Jay,

But, But, He's a Democrat, so he can't be a terrorist! Every act he did, he did with the best of intentions. You know that all democrats only act with peace and love in their hearts.

And besides, all those acts were committed in pre-history, before the evil Bush stole the election and took office! It's all Bushs' fault!

What's the matter with you. Contributing in this horrific manner to the downward spiral of political discourse in this country.

Shame, Shame on you....

If his past is starting to bother him, if he actually regrets the terrorist ways of his youth, or even if it is only causing problems for him in his every day life, I'm happy to hear it.

I hope he lives a long time, in misery.

I got a place that we can all send Mr Ayers, Pelosi, Reid, Obama, jarret, Dodd, and the other idiots that are driving this country to abysmal cliff..........SOMALIA

PS: Just throw the keys away and forget about them please.......

Decorum prevents me from saying exactly what I think about that @$$ and his attempts to gloss over his TERRORIST past.

Ayer's isn't a terrorist, it's not a tax, and "I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky".

I heard someone say recently, "Freedom Fighter or Terrorist" depends on which side you're on.
That about sums it up there for the liberals/progressives.

The Vietnam War was certainly a divisive issue back then. I had my draft card from the war, but wasn't called up because President Nixon decided to wind down the U.S. involvement at the time. I supported what both Lyndon Johnson and President Nixon were trying to do at the time; allow the government of the South to have their own self-determination rights. However, with strong feelings by those in the North to reunify the country, the U.S. faced a difficult situation stuck in the middle of a civil war in Vietnam.

Some antiwar radicals like Bill Ayers chose to go to outrageous extremes to oppose that war. I couldn't understand that personally. But, Presidents Johnson and Nixon had little choice but to seek to restore order there. The continued civil war in Vietnam left that country in violence and chaos. And often peacekeepers face very difficult situations in civil wars when two sides refuse to seek an orderly path to deciding government for their country.

But today, Vietnam is friend of the U.S. once again. And trade is increasing each year. I even sell products from Vietnam in my store such as soups and school supplies. (Soups from Vietnam are good by the way).

The U.S. once even had a civil war as well you know, and now it's one big country again.

Civil wars always bring out the worst in people for a while, and then all is forgotten(or should be). Maybe, Bill Ayers, Jane Fonda and a few other folks behaved like idiots during that civil war in Vietnam. But, I think it's time to move on.

Paul Hooson: "But, I think it's time to move on."

Yes...without them.

They can live out their years...they just need to STFU. When they choose to open their mouths then it is OUR right to remind them what flagrant assholes they were and are...and that in any sane society they would be dead or imprisoned. They should be happy just to be breathing.

Period.

How about calling him an ugly piece of shit that never deserved to be born in a country like America.

And it wasn't the Vietnam war that made him do the things he did, it was just a cover, these types always have a "cause"...the true cause is to destroy America.

And here he is friends with the president...thanks again the jerks who voted him in.

"But, I think it's time to move on."

How 'bout - no? That's exactly what Ayers would like so he can get on with his government school indoctrination programs unimpeded by the memory of something he did in his past that not too long ago he reminded us he did not regret.

So that would be a resounding NO.

The continued civil war in Vietnam left that country in violence and chaos.

It was no civil war, any more than the Korean War was. Both were straight-up invasions. In the case of Vietnam, the invasion was preceded by an insurgency organized, funded, supplied, and led by the Communist north. The North Koreans didn't bother with that stage.

Well said Jay,

The White House's attempt to link the Tea Party movemement to potential violence leads inevitably to prior protest movements, namely the anti-war movement of the 60s and 70s. And that leads to the truly violent Weathermen/Weather Underground. It also opens the can of worms that President Obama doesn't want discussed and that is his pal Bill Ayers along with his wife Bernadine Dorn were the leaders of this outlaw movement.

I think even the NY Times would have a tough time whitewashing Ayers. So Ayers is alone trying to rehabilitate his reputation. And that is near impossible.

Bombs are bombs, Mr. Ayers.

I know: let's call him "a Darkie™"

Anyone who has not seen the documentary about the Weather Underground available on the net should seriously view it.

Your comrades (including your then-lover) were building a nail bomb -- that's a bomb with nails embedded in it to maximize the carnage and inflict the worst wounds on the victims

bryanD,

The Vietnam war didn't really happen. It was made up like the Apollo moon landing. (For the uninformed, bryanD is a moon landing denier).

Ho Chi Mihn was demonized and kept demonized ever since the late 1940s

And all because he wanted Anschluss with all the ethnic Vietnamese in the Sudetenland. Imagine.

Uncle Ho was more expert on the founding US documents than Glenn Beck, I say (using an example).

Which makes Ho a helluva lot more expert on them than Dear Reader (the Reds' answer to Milli Vanilli), who doesn't have a stranglehold on how many states there are.

SER... you left out being a tooofer, a Nazi UFO expert with a firm belief in grassy knoll denizens.

Put simply NUTCAKE

Pssst bryanD... better jump on this and add it to your resume while it's hot:

"Remember that ash cloud? It didn't exist, says new evidence."

Never happened right?

How about calling him an ugly piece of shit that never deserved to be born in a country like America.

An insult to pieces of shit everywhere.

Ayres' problem is that one of his own--Barack (Barry) Obama (Soretoro) is now on the inside. Gotta cover some tracks.

Now this idiot Ayers wants give a speech at a major university in the United States. To more specific, the University of Wyoming. The University liberal student body invited him there, knowing full well that his invitation would raise a ruckus. Well it did. After most of the Alumni told the University in no uncertain terms that if Ayers did give that speech, they would stop sending endowments to the University. So the University uninvited him. Now he wants to sue the University for violation of his free speech rights. http://trib.com/news/state-and-regional/article_75b47c0c-5148-11df-bb79-001cc4c002e0.html

I have one question for the liberals that invited him there. What would you do if the University invited Karl Rove, Sarah Palin or Ann Coulter to speak? Yep that is right, you would throw pies or something much worse and demand the University cancel their speech. Don't we have the same right to reject a divisive speaker the same way that the left would? One would think so, but then I could be wrong.

Just a suggestion, but if you're going to delete a comment you should probably delete all the replies to that comment. It just confuses us latecomers.

Again, just a suggestion.

BH - "It just confuses us latecomers."

Your easily confused - sorry for being obvious - but really is it that hard to know bryanD gets canned ALL the time.

Sorry, Bruce. I probably should, but it gets too complicated.

For the record, BryanD started tossing around racial epithets casually. I gave him a warning to not do that. He refused to clean up his act, so I banned him. He's found ways around the ban, so at least a couple times a day I have to check and get rid of his comments, but I don't always catch him in time.

I don't particularly enjoy it, but he refused to act civilly. And when it comes to banning, I don't bluff. Ever. Because the first time I do not follow through on a ban or threat to ban, I (rightfully) lose all credibility and authority.

Sorry, BryanD. I've appreciated some of the comments I've deleted, but I ain't backing down. Not now, not ever. I might be open to an appeal, but not by blunt force.

Not ever.

J.

I think by now most of us know that bryanD's comments are subject to deletion. Didn't stop me from replying to him in another thread...

Hey, Mr. Hooson, here's a question for you:

What would you say differentiates Timothy McVeigh from William Ayers? Apart from being political opposites, of course.

Here are a few:

McVeigh had the courage of his convictions to carry out his heinous crimes personally. Ayers gulled others into doing his dirty work.

McVeigh was competent enough to carry out his plans successfully. Ayers' cronies blew themselves up.

McVeigh paid the price for his crimes. Ayers got a good lawyer and got off, despite being, in his own words, "guilty as sin, free as a bird."

Feel free to continue the comparison, Mr. Hooson -- or anyone else who'd like to contribute.

J.

Bill Ayers should have the word "Terrorist" tattoed across his forehead as a warning to decent people that might have to interact with him.

How many Republican office holders hung out with McVeigh? Or have kind words for him?

How many Democrat office holders hung out with Ayers?

Hooson-

"But, I think it's time to move on."

I agree, feel free to get lost.

The context. Yes, sure the sixties were rift with nutty cultural wars in the US, some against the Pentagon, but of course the 'patriotic' Pentagon, were not exactly lily white and sometimes supported maniacal terrorist tactics, such as 'false-flag' operations even done to Americans, for the right political goals.

This is a 'real doosie' from Operation Northwoods, in March of 1962, which had

"the support of every single member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, (The Joint Chiefs of Staff recommend that the proposed memorandum be forwarded as a preliminary submission suitable for planning purposes) and even senior Pentagon official Paul Nitze argued in favor of provoking a phony war with Cuba. The Joint Chiefs of Staff drew up and approved plans for what may be the most corrupt plan ever created by the U.S. Government. In the name of anticommunism, they proposed launching a secret and bloody war of terrorism against their own country in order to trick the American public into supporting an ill-conceived war they intended to launch against Cuba. Codenamed Operation Northwoods, the plan, which had the written approval of the Chairman and every member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, called for innocent people to be shot on American streets; for boats carrying refugees fleeing Cuba to be sunk on the high seas; for a wave of violent terrorism to be launched in Washington, D.C., Miami, and elsewhere. People would be framed for bombings they did not commit; planes would be hijacked"

And from the recently released actual Operation Northwods MEMO FROM THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF, March, 1962 includes.

8. It is possible to create an incident which will demonstrate
convincingly that a Cuban aircraft has attacked and shot down
a chartered civil airliner enroute from the United States to
Jamaica, Guatemala, Panama or Venezuela. The destination would
be chosen only to cause the flight plan route to cross Cuba.
The passengers could be a group of college students off on a
holiday or any grouping of persons with a common interest to
support chartering a non-scheduled flight.

Lovely read, the actual approved memo. It was eventually turned down fortunately by President Kennedy, much to the displeasure of the Joint Chiefs of Staff! But the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Pentagon get a pass because they are Generals, while a young student like Ayres is still vilified over 40 years later by the right.

OOH, OOH, Mister Kotter!!!

The right despises McVeigh and don't want to associate with his name or legacy

The left adore and lionize Ayers.

So, Steve, you're cool with what Ayers and his crowd did -- and planned to do?

You're avoiding saying anything about it, you're talking about how much the other side was basically "asking for it..."

What other conclusion should we draw?

I have never once expressed sympathy for McVeigh. I respect his abilities: he set out to achieve a very difficult goal, and did it. He was far more competent than Ayers could ever hope to be.

And acknowledging the competence of an individual or group is generally a Good Idea. It helps avoid the danger of thinking that just because someone is bad, they are also inept. It helps avoid misunderestimating the enemy.

Come on, Steve... offer a sincere opinion on what Ayers and his followers set out to do.

And I'll give you bonus points if you can rationalize or defend their dedicating their manifesto, "Prairie Fires," to a whole host of people -- including Sirhan Sirhan.

J.

I'm not rationalizing it. Yes, the weatherman splinter group were violent unlike the vast majority of the antiwar protesters. I personally went to a SDS convention in Chicago in 1970 and it consisted of picketing aand passing out leaflets at about 630am, apart from the speech making at the convention.
I'll look at this manifesto 'Prairie Fire' now.

You are right. Point taken, it's crap just like the heavy communist or socialist propaganda at that SDS Chicago convention, I went to in 1970 or 71.
The moratoriums were much more interesting! Hey but moderates don't get attention.

bryanD,
The Vietnam war didn't really happen. It was made up like the Apollo moon landing. (For the uninformed, bryanD is a moon landing denier).
16. Posted by SER

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/space/6105902/Moon-rock-given-to-Holland-by-Neil-Armstrong-and-Buzz-Aldrin-is-fake.html
-----------------------------------------------
"Just a suggestion, but if you're going to delete a comment you should probably delete all the replies to that comment. It just confuses us latecomers.
23. Posted by Bruce Henry

Et tu, Bruce?
-------------------------------------------
"For the record, BryanD started tossing around racial epithets casually. I gave him a warning to not do that."--jay tea

My sticky sticky inconvenient Brain recalls my use of the coined word "niggerdom" which I used to expostulate a social category far removed from Blacks per se (in fact, regarding Whites or the citizenry at large....check your facts) but which the Big Gubmint policies evoke in ex potentialis per Glenn Beck(?).

Yes, I've attended more Tea Parties than anyone else on this board, I'm confidant (=5).
Jealous guts? as they say..

Perhaps coining and enjoying the English language here is frowned upon, but I must appeal to Saints Clemens and Mencken and that Odd Fellow, Capote.
And OH! G-D! Chaucer the "Pornographer"! :-P

Sorry. Well-read. Make a hole!
--------------------------------------------

"Sorry, BryanD. I've appreciated some of the comments I've deleted"--jay tea

I told you 1 year ago, you need a 100-comment average! I'm here to help you!
--------------------------------------------

"I might be open to an appeal, but not by blunt force."---jay tea

Does the appeal require e-mail via a *real* e-mail address?
(E-mail is a scourge. (My Wizbang e-mail comments field---as all others everywhere, at all times (not involving sex or "romance" from 2nd- or 3rd-world countries)---is always FakeO. If there's anything I'm Pius IX Vatican about it might well be e-mail...hoch! spit!)

But besides that, what? A sonnet?
I love sonnets!

PS. I refuse to assume the bottom position though naked wrestling is OK (we'll all pretend we're 12 y.o. on a camp-out!)

I'm leaving BryanD's comment up there because it features him telling him half the story. Yes it was his use of "niggerdom" that started the ball rolling. But that wasn't the final straw.

"Bryan, I'm gonna cut you a break. Offer up an alternative phrasing to the racial epithet and I'll edit into your original comment, and I won't bring down Olaf The Troll God's Hammer on your IP.

Fair enough?"

His answer:

"Though my IP is amorphous, I thank you for your concern.

I'm burning my copy of Huckleberry Finn even now and will send the ashes to the Crones of NEA, LLC for use in their scaaary ceremonials."

So I banned him. He keeps coming back, I keep deleting his comments and banning his IPs. And I see absolutely no reason to change that policy.

If for no other reason, neither he nor anyone else has asked me to do so.

J.

Steve, I'm a bit rusty on my Christian doctrine, but I seem to recall that a key part of forgiveness involves repentance from those seeking absolution.

Ayers is utterly unrepentant.

Upon his acquittal based not on lack of evidence but prosecutorial misconduct, Ayers proclaimed "guilty as sin, free as a bird -- ain't it a great country?"

He has been quoted several times saying his major regret from that era is that they didn't set enough bombs.

The son of a bitch is still PROUD of what he did. You are certainly free to endorse his pride of accomplishment, but if he's going to keep insisting that what he did was right, I'm going to keep on pointing out that he was Timothy McVeigh with less skills and better PR.

J.

Steve,

Please watch this video. it shows just what the Weathermen were comfortable with, what they would have liked to do to their opposition.

Now, granted, Ayers and company were utterly incompetent and were never going to succeed in their plans, but sitting around casually discussing murdering millions is a sign of serious evil even when one is incapable of actually doing it.

Paul Hooson talks of the invasion of FRee South Vietnam by the mass-murdering gangster totalitarian tyrants of the country to that nation's north as a "civil war."

It was no such thing.

And nor, come to that, was America's war between the states anything other than the invasion of the sovereign Confederate States of America by the united (northern) States of America's feral gummint.

Now, I recall it was the Chicago June SDS conference at the old Coliseum that I went to, 1969 in which the Weathermen split up, because the majority were against violence and wanted to align themselves with workers. Who knows I probably rubbed shoulders with Ayers who was the education secretary? great I was there as a freshman more as an observer than anything? Yes they were all politically nuts, and knew very little about the Russian Revolution and its leaders(which they used as their touchstone to plead their case) in their endless speeches, both the so called moderates and the splinter weathermen, Ayres group.

Here is the wikipedia entry about Ayres. I don't have alot of time at the moment. He denies a lot of the things he may have said and some what he did. It is a fine line, I suppose how much was theater and how much they believed, but they were certainly caught up in being dangerous loonies like a cult group.