Enquirer Article

Interesting article and observations by Peter Bronson. I've added a link so you can read this article with ease. I especially appreciate the "Rabbit Hole".

Not A Terrorist?

In his interview on GMA Bill Ayers made the statement that despite his involvement in bombings and other forms of mayhem he was not a terrorist. The interviewer seemed incredulous at the statement. In "Prairie Fire", on pages 4 and 5, the Weather Underground lists the various bombings for which they claimed responsibility. See below to see the list. By their own count they list 17 bombings from 1969 until 1974, plus various draft center and ROTC offices that they do not list explicitly. That's at least 17 bombings they claim responsibility for, not to mention other bombings, such as the one that killed Officer McDonnell, where they are alleged to be responsible.

Of course, it doesn't stop there. Let's not forget about street violence (theDays Of Rage), their support for groups such as the Symbionese Liberation Army (kidnapping, bank robbery, murder), and their glorification of murder by the Manson family. By any objective measure, devotion to violent means on this scale can only be described as terrorism.

With such a resume, the scariest thing of all is that Bill Ayers can go on national TV and look into the camera and claim that he was not a terrorist. One can only speculate as what kind of moral relativism will allow someone justify this culture of violence.

It's stunning how Bill and his apologists just refuse to see it. The problem is these tactics can get co-opted by any group in the political spectrum. It starts with a bunch of guys sitting around a beer hall in Munich talking politics. Next thing you know they try a half-baked coup, and get busted. When they get out they figure "we didn't do enough". They resort to more and more thug tactics. Then they get matching brown shirts. And before you know it, the Jews are getting tossed in the oven.

The Real Agenda

In his various attempts to claim some form of moral high ground, Bill Ayers asserts that he was not a terrorist, but an anti-Viet Nam war activist. Well, all I have to say is read "Prairie Fire: The Politics Of Revoultionary Anti-Imperialism". "Prairie Fire"is the written political policy statement of the Weather Underground. If the point of the Weather Underground was to stop the war, then why is so little time spent on the topic? In the entire first chapter (24 pages), Viet Nam is only mentioned 4 times. But to hear Bill tell it, Viet Nam was the whole point.

The reality is that the Weather Underground was not about Viet Nam at all. Viet Nam was merely a tool to accomplish the real goal: the violent overthrow and destruction of the United States. If you read "Prairie Fire" that point is spelled out. Page 24 in the first chapter makes it clear. "Our final goal is the destruction of imperialism, the seizure of power, and the creation of socialism". Later on the same page, "The Vietnamese struggle provides a strategic model: as the anti-colonial liberation movement advanced, contradictions within the US heightened, creating more favorable conditions for revolutionary organizing and action".

The reality is that the Weather Underground was engaged in a cynical scam. Viet Nam was nothing more to them than a tool to drive revolutionary organizing. Now Bill Ayers is attempting to reprise the cynical ploy by portraying himself as an anti-war hero. Don't fall for it, it's complete spin.

Officer McDonnell

I added a link about Officer McDonnell who succumbed to wounds sustained when a bomb exploded in the San Francisco Park Police Station. This bomb had shrapnel similar to the one that destroyed the Greenwich Village townhouse, killing three members of the Weather Undergound. On the page it says "Although Sergeant McDonnell's murder was never solved, it is believed the bomb was set by members of the domestic terrorist group Weather Underground." Officer McDonnell left behind a wife, kids, and his parents. But remember, Bill Ayers says he is the victim and that he never hurt or killed anyone.

Billy on GMA

Safely after the election (Novermber 14th), Bill Ayers appeared on Good Morning America to hawk his book, "Fugitive Days". For those who want to see Bill spin his story, I've added links to the video on YouTube.
The formula for his spin became clear. He is a "respected professor". He is a victim of the "dishonest narrative" surrounding the 2008 election, and that he has been unfairly demonized. Bill claims he was a "Viet Nam protestor", and that he "never hurt or killed anyone", and even better yet, that he "never committed terror". That about sums it up. Bill is the victim, not Officer McDonnell (killed by a bomb) or the Murtagh family (fire-bombed while at home in bed).
Billy chooses a show like GMA to appear on because, let's face it, they aren't going to ask the most probing of questions. The interviewer did an OK job of at least questioning how he could not see himself as a terrorist. The interviewer even had a copy of "Prairie Fire" and asked about the Sirhan Sirhan dedication.
Ultimately, that is the problem. The interviewer had the book, but no one actually read the book. If they had they would have noticed that Chapter 1 was about "Why Is Revolution Necessary". Even a simple review of the table of contents would show that out of 150 pages only 17 are on the War.
The reality is that Bill and the Weather Underground were motivated by a desire to violently overthrow the United States. Viet Nam was merely a tool to exploit in their much larger scheme. If they were just anti-war protestors then why did they continue to plant bombs, even after cease fire had been declared in Viet Nam?
Thats' the problem. Too many in the media give the glossy MTV treatment. No one takes the time to understand the events, follow the time lines, or actually reads the damn book!

Prairie Fire

In 1974 the Weather Underground published a book titled "Prairie Fire". "Prairie Fire" was a document that outlined their political ideology. Now what makes "Prairie Fire" interesting and relevant today is that Bill Ayers, the self-proclaimed anti-war activist, would sign his name (actually he signed it Billy Ayers) to a document dedicated to, among other people, Sirhan Sirhan. For those of you who do not recall, Sirhan Sirhan was the man who murdered Robert Kennedy.

Robert Kennedy was a great man who took a courageous stand against the war. Now he was truly an anti-war activist (unlike Billy). How can you possibly claim to be anti-war and dedicate your philosophy to Sirhan Sirhan?

For those who doubt my accuracy, here are two of the initial pages of "Prairie Fire". Look at the second page on line 13 (in the middle) and you will see Sirhan Sirhan. Need I say more?

Billy and the NYT

In a recent New York Times Op-ed piece Bill Ayers has attempted, once again to portray himself as merely an 'anti-war' protestor. According to Bill it was just "several small bombs in empty offices". Nothing could be further from the truth. I will be sending in my response to the Times, and it will be interesting to see what they do with it.