Palin's Christian Values

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-27-2008
Palin's Christian Values
120
Sun, 10-05-2008 - 2:08pm

Apparently, Palin's bible is short of a few commandments. It looks like in her mad pursuit for power Palin has forgotten about the admonitions against lieing and bearing false witness. During the debate Biden continually admonished her for not telling the truth (lieing). She is now also calling Obama a terrorist. She knows she is bearing false witness but is repeating this statement over and over again and all of those alleged christian conservative applaud.

She is a absolute and total hypocrite, and so are her fundamentalist supporters. She has a lot of nerve telling other women that they will burn in hell for not supporting her.

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-27-2008
Tue, 10-07-2008 - 10:20pm

.>>> If Ayers is a terrorist why isn't he in jail? When was he tried and convicted?

The wiretap evidence against Ayres was inadmissible and he was released on a technicality. Ayres has admitted to committing the terrorist acts.

So he wasn't convicted of any terrorist acts? If he confessed, why isn't he in jail?
Where is the conviction?

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-07-2008
Wed, 10-08-2008 - 12:41am

>>> Are you voting for McCain/Palin despite of the endless lies and distortions?

Unlike Obama/Biden, I haven't heard endless lies and distortions from McCain/Palin.

>>> I consider Obama far more honorable than McCain/Palin together.

I consider Obama completely deceitful and completely lacking in integrity and honor.

>>> The Wright Ayers issues are nothing but exaggerations,distortions and lies.

The Wright/Ayres issues are very important examples of Obama's extreme radicalism, poor judgment and selfish ambition.

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-07-2008
Wed, 10-08-2008 - 12:49am

>>> Could you explain to me how his behavior is considered moral?

Sure...I think it was moral to meet Carol, get married and start a family...moral to serve his country...moral to put his honor and the lives of his fellow soldiers before his own...moral to come back, changed emotionally and physically, to his wife, who had changed emotionally and physically, and try to pick up the pieces of his life/relationship...moral to work at that relationship for an additional 6 years...moral to realize that the relationship was not salvageable and separate from his wife...and moral to meet and commit himself to his new wife and family.

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-07-2008
Wed, 10-08-2008 - 12:57am

>>> So he wasn't convicted of any terrorist acts? If he confessed, why isn't he in jail?
Where is the conviction?

No, charges were dropped due to prosecutorial misconduct. Yes, he confessed, he even wrote a book. I don't know why charges weren't refiled...perhaps the statute of limitations had run out, or perhaps the only evidence that could have convicted Ayres was tainted. The fact remains that Ayres admits to the bombings and remains unrepentant...and a friend of Obama's.

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-27-2008
Wed, 10-08-2008 - 1:00am

I am guessing that you didn't own a television during that time, or never read a newspaper. Even though it is hard for me to believe that you had not ever heard of Ayers until 3 months ago I certainly didn't say baloney to you. Please keep your hostility to yourself.

>> I grew up in the rural mid west. My family was not affluent and information was not ubiquitous. We received one regional newspaper. We could not afford magazine subscriptions. We owned a television but remember at that time there were only three channels. Television news did not provide detailed coverage. There were no home computers in the 60's. Indeed, I had never heard of Bill Ayers until a few months ago and from what I can tell he was not all that significant.

If McCain is elected everyone but the very rich will get a chance to experience my 1960's lifestyle. It wasn't fun.

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-27-2008
Wed, 10-08-2008 - 1:36am
Article published in Chicago sun Times, Sept 16, 2008
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-07-2008
Wed, 10-08-2008 - 8:39am
This is such a misconception.
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-08-2008
Wed, 10-08-2008 - 10:34am
I don't know why charges weren't refiled...perhaps the statute of limitations had run out, or perhaps the only evidence that could have convicted Ayres was tainted.


Charges weren't refiled because no one died. Murder is currently (as far as I know) the only crime for which the statute of limitations does not expire. The Pentagon bombing caused fairly extensive damage to the building (considering it was only a 2-pound bomb), including a water leak, which forced shut-down of enough of the building that the aerial bombardment of North Vietnam which was coordinated out of the Pentagon had to be discontinued for several days as a result of the damage....but no one was killed (or even injured). If anything, there are probably people alive in Vietnam because of that brief respite.
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-08-2008
Wed, 10-08-2008 - 10:51am
I don't know why charges weren't refiled...perhaps the statute of limitations had run out, or perhaps the only evidence that could have convicted Ayres was tainted.


I forgot to mention also that not only has the statute of limitations on any potential charges which might have been filed against Ayers long since expired, the second half of your sentence is also more true than you probably realize. The evidence wasn't merely "tainted," it was flat-out illegal. The program was called COINTELPRO, and though I'm sure there are people here old enough to have been of the age of reason when it was going on, even for them it was still more than thirty years ago, and memory dims, so it's often good to have a refresher regarding just how illegal our own authorities acted in their efforts against what was at the time called the "new left" - including the women's rights movement, black organizations (from the Black Panthers to MLK, all of them):

In the Final Report of the Select Committee COINTELPRO was castigated in no uncertain terms:
"Many of the techniques used would be intolerable in a democratic society even if all of the targets had been involved in violent activity, but COINTELPRO went far beyond that...the Bureau conducted a sophisticated vigilante operation aimed squarely at preventing the exercise of First Amendment rights of speech and association, on the theory that preventing the growth of dangerous groups and the propagation of dangerous ideas would protect the national security and deter violence.....

While the declared purposes of these programs were to protect the "national security" or prevent violence, Bureau witnesses admit that many of the targets were nonviolent and most had no connections with a foreign power. Indeed, nonviolent organizations and individuals were targeted because the Bureau believed they represented a "potential" for violence -- and nonviolent citizens who were against the war in Vietnam were targeted because they gave "aid and comfort" to violent demonstrators by lending respectability to their cause.

The imprecision of the targeting is demonstrated by the inability of the Bureau to define the subjects of the programs. The Black Nationalist program, according to its supervisor, included "a great number of organizations that you might not today characterize as black nationalist but which were in fact primarily black." Thus, the nonviolent Southern Christian Leadership Conference was labeled as a Black Nationalist-"Hate Group."

Furthermore, the actual targets were chosen from a far broader group than the titles of the programs would imply. The CPUSA program targeted not only Communist Party members but also sponsors of the National Committee to Abolish the House Un-American Activities Committee and civil rights leaders allegedly under Communist influence or deemed to be not sufficiently "anti-Communist". The Socialist Workers Party program included non-SWP sponsors of antiwar demonstrations which were cosponsored by the SWP or the Young Socialist Alliance, its youth group. The Black Nationalist program targeted a range of organizations from the Panthers to SNCC to the peaceful Southern Christian Leadership Conference, and included every Black Student Union and many other black student groups. New Left targets ranged from the SDS to the InterUniversity Committee for Debate on Foreign Policy, from Antioch College ("vanguard of the New Left") to the New Mexico Free University and other "alternate" schools, and from underground newspapers to students' protesting university censorship of a student publication by carrying signs with four-letter words on them."

According to attorney Brian Glick in his book War at Home, the FBI used four main methods during COINTELPRO:
  1. Infiltration: Agents and informers did not merely spy on political activists. Their main purpose was to discredit and disrupt. Their very presence served to undermine trust and scare off potential supporters. The FBI and police exploited this fear to smear genuine activists as agents.

  2. Psychological Warfare From the Outside: The FBI and police used myriad other "dirty tricks" to undermine progressive movements. They planted false media stories and published bogus leaflets and other publications in the name of targeted groups. They forged correspondence, sent anonymous letters, and made anonymous telephone calls. They spread misinformation about meetings and events, set up pseudo movement groups run by government agents, and manipulated or strong-armed parents, employers, landlords, school officials and others to cause trouble for activists.

  3. Harassment Through the Legal System: The FBI and police abused the legal system to harass dissidents and make them appear to be criminals. Officers of the law gave perjured testimony and presented fabricated evidence as a pretext for false arrests and wrongful imprisonment. They discriminatorily enforced tax laws and other government regulations and used conspicuous surveillance, "investigative" interviews, and grand jury subpoenas in an effort to intimidate activists and silence their supporters.

  4. Extralegal Force and Violence: The FBI and police threatened, instigated, and themselves conducted break-ins, vandalism, assaults, and beatings. The object was to frighten dissidents and disrupt their movements. In the case of radical Black and Puerto Rican activists (and later Native Americans), these attacks—including political assassinations—were so extensive, vicious, and calculated that they can accurately be termed a form of official "terrorism."
    The FBI also conducted more than 200 "black bag jobs", which were warrantless surreptitious entries, against the targeted groups and their members.

In 1969 the FBI special agent in San Francisco wrote Hoover that his investigation of the Black Panther Party (BPP) revealed that in his city, at least, the Black nationalists were primarily feeding breakfast to children. Hoover fired back a memo implying the career ambitions of the agent were directly related to his supplying evidence to support Hoover's view that the BPP was "a violence-prone organization seeking to overthrow the Government by revolutionary means".

Hoover was willing to use false claims to attack his political enemies. In one memo he wrote: "Purpose of counterintelligence action is to disrupt the BPP and it is immaterial whether facts exist to substantiate the charge."

The Final report of the Church Committee concluded:
"Too many people have been spied upon by too many Government agencies and too much information has been collected. The Government has often undertaken the secret surveillance of citizens on the basis of their political beliefs, even when those beliefs posed no threat of violence or illegal acts on behalf of a hostile foreign power. The Government, operating primarily through secret informants, but also using other intrusive techniques such as wiretaps, microphone "bugs", surreptitious mail opening, and break-ins, has swept in vast amounts of information about the personal lives, views, and associations of American citizens. Investigations of groups deemed potentially dangerous -- and even of groups suspected of associating with potentially dangerous organizations -- have continued for decades, despite the fact that those groups did not engage in unlawful activity. Groups and individuals have been harassed and disrupted because of their political views and their lifestyles. Investigations have been based upon vague standards whose breadth made excessive collection inevitable. Unsavory and vicious tactics have been employed -- including anonymous attempts to break up marriages, disrupt meetings, ostracize persons from their professions, and provoke target groups into rivalries that might result in deaths. Intelligence agencies have served the political and personal objectives of presidents and other high officials. While the agencies often committed excesses in response to pressure from high officials in the Executive branch and Congress, they also occasionally initiated improper activities and then concealed them from officials whom they had a duty to inform.

Governmental officials -- including those whose principal duty is to enforce the law --have violated or ignored the law over long periods of time and have advocated and defended their right to break the law.

The Constitutional system of checks and balances has not adequately controlled intelligence activities. Until recently the Executive branch has neither delineated the scope of permissible activities nor established procedures for supervising intelligence agencies. Congress has failed to exercise sufficient oversight, seldom questioning the use to which its appropriations were being put. Most domestic intelligence issues have not reached the courts, and in those cases when they have reached the courts, the judiciary has been reluctant to grapple with them."
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-16-2008
Wed, 10-08-2008 - 2:44pm
ITA - I grew up during the same time

Pages