly?
Point is: there are some very questionable partnerships on both sides of the aisle. If the Right stood up to their own party, they'd have more credibility on the Ayers issue.
Yes, you're too busy mischaracterizing what most liberals feel.I'm always tickled when non liberals tell us how "all" liberals feel. And yes, it's a matter of being overly sensitive if you're still hung up on Ayers. Persuasive or not, it's the truth...much like poll numbers from last November; I remember more than one conservative poster here not believing them...you'll never guessed what happened to them. Those numbers weren't "persuasive either" but they were the truth.
I am always amused by pompous irrelevant bleatings from some silly liberal like you.
I did not say anything about what "all" liberals feel.
To be bothered 40 years later is silly....no matter how much impotent profanity you spew.And you remain wrong, no matter how often you repeat yourself.
The liberal scumbag piece of shit, Bill Ayers, good pal of The ONE, was a domestic terrorist. He should have been sent to prison long ago. I'd be pleased if he spent every last minute of his worthless life there.
Mindless liberal idiots call that being too "sensitive" to him, but that's only because so many of you mindless liberal idiots either forget what he did or just don't care.
It is your rhetoric that is unpersuasive and your cheese dick rhetoric is not remotely akin to poll numbers. But I enjoy your many fails.
Weren't you vowing to leave the board if Obama won? Or am I talking to the wrong beeotch?
One man's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter.
Reagan called the Mujahideen "Freedom fighters" when the US trained and financed them to fight the Russians in Afghanistan. The Mujahideen later morphed into Al Qaeda, having been made much more powerful by Reagan. Reagan also sold weapons to Iran, increased aid to Saudi Arabia, and removed Hussein's Iraq from the list of Terrorist Nations.
Bush Sr. and Jim Baker were in the Carlyle Group with members of the Bin Laden Family.
These things are never reported because the mainstream media is owned by large corporations who want lower taxes and fewer regulations - therefore, we know who they support.
Point is: there are some very questionable partnerships on both sides of the aisle. If the Right stood up to their own party, they'd have more credibility on the Ayers issue.[/QUOTE
I had to come back at this.
More credibility on the Ayers issue? Issue?
Fuck you. The Weathermen were terrorists. Don't you even play this game for a minute.
You're in my sights now. Fuck off that you could even dream that Ayers and Dohrn weren't terrorists.
Game on.
I lived in NYC when William Ayers was blowing us up, and on 9/11/01 the scumbag gave an interview regretting that he didn't do more of it. After Boston, do you Libs start to understand why Obama's pal Ayers bother us?
Can you link the interview? I recall that he said that he didn't do enough to stop the senseless slaughter of American soldiers - but I'd love to see all his words in context. Frankly, I don't doubt he said some very radical things, some of which were violent.
Also, can you give the specific details of the bombs he exploded? I have researched some of this, but would love to see some non-partisan sources of what he was specifically involved in. I heard he bombed a statue and the Pentagon, neither of which resulted in casualties, both of which were accompanied by a political statement on his opposition to the Vietnam War. Similar to bombing an abortion clinic where the bomber is attempting to protest what they see as needless deaths.
Here is a quote from Ayers
The Weather Underground went on to take responsibility for placing several small bombs in empty offices.... We did carry out symbolic acts of extreme vandalism directed at monuments to war and racism, and the attacks on property, never on people, were meant to respect human life and convey outrage and determination to end the Vietnam war
Here is a description of the deaths caused by the group - which happened after Ayers fled the group and went underground
The bombing attacks mostly targeted government buildings, along with several banks. Most were preceded by evacuation warnings, along with communiqués identifying the particular matter that the attack was intended to protest. No persons were killed in any of their acts of property destruction, although three members of the group were killed in the Greenwich Village townhouse explosion and former members of the group robbed a Brinks armored car in 1981 resulting in the death of three people including Waverly Brown, the first black police officer on the Nyack police force
Here is an interview he gave on the matter to a partisan interviewer.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkRBTH-eFoM]William Ayers GMA Interview About Obama - 11/14/08 - YouTube[/ame]
It was extremely poor judgment on Weathermen's part to resort to violence and odd and erroneous on Ayers' part to elevate violence and destruction of properties built with the tax money from many people who also opposed to Vietnam War to the level of education. It's an utter insult to all true educators, of whom he is currently one. Nonetheless, Weathermen were extreme vandals, not terrorists. Is vandalism of government property bad? Absolutely. Is it as bad as actions that most Americans consider to be terrorism: intentionally targeting and killing civilians to push any kind of a social agenda? Absolutely not.
[
YOU might have your first hint of credibility if YOU had not snipped my comment.
In addition to my reiteration of the oft-repeated words used by so many liberal apologists, I ALSO said, "SOMETIMES, * * *, a freedom fighter is also just a scumbag terrorist."
Fucking leftwing lunatic liberals have pictures on their t-shirts of scumbag murdering filth like Che Guevarra. So, I think I'll pass on accepting lectures on credibility from a defender of the lunatic leftwing.
He is a murdering terrorist. There the truth is out, and it is so. Only idiot socialist pukes would defend the fool. But then you defend obamaturd also.It was extremely poor judgment on Weathermen's part to resort to violence and odd and erroneous on Ayers' part to elevate violence and destruction of properties built with the tax money from many people who also opposed to Vietnam War to the level of education. It's an utter insult to all true educators, of whom he is currently one. Nonetheless, Weathermen were extreme vandals, not terrorists. Is vandalism of government property bad? Absolutely. Is it as bad as actions that most Americans consider to be terrorism: intentionally targeting and killing civilians to push any kind of a social agenda? Absolutely not.
More: Sam Sedaei: Calling Bill Ayers a "Terrorist" Doesn't Make Him So
JFK was probably the last sensible dimwit.[
YOU might have your first hint of credibility if YOU had not snipped my comment.
In addition to my reiteration of the oft-repeated words used by so many liberal apologists, I ALSO said, "SOMETIMES, * * *, a freedom fighter is also just a scumbag terrorist."
Fucking leftwing lunatic liberals have pictures on their t-shirts of scumbag murdering filth like Che Guevarra. So, I think I'll pass on accepting lectures on credibility from a defender of the lunatic leftwing.
How is that any different than a lot of the murdering scumbag filth we allied ourselves with during the Cold War, from the Apartheid Regime in South Africa to the Juntas in Latin America to Franco in Spain. (Buds with Hitler and Mussolini!)
Here's what a sensible American said about the Cuban Revolutionaries.
"I believe that there is no country in the world including any and all the countries under colonial domination, where economic colonization, humiliation and exploitation were worse than in Cuba, in part owing to my countrys policies during the Batista regime. I approved the proclamation which Fidel Castro made in the Sierra Maestra, when he justifiably called for justice and especially yearned to rid Cuba of corruption. I will even go further: to some extent it is as though Batista was the incarnation of a number of sins on the part of the United States. Now we shall have to pay for those sins. In the matter of the Batista regime, I am in agreement with the first Cuban revolutionaries. That is perfectly clear."
U.S. President John F. Kennedy, interview with Jean Daniel, 24 October 1963[11]
You guys get upset about Che, who frankly, isn't all that. He wrote some stuff that yuppie Americans relate to because of the alienating nature of our own society.
But the reality is, the people we opposed were often less noxious than the people we supported.
Incidently, on balance, I think we were on the right side in the Cold War. But we weren't saints. And we created problems in the process we are STILL dealing with.
If the USSR were still in her prime, you really think we'd have Chechens blowing shit up in Boston in 2013?
Blowback, anyone?
It was extremely poor judgment on Weathermen's part to resort to violence and odd and erroneous on Ayers' part to elevate violence and destruction of properties built with the tax money from many people who also opposed to Vietnam War to the level of education. It's an utter insult to all true educators, of whom he is currently one. Nonetheless, Weathermen were extreme vandals, not terrorists. Is vandalism of government property bad? Absolutely. Is it as bad as actions that most Americans consider to be terrorism: intentionally targeting and killing civilians to push any kind of a social agenda? Absolutely not.
More: Sam Sedaei: Calling Bill Ayers a "Terrorist" Doesn't Make Him So
I lived in NYC when William Ayers was blowing us up, and on 9/11/01 the scumbag gave an interview regretting that he didn't do more of it. After Boston, do you Libs start to understand why Obama's pal Ayers bother us?
The only reason you righties give a shit about Ayers is to somehow link him to Obama - and that horse has been beaten to death. Why aren't you discussing little Timmy McVeigh...?
The only reason you righties give a shit about Ayers is to somehow link him to Obama - and that horse has been beaten to death. Why aren't you discussing little Timmy McVeigh...?
