Comments on: Episodic Notoriety–Fact and Fantasy

By: Robbins Mitchell

Robbins Mitchell — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 03:54:22 +0000

Billy,I just wanted you to know that I’m still dragging your whore’s filthy lower class pussy through the mud like a piece of garbage and telling people what a bloodthirsty little punk she’s been spreading her criminal legs for all these years…..how long do you think it’s going to be before your family finds out that you don’t have the balls to do anything about it?…..I’m a patient man,Billy….I’ve got lots of time to flush you and your whore down history’s political toilet…..how much time do you have?….how long do you think you would live if your little ‘revolution’ actually did break out?….got any idea how many people have put you and your whore on their hit list?

By: d brier

d brier — Fri, 30 May 2008 22:32:58 +0000

billy ayers and his seriously disturbed wife are now targeted marxists, and they damn well know they’re now fair/ in-season game — though, crazily, vicariously, they seem to enjoy it. billy’s screwball father, Tom and his silly wife, sequestered and abetted them and thus deserve the American public’s most malevolent chagrin. Tom, may you, you complete asshole, and your goofy wife, and your felonius children, and all their homicidal friends — may you rot and then die slowly, ignominiously. billy’s got the IQ of a ferrott .

By: d brier

d brier — Thu, 29 May 2008 01:03:56 +0000

Can’t believe this site’s gibberish. billy is an avowed anti-American phoney. So can’t this nonsensical site see this faux “Che” wanna be. He’s a rich father’s (Tom Ayers’ wayward son, whom Tom hid and then saw fit to equip with rigged scholastic credentials. Hyde Park knew billy wasn’t qualified for a janitor’s job. Tom Ayers, reared in Chicago politics, covered for his screwball son, billy’s psychotic wife, and billy’s wayward brothers. But billy continues to crow about wanting to murder/ maim folks like me, my wife, kids and grandkids. You know, I’d like to meet with billy boy and his lovely wife and his crazy brothers much like obama would. Maybe we could figure out what billy’s and his lovely wife’s problem is with me and my family and maybe i could solve billy’s and his wife’s problem. Maybe they would finally see or maybe not. For sure, though, vermin stink, don’t they, like hell in their own time. We’ll get it all settled, for sure.

By: julia

julia — Sat, 24 May 2008 14:58:14 +0000

Speaking as an anti-war liberal, this is pathetically weak. Your ideology didn’t put the blood on your hands, your tactics did. You made the decision that you could take life if you framed it as an anti-war statement, and people did in fact die.

I’m not questioning people who fought the war by peaceful means or what they did. I’m questioning you and what you did.

By all accounts you’ve done a lot of good things since, but it’s far from a sophistry to say you’re defending your violent acts, and you really need to stop it.

By: Byron Jack

Byron Jack — Sat, 10 May 2008 16:47:22 +0000

America kills thousands of innocent Iraqiis and calls it installing Democracy.

When you never question the actions of the state you are complicit.

By: Matt

Matt — Wed, 07 May 2008 17:56:49 +0000

I would like clarification on a few points Mr. Ayers. Professor you stated,” In the end the U.S. military was defeated, and the war ended.” This was in reference to Viet Nam. Would you please explain to me how a military would define defeat? The U.S. military never suffered a “defeat” in Viet Nam. Now before the rhetoric starts, lets look at the reason in going to S.E. Asia. And no that is not a missed key stroke, S.E. Asia is where the conflict insued. The U.S. Military, following the orders of YOUR elected officials, deployeed forces to Viet Nam. The overall mission was to stop the spread of communism in S.E. Asia. I ask how many countries in S.E. Asia fell to communism while there were U.S. forces deployeed on the ground? The fall of Saigon in ‘75 was not a defeat of U.S. Forces. There was a contingent of Marines defending the embassy, and a small number of “advisors” with the operational forces of South Viet Nam. Considering that a defeat would be similar to your favorite football team losing a game when only the punter showed up for the game. Calling the fall of Saigon a defeat in military terms is a reach.
I completely agree wtih your definition of terrorism. Please, for those of us who are unable to understand, explain how you have not committed acts of terrorism, and therefore are not a terrorist. The U.S. involvement in any conflict can be descibed as terrorism. Any conflict, starting with the Revolution. Although, here is the caveat, we are not looking to force, that means by scaring, strong arming, threatening, and ruling with out elections the populace of that foreign state,to agree with the US government. I am certain that we the people, have the greatest country in the world. There is undoubtedly room for improvement. I don’t believe that your beliefs and convictions are that of the people. Your convictions are to be applauded. Your convictions run parallel with those of us who have defended this country with military service. WE, you and I, have both believed in, and loved something enough to KILL for it. I, and those that have gone before me, have given you the freedom to defame and disgrace our flag and our freedom. With heavy hearts, sleepless nights, and the memories of brothers that never returned to the land that they killed for, YOU ARE WELCOME!
Semper Fidelis NON SIBI SED PATRAIE

By: Michael Hureaux

Michael Hureaux — Wed, 07 May 2008 00:02:50 +0000

You pricks accusing Ayers of being Pol Pot and shit have no sense of proportion, and certainly no sense of history. What the hell is wrong with some of you geniuses?

By: Mark D

Mark D — Thu, 01 May 2008 14:12:57 +0000

I read your blog from March, where you offered a decent apology. I withdraw my comment above. I personally think your penance should be to have to spend the rest of your life studying the minutia about when violence is justified. Why were your actions wrong? could they have been right? When is violence right? Those are tough questions. Offering people something constructive in exchange for violence seems like good pennance– for an intellectual that would mean answers to very hard questions.

By: d brier

d brier — Thu, 01 May 2008 01:30:46 +0000

You censor, don’t touch my words anymore. billy is a transparently harmless, confused little mind . Its his wife we all worry about. Why billy protects this lune is what indites him, not his fantasies about why he thinks he deserves what Tom arranged for him and how he thinks he beat the system like some cheap comic book hero. little billy is just wiley enough to know he’s about to get his wee cock caught in the proverbial ringer. God help this idiot’s innocent kids now being raised by his sicko wife and their afflicted circle. What losers these humans be. What a waste of life. Censor, heed: don’t change my words again. Its a free country, just ask your moronic billy, when he’s sobor again. Its not a secret honey.

By: d brier

d brier — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 19:45:15 +0000

Think this site’s censor is a stalinist who doesn’t allow honest reportee. billy and his university are now up on the national periscope for all to see. No longer is he, nor his screwball father, brother, and mentally distraught wife, a foregone and forgotten enigma. billy, despite his need for pseudo fame/anonymity, is about to become the most virulent , anti-American specimen our country will ever hold under its microscope. Billy’s intimate connects with Obama will become so well known during the general election that the supercilious billy will expose his federally funded university to the point where they ask his undistinguished ass to leave — or risk their federal funding. So will billy and his weird wife go underground again (meaning in his nutty father’s basement), or will he and his screwball wife join the national guard of venezuela? What a loss this will be. To the censor: Quit editing my remarks and please play fair here.