Wednesday, October 22, 2008


Bill Ayer's name is often preceded by the term "unrepentant terrorist". What does that mean exactly, you may wonder? Ayers has gone out of his way to emphasize in his many interviews that his pathetic little group did not kill many people (except members of the group who had an on the job work accident at their bomb factory in Greenwich Village). He has also said he wished they had "done more"; and there is evidence that at the end of their terror run, they planned to blow up a number of people at a dance at Fort Dix.

One of the commenters in a previous post (Beverly) supplied this link related to the Weather Underground. It is from an eyewitness to one of their meetings who later wrote a book (Larry Grathwohl and Frank Reagan, ed., Bringing Down America (New Rochelle, New York: Arlington House, 1976). The following are excerpts of an interview with Grathwohl from a video "No Place To Hide" made some years ago:
Grathwohl: They thought I was a demolition expert and I never led them to believe otherwise. As a kid growing up my grandmother … (fades during Griffin narration) …if you lit it or whatever, but they had no experience at all which was a tremendous advantage to me.
Griffin: Larry Grathwohl became a member of the Weather Underground organization as an undercover operative for law enforcement agencies in Cincinnati. His role within the organization was to carry directives from the Central Committee to the operating units in the field.[5]
Grathwohl: Most of the people that had no prior experience, let's say the average Weatherman, if there is such a thing, they were sent to Cuba for training in Cuba. When the Venceremos Brigades were first being organized, I had a part in that, myself and a guy named Robert Burlingham were assigned the responsibility for organizing the first and second Venceremos Brigade in Ohio. I was told at that time that the only reason that the Venceremos Brigade existed was so that the Weathermen could send people and other terrorist organizations in the United States could send people to Cuba for training. Also, Tri‑Continental played a significant role in Weathermen activities, the leadership was in constant contact with Tricontinentale and that particular organization is funded by the DGI. I was told after my experience with the Weathermen that many of the people sent to Cuba on the Venceremos Brigade were approached by agents of the DGI and I also know that the DGI is controlled by the KGB.
Griffin: As the Soviet connection with international terrorism became increasingly obvious, the KGB made a tactical decision to establish training centers in countries that, generally, are not regarded as Communist. In this way, the Soviets could disclaim responsibility.
An example is Libya, under the dictatorship of Muammar Quadafi. Quadafi's army and air force are almost entirely supplied by the Soviet Union.
Altogether, there are 5,000 military personnel from the Eastern Communist Bloc and from Cuba.[6] Libya received $2.5 billion worth of arms from the Soviets between 1974 and 1981, an amount far in excess of its own internal needs. Most of these arms have moved through Libya and into the terrorist network.
The Provisional IRA in Ireland has been receiving weapons from Libya at the race of over $5 million per year. They received their first Russian helicopter and rocket launchers as early as 1972.
Quadafi has maintained three separate training camps which are staffed by personnel from the Soviet Union and East Germany. He has provided instructions, money, or weapons to practically every terrorist group in the world. He has been one of the primary financial sponsors of the PLO, and he openly has called for the death of any Arab leader who is friendly to the United States.
Angola is another country that, although not officially a Soviet satellite, nevertheless serves as a Communist outpost in Africa. In September of 1981, South African troops made a surprise sweep 60 miles into Angola to destroy a guerrilla training base from which terrorists had been conducting operations. It was a highly productive raid which cleared away any doubt about Communist involvement in African terrorism. Killed in the fighting were two Soviet military officers, and a Soviet Sergeant‑Major was taken prisoner. Also taken were 50 Soviet tanks and armored vehicles and over 2,000 tons of ammunition, rifles, rocket launchers, anti-aircraft guns, and land mines. It is now known that, in Southern Africa alone, there are 3,800 Soviet and East German military personnel and, from Cuba, more than 28,000 soldiers.[7]
By the end of the 1970s, the KGB had succeeded in establishing terrorist support centers like these, not only in Libya and Angola, but also in Algeria, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, South Yemen and Mozambique.
The problem of moving terrorists from one country to another without detection by the authorities has become the specialty of an organization headquartered in Paris called the Curiel Apparatus. Henri Curiel was an Egyptian Communist who had been expelled from Egypt by King Farouk. He went to France where he established an underground railroad for draft dodgers and deserters, and, later, during the Algerian war, for terrorists of the FLN.[8]....

Grathwohl: I brought up the subject of what's going to happen after we take over the government. You know, we become responsible for administrating, you know, 250 million people. And there was no answer. No one had given any thought to economics. How are you going to clothe and feed these people? The only thing that I could get was that they expected that the Cubans, the North Vietnamese, the Chinese and the Russians would all want to occupy different portions of the United States. They also believed that their immediate responsibility would be to protect against what they called the counter-revolution. And they felt that this counter-revolution could best be guarded against by creating and establishing re-education in the Southwest where we would take all of the people who needed to be re‑educated into the new way of thinking and teach them how things were going to be. I asked, "Well, what is going to happen to those people that we can't re‑educate, that are die-hard capitalists?" And the reply was that they'd have to be eliminated and when I pursued this further, they estimated that they'd have to eliminate 25 million people in these re‑education centers. And when I say eliminate, I mean kill 25 million people. I want you to imagine sitting in a room with 25 people, most of whom have graduate degrees from Columbia and other well-known educational centers and hear them figuring out the logistics for the elimination of 25 million people and they were dead serious. (emphasis mine...and Beverly's)

This is another perfect example of malignant narcissistic idealism, or sociopathic 'selflessness' that I have written about. This is the form of narcissism that dominates the mind of a collectivist like Bill Ayers and his ilk (of which I firmly believe Barack Obama is an example).

The typical leftist collectivist--i.e., of the 'peaceful' antiwar, America-hating, crowd--considers his or her sociopathy as a form of altruism, or "selflessness".

Let me quote extensively from my earlier post because it is highly relevant to the window into the minds of Ayers' Weather Underground:

In "Tne Narcissistic Synthesis" I proposed that the optimal synthesis of the two opposing ethical imperatives of the developing self--the Grandiose Self (GS) and the Idealized Object (IO) -- was Individualism, or as it is sometimes called, "Enlightened Self-Interest". The two ethical imperatives that derive from the GS and IO, and which form the dialectic are in the table below in red and blue:

The study of Ethics is concerned with the question of what constitutes ethical ( good) human behavior; as well as unethical (bad) human behavior.

Through Ethics, we are able to develop our values and take action in the real world to pursue those values. The study of Ethics answers such questions as: "Should I only pursue my own happiness?" or "Should I sacrifice myself for the greater good of others?"

These two questions are at the heart of the narcissistic dialectic in the area of Ethics, and they appear to be completely the opposite of each other. But somehow, a healthy individual must find a way to creatively synthesize an effective and life-affirming value system from both sides of that ethical dialectic.

It is not an exaggeration to say that most of human history has been a battle between forces which advocate one or the other of these two absolute ethical imperatives. The self-GS says unequivocally that I should always pursue my own happiness, regardless of its impact on others; while the self-IO demands that I always sacrifice myself for others and/or the "greater good"; or, that an individual's happiness is nothing compared to the happiness of others.

Individuals, as they go through life, often run head-on into this seeming dilemma; and if they do not find a way to resolve it within their psychological self they will forever bounce back and forth between what I have termed "sociopathic selfishness" and "sociopathic selflessness".

It is my contention that the adoption of either of the extreme ethical systems derived from the developing self will inevitably leads to disastrous consequences for both for the individual and for society, and is the cause of most human suffering. Both extremes represent a form of malignant narcissism with which our world is plagued.

The unopposed Grandiose Self gives rise to tyrants big and small; to megalomaniacal dictators and dictator wannabees; to unbelievable corporate greed and plundering; and to the typical criminal sociopath in all his/her glory. The damage that such individuals do in individual relationships, in business, in politics and in all spheres of human behavior, is well documented and appreciated in the world. Most children are abjured repeatedly never, never to be "selfish". To always consider others. Laws are set up to protect people from victimization at the hands of these unrestrained grandiose monsters, unable to see other people as distinct individuals separate from their own self. These "others" exist only as the means to achieving their own desires.

But far more menacing to humanity is the unrestrained IO, which has unlimited potential to cause human misery and death; and whose destructiveness we have seen dominate the 20th century. The countless dead bodies that are the direct result of this form of malignant narcissism are quickly forgotten because they died as some nations, religions, ideologies attempted to implement their IDEAL in the real world.

This second type of evil is more subtle, and it derives from the ethics of the IO side of the self. The IO also does not see other people as distinct individuals with needs and desires of their own, but only as fodder for the expression of an IDEAL; or as pawns for the wishes of a deified GS. People with this narcissistic defect completely reject the needs of the individual and enslave him or her to the service of their IDEAL. Eventually, the enslavement--whether religious or secular--snuffs out human ambition, confidence, energy, self-esteem, and life. These mindlessly malignant "do-gooders" far more harm than good and their ideologies can lead to genocidal practices and unbelievable atrocities on a grand scale, all in the name of an IDEAL or GOD.

The malignant and sociopathic potential of both the GS and IO are inherent in the human species. They are flip sides of the same human coin, you see. One side cannot exist without the other. Either a way is found to synthesize the two, or an individual will forever flip-flop between them--coldly and viciously tyrannical toward all humans in pursuit of his own desires on the one hand; and on the other, coldly and viciously determined no matter what the cost in human lives and suffereing to implement his IDEAL in all human society.

We are always warned about the individual narcissitic sociopaths; but most people don't appreciate the sociopathic qualities of groups, religions, nations, and ideologies that demand all individuals sacrifice themselves for the good of the latest utopian ideal or some blood-thirsty god.

In our modern world, the Islamic Jihadists have perfected this ethical demand; and the suicide-bomber is the ultimate expression of their ethics. (see the post "Union With An Evil God" and "Narcissistic Rage and Awe" for more on this).

But they are not alone in their disregard and contempt for the individual, who they see as only existing to serve the IDEAL, or to bring about the utopia/paradise/caliphate/[insert fantasy delusion here].

Extremes of both the political left and the political right are also dominated by the malignant narcissism of the GS and the IO.

If we go back to our understanding of healthy narcissistic development, we appreciate that the GS and the IO in adults is a result of the failure of narcissistic synthesis. The developmental process that should lead to a healthy self is broken; or fractured; or poisoned.

This can happen under many and varied circumstances--some of which can be prevented and some of which cannot (but that is for another post). We see it happening to the Palestinian children, taught from birth to hate the other/Jew; taught to die for the IDEAL. We see it in college students who are encouraged by their malignantly narcissistic professors to reject traditional moral values; embrace nihilism, and transform the world according to the professor's utopian fantasy. We see it in the postmodern rhetoric of the socialists who still dream of a universal socialist utopia, no matter how many people they have to kill to make it happen.

This is the final destination on the collectivist [psycho]path. Ayers and his crowd, in their quest for what they call "social justice" are dead serious about it--even if they have to kill 25 million people or so to make that "justice" come about. Oh yes, they are kind, they are compassionate, they are benevolent (with other people's money, particularly); but don't you dare oppose them because in their ethical system, your life isn't worth spit to them, compared to their ideology.

And that is why their atrocities on the world stage make even those originating from the grandiose self of some two-bit dictator pale in comparison. Both are malignant, but the Ayers and Dohrns subscribe to the warm, fuzzy utopian variety of malignant narcissism; and their psychopathy always ends in the coldly calculated death/sacrifice of literally millions of human beings on the altar of their ideological god.

Unrepentant? You don't know the half of it.

No comments: