For the Boston Bombers, the President is Just Putting On Ayers …

Bill Ayers and Dzokhar Tsarnaev side by side. Photo courtesy of Cold Warrior.

Bill Ayers and Dzokhar Tsarnaev side by side. Photo courtesy of Cold Warrior.

I have listened, with fascination and horror, to the President’s words since the Boston bombing.

I found them a dispassionate litany of the obvious that did little to inspire or encourage. Among them, he noted:

… on days like this there are no Republicans or Democrats – we are Americans …

…that all Americans stand with the people of Boston.

and

… we salute all those who assisted in responding so quickly and professionally to this tragedy.

Missing was any outrage at the perpetrators of the heinous act or grit and determination in his intent to find who did the deed.

Speaking of the bombers, the President merely said:

… we will get to the bottom of this. And we will find out who did this; we’ll find out why they did this. Any responsible individuals, any responsible groups will feel the full weight of justice.

and

I just want to reiterate we will find out who did this and we will hold them accountable.

I contrast his words with those of George W Bush in the aftermath of 9/11.

His was a call to the defense of a nation under attack; a clear delineation of the acts of terror as evil and a full on promise that there would be no rest until those responsible were tracked down. The phrase rang out and lingers even after almost 12 years, “Whether we bring our enemies to justice or bring justice to our enemies, justice will be done.”

President Obama, in contrast, appears to be merely doing the minimum expected of him. Perhaps for good reason.

Just a week before the Boston bombings Bill Ayers, infamous for being a domestic terrorist in the late 60s and early 70s, confirmed that Barack Obama had, indeed, launched his political career in his living room. The living room of the home he shares with Bernadine Dohrn, also a domestic terrorist.

Ayers and Dohrn were instrumental in the founding and running of an organization known as the Weather Underground Organization (WUO), or just the Weathermen. The WUO were even more radical than the group from which they sprang, Students for a Democratic Society (SDS).

From their genesis in 1969, the WUO planned and executed a number of “bombings, jailbreaks and riots.” 1970 was their banner year.

All told, given the sheer number of bombs they built and deployed it is a miracle they never killed anyone. They actually killed more of themselves than anyone else. Three of their own were killed in March of 1970 when one of their bomb factories exploded.

But it wasn’t for lack of trying. From December of 1969 to September of 1975, Ayers’ and Dohrn’s organization bombed police stations, military installations including the Pentagon, the US Capitol, US and international corporations, state and local government offices and private homes in almost 30 separate bombings.

The group’s final act was in 1981 where members robbed a Brinks truck of $1.6MM and killed two cops and a Brinks guard.

Dorhn was on the FBI’s 10 Most Wanted list for almost 3 years. The reason she and the others didn’t do serious time wasn’t because they weren’t guilty. Rather, the FBI also broke the law in compiling the case against them and the evidence gathered was dismissed.

But no one doubts that Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn intended death, mayhem, destruction and terror even worse than that currently gripping Boston. The Boston bombers targeted a city on a single day. The WUO bombed the nation from coast to coast for years. Ayers himself said of those years that he felt they didn’t do enough although he later claimed that sentiment was to be applied only to his non-violent actions.

This is the couple from whose home Barack Obama launched his political career. Why would I expect him to now be critical of behavior identical to that of his original inner circle? Why would I expect him to be serious about bringing justice to murderous thugs who target the innocent? To do so would require him to “bring the full weight of justice” to bear on his supporters, friends and mentors.

To me his remarks are not presidential at all. He’s merely saying what he thinks he’s supposed to say. I don’t buy it for a moment. To me … he’s just putting on Ayers …

SEE ALSO:

Tale of Two Terrorists by John Murtagh (son of one of WUO’s intended targets) @ New York Post;

FBI Hunting Sleeper Cell Connected to Boston Bombers @ UK Mirror;

Ken Marrero

The Blue Collar Muse

Shortlink:

Posted by on April 20, 2013.
Filed under Agitators, Barack Obama, Domestic Terrorism, Featured Columns, George W. Bush, National Security, The War On Terror, War On Terror.
Tagged with: .
Ken is an experienced 50-Something and has been married to The Much Younger Trophy Wife for 25+ years. They have 5 children, the oldest of which is currently serving tour #2 in Afghanistan. The rest share a home in Tennessee with their tyrannical dachshund, Rusty and an assortment of teens, friends, political crazy people and relatives ... His views are his own but he highly recommends they become your views ... No, really ...

You can leave a response or trackback to this entry
  • GarandFan

    You missed one of the best parts of Dear Leader’s speech:

    “That American spirit includes staying true to the unity and diversity that makes us strong.”

    Unity and diversity?

    War is peace! Knowledge is ignorance! Strength is weakness!

    Somewhere, George Orwell is laughing his ass off!

    • jim_m

      Somewhere, George Orwell is laughing his ass off!

      More likely saying, “I told you so.”

  • Commander_Chico

    I never thought I’d say this, but this post makes Warner seem like Joe Alsop.

    • jim_m

      So was that a thinly veiled homophobic slam? I would expect so.

      • Commander_Chico

        Now you’ve added “homophobe” to your repertoire? Well, “anti-Semitic” was getting a little tired.

        No, I was referring to the writing. I did not even know Alsop was gay. But I doubt you read Alsop, probably just looked him up on Google.

    • Brucehenry

      Not to mention basing a whole post on a World Nut Daily link.

      • Blue Collar Muse

        Well, Bruce …

        Seems you have some paying attention to do.

        The “whole post” was based on the notion that Barack Obama’s concern for all of us was feigned given that his closest supporters behaved in exactly the same fashion as the Boston Bombers. Not sure how you missed that.

        The only thing the link to WND was meant to do is support the notion that Bill Ayers has publicly stated that Obama’s career was launched from his home. It’s sort of why the words turned into a link read, “This is the couple from whose home Barack Obama launched his political career.” But perhaps you don’t understand the concept of citation.

        Given that we have a 1st Amendment in our nation, you are entitled to both your opinion and to express it. But nowhere does that mean that you are either correct or relevant.

        I understand that concept and your object lesson of speaking publicly in the fashion that you have makes it impossible to miss when it is applied to you.

        Ken~

        • Brucehenry

          OK, so the WHOLE post wasn’t based on the WND article. But let’s admit that WND is a kooky outfit, shall we?

          WND didn’t link to the Daily Beast interview, and neither did you, but when you read it you’ll find Ayers isn’t exactly one of Obama’s “closest supporters” — and never was, despite the paranoid fantasies and opportunistic gotchas of wingnuts like yourself.

          http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/04/03/exclusive-bill-ayers-on-the-weathermen-obama-s-crap-job-more.html

          Hey, if a candidate for state legislator asked if he could hold a fundraiser at your house, and you said yes, would that make you “one of his original inner circle?” Would you consider that you had “launched his political career” from your home? Would that mean that 20 years later you could fairly be characterized as his “friend and mentor” even if you expressed ambivalence about his policies?

          But I think you should continue to beat this dead horse, Ken. Re-debating the whole Vietnam War argument worked so well for Republicans in 2008. And it’s not shameful at all to use this Marathon terrorism thing as a stick to beat Obama with, either.

          PS: Robert Redford wants to thank you for the indirect plug for his upcoming movie.

          • Walter_Cronanty

            Bruce, one thing, more than a myriad of others, has always bothered me about the MSM and Obama. Obama writes about his close relationship with Frank Davis Marshall, his father figure/mentor, a known communist sympathizer. He also writes that he gravitated towards Marxist/revolutionary professors in college. He was an Alysinkite “community organizer” and a member of the “New Party”, a socialist [at best] political party. His political career started in the living room of Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dorn, known terrorist bombers – and more importantly, totally unrepentant. He also attended the Rev. Wright’s church, inculcating his daughters in that soupy mix of anti-Semitic, socialist, liberation theology. Not the most pro-USA, capitalistic of backgrounds, even you must admit.

            I got “clean for Gene” in ’68 – so I’m no one to cast stones at someone for what they believed in college, or for a few years later. But I can tell you when I had my road to Damascus moment. When was Obama’s? Did he have one, or does he still believe what he did 10, 20 or 30 years ago? No one that I am aware of has ever questioned him about the change of his earlier political views.

            Don’t give me that tired cop out about beating “a dead horse.” I’m interested, curious about my Commander-in Chief. What will history write? When did he change? And why?

          • herddog505

            Asking those questions is RAAAAACIST.

            Remember: Barry’s a blank slate on whom people can see what they want. For democrats, of course, that means seeing an intelligent, erudite, calm, thoughtful, middle-of-the-road, compromising, clean and articulate new type of politician.

            For the rest of us, it means… seeing him for what he is.

            Unfortunately, history is written these days by lefties of the sort who will tell us that gun ownership in America is a fairly new phenomenon*, that the Second Amendment was written for slavery^, or that bans on abortion is all about keeping women in their place**. It’s not really about reality.

            ====

            (*) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_A._Bellesiles

            (^) http://www.saf.org/LawReviews/Bogus2.htm

            (**)http://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/issues/97may/abortion.htm

          • Brucehenry

            So everyone’s life has to follow the same course as yours? Everyone was a liberal in college, then had a Road to Damascus moment?

            With all due respect, Walter, you’re just spouting Talk Radio shouting points — and you’re not even getting all of THEM right. It was Frank Marshall Davis you’re so concerned about, not Frank Davis Marshall, whoever he was. LOL.

            I find wingnuts (and I use that word as a term of endearment, no offense) are “curious” about Obama in the same way Oliver Stone was “curious” about the JFK assassination and about Nixon. Willing to swallow the MOST outlandish and scary-sounding interpretations of events, willing to believe the worst about him, whether it’s true or not true, whether it’s plausible or made up out of thin air.

            As for what Ayers and Dohrn did, if you were “clean for Gene” you must be a couple of years older than I am. You must remember the zeitgeist of the times. Did YOU feel terrorized by the Weather Underground, in the same way that Al Qaeda (or even these rookie lamers who bombed the Boston Marathon) makes you feel today? And, not to excuse bombings, but all of theirs were preceded by warnings and occurred when no one was around to get hurt, if I’m not mistaken. I would venture to guess that many of your fellow Gene McCarthy campaign volunteers, while not endorsing bombing stuff, weren’t exactly vociferous in their condemnations of the Weathermen, either. and felt Vietnam and social injustice at home were intertwined and must be opposed by any means necessary. I myself, as a teen approaching military age, was much more fearful that the war would still be ongoing than I was of being blown up by some naive radical anarchist.

            I admired, in some ways, the “revolutionaries” of the 1960s student movement. It didn’t occur to me at the time just how privileged, naive, and spoiled many of these “kids” were. I never had a “come to Damascus” moment, I just grew up. Accepted reality. After a while all that revolutionary rhetoric seemed childish and silly, and sad, and then tragic when someone got killed. By the time the SLA kidnapped Patty Hearst, those kinds of radicals seemed almost laughable. When you’re out there, trying to make a living, you have to come to terms with the world as it is, not live in some Fantasyland world as it “should be.”

            As for repentance, well, I suggest Ayers and Dohrn are human beings who can rationalize what they did in the past, as most people can. Not to be too outrageous, but Robert McNamara, at least partially responsible for millions of Vietnamese and thousands of American deaths, didn’t exactly beat himself up in later years. Dick Cheney vows on camera he’d “do it all again” — meaning torture people if he thought he could glean information about terror plots from them, and invade countries that didn’t attack us, causing perhaps hundreds of thousands to die. People rationalize their actions and justify in their own minds what they did, so they can live with themselves. Ayers and Dohrn are no different than McNamara, Cheney, and George W Bush in that regard.

            PS: See also Nixon, Dick; Kissinger, Henry; Rumsfeld, Donald; etc etc etc. These fuckers killed many more people than Ayers and Dohrn did, which was zero.

          • Walter_Cronanty

            Since I don’t listen to much talk radio, who has been “shouting” my questions? Certainly no one at an Obama press conference.

            But, all that blather and you didn’t answer the questions I asked – instead, like an Obama apologist, you go off on a rant about W and Cheney. With all due respect to you, Bruce, you’re just spouting MSNBC shouting points.

            Of course, you don’t know if Obama has changed his political views from 10, 20, or 30 years ago, do you Bruce? With greatest media saturation in history, with the 24-7 news cycle, this is the most un-vetted President we’ve ever had and you aren’t in the least bit curious. Instead, you blame Bush and apparently adopt Hillary’s complete lack of curiosity about Benghazi: “What difference at this point does it make?”

          • Brucehenry

            What I meant to say — and yes, I digressed, lol — is that some people’s views evolve slowly, and others, such as yourself, have Road to Damascus moments.

            If Obama has views similar to Frank Marshall Davis’s today, he has a funny way of showing them. His healthcare “reform” was a giveaway to Big Insurance; his foreign policy still entails having military bases in over 100 countries and includes a “right” to preemptively invade other nations; he has left Guantanamo open; his drones fill me with more terror than the thought of two Chechen al Qaeda wannabes; he accepts, no WELCOMES, donations from Wall Street fat cats and shoulders the obligations such donations entail; he continues the Cuban embargo — shall I go on? If Davis, or the Ayers and Dohrn of the 60s, were still influential in his thinking, would he espouse those policies?

            Funny how my mentioning Cheny and Bush is a “rant,” but I suppose mentioning Hillary and Benghazi is perfectly valid.

          • jim_m

            Funny how my mentioning Cheny and Bush is a “rant,” but I suppose mentioning Hillary and Benghazi is perfectly valid.

            That’s because most lefties complaining about Bush and Cheney are unhinged lunatics spouting asinine conspiracy theories, whereas Hilary was the Secy of State and there are legitimate questions which have gone unanswered about what the sequence of events was at Benghazi.

          • Brucehenry

            Oh, okay.

          • fustian24

            And BruceHenry: “unhinged lunatics spouting asinine conspiracy theories” is just a term of endearment if you didn’t realize it.

          • Brucehenry

            That’s fine. No offense taken.

          • Commander_Chico

            I’m not a lefty, I don’t have conspiracy theories: Bush and Cheney were just fuck-ups.

          • jim_m

            Since you are an obama supporter your judgement is highly questionable.

            And your claim of not having conspiracy theories is a howler since you are constantly carrying on about the “oligarchy”.

          • Jwb10001

            You are a leftie and you are complete conspiracy nut, ever read your own posts? Tells about the Oligarchy and how they are in complete control of the world again.

          • Commander_Chico

            The oligarchy is not a conspiracy, it’s not a secret that large financial interests direct policy.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            But you are our soi disant cognoscenti.

          • twmon9816

            He didn’t change one bit. He hates this country as it was founded. He and his pig wife hate white people and all of his actions since he duped the truly ignorant people in this country to elect him is the proof. He’s not dtupid though, his Cloward-Piven strategy is right on course to making the us a third world sh!thole.

          • fustian24

            Sure, and when I decide to launch my political career in Boston, I’m going to use the living room of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev (who I expect to be named an Ivy League professor any day now).

            Because, you know, as long as I don’t really know him that well, it doesn’t say anything about me that I wouldn’t find that morally repugnant really would it?

            And if a conservative were to go to some Christian college, none of you guys would squawk would you as long as they offered a space to further a political career?

            Yeah.

          • jim_m

            The reason the left does not find islamic terrorism to be a threat and finds islamophobia to be such a concern is because just like with Ayers and Dohrn, they find commonality with the islamists in their hate of America and what the US stands for.

            If Boston had been committed by a right winger they would be talking about cracking down on civil liberties. Now that it has been shown to be islamic terrorism we have Sen Feinstein on TV talking about the dangers of islamophobia.

            You can always count on the left to take sides with our enemies and against America.

          • Brucehenry

            Squawk all you want. I just disagree, is all.

            If you find Obama’s choice to not shun Ayers, who was handed his freedom by a technicality and later became a respected teacher, morally repugnant, don’t vote for him.

            Meanwhile, I’ll not vote for anyone who goes on G.Gordon Liddy’s show — a guy who advocates killing federal agents and is unrepentant about that to this day — to advance THEIR political careers. And I won’t vote for anyone who makes nice with Falwell or Hagee, homophobes and fanatics of the first order.

            We all have our points of view. I come to Wizbang to disagree with the prevailing one here. I’ve learned a lot since I’ve been coming here. Occasionally, from YOU.

          • fustian24

            Maybe you need to read a little more about Ayers. At one point he planned to exterminate something like 20% of the US population because he didn’t think they could be brainwashed enough in the reeducation camps he planned to set up in the desert southwest.

            And he is unrepentant to this day.

            I mean really. Falwell and Liddy? Versus Ayers? You nuts?

          • Blue Collar Muse

            BruceHenry – you said, “OK, so the WHOLE post wasn’t based on the WND article. But let’s admit that WND is a kooky outfit, shall we?

            WND didn’t link to the Daily Beast interview, and neither did you, but when you read it you’ll find Ayers isn’t exactly one of Obama’s “closest supporters” — and never was, despite the paranoid fantasies and opportunistic gotchas of wingnuts like yourself.”

            Which I take to mean, “Gee, Ken, the point you made is actually factually correct. Obama really did begin his career in the living room of Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn. And it really chaps my butt that World Net Daily got the story right because I don’t like them.”

            To which I respond, “You’re welcome!”

          • Brucehenry

            Did I ever say that there was not a fundraiser in Ayers’ living room? My point is that a.) WND is a kooky outfit, and b.) the 1995 fundraiser is a molehill that WND, and other kooks, wishes was a mountain.

            Your points, that Ayers is one of Obama’s “closest supporters,” or that he and Dohrn are “friends and mentors,” are NOT demonstrated by the Daily Beast interview, which is why, perhaps, neither one of you linked to it? You tell me why you didn’t want your readers to get the full story, Ken.

          • jim_m

            The fund raiser was enough of an embarrassment that obama lied about it claiming that it never happened. It ties him to a terrorist and communist as a close friend and political ally. It demonstrates that the MSM was totally in the tank and refused to investigate the connection. The point is that it demonstrates how the left and the media have covered up this tool’s past and we have been stuck with an incompetent ideologue that hates what America stands for.

          • Brucehenry

            Except I heard about the story on both NPR and ABC News in 2008. Oh, and in the News and Observer of Raleigh, a McClatchy paper. Along with the rest of America, who weren’t interested in re-debating the Vietnam War and the social upheaval it spawned.

          • Blue Collar Muse

            Bruce –

            When you put straw man words in my mouth and then try to shoot the thing down you just sound silly.

            I didn’t link to the Daily Beast article because I didn’t link to the Daily Beast article. I linked to the WND piece.

            And if the Daily Beast article does not support the notion that Ayers and Dohrn are friends and mentors that is irrelevant. I did not link to WND to substantiate a friendship. I linked, as I pointed out earlier, to substantiate that Obama launched his career in Ayers’ home. Something even you admit …

            Finally, once again, even if the Daily Beast piece doesn’t support the notion of a strong relationship between Obama and Ayers, that’s all that you can say based on that piece – that it doesn’t support it. You cannot, as you want to do, argue that it proves they didn’t have one.

            The DB piece has Ayers saying they had all the trappings of a friendship and in the next breath denying the friendship existed. About what I expect. Nothing there to compel me to believe that they were merely acquaintances who bumped into each other now and then.

            You disbelieve the evidence because you don’t want your President to be the companion of murderous, leftist, domestic terrorists who are no different from the ones your President denounced in Boston. I believe they were friends because the evidence points to that conclusion and offers nothing that conclusively refutes that conclusion. I believe your President is a hypocrite and cannot safely denounce today’s terrorists because he ran with, and may still run with, yesterday’s terrorists.

          • Brucehenry

            So you believe that they were “close friends and supporters”, and maybe still are, and that Ayers and Dohrn were Obama’s “mentors,” (your words) based on the “evidence” which is nowhere to be found in the WND piece or the DB interview, the two bases of your article.

            One of which you don’t link to, perhaps because, oh, I don’t know,….it doesn’t support your thesis?

            Okay.

            Now explain to me how what anything Ayers said in the DB interview meant that he and Obama had “all the trappings” of a friendship. I missed that. Or that he and his wife were Obama’s “mentors” or some of his “closest supporters.” Or how the fact that Obama held a fundraiser in their living room makes them two of his “original inner circle.” Missed all those things too.

            See, THAT’S what makes you a wingnut, Ken. You take facts and run with them, putting the most outlandish and scary-sounding interpretations on them and spouting allegations based on these spurious interpretations as if they were Gospel Truth. A Glenn Beck wannabe?

            And, please, spare me — anyone who links to WND for any reason has some nerve saying ANYONE else “looks silly.”

            Edited to add: The point of your article, as I read it, was that Obama can’t condemn the Marathon bombers strongly enough because their behavior was similar to Ayers’s and Dohrn’s. WHO YOU THEN DESCRIBE AS MENTORS, FRIENDS, AND “CLOSEST”SUPPORTERS based on the WND article, which is supposedly based on the DB interview. But here you admit that maybe it DOESN’T establish that Ayers and Dohrn played those roles.

          • jim_m

            You are either ignorant or dishonest.

            It is a well known fact that obama was sellected by Ayers to be President of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, responsible for passing out millions in foundation money to far left causes that did nothing to improve education. They worked together on the Challenge for 6 yearss and shared an office with Mike Klonsky (another radical leftist and communist) for 3 years.

            Oh, and while they shared that office obama steered $1,968,718 to Ayers and his bogus front organization. But we are to believe that despite sharing an office and obama giving millions of dollars of other people’s money to Ayers that they are not friends and hardly know each other.

            Go ahead and lie to us or at least yourself that obama had no connection with these terrorists. But that is all you are doing.

          • Brucehenry

            Nope. Never said no connection. I said there is no evidence in the WND article or the DB interview it’s based on that Ayers or Dohrn are “mentors,” members of Obama’s “original inner circle,” “closest supporters,” or, indeed, even “friends.”

            You ever work with someone for a long time, even for, say, 4 years, and have friendly daily interaction with them, yet not really consider them a “friend,” Jim? I have. I’ll wager lots of folks have. That’s why voters yawned when wingnuts had a hissyfit about this in 2008 — and yes, it was covered by the Lamestream Media ™. That’s why they yawned when wingnuts brought it BACK up in 2012.

            This is not a winner for you guys, Jim. And clue Ken in, too, willya?

            By the way, the Wikipedia entry for the Annenberg Challenge says someone named Deborah Leff suggested Obama to be president of the challenge. Here’s a link:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Annenberg_Challenge

            Here’s another interesting one from Wikipedia:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Ayers_presidential_election_controversy

          • jim_m

            Yeah, I’ve worked with plenty of people that I would not call friends. But then again, I didn’t give them $2M either. You go giving money to the person you share an office with and there is probably something more than loathing there.

          • Brucehenry

            Now I’m confused. Did Obama personally give Ayers two million dollars or did Ayers personally give that amount to Obama?

          • jim_m

            Yet another reading comprehension challenged lefty. I said explicitly who gave who money and where that money came from above. You’re proving my point that you are either ignorant or dishonest on this issue.

          • Brucehenry

            Something must be wrong with my computer. I coulda swore that comment above had only 3 paragraphs when I read it the first time.

            EDIT; The “link” is in blue but it doesn’t “link.”

          • jim_m

            link is fixed

          • Brucehenry

            And your comment was edited.

            The Verum Serum link proves nothing. You know the Annenberg Challenge was ABOUT giving away money, right?

            That was a pretty big office building. You guys make it sound like these guys had two desks in the same cramped basement office or something.

          • jim_m

            Yes, the challenge was about giving money away that would improve education. Instead obama and Ayers steered the funds to themselves and to ideologically far left organizations that did not ultimately promote educational improvement but instead promoted political indoctrination.

            And it is not a very big office building. It is only 5 stories and also houses the local Social Security Office, which I’ll bet takes up more than one floor.

            They did not share and address, they shared an office.

          • Brucehenry

            “They did not share an address, they shared an office.”

            If so, that’s not established in your link. Same building, same floor, but I don’t see a Suite number or office number, do you?

            Plus, even you have shared offices with folks you didn’t think of as friends, right? Much less “mentors,” “close supporters,” or members of your “original inner circle?”

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Both is a near certainty in this case.

  • MartinLandauCalrissian

    Obama can’t get excited about Americans being killed by his pals in Islam. But he CAN get upset that his drive to disarm Americans failed. He was VERY upset about that.

  • Walter_Cronanty

    The lib in the next cubicle [not a bad guy] told me he thought the marathon bomber was a member of the Tea Party. I ask him to name one terrorist who was member of the Tea Party. He couldn’t. I told him the President of the United States is personal friends with at least two more terrorist bombers than existed in the Tea Party. He shut up, for a little while.

  • Blue Collar Muse

    I’ve updated the post with a picture of Ayers and Tsarnaev side by side along with a couple of interesting links. The NYP link in particular is a must read. It’s written by the son of one of the judges Ayers and Dorhn’s group tried to murder. And don’t worry BruceHenry … murder is just a term of endearment for “serious noogies.”

    • Brucehenry

      Maybe I’m blind or crazy but I can’t find any new link to the NYP.

      Edited to add: Found it, not on Wizbang but on your own blog.

      The article is about Kathy Boudin, who was associated with Ayers and Dohrn but is not, umm, either Ayers or Dohrn. To my knowledge, neither Ayers nor Dohrn were ever charged with the Greenwich Village townhouse explosion or the attack on the judge’s house. Correct me if I’m wrong.

      • jim_m

        Here Bruce, you can edify yourself with this link from the telegraph which details what Tamerlan Tsarneav did on his 6 month trip to Russia. Apparently he spent much of it conferring with a radical islamic imam.

        One has to wonder how much of this failure is due to the lax attitude toward islamic terrorism promoted by obama himself. It seems as though following up on a lead simply was not a priority.

        • Brucehenry

          Oh yeah, Obama probably asked his mentor Ayers what to do, and Ayers told Bernardine to tell Michelle to tell Obama not to worry about it.

          • jim_m

            lol. No, but you cannot deny that this admin has done everything it can to ignore terrorism.

          • Brucehenry

            I can’t? Well, okay.

          • jim_m

            Alright, you can but it would make you look really foolish.

      • Blue Collar Muse

        Well, gee, Bruce … Ayers and Dohrn found WUO … they established the modus operandi of putting bombs in public places and private residences … one of their followers does as instructed but you want to give them a pass?

        If you are suggesting that Ayers and Dohrn are blameless in these attempted murders and terrorist acts because they didn’t actually commit the crimes then you’d have to also believe that Osama bin Laden is as pure as the driven snow since he didn’t actually fly a plane into anything.

        The rest of us will continue living in a place known to most as Reality Land.

        • Brucehenry

          There you go again. So Ayers and Dohrn INVENTED putting bombs in public places? And where is your evidence that Ayers and Dohrn “instructed” those who bombed the judge’s house?

          Seems like if Boudin had been “instructed” by Ayers or Dohrn they would have been charged with conspiracy in this case. Were they?