Obama - First Black President

[Beckwin]

noble, for whatever it may be worth, people coming from a perspective similar to mine or Elvis's tend to "blame" people much higher up than those sent in to do the dirty work. aside from the puppy-tossers and POW-molesters types, I don't think Elvis or I really label most soldiers as murderers and the source of the problem.

[Elvis]

I was posting in response to Plow's comments on Ayers. This entire exchange between him and Beckwin has been about that for the last page. Anyways, my underlying point is that Ayers was given lots of attention for his terrorism in the 60s.

Now, the memory of the 60s - in general - was continually being betrayed throughout the election and this small exchange proves that. No one seems to think COINTELPRO was important even though it was an attack on American civilians - the civil rights movement, the feminist movement, dissent in general).

So while Ayers's actions are deplorable, it's shallow to just dismiss him as a terrorist without at least acknowledging the things our own government did during that decade.

[Plow]

BTW I get a free pass on Godwin's when we're talking about people that try to bomb people with dynamite and roofing nails. Just fyi.

[Elvis]

.

You bold the reports that suit YOUR perspective. Now, let's draw up all the reports in google that state it was an attack on civilians.

[Churchill]

You mean the Muslim propaganda and the regurgitation of it? I'll pass.

[Elvis]

You mean the Muslim propaganda and the regurgitation of it? I'll pass.

You mean the White House propaganda and regurgitation of it? I'll pass. You're clever.

[Beckwin]

google news is in the tank for jihadists.

[Elvis]

I know right, we can only trust Dana Perino.

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

It's all in the eye of the beholder, but defending the actions of someone like Ayers, let alone comparing him to some of the great dissenters of all time is unreasonable, he didn't accomplish anything, hell, even the Black Panthers eventually went "whoa... these guys are fucked up."

Not sure but quite impressed how you managed to completely disagree with yourself in one statement.

The only reason they are "some of the great dissenters of all time" is because they won. If the British had won they would have been known as some of the greatest terrorists of all time.

If Bill Ayers had ignited a popular revolution in which the people overthrew the government and started a new government, our perception would hail Bill Ayers as an hero. It's the same exact difference.

Thanks for seeing my point and trying to claim it as your own after arguing it for two pages.

[archibaldcrane]

You bold the reports that suit YOUR perspective. Now, let's draw up all the reports in google that state it was an attack on civilians.

His report said:

U.S. officials contended that all those killed during the raid were associated with Abu Ghadiya, the operation's target.

If you believe that, well, they could've been civilians who were "associated" with a terrorist.

Fuck, that language is so loose that Obama is a civilian associated with a terrorist if you want to have fun with it.

This isn't much of an argument about the facts, just the framing it seems.

[Plow]

Not sure but quite impressed how you managed to completely disagree with yourself in one statement.

The only reason they are "some of the great dissenters of all time" is because they won. If the British had won they would have been known as some of the greatest terrorists of all time.

If Bill Ayers had ignited a popular revolution in which the people overthrew the government and started a new government, our perception would hail Bill Ayers as an hero. It's the same exact difference.

Thanks for seeing my point and trying to claim it as your own after arguing it for two pages.

You'd be right, if the U.S.A. had attacked and tried to take over Britain. Unfortunately for your argument, they wanted to peacefully secede.

[SwampdonkeyPLD]

It's always our fault. It doesn't matter that Osama attacked us. It doesn't matter that the Taliban harbored him. It doesn't matter they hide behind civilians. It doesn't matter that they keep fighting. It's our fault, and as a result our soldiers in Afghanistan are no better than William Ayers. /done

[Plow]

It's always our fault. It doesn't matter that Osama attacked us. It doesn't matter that the Taliban harbored him. It doesn't matter they hide behind civilians. It doesn't matter that they keep fighting. It's our fault, and as a result our soldiers in Afghanistan are no better than William Ayers. /done

No, Ayers is better than them.

So much so, in fact, that he should try to bomb them with roofing nails.


That would make him the man.

[noblemountain]

noble, for whatever it may be worth, people coming from a perspective similar to mine or Elvis's tend to "blame" people much higher up than those sent in to do the dirty work. aside from the puppy-tossers and POW-molesters types, I don't think Elvis or I really label most soldiers as murderers and the source of the problem.

i know man...that's why i tend to avoid these threads, i take shit a little personally when it comes to accusing soldiers of murdering civilians. whether that's what he meant or not is open for interpretation, it's just how i took it. my girlfriend's view is very similar to yours and we've had discussions about things like this because it's easier face to face than online, not being able to hear inflection and tone.

*statement made in a little bit of emotion after having a similar argument in private with my girlfriend...details aren't necessary, just know this was my bad.*

all in all, i do understand y'alls view on this...i don't/haven't always agreed with what's been going on the last 8 years, i did do my job and they are as well. it just really sucks when you come home to the airport and people are picketing with signs and screaming at you, calling you a baby killer. soldiers have it hard enough without people blaming them for things they have no control over.

sorry for my little rant, i'll go back to posting in the MMA threads and leave the politics to you guys.

[Plow]

noble, for whatever it may be worth, people coming from a perspective similar to mine or Elvis's tend to "blame" people much higher up than those sent in to do the dirty work. aside from the puppy-tossers and POW-molesters types, I don't think Elvis or I really label most soldiers as murderers and the source of the problem.

Wow, I totally didn't see this before.


You realize the people they tried to bomb directly were students and soldiers, right?


Oh, I forgot, you have no clue wtf you're talking about and just want to make Ayers look good since people tried to use him to make Obama look bad.

[Elvis]

It's always our fault. It doesn't matter that Osama attacked us. It doesn't matter that the Taliban harbored him. It doesn't matter they hide behind civilians. It doesn't matter that they keep fighting. It's our fault, and as a result our soldiers in Afghanistan are no better than William Ayers. /done

I can't help that you and Churchill are uninformed. I mentioned Afghanistan for a specific reason. Since you're around here a lot talking about blah blah blah, I assumed you'd know that prior to the bombing, there was a starvation crisis in the country.

~Excerpts w/ especially important parts in bold~

NYTimes
Oct. 17th, 2001

A NATION CHALLENGED: CHARITIES; Bush Voices Pride in Aid, But Groups List Hurdles - New York Times

President Bush promoted his relief fund for Afghan children at the headquarters of the American Red Cross today, but international relief groups said the American bombing campaign was making it virtually impossible to deliver large amounts of food to starving Afghans.

Aid officials were especially infuriated by the bombing of an International Committee of the Red Cross compound in Kabul by an American warplane earlier today.

The situation prompted Raymond C. Offenheiser, president of Oxfam America, to call today for a halt in the airstrikes. ''The bombing has demonstrated that we cannot get food to hungry Afghan people in relative safety,'' he said. ''We've run out of food, the borders are closed, we can't reach our staffs and time is running out.''

Mr. Bush said proudly at the Red Cross that the White House had received 90,000 pieces of mail -- many containing money from American youth -- for food and supplies for Afghan children. He made no mention of the bombing. ''Thanks to the American children, fewer children in Afghanistan will suffer this winter,'' he said against a photogenic backdrop of American boys and girls.

The organization also said that one of five buildings in the compound, containing blankets, tarpaulins and plastic, suffered a direct hit and was completely destroyed. A second building that stored food caught fire and was partly destroyed.

The airstrike prompted a sharper reaction from Red Cross officials in the area, who said that it occurred in broad daylight and that the top of the warehouse was painted with a large red cross on a white background.

Robert Moni, the director of the International Red Cross in Kabul, who has been evacuated to Pakistan, was quoted by Reuters as saying: ''It is definitely a civilian target. In addition to that, it is a clearly marked I.C.R.C. warehouse."

The United Nations believes that 7.5 million Afghans will need food over the winter -- 2.5 million more than on Sept. 11. Relief groups said today that the 275,000 packets of food dropped in the country so far are at best a minor public relations gesture and at worst a source of mistrust.

As to the other nonsense you wrote Swamp, my point is not that American soldiers are terrorists or that this concept of America is a terrorist-friendly country.

First of all, America is more than just the government and the military. If we're talking politics then this is a given.

[Elvis]

And sorry for a double post but didn't want to tl;dr anymore than I had to...

Chomsky quoting the New York Times article published the day before the one I posted above, covering Washington's official demands prior to the bombing:

[Oliver] Kamm claims that I provided no evidence to support the judgment that the US was bombing Afghanistan with the knowledge that it might lead to the death of millions of people. It takes real talent to miss the extensive evidence cited in the few pages I devoted to these matters.

The citations include the New York Times report three weeks before the bombing that Washington "demanded [from Pakistan] the elimination of truck convoys that provide much of the food and other supplies to Afghanistan's civilian population ," and the Times report that the numbers at risk of starvation were estimated to have risen by 50% a month later, to 7.5 million. Also cited are reports in the Times of the bitterness of fleeing aid workers who said that "The country was on a lifeline and we just cut the line" by threatening to bomb; the report by the UN World Food Program that the threat forced them to reduce food supplies to 15% of what was needed and later that the bombing itself caused them to terminate it entirely; warnings by major relief agencies of a likely "humanitarian crisis of epic proportions in Afghanistan with 7.5 million short of food and at risk of starvation"; and a great deal more. Also included was the urgent plea by 1000 Afghan leaders in late October to terminate the "bombing of innocent people" and to adopt other means to overthrow the hated Taliban regime, a goal they believed could be achieved without slaughter and destruction; and the denunciation of the bombing by one of the anti-Taliban leaders who was most respected by Washington and Hamid Karzai, Abdul Haq, who described the bombing as "a big setback" for efforts to overthrow the Taliban from within, carried out because Washington "is trying to show its muscle, score a victory and scare everyone in the world" but "don't care about the suffering of the Afghans or how many people we will lose."

[Beckwin]

Plow did Ayers kill those soldiers? did those soldiers ever come under any harm? All you've got to go on is two Weather members who killed themselves trying to make a bomb.

But still, terrible fucking parallel on your part (yet again)... soldiers and radicals/insurgents/etc alike feel a duty to carry out killing sometimes. The issue becomes of motivations and whether you agree with them or agree with them enough.

[archibaldcrane]

You realize the people they tried to bomb directly were students and soldiers, right?

This planned bombing you refer to, as I understood, was being planned and was supposed to be executed by other members of the Weather Underground, not Bill Ayers specifically, right?

[Beckwin]

This planned bombing you refer to, as I understood, was being planned and was supposed to be executed by other members of the Weather Underground, not Bill Ayers specifically, right?

terrest1 = terrest2 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

which is like saying Noblemountain is the same as Donald Rumsfeld, a.k.a. that'd be a retarded thing to say.