April 18, 2008

Stupidity and Terrorism

Bill Ayers, the man described as a casual friend of Barack Obama, who threw a fundraiser for Obama during his state senate campaign, who appeared with him at academic conferences, and who served as a board member under Obama's chairmanship of the liberal Woods Fund, refuses to admit that attempting to blow up soldiers and debutantes or other bombings as a leader of the Weather Underground were acts of terrorism:

"I've never advocated terrorism, never participated in it, never defended it. The U.S. government, by contrast, does it routinely and defends the use of it in its own cause consistently," he wrote.

Ayers defines terrorism as "the use or threat of random violence to intimidate, frighten, or coerce a population toward some political end," and he cites, as examples, "an Israeli assault on a neighborhood in Gaza," the Sept. 11 attacks, and "Sherman's March to the Sea" during the Civil War.

It is, of course, a purposefully false definition provided by an unrepentant terrorist.

Terrorism is premeditated, politically or ideologically motivated violence against civilians or military targets in non-military situations.

When the Israeli military launches raids into Gaza with the express intention of neutralizing Hamas (and in the past, Fatah) militants that continually bombard Israel with rocket fire, it is not terrorism. Israel's incursions and return fire into Gaza are purposeful strikes against specific targets of military value carried out with precision weapons only after the risk collateral damage have been evaluated and determined to be minimal.

The attacks of September 11, 2001 were conducted with the dual designs of attacking symbolic U.S. civilian targets and collapsing economic markets. al Qaeda succeeded in completing 3 of their 4 attacks, but failed their larger goal. These attacks were acts of terrorism, but like many acts of terrorism, were not random by any means.

Sherman's March to the Sea was conducted by Union soldiers with the goals of strategically, economically, and psychologically breaking the Confederacy. It was a sound strategic decision designed to end the war, and while brutal, it was hardly random, nor was it terrorism.

Some of the members of the Weather Underground are murderers and armed robbers, but every bombing and attempted bombing committed by the Weather Underground and it's members were acts of terrorism, and therefore every member of the Weather Underground, including Bill Ayers, are terrorists. Period.

Barack Obama's campaign has attempted to minimize the relationship between Obama and Ayers on the campaign's official site:


Absolutely true, and utterly irrelevant. While Ayers has been forgiven by the ultra-liberal social circle in Chicago, Barack Obama knew as an adult that Ayers was a terrorist, as his actions were well-documented, well known, and among some circles, celebrated. Barack Obama did not have to socialize with terrorist Bill Ayers, but he did.


I don't think anyone has accused Obama and Ayers of an intimate love affair, but to deny that Ayers has served with Obama in various social settings over a number of years—which the candidate's web site attempts to minimize— is the same sort of typical disingenuous hackery we expect from run of the mill politicians, not someone who promises "change."


And Ayer's comments regretting his lack of successful terrorist activity prior to Sept. 11, 2001, is less reprehensible than they were afterward? Why? Simply because more people had a better of the kind of violent radicalism he represented after watching more successful terrorists kill almost 3,000 Americans in front of us on live television?

Bill Ayers is an aging terrorist who doesn't consider his terrorism as real terrorism. Barack Obama expects those of us outside of his ultra-liberal Chicago social circles to understand that spending time in homes, boardrooms, and in conferences with aging terrorists (Ayers is just one aging terrorist Obama knows) is simply the cost of doing business in Chicago politics.

I don't think my fellow Americans are that stupid, but Obama certainly seems to be betting his political future that they are.

Posted by Confederate Yankee at April 18, 2008 09:56 AM


Now, imagine someone with similar ties to Duke trying to pooh pooh that relationship while running for POTUS. It would be the death of their campaign. And Duke, unlike Ayers, hasn't actually killed anyone.

Posted by: Pablo at April 18, 2008 10:14 AM

Perhaps I'm missing the point. What's Obama's crime here?

Posted by: Craig at April 18, 2008 11:09 AM

"What's Obama's crime here? "

No crime, just absurdly poor judgement. Given that he's trying to run on his judgement...

Posted by: Rob Crawford at April 18, 2008 11:12 AM

I'm sure it is surprising to most of our citizens that such characters as Ayers and Dohrn and others like Solia, not only live openly and enjoy the normal benefits of this great land they did so much to harm, but prosper at the higher levels of academe. Hillary can't really say much since the Clinton Cabal did more than have coffee with splodeydopes of yesteryear... THEY GOT THEM OUT OF JAIL!

What a disgusting disgrace is the Democratic Party of the millenial era. The competition on the Left is to see who can more competently scrub their bio of support for domestic terrorism and it is nakedly declared that this is for the general election merely; apparently the Dem elites presume no significant Dem heartache at these revelations. The winner there is obliged to posture as a liar of lesser frequency and greater skill. Only then will the field be reduced to single combat. And then Barry (presumptively) you had better REALLY man up. For tactical reasons of her own Hillary hasn't even come CLOSE to throwing any chin-music here. She can't without exposing the Clinton record to scrutiny it cannot survive. McCain, whatever his many flaws will have to do little to contrast his own life of service to the feckless, self-righteous twerp they have dug up for this one.

Posted by: megapotamus at April 18, 2008 11:14 AM

No crime, except the ones committed by his associates.

And the poor judgement he displayed, and continues to display by his non-answers regarding them.

Apparently to you, Craig, no one should be looking at the company one keeps as an indicator of what one thinks.

You're wrong. People make their social groups from a deep seated need to be accepted in them. "Hey that guy thinks like I do! Let's be friends!"

If you think this doesn't happen, then you're a naive dolt and there's no discussing this with you.

Obama has continually surrounded himself with people that go against the very grain and fabric of this country and what it stands for.

And when he's called on it, he takes 4 months to put out some lame half baked reason why he continued to do so.

The only people buying his empty nonsense are the people carrying his water. You seem to be one of them.

Posted by: Conservative CBU at April 18, 2008 11:33 AM


Picking out people that think like me is not the way I make friends. If I did, I'd be bored and perpetually irritated. Sure, you have to be simpatico on some level, but it could be sports, sense of humor, whatever. People are more complex that you're allowing for. Also, people have associations with others that are not friendship-based, such as professional or civic, where the personal interactions are very shallow.

In view of the above, you seem to be way overstating the relationship between the two. I know it's important for you to imagine them speaking French, wearing berets, and making bombs together in Ayers' basement, but the *facts* don't support that close a connection.

As to going against the fabric of this country and what it stands for, the polls show him a little ahead of McCain. Maybe its McCain that is against the fabric of the country and what it stands for. Maybe you are against it. In reality, though, what the country stands for is different depending on who you ask, agree?

Posted by: Craig at April 18, 2008 11:55 AM
Picking out people that think like me is not the way I make friends.

See, you're looking for friends, we're looking for a President.

Sure, you have to be simpatico on some level, but it could be sports, sense of humor, whatever.

I could use a new friend. I think I'll drop Charlie Manson a line. After all, we both like the Beatles.

Posted by: Pablo at April 18, 2008 12:03 PM

One more time, Craig:

Ayers, Wright, Rezko, Auchi, etc.--Obama has a list of shady associations that's rivaled only by the Cliton's rolodex during their time in the White House.

Does it not bother you at all that, in *every single case* he has sought to minimize, explain away, trivialize and poo-poo each and every one of these relationships? It's not like he's only been connected to one of these reprobates--he's in bed with *all* of them to one degree or another.

As everyone has said (and I posted yesterday on a similar thread) the man clearly has, at best, a spectacular lack of judgement (and that's really being generous and probably more fair than Obama deserves at this point)--at worst, he doesn't reallly give a damn and truly does believe the inane comments he made in San Francisco.

How you can keep coming on here and harping on the Ayers point when this is just the latest in a long list of villains is stunning to anyone with even an elementary grasp of the questions swirling around Obama and the company he keeps.

Posted by: ECM at April 18, 2008 12:16 PM

You have to believe one of two things with the Obama/Ayers connection.

One, Obama really didn't know that Ayers is a terrorist when he served on the same BoD with him, had fundraisers in the man's home, and didn't for the entire time of this "tenuous" association look into who this "Upstanding member of Chicago politics" was.

Two, he knew who this person was, knew that he was a terrorist, and simply didn't give a damn what that relationship said about his choice in associations. Furthermore, when pressed about Ayers background, he gives a less than enthusiastic rejection of the man.

Seems Obama surrounds himself with people that are of at best dubious character, reluctantly distances himself when pressed, and defends them when he thinks no one's looking.

And no, I do not agree that what this country stands for, depends on who I ask. This country was not founded on polls, I know to you focus group loving liberals, that has to be a terrible thing to have said, but that's the way it is.

Posted by: Conservative CBU at April 18, 2008 12:35 PM

The key word I guess in the Ayers definiton is "random". If you know your target, you are not a terrorist, merely an assassin. The left wing radical universe left over from the sixties still has a few burnt out dark stars like Ayers drifting around. Obama was educated among academics who regarded people like Ayers as sort of folk heros. Now he moves in circles that feel their previous cimes are entirely forgivable, even to be admired. Obama's "crime" is that he is running for an office that should carry great moral weight. By allowing himself to be associated with men like Ayers, without any signal whatsoever that he may have regrets , he seems to diminish what the office should stand for. He must wise up, if he can.

Posted by: mytralman at April 18, 2008 12:50 PM

Part of why none of this gives me heartburn is that, having lived in Chicago, I know it's a fact that everyone in politics in Chicago is sketchy. You can't elected dog catcher without "associating" with some colorful characters and the odd anarchist. So even if you're a good, honest person, you won't get elected to anything if you don't have the blessing of all kinds of people that are on the take. That's Chicago, baby!

Posted by: Craig at April 18, 2008 01:36 PM

America, thankfully, is not Chicago, baby.

Posted by: Pablo at April 18, 2008 01:44 PM

Craig, how about naming some more sketchy people in Chicago who bombed as many places the Weathermen did and then go on bragging about it. Lets be real, how many sketchy people in Chicago brag about taking kickbacks, extortion, murder and robbery .. lets hear it Craig.

Posted by: Rory at April 18, 2008 02:27 PM

Blessings of all kinds of people huh?

Hamas, I guess, is all kinds of people too?

Posted by: Conservative CBU at April 18, 2008 02:35 PM

Obama was not in the Weathermen. Now breathe deeply and slowly until you're not purple anymore.

Posted by: Craig at April 18, 2008 02:37 PM

Craig - If you are so confident that all these sketchy people Obama has associated with and surrounded himself with are a nonissue for a presidential candidate, why are you so against having them discussed in public? Shouldn't other voters be allowed to come to the same conclusion which you have already reached? Why sweep the information and associations under a rug? Are you afraid of the reactions or is something else motivating you?

Posted by: daleyrocks at April 18, 2008 03:21 PM

I never said don't discuss it. I only said that it should be discussed with accuracy. Discuss from now till next year if you want.

Posted by: Craig at April 18, 2008 03:25 PM

Really, Craig? Shouldn't Obama be able to do away with all criticism of his political allies by adopting this as his new campaign song? It seems a perfect fit.

Posted by: Pablo at April 18, 2008 03:29 PM

Craig - I'm sorry. I mistook your incessant whining about the unfair treatment of your candidate for something else. I apologize.

Posted by: daleyrocks at April 18, 2008 03:29 PM

"Part of why none of this gives me heartburn is that, having lived in Chicago, I know it's a fact that everyone in politics in Chicago is sketchy."

So what you're really saying is we'd be insane to elect ANYONE from Chicago politics to higher office?

Posted by: Rob Crawford at April 18, 2008 04:09 PM

Check this out. In the Chicago Tribune today, there is a story about how a rap artist and suspected criminal and thug managed to get a zoning variance to build a castle in a residential neighborhood the "Chicago Way". But better than that is the highly entertaining video that includes a flow chart of the political influence that made the variance possible. One of the politicians involved is known as Pastries. I kid you not. This is pure Chicago, people. Enjoy!

Posted by: Craig at April 18, 2008 04:37 PM

Craig, if McCain had been on a board of directors along with David Duke, would you say that it's a Bad Thing for the lefties to let the American people know that?

Posted by: C-C-G at April 18, 2008 06:20 PM

If I knew that Barry was associated with Jeffrey Dahmer, I would certainly become interested in his cuisine. Barry seems to be associated with a bunch of people who serve up crap. What HAS Barry been eating?

Posted by: twolaneflash at April 18, 2008 09:55 PM

Why did Craig change the subject all of a sudden?

Posted by: daleyrocks at April 19, 2008 12:04 AM

According to Craig if McCain hung around with someone who was bombing abortion clinics back in the 80's then that's just alright with him. Is anyone else stunned by the intellectual dishonesty displayed by the left?

Posted by: Capitalist Infidel at April 19, 2008 06:46 AM
Is anyone else stunned by the intellectual dishonesty displayed by the left?


There is only one core belief on the left: the raw thirst for power. Any and every other principle can and will be sacrificed on that particular altar.

Posted by: C-C-G at April 19, 2008 08:23 AM

Didn't have time to read the comments --

---- but I heard on the radio yesterday that Ayers has gone underground again since the investigation into his connection with Obama has moved from conservative talk radio to the mainstreampress. If true, that would seem to indicate there is more to the Ayers connection than we've heard so far.

Posted by: usinkorea at April 19, 2008 09:36 AM

Terrorism is premeditated, politically or ideologically motivated violence against civilians or military targets in non-military situations.

Where did this definition come from?

Posted by: hed at April 19, 2008 01:09 PM

Uh, Hed, if you'd look, up in the original article, where it first appears, the word "Terrorism" is a link, presumably to where the definition came from.

(sighs, shaking head sadly) And the left thinks they're the "intelligent" ones.

Posted by: C-C-G at April 19, 2008 01:30 PM

Snobama is such an elitist idiot. Surrounding oneself with fellow travellers, communists, raving racists, terroristsdoesn't make one guilty of anything except very poor judgement and having fleas. As any criminal knows the terms of parole require you not associate with known criminals. Apparently Snobama loves to associate with those who hate America. Any doubts about how this reflects his own vision of America and the American people?

Any bets on what Craig and the other kool aid drinkers would be saying about any GOP politician who had the same relationships with abortion bombers, KKK recruiters, and Aryan Nation leaders?

The howling and braying about the last debate by the leftist trolls is due to the fact that they can't stand having their fearless leader asked to defend his association with so many slugs.

They still cling to their bitterness and failures.

Posted by: Thomas Jackson at April 19, 2008 03:23 PM

"Any doubts about how this reflects his own vision of America and the American people?"

Trent Lott's head was served on a platter because of legitimate questions were raised about what he meant when he said perhaps the US would be a better place today if Strom Thurmond had won the White House on his segregationist platform.

At least with Thurmond, he eventually moved away (partly) from his racist past - at least he gave that appearance and kept getting elected. Ayers is openly proud of his terrorist activities and wishes he'd done more.

The main point, however, is that Trent Lott's possible association with pro-segregationist thought was limited (as far as I heard) to one stupid thing he said in a speech, but the questions about what really sits in his heart were enough for the media and others to bury him.

But, I'm supposed to believe that Obama's much longer connection to Wright and Ayers and the like is so clearly a non-issue?


Posted by: usinkorea at April 19, 2008 04:15 PM

For all their highfalutin' rhetoric, the Party of the Donkey is still the party with the closer connection to the real racists... people like Robert Byrd (D-KKK), Reverend Wright, Bill Ayers, and so on.

Posted by: C-C-G at April 19, 2008 04:30 PM