patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,209,976 comments by 14,377 users - Ceffer, rocketjoe79 online now
invite response« First « Previous Comments 105 - 144 of 219 Next » Last » Search these comments
Schoolchildren have been putting pipe bombs in school bathrooms, or at least talking about doing that, probably for as long as there have been pipe bombs and school bathrooms.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Weatherman_actions
you can read the who list.. of bombings and killings...
yes, you hate wiki, but anything that disputes your claims gets equal contempt.
February 16: A bomb is detonated at the Golden Gate Park branch of the San Francisco Police Department, killing one officer and injuring a number of other policemen (one seriously). No organization claims credit for either bombing. (See San Francisco Police Department Park Station bombing.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_Police_Department_Park_Station_bombing
March 6 – WUO members Theodore Gold, Diana Oughton, and Terry Robbins are killed in the Greenwich Village townhouse explosion,[2][8] when a nailbomb they were constructing detonates. The bomb was intended to be planted at a non-commissioned officer's dance at Fort Dix, New Jersey
March 30 – Chicago police discover a WUO "bomb factory" on Chicago’s north side
April 1 - Based on a tip Chicago Police find 59 sticks of dynamite, ammunition, and nitro glyerine in an apartment traced to WUO members.[12] The discover of the WUO weapons cache ends WUO activity in this city.
June 6 – In a letter, the WUO claims credit for bombing of the San Francisco Hall of Justice, although no explosion has occurred. Months later, workmen locate an unexploded bomb
June 9 - The New York City Police headquarters is bombed by Jane Alpert and accomplices. Weathermen state this is in response to "police repression."[13][14] The bomb made with ten sticks of dynamite exploded in the NYC Police Headquarters. The explosion was preceded by a warning about six minutes prior to the detonation and subsequently by a WUO claim of responsibility
curious2
2013 Apr 9, 10:03am
you can read the who list.. of bombings and killings...
yes, you hate wiki, but anything that disputes your claims gets equal contempt.
I don't hate Wikipedia, it has the candor to acknowledge it isn't a source. Only you and SoCal seem to claim it as one, a claim that it denies.
Update - since you edited your post to add a quote about a San Francisco incident - as your own "source" acknowledges, nobody was ever even charged, let alone indicted or convicted, because there was no reliable evidence. If you have any evidence related to the incident, please report it to the SFPD or the FBI. If you don't, then don't accuse people of murder without evidence.
Second update, since you're spamming your own post with quotes from Wikipedia. In addition to quoting Wikipedia, you're trying to use substitution again. None of those incidents even allegedly involved murder.
I don't hate Wikipedia, it has the candor to acknowledge it isn't a source.
choke on it!
Update - since you edited your post to add a quote about a San Francisco incident - as your own "source" acknowledges, nobody was ever even charged, let alone indicted or convicted, because there was no reliable evidence.
According to the San Francisco Chronicle, "Investigators in the early '70s said the bombing likely was the work of the Weather Underground,
were you expecting a school girl with pipe bombs being responsibe for all this ?
curious2
2013 Apr 9, 10:09am
choke on it!
Choke on what, your ignorance? The air is clean here, no matter how you try to pollute it.
likely
So they investigated and did they find sufficient evidence to support the charge? No. Eventually the absence of evidence becomes evidence of absence. They kept investigating "the usual suspects," while the real perpetrators got away. Maybe it was the guy who went after Texas prosecutors recently.
April 1 - Based on a tip Chicago Police find 59 sticks of dynamite, ammunition, and nitro glyerine in an apartment traced to WUO members.[12] The discover of the WUO weapons cache ends WUO activity in this city.
Maybe it was the guy who went after Texas prosecutors recently.
maybe it was the CIA and FBI...
July 25 - The United States Army base at The Presidio in San Francisco is bombed on the 11th anniversary of the Cuban Revolution.[13] [NYT, 7/27/70] On the same day, a branch of the Bank of America is bombed in New York.[14]
July 28 - Bank of America HQ in NYC is bombed around 3:50 AM. WUO claims responsibility.
curious2
2013 Apr 9, 10:13am
maybe it was the CIA and FBI...
Well, since you mentioned them, at least those organizations were actually involved in killing people.
October 8 - Bombing of Marin County courthouse. WUO states this is in retaliation for the killings of Jonathan Jackson,
October 10 - A Queens traffic-court building is bombed. WUO claims this is to express support for the New York prison riots.
October 11 - A Courthouse in Long Island City, NY is bombed. An estimated 8 to 10 sticks of dynamite are used. A warning was given around 10 min. prior to the 1:23 AM blast by the WUO
October 14 - The Harvard Center for International Affairs is bombed by The Proud Eagle Tribe of Weather (later renamed the Women's Brigade of the Weather Underground).[18] WUO claims this is to protest the war in Vietnam. [NYT, 10/14/70, p. 30] The bombing was in reaction to Angela Davis' arrest and was the first action undertaken by an all-women's unit of WUO
December 5th - Five Weatherman are captured for trying to bomb First National City Bank of NY and other buildings on the anniversary of the death of Fred Hampton. These individuals subsequently plead guilty.
March 1 - The United States Capitol is bombed. WUO states this is to protest the invasion of Laos. President Richard M. Nixon denounces the bombing as a "shocking act of violence that will outrage all Americans." [NYT, 3/2/71]
October 15 - The bombing of William Bundy's office in the MIT research center. [NYT, 10/16/71]
May 18 - The bombing of the 103rd Police Precinct in New York. WUO states this is in response to the killing of 10-year-old black youth Clifford Glover by police.
September 28 - ITT headquarters buildings in New York and Rome, Italy are bombed. WUO states this is in response to ITT's alleged role in the Chilean coup earlier that month
May 31 - The Office of the California Attorney General is bombed. WUO states this is in response to the killing of six members of the Symbionese Liberation Army.
maybe it was the CIA and FBI...
Well, since you mentioned them, at least those organizations were actually involved in killing people.
what you really mean is WU, was responsible but never admitted to it.
and who else was running around the nation bombing state and federal buildings..
week after week after week for several years... who were the members found and pled guilty to having dynamite and nitro.
curious2
2013 Apr 9, 10:30am
what you really mean is
That is definitely not what I meant, as you should know since it's the opposite of what I wrote.
But you are illustrating something about how Democrats have held power lately. Although as Dan said neither side has a monopoly on ugliness, the critics of the left are disproportionately likely to be nuts. For example, spamming a thread with quotes from Wikipedia, or FortHood's fear of black people taking over his TV, and his insistence that gasoline prices are higher now than during the Bush/Cheney administration. You guys make the left look reasonable by comparison.
That makes the left look reasonable by comparison
with bombings across several years, month after month, week after week.
average citizen unwilling to travel to govt facilities for services for fear of a WU bomb.
yea.. fear and terror is about the only look you get ! But WU certainly came in 2nd
when you look at what Bin Laden did to NYC. Be proud of your side !
Here is a timely Daily Beast piece on the subject.
"How 60's Radicals Ended Up Teaching our Kids"
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/04/10/how-1960s-radicals-ended-up-teaching-your-kids.html
There is just no chance that any "ugly person" on the poltical Right with these kind of criminal records would be allowed within mile of teaching our kids at our major universities.
leo707
2013 Apr 10, 7:25am
Here is a timely Daily Beast piece on the subject.
"How 60's Radicals Ended Up Teaching our Kids"
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/04/10/how-1960s-radicals-ended-up-teaching-your-kids.html
There is just no chance that any "ugly person" on the poltical Right with these kind of criminal records would be allowed within mile of teaching our kids at our major universities.
It seems that the Daily Beast has the same moral lacking as you in being able to see the difference between what the Weather Underground did (which I don't condone), and someone who -- in violation of the Constitution of the United States of America -- funnels untold piles of cash and support a group known to be one of the worst human rights violators in the world.
I am sorry, but I don't see the equivalence between 70s radicals who actually did the time that the American justice system demanded of them and someone who took part in some of the most horrible war crimes imaginable. If your panties are in such a bunch over Weather Underground I don't see how you can justify that it is OK for Oliver North to have such a prestigious (and lucrative position) over at Faux News.
Why would someone from the political Right who has wiped the Constitution with his/her ass, and financed acts that make the Weather Underground seem like girl scouts, take a crappy teaching gig? There are much more lucrative and prestigious jobs available to them.
You really think trying to sell arms to Iran to free American hostages held
in Lebanon is the equivalent of blowing up government buildings, targeting
judges and murdering American citizens?
Not just wrong, but totally f'n wrong. The arms dealing was done before, during, and after the hostage scenario, and was also done while Iran was labeled a terrorist supporting government.
You should learn what really freed those hostages, because it wasn't what you think.
Ollie was trying to free American Hostages.
Weather Underground was killing Americans citizens.
One Cable news stations does not = Ivy League Schools.
If you are incapable of appreciating the difference, I can't help you.
Ollie was trying to free American Hostages.
Wrong. He was trying to fund the Contras because congress shut off the money supply for it.
And, ironically those hostages sued Iran and won because of legislation that was passed for that, and the forfeiture of assets was done by Bush 2, who said that terrorists shouldn't be prosecuted but tortured and run through his beloved kangeroo court.
I'll ask my friend who was one of the (severely tortured) hostages if you prefer. Or you can choose to become smarter and research the topic yourself.
Not just wrong, but totally f'n wrong. The arms dealing was done before,
during, and after the hostage scenario, and was also done while Iran was labeled
a terrorist supporting government.
You should learn what really freed those
hostages, because it wasn't what you think.
I also don't mind arming people to fight Marxists in South America.
The Weather Underground were Marxist trying to kill Capitalists in America.
leo707
2013 Apr 10, 7:52am
I also don't mind arming people to fight Marxists in South America.
Oh, so butchering, raping, terrorizing, and torturing civilians is A-OK in your book, just as long as the perpetrators share your political views?
Interesting...at least it is nice to know what moral ground you are working from.
The Weather Underground were Marxist trying to kill Capitalists in America.
As, discussed earlier in this thread this is not a proven point, and in-fact -- at least some of the people you are complaining about -- went out of their way to avoid killing anyone capitalist or not.
leo707
2013 Apr 10, 7:57am
One Cable news stations does not = Ivy League Schools.
If you are incapable of appreciating the difference, I can't help you.
You must be joking if you think that any one of the Weather Underground members would not immediately quit their ivy league teaching job if they were offered a television show with the pay, exposure and prestige as offered to Oliver North. Yes, you are correct in that they are not at all equivalent.
I also don't mind arming people to fight Marxists in South America.
The Weather Underground were Marxist trying to kill Capitalists in
America.
Yea, another fucked up and beyond insane theory of a right winger. Breaking numerous laws, which could have AND SHOULD HAVE led to the impeachment of both the president and vice president, trials and convictions, just to carry out their assinine ideological based agenda, against their ideological enemy, that in reality wasn't.
You McCarthy types wouldn't know a commie or marxist if you ever saw or met one, because anybody not like you is supposedly one of those.
Oh, so butchering, raping, terrorizing, and torturing civilians is A-OK in your
book, just as long as the perpetrators share your political views?
I said I don't mind arming people to fight back against Communists. I never said anything about rape, torture etc. You can't always control the folks you arm when fighting against a greater enemy (which Communism certainly was back in the 1980's). Just ask Obama about all the folks he armed in Libya who are now killing and torturing people including our ambassador. I trust you are keen to get to the bottom of Bengazi - right? Wonder what those CIA guys were doing just a few blocks away?
I said I don't mind arming people to fight back against Communists. I never
said anything about rape, torture etc. You can't always control the folks you
arm when fighting against a greater enemy (which Communism certainly was back in
the 1980's). Just ask Obama about all the folks he armed in Libya who are now
killing and torturing people including our ambassador. I trust you are keen to
get to the bottom of Bengazi - right? Wonder what those CIA guys were doing just
a few blocks away?
Your theory is lacking one major part.........proof. and yet you'll push that screwed up idea, even after you're proven wrong, time after time.
justme
2013 Apr 10, 8:09am
Just ask Obama about all the folks he armed in Libya who are now killing and torturing people including our ambassador.
Typical right-wing nonsense. You should be talking about Reagan and Thatcher arming Iraq to fight Iran, and then watch that come back to bite us in the ass with Iraq invading Kuwait. Oops.
just to carry out their assinine ideological based agenda, against their
ideological enemy, that in reality wasn't.
Up really is down with you! Great moniker dude.
Yep - Communism wasn't our ideological enemy!
Just ask all the Poles and Eastern Europeans who erected statues of Reagan and Thatcher thanking them for helping bring down the iron curtain.
But what did they know? They only lived it.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2011/11/21/anti-communist-polish-leader-lech-walesa-unveils-reagan-statue-in-warsaw/
Yep - Communism wasn't our ideological enemy!
So in your world, Nicoraugua was communist, and not a democratically elected government, and that's why you justify the overthrow of that government.
You rewriting history somehow makes you right?
So in your world, Nicoraugua was communist, and not a democratically elected
government, and that's why you justify the overthrow of that government.
You
rewriting history somehow makes you right?
Yup.
History has more than proven that Commies/Marxists = bad. Maybe you are still deluded to think that Communism wasn't one of the greatest political/economic evils in the modern world in terms of mountains of dead people?
Besides, the Soviets were certainly doing the same as us trying to overthrow liberal regimes around the planet. Communism was gaining alot of ground in Africa, Asia, Middle East and South/Central America at the time......and most certainly not all through the ballot box.
But just like our college faculties, many of the Democrats in Congress (particularly in the 70's and 80's) were unthinking useful idiots doiing everything in their power to keep South America mired in the failed Marxist/Communist ideology.
Hell - talk about ugly commies. We had freaking Ted Kennedy writing letters to the KGB trying to get help to defeat Reagan in 1984.
History has more than proven that Commies/Marxists = bad. Maybe you are still
deluded to think that Communism wasn't one of the greatest political/economic
evils in the modern world in terms of mountains of dead people?
While that may be true to some extent, funding the Contras to overthrow the democratically and legally elected government does NOT make that government, or any people in it, communist.
Calling them communist because you disliked them or they were ideologically your opposite, also does NOT make them communist. And doing anything to support that overthrow, which included dealing drugs and supplying terrorists with weapons, and doing anything while congress specifically passed numerous Boland amendments to prohibit any support, was illegal.
Hell - talk about ugly commies. We had freaking Ted Kennedy writing letters
to the KGB trying to get help to defeat Reagan in 2004.
I'm sure that you also have equal contempt for Nixon and Bush sr because of their kissing the feet of the Chinese government.
And coincidentally(and ironically) Nixon derailed the peace talks with N. Vietnam for an election ploy, just as Bush did for reagen in regards to the Iran hostages to secure the election for Reagan over Carter.
leo707
2013 Apr 10, 8:52am
I never said anything about rape, torture etc.
No need to, it was well known what type of people Ollie North was funneling support to. Hell, the CIA even advised them on how to justify killing of civilians, and attacking medical clinics. Hint: the CIA even suggested that they may want to hire criminals to do some of the dirty work. Hmmm...I wonder where they got the money to hire people that were willing to rape, mutilate and murder other humans.
Oh, that's right I almost forgot, you don't care just as long as the victims were people who have political beliefs different from yours...
I also don't mind arming people to fight Marxists in South America.
Oh, so butchering, raping, terrorizing, and torturing civilians is A-OK in your book, just as long as the perpetrators share your political views?
And, upisdown is correct the Sandinistas were not commies.
I never said anything about rape, torture etc.
No need to, it was well known what type of people Ollie North was funneling support to.
And we know full well the type of people our current government and Obama is funneling support to in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Pakistan, Egypt, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Jordan.........
Good grief. Love your selective faux outrage. We funneled money to the Soviets during WWII having a good idea what type of person Stalin was. Greater good and all that.
As long as Republicans insist on believing impossible things, like the queen in
Alice in Wonderland, and compete to show their loyalty to those beliefs,
Democrats can get away with practically anything.
Talk about believing in "impossible things". There can be no bigger fairy tale than those "cultists" who still think California pension liabilities are payable or that American Federal entitlements can work with our demographics if we just keep increasing taxes.
But you are totally right that Democrats can get away with anything when the Democrats and the lap-dog media run on super "important things" like gay marriage, contraception, guns.....
So kindly spare me your lame "cultist" meme thank you very much.
So in your world, Nicoraugua was communist, and not a democratically elected government, and that's why you justify the overthrow of that government.
You rewriting history somehow makes you right?
and some have forgotten it.
Sandinista's created a junta and abolished all opposition. The same members of the junta left the government and joined the opposition, called the Contras
Luis Alfonso Robelo Callejas (born October 11, 1939), a Nicaraguan businessman, was the founder of the Nicaraguan Democratic Movement (MDN).[1] He was one of the "moderates" on the five-members Junta of National Reconstruction that the Sandinistas claimed would rule Nicaragua following the overthrow of Anastasio Somoza Debayle. However, Robelo found that the real power lay with the FSLN National Directorate.
After resigning from the Junta on April 22, 1981, Robelo went into exile in 1982. He brought his MDN into Edén Pastora's rebel Democratic Revolutionary Alliance. Later, he split with Pastora, and joined the United Nicaraguan Opposition (UNO) with Arturo Cruz, and Adolfo Calero of the Nicaraguan Democratic Force. After UNO's collapse, he joined the directorate of the new Contra umbrella group, the Nicaraguan Resistance.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfonso_Robelo
Violeta Chamorro's rise to power began with the assassination of her husband when she took over as editor La Prensa. The paper was traditionally anti-Somoza, and initially backed the Sandinistas. As a result, she was invited to join the Sandinista First Coalition Junta, however she resigned in 1980 when she claimed to have felt slighted and manipulated by the junta, and shocked by their socialist agenda. She then turned to the opposition: the Contras.
Cutting taxes on the highest income recipients will somehow magically balance the budget, if the cult members all agree to believe that. Everything bad is always the fault of the other side, through mysterious mechanisms that are revealed only to our side. Cultists gain status within the cult by proving their loyalty to the cult's strangest beliefs.
Yet you have no economic theory to point to except the now extinct socialist policies which has failed many times over.
Yes, its been proven tax cuts allow for demand for capital goods by business which in turn hired greater amounts of employees. And given Reagans tax cut, business ordered greater amounts of computer hardware/software/services. In Silicon Valley, this was also part of the economic growth from 1980 to 2000. Jobs increased, incomes grew and wealth was created.. and we had increases to tax revenues as we also saw tax revenues increase post 2001.
Your kind of policies failed... they produced nothing
curious2
2013 Apr 10, 11:27am
you have no economic theory to point to except the now extinct socialist policies which has failed many times over... Your kind of policies failed... they produced nothing
I hesitate even to reply to this comment, because it's so absurd. The false choice between tax cuts for the 1% and "socialism" is a distraction. It's similar to your earlier attempt at substitution.
The tax rates of the Clinton era produced a balanced budget and sustained economic growth. W's tax shift and massive spending increases on both the military and medical industrial complexes produced deficits and recession followed.
You keep harking back to Reagan, but when he saw his tax cuts weren't producing the results that Arthur Laffer had predicted, Reagan raised taxes. Also, he left a legacy of deficits and debt, so his Republican successor Bush the elder had to raise taxes again. Then Clinton raised them again. Eventually, the budget balanced and the economy prospered.
I'm sure that you also have equal contempt for Nixon and Bush sr because of their kissing the feet of the Chinese government.
And coincidentally(and ironically) Nixon derailed the peace talks with N. Vietnam for an election ploy, just as Bush did for reagen in regards to the Iran hostages to secure the election for Reagan over Carter.
You mean how incompetent both Johnson, Humphrey and Carter were.. and later Mondale... how much of a failed policies compared to the outcome of Reagans work with Soviets.
Your still breathing air boy... your ass wasnt fried by Nuclear war... Thank Reagan for that.
The tax rates of the Clinton era produced a balanced budget
a "projection of a balanced budget" before the fiscal year starts is not a balanced budget...
when the outcome 12 months later is a deficit.
How many times do corporations make a budget that is profitable or breakeven only to show a loss at year end ?
Reagan raised taxes.
no, he reduced the number of tax rates, closed loopholes.
some had taxes lowered some saw increases.
and what did the democrats want ... what was their plan ... list them !
curious2
2013 Apr 10, 11:42am
In the late 1990s, America had a budget surplus, and in fact we were paying down debt. Since W's tax shift, we have borrowed more than ever before.
As for Reagan raising taxes, you can read all about it, including his own speech announcing it. Even Republicans do not deny the increase, which was passed by a Republican Senate; the official mythology concerns only his motive, but your variation goes even further, denying undeniable facts.
« First « Previous Comments 105 - 144 of 219 Next » Last » Search these comments
As ugly and despicable as the right is, it does not have a monopoly on ugliness. Recently, a successful female Princeton graduate, Susan Patton -- one of the first women to attend Princeton, by the way -- recently wrote a short, honest letter in which she advocated that Princeton women follow a long-term dating strategy in college rather than a short-term stating strategy. Patton argues that college is the best time for women to secure a husband and that who a woman marries will be instrumental in her happiness.
Of course, everything Patton said is undeniably true. College is the time in which both men and women have access to the greatest pool of eligible mates with similar interests and life situations, with the freedom to live anywhere, and the least emotional, financial, and physical baggage.
It is also indisputably true that mate selection is one of the most important, if not the most important, decision a man or woman will ever, ever make in his or her life. A happy marriage makes for a far better life than a miserable one. And as indicated the sheer ferociousness of the mating market, competition for high quality mates is extremely high for both straight men and women. (I would think that such competition would also be extremely high in homosexual and bisexual mating markets, but I'll leave that for another thread.) Not that being single can't be great, but even then, your family is an essential part of your life. If you do get married, that doesn't become less true.
So, Susan Patton advices that women at Princeton consider shifting from "playing the field" (short-term strategy) to "looking for a husband" (long-term strategy). Now, one can argue whether or not Patton is correct. There are many trade-offs in life including marrying young when your options are vast or waiting until your older and your options are limited to what's left over or in the secondary market. There are various pros and cons, and I'm sure this thread will spawn a discussion on those pros and cons and well as the nature of Patton's advice.
However, before we get to that, I would like to point out the utterly unacceptable behavior of the far left which seeks to silence the very discussion of this topic by making personal attacks on Patton and by making dumb Straw Man arguments including the false dichotomy that either a woman of college age must be completely disinterested in husband selection or she is forever doomed to live in the 1950s.
Such arguments and attacks show an irrational opposition to even listening to a discussion that creates a bubble around the left that is essentially the same as the bubble the right lives in. No facts, no ideas, no truth can get inside that bubble. And those living in the bubble must preserve the integrity of that bubble, no matter what the cost.
The letter Susan Patton wrote to The Daily Princetonian
By the way, doesn't Princetonian remind you of Praetorian? Or is that just me?
CNN Video: A nasty leftist attacks Patton
ABC News Video: Reactions to Patton's Letter
OK, have at it...