Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

1960's Michigan Coed: William Ayers 1965 Gang Rape [WARNING: GRAPHIC LANGUAGE]
FrontPageMagazine & WorldNetDaily ^ | 2008-10-08, 2006-01-04 | Donna Run & Aaron Klein

Posted on 10/15/2008 7:30:59 AM PDT by KayEyeDoubleDee

Edited on 10/15/2008 7:49:56 AM PDT by Sidebar Moderator. [history]

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-152 next last
To: mquinn

With that kind of “common sense” we are all ruined. Never excuse such behavior.


101 posted on 10/15/2008 9:18:54 AM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Baynative

“Character cannot be made except by a steady, long continued process.” ~ Phillips Brooks

You have to believe; not let them get you down and they will surely try.


102 posted on 10/15/2008 9:19:37 AM PDT by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: verity

Because we rule by law and not the mob.


103 posted on 10/15/2008 9:20:43 AM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: Huck
For a guy named Ghengis, you’re a kitten!

Even a lion will sometimes purr! ;-)

104 posted on 10/15/2008 9:21:36 AM PDT by Ghengis (Sarah Palin is more accomplished in every level in her life than Tina Fey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: Doctor Raoul

Part of the problem is that a huge part of the voting public in the US doesn’t remember the Weather Underground or that time period. And we don’t teach kids that stuff.


105 posted on 10/15/2008 9:24:06 AM PDT by brytlea (Obama--Keep the change!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Huck

She had to prove to him she wasn’t a bigot so he would let her leave.


106 posted on 10/15/2008 9:25:02 AM PDT by brytlea (Obama--Keep the change!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Baynative

First the media has not run this campaign. The people who run the media(not necessarily the media)have run this campaign.

I don’t find most of us here on FR uninformed. We know what’s going on. We need to fix it. And the only way to do that is to believe in your principles; etc. That’s where you start. Then you put it into practice.


107 posted on 10/15/2008 9:27:08 AM PDT by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: newheart
That kind of completely out of place name-calling

When moral monsters try to justify rape and kidnapping and split hairs over it I will call them foul ugly names.

108 posted on 10/15/2008 9:27:26 AM PDT by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: TomasUSMC

Yeah, right....she deserved it! /sarc

I have never been of a mind that men cannot understand something like rape, but I may just revise my opinion.


109 posted on 10/15/2008 9:30:47 AM PDT by brytlea (Obama--Keep the change!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: capn dino
Narcissist perhaps?
110 posted on 10/15/2008 9:44:41 AM PDT by brytlea (Obama--Keep the change!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: AndyJackson
moral monsters????

No more coffee for you this morning.
111 posted on 10/15/2008 10:02:16 AM PDT by newheart (The Truth? You can't handle the Truth. But He can handle you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March; Fiddlstix; PhilDragoo; Liz; onyx; potlatch; devolve; MEG33; Grampa Dave; ...

bump! ping! bump!


112 posted on 10/15/2008 10:03:27 AM PDT by MeekOneGOP (Obama, WHO is Bill Ayers and WHY are you still friends with him? Please RSVP asap!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: newheart

Rape ok with you?


113 posted on 10/15/2008 10:05:06 AM PDT by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: brytlea
She had to prove to him she wasn’t a bigot so he would let her leave.

Isn't that the fundamental reason given by the majority of Obama supporters?
114 posted on 10/15/2008 10:06:50 AM PDT by newheart (The Truth? You can't handle the Truth. But He can handle you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: newheart

” It means that she was a child of the sixties fraught with all of the conflicting messages that she received from her parents, her friends and the culture at large on issues of race and sex. “


In 1965 when this took place she was already 19 or 20 years old and a sophomore in college, I think that she was more a child of the fifties.


115 posted on 10/15/2008 10:07:15 AM PDT by ansel12 (America's favorite baby boomer, Sarah Barracuda. Hell, she's a natural-born world-shaker.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: newheart

It is like WFB once wrote. Principles have sharp edges and they cut deeply.


116 posted on 10/15/2008 10:07:35 AM PDT by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: brytlea
Coward. The most damning statement in the article is, "I thought how like him to send his girlfriend to make the bomb rather than do it himself. "

That should smart.

117 posted on 10/15/2008 10:09:37 AM PDT by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: AndyJackson

Man, you are relentless. Please note that I was the first person on the thread to say that the situation described in the article was inarguably rape. And I have consistently held that position. So, no, rape is not ok with me.

But when someone raises the question of whether the victim in this case holds any responsibility or whether her actions involved a kind of tacit consent, I think that is a legitimate question. I completely disagree that she was responsible and have stated as much, but it remains a legitimate question.

I pray that your hostility on this issue is not based in personal experience which would be completely understandable. But the name calling diminishes your case.


118 posted on 10/15/2008 10:14:17 AM PDT by newheart (The Truth? You can't handle the Truth. But He can handle you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: AndyJackson

But WFB was a master at intense, yet civil, discourse with erudition, humor, and courtesy—even toward those with whom he disagreed. He would not brook the ad hominem attack (though he might subtly sneak one in as a joke on his opponent.)


119 posted on 10/15/2008 10:17:13 AM PDT by newheart (The Truth? You can't handle the Truth. But He can handle you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
...I think that she was more a child of the fifties.

Judging from her choice of friends in 1965, I'd say she was still a child in the sixties.
120 posted on 10/15/2008 10:19:18 AM PDT by newheart (The Truth? You can't handle the Truth. But He can handle you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

Comment #121 Removed by Moderator

To: newheart
whether the victim in this case holds any responsibility or whether her actions involved a kind of tacit consent, I think that is a legitimate question,

You are sliding down the slippery slope that I am condemning. Once she has been kidnapped and imprisoned, every subsequent action is under duress until she is free to walk out in the open air. I don't care whether Ayers "asked" pretty please with sugar on top. It is under duress.

122 posted on 10/15/2008 10:23:09 AM PDT by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: bvw

No.

_I_ certainly don’t want a terrorist sympathizer in the White House. _You_ don’t. But I think we all here have to face the reality that this issue simply isn’t catching fire with the voting public.

McCain needs to tell the people how destructive the Obamalama’s economic policies would be to them and their children’s futures. That is what resonates. Not this.


123 posted on 10/15/2008 10:29:09 AM PDT by mquinn (Obama's supporters: a deliberate drowning of consciousness by means of rhythmic noise)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: KayEyeDoubleDee

bttt


124 posted on 10/15/2008 10:30:36 AM PDT by apocalypto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: newheart
He would not brook the ad hominem attack

Two points. First Buckley could be viciously condemnatory of those over whom he took moral umbrage. Go read him extensively.

Second you are misusing the term ad hominem. An ad hominem attack is a rhetorical fallacy defined as substiting name calling for argument on the substance of the issue.

But I am not arguing the substance of this issue, whether Ayers is guilt of rape, false imprisonmnet and kidnapping, according the stated facts. That is clear cut, if the facts are as stated. Furthermore, Ayers is under no legal jeopardy at this point on these facts.

Instead I am arguing that those who forward an arguement that maybe Ayers is innocent because the author was complicit are moral monsters. That is a substantive issue and not an ad hominem even though it is an argument directed against those who would let Ayers out of the vicegrip of what I hope is our collective moral code.

125 posted on 10/15/2008 10:33:06 AM PDT by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: AndyJackson

So how many times do I have to repeat this? I agree it was rape. I agree it was under duress. And I have even stated that the episode is only one of many reason that Bill Ayers deserves to (at the very least) spend the rest of his life in prison. The slope I am on ain’t slippery.

But in the words of that most eminent of philosophers, Archie Bunker, “Whatever.”


126 posted on 10/15/2008 10:34:05 AM PDT by newheart (The Truth? You can't handle the Truth. But He can handle you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: Question_Assumptions

Correct - he is almost certainly a psychopath according to his actions on many fronts.


127 posted on 10/15/2008 10:36:24 AM PDT by Triple (Socialism denies people the right to the fruits of their labor, and is as abhorrent as slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: KayEyeDoubleDee
"I got my parents to send me to a psychiatrist. "

Should have been a medical record of this....I wonder if it can be produced.

128 posted on 10/15/2008 10:38:34 AM PDT by cookcounty (Sing together now.......".............Barack.........the Magic A---CORN.......".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: newheart
We are not arguing that you said it wasn't rape. You didn't.

We are arguing whether it is an ad hominem attack to call moral monsters those who suggest that she was complicit.

129 posted on 10/15/2008 10:41:50 AM PDT by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: mquinn
Nothing Obama says can be trusted. It's not good advice to give to suggest discussing Obama's policies. It's a waste of time, and the reachable people know that.

Character issues like close pal terrorist bomber Ayers, personal Reverend of Hate Wright, favored club vote and grant fraudster Acorn, bribe giver Rezko-the-Syrian, the Obama-supporting corrupt Chicago machine etc etc are all getting out there, getting repeated, gaining steam.

Character is the issue.

130 posted on 10/15/2008 10:45:45 AM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: AndyJackson
Instead I am arguing that those who forward an arguement that maybe Ayers is innocent because the author was complicit are moral monsters.

Unless I missed it, I don't believe anyone suggested that Ayers is not guilty. That is precisely why I don't think they are moral monsters. And I have seen no one on this thread who "would let Ayers out of the vicegrip of ... our collective moral code." (Nice turn of phrase there, Andy.)

Finally, my contentious friend, name-calling, whether along side or as a substitute for an argument based on substance, is still correctly labeled as ad hominem.

And yes, Buckley could get a little cranky with those he disagreed with. But then I take great pleasure in engaging cranky people.
131 posted on 10/15/2008 10:48:45 AM PDT by newheart (The Truth? You can't handle the Truth. But He can handle you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: bvw

If he were that reprehensible, someone would have no problem disregarding the law.


132 posted on 10/15/2008 10:53:48 AM PDT by verity ("Lord, what fools we mortals be!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: newheart
You don't get it. You really don't. If Ayers said the moon is made of green cheese, a refutation based on the claim that Ayers is a terrorist is an ad hominem. It is irrelevant to the substantive issue of the composition of the moon.

The statement that Ayers is a terrorist because he set of bombs is not an ad hominem. It is merely definitional.

The claim that a journalist who argues to let Ayers off the hook is a moral monster is not an ad hominem. It is not directed to the substance of whether or not Ayers is a terrorist, but rather at the moral fiber of the journalist trying to justify terrorists and terrorism. Substitute one crime for another and a freeper for the journalist and you have the same argument.

133 posted on 10/15/2008 11:12:32 AM PDT by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: newheart

Your problem is that you crawled down into the gutter with your friends and now don’t like it pointed out that your clothing is bespattered.


134 posted on 10/15/2008 11:13:33 AM PDT by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: newheart

“Judging from her choice of friends in 1965, I’d say she was still a child in the sixties.”


Her “friends” were even older, and were like her, children of the fifties.


135 posted on 10/15/2008 11:14:50 AM PDT by ansel12 (America's favorite baby boomer, Sarah Barracuda. Hell, she's a natural-born world-shaker.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: newheart

LOL


136 posted on 10/15/2008 11:20:12 AM PDT by brytlea (Obama--Keep the change!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: Doctor Raoul

“... were among the worst with respect to the treatment of women.”

As were the Black Panthers.


137 posted on 10/15/2008 11:35:20 AM PDT by riverdawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: brytlea

You’d be surprised how:
Sometimes a foot in a mans nuts helps to clear his head.


138 posted on 10/15/2008 11:43:31 AM PDT by TomasUSMC ( FIGHT LIKE WW2, FINISH LIKE WW2. FIGHT LIKE NAM, FINISH LIKE NAM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: TomasUSMC

I agree with that, and I like to think I would do that, but as a 19 year old I’m not sure I would have had the courage I have as an old lady (and of course, I’m smart enough not to put myself in that position now either).

But, I think that it must be difficult for men to really grasp how one who is weaker and smaller can be intimidated just by the allusion of force. Even now, I don’t know what I would do in a situation where I could do what someone told me, or risk real physical injury or death. I mean, it’s very easy from the comfort of my computer chair to say, “Yeah, I would fight back” but I cannot second guess someone who is in that actual position.


139 posted on 10/15/2008 11:54:31 AM PDT by brytlea (Obama--Keep the change!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: Teacher317

The totality of the situation could lead to rape and kidnapping charges. If the DA got tough with his brother, his brother would have been forced to offer testimony about the coercion. Testimony that a credible threat was made regarding leaving the room is sufficient grounds for charging one or both people. In the 1960s climate, this incident would never have been prosecuted. In today’s climate, it would be prosecuted if the woman was credible and insisted on prosecution.


140 posted on 10/15/2008 12:35:14 PM PDT by businessprofessor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: riverdawg
Well the Black Panthers did hit Ayers with a 2 by 4!

When Fred Hampton was killed, the Black Panthers wanted the SDS to make posters, but the SDS was broke. OK, that's a good reason if you're not a radical thug, but...

So the Black Panthers wailed on Ayers and his buds. Ayers rationalized it as he had it coming due to his having benefited from “white privilege”.

141 posted on 10/15/2008 1:22:48 PM PDT by Doctor Raoul (Fire the CIA and hire the Free Clinic, someone who knows how to stop leaks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]

To: Ann Archy
OMG!! GOD HELP US.

Remember another "Perpetrator"???

"Just put some ice on it"!!!

142 posted on 10/15/2008 3:55:48 PM PDT by danamco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: KayEyeDoubleDee
At this point Bill and I had slept together just once.

That bothered me. What does she mean "At this point"? Did she sleep with him again later?

Yes, she was raped. No, she didn't practice due diligence to protect herself.

143 posted on 10/15/2008 4:20:06 PM PDT by FrogMom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: giotto

We can thank Ayers’ rehabilitation on his wealthy father. Were Ayers the son of the middle class, I can assure you he would have done hard time and would be a pariah.


144 posted on 10/15/2008 4:57:18 PM PDT by attiladhun2 (Obama is the anti-Reagan, instead of opposing the world's tyrants, he wants to embrace them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Huck
What does it mean when she says I had to prove to him I wasn't a bigot, so I went and laid down on the black guy's bed?

It happened a lot in the civil rights days with the Freedom Riders, etc. Young black males quickly realized that guilt trips worked on young white females, particularly the Jewish ones. They were easy...

145 posted on 10/15/2008 5:02:16 PM PDT by xJones
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: xJones

That’s fine. Point is, she consented.


146 posted on 10/15/2008 5:12:56 PM PDT by Huck (Teddy Roosevelt vs. Che Guevera)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: Huck
That’s fine. Point is, she consented.

That's fine, and it was also my point. She didn't kick, scream, yell, and by her own account she wasn't hit at all. And she laid down for the brother, who had enough decency to not take his turn. She consented because she didn't want to be called a bigot.

147 posted on 10/15/2008 5:19:14 PM PDT by xJones
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: xJones

We are in agreement. You ever see “Fritz the Cat”? Captures this whole phenomenon very well.


148 posted on 10/15/2008 5:30:27 PM PDT by Huck (Teddy Roosevelt vs. Che Guevera)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
...the older, less naive women on the left tend to be angry, thin-lipped harridans

The treatment they got when they WERE pretty and naive is what made them that way.

149 posted on 10/15/2008 5:41:13 PM PDT by nina0113 (If fences don't work, why does the White House have one?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: KayEyeDoubleDee

This was from forty years ago. Leftist chicks will charge you with sexual harassment in the blink of an eye.


150 posted on 10/16/2008 2:09:14 AM PDT by Luke21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-152 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson