Boycott Fugitive Days: Ayers deserves no profit from terrorism

If in 3 years Osama Bin Laden publishes a book about his attack on the Twin Towers, and his work with Al Quida, would you buy it?

Simple question. I think that most Americans agree that they would not. So why then would anyone buy Bill Ayers book Fugitive Days?

Bill Ayers is releasing the book again after all the media attention generated by the Presidential election.



This media attention is being capitalized on as Ayers has his old book, and a new one, coming out. And in the old book, Fugitive Days, he has added a new portion that discusses his relationship with President Obama.



Now let’s look at what the book actually discusses

“Above all this is not a book for those looking for well-considered facts. This is not a book of dispassion. Some thirty years later Ayers is still trying to justify—as he did then—the core Weatherman belief that some forms of violence are tactically useful to achieve just ends.

…Ayers takes the reader through the townhouse destruction three times in the course of his memoir. His narrative opens with the explosion—or more accurately, his hearing about the explosion in a telephone call placed to a phone booth in a desert location. The second time he relates the explosion in the chronological context of his memoir. A third time he re-imagines the explosion and so reinterprets its significance. The whole point of his memoir, plausibly, is just to set the stage for that final re-imagination.”

So this book is the revisioning of fact, when fact is addressed at all. There is no remorse or apology. There is just the attempt to justify, and promote the ideals of a terrorist. And profit from that re-making of history.

The first try did not sell as well as Ayers hoped I imagine, as the book came out in 2001. It’s hard to justify bombing America when thousands of Americans are dead from a terrorist act. But Ayers is counting on the fact that the MTV generation is too busy to remember just 7 years ago.

I remember. And I understand what Ayers was trying to do in the 1970’s. He wanted to destroy the nation. And he thought his actions were not enough.

''I don't regret setting bombs,'' Bill Ayers said. ''I feel we didn't do enough.''

So I ask you, would you buy a book by an admitted terrorist who has no remorse? Would you help promote the ideals of a terrorist, and provide them profit? Because if so, you would buy a book by Bill Ayers. And that is no different than shaking Osama Bin Laden’s hand and handing him a check over the ruins of the Twin Towers.

If you disagree I’d like to hear why.

But no matter what, I suggest that all my readers, all your friends and co-workers, all Americans boycott the books of Ayers. If you support that I’d really like to hear your comments as well.

A conversation about President Bush - 2.18.2008.1

I had an interesting conversation last night with a guy on the current status of the Presidency and the up-coming election. It’s a conversation I’ve had many times and I think needs to be discussed in a broader manner.

The crux of the conversation dealt with the anger this one guy had with President Bush. In his opinion, which I have seen mirrored in the media and on many blog sites, President Bush has driven the nation into the ground, broken laws, and involved us in a war that we have no place in. In this opinion America has been lessened by the actions of President Bush.

I disagree.

First I suggest that there is a separation that needs to be made from the emotion some carry with the actual effects of President Bush. While he may not be liked, that is not the same as what he has done being bad for the nation. Much like President Nixon, who was massively disliked in the 70’s, time and a review exempt of emotions shows that he did many things that were in the best interest of America and he was in fact a decent President.

President Bush finds himself as the second President to be involved with an openly disliked war. The fears of mothers and loved ones for the Armed Forces in Iraq and Afghanistan is no small thing. But that does not mean that President Bush has done something wrong. Nor does it mean this is not in the best interest of America in the long-term.

America needs oil, a moderately peaceful Middle East, and a beachfront against terrorists that would kill every American man woman and child for no reason other than they exist. And as I mentioned in conversation, if this were likened to a bar fight the Democrats want to shout “I am done, I give up” then turn and walk away. Those same Democrats want to ignore the fact that in the middle of a fight, your opponent will likely not stop, and given the chance as you walk away back exposed will strike you over the head with a barstool. Just because some want to stop fighting, our enemies so not.

Perhaps some would prefer to fight terrorists on American soil. Perhaps they would be more motivated in attacking our enemies after they have taken down our skyscrapers and killed our children in schools and school buses. Some are disheartened because in attacking these vile individuals there is a cost of some innocents, as is true in every war.

But I say that I do not want to risk the hundreds or thousands that would die in America. I do feel badly for the tens of Iraqis and Afghans that die as a result of hiding, abetting, and/or ignoring those that attack America. But I feel far worse for the thousands that died in New York. Is it fair? Maybe not, but I love America far more than I do any other nation.

Some say President Bush has taken America down a dark path. I disagree. I would say that America has not changed course since arguably WWII. Less debatable is that America is still tracking the same direction that we have been on since the 1980’s. Every President, Democrat or Republican, has not deviated from this course. Some Presidents have just had worse media coverage, and more difficult events to deal with. (And with all honest and lack of emotional predetermination the next President will follow in that direction as well)

President Clinton attacked Iraq. America was the police force of the world during his administration. The Tech Bubble was created during his fiscal watch, and the resulting crash was caused by his in/action. President Clinton allowed Osama Bin Laden to live and kill thousands of Americans, and he lied to America directly. But I don’t see the passion for the laws he actually broke; and I do hear compassion about the actions he took that allowed Saddam Hussein to kill thousands of Kurds, cost thousands of Americans their jobs and homes, and embarrass the nation in front of the world.

All of this is not to say I agree in a blanket manner with President Bush. He deserves criticism for his actions in Katrina (or more accurately failure to act), and scrutiny on the powers given by the Patriot and other Acts.

America is at a crossroads. The decisions at the feet of the next President are huge and long-lasting in their impact on every American life. But to blindly pack every problem facing America on the back of one President is to potentially open the door for the next President to fail at various points even more regrettably.

Comments by Senator Clinton - 2.6.2007.1

There have been several interesting things ongoing currently with the various candidates. As we see that Democrats are trying to push a defunding of the war in Iraq, which I feel would signal our defeat to our enemies and a lack of resolve, there is also comments from various figures on what might be forth-coming if they are elected.

Senator Clinton has made several statements recently that give me pause. Prior to January 2007 the senator was a staunch supporter of the war (while most of the popularity was still mostly divided I noticed) and is now against. Not only against the plan made by the President, but is seeking to limit the President’s plan. Yet Senator Clinton has no alternate plan to offer. In addition the senator has been speaking about holding conversations to understand our enemies. It is the senator’s opinion, as I understand it, that a dialogue is the key to stop Iran from gaining nuclear weapons, or nations supporting terrorists that wish to attack us for being rich, free and powerful. I would equate that conversation with speaking to the local school bully when he asks for your money. Anyone watching would not be surprised when the bully decides to pummel you for wasting his time.

But Senator Clinton has some thoughts [note that she has not declared any concrete plans or opinions – though to be fair nor has her opponents] on domestic issues as well. The senator has stated, and has been recorded publicly, that she would ‘take the revenues’ from oil companies to use for alternative energy research. I’m sure that will help the stock market, and make all socialists quite happy. Does that mean the next step would be taking the revenues or profits from pharmaceutical companies to pay for a national healthcare system? Then maybe nationalizing entertainment companies so that specific types of movies or television channels exist? Where might this process end?

Lastly Senator Clinton stated that if the war is continuing in January 2009, and she were elected President, she will end the war (“You have to have 60 votes to cap troops, to limit funding to do anything. If we in Congress don't end this war before January 2009, as president, I will.”). Well I’m sure Iran, Osama bin Laden, Al Quida, and any other group that opposes the U.S. will pray for her election. It guarantees their victory in Iraq and long-term. To make such a blanket statement without qualification only emboldens the enemy to continue to fight since they have an unequivocal timeframe that removes any opposition. Not quite the words from a Commander-and-Chief seeking the best result for the nation. But in this case at least I’m glad it isn’t a declared plan. [By the way, I note Senator Clinton has also insulted President Bush by saying he has no power over the war but Congress does, unless she is the President at the time. Quite rude.]

There will be more on other candidates shortly. I will also mention my thoughts of former New York City Mayor Mr. Ruddy Gulliani, especially while I lived in the city with him as Mayor.

This is what I think, what do you think?