Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
With all this recent talk about right wing extremism I was curious how some of you would compare right wing extremist like Tim McViegh to left wing extemist such as the Weather Undeground? I'am comparing them because both used bombs and were anti the government of their time.
Both are known to have operated outside the law. In any case where that can be proven under the rule of law they should be punished. The supporters of both belong in mental institutions.
Ayers is a government employee and buddy of the sitting president.
I thought the question was about the Weather Underground, not Ayers. If there are current or past members with outstanding warrants, pending charges or unserved sentences they should be brought to justice and handled under the rule of law. On the other hand if someone is a past member but has none of those things harming them would be a criminal act and the person doing it should be punished-- under the rule of law.
Sooo, what how does McVeigh and the Weather Underground differ?
They don't. They both had/have idiots who idolize/whitewash thier actions. That cannot be denied.
The unibomber was a evoronamntalist terrorist as is the peole who spike trees and burn homes in forested areas. They arejust that a expreme eaample. But then looking at the tea parties and the fear monegring ;I can look at left wing protest her and around the world and see violence thatis truely agenda driven and justified by left wing groups. its always best to separate the lone extremist and talkers from those groups who actaully do violence as a means to a end. I thni we saw in tehTea paties 500 gathering of a rare unviolne tgroup. That contrasting even sporoting events victory parties. The think about who these at these events where that did the vioence ;burning and looting. Young violent thugs is what I see.Look at the growing vilences at even colleges and schools.The contrast that with the families and civil behavior at the tea Parties and make your own judgement.Its easy to see who is violent and a threat to society.
One was an avid communist group and some would still describe themselves as socialist or communist. One former leader now plays a key role in writing the curriculum in one of the biggest teachers associations around.
One was an avid communist group and some would still describe themselves as socialist or communist. One former leader now plays a key role in writing the curriculum in one of the biggest teachers associations around.
None of which are crimes, whereas blowing up a federal office building and killing 168 innocent men women and children is a crime.
None of which are crimes, whereas blowing up a federal office building and killing 168 innocent men women and children is a crime.
I think everyone knows that.
You have to admit though, that by all accounts Ayers is not repentent, anymore then McVeigh was. And it is scary that someone with such a violent and rebellious bent is a professor and has carte blanche to teach what he will.
Now, I personally do not care if it is a violent extremist with a liberal bent, a conservative bent, an atheist bent or a religous bent. They are all dangerous, and they are all to be feared to an extent -- much the way a wise person would fear a rattlesnake.
I know that there is a kneejerk reaction when it comes to Ayers because it may or may not reflect badly on Obama. I am not going there at all. Personally, I believe Obama does not think that highly of Ayers, is not a disciple of Ayers or in anyway believes that Ayers actions were justified. I do believe though that in Chicago you have to play by the rules to get ahead....and sometimes that means being on committees with people you might otherwise not want to associate with. It is what it is. But, as to Ayers specifically and that psychob**ch wife of his, yes - they are dangerous, unrepentent terrorists. Just like McVeigh, only with a smaller body count. And only then because they didn't have the knowledge on how to build bigger, better and more reliable bombs. If they had McVeighs resources, you can bet they would have used it.
You have to admit though, that by all accounts Ayers is not repentent, anymore then McVeigh was. And it is scary that someone with such a violent and rebellious bent is a professor and has carte blanche to teach what he will.
Now, I personally do not care if it is a violent extremist with a liberal bent, a conservative bent, an atheist bent or a religous bent. They are all dangerous, and they are all to be feared to an extent -- much the way a wise person would fear a rattlesnake.
I know that there is a kneejerk reaction when it comes to Ayers because it may or may not reflect badly on Obama. I am not going there at all. Personally, I believe Obama does not think that highly of Ayers, is not a disciple of Ayers or in anyway believes that Ayers actions were justified. I do believe though that in Chicago you have to play by the rules to get ahead....and sometimes that means being on committees with people you might otherwise not want to associate with. It is what it is. But, as to Ayers specifically and that psychob**ch wife of his, yes - they are dangerous, unrepentent terrorists. Just like McVeigh, only with a smaller body count. And only then because they didn't have the knowledge on how to build bigger, better and more reliable bombs. If they had McVeighs resources, you can bet they would have used it.
What exactly did he do that he should "repent"? I'm seriously asking because I don't know much about the guy. I am familiar with the weathermen/weather persons/weather underground. Not too long ago they captured a lady that belonged to one of the violent antiwar organizations who had been involved in some bombings. She served time and eventually was paroled. I think that's totally appropriate, though some do think its harsh. If it's just the antiwar political opinions he held back then people feel he should repent, that's baloney and its wrong of them to want that. If its Leftist political views he holds today, that's bunk too. If he's committed a crime he should be punished. If he hasn't the people who want to punish someone need to go find someone who has.
None of which are crimes, whereas blowing up a federal office building and killing 168 innocent men women and children is a crime.
Federal Bureau of Investigation - Freedom of Information Privacy Act (http://foia.fbi.gov/foiaindex/weather.htm - broken link)
Sure about that?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
