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

[Ame®icano]

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.

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.

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]

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!

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]

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

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.

Cliff Kincaid - SourceWatch

The link you gave is written by a right wing hack

 

[California Girl]

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.

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.

 

[Truthmatters]

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]

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

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.

Cliff Kincaid - SourceWatch

The link you gave is written by a right wing hack

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]

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

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.

Cliff Kincaid - SourceWatch

The link you gave is written by a right wing hack

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

 

[Truthmatters]

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

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.

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]

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

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]

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

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]

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]

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]

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?

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.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

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!

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.

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.



---\

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?

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.

 

[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.

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.

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?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

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.