Ayers in chronic denial

First there was Bill Ayers and his Weather Underground domestic terrorism. Then there was Kent State, then there was the rise of Islamic terrorism, then there was the Boston Bombers. (an abbreviated list to be sure) But now we have Bill Ayers doing Iran, some form of terrorist diplomacy known only to Iran and Ayers.

But what he said was not in code. It was very clear. Brietbart

“…he proclaimed that the United States is a “terrorist nation” that is the “greatest purveyor of violence on earth… and the foremost threat to world peace.”

I mention it because he used similar rhetoric in 2013 at the Kent State anniversary. The Daily Caller reported:

Ayers reportedly said that the United States is the most violent country that has ever been created.

Ohio.com: Ayers said the task is “….to be astonished at both the beauty of the world and the unnecessary suffering we visit on the world. And then to act.”

At Kent State, he somehow managed to deny the moral equivalence of what he and his group did with jihad terrorists like Boston Bombers. Again, reasoning known only in his mind that he’s a righteous hero, while they aren’t? He’s an “activist” but Jihadists are just… terrorists.

In an interview with Megyn Kelly, he said he cannot say he would not rise up again in a “very militant and serious way” against the US. So there you have it. But we should not confuse what he and his cohorts did with standard terrorism. I’m sure his cushy pension via academia allows him the freedom to make such proper distinctions.

The Blaze: Kelly later pressed Ayers on one of the more controversial statements he’s made since becoming an academic. He is quoted as saying, “I can’t quite imagine putting a bomb in a building today— all of that seems so distinctly part of then. But I can’t quite imagine entirely dismissing the possibility, either.”

Ayers confirmed that he can’t say for sure that he would never again rise up against the “violent” United States in a “very militant and serious way.” However, he said at 70 years old such a prospect is unlikely. Still, he made it clear he, like his wife, is not “committed” to an ideology of “nonviolence.”

Apparently, at 70, Ayers is not up to the physical demands of terrorism. I bet he and the Iranians would have much to discus about human rights, civil rights agendas et al.

The central deciding factor in Ayers’ mind appears to be the ‘motive’ — his vs theirs. If so, then I bet Islamic terrorists would disagree that their 1400 year-old religious grievances are not quite up to those righteous standards.

RightRing | Bullright

Ayers in Obama’s Dreams

Maybe its old news to most of us, but it does say something about the press to have not followed up on the claims. Limbaugh describes the matter.

Why would it matter, some say? I think its clear why. Even this clip didn’t seem to get much attention.



Obama has always claimed authorship of his bestselling “Dreams From My Father.”

But Ayers is telling a different story. In promoting his new book, “Public Enemy,” Ayers’ publisher, Beacon Press, has written a blurb on Amazon.com that says Ayers “finally ‘confesses’ that he did write ‘Dreams From My Father.'”

The boast appears in other promotions for the book as well. For instance, a Baltimore bookstore — Red Emma’s — last week posted a similar claim that Ayers penned Obama’s memoir as part of an announcement for a book-signing event at the leftist coffeehouse.

-Investor’s Business Daily

4 dead, move along…. nothing to see here

The times, they are a changin’ – not.

In May 1970, shots rang out at Kent State, and the phrase “4 dead in O-hi-o” echoed from coast to coast. I remember it well. Americans wanted answers and they wanted them ASAP. Understandably so, what caused this and why? It did not go down easy. And some vowed they would not forget or let it be in vain and dismissed.

They recently celebrated another anniversary and they had Bill Ayers, of all people, give a keynote speech. And this speech came on the heels of Boston’s bombing, which conjured up visions of domestic terrorism in media from the onset, even reminiscent of the Weather Underground.

But Ayers could rest peacefully in his retirement from education because he nor the Weather Underground would be the whipping post. He later showed up to deliver that speech carefully trying to separate their deeds all those years ago with those of terrorists in Boston. The main difference is they were more successful. That part he could leave off.

Eight months ago, the heart of the nation was again struck by terrorism but overseas in a consulate in Benghazi, killing three heroes and our ambassador to Libya. It took place on September 11th, another key date for terrorism on our homeland. But it was also amidst a heated campaign and presidential election cycle — unfortunately for us and them. It was not the story we wanted to hear but that we needed to know.

It was sidelined and marginalized just after the pictures came in. It was a shocker all right. The greatest shock to come was how the story would be treated. The story shifted to one about an internet video almost no one knew anything about. Apparently things were so hot in Benghazi it would take time for even investigators to look into it. 4 dead in Benghazi read the report. That was about all we knew or would know for days.

But the White House and State department cranked up their talking points and were up to speed some 5 days later when they sent Susan Rice out to all major news outlets on a Sunday to spread the word far and wide: internet video = violent protest = RPG’s and mortars = death of four Americans, including our ambassador. 4 dead in Ben-gha-zi.

And when their bodies came home in coffins, amid a ceremony, Hillary vowed to the families they would get the guy who produced the video. 4 dead in Ben-gha-zi.

There were campaign stops to make, fundraisers that must go on, and a campaign to wage — not on the Benghazi culprits but for the incumbent president in his reelection bid. It’s a tough thing but choices apparently must be made, between security and terrorism time on Benghazi and winning an election. Elections rule, as everyone knows, and politics trumps terrorism in the end.

They always tell us elections have consequences…but so do campaigns, unfortunately for us. Too bad, 4 dead in Benghazi.

Flash forward, it would be months and countless attempts at truth-hunting hearings and investigation. The administration designated an investigator. But the story line was still little more than 4 dead in Benghazi. Hearings came around after troubling delays, Hillary with a concussion and all expected to testify on 4 dead in Benghazi. Finally, she did not fail to demonstrate both her passion and emotions saying “what difference, at this point does it make?” 4 dead in Benghazi.

You know,  I feel passionate enough to keep on saying 4 dead in Benghazi till we get anything resembling the truth about what happened and why, in as much as we haven’t received it from our government involved to their eyeballs  in its cover up.

It would be after 7 months to a question at the WH press briefing, to which Jay Carney would say, “Benghazi happened a long time ago”. As if we need reminding just how long it has been. But what we know is there are 4-dead-in-Benghazi.