McCAIN'S Terror Connection - SCAREY!!

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-20-2007
McCAIN'S Terror Connection - SCAREY!!
38
Fri, 10-10-2008 - 2:15pm

Liddy has donated $5,000 to McCain’s campaigns since 1998, including $1,000 in February 2008. In addition, McCain has appeared on Liddy’s radio show during the presidential campaign, including as recently as May. An online video labeled “John McCain On The G. Gordon Liddy Show 11/8/07″ includes a discussion between Liddy and McCain, whom Liddy described as an “old friend.” During the segment, McCain praised Liddy’s “adherence to the principles and philosophies that keep our nation great,” said he was “proud” of Liddy, and said that “it’s always a pleasure for me to come on your program.”


Liddy called for the murder of federal agents, served time in jail, plotted murder - and after that, John McCain applauded him and took his money.


 

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-29-2003
Fri, 10-10-2008 - 7:13pm

Well said. It's shocking to me how how *common sense* is really *not so common* it scares me sometimes with people *in general* .

Avatar Image"The Small Peanu
iVillage Member
Registered: 05-29-2007
Fri, 10-10-2008 - 8:40pm

Great post!


Let's not also forget the fact that he was married in a Christian church and had his daughters baptized in one.


    

 4a696320.gif picture by rwctlc1107

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-08-2008
Sat, 10-11-2008 - 3:25am

((The only thing Liddy did was burglary and he paid for his mistake. ))

lol. Okay. burglary is now a "blip" on the radar? NO. It's a terrible CRIME! Ayers was found not guilty. NO crimes. Liddy is a terrorist: a person who terrorizes or frightens others. Isn't that what Palin and McCain have been doing over the past few weeks by inciting fear and suspicion with their lies and innuendo?

Throwing around such volatile words is irresponsible for McCain and his surrogates. The GOP is dividing the country, and they don't care. That is a huge advertisement that the GOP are no good for America. The past 8 years have shown that.

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-20-2007
Sat, 10-11-2008 - 8:41am

burglary is now a "blip" on the radar? NO. It's a terrible CRIME! Ayers was found not guilty. NO crimes.


Exactly.

 

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-05-2008
Sat, 10-11-2008 - 8:44am

What difference does it make if he is a Muslim? (Not that I believe he is, nor would I care one way or the other.)Why does that matter? And if he was a

Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-08-2008
Sat, 10-11-2008 - 9:36am
NO! Lapel-pins, book-reviews, the sixties and middle names are the ONLY important issues in this campaign, at least according to John McSame and Caribou Barbie, who'd rather you NOT look all that closely at the meltdown currently taking place as a direct result of unimpeded Republican dominance.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
Sat, 10-11-2008 - 12:24pm

Why aren't you scared of McCain?

 


Photobucket&nbs

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-24-2008
Sat, 10-11-2008 - 12:29pm
I have said I wouldn't care if he was Muslim and I don't. I do care though if the Muslims or people he associates with hate America and have a record of acting violent towards Americans. That does bother me.

 

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-31-2003
Sat, 10-11-2008 - 12:51pm

Ayers never went to trial, he was not found "not guilty".

NIU Ribbon   Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-08-2008
Sat, 10-11-2008 - 1:07pm
Oh, I'm all for honesty in regards to the facts.....but you didn't actually provide it. I can't tell whether that's because you're not aware of what actually took place, or because you're intentionally covering it up. I'm going to assume the former, because to assume the latter, we'd have to assume that you were chastising other for not being honest with the facts at the same time that you yourself weren't being honest with the same facts....and that's just an UGLY thing to think about a fellow boardie. So I won't go there.

However, even assuming the best by assuming that you're unaware of the facts, that still leaves the essential incorrectness of your claims to be dealt with. Specifically, this claim of yours:

He got off on technicalities b/c some people didn't do their job correctly.


It's simply incorrect to suggest that "some people didn't do their job(s) correctly," though you are correct when you say that Ayers "got off on a technicality." In reality, what happened is that the evidence against Ayers was collected through an illegal program called COINTELPRO. Perhaps you've heard of it? It was a decades-long covert program conducted by the FBI against American citizens in violation of existing laws and also in ethically questionable but legally murky areas which were subsequently the reason for the forming of the Church Committee after Watergate. COINTELPRO was too large to be summed up in one sentence, but its essential goal was to keep tabs on anyone whom J. Edgar Hoover (and, later Nixon as well) considered "domestic enemies." These people didn't have to be violent (as Ayers and the Weathermen unquestionably were). In fact, they were often explicitly non-violent activists or even sometimes just the political opponents of the conservatives who ran the FBI (and often the White House). In fact, the abuses of the COINTELPRO program were so pervasive and so egregious that the Select Committee's final report concluded the following:

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.


The specific tactics, used against Ayers and many, many other groups, included:

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.


It's important to note that it is 100% contrary to fact to say that the reason the evidence against Ayers was dismissed was because "people didn't do their jobs correctly." On the contrary, as I've demonstrated above, people - the FBI, specifically - WERE "doing their jobs correctly," according to the orders they were given. It's just that those orders themselves, handed down from the leadership of the organization and from civilian political leadership of the country, were flat-out illegal, not to mention despicable.