Bill AYERS admits (again!) that he wrote Dreams, Obama's biography. http://tinyurl.com/4fym7pz #tcot #phnm #decobama

#birthers don't get sarcasm. RT @Tallulahstarr: Bill AYERS admits...that he wrote Dreams.. http://tinyurl.com/4fym7pz #tcot #phnm #p2

@_ccm That wasn't sarcasm. #birthers #tcot #phnm #p2

RT @Tallulahstarr: @_ccm That wasn't sarcasm. #birthers #tcot #phnm #p2 |Yeah, it was. http://politi.co/18g3kM Been telling it a long time.

.@Tallulahstarr But thanks for proving my point. #birthers #tcot #phnm #p2

@_ccm No, it wasn't. #birthers #tcot #phnm #p2

@_ccm You proved nothing. Just like the other 364 days of the year. #birthers #tcot #phnm #p2

RT @TheFumingLib: @TallulahStarr Seriously, you could not be more stupid or more delusional. I suggest you blow your brains out. #P2 | #phnm

RT @TheFumingLib: @frankybean @TallulahStarr You could try tweeting that again inEnglish. I don't understand Ebonics.| Racist, too?#p2 #phnm

Ayers admits (again) he wrote Obama bio
Weather Underground terrorist speaks to new generation of SDS

By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2011 WorldNetDaily

NEW YORK – Bill Ayers has once again suggested he was the author of Barack Obama's celebrated autobiography, even though the admission could be explained away as a mocking irony designed only to goad Ayers's critics by yet another false admission he was the president's ghostwriter.

At the conclusion of a speech sponsored by the Students for a Democratic Society at Montclair State University in New Jersey, the former Weather Underground bomber gleefully claimed credit for writing Obama's "Dreams from My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance."

As shown in a video clip on YouTube, Ayers, responding to a question about "Dreams," said, "Did you know that I wrote it, incidentally?"

In particular, I remember him saying that what he did wasn't really "terrorism," because it's not terrorism according to Ayers if nobody dies.

In particular, I remember him saying that what he did wasn't really "terrorism," because it's not terrorism according to Ayers if nobody dies.

I seriously object to the definition of "terrorism" as including things, such as destruction of property, that would not induce "terror" in any reasonable person. For example, the primary definition of "terror" in the Oxford English Dictionary is "[t]he state of being terrified or greatly frightened; intense fear, fright, or dread. Also, with a and pl., an instance of this." The only thing which arouses this feeling in me is the fear of imminent death or bodily harm.

I know that currently, the U.S. government has redefined "terrorism" to the point that anything, including annoying vandalism, could constitute "terrorism" if committed for a political end. I do not find this definition particularly sane. The term "terrorism" should be reserved for the most heinous of offenses, which reasonably induce horror and extreme fright in reasonable people.

I wouldn't say absolutely that a reasonable definition of "terrorism" couldn't include the bombing of unoccupied buildings, since this could quite reasonably induce such extreme fright in people who occupy those buildings, who would have no particular reason not to fear that the perpetrators would not maintain ideological purity about only bombing unoccupied buildings.

I also have a certain bias, in that I have friends who were involved in Students for a Democratic Society (who stridently reject the "Weather Underground" label as essentially made-up) and who participated in such actions against the Vietnam War. Their legal issues were long ago resolved.

I seriously object to the definition of "terrorism" as including things, such as destruction of property, that would not induce "terror" in any reasonable person. For example, the primary definition of "terror" in the Oxford English Dictionary is "[t]he state of being terrified or greatly frightened; intense fear, fright, or dread. Also, with a and pl., an instance of this." The only thing which arouses this feeling in me is the fear of imminent death or bodily harm.

I know that currently, the U.S. government has redefined "terrorism" to the point that anything, including annoying vandalism, could constitute "terrorism" if committed for a political end. I do not find this definition particularly sane. The term "terrorism" should be reserved for the most heinous of offenses, which reasonably induce horror and extreme fright in reasonable people.

Abortion clinic bombers are terrorists; it doesn't matter if they blow up the buildings while they're unoccupied. Eric Robert Rudolph was a terrorist, and not just because of the two people who died in the Olympic park bombing here in Atlanta. And Bill Ayers was a terrorist, who refuses not only to apologize for his actions, but even to acknowledge that his youthful hobby of BLOWING UP BOMBS was terrorism. What he did was disgusting and wrong, and it disgusts me further that forty years later, he won't admit it was wrong.

Exclusive: Bill Ayers On the Weathermen, Obama’s Crap Job & More ...

There was a big hullabaloo during the 2008 presidential election over your relationship to Obama. What is or was your relationship to him?

I brief him every Monday in the White House, and he never listens! No. The truth is exactly what he said and what the campaign said in 2008. David Axelrod said we were friendly, that was true; we served on a couple of boards together, that was true; he held a fundraiser in our living room, that was true; Michelle [Obama] and Bernardine were at the law firm together, that was true. Hyde Park in Chicago is a tiny neighborhood, so when he said I was “a guy around the neighborhood,” that was true. Today, I wish I knew him better and he was listening to me. Obama’s not a radical. I wish he were, but he’s not.

But were you excited when Obama was elected president in 2008?

Politics has very little to do with ideals. All through the 2008 campaign, candidate Obama said, “I’m a pragmatic, middle-of-the-road, pragmatic, compromising politician.” The right looked at him and said, “No! He’s a secret Muslim, secret socialist who pals around with terrorists and has a soft spot for Palestine,” while the left looked at him and said, “I think he’s winking at me.” Why did they think he was winking at them? He was saying the truth. And the other thing he said that was very telling in 2008 was he was asked by Stephanopoulos, “Who would Martin Luther King Jr. support?” And Obama’s response was, “He wouldn’t support any of us. He’d be in the streets building a movement for justice.” That strikes me as something only a community organizer would say, and it strikes me as absolutely true. Why should everyday people spend our time looking worshipfully at the sites of power we have no access to: the White House, the Pentagon, Wall Street, and Congress? We spend too little time looking at the power we do have access to: the community, the classroom, the streets, the farm, and the workplace—and that’s where we ought to spend our energy. Voting for someone in the two great war-making, capitalist parties? Why would they do what you think they ought to do? So to say Obama’s smarter, more compassionate, a more decent human being, that’s all true. But it has nothing to do with policy.

But you did vote for Obama, yes?

I voted for Obama twice, actually. I had voted for a Democrat once before in my life, George McGovern. I had no illusions that Obama was going to bring us anything, but I did want to cast my vote for the first African-American president, which I thought would strike a small blow to white supremacy, and I wanted to help create the conditions for a more just government. But I haven’t been disappointed for one minute because I had no expectations. He said, “I will sit in the throne of Empire,” and that’s exactly what he’s doing.

I just finished a novel, The Ghosts of Belfast by Stuart Neville. Compared to what the people of Northern Ireland, Britain, and Ireland had to go through, Americans experienced almost nothing worth calling "terrorism" during the years of the Vietnam War protests. There was violent, deadly governmental repression.

I would not be terribly surprised to find that some of the people now decrying the Weathermen and Ayres were contributors to the IRA during the Troubles. In fact, the stream of American financial support for the IRA did not dry up until the bombing of Omagh; some say that financial support continued on a smaller scale until 9/11/2001.