By Larry Johnson
closeAuthor: Larry Johnson
Name: Larry Johnson
Email: larry_johnson@earthlink.net
Site: http://NoQuarterUSA.net
About: Larry C. Johnson is a former analyst at the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, who moved subsequently in 1989 to the U.S. Department of State, where he served four years as the deputy director for transportation security, antiterrorism assistance training, and special operations in the State Department's Office of Counterterrorism. He left government service in October 1993 and set up a consulting business. He currently is the co-owner and CEO of BERG Associates, LLC (Business Exposure Reduction Group) and is an expert in the fields of terrorism, aviation security, and crisis and risk management, and money laundering investigations. Johnson is the founder and main author of No Quarter, a weblog that addresses issues of terrorism and intelligence and politics. NoQuarterUSA was nominated as Best Political Blog of 2008.[1] He has worked as a private consultant on issues of international terrorism and security for the U.S. Government and private companies. Johnson has appeared as a consultant and commentator in many major newspapers and news programs.[2]
Contents [hide]
1 Background
2 Views
2.1 1996
2.2 1998
2.3 1999
2.4 2000
2.5 2001
2.6 2003
2.6.1 Plame affair
2.7 2008
3 Notes
4 References
5 External links
[edit]Background
Larry Johnson moved to Washington, D.C. in 1979 to begin work on a Ph.D. at the American University. Although he completed successfully all coursework and comprehensive exams, he did not write a dissertation. In 1978 and in 1983-85 he worked in Latin America on community development projects as a community organizer. Returning to the United States in 1985 he joined the Central Intelligence Agency, thanks in part to a letter of recommendation from Republican Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) that helped to "open doors" for him at the Agency.[3] Johnson entered on duty at the CIA in September 1985 and was a classmate of Valerie Plame. Every member of that class was undercover. After a year in the Career Trainee program, which included a stint with the Afghan Task Force, Johnson was assigned as an analyst in the Middle America Caribbean Division in the Latin American Affairs Office of the Directorate of Intelligence. He received two Exceptional Performance awards and was promoted ultimately to Senior Regional Analyst for Central America.
Johnson remained undercover in the CIA until October 1989, when he resigned from the CIA and started a new job in the Office of Counter Terrorism at the Department of State. Johnson played an instrumental role in launching the Terrorism Rewards program international advertising campaign (working with Diplomatic Security officers Brad Smith and Michael Parks). [4] Johnson also was involved in a variety of crisis management response operations, including the release of hostages from Lebanon and liaison with the Pan Am 103 families. He left government service in October 1993 and started his own business as a consultant.
After leaving government service, Johnson became a frequent guest on many major television news shows when a question of terrorism came up. He was first interviewed by CNN following the capture of Carlos the Jackal. Johnson subsequently appeared on CNN, ABC's Nightline, CBS, the BBC, MSNBC, the Jim Lehrer News Hour, NBC, and NPR. In December of 1999, for example, Johnson was hired by NBC to serve as its terrorist expert for the Y2000 and was in Time Square with Tom Brokaw and Katie Couric ("a lot of fun and the best way to see in the New Year"). Johnson also was hired in January 2002 as a Fox News Analyst and remained under contract until February 2003.
Since 1994 a significant focus of Johnson's consulting work has been with the U.S. military special operations forces in scripting and conducting military counter terrorism exercises. He traveled under orders from the U.S. military to Iraq in May 2006 to work on a short term project.
A registered Republican who supported President Bush in 2000, Johnson became a strong critic of the Bush administration in May 2003 for its conduct of the war in Iraq and, a few months later, for its role in the outing of CIA operative Valerie Plame.[5] He was also featured in the 2004 political documentary Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism. Since Robert Novak's controversial disclosure of Valerie Plame as a CIA operative in July 2003, Johnson has contributed to public discourse on intelligence matters, often sparking further controversy. He has been interviewed by both the mass media and the alternative media and published commentaries on a variety of issues, including the Plame affair, the controversy concerning Mary McCarthy, and the resignation of Porter Goss as Director of Central Intelligence.
[edit]Views
This article or section may contain an inappropriate mixture of prose and timeline.
Please help convert this timeline into prose or, if necessary, a list.
[edit]1996
In 1996, Johnson noted that terrorism worldwide was on the decline. "Terrorist incidents [both internationally and in the US] have fallen to levels not seen since the 1970s. Whether measured by the number of incidents, the number of fatalities, or the number of groups, raw statistics demonstrate that the level of terrorist violence has declined since the mid-1980s. In fact, the evidence suggests terrorism was more widespread and deadly 10 years ago."[6]
He also wrote an op-ed piece for the New York Times suggesting that the newer and more deadly terrorist threat to the U.S. was embodied by "networks of terrorists, mostly foreign, working within its borders." Exemplifying this threat was Ramzi Yousef, one of the masterminds behind the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center. In the article, Johnson suggests that enhanced cooperation between intelligence agencies, particularly the FBI and CIA, is mandatory to meet the growing threat of terror networks.[7]
[edit]1998
In 1998, Johnson argued that while overall terrorism was declining, the threat from bin Laden and al-Qaeda should be the focus of American counterterrorism policy:
The nature of the threat posed by Bin Ladin is highlighted by my final chart, number 7. Osama Bin Ladin and individuals associated with him have killed and wounded more Americans than any other group. This chart also illustrates that groups such as Hamas and the Tamil Tigers (LTTE) prior to 1998 have killed more foreigners in the anti-US terrorist attacks. If we take into account the bombings of the US Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, Osama's status as the most lethal terrorist is certain.[8]
In addition, he told USA Today that bin Laden had participated in "virtually every major attack of terrorism against the United States" in the 1990s. Johnson underlined the threat posed by bin Laden, saying that he was possessed by "hatred and craziness." If left unanswered, "he would continue to terrorize Americans around the world. He has no compunction about killing women and children. He's a complete egalitarian in his murderous attitude."[9]
[edit]1999
In an interview with PBS's Frontline for its 1999 program, Hunting bin Laden, Johnson discussed Osama bin Laden.[10] According to Johnson, Americans had "tended to make Osama bin Laden sort of a superman in Muslim garb." "Actually," he continues, "Osama bin Laden, in my view, represents more of a symptom of a problem, and the problem is this: the Saudi Arabian government, not just Osama bin Laden but many people in Saudi Arabia, have been sending money to radical Islamic groups for years." Johnson continued:
When you look at who's killed Americans in the last 10 years, the individuals he's supported and backed--I'm basing that upon the initial information that's been released in the indictments and conversations with others in the intelligence communities--Osama bin Laden has been the one killing Americans. No other terrorist group in the world has been out killing Americans except for Osama bin Laden.... Osama bin Laden remains out there as the one really targeting us. So, we recognize that he's the threat. He's serious about wanting to kill Americans, but as long as he's in Afghanistan, as long as he doesn't have access to a cell phone, as long as he can't just hop on a plane and travel wherever he wants without fear of being arrested, his ability to plan and conduct terrorist operations is extremely limited. We have to recognize [that] he would like to do a lot of damage. He would like to kill Americans, but wanting to is different from being able to, having the full capabilities in place.[11]
In the interview, Johnson doubted the ability of members of bin Laden's organization to plan and put their lives on the line:
There's not another Ali or Mustafa out there at this point and Osama bin Laden in my view has not been a very effective organizer or leader. He talks a great game and puts out terrific threats as far as stirring the passions in the United States and maybe firing up the imaginations of some young Muslims throughout the world. But when push comes to shove, can he get a group of people who are together who will say: we are going to plan an operation, we're going to put our lives on the line, we're going to go out and try and kill people and we don't care what the consequence is? It hasn't happened.[12]
Frontline asked:
[Is it] ... fair to say what you're saying is that the president of the United States, his national security advisor, his deputy national security advisor for counter-terrorism, are basically blowing smoke [about the danger posed by bin Laden] and his followers]?
Johnson responded:
They're grossly exaggerating the problem. They are hyping it. They shouldn't be talking about rising terrorism. Instead of saying "terrorism's rising," it's not. "Terrorism is spreading," it's not. "More people are dying from terrorism," not the case. But what they should be saying is, "There's one individual out there that really doesn't like us, and he's made it his mission in life to kill Americans, and we've gotta deal with him." But we need to have a voice of reason in that process instead of putting ourselves out crying wolf, because this is essentially what's taking place right now. They call it the administration that cries wolf.[12]
[edit]2000
Johnson co-authored an article in 2000 with Milt Bearden which focused on the threat posed by al-Qaeda specifically, rather than terrorism trends in general. Beardon and Johnson note that new information emerging about the bombings at Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 points to the threat posed by Imad Mugniyah and Osama Bin Laden will require "a coordinated policy that will employ a full range of covert, clandestine, diplomatic, and military operations," concluding:
The Clinton Administration has shot its bolt on the terrorist problem with small effect, and no last minute show of force will change the record. A new administration can start afresh with a more sharply defined set of terrorism goals – Mughniyeh and bin Laden and their protectors for starters – and bring the full, coordinated force of American diplomatic, military, and intelligence capabilities to bear on the problem.[13]
[edit]2001
After Johnson's testimony to the special forum at the U.S. Senate, Gary J. Schmitt, executive director and CEO of the Project for the New American Century, refers in the Daily Standard (blog) to an op-ed piece Johnson wrote two months prior to the 9/11 attacks, claiming that Johnson argued that the US had little to fear from terrorism.[14]
In an editorial entitled "The Declining Terrorist Threat," published in the New York Times on 10 July 2001, Johnson says:
Judging from news reports and the portrayal of villains in our popular entertainment, Americans are bedeviled by fantasies about terrorism. They seem to believe that terrorism is the greatest threat to the United States and that it is becoming more widespread and lethal. They are likely to think that the United States is the most popular target of terrorists. And they almost certainly have the impression that extremist Islamic groups cause most terrorism.... None of these beliefs are based in fact.... While terrorism is not vanquished, in a world where thousands of nuclear warheads are still aimed across the continents, terrorism is not the biggest security challenge confronting the United States, and it should not be portrayed that way.[15]
Ten days after the 9/11 attacks, after quoting the above passage, Timothy Noah concludes a post in his "Chatterbox" feature at Slate: "Johnson's analysis, we now see, was bold, persuasive, and 100 percent wrong."[16] Johnson defended himself against such attacks:
The rightwing is resurrecting an op-ed I wrote in July 2001. I stand by the full article. It is still relevant today. I am accused, incorrectly, of ignoring the threat of terrorism. In fact, I correctly noted that the real threat emanated from Bin Laden and Islamic extremism. President Bush, for his part, ignored the CIA warning in August 2001 that Al Qaeda was posed to strike inside the United States.[17]
After September 11, Johnson appeared several times on FOX News to address the question of military action against terrorism. On 14 November, he defended the FBI's proposal to interview 5,000 students in the U.S. suspected of having information relevant to the September 11 investigations:
I think they should talk to everyone that they feel they have a need to talk to. I mean, look, this is war. This is not a legal proceeding. This isn't the O.J. Simpson trial. The folks that attacked us -- they murdered Americans. And we've got to recognize that in wartime, we should do things differently.[18]
[edit]2003
In January 2003, Johnson wrote an analysis of the relationship between the upcoming U.S. invasion of Iraq and the threat of transnational terrorism. According to Johnson, Bremer's response was to tell him that "it didn't matter what Saddam did or didn't do, we were going to war."[19] The paper warned that an invasion would "do little to destroy the infrastructure of radical Islamic terrorism responsible for the 9-11 attacks." Noting that Saddam Hussein's regime has been a longtime supporter of regional terrorist organizations such as the PLO, Johnson examines contacts between Saddam Hussein and transnational terrorist organizations such as al-Qaeda:
There is no doubt that Iraq is a state sponsor of terrorism—i.e., a country that provides financial support, safe haven, training, or weapons and explosives to groups or individuals that carry out terrorist attacks. . . . According to Central Intelligence Agency data, there is no credible evidence implicating Iraq in any mass casualty terrorist attacks since 1991. . . .
Johnson notes that the period immediately leading up to 2003 saw a rise of activity surrounding terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, suggesting that "Iraq is willing to help a movement that it would otherwise oppose on ideological grounds. Nonetheless," Johnson concludes, "it is important to understand that Iraqi entreaties to Al Qaeda, are most likely intended as a tactic to bolster Iraq’s ability to fight off a U.S. invasion rather than a deep-seated theological and ideological commitment to the terrorist agenda of Bin Laden.[20]
In that analysis Johnson also warns that the U.S.-led invasion was likely to backfire:
In fact there is a serious risk that a U.S. led war against Iraq may crystallize the diffused anger in the Arab and Muslim world — a heretofore unattained goal of bin Laden and his followers — and persuade more Muslim youths to take up the terrorist banner against America and her citizens.... If we decide to invade Iraq we must be prepared for the contingency that our attack will inspire young Muslims to pursue jihad against the West in general and the United States in particular. Just as the 1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan rallied many Muslims, especially young adults to the cause of jihad, a U.S. attack may enable Islamic extremists to attract new followers.[20]
Johnson also gave interviews on the topic of what to do with captured al-Qaeda leaders; while he did not condone torture, he suggested that a "sleep deprivation and reward system" might be useful for getting information from Khalid Sheikh Mohammed:
I don't see a constitutional right to have eight hours of sleep. You shouldn't subject someone to freezing but they don't get to wear mink coats, either.[21]
In May 2003, Johnson joined members of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) in condemning the manipulation of intelligence for political purposes:
It is a misuse and abuse of intelligence. The president was being misled. He was ill served by the folks who are supposed to protect him on this. Whether this was witting or unwitting, I don't know, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.[22]
[edit]Plame affair
After Robert Novak wrote a column identifying the wife of former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson as a CIA officer, the media invited Johnson to comment on the ensuing scandal because he had been a member of the same Career Trainee class with Valerie Plame Wilson. For example, in October 2003, he appeared on Democracy Now to discuss the Plame affair. He told interviewer Amy Goodman that Valerie Wilson's cover should have been respected whether she was an "analyst" or a "cleaning lady": "if she's undercover she's undercover, period. If the media allows themselves to get distracted with those kinds of curve balls, they ignore the issue."[23]
He told a Senate Democratic Policy Committee in October 2003, "My classmates and I have been betrayed. Together, we have kept the secrets of each other's identities a secret for 18 years. Each and every one of us have kept that secret, whether we were in the CIA, in other government service or in the private sector. But this issue is not just about a blown cover. It is about the destruction of the very essence, the core of human intelligence collection activities: plausible deniability, apparently, for partisan domestic political reasons."[24]
Johnson testified at a special joint hearing of Congressional and Senate Democrats on 22 July 2005 about the consequences arising from the Plame affair.[25]
[edit]2008
In 2008, Johnson emerged as a staunch supporter of Hillary Clinton and a strong critic of Barack Obama. Larry Johnson's blog, NoQuarterUSA, became a rally point for Clinton supporters wary of Barack Obama's qualifications to be president. Supporters of Barack Obama insist that a story that first appeared on Johnson's blog--a report that Republican operatives have a tape of Michelle Obama making racially insenstive comments about caucasians--has been "refuted" Barack Obama's Fight the Smears website.[26]. However, Johnson never claimed to have the tape and reported that the Republican operatives controlling it intended to release the tape sometime after the Democratic Convention in August 2008. On October 21, however, he asserted that the operative in possession of the tape had been instructed by the McCain campaign not to release it.[27]
[edit]Notes
^ http://2008.weblogawards.org/polls/best-political-coverage/
^ Larry C. Johnson, "About Me," No Quarter (personal blog).
^ "Former CIA Official Larry Johnson Delivers Democratic Radio Address," transcript posted on official Democratic National Committee's website for The Democratic Party, July 23, 2005], accessed November 21, 2006.
^ Interview with Larry Johnson, confirmed by his supervisor
^ "Ex-CIA official Blasts Bush on Leak of Operative's Name: Democrats' Radio Address Focuses on White House Aides' Role," CNN July 23, 2005, accessed November 21, 2006.
^ Gail Russell Chaddock, "Why Terrorists Pick On the French," Christian Science Monitor (5 December 1996) p. 1.
^ Larry Johnson, "Terrorists Among Us," New York Times (20 August 1996) p. A19.
^ Terrorism Today
^ Lee Michael Katz, "The Hunt for Bin Laden," USA Today (21 August 1998) p. 1A.
^ See Transcript of original interview with Larry C. Johnson, as broadcast on Frontline in 1999. Cf. "Interview: Larry C. Johnson," for Hunting bin Laden, transcript of interview broadcast on Frontline subsequently on 13 April 2001. See also dedicated PBS webpages for media links: Iraq and the War on Terror, Frontline PBS, online featured programs, accessed 19 November 2006.
^ frontline: hunting bin laden: interviews: larry c. johnson | PBS
^ a b [1].
^ As posted in [2].
^ Gary Schmitt, [ 07/25/2005 "Meet Larry Johnson: The CIA official Turned Democratic Spokesman Has a Pre-9/11 Mindset," Daily Standard (blog), July 25, 2005, accessed November 20, 2006.
^ *Larry C. Johnson, "The Declining Terrorist Threat," The New York Times 10 July 2001: A19.
^ Timothy Noah, "(Not Exactly a) Whopper of the Week: Larry C. Johnson," Chatterbox: Gossip, speculation, and scuttlebutt about politics (blog), hosted by Slate September 21, 2001, accessed November 20, 2006. Note the full context of this quotation:
It is, to be sure, a little bit cheap (and slightly at odds with the usual parameters of this feature) to criticize someone for making an erroneous prediction, particularly after a tragedy. Chatterbox is especially reluctant to tag Johnson because Johnson's op-ed was argued forcefully, backed up meticulously with factual data, and bravely at odds with conventional wisdom at the time of its publication. Add in that Johnson now makes his living as a consultant to corporations about terrorism, and therefore had everything to gain by exaggerating the dangers terrorism poses, and the guy practically looks like a hero. Chatterbox, who two decades ago was an editor for the New York Times op-ed page, would have published Johnson's piece had he still been an editor there this past July. In his capacity at Slate, Chatterbox might well have written up Johnson's prediction, and perhaps even endorsed it.
But boy, is he glad he didn't! Johnson's analysis, we now see, was bold, persuasive, and 100 percent wrong. Sadly, a mistake this embarrassing cannot be ignored. As a fellow skeptic, Chatterbox in all sincerity wishes Johnson better luck next time.
^ Larry C. Johnson, "Johnson vs. President Bush," re-posted and updated by SusanHu at DailyKos (blog) July 25, 2005.
^ FOX News Interview with John Garrett (14 November 2001) Transcript #111405cb.260.
^ [3].
^ a b Larry C. Johnson, "Setting the Record Straight on Iraqi Terrorism," posted in Booman Tribune: A Progressive Community (personal blog) 27 January 2003. accessed 19 November 2006.
^ Qtd. in Toby Harnden, "CIA 'pressure' on al-Qa'eda chief," The London Telegraph 5 March 2003: 16.
^ Qtd. in Nicolas D. Kristof, "Save Our Spooks," The New York Times 30 May 2003:A6.
^ Democracy Now (3 October 2003)[4]
^ U.S. Senate, Democratic Policy Committee Meeting on the CIA Operative Leak, (24 October 2003).
^ Letter to the Senate.[Needs full source citation; see "References" section.]
^ Tumulty, Karen (2008-06-12). "Will Obama's Anti-Rumor Plan Work?", Time Magazine. Retrieved on 20 June 2008.:"a story that apparently first made a big splash on the Internet in late May in a post by pro-Hillary Clinton blogger Larry Johnson"
^ Whitey Tape, API, Phil Berg, and Andy MartinSee Authors Posts (1090) on February 22, 2008 at 2:54 AM in Current Affairs
Ben Smith at Politico.com has the start of the story of Obama’s ties to an unrepentant former member of the Weather Underground, a terrorist group. It goes beyond Ayers just making a $200 dollar donation in 2001. Nope. Ayers helped raise funds for Obama. It all started in 1995:
In 1995, State Senator Alice Palmer introduced her chosen successor, Barack Obama, to a few of the district’s influential liberals at the home of two well known figures on the local left: William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn. . . .
Now, as Obama runs for president, what two guests recall as an unremarkable gathering on the road to a minor elected office stands as a symbol of how swiftly he has risen from the Hyde Park left to a man closing in fast on the Democratic nomination for president.
“I can remember being one of a small group of people who came to Bill Ayers’ house to learn that Alice Palmer was stepping down from the senate and running for Congress,” said Dr. Quentin Young, a prominent Chicago physician and advocate for single-payer healthcare, of the informal gathering at the home of Ayers and his wife, Bernardine Dohrn. “[Palmer] identified him as her successor.”
Except Ms. Palmer had a change of heart. She decided not to run for Congress. But Obama betrayed her. He would not relinquish running for her state senate seat. So much for loyalty. Obama led the effort to ensure she could not run against him. Betray your mentor. Yep. That’s the kind of politics we don’t see in Washington.
Obama tries to dismiss the tie to Ayers by claiming he was only eight years old when Ayers was planting bombs in the United States. That is true. But when Barack subsequently met Ayers he knew about Ayers’ past and Ayers’ belief he had nothing to apologize for. So here we have a guy who dreams of running for president and he does not understand the implications of letting an unrepentant terrorist raise money for him?
What is it about terrorism that a brilliant constitutional law professor does not understand? And Obama believes the Republicans won’t use this against him? Hell no. He understands. Hence the stonewall. Obama is trying to figure out whether Alzeheimers is a defense. And Ayers and Obama are trying to maintain the pretense that they barely know each other. Ayers is a tough customer. He’s not saying anything. He refuses to talk.
They may be able to deceive die hard Democrats enamored of the Obama myth. Cotton candy platitudes. Soaring (plagarized) rhetoric. But come the fall, the Republican machine will beat him senseless with this. They will hammer on the theme–Obama is in bed with a terrorist who insists he was right to bomb the Capitol. Ayers is too much of a committed ideologue to backdown. He told the New York Times in 2001:
I don’t regret setting bombs; I feel we didn’t do enough.
Please Obamatrons. Explain to me why the Republicans will ignore this? And as they subsequently probe into every grant made by the Woods Fund when Obama and Ayers sat on the board and steered money to cronies of Obama I am sure the Republicans will say, “hell, there’s nothing there.” Right! And Karl Rove is a warm, wonderful human being who believes politics is softball.
Obama cannot beat this with happy talk. He will be forced to deal with it. Unfortunately, Joe and Jane Average American will be, shall we say, a tad uncomfortable electing a guy to protect America who had no problem taking money from a terrorist and working with him in giving money to a guy, Rashid Khalidi, who the Government of Israel will be more than happy to identify as someone who they believe helped fuel Palestinian terrorism.
If you find that an easy position to defend please get your resume soonest to the Obama campaign. They are going to need you.
(small, medium and large sizes; for both dogs and cats)
+ 
So the bomb is a big deal and all but I see this as significant: this story is a continuation, and reinforcement of the WSJ piece yesterday that said O’s rhetoric was not advancing an agenda, like it did for MLK, FDR, but hiding a more left-wing ideology. Liberal blogger Kevin Drum complained about the rhetoric doing no advancing a week ago:
Now here’s Politico, showing how swiftly Obama shifted from a far-left politician who hobnobbed with an unrepentant Ayers to a non-ideological transcendent pol:
And yes, the WSJ piece was by Rove. But it hit at something that sticks.
And of course, the bombing Ayers and his statement of no regret in 2001 is a big deal.
And frankly, unlike Drum I’m not convinced Obama is devoted to center-left. What he actually is devoted to is tough to pin down.
The accumulation of large amounts of money, to be held in a foreign bank account, in the name of another?
Just a thought.
Perfectly put.
Obama and Clinton are not center left, they are far left, look at their agenda to spend and tax us into oblivion.
I agree. I do not think he is, in his heart, a leftie like Rove says. I really don’t think he gives a damn about the issues as much as he does advancing HIMSELF. It’s all about winning.
And I hope to go you all read my quotes / links yesterday — and in previous weeks and months — about his RIGHT-OF-CENTER economic advisers! His Social Security guy is a privatizer!
Ayers? I think Obama is too much self-involved to think hard about what Ayers’ HORRIFIC violence and terrorism did to this country — as well as to the theretofore PEACEFUL antiwar protests, tearing all the groups asunder.
And that some academic institution gives Ayers a teaching spot is no surprise. Colleges/universities often overlook their academics’ shady or violent pasts. And, it’s still HIP among the very far left professors to diss everything American. So they have no problem with Ayers — probably kinda get off on it, ya know, and have fantasies of “oh, I wish I’d could have had the guts to do that.”
But Obama? He just doesn’t stop to think about it much. Especially whenever there is GREEN involved — and someone like AYERS can use his influence among his friends to get EVEN MORE money into Obama’s hands.
Huh … maybe that’s Larry’s NEXT assignment. Find out who Ayers hangs with — Larry’s done some of that already — and find out how cozy they all got with Obama too. Remember, it’s the flash of green that gets Obama’s attention.
I think it’s possible that in the not-too-distant future, the word “opportunist” will have a picture of Obama next to it in the dictionary.
Obama cares about Obama, which makes him very short-sighted - seeing only the immediacy of how something can advance him up the ladder, and not thinking about the long-term consequences. While that’s a trait that is so far only impacting on him, I fear that it is one that is all-too-reminiscent of Bush. “Act now, think later” is an approach that has gotten us in a world of hurt.
This pattern of shortsightedness for self-aggrandizement is something that needs to be looked at more closely - this is just not a good trait for someone who wants to make life-or-death decisions.
“They” do have a point when it is repeated that Obama could have gone for the “green” immediately after law school and he did not. I really do not doubt his sincerity or his commitment. I do not like his fence sitting.
Kathleen -
In what way do you feel that Barack Hussein Obama didn’t go for the green immediately? If he had gone to a big firm or corporation he might have had to do some work.
Obama did nothing in an incredibly lackluster legal career.
He didn’t handle jury trials. It doesn’t appear that he handled any trials. As far as anyone can tell, he only put in 5 hours of work for Rezko and some mystery hours for an entity that worked in conjunction with Rezmar - Rezko’s company.
(Obama’s senior partner actually left the firm and went into business with Rezko.)
No great legal briefs written - if any. Basically little if anything to show for his time as a lawyer. Or professor or Senator for that matter.
He re-invents his resume as much as he has re-invented himself. He claims to have handled various cases, but when pressed for details he can’t remember, much like his idol Reagan in his last days.
Obama seems to have made out like a bandit with little effort in his career .
If Obama was truly all about winning, wouldn’t he go negative? oh wait that was hillary. What fucking crazy world do you people live in?
guilt by association time! You peeps have linked to Michelle Malkin’s Hot Air, The Ace of Spades, and now John Podhoretz (son of Norman, Zionist Nut Ball, Legacy hire for wingnut welfare, describes GWB as “the first great leader of the 21st century”). Ergo, this site is officially republican! You guys should ask Obama when he stopped beating his wife already!
On Bill Maher two weeks ago, Bill tossed out what was essentially a throwaway line- “of the two candidates left, I mean…Obama is more liberal. Clearly. Right?”
The panel nodded and agreed unanimously- oh yes, of course, Obama is more liberal than Clinton. Of course. It’s obvious.
At the time I thought, “WHY? Based on WHAT?”
The only conclusion I could reach: Obama is assumed to be more liberal because of the color of his skin.
Because other than the vote against the war he wasn’t there to make, I can’t think of one way in which Obama’s record suggests he’s more Liberal than Hillary. His Health Care “plan” sure isn’t.
He’s more liberal because he’s black and his opponent is white. And this is being fed to me by so-called “Progressives”- judge a person’s Progressive bonafides based on the color of his skin. Wonderful.
Drum also was a proponent of the Iraq invasion back in the day, kinda any killed notion he was ever truly the mythological “moderate” republican.
Actually, I had read an Obama election would further insure right wing ideologues.
Notice would be world king maker and Rezko godfather Auchi donates to both political parties.
It is more than just rhetoric, and advancing an agenda (whatever that may be as it is still hidden).
It speaks to JUDGEMENT or more correctly - lack thereof. Yet in each debate and speech Obama touts his ahmmm “Superior Judgement”.
Falling back on well worn adages “Talk is Cheap” and “Actions speak louder than words”
The phrase “round the bend” comes to mind.
Willie and the Poor Boys:CCR.
Now I can only picture ‘Bama in the hood.
Shit.
Eh….As opposed to all of the Christian Reconstructionist types running with the Bushies?
Ayers is so, uhm, well, old. He’s one person of a long defunct criminal organization, that wasn’t particularly competent.
The Reconstructionists, by contrast, have real power, are politically and strategically competent and have done real harm to the US.
Snore…..
Obamatons shouldn’t believe their own rhetoric, like Bush, Cheney, and even the scaredy cat Rove, next thing you know, you’re in a bubble.
Cheney is old, did a lot of damage.
OTOH, Ayers is just a delusional old fart, I’m more interested in his connection to the Woods Fund, and the other charities to which Obama is connected.
Please read the wikipedia entry on Ayers:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Ayers
He may be old, but he’s still an unrepentant domestically grown terrorist. His wealthy family was able to provide him with the very best in legal talent (his father, Thomas Ayers, was Chairman and CEO of Commonwealth Edison, the electrical utility provider for most of Illinois). Quoting from the Wiki entry:”Ayers went underground with several comrades after their co-conspirators’ bomb accidentally exploded on March 6, 1970, destroying a Greenwich Village townhouse and killing three members of the Weather Underground (Ted Gold, Terry Robbins, and Diana Oughton, who was Ayers’ girlfriend at the time). He and his colleagues invented identities and traveled continuously. They avoided the police and FBI, while bombing high-profile government buildings including the United States Capitol, The Pentagon, and the Harry S Truman Building housing the State Department. Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn raised two children, Zayd and Malik, underground before turning themselves in in 1981, when most charges were dropped because prosecutorial misconduct during the long search for the fugitives…”
I was a wee one when this occurred, younger than Obama, but for some reason, I remember it, maybe my parents were upset, and that made an impression.
I don’t excuse Ayers, he is as conceited as George Bush, he’s a sorry excuse for a human. And one intent on real change does it from within, peacefully. Ayers, IMO, just wanted, WANTS, to be a star, and show up his Daddy.
Really, what is it about Obama, and terrorists?
Terrorists MURDER, they aren’t docile, cool guys.
I mean, Ayers glamorizes terrorism, but I wonder how he’d do at the other end of a Saddam’s drill? I can’t see Hezbollah giving a treasonous guy like Ayers a break, simply because they both fight, hate “the man.”
And Ayers, and Obama are connected to Rezko?
Jeez.
To add, I get the feeling that men like Ayers, and Obama, see terrorism as this false thing, unreal, dangerously cool, simply business, not understanding they shouldn’t be messing with men like Rezko.
It’s this massive denial, not acknowledging how a man like Saddam operated, or thinking, in some way, “no one will ever drag my ass to a rape room” (or your wife’s, or your daughters, big O) “this will never happen to me.”
But the men Auchi is connected to DO things like this, and Obama is willing to take money from him?
What?
As long as it’s someone else’s kid, or wife, or anus?
And you mess with this, you sell yourself as a political whore to men of this sort, they’ll come for you, if you cross them, evem if you don’t.
Which again, makes Plame’s outing SUCH a crime.
There you go.
Those of us who lived through that era — and saw the destruction of the peaceful anti-war movement by the vicious violence and terrorism of Ayers et al. — remain appalled to this day.
They murdered so many innocent people. From policemen to security guards to Brinks drivers to the Superintendent of Schools for Oakland to a Hispanic prison guard … and on and on. And they terrorized Americans everywhere. No ROTC building was safe from their bombing attempts…
I’m especially appalled that people don’t get just how evil this guy is, and how much he still believes in terrorism. Oh sure, he got a cushy job at a university — but that’s par for the course for these unrepentant terrorists.
I can’t believe Obama ever had any dealings with him. But, like Rezko, Obama and Ayers were thick as thieves.
“They were careless people, Tom and Daisy — they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made.”
I’ve always loved this quote from The Great Gatsby, and I was reminded of it when I thought about the interesting Ayers/Obama connection. Is Obama pro-terrorist or Weatherman? Well of course not, but so much of the story perfectly reflects World Obama and its Gatsby-esque diffidence and absence of seriousness. It’s an attitude that claims we don’t have to be accountable for our words or deeds because, after all, we arise from wealth, privilege and superior education.
Want to play College Kid Revolutionary for a while and then ease back into polite society when it becomes tiresome? Sure, why not, so long as you were careful not to be there when the fuses were lit or the bullets fired and you have the social connections back home to do so. Betray and abandon your staunchest allies—your mentor!—without ever a glance back? Certainly, for the greater accomplishments and accolades you deserve await. Take the introductions and the money of the College Revolutionary without a thought as to whether you should even be in the same room as a man who apparently really does hate this country and would do it harm? Why not, because we all oppose the injustices he protested and besides, you can always say you hardly knew the guy. And if you really, really have to have the mansion of your dreams (and to which you surely are entitled), well, everyone knows that story by now. And no further questions will be tolerated.
It’s a history of everything so easy and painless and taken for granted. And why is this important to me? Because it seems to me self-evident that a life history like this so above the fray and without any documented battle–and I mean battle!—is a life that leaves you ill-prepared for the battles that clearly face this country in the very near term, at home and abroad.
I believe true progressives should be looking forward to these fights and not yearning for a four year University of Chicago cocktail party. And for that I believe we need a warrior and not a Philosopher King. For me, that warrior, tried and true, scarred and made better is Hillary Clinton.
And if you didn’t see that last night we really have nothing further to discuss.
Just to make sure we’re not crossing our wires and in an effort to keep us all historically and intellectually honest.
“They murdered so many innocent people.”
- 3 members of the Weather Underground were killed in an accident at the house of another militant group in Greenwich Village March 6 1970, when a bomb intended for an attack on Fort Dix exploded prematurely.
All of my reading hasn’t turned up a murder directly linked to Bill Ayers, or the Weather Underground prior to their disbanding (If you can find one please let me know. I’m all about educating and evolving our collective consciousness).
“to the Superintendent of Schools for Oakland”
- The assassination of the Superintendent of Schools for Oakland was by the SLA, October 6 1973(The Symbionese Liberation Army, made famous by the kidnapping of Patty Hearst). Not Bill Ayers or the WU.
“…to a Hispanic prison guard.”
- I couldn’t find a reference to the murder of the Hispanic Prison guard you mention (Can you supply a link?). However considering the SLA was a group consisting of convicts and prison activists it wouldn’t surprise me if they were potentially responsible for this as well.
- William Ayers turned himself in with Bernadine Dorhm Dec. 3, 1980.
“From policemen to security guards to Brinks drivers.”
- A year later the Brinks Security guard murders were the result of a botched robbery by the ‘Black Liberation Army’. On Oct. 20, 1981. Two ex members of the Weather Underground were also involved.
This certainly doesn’t clear Ayers of wrongdoing (Though i’d suggest a stark difference between destruction of property and murder). Guilt of murder by association we can debate till the cows come home. Guilt by the statement “…I feel we didn’t do enough.” we could debate till we’re blue in the face. I will say though that philosophically the WU were never about assassination and kidnapping and stated as much numerous times.
To throw around erroneous accusations of murder and assassination to prove your point I think does a disservice to the debate.
Is Obama potentially involved with some dubious characters? Yes. But lets keep things honest. It’s hard enough already to sort fact from fiction to make an informed choice without smart passionate people like yourselves misrepresenting the historical record.
It only took me three or four clicks of google afterall to sort through fact from fiction.
d.
HONEST - When it comes to OBAMA???
Better keep googling - you have missed much!
The SLA was thick with the Panthers et al.
The murder of the Hispanic prison guard was carried out by a violent group near San Francisco who killed the guard when he was helping to transfer a Black Panther prisoner to another prison. It never got much media play but I can look up the link. That violent group had ties to WU, and other terrorist groups across the country.
I wasn’t aware of the details about the Avery/Dohrn connection. Thank you for sharing the informantion. I need more links to back up my comments about Obama. The Obamasphere refuses to accept any criticism of their candidate. A criticism of Obama no matter how politely phrased, no matter how politely tendered, no matter how judiciously argued is part of a Vast Hillary Conspiracy to smear Obama.
We share these facts about Obama in the face of being flamed or banned. At least the message will get out.
I refuse to add the required disclaimer to my comments “I’m proud that we have two great candidates. I would happily vote for either of them. I will vote for the Democratic candidate.”
Informed Comment, Prof.Juan Cole
More good news, as the invasion of Kurdish Iraq continues:
“Turkey told US, Iraq of incursion plan”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080222/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_turkey_iraq;_ylt=AmBJgeeTLX8cJX.45fa6Na2s0NUE
Mr. Murder, you need an open thread.
Thank you Mr. Murder. I have nowhere near your experience or knowledge.
What I do know for sure is that Military service is Mandatory in Turkey. There are more Turks than Kurds - so where will the Kurds get more men? Will they allow some form of Al Qaeda forces to join them?
What is your best estimate, Sir?
Larry………Did Obama get intel that Iraq had no WMD’s as a State Senator? If he did could it have been from some Chi/Iraq connection ? Could this also be a revelation from this trial?
Great question!
the phrase “loony bin” comes to mind…you people need to GET REAL
Oh, man, dude, you need to come in with something better than that…
Try again.
Does the way Obama is able to keep dodging his problematic relationships, like this one and more significantly, his relationship with Rezko, remind anyone else of the old Warner Brothers Road Runner-Wile E. Coyote cartoons? When it looks like things are about to catch up with Obama, he’s like the Road Runner, “beep, beep”(except for Obama, “it’s legal”) and he scatters off.
Is this the 3rd rewrite of the story here at NQ? Can’t help but notice the hotlink to the WaPo story didn’t make the cut. Sorry can’t recall the writer’s name (He was the one Larry referred to as “that lazy bastard”) anyway, the point I’m trying to make is that WaPo story, as best as I can recall, presented a moral eqivalence, asking is it worse to try & nail Obama for associating with disreputable people who committed their acts of violence decades ago, (but were not convicted) during a time frame when Obama was just a little child, or for Pres Clinton to pardon equally violent individuals who were actually convicted of their crimes? This argument brings to the forefront basic questions of fairness, double standards & hence scourched earth tactics.
The problem is the lazy Washington Post reporter REFUSES to examine Obama’s connections.
Is Ayers really inactive, or is he funneling money through “charities?”
What about Rezko? What about Auchi?
Wasn’t that a favorite way for Tom Delay to launder money, “the charity, the charity as a gateway?”
From Rob Guard up thread (wiki)
Thomas Ayers, was Chairman and CEO of Commonwealth Edison
ComEd, a division of Chicago-based Exelon Corp.,
John W. Rowe is a member of the boards of directors of Sunoco and the Northern Trust Company.
Northern Trust Company…did not Obama get his loan for the house thru Northern Trust Company and Rezko had “deals” out of there?
—
Rezko ‘clout list’ outed
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-rezko-clout-list_webfeb22,0,2439036.story
—
http://kimallen.sheepdogdesign.net/cinnamon/2007/06/thomas-g-ayers-1915-2007.html
Terrific links, Teak!
Does Barack Hussein Obama believe if McVeigh claimed he was protesting a war, it would have been O.K. to blow up the federal building in Oklahoma?!
The Weather Underground were assholes with explosives and they murdered three of their own including Ayers then girlfriend.
I have had and do have loved ones employed by the federal government. They do not deserve to die because some asshole has a grudge and a bomb.
Any Presidential candidate who knowingly keeps a donation, much less cavorts with such a terrorist will not receive my vote.
The Weather Underground were assholes with explosives and they murdered three of their own including Ayers then girlfriend.
Um, I know “murder” has a much better rhetorical ring when you want to slam someone, but murder is an intentional act, whereas being blown up accidentally is, well, an accident. Overblown rhetoric loses you credibility among the thoughtful. But maybe that’s not the demographic you’re targeting.
Someone here said that Obama supporters refuse to accept any criticism of Obama. If I say that this particular bit of criticism is pretty lame, will you refuse to accept that?
I am not sure the guilt by association argument is going to work. Ayers, Dohrn, and the rest of the Weather Underground members who went to prison served their time and are living more or less normal lives.
The GOP might use it, and they might not. Remember, many voters have NO memory whatsoever of the Weather Underground back in the group’s heydey of the late 1960s, early 1970s.
I am more worried about Obama’s unpreparedness NOW rather than people he associated with who did their time in prison. The GOP really don’t even have to mine the distant past of the Weather Underground to sink Obama.
I am not sure the guilt by association argument is going to work.
Depends who is using it. I agree they will not have to go to far back….but the “images” are to be drawn…
Susan Nunes -
But Barack Hussein Obama is choosing to take his donation and keep it TO DATE.
Obama knows Ayers thinks being a terrorist is O.K. and is agreeing with him by keeping his cash - TO THIS DAY.
There is so little positive known about Obama that things like associatiing with self-avowed terrorists (while running for President) does provide insight into Obama’s domestic and foreign policy, morals, ethics and lack thereof.
This is happenning NOW Susan Nunes. Not in the 60’s or 50’s. CURRENTLY.
The people they killed are still dead.
I’m deeply saddened that you feel it’s O.K. to kill 3 people and say you should have done more. Please avoid jury duty at all costs.
It’s February 22, 2008 - and Obama still has the money, the mansion and his friends Ayers and Rezko - get it?
The $200 donation was taken in 2001, that’s seven years ago, for those playing at home. There is no donation to return anymore. He wasn’t running for President in 2001.
Greg -
Barack Hussein Obama was running for office then and now. He was friends with Ayers then and still is NOW - TODAY - GREG!
Barack Hussein Obama knows Ayers is a terrorist.
Obama simply doesn’t care.
Ayers has neither paid his debt to society, nor expressed remorse.
The law matters. The safety of federal workers and United States citizens matters.
McVeigh and Ayers and the 9.11 terrorists all believed in their causes. Their victims are STILL dead.
Why does Obama insist on a Secret Sevrvice detail at tremmendous taxpayer expense if he thinks terrorism is so great?
Oh, yeah, because it’s him, not just one of his constituents. Hell, they can freeze to death for all he cares about their poor asses.
Obama wanted a mansion and his slumlord friend Rezko with his unheated buildings at taxpayer expense got him one.
I’m sure that he’ll be there for you though Greg.
I think it was Larry who mentioned Obama has a pattern of dealing with terrorists, from Ayers, to any connections Rezko or Auchi have.
This isn’t an isolated incident, and it’s highly relevant.
But those terrorists might still be connected to today’s terrorists, if only for the money.
It will be interesting to see how the Woods Fund is dispersed, and Tony Rezko’s true connections.
And btw, it’s silly to think the federal government doesn’t know the truth about Obama, his money, and connections, would have known even before Obama choose to run for President.
It’s just a matter of how much will be revealed, and when.
Hi, I’m running for state Senator, but before I appear at your house to be introduced to your supporters and possibly raise funds, could you please give me their names and social security numbers so that I may run a background check on them all?
You guys are well and truly bent if you think that it would be possible or practical or even desirable for this to happen before every political event of the size described in the article.
C’mon, Larry, you’re a former spook, you probably have free access to background reports and dossiers on everyone you meet. For those of us civilians, a criminal background check costs money!
Oh, and you’re misrepresenting the article when you say that it shows that “Ayers helped raise funds for Obama.” The article describes it as no more than an introduction.
Will Obama have to deal with this? Will the Republicans bring it up? Probably. They will throw anything against the wall. Personally, I’d much rather explain a brief introduction, a $200 contribution and serving on the board of a prominent Chicago charity with this former (unconvicted) terrorist than have to explain how the pardoning of 17 convicted terrorists (over the opposition of the FBI, DOJ, the victims, and the FOP) wasn’t done to pander to the Puerto Rican vote.
It’s also silly to think that Hillary doesn’t have any more hidden secrets. We’ve seen in the past two weeks that donations to her husband’s library is fertile ground for the production of innuendo. Her White House records are still under seal. Bill Clinton claimed executive privilege for the documents related to the pardoning of the FALN members. Would-be Swift-boaters will take the latter as an admission of guilt by the Clintons and the former as a deliberate attempt to keep the public from knowing what other secrets are hidden in the Clinton files.
Greg -
Barack Hussein Obama has not disavowed Ayers. That is what I’m asking for him to do. You can try and cast aspersions against the Clintons all day long much as the MSM does; however, Obama must disavow Ayers.
The key to understanding this a problem is here:
This is something that isn’t going to go away. If Obama’s smart, he’ll deal with it openly, and discuss why he did this. I suspect there’s nothing more to this story than Larry’s laid out, but if that’s all there is and all that comes from the Obama camp is denials and silence, it’s not going to matter. The Republicans will have a field day with this.
It can’t go away because it never arrived. Where in the press have we seen this covered so that DEMOCRATS can see it.
I’m surprised you all haven’t picked up on this,
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/02/21/obama-us-troops-in-afghanistan-forced-to-arm-themselves-with-stolen-taliban-weapons/
or this
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/255463.php
or this,
http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2008/02/us_troops_scavenging_weapons.asp
You and these guys are the two sides of the same coin.
Pentagon disuptes the first charge, regarding the Taliban.
Obama looks kinda dumb, doesnt he?
Poor Jim Webb, he must be having a hard time knowing whether to laugh or cry.
What it does point out is that Obama LIED yet again, and on national TV - and now is back pedaling.
GWB II - one serial lie after another. Left Coaster has invented a word because of the frequency of this stuff - they call it W.O.R.M. which stands for What Obama Really Meant.
[...] — on the importance of William Ayers’ long association with Barack Obama — which Larry Johnson has been introducing us to now for a couple weeks. (Taylor quotes Larry in her story.) Let there be no mistake: These [...]
Here’s how a victim of the Black Panthers feels today:
http://www.suntimes.com/news/24-7/809445,CST-NWS-pannell23.article
Taylor Marsh mentions, though it’s unconfirmed, Obama and Ayers channeled money to a figure currently under federal indictment, possibly through the Woods Fund, Obama working with another known terrorist.
WTF is WRONG with the democratic leaders, why are they supporting Obama?
http://www.taylormarsh.com/archives_view.php?id=27075
[...] just making up shit again? LIAR! Obama once visited ’60s radicals - Ben Smith - Politico.com Obama Tries to Hide Ayers Tie : NO QUARTER there are more, but considering it’s you, this is more than enough __________________ "We [...]
[...] Larry Johnson’s stories here and here on the relationship with [...]
[...] For more on Ayers, see Larry Johnson’s article here, “Obama Tries to Hide Ayers Tie.” [...]
[...] this information to be on their website. It is a part of their BIG TENT approach. Republicans, Terrorists, Racists, Homophobes and Bigots For Obama is their battle cry. And they only take this stuff down [...]
Bill Ayers, his wife Bernardine, and the Weather Underground:
Weatherman, AKA Weather Underground Organization, was a violent U.S Radical Left group. They called themselves a revolutionary organization whose purpose was to carry out a series of attacks to overthrow of the Government of the United States .
The Weatherman believed that militancy was far better than nonviolent protests. Their goal was to thwart the US Government using guerrilla warfare to achieve a revolution. They wrote a “Declaration of a State of War” against the United States government.
Weather Underground claimed credit for a bombing in Chicago, which they referred to as a “kickoff” of the Days Of Rage. They even had the audacity to claim the credit in their book entitled, “Prairie Free”, which strongly called for a unified Communist Party. You ought to read it and ask yourself how come Jesus Obama thinks these people are cool.
The Weather Underground blew up several Chicago Police cars as well.
Next, these slime balls held a “war council” to firm up plans to remain underground and commit acts of sabatoge against the US Government. They bombed several police cars in Berkley. Then they detonated a bomb at the San Francisco Police Department, during which one officer was killed and several others were injured.
When 36 sticks of dynamite were discovered at a police precinct in Detroit, Bill Ayers just happened to be in town.
Later, several of the Underground’s own members died when they accidentally blew up their own bomb factory in New York. No loss. The bomb was intended to be used at an officer’s dance at Fort Dix. The bomb they were going to use was packed with nails for maximum damage. How wonderful that they got them into their own bodies instead. Then another bomb factory was discovered in Chicago’s North side. Their weapons cache was also discovered in an apartment in Chicago’s South side. Then they blew up the National Guard building in DC.
Nice people huh?
While they continued to hide from indictments, Bernardine Dohrn issued a “Declaration of A State Of War“.
They claimed credit for the explosion of the San Francisco Hall of Justice, which never occurred. Later an undetonated explosive device was discovered on the premises. Then the NY City Police headquarters was bombed. Then they bombed the Presidio Army Base in San Francisco in honor of the anniversary of the Cuban Revolution.
Think I am done talking about the Underground yet? Nope.
They then helped Timothy Leary escape from prison, bombed the Marin County courthouse. After that they bombed the Queens Traffic Court building. They bombed the Harvard Center For International Affairs. A few of them fled to Cuba, where I hope to God they still reside.
Next, they bombed the US Capital. Another of their bomb factories was discovered in San Francisco. Then they bombed the office of California Prisons, The New York Department of Corrections in Albany, NY, and William Bundy’s office at MIT Research Center.
Nope. I’m not done yet. They bombed the Pentagon. They bombed the 103 Police Precinct in New York.
Then they bombed the ITT in both New York and Rome, Italy.
They bombed the Department of Health, Education and Welfare.
They bombed the Office of California of Attorney General.
They bombed Gulf’s Pittsburgh headquarters.
Then they bombed the Anaconda headquarters.
They bombed the State Department. They bombed the Banco De Ponce in Puerto Rico as well as the Kennekot Corporation.
They also committed the Brinks Robbery.
Think about all of this. I’ll wait. While you are waiting, here’s a little video to introduce you to the fear and misery these two people generated, only to say in 2001 they “Didn’t do enough”.
Then tell me that this is just another “boneheaded” affiliation that Obama made for himself–or that he just “didn’t know”.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxoiZdBSi-g&eurl=http://hyper-educated-uppity-woman.blogspot.com/search?q=weatherman
some people dont believe in guilt by assosiation….my question is how many people, bad people, has obama associated himself with ? the answear is too many ! it just cant be ignored any longer, it is crystal clear that something is really wrong with all of obamas associations. too many is all i can say… when does the msm come to this reasonable conclusion ? i pray that it will not be too late.
[...] this information to be on their website. It is a part of their BIG TENT approach. Republicans, Terrorists, Racists, Mysogynists, Homophobes and Bigots For Obama is their battle cry. And the Obama campaign [...]
tonight was the first time I heard a mainstream media pundit go after Obama on his connection to Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers. Hopefully it won’t be the last.
Thomas Ayers died last year. I believe he was living with Bill Ayers at the time. Now let’s play the guilt by association with some others based on Thomas Ayers and Bill Ayers.
Weather Underground sympathizers based on Thomas Ayers membership:
Commonwealth Edison
G.D. Searles
Northwestern University
Sears Roebuck
Zenith
The Tribune Company
First National Bank of chicago
Chicago Urban league
Chicago Symphony orchestra
In addition Commonwealth Edison during Ayers reign was very aggressive in the nuclear power industry so it can logically be said that the WU supported nuke plants, hey and maybe they were seeking to turn the spent rods over to the WU so they can have dirty bombs. It might be time to take preemptory action against Commonwealth edison.
I think we are getting silly on the Bill Ayers connection
Fine. YOU say its silly. Happy for you in your blissful don’t want to hear it state. Koolaid refills for all!
So let me get it straight, now: Obama should have refused an invitation from his patron to a public event, where she was going to announce him to the local party leaders as her hand-picked successor…because he didn’t approve of her choice of friends.
I can just see that conversation. “Gee, Debbie, it’s real nice of you to give up your job and tell everyone you recommend me, but I can’t go to your friend’s house when we do that, ‘coz he’s scum. Do it at my house, b*tch.” Yeah, that’d go over really well.
Hey, I know, maybe he should have just boycotted any party that included criminals. That would have left him with, let’s see, zero political parties. But he could have started his own: the holier-than-thou party.
How many of y’all ever refused to take a job because an employee in another department had a bad record?
As for the idea that he betrayed her, see http://www.democrats.org/page/community/post/elizabethberry/ChLY
— looks more like she betrayed him. She told him she wouldn’t run, and then after he sunk money and credibility into the race, changed her mind and ran against him.
If he had betrayed her, I don’t think she’d be endorsing him for President now, do you?
N7ATXb bnbrntiklatr, [url=http://hljstoshjkry.com/]hljstoshjkry[/url], [link=http://phqmcwlcizhx.com/]phqmcwlcizhx[/link], http://mlxkkgpxlmmy.com/
Well, you people want to bring Obama down for this? Ayers is a distinguished professor at the University of Illinois, not exactly what you need to say an association with a person of this type is just going to kill a campaign. You racist blinded Obama haters just will reach for anything. Now, I am going to work double hard at raising money for Obama and getting votes, Thank you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Dems that say “it doesn’t matter who Obama has associated with” should be asked the following:
Does it matter who your family associates with?
Why then is the terrorist Bill Ayers allowed to be a college Professor at Ill. University?
No man remains quite what he was when he recognizes himself.
http://otutatuqu.ifrance.com/arhiv11414/asian-marketing-perspective-principle.html - asian marketing perspective principle http://otutatuqu.ifrance.com/arhiv59699/free-mature-pic-post.html - free mature pic post http://otutatuqu.ifrance.com/arhiv11414/asian-royals.html - asian royals