my homer is not a terrorist

[candid]

Ladies and gentlemen, William Ayers:"I'm not an unrepentant terrorist; I'm just a guy who set off a bunch of bombs in support of my political agenda, and (looking back) it's possible (but definitely not certain) that doing so might have been a bad idea. If I have any regrets, it's that our terrorism bombing campaigns weren't successful in

Comments

[the23]

mr obama will surely have a greater reign of terror and more new york times op-eds.

[mcfnord]

They publish Rove so the answer is Arabs. Of course, you know you chose whom, rather than what, to malign Mr. Ayers, despite all that other fancy HTML! Sanctimony: secure!

If I Understand You Correctly...

[infopractical]

When being specific, it's impossible to be general. If you're suggesting that candid...gets cozy with Rove...while maligning Ayers...you're so clearly and obviously wrong that it makes me wonder why you think you know him well enough to make that comment. I don't know him all that well, but I've read enough of his writing to know he's not a member of the Republican goonsquad.

But, of course, you choose to comment on the maligning of whom, rather than what, to malign Mr. Grus, despite all that other fancy HTML! Sanctimony: secure!

My Obvious Meanings, Willfully Misread...

[mcfnord]

Nope, you don't understand me correctly. candid asked how to get published in NYT. You may not be aware of this, but Rove is published frequently, both there and in the WSJ. The pronoun they should have been a clue for you here. I'm not sure why a newspaper is plural, but it does seem a newspaper is more sensibly plural than a single LiveJournal user.

Mr. Ayers never bombed anyone. He bombed things. "Who did you bomb?" "I didn't bomb anyone." It's all rather clear to the native speaker.

Re: My Obvious Meanings, Willfully Misread...

[infopractical]

Willfully misread? Ha.

I can't believe you're making a defense of the flow of what you wrote. Your middle sentence could have 14,000 equally valid interpretations now that I take a fifth look at it.

[spoonless]

Where is the source of that quote? By linking to the article and putting that quote there, it makes it seem like that's something from the article. The closest thing to it I see is this, which seems to say something quite different (possibly opposite):

"I have regrets, of course - including mistakes of excess and failures of imagination, posturing and posing, inflated and heated rhetoric, blind sectarianism and a lot else. No one can reach my age with their eyes even partly open and not have hundreds of regrets. The responsibility for the risks we posed to others in some of our most extreme actions in those underground years never leaves my thoughts for long."

[infopractical]

I think candid is making up the quote to mock Ayers, who is, after all, essentially doing PR work for his movement so that it might become more politically acceptable in the Age of Obama, who, after all, spent time with Ayers mulling over how best to fund that movement.

[spoonless]

And what movement would that be? I thought the movement he was involved in that he's writing the article about was the anti Vietnam movement.

[infopractical]

Actually, no -- that Ayers was against the Vietnam War was incidental to his politics, and more than anything was a justification for a bombing. Ayers is quite plainly a Marxist revolutionary. If you look through his career, it's the common denominator of everything else he's ever done.

iphone unlock

[anonymous]

[url=http://www.3gsunlock.co.uk]iPhone Unlock[/url]