Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Ayers Elaborates

By Howard Schneider
Former Weather Underground member Wiliam Ayers did not want to talk about his relationship (or lack thereof) with now President-elect Barack Obama during the campaign. But with that in the past -- and an update of his memoir "Fugitive Days" in circulation -- Ayers is ready to blab.

In an interview on Good Morning America this morning, the radical activist turned college professor slammed the "dishonest narrative" that tried to turn his "civic" relationship with Obama into something nefarious.

The Weather Underground was a radical group that set off a string of bombs in protest of the Vietnam War -- which "was not terrorism," Ayers said, "because it did not target people to kill or injure them." Three of the groups own members died in one accidental explosion.

Ayers this morning was largely unrepentant about the group's activities, saying they were undertaken at a time when "thousands of people were being murdered by our government every month...I was part of a militant faction...and I have been quoted as saying I don't regret it...and I don't think we did enough" to stop the war.

But all of that, he said, is irrelevant when it comes to Obama. (The President-elect noted during the campaign that he was 8 when the Weather Underground was active, and he characterized the group's actions as "despicable").

Ayers said he knew Obama because they were both active in education and other issues around their Chicago neighborhood, and hosted a coffee during Obama's state senate campaign at the request of another local politician.

"We had him in our home. He was probably in 20 homes that day," Ayers said. "We came together in a civic community around issues of school improvement, around issues of fighting for poor neighborhoods...And that is the extent of our relationship."

"I became an issue unwittingly and unwillingly...I don't buy the idea that guilt by association should be part of our politics."

By Washington Post Editor  |  November 14, 2008; 8:18 AM ET
Categories:  Barack Obama  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The YouTube Presidency
Next: The No-News Transition Gets a Dose of Buzz

Comments

It is very scary when someone like Ayers gets prime time attention on major networks. Understanding his relationship with our new President might be appropriate but providing a forum to argue that terrorist bombing is an appropriate method of protest is outrageous and should be off limits for our our mainstream networks. I am very disappointed with ABC and Good Morning America.

Posted by: lford77 | November 15, 2008 12:15 AM | Report abuse

The memories the Ayers interview stirred for me was of the student protests and buildings burned on campuses along with their draft cards and the young men who disappeared into Canada rather than be drafted. The people who have tried to link Obama with those activities have just flat out lied, attempting to smear Obama rather than discuss the financial and migration and war issues we are now facing. There was NOTHING that Obama or Ayers could have said before the election that the Republican campaign machine would have accepted.
The Viet Nam War was wrong and we WON by leaving. They are now a friendly trading partner The Iraqi War is wrong and we will win by leaving. They may or may not become a friendly trading partner. That will depend upon the diplomatic efforts of both countries.

Posted by: Thependulumswings | November 14, 2008 9:24 PM | Report abuse

Can either Ayers or Obama be trusted to tell the truth about anything?? NO!!

Obama's natural born citizen constitutional qualifications are under seige by no less than FIFTEEN states as reported by world renouned internet news provider World Net Daily.
http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=80928

Posted by: Archarito | November 14, 2008 1:39 PM
****************

Good grief, when are you wingnuts going to recognize that anyone with half a brain (that's all I'll give myself credit for) can and will look up your silly references. Even the "estimable" WND, whose article you site, states that every single one of those "cases" were thrown out, often within minutes of filing and generally with contemptuous states from the judges involved observing the silliness of the filings?

You guys just manage to make yourselves look sooooooo stupid with everything you try to pull.

If you want to challenge the Obama administration on a serious policy difference, folks will respect that. But the legitimacy of his birth certificate? You're INSANE and your party is, too (how's that for guilt by association?)!

Posted by: abqcleve | November 14, 2008 3:33 PM | Report abuse

Sorry, sounded harsh. I do not, for the record believe Obama is evil or the "worst" unless I am talking about his liberal record or liberal agenda as it stands. Most half of the country hope Obama is not able to enact his liberal agenda. But this is a classification and broad. Mostly, we worry about damages to freedoms we hold as important. Others may wish to give them up to change things(somehow) with the hope those changes (somehow) Oh, I give up. Obama is not for me as presented. I hope to wake up one day into his Presidency and find he was just kidding about things like abortion and taxes and healthcare and the government saving us. I just hate social engineering. The government just can't function that way.

Posted by: Fred29 | November 14, 2008 2:49 PM | Report abuse

Have any of you conspiracy-minded volk ever been a member of any charitable or other boards? They usually meet a couple of hours about once a month and then everyone goes home. They rarely sit around afterwards in smoke-filled taverns plotting the Marxist overthrow of America. But then, intellectually you probably already know that, you're just not willing to let go of the idea of some nefarious, if non-existent, connection between Ayers and Obama.

Posted by: ejs2 | November 14, 2008 2:45 PM | Report abuse

"Character assassination has no place in American politics except for those who live in and prey on fear. And what we have here are folks living in and preying on fear." My answer to this is when the press never asks these questions and gives a candidate a pass then someone needs to ask these questions.

I do agree with you that "demonizing" is a good word and it can be unsavory is posed as such. Thing is, it is funny that Obama did not seem to know how to pick who he associates with. I hope to see him have better sense as he steps into the White House. All is not lost unless you base everything on your party and you are Republican(and I am). The hope stays alive no matter as fate (I am being judicious) or God( being true to my belief) can work wonders through the worst times or the worst people.

Posted by: Fred29 | November 14, 2008 2:40 PM | Report abuse

Okay, here are the questions they SHOULD have asked Ayers:

1) "So, when you founded the Chicago Annenburg Challenge, what prompted you to pluck a little-known lawyer named Barack Obama (who you supposedly knew only casually) out of thin air, to not only sit on its board with you, but actually serve as Chairman of the Board?"

2) "What prompted you to host the kickoff of this little-known lawyer's first run for public office in your own living room, when you supposedly only knew him slightly?"

3) "What was your relationship with Obama when the two of you served on the Woods Fund of Chicago for three years? Was that just a coincidence?"

4) "Did you ever discuss your career as an urban terrorist with Mr. Obama? Did you ever tell him you were glad you had bombed the Pentagon, and that you still wish you had done more bombings? If yes, what was Mr. Obama's reaction? If no, why didn't you share that part of your past with him, since you were - and still are - so proud of it?"

5) "Why shouldn't anyone who cares for this country spit in your face?"

Posted by: gilbertbp | November 14, 2008 2:17 PM | Report abuse

I could care less about Bill Ayers, and the attempt to demonize Obama with Ayers' past was ridiculous.

What concerns me the most is that Sarah Palin was allowed to accuse Obama with "pallin' around with terrorists", and get away with it. There should have been an enormous outcry from the public. Not since Senator Joe McCarthy have we seen such disgraceful attempts at guilt by association.
~~~~~~~~~~
Sarah Palin was too restrained from going any further. Sarah Palin did not say enough, she should have said more.

Barack Obama's obvious scam to run roughshod over the US Constitution by running as an unqualified candidate, and; his despicable efforts to intransigently conceal the fact he is unqualified is a nightmarish precursor of what would come should he be inaugrated.

Posted by: Archarito | November 14, 2008 2:13 PM | Report abuse

"44" POSTERS BEWARE: More Signs of 'Big Brother' Censorship
• "Prior restraint" imposed on WaPo blogs

http://my.nowpublic.com/world/political-bloggers-beware-more-signs-big-brother-censorship
or http://members.nowpublic.com/scrivener
~~~~~~~~~~~~
It has been obvious on WaPo.

It is also obvious on FOX, CNN, Slate and others.

Censorship comes just before the crackdown;
the crackdown starts several weeks BEFORE martial law is imposed, and;
the patrioic citizens knowledgeable about the elitist plot to impose martial law will be hauled off early to stifle the warnings of what is ongoing, such as occurred in pre-WWII Germany.

Check out the large assortment of home-made FEMA (death) camp videos available on YouTube from all over the country. You will never look at our government in the same way again.

Posted by: Archarito | November 14, 2008 2:00 PM | Report abuse

pkhenry, Was Ayers involved in this attack?

Posted by: browneri | November 14, 2008 1:55 PM | Report abuse

"44" POSTERS BEWARE: More Signs of 'Big Brother' Censorship
• "Prior restraint" imposed on WaPo blogs

http://my.nowpublic.com/world/political-bloggers-beware-more-signs-big-brother-censorship
or http://members.nowpublic.com/scrivener
~~~~~~~~~~~~
It has been obvious on WaPo.

It is also obvious on FOX, CNN, Slate and others.

Censorship comes just before the crackdown;
the crackdown starts several weeks BEFORE martial law is imposed, and;
the patrioic citizens knowledgeable about the elitist plot to impose martial law will be hauled off early to stifle the warnings of what is ongoing, such as occurred in pre-WWII Germany.

Check out the large assortment of home-made FEMA (death) camp videos available on YouTube from all over the country. You will never look at our government in the same way again.

Posted by: Archarito | November 14, 2008 1:54 PM | Report abuse

Ayers handled this with dignity. Seems like the good professor never misses a teachable moment! Conversely, having made this an "issue" the GOP look foolish....

Posted by: protagoras | November 14, 2008 1:51 PM | Report abuse

I thought EJS made some fine and balanced points. It's certainly fair to call Ayers to account. I think he and the ultra-leftists in the Weather Underground (most of whom came from very privileged backgrounds) hurt the left and the anti-war movement in the 60s. Most anti-war people understood that setting off bombs was not the answer and was counter-productive and wrong. What I see missing from these responses with their righteous denunciations of terrorism is a recognition of the fact that our country was dropping bombs on the heads of civilians for over 10 year in Vietnams. Millions were killed in a war we had no business being part of, and that we were deceived into entering (much like the WMDS). Who is taking responsibility for all those deaths? It wasn't Ayers who was responsible.

Posted by: BronxGuy | November 14, 2008 1:50 PM | Report abuse

I could care less about Bill Ayers, and the attempt to demonize Obama with Ayers' past was ridiculous.

What concerns me the most is that Sarah Palin was allowed to accuse Obama with "pallin' around with terrorists", and get away with it. There should have been an enormous outcry from the public. Not since Senator Joe McCarthy have we seen such disgraceful attempts at guilt by association.

Posted by: Arjuna9 | November 14, 2008 1:49 PM | Report abuse

Character assassination has no place in American politics except for those who live in and prey on fear. And what we have here are folks living in and preying on fear.

We also have folks here who obviously know little about the anti-Vietnam movement and the social upheaval of the time. It is not nice to make comments about which you know little or nothing.

Posted by: pbarnett52 | November 14, 2008 1:48 PM | Report abuse

I continue to be amazed by the poor grammar/editing at the Post: in re the headline, the election has PASSED, not PAST. Please!

Posted by: walker2 | November 14, 2008 1:45 PM | Report abuse

Omigod Archarito you're right! Here's another story!

http://www.theonion.com/content/news/international_con_man_barack_obama

Pass it on!

Posted by: mikem1 | November 14, 2008 1:44 PM | Report abuse

There will never be a better time for Ayers to hawk his book. That's all this is.

Controversy generates interest. Interest generates cash.

Posted by: mikem1 | November 14, 2008 1:41 PM | Report abuse

Can either Ayers or Obama be trusted to tell the truth about anything?? NO!!

Obama's natural born citizen constitutional qualifications are under seige by no less than FIFTEEN states as reported by world renouned internet news provider World Net Daily.
http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=80928

Independent, non main-stream controlled media all over the country are reporting on concerns about protecting our Constitution from the intense attack by the MSM whoare protecting the illegal candidacy of Barack Hussein Obama.

The damage resulting from disqualifying Barack obama from the presidency is inconsequential compared to the damage to the American institution of freedom we will suffer from the effective abolishment of the US Constitution by putting into place a known constitutionally unqualified potus. Freedom would cease to exist in the USA.

Why have they been trying for decades to take away the guns of the unorganized militia, who would honor and protect the US Constitution, all across the USA?

The BIG LIE is Barack Obama convincing US voters through a campaign doctrine based on; how far can I go in lying to the American public and get away with it?

The shallowness of the American public who actually believe the msm propaganda and indoctrination.....
I suppose the jews in Germany prior to WWII were equally ignorant...

Is Obama constitutionally qualified to be potus? Definitely NOT!

Posted by: Archarito | November 14, 2008 1:39 PM | Report abuse

I am a proud center-left Democrat who believes the GOP's attempt to tie Ayres to President-elect Obama is ridiculous. But I want to say this to Ayres: You are a terrorist. Millions of people managed to oppose the Vietnam War and the current war without breaking the law.

ter-ror-ism (n): The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.

Posted by: spotfoul | November 14, 2008 1:36 PM | Report abuse

gengar843 posted:
Exactly!
Ayers TRIED to kill people. (LIE)
Ayers was arrested but was released on a TECHNICALITY. (SO!?)

He ADMITTED he did it all.(YES, Bush didn't!)

He is NOT a hero. Abbie Hoffman is a hero. Jerry Rubin was a schlump. Jerry Brown was an idiot. Ayers was and is a psycho.

Question: Why do you, Obama, hang around with this psycho? What does he afford you? Obviously, connections to people who can pay his way into Harvard. How did he get there?

Yep. I'm just hallucinating. Riiiiight.
....
GENGAR...YES WE GOT THAT..
You have been Sucking on Neocons Tit...
Now afflicted with KOOLAIDES!!!)

Fei Hu

Posted by: Issa1 | November 14, 2008 1:32 PM | Report abuse

Yes, Mouli, lets pause a minute to think about the criminal actions of the government. Tell me do people take you seriously? Do you take yourself seriously? Do you have a point, a particular goal?

Let me turn it around:

Citizens, how many times have you taken "one too many?" Citizens how many times have you littered (without conscious). What have you got to say for yourself? Did you honk your horn and disturb the peace? Have you driven your cycle around without a muffler? What about speeding? Need I go on? --------------------------------------------------You need to examine yourself as you examine government. If you call into question the deeds of the government you need to know you are the government in America. You can talk of the hardships of running for office or getting signatures for this and that. You can complain that it is too difficult to spend time on the minutiae—“ that is our leaders job…..that is the job of my senator” But.. then you need to drop your pen and move away from the keyboard because otherwise you are just a neighs Ayer (sorry, could not resist).

Posted by: Fred29 | November 14, 2008 1:31 PM | Report abuse

Remarkable how the MSM find time to talk about everything except what matters.
Ayers isn't going to try to drag this country's reputation out of the mud; Obama is.
Ayers has nothing of importance to say to today's Americans, although the question of governments murdering the innocent civilians of other countries in the name of greed and short-sighted political gain is still a valid question.

Posted by: wardropper | November 14, 2008 1:30 PM | Report abuse

Ayers is, of course, way, way, WAY off base when he talks about setting off bombs with the intent only to destroy property. That, in and of itself, is criminal and immoral. Furthermore, how do you know when you set off a bomb that it will "only" destroy property? His rationalization, intellectual dishonesty and moral obtuseness is worthy of the Bush Administration. If his father hadn't been the CEO of Commonwealth Edison, he would probably have gone to jail, despite whatever rights violations may have been committed by the police and Ayers would certainly not be a college professor or a member of polite society today. All that having been said, it is obvious that the Republican attacks on Barack Obama because of his slight relationship with Ayers in the context of improving the education of our children was also way, way, WAY off base. It was a typical slimy Republican attempt to destroy someone's character with pure idiocy and to divert Americans from dealing with actual campaign issues. The Republicans are sure losers when it comes to policy, so they try to divert people into personal nonsense. Yeah, that Karl Rove is sure a genius, isn't he?

Posted by: ejs2 | November 14, 2008 1:28 PM | Report abuse

iconoblaster: As a former hippie (well, I guess we're always hippies, aren't we?), I know a little bit about Vietnam. Your language is perfect in the context of trying to reach me on that level, and I feel the tug of sentimental anarchic tendencies.

Posted by: gengar843 | November 14, 2008 1:24 PM | Report abuse

"44" POSTERS BEWARE: More Signs of 'Big Brother' Censorship

• "Prior restraint" imposed on WaPo blogs


http://my.nowpublic.com/world/political-bloggers-beware-more-signs-big-brother-censorship

or http://members.nowpublic.com/scrivener

Posted by: scrivener50 | November 14, 2008 1:22 PM | Report abuse

No, Ayres was not a terrorist so to speak. His intent was not to kill people but to save lives somehow. He is an unfortunate fool. He went to jail because he was a criminal. The only problem I have with calling him a hero is that he used bombs that endangered lives (and ended up by his own admission killing citizens-his friends). He was no success. I think you have to be a success to be a hero. We don't really, hold up someone as a hero when they were a terrible failure and end up in jail.

As for Obama,

He was not my choice , but then neither was McCain. I adapt as I have to. With the 2 party system what can you do but work within the system. Now, my only hope is that God works wonders through Obama. If I were Ayres I might bomb something and demand Obama step down.

Posted by: Fred29 | November 14, 2008 1:21 PM | Report abuse

Before labeling others criminals, let's pause for a moment to review the criminal actions of the government.

Posted by: mouli_7982 | November 14, 2008 1:17 PM | Report abuse

To anybody who believes in the Second Amendment Bill Ayres should be a hero. The parentage of the Second Amendment was in the English Bill of Rights in 1689 and the Virginia Declaration of Rights in 1778. In both cases there was a need to justify an armed resistance to an overbearing government. All Bill Ayres was doing was bearing arms to resist what he saw as an overbearing government. If you wish to argue that it is now wrong to take up arms against the government because we have at the ballot box which was unavailable in England in 1689 and here in 1776 then you should argue for the repeal of the Second Amendment. If you wish to keep the Second Amendment then you should praise Bill Ayres.

Posted by: Chrisle | November 14, 2008 1:17 PM | Report abuse

“Or is it only terrorism when "they" do it to "us"?”

I think that is an easy question to answer. If you were my kid I would make you answer that yourself!

It has to do with intent..does that mean anything to you?

Heck, we make these devices just for confining the destruction upon a specific target. Lasers are used to direct smart munitions. We drop food and stuffs and try to rebuild in the aftermath. And when did we ever try to destroy a country so we could make it part of the United States. No, I tell you we are not so bad; we are America. You can point the finger and accuse us of terrorism but the fact is the US is at the forefront of humanity. We are involved, we are responsible. Problem is we have big shoulders. We are a very easy target to point the finger at. Terrorism indeed; give me a break! No, we are not perfect as a country.Yes, we do need to examine how we carry out war(and also avoid war when possible). But, we are engaged in the world and we have our interests scattered globally. I see no reason for a comparison with the terrorist who means to destroy society by killing innocent people, with intent to kill innocents, with desires for religious conversion through any means and with no populace to answer to, just Allah.

Posted by: Fred29 | November 14, 2008 1:11 PM | Report abuse

Ayers is a wacko, plain and simple.

- Ray

Posted by: rmcazz | November 14, 2008 1:09 PM | Report abuse

What is it with the overuse and misuse of the word "terrorist." During the Vietnam war the U.S. conducted a terror campaign on the people of Vietnam. Napalming villages and using bombs that looked like toys that were used to maim children! That is terrorism by any definition. Try reading history before casting dispersions on Bill Ayers.

Bill Ayers is a patriotic American who was repulsed by the U.S. war crimes that were being committed in the name of its citizens.

He then spent the rest of his life working to help improve the education system. This nonsense of tring to equate Obama to Bill Ayers was a lame attempt by ignorant Republicans to try to get Americans to take their eye off the ball (the economy stupid). Fortunately, despite demonizing Ayers, their strategy failed.

Bill Ayers has nothing to apologize for.

Posted by: biobot | November 14, 2008 1:08 PM | Report abuse

Ayres is linked to Nixon in history.

Nixon used bombing raids (operation breakfast, operation snack, operation...tea time--who cares).

Ayres used bombs.

Nixon was a criminal

Ayres was a criminal

Ayres wanted us out of the war

Nixon wanted us out of the war

Nixon used the justification "the end justifies the means"

Ayres used the justification "the end justifies the means"

Mr. Ayres, if you are reading, you are forever tied to Nixon. You are no less a criminal. You did not work within the system and you still are not repentant. You still think you were right but that makes you a deviant separate from normal society. At least Nixon admitted his single-minded pursuits outside the law where his downfall.

And since Nixon had some redeeming value in his deprecations I read his history as more savory than yours. You sir, are no hero!

Posted by: Fred29 | November 14, 2008 12:52 PM | Report abuse

Someone takes issue with Ayer's denial that his erstwhile political violence was terrorism, and offers this definition:

"TERRORISM - the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion."

Like the "Shock and Awe" campaign of aerial bombardment on Baghdad?

Would that also include Predator attacks on "militants" (which sometimes turn out to be wedding parties, or houses full of women and kids) in Afghanistan?

How about the targetted assassination of a paraplegic elderly man in a wheelchair, along with fatalities to bystanders, by air-to-ground missile, in the Israeli-occupied territories?

Or is it only terrorism when "they" do it to "us"?

Posted by: Iconoblaster | November 14, 2008 12:45 PM | Report abuse

gengar, you aren't listening... he DIDN'T try to kill anyone... they tried to avoid "collateral damage" to people, but to attack facilities, like recruiters offices, that were involved in the institutional program of killing (the Viet Nam War) that they were trying to stop.

His methods were wrong, dangerous to innocent people and a self-defeating tactic for the opposition to the war... and others involved in the same effort went ever FURTHER wrong, and committed direct, intentional violence against other people. But in the context of the HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of innocent people who had died, or would die, in a totally unnecessary and futile foreign war, sold to the American people by fraud and deceit, the misconduct of the anti-war radicals was still the LESSER evil.

Americans today don't remember, or perhaps never knew, what a wretched, tragic exercise the Viet Nam War really was. Pity. That ignorance can only have made it easier for the Bush government to lead us into a similarly self-defeating conflict in Iraq, by similarly dishonest methods... those who fail to learn the lessons of history are often condemned to repeat the course in personal experience.

Posted by: Iconoblaster | November 14, 2008 12:27 PM | Report abuse

Gengar 843: Obviously you can't read. Try again reading the blog, and see if this time you can actually comprehend what Ayers is saying. You know, reading can be fun. You will even learn how to read your Bible, and, as a bonus, actually understand it!

Posted by: nwsjnky1 | November 14, 2008 12:15 PM | Report abuse

Exactly!

Ayers TRIED to kill people.

Ayers was arrested but was released on a TECHNICALITY.

He ADMITTED he did it all.

He is NOT a hero. Abbie Hoffman is a hero. Jerry Rubin was a schlump. Jerry Brown was an idiot. Ayers was and is a psycho.

Question: Why do you, Obama, hang around with this psycho? What does he afford you? Obviously, connections to people who can pay his way into Harvard. How did he get there?

Yep. I'm just hallucinating. Riiiiight.

Posted by: gengar843 | November 14, 2008 11:53 AM | Report abuse

Trying to connect dots between Obama and Ayers is weak.

But Ayers is scum. This is the US, we don't resort to acts of terrorism if we don't like things, if you disagree, there are many forms of peaceful protest. I think a lot of the anit-VietNam war movement falls under this concept.

The unfortunate side effect of political types trying to connect him to Obama is that he's going to cash in.

Posted by: kolbkl | November 14, 2008 11:51 AM | Report abuse

Many readers were not born, when NAM was being fought, and have no knowledge of what happened, I can assure them it is history WASHINGTON would like to forget.

That being said, the republican party were nothing more then political vandals in trying to connect OBAMA with AYERS. I do not believe that they understand, that they threw crap upwind and it landed on them.

Posted by: dv1236 | November 14, 2008 11:42 AM | Report abuse

Ayers is lying. He attempted to kill an entire family, but simply failed.
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2008/04/30/2008-04-30_barack_obama_pal_is_an_enemy_too.html

"In February 1970, my father, a New York State Supreme Court justice, was presiding over the trial of the so-called "Panther 21," members of the Black Panther Party indicted in a plot to bomb New York landmarks and department stores. Early on the morning of Feb. 21, as my family slept, three gasoline-filled firebombs exploded at our home on the northern tip of Manhattan, two at the front door and the third tucked neatly under the gas tank of the family car. "

Posted by: pkhenry | November 14, 2008 11:30 AM | Report abuse

rharring:

Excellent point!

Posted by: Godhimself1 | November 14, 2008 11:26 AM | Report abuse

One of the unanswered questions by the MSM is whether or not Khalidi and Ayers had a relationship
http://jumpinginpools.blogspot.com/2008/11/did-khalidi-and-ayers-have-relationship.html

Posted by: MatthewAvitabile | November 14, 2008 11:20 AM | Report abuse

The problem that I have with Bill Ayers and his wife, Bernadette Dohrn, is they apparently have knowledge of who murdered a police officer in San Francisco and who murdered a police officer and two armored car guards in New Jersey.
They have refused to cooperate with law enforcemnt regarding these despicable crimes.
No politician should have any involvement with individuals like this at any time!

Posted by: mwhoke | November 14, 2008 11:19 AM | Report abuse

According to Ayers if you don't like him it's ok to blow up his house...just try to make sure he's not in it and of course that's not terrorism. Why would ANYONE spend good money to send their family to the school where he teaches much less allow them in the classroom of this moron.

Posted by: ekim53 | November 14, 2008 11:13 AM | Report abuse

I find it funny that people are saying him knowing Ayers makes him just as guilty or his views lean toward Ayers because they sat on some boards. Or the ignorant comment that Obamas parents were communists. So chew on this, 15 of the September 11th hijackers were Saudi Arabian, and Bush was holding the prince of Saudi Arabia's hand a few years back. And the hijackers received benefits from the Saudi government. So which is worse, knowing Bill Ayers or holding hands with the head of the country who citizens just attacked you???????

Posted by: rharring | November 14, 2008 10:56 AM | Report abuse

I suggest some of you go and watch the film Weather Underground released a few years ago and realise how ridiculous you sound when you trash Bill Ayers. He was a hero.

Go and watch the footage of the napalm being dropped on innocent people by the US, see the footage of the massacre by US soldiers in My Lai, the thousands and thousands of names on the Vietnam wall of rememberance and then grow up and stop ranting like tedious children.

As for Rashid Khalidi, he was on a peace mission with Israel - he has never been in the PLO and is an American citizens.

The tiny minds need to go and take a cold shower or do some reading about the Vietnam catastrophe before being any dumber.

Posted by: shepherdmarilyn | November 14, 2008 10:54 AM | Report abuse

One of the most hopeful things about this past campaign was the fact that the Ayers guilt by association smear didn't work at all. It signals that the nation is ready to move beyond the culture wars of the 1960s and get down to practical solutions in the real world. Let's hear it for mature political discourse and mature public policy!

Obama's intellectual and spiritual depth is his greatest strength. Let's work with him and use the momentum we have to fix some of our longstanding problems. The opportunity is there now if we seize it.

Posted by: johnsonc2 | November 14, 2008 10:30 AM | Report abuse

Some highly dishonest reporting by ABC, for which this journalist should be ashamed. Ayers didn't say he wished they had done more "after 9/11." His remarks were published in the newspaper ON 9/11 by complete chance. To be published in the paper on 9/11, one would have to make the remarks BEFORE 9/11. No one's excusing the bombings here, but ABC should at least try to set the record straight, rather than simply inflame the emotions of their viewers.

Posted by: homer44 | November 14, 2008 10:24 AM | Report abuse

Those who did not learn that trying to make something out of the Ayers association was a mistake. It was prattle when the electorate wanted serious discussion of issues during this campaign. If Republicans did not have substantive issues to consider than they deserve to be relegated to the wilderness.

I heard Governors Samford and Pawlenty the other night and they were both intelligent men. Samford had a directness that would make him seem like an excellent choice if McCain had been willing to run a serious campaign. Palin compared to either of these men is a midget.

Palin and Ayers as a political issue were the road to defeat. The political judgment was poor. There are more defeats ahead for those who cling to that political pathway.

Posted by: Gator-ron | November 14, 2008 10:11 AM | Report abuse

Does anyone really doubt that before Ayers became a potiential obstacle to his political goals Obama would have had any problem shaking the man's hand, socializing and sitting on boards with him? In Obama's private world Ayers is not despicable, whatever he says now. But he is despicable (if unimportant) in my world, and so I must harbor this reservation about our new president.

Posted by: Roytex | November 14, 2008 10:05 AM | Report abuse

thank goodness,the posters here have Ayers and Palin. With supporters like you, The GOP is in for a good 8 or 16 or 20 years.

Posted by: silverspring25 | November 14, 2008 9:53 AM | Report abuse

Hey dunnhaupt:

It's not about how old Obama was when Ayers did his thing. It's who Obama hangs with and admires. Follow the bounding ball: Obama's mother and father were avowed Communists. Obama spent time as a teen with W.M. Davis, Communist. Obama's spiritual advisor has been a black liberation theology minister, which is Communism. He has relatives in Kenya which are part of the Islamic Communist movement, which are not Islamics but Communists. He joins with Ayers, Communist, who talks with Chavez, Communist. Get the picture?

What if Obama hung with George Bush, Dick Cheney, Rumsfeld, and other neo-cons? Wouldn't you say Obama is a neo-con by his associates?

Get real! Wake up!

If your friend, Joe, hangs with drug dealers and punks, isn't he part of that crowd? Or, is he above it, just with them? Who is he, JESUS???

Posted by: gengar843 | November 14, 2008 9:46 AM | Report abuse

Bill and Hillary Clinton were also part of the Vietnam protests, even went to Moscow while others were fighting in Vietnam. It was an anti-war movement that thousands participated in. Obama was 8 years old at the time.

Posted by: dunnhaupt | November 14, 2008 9:35 AM | Report abuse

I'm surprised that suburban rich-kid brat Ayers is even still alive. Revolution is a dangerous business and you either make it to the top of the greased pole, like Mao or Castro, or you are one of the thousands who die trying.

Ayers should thank God he conducted his activities in America, which is tolerant has rules by law. Anywhere else, playing with revolution like he did would have got him assassinated.

Posted by: pgr88 | November 14, 2008 9:34 AM | Report abuse

We wonder about the Ayers of Christian Redemption. ..............


http://thefiresidepost.com/2008/10/19/the-ayers-of-christian-redemption/

Posted by: glclark4750 | November 14, 2008 9:23 AM | Report abuse

Let's see the suppressed LA Times video. I want to see if Bill Ayers and Obama were having a "civic" relationship when Kalidi and his cronies were yelling "Death to Israel!" Were they yukking it up? Were they clinking glasses together in drink? Why didn't Obama leave? Was there a reason to leave?

Bah!

Posted by: gengar843 | November 14, 2008 9:23 AM | Report abuse

I too protested the Vietnamese War. Never in my wildest thoughts did I ever consider bombing my own government. It is very disturbing that William Ayers is given so much credibiility within our educational system. Is this creep a tenured professor? Just one more reason why tenure should be reformed or abolished.

Posted by: feudi | November 14, 2008 9:13 AM | Report abuse

It seems to me Prof. Ayers has handled this situation about right: he kept out of the kerfuffle between Obama and the McCain/Palin campaign until after the election, then spoke out. The lame attempt to blame Obama for Ayers' activities of forty years ago was disgusting, but he would only have made it worse by speaking out at the time. Whatever his culpability for his actions forty years ago, he has come through the recent dustup with more honor than John McCain.

Posted by: thrh | November 14, 2008 9:12 AM | Report abuse

Go schlep your book and shut the hell up. BTW "professor"; TERRORISM - the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion (WEBSTERS). So to use his ignorant, self serving, rationalization; if no one died in WTC1 or WTC2, blowing up the building alone is not terrorism. If no one is killed when the KKK firebombs a house, it’s what – just a nice way to say welcome to the neighborhood. I don't think I want this slime or his ilk with their situational ethics involved with the education of my kids.

Posted by: Bcamp55 | November 14, 2008 9:03 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company