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

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Abortion

family values crap

Gay Marriage

Shiavo


The cons are always telling people how to live

Abortion: I am against it but will always vote for pro choice. Chopice is a true conservative value

Family Values: what goes on in your house is none of my business.

Gay Marriage: I am noit part of the gay lifestyle and I do not try to understand it. Have a vote here in NY and I will vote yes for gay marriage. Live your life as you wish. This is America.

Shiavo: That was a family battle and none of our dam business.

So go to hell with your HAHAHAHA. You do not know what a conservative is. You use the word in anger and hate and you are clueless to what a conservative is.

Now go look at how both the tea part and the republican party stand on these issues.

You would not pass muster with either.

You would be defined as a libertarian

I am not defined by the tea party nor the GOP. I am a conservative.

What the hell is so hard for you to understand?

Now you want to label me as a libertarian becuase you can not understand what a conservative?

So now you have the right to define ME? Sort of goes along with my definition of a liberal.

Sadly grossly and dangerously misguided.
 
We were very careful from the moment of the townhouse on to be sure we weren't going to hurt anybody, and we never did hurt anybody.

Whenever we put a bomb in a public space, we had figured out all kinds of ways to put checks and balances on the thing and also to get people away from it, and we were remarkably successful.
— Bill Ayers 2003

[6]Weather Underground (organization) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
hmmm...

The difference

Yea, it's not like Billy boy had any agenda in misrepresenting what they did. It only took him until 2003 to come up with an alternative view of what they did.

Even for you, this is stupid, and you have a PhD in Stupid.

It was an interview in 2003 you dope. What the WU and SDS stood for and how the WU bombed places was always public you fucking wench.

I never agreed with WU. I do know some other radical group bombed the Court house in Boston, in the 70s---while my younger brother was in it. And they were not the WU

so fuck you you ugly prude.


btw, I met relatives of the radical bombers when I was working in Cambridge MA. We talked. They were far better representatives of America than you are. They were raised by radicals and civil to a fault. Unlike you you wench
 
That is all anyone has been asking of the right here.

Stop talking violence to the crazies

Huh? We've never condoned violence. Ayers, on the other hand, stated "Peaceful protests weren't working, so we started a violent revolution and war............in protest of the Vietnam War."

Hmmm. Funny. No one on the left worried about the Iraq War protests, which were mostly peaceful, leading to another coming of a Bill Ayers who turned to violence because "Peaceful protests weren't working". Hypocrites.

The guy who told peopl eto throw bricks and bricks got thown

The guy who gave the congressmans brothers house address and the gas line got cut.

Yes hey have been inciting violence

You mean a whole TWO people out of tens of thousands?

Jeez. I am done with this crap.
 
Abortion: I am against it but will always vote for pro choice. Chopice is a true conservative value

Family Values: what goes on in your house is none of my business.

Gay Marriage: I am noit part of the gay lifestyle and I do not try to understand it. Have a vote here in NY and I will vote yes for gay marriage. Live your life as you wish. This is America.

Shiavo: That was a family battle and none of our dam business.

So go to hell with your HAHAHAHA. You do not know what a conservative is. You use the word in anger and hate and you are clueless to what a conservative is.

Now go look at how both the tea part and the republican party stand on these issues.

You would not pass muster with either.

You would be defined as a libertarian

I am not defined by the tea party nor the GOP. I am a conservative.

What the hell is so hard for you to understand?

Now you want to label me as a libertarian becuase you can not understand what a conservative?

So now you have the right to define ME? Sort of goes along with my definition of a liberal.

Sadly grossly and dangerously misguided.

Goody for you.

You dont even know what your own views classify as
 
hmmm...

The difference

Yea, it's not like Billy boy had any agenda in misrepresenting what they did. It only took him until 2003 to come up with an alternative view of what they did.

Even for you, this is stupid, and you have a PhD in Stupid.

It was an interview in 2003 you dope. What the WU and SDS stood for and how the WU bombed places was always public you fucking wench.

I never agreed with WU. I do know some other radical group bombed the Court house in Boston, in the 70s---while my younger brother was in it. And they were not the WU

so fuck you you ugly prude.


btw, I met relatives of the radical bombers when I was working in Cambridge MA. We talked. They were far better representatives of America than you are. They were raised by radicals and civil to a fault. Unlike you you wench

DId that make you feel better Dante?

Try using vaseline next time. It makes it even easier and feel even better. :eusa_whistle:
 
So you are going to claim that prochoice is a republican stance?

In order to actually understand anything, you firstly have to realize that a conservative is not necessarily a republican, nor are they necessarily a libertarian. It is only the left that clings to a party.
 
Now go look at how both the tea part and the republican party stand on these issues.

You would not pass muster with either.

You would be defined as a libertarian

I am not defined by the tea party nor the GOP. I am a conservative.

What the hell is so hard for you to understand?

Now you want to label me as a libertarian becuase you can not understand what a conservative?

So now you have the right to define ME? Sort of goes along with my definition of a liberal.

Sadly grossly and dangerously misguided.

Goody for you.

You dont even know what your own views classify as

Wrong again.
I know what my values are. I simply do not expect or ask anyone else to have the same values as I do.
You cant comporehend such a thought process, so you wish to define it as something else.

That is not my issue, that is yours. And good luck with it.
 
Well, I think my thread was a success. To point out the MASSIVE hypocrisy going on in the left right now concerning McVeigh and their attempts to link him with the Tea Party when compared to the CONFIRMED link of Obama and the left to a man whose intenet was equal to McVeighs, and only differ in that McVeigh committed one act resulting in massive horror, while Ayers committed multiple acts of similar intent but lacked the training or tools to really do mass damage.

Our president is voluntarily friends with one of these monsters. Yet the left only pays attention to the one who is currently dead.

nope. you stated there was no difference between these beliefs below (no proof Ayers planted any bombs)

We were very careful from the moment of the townhouse on to be sure we weren't going to hurt anybody, and we never did hurt anybody. Whenever we put a bomb in a public space, we had figured out all kinds of ways to put checks and balances on the thing and also to get people away from it, and we were remarkably successful.
— Bill Ayers 2003[6]


and what Timothy McVeigh did.


you belittled right wing terrorism in order to link a sixties radical student to President Obama.

like I said in another post, Ayers wasn't even on the radar until the right wing noise machine resurrected him from political oblivion.

Wow are you gullable. So, in 2003, 30 years later, the domestic terrorist HIMSELF tells you he purposely tried not to harm anyone, and you BELIEVE it? Isn't it FAR more likely that he just sucked at building bombs, was embarrassed that he was so ineffective, and in retrospect decided to take a moral high ground in his newfound professorship to claim he is an honorable terrorist?

God d**n liberals are gullable. Hey, truthmatters, did you see the new Bin Laden video? He said "We didn't intend to hit the buildings, we intended to fly by, miss them and just scare everyone a lot, but there was a mechanical malfunction in BOTH planes and we lost steering and had a bad accident. Sorry, we didn't mean it."

You'd be first in line to say "Well, they didn't MEAN to hit the towers, he said so himself."

Or better yet, if you were a NYPD detective, interviewing a guy arrested for shooting at people but not hitting anyone, you would take a plea of "I intentionally missed, just to scare everyone, I purposely and carefully aimed around them for effect and did not want to harm anyone." You'd let the guy walk, wouldn't you?
 
Yea, it's not like Billy boy had any agenda in misrepresenting what they did. It only took him until 2003 to come up with an alternative view of what they did.

Even for you, this is stupid, and you have a PhD in Stupid.

It was an interview in 2003 you dope. What the WU and SDS stood for and how the WU bombed places was always public you fucking wench.

I never agreed with WU. I do know some other radical group bombed the Court house in Boston, in the 70s---while my younger brother was in it. And they were not the WU

so fuck you you ugly prude.


btw, I met relatives of the radical bombers when I was working in Cambridge MA. We talked. They were far better representatives of America than you are. They were raised by radicals and civil to a fault. Unlike you you wench

DId that make you feel better Dante?

Try using vaseline next time. It makes it even easier and feel even better. :eusa_whistle:

Dainty is a fine one to talk about 'civil'. I doubt he could find it in a dictionary. The guy is a trolling moron. Every thread he starts he ends up talking to himself cuz very few even bother responding. I actually feel sorry for him.
 
It wasn't from lack of trying...the word is "Intent".

"McVeigh was smarter and built better bombs. Thats it. They both had serious problems with the government. Both built bombs and executed their plans. Both bombed government buildings.

The ONLY difference is McVeigh had intense military training that enabled him to succeed in his horrendous acts, while Ayers was an amateur and just not smart enough to duplicate it."


McVeigh Killed 168 United States Americans and was convicted of his crimes.

What ever Ayers did it pales in comparison
 
That is all anyone has been asking of the right here.

Stop talking violence to the crazies

Huh? We've never condoned violence. Ayers, on the other hand, stated "Peaceful protests weren't working, so we started a violent revolution and war............in protest of the Vietnam War."

Hmmm. Funny. No one on the left worried about the Iraq War protests, which were mostly peaceful, leading to another coming of a Bill Ayers who turned to violence because "Peaceful protests weren't working". Hypocrites.

The guy who told peopl eto throw bricks and bricks got thown

The guy who gave the congressmans brothers house address and the gas line got cut.

Yes hey have been inciting violence



Former militiaman unapologetic for calls to vandalize offices over health care - washingtonpost.com

You forgot the SEIU members who lynched a conservative black man at a rally.
And you forgot the DailyKOs-dot-com member, radical leftist, who bit off the finger of a Tea Party member at a rally like some sort of fuc*ing animal.
And you forgot the Obama supporter who fired a bullet through Eric Cantor's window.

Lynching a man, biting appendages off, and firing bullets are a bit more "violent" than what you are saying the right did.
 
I am a conservative. A right wing believer if you prefer. I dont have any feelings like McVeigh. None of my conservative friends do either. Most of us simply want to be left alone to live our lives.

Dante, I fear you have no idea how a true conservative thinks, acts and believes.

McVeigh was not a conservative in any way shape of form. A conservative does not believe that his or her actions should affect the way others live OR DIE.

A conservative does not levy his belief system on others. He or she lets others live any way they wish. That is consertvatism.

That is why I always say:

A liberal has great intentions and wants what is good for his fellow man but wants all to live the way he beleives they should live.

A conservative also has good intentions and wishes for the best for his fellow man but in no way does he insist that others believe as he does.

And no. That is not what many who claim to be conservative feel. It is what a trrue conservative feels.

Ideological purity and text book definitions will not suffice. The conservative movement in America may not fit your definition of conservative, but they are surely the poster children for what it means to be a conservative in America today.

Your argument is not with me...it is with them. And right now it is the stated purpose of certain GOP members within the Tea Party movement to remake the GOP into what they see as a true conservative party. I doubt you will share their view either.


ROFLMNAO...

Dante, you have no argument... All ya have is the obtuse regurgitation of inane drivel.

There is NOTHING Conservative about McVeigh... McVeigh was a coward, who felt that he was entitled to be accepted into Ranger School and when he couldn't make the cut he got pissed at the world... which provided the reason to rationalize a means to do something monumentally IMMORAL.

Your reasoning amounts to little more than off the HOOK fallacious caterwauling; a string of specious ad hoc conclusions...
 
Yea, it's not like Billy boy had any agenda in misrepresenting what they did. It only took him until 2003 to come up with an alternative view of what they did.

Even for you, this is stupid, and you have a PhD in Stupid.

It was an interview in 2003 you dope. What the WU and SDS stood for and how the WU bombed places was always public you fucking wench.

I never agreed with WU. I do know some other radical group bombed the Court house in Boston, in the 70s---while my younger brother was in it. And they were not the WU

so fuck you you ugly prude.


btw, I met relatives of the radical bombers when I was working in Cambridge MA. We talked. They were far better representatives of America than you are. They were raised by radicals and civil to a fault. Unlike you you wench

DId that make you feel better Dante?

Try using vaseline next time. It makes it even easier and feel even better. :eusa_whistle:

really? believe it or not I used to be a safer sex instructor when I did syringe exchange and aids/hiv outreach. That's is how and where I met people raised in communes by the people who bombed the court house...coincidence? These community organizers and activists were taught by people like Ayers. I applaud the way people like Ayers turned away from violent action.
 
the weahter underground never targeted people only property

Couldnt the same be said for the World Trade Center bombings? And Pentagon bombings? And embassy bombings? And USS Cole bombings? WTC towers, Pentagon, US Navy ship.....all symbolic property targets with no specific human target.

Just accept it: Criticizing McVeigh and linking him to the Tea Party is hypocritical when your saviors buddy Bill Ayers committed multiple acts of domestic terror, he just didn't build a big enough bomb to destroy the multiple police departments, Pentagon and military base he targeted.

And then, of course, you buy his 30 year later explanation that he tactically placed them to do little damage but cause effect. He's embarrassed he "Didn't do more". Thats all. Yet, I can always count on morons like you to defend a domestic terrorist. You must be proud.
 
the weahter underground never targeted people only property

Couldnt the same be said for the World Trade Center bombings? And Pentagon bombings? And embassy bombings? And USS Cole bombings? WTC towers, Pentagon, US Navy ship.....all symbolic property targets with no specific human target.

Just accept it: Criticizing McVeigh and linking him to the Tea Party is hypocritical when your saviors buddy Bill Ayers committed multiple acts of domestic terror, he just didn't build a big enough bomb to destroy the multiple police departments, Pentagon and military base he targeted.

And then, of course, you buy his 30 year later explanation that he tactically placed them to do little damage but cause effect. He's embarrassed he "Didn't do more". Thats all. Yet, I can always count on morons like you to defend a domestic terrorist. You must be proud.

NOPE they all wanted human casulties
 
It was an interview in 2003 you dope. What the WU and SDS stood for and how the WU bombed places was always public you fucking wench.

I never agreed with WU. I do know some other radical group bombed the Court house in Boston, in the 70s---while my younger brother was in it. And they were not the WU

so fuck you you ugly prude.


btw, I met relatives of the radical bombers when I was working in Cambridge MA. We talked. They were far better representatives of America than you are. They were raised by radicals and civil to a fault. Unlike you you wench

DId that make you feel better Dante?

Try using vaseline next time. It makes it even easier and feel even better. :eusa_whistle:

really? believe it or not I used to be a safer sex instructor when I did syringe exchange and aids/hiv outreach. That's is how and where I met people raised in communes by the people who bombed the court house...coincidence? These community organizers and activists were taught by people like Ayers. I applaud the way people like Ayers turned away from violent action.

Fair enough. But us conservatives would rather applaud those who never turned to violence in the first place. You guys just keep hugging domestic terrorists, and we'll keep supporting the execution of such terrorists.
 
Well, I think my thread was a success. To point out the MASSIVE hypocrisy going on in the left right now concerning McVeigh and their attempts to link him with the Tea Party when compared to the CONFIRMED link of Obama and the left to a man whose intenet was equal to McVeighs, and only differ in that McVeigh committed one act resulting in massive horror, while Ayers committed multiple acts of similar intent but lacked the training or tools to really do mass damage.

Our president is voluntarily friends with one of these monsters. Yet the left only pays attention to the one who is currently dead.

nope. you stated there was no difference between these beliefs below (no proof Ayers planted any bombs)

We were very careful from the moment of the townhouse on to be sure we weren't going to hurt anybody, and we never did hurt anybody. Whenever we put a bomb in a public space, we had figured out all kinds of ways to put checks and balances on the thing and also to get people away from it, and we were remarkably successful.
— Bill Ayers 2003[6]


and what Timothy McVeigh did.


you belittled right wing terrorism in order to link a sixties radical student to President Obama.

like I said in another post, Ayers wasn't even on the radar until the right wing noise machine resurrected him from political oblivion.

Wow are you gullable. So, in 2003, 30 years later, the domestic terrorist HIMSELF tells you he purposely tried not to harm anyone, and you BELIEVE it? Isn't it FAR more likely that he just sucked at building bombs, was embarrassed that he was so ineffective, and in retrospect decided to take a moral high ground in his newfound professorship to claim he is an honorable terrorist?

God d**n liberals are gullable. Hey, truthmatters, did you see the new Bin Laden video? He said "We didn't intend to hit the buildings, we intended to fly by, miss them and just scare everyone a lot, but there was a mechanical malfunction in BOTH planes and we lost steering and had a bad accident. Sorry, we didn't mean it."

You'd be first in line to say "Well, they didn't MEAN to hit the towers, he said so himself."

Or better yet, if you were a NYPD detective, interviewing a guy arrested for shooting at people but not hitting anyone, you would take a plea of "I intentionally missed, just to scare everyone, I purposely and carefully aimed around them for effect and did not want to harm anyone." You'd let the guy walk, wouldn't you?
No it was a recognized fact that the WU went out of the way to avoid killing people.


please don't link bin laden to this. He's not an American

you have a vivid imagination stepping in where facts do not fit your world view

The WU turned away from violence. Ayers stopped advocating violence. I applaud him for that. I never condoned the WU.

so you are just talking out of your ass again


good bye


you're bankrupt
 

Forum List

Back
Top