Is Bill Ayers The "Domestic Terrorist" Actually a Freedom Fighter?

Let me ask you a question if anyone here can answer? Is this Bill Ayers really a bad guy? For you people who dont know who he is..the McCain campaign is tying Obama to this guy who was part of an underground movement against the Vietnam war. Yes he planted a few SMALL bombs at certain government sites not hurting or killing anyone. But let me ask you a question. What is a people supposed to do when your government refuses to listen to the will of the people. I think the population overwhelmingly was against the war in Vietnam and the government fought it anyways killing thousands and costing us billions. We now see the war as a big mistake. Bill Ayers was actually RIGHT. He saw long before all of us this push for a NWO.

Now this brings us to now. I think the population overwhelmingly wanted no bailout package...especially a package with all sorts of pork, Out of Iraq, Osama Bin Laden Captured or Killed (Is he TRULY is the one who did 9/11), Our borders and immigration isnt fixed, and at least SOME effort at paying off the debt and yet the government still does not listen to the people. What the hell are we supposed to do? Calling the reps does not help they just chuckle and continue on. Voting doesnt help because they all promise to do this and that and it never gets done and beyond that I really dont see a big difference in the candidates. So what is a person to do? Thomas Jefferson said a Free Society is when the government fears the people. A tyranny is when the people fear the government. So I ask myself. Is Bill Ayers a domestic terrorist or actually a freedom fighter?

Definitely an interesting question. I was listening to Sean Hannity on my way home from work yesterday (no I don't like him) and he was ranting and raving about how Bill Ayers is not remorseful for what he did and actually says he would do it again. Back to the question though no, I don't consider him a terrorist. Radical yes.

Originally posted by mybigunit
What is a people supposed to do when your government refuses to listen to the will of the people.

Not plant bombs at Government offices or sites, that is never going to work

It still amazes me that there are people willing to defend this man simply because of his connection to Obama.

Now really, do you think people would be sticking up for Ayers if it were not for the context of Obama running for President? I don’t think so.

What we have is a man who set bombs in US government buildings, in blatant acts of terrorism. We have a man who admitted to being at war with our country, and wishes he were able to do more to harm it. Does this sound like a man anyone would want to stick up for?

Yet here we are, in the midst of an election, and simply because this man is associated with Obama, people will defend him.

I always ask people to imaging they were reading about Ayers for the first time, and knew nothing else of Obama or the election or anything.

What would you think about him? Would you still be defending someone who was at war with your country?

Originally posted by nyk537
It still amazes me that there are people willing to defend this man simply because of his connection to Obama.

I find this an odd thing to say.

There's a lot of Americans on this forum that are very pro-gun. They explain that it's a right given to them from the very foundations of American law. Which, whilst I'm not in favour of guns myself, is hard to disagree with. Guns and the right to have them is as American as 'apple pie' - although I'm not wholly sure apple pie is American per se.

Anyway, it's always been explained to me that a major part of the reason that gun ownership is important is to 'fight government when the government turns and fights the people'.

If that's the case, then from what I know of Ayers, he's actually putting his money where his mouth is and acting on this principle. Will the American survivalist movement and those who are prepared for when/if Martial Law appears, all agree on what point to fight back? Will some start loading and shooting earlier than others? Some needing a few more signs that 'it' has started whilst for others the evidence is as clear as day? Perhaps some needing different signs?

It seems to me that Ayers simply saw the 'proof' that America was fighting against what he believed to be against the best interests of Americans before others see it.

As for the specifics of a bombing campaign, I think it's churlish and pedantic to say that somehow bombs are 'worse' than shotguns, automatic rifles, cross-bows &c. If you're fighting the government, you're fighting the government.

[edit on 7-10-2008 by Merriman Weir]

He is a domestic terrorist. Even though most of us believe that the US gov is no longer "for the people" it is not acceptable to use explosives. He needs to take a page from the books of MLK and Ghandi. Peaceful resistance, although not as immediately gratifiing has been shown to be effective is a much more acceptable means of declaring war on an institution. IE: the government.

reply to post by nyk537


Did you even read this mans post? No...

Then why are you talking. The man clearly said neither candidate is different from one another. They are both schisters. He's sticking up for this patriot because no matter how "wrong" what he did was, he did something. What have you done to fight the mass corruption and seemingly REAL 'evil' that is upon us?

Ayers didn't hurt anyone. He was frustrated and did something he thought could change. While I disagree with his tactics as well, I still applaud him because I certainly am doing much less FOR MY COUNTRY. He's a damn hero because hes a damn hero not because he has been connected with Obama. If it were true... which im sure its only spin, then I would either lose respect for Ayers, or support Obama. I would support Obama because of Ayers, not the other way around. Obama has many of the same sponsors as McCain... Are you enjoying your theatrical display of what a democracy might look like, if we had one? It's a damn show meant to distract and it works flawlessly. After all these years of lying, after all these wars... you are still buying this same old crap?

Goggle video "war made easy" narrated by sean penn, its really well done .

Read the watergate transcripts. There is a criminal organization in control that has much more power now than it did in the past. And all because of ignorant people like you. Instead of changing that ignorance, you come to site devoted to denying ignorance and act as ignorant as possible.


[edit on 7-10-2008 by Looking4LikeMindz]

Originally posted by SuperSecretSquirrel
He is a domestic terrorist. Even though most of us believe that the US gov is no longer "for the people" it is not acceptable to use explosives.

He needs to take a page from the books of MLK and Ghandi. Peaceful resistance, although not as immediately gratifiing has been shown to be effective is a much more acceptable means of declaring war on an institution. IE: the government

Do you think the same about guns, crossbows &c?

I'm all for non-violent protests as I'm tired of a world tainted by war and conflict. Yet, does non-violent protest always work? Will it work in 2008? 2009? 2010? Our governments are not only not listening but they're actually laughing at us.

Look at the (relatively) peaceful demonstrations across the world over the last couple of years. The anti-war protests, the anti-globalism protests and so on. What does it do? Also, in some allegedly free countries, it's getting harder to peacefully demonstrate as more restrictions come into place every year. I don't live in 1960s communist China either. I live in Britain.

Originally posted by nyk537
It still amazes me that there are people willing to defend this man simply because of his connection to Obama.

Now really, do you think people would be sticking up for Ayers if it were not for the context of Obama running for President? I don’t think so.

Its obvious you didnt read my post otherwise you wouldnt spout this rhetoric. I have NO horse in this race. They are ALL corrupt. My horse was Ron Paul who is actually for more of a peaceful approach. What I am saying is as we sit here and complain and moan about the issues I stated above the government continues with their dictatorship type agenda which is costing us our freedom both in the way of individual liberties and in the way of we are going to be in so much debt we will have to work for free for most of our lives just to pay it off. The government doesnt care. Both Obama AND McCain want big government ie the warfare/welfare state the only difference is Obama is going to make you pay up front and McCain will put it on the charge card and make us pay interest on it.

What is a country supposed to do when they dont listen to their people? This is why the second amendment was put into the constitution for those who dont know. When the government gets tyrannical its time to break out the guns.

So please next time read my someones post before you respond.

Freedom fighter, fighter, don't Americans say they go to war to fight for freedom?

Freedom fighter,

If you want peace why would you act in the same way as the ones you despise?

You scream peace and also use bombs?

Freedom fighter?

If he used bombs then he is no better, then that which he hates.

“Fighting for peace is like screwing for virginity”
George Carlin

reply to post by Stormdancer777



Ok he went about it wrong. I still give him credit for doing something and not just killing himself because all this # seems pointless. Why is it that we seek to inferioritize those that are different. He must be some nutty loopy crazy guy to actually bomb a place huh? He's frustrated, I didn't do any research on the guy but he may have been wronged more seriously by the government than all of us. I wouldn't bomb a place, but ya know if these FEMA camps are really built for what some are saying they are. We may not be fighting for peace, but survival. I would never attack the government with bombs or guns for a multitude of reasons.

1. They have much more firepower. Biological weapons.. ray guns... Its honestly like going into an uzi battle 10 vs 1 with a washcloth. It just gives them a reason to declare martial law, SO DONT DO IT.

2. Who would we be killing exactly? Who would you attack that it would change anything... You would have to stage a "holocaust" like event to kill all the bad guys. That seems ass backwards and if you start the thing with the intention to kill or control your enemies you will be no better than them, in fact what if we are in a similiar event... Man is mad. They are fleecing us for our money and killing us because we are the bad guys... haha I could totally see it justified like that.... anyways

3. You do it, it does nothing, you get thrown and jail, everyone thinks your crazy... thats it.

While I URGE people not to do anything this foolish. I just empathasize with him, that must have been a hard thing to do. If he thought it would help us all, then I respect him for it. Wrong decision or not.

Originally posted by Merriman Weir
...
Yet, does non-violent protest always work? Will it work in 2008? 2009? 2010? Our governments are not only not listening but they're actually laughing at us.

Look at the (relatively) peaceful demonstrations across the world over the last couple of years. The anti-war protests, the anti-globalism protests and so on. What does it do? Also, in some allegedly free countries, it's getting harder to peacefully demonstrate as more restrictions come into place every year. I don't live in 1960s communist China either. I live in Britain.

I am with you on this point. The people's voice is falling on deaf ears, better yet, no ears. The powers control with wealth and the military. Protests, even peaceful, are no longer to be tolerated unless the subject is meaningless to the agenda of those in power. Times are going to be changing...

The man is only labeled a terrorist because he wasn't working for the government.

Be VERY VERY careful how you answer in threads such as this. More than one informant has used stuff like this to feel out those "sympathetic" to this or that cause.

Also, please note: I am not accusing the OP of anything.

Originally posted by mybigunit
Is this Bill Ayers really a bad guy?

Of course. He's an unrepentant terrorist. He bombed, destroyed public and private property, and ploted to kill innocent Americans. To call him a 'freedom fighter' is pathetic.

I wonder if Obama and McVeigh were buddies would he suddenly be referred to as a "freedom fighter?"

Every lunatic is a "freedom fighter" in their own mind and sadly nearly all of the lunatics have some quantifiable fan base.

If I needed another reason to not vote for Obama I think being pals with a McVeigh type and being able to stand what he had done enough to allow him to babysit ones kids (unsubstantiated as far I know) would probably be a good enough reason.

It would show that somewhere there was some agreement between the two.

It all depends on 'who' labels 'who' as a terrorist. The 'guerillas' who fought against the British, at the time of the Revolutionary War, were 'domestic terrorists' against the British Crown. Time and place of the acts one takes also come into consideration.

Barack Obama has spent very little time with his 'PAL' Bill Ayers. On the other hand, John McCain has spent considerable time with Phil Gramm, who could be considered a domestic terrorist because of the laws he 'porked' into being that were the direct cause of the current economic crisis. The same Phil Gramm that John McCain wants to rely on as an adviser if he were elected President.

I understand that 'blogs' are not considered reliable sources, but I found this April 5, 2008 link a very interesting google find of 'Phil Gramm McCain'

Phil Gramm: McCain’s Terrorist In Pinstripe

There is a ticking time bomb in the John McCain campaign and the sooner that Barack Obama can turn his full attention to exploiting it the bigger and consequential the explosion should be for this phony maverick.

The presumptive Republican nominee supposedly swore off lobbyists after the Keating Five scandal nearly destroyed his political career, but they continue to have him by the short and curlies.

Phil Gramm, who is co-chair of McCain’s campaign, is not just another lobbyist. He is the man most responsible for the repeal of Depression-era banking regulations that have led directly and inextricably to much of today’s economic turmoil, and parlayed that classic example of legislative legerdemain into a lucrative lobbying career for the very people who scratched the smug Texan’s back — as well as McCain’s — on Capitol Hill.

Gramm was the biggest of the big guns behind the 1999 repeal of the banking regulations — the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act — which was officially called The Financial Services Modernization Act.

It all depends on who is pointing the finger, and when.
DocMoreau

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
I wonder if Obama and McVeigh were buddies would he suddenly be referred to as a "freedom fighter?"

Every lunatic is a "freedom fighter" in their own mind and sadly nearly all of the lunatics have some quantifiable fan base.

If I needed another reason to not vote for Obama I think being pals with a McVeigh type and being able to stand what he had done enough to allow him to babysit ones kids (unsubstantiated as far I know) would probably be a good enough reason.

It would show that somewhere there was some agreement between the two.

I find it ironic your signature says

"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards." - Claire Wolfe, 101 Things to Do 'Til the Revolution

You realize that this is domestic terror right? YOU could be and would be labeled a domestic terrorist because you are advocating violence on our government. See my point? I happen to totally AGREE with the signature. Something needs to be done. I am not advocating violence however I think the people need to stop paying taxes. I feel this is the only way to get the government to listen. But my point which DocMoreau said perfect it depends on who is labeling who the terrorist. That is the key and that is the point I am making. If doing harm to innocent civilians is domestic terrorism then what do you call stealing billions in tax dollars to bail out banks? What about going to war using a false flag operation costing the lives of thousands isnt that a form of domestic terrorism?

I’ve been reading up on the whole Weatherman thing and I’ve come to the conclusion that Bill Ayers was in all probability acting in the best interests of the big money elite. Not surprisingly, he is the son of a big money elitist. While he was in the forefront of radicalizing the various ‘student movements’, and was a driving force behind moving them towards being militant, he never really suffered serious consequences for his actions. While others died while making bombs, and remain in prison to this day, Ayers is an honored professor at Chicago University and active in politics. The federal charges he was facing were dropped due to a ‘break in’ at an FBI office that revealed COINTELPRO. It’s all too convenient for my taste; I think Ayers was a plant who was spectacularly successful in militarizing and radicalizing the leftist collage campus movements in order to marginalize and discredit them. Not that I’m any fan of the leftists.

Bill Ayers probably just scares John McCain and those like him. I think that's why they just love to misrepreent him, knowing that most people will not take the responsibility to find out if what they are being told is the truth or not. It certainly doesn't seem to bother their conscience at all that they are lying in such a big way. Ayers put himself on the line for his beliefs, noble beliefs at that. Bill Ayers blew up some statues. What was the tally for the Vietnam war by the way?

Why doesn't McCain ask what Ayers is doing with his life now, instead of what he did with his life 30 years ago [about the same time McCain was recanting as if he had been in in the custody of the Spanish Inquisition].

Ayers was a soldier too, and apparently a better one than McCain ever was. Men like him won the American Revolution, not men like McCain. Men like McCain would have had us never fight it in the first place because they would have had too much to lose in the own little lives. If McCain had been a soldier back then he would have chosen the British army. And who cares about a bunch of peasants, laborers and farmers anyway?

Give me Ayers any day, a man who will stand up and fight when others won't - that's a leader.

Guys, the bottom line is that this person did what he had to do because there was no other choice left.
The government of the day was not listening!

You all think Nelson Mandela is one of the greatest people alive, don't you?
Even HE went to jail for blowing up buildings because he was being ignored.

Your government is doing the best it can to bring your country - and your standard of living- down to the 3rd world status that Madiba came from.

I respectfully suggest that you better start looking at Mr Ayers as a loyal citizen, because your elected government is going to soon force you to take the same steps to change the plans they have to force their belief systems onto you and your children, unless they listen to you.

None of the posts I have read have hinted of any respect or positive communication from your elected leaders.

Here in South Africa, we are facing a typical African Solution: the chief owns and controls everything and everyone.
If the Chief says you are to die, you are taken outside the village walls and executed.

When will the current 1st world countries read up on your African history and realise that this is the African solution to an African problem?
Life means nothing to the average warrior in Africa.