Weather Underground Informant Video

[RobMoney$]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJn5b8_weUY


Re-education and murdering 25 million capitolists i.e. genocide?


I'm not posting this primarily to raise the issue of Obama's relationship to Ayres, so all the Obama supporters can take a chill-pill.
I am posting it for those folks who may not have been aware of exactly how bat-shit crazy the WU were and for people who were willing to dismiss all of Ayres misgivings because it was 40 years ago.
I'm sorry, but that doesn't excuse the planning to kill 25 million people because they don't subscribe to your line of thinking.

The term "Domestic terrorists" is not too strong a term for what they were IMO.

[Documad]

Rob, you should check out the links on that video -- google some of the names, etc. I can't find any reputable site discussing that "documentary" and the group that originally funded it is suspect (to me). And note that Ayers name is never mentioned -- he's not the one who allegedly said that stuff and he's not alleged to have been in the room at the time, right? There are so many better sources to use to educate yourself about the Weather Underground. They've been discussed in mainstream media for decades so there is no reason to resort to suspect sources.

I'll repeat what I said in the other thread: As for the Weather Underground -- I can't tolerate anyone sticking up for them. It's bad enough when old hippies romanticize them. I just re-watched that documentary on them last night, so I have a bee in my bonnet. They were spoiled rotten stupid fucking assholes. And the black panthers wanted no part of them. (not that I like the black panthers either -- it's just that they wanted so bad to be like the black panthers and instead they were dumb hippie kids from semi-affluent white homes so it's even more pathetic.)

The documentary I mentioned is called Weather Underground. It's too sympathetic to them for my taste but it's got interviews with Ayers and others if anyone is interested. It's a mainstream documentary so it's available for rental via netflix and other sources.

I can't stand the romanticism of any of the hippie groups, especially ones that advocated violence or destruction of property. But I have an equal loathing for some of the undercover "police officers and informants" who infiltrated the groups for J. Edgar Hoover or whoever. Much of what they reported it complete fiction. And when they engaged in their domestic spying, they never seemed to distinguish between Martin Luther King and John Lennon and people who were truly threats to our country. They famously ignored organized crime, for instance.


By the way: NONE OF THIS HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH BARACK OBAMA. I know that Rob knows that, but I want to be sure that it's crystal clear to everyone.

[kaiser soze]

palin blindly chooses what a terrorist is and isn't

god, she is a horrible interviewee and mccain looks worse than most people on their death beds

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ynLUelxXwQ

[Documad]

palin blindly chooses what a terrorist is and isn't

god, she is a horrible interviewee and mccain looks worse than most people on their death beds

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ynLUelxXwQ

Thanks. I only saw one part of that so far.

Has the whole Brian Williams interview been released yet?

[Documad]

palin blindly chooses what a terrorist is and isn't

god, she is a horrible interviewee and mccain looks worse than most people on their death beds

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ynLUelxXwQ

Good lord. Palin can't say that Eric Rudolph is a terrorist? Is there some kind of exception for anti-abortion terrorists? That says SOOOO much about her base. She's afraid of offending them by saying it's domestic terrorism to bomb abortion clinics?

At least McCain gets it. I'm glad he eventually responded to it.

[RobMoney$]

Rob, you should check out the links on that video -- google some of the names, etc. I can't find any reputable site discussing that "documentary" and the group that originally funded it is suspect (to me). And note that Ayers name is never mentioned -- he's not the one who allegedly said that stuff and he's not alleged to have been in the room at the time, right? There are so many better sources to use to educate yourself about the Weather Underground. They've been discussed in mainstream media for decades so there is no reason to resort to suspect sources.

I have read about the WU's "Days of Rage" in which they took to the streets of Chicago with lead pipes and smashed cars and businesses, bombed the Capitol and Pentagon, and broke Dr. Timothy Leary out of Prison because they were protesting racism and Americas role in Vietnam and SE Asia as a whole, but genocide was a whole other level that I wasn't aware of.

The WUO publicly portrays themselves as "purposefully and successfully avoided injuring anyone" because they took lengths to ensure there were no innocent victims during their roits and bombings. This video suggests that what they portrayed publicly and what they were planning privately were two very different things.

Although you can argue that the validity of the source, it is info that is worthy of discussion.

[Documad]

Although you can argue that the validity of the source, it is info that is worthy of discussion.
If the source is invalid then there is no info to discuss.

And remember that even this alleged source doesn't name anyone.

Believe me I find rumors and scare tactics interesting in their own right because I'm interested in human behavior. For instance, why did so many crackpots claim that Hillary Clinton murdered Vince Foster? Why do so many people believe the claims in Loose Change without question?

If you know a lot about a subject and then suddenly there is sensational new information that no one else has reported, why would you assume that it's true and repeat it to others without question?

[Documad]

I'd like to be clear that I think it's bullshit that they say they purposefully harmed buildings instead of humans. I'm sure that helped them sleep at night but it doesn't get anywhere with me.

When you bomb a building in order to make a political statement, that's terrorism--whether it's the pentagon or an abortion clinic. And even if you do everything in your power to make sure the building is empty, you are risking the lives of innocent people and that's just plain evil. But I'm going to find it difficult to believe that, as an organization, they planned to exterminate 25 millions americans and that it hasn't been widely reported. It's possible that some crazy person said that to someone once, but that's not the issue. .

[Bob]

It's possible that some crazy person said that to someone once, but that's not the issue. .

but what if you really, really want it to be the issue?

[RobMoney$]

I don't see how we can discount the article, yet say that even if it was said it there's some sort of excuse for it like "it was a crazy, low-ranking person in the organization".

The account was that it was part of the discussion of the meeting by the panel of the leadership of the WU, "25 people, most of which with graduate degrees from Columbia and other well-known educational centers".

I think you either put creedence into the story, or you don't.
To pick and choose which parts you believe is not responsible.

[Documad]

It's not an article, it's a clip from an old video made by a goofy defunct group. We have no idea who supposedly made the comment because they don't tell us. We don't know who was supposed to be there because they don't tell us. It doesn't incriminate any particular person in any way. And I don't trust any part of it.

Separate from that, I'm saying that it doesn't matter to me because the clip doesn't get me where you're trying to go.

I guess I'll have to let it drop because I can't make myself understood. We can just agree that the Weathermen were bad people who did bad things.

[yeahwho]

How much research is there actually left on Barack Obama and John McCain? To me it sounds as if Obama and Ayers are both politically active in various school programs in the Chicago area, they met at a few of these functions. Then he helped hm in 1995 by sponsoring a political kick off campaign. After that it, it sort of faded.




More than 3,000 professors back Ayers petition (http://www.cavalierdaily.com/news/2008/oct/24/more-than-3000-professors-back/)
Petition aims to counter recent attempts to ‘slander’ Bill Ayers during current presidential election



As of press time, a McCain campaign representative could not be reached for comment. Since the allegations from McCain’s campaign came to light regarding Obama’s associations with Ayers and Ayers’ past history, Obama has denied on multiple occasions having any sort of illicit or questionable associations with Ayers. Various media sources have reported that Ayers and Obama at one time lived in the same Chicagoland area, and both were involved in a variety of education reform projects. Ayers hosted an event in 1995 in support of Obama’s first run for political office, and in April 2001, Ayers contributed $200 to Obama’s re-election fund to the Illinois State Senate, those media sources reported.

It is two way street.

[DroppinScience]

I'd like to be clear that I think it's bullshit that they say they purposefully harmed buildings instead of humans. I'm sure that helped them sleep at night but it doesn't get anywhere with me.

When you bomb a building in order to make a political statement, that's terrorism--whether it's the pentagon or an abortion clinic. And even if you do everything in your power to make sure the building is empty, you are risking the lives of innocent people and that's just plain evil. But I'm going to find it difficult to believe that, as an organization, they planned to exterminate 25 millions americans and that it hasn't been widely reported. It's possible that some crazy person said that to someone once, but that's not the issue. .

I know where you're coming from on this in that you're not wanting to condone violence on either side, but I'm refusing to see the Weather Underground in purely black and white terms (i.e. they're either downright evil or heroes according to hippies romanticizing them). I see it as somewhere down the middle with more than plenty amounts of shades of grey. Among all the great social movements of the '60s and '70s who demonstrated to resist war or demand civil rights (be it blacks, women, or gays), the Weather Underground does not deserve to be uttered in the same sentence as SNCC, CORE, VVAW, SDS, etc. However, I sympathize with the amount of rage they had against their foes. I mean, the government they were dealing with was indiscriminately napalming as many as 2 million Indochinese (just think about that, that's 1/3 as much as the Holocaust). They covered up massacres like the Mai Lai Massacre. This is shit you just cannot defend and it's apalling people like Gen. Westmoreland did not get put on trial for war crimes.

As wrongheaded as the Weathermen's means were, what they did pales in comparison with what was done in the Vietnam War. If you're going to condemn them for blowing up public buildings that were evacuated (and damage to public property pales vastly in comparison with human lives lost), I'd expect something similar about the Defense Department, war profiteers, weapons contractors, etc. It's only fair.

[RobMoney$]

So in summation, the WU were wrong but had their heart in the right place.

But McCain is an absolute monster in your eyes?



right.

[Documad]

The Weather Underground didn't do a thing to stop the Vietnam War. In fact, I'd be pretty sure that they helped make mainstream people run into the arms of Nixon. The Vietnam War didn't stop because some middle class college kids bombed a few buildings. The Vietnam War stopped because middle america finally got sick of seeing their kids come home in body bags.

All terrorists think they have a legitimate reason for doing what they're doing. The guys who bomb abortion clinics think they're saving lives too. It's just as wrong. Frankly organized crime thought they had a legitimate reason for protecting their way of life too.

(BTW, I'm not a fan of SDS either, but that's because they were self-indulgent assholes. They weren't a terrorist organization. I can't stand the romanticizing of counterculture groups. Some had good people and good objectives but there were many repugnant people in those groups. I have a lot of friends and family who were involved in counterculture groups--not in the WU. Some turned into really cool people. Some are and always were straight up con men. )

Again, to be crystal clear, none of this has a god damned thing to do with Obama.

[DroppinScience]

The Weather Underground didn't do a thing to stop the Vietnam War. In fact, I'd be pretty sure that they helped make mainstream people run into the arms of Nixon. The Vietnam War didn't stop because some middle class college kids bombed a few buildings. The Vietnam War stopped because middle america finally got sick of seeing their kids come home in body bags.

All terrorists think they have a legitimate reason for doing what they're doing. The guys who bomb abortion clinics think they're saving lives too. It's just as wrong. Frankly organized crime thought they had a legitimate reason for protecting their way of life too.

(BTW, I'm not a fan of SDS either, but that's because they were self-indulgent assholes. They weren't a terrorist organization. I can't stand the romanticizing of counterculture groups. Some had good people and good objectives but there were many repugnant people in those groups. I have a lot of friends and family who were involved in counterculture groups--not in the WU. Some turned into really cool people. Some are and always were straight up con men. )

Again, to be crystal clear, none of this has a god damned thing to do with Obama.

Of course it's got nothing to do with Obama. I think (and hope) we're past that.

Like I said though, the Weathermen are hardly your shining example of a movement. But I do have to take issue with your notion that they extended the Vietnam War (their efforts didn't shorten or lengthen it). I've heard a lot of right-wing voices say that protesting in general (and I'm talking your standard non-violent people, not the fringe groups) extended the war rather than shortening it, and that's about as big a lie as the urban myth that hippies spat on soldiers coming home from Vietnam (no documented proof it EVER happened).

I do have to wonder why you don't like about counter culture groups being "romanticized." Their legacy is one of bringing about consciousness of a world without war, environmental issues being brought to the forefront, gay rights, womens rights, you name it. I can't find anything wrong with that other than the fact that many had long hair and not the best of hygiene ( :p ). Better than being in the "Silent Majority" if you ask me.

[saz]

How close are McCain and Liddy? At least as close as Obama and Ayers appear to be. In 1998, Liddy's home was the site of a McCain fundraiser. Over the years, he has made at least four contributions totaling $5,000 to the senator's campaigns -- including $1,000 this year.

Which principles would those be? The ones that told Liddy it was fine to break into the office of the Democratic National Committee to plant bugs and photograph documents? The ones that made him propose to kidnap anti-war activists so they couldn't disrupt the 1972 Republican National Convention? The ones that inspired him to plan the murder (never carried out) of an unfriendly newspaper columnist?

Liddy was in the thick of the biggest political scandal in American history -- and one of the greatest threats to the rule of law. He has said he has no regrets about what he did, insisting that he went to jail as "a prisoner of war."

Liddy's penchant for extreme solutions has not abated.

Last November, McCain went on his radio show. Liddy greeted him as "an old friend," and McCain sounded like one. "I'm proud of you, I'm proud of your family," he gushed. "It's always a pleasure for me to come on your program, Gordon, and congratulations on your continued success and adherence to the principles and philosophies that keep our nation great."

In 1994, after the disastrous federal raid on the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas, he gave some advice to his listeners: "Now if the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms comes to disarm you and they are bearing arms, resist them with arms. Go for a head shot; they're going to be wearing bulletproof vests. ... Kill the sons of bitches."

He later backed off, saying he meant merely that people should defend themselves if federal agents came with guns blazing. But his amended guidance was not exactly conciliatory: Liddy also said he should have recommended shots to the groin instead of the head. If that wasn't enough to inflame any nut cases, he mentioned labeling targets "Bill" and "Hillary" when he practiced shooting.

Given Liddy's record, it's hard to see why McCain would touch him with a 10-foot pole. On the contrary, he should be returning his donations and shunning his show. Yet the senator shows no qualms about associating with Liddy -- or celebrating his service to their common cause.

How does McCain explain his howling hypocrisy on the subject? He doesn't. I made repeated inquiries to his campaign aides, which they refused to acknowledge, much less answer. On this topic, the pilot of the Straight Talk Express would rather stay parked in the garage.

That's an odd policy for someone who is so forthright about his rival's responsibility. McCain thinks Obama should apologize for associating with a criminal extremist. To which Obama might reply: After you.

link (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-oped0504chapmanmay04,0,6238795.column)