"Eric Rudolf?  David Duke?  Ollie North? "

In the unlikely event Eric Rudolf was released from jail, he wouldn't be welcomed into Republican political circles or be getting any university jobs or board memberships, would he? I don't think so. There must be some convicted abortion clinic bombers out there who have served their time. Are any of them involved in Republican politics, or have appointments at right wing foundations?

David Duke is a pariah in right wing circles, was condemned by the Republican Party who avoid him like the plague, this despite that even though he is a convicted criminal his crimes are rather minor in comparison with Ayers and Klonsky, and he is less ideologically extreme than Ayers and Klonsky.

Oliver North is a decorated combat veteran (Silver Star, Bronze Star, two Purple Heart medals). He's never been a political extremist and he's not a convicted criminal. Equating him with people like Duke is absurd, let alone Rudolph and Ayers.

"And here we have the Classic 'Gordon Moving the Goalposts' move."

I was attempting to clarifying the initial questions.

"your inane questions completely ignore astute points by the simple expedient of saying his examples are "in no way equivalent"

They weren't equivalent.

"Moving the goal posts"

I've noticed when you don't understand something you accuse people of being unfair to you.

Where did I accuse someone of being unfair?

It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine

Oliver North is a decorated combat veteran (Silver Star, Bronze Star, two Purple Heart medals).

True.

He's never been a political extremist.

Not true. His extralegal actions while serving in Reagan's White House were extreme, and they were used for political purposes.  

And he's not a convicted criminal.

True. He was given immunity by a Democratic congress to speak about crimes that he committed and was accessory to.

Equating him with people like Duke is absurd,

True.

let alone Rudolph and Ayers.

Not true.  Oliver North knowingly and willingly violated US law to trade with Iranians, including the Iranian government.  The same Iranian government who had engaged in and would continue to provoke terrorist actions against US citizens and military.   Oliver North's action directly impacted the national security of America in a negative way, it endangered US civilians,  it was against the law, yet he was eventually rehabilitated.

Oliver North is not a perfect analogy to Ayers and Rudolph, which is why I didn't name him.  North never deliberately planned the death of Americans due to his illegal actions.  However, his illegal actions did weaken the United States, and shouldn't be viewed lightly:

""U.S. willingness to engage in concessions with Iran and the Hezbollah not only signaled to its adversaries that hostage-taking was an extremely useful instrument in extracting political and financial concessions for the West but also undermined any credibility of U.S. criticism of other states' deviation from the principles of no-negotiation and no concession to terrorists and their demands."--

Magnus Ranstorp

"His extralegal actions while serving in Reagan's White House were extreme"

Not in comparison with Maoists.

"it was against the law"

Was it? That's debateable. Even if it was, violating the Boland Amendment isn't the equivalent of bombings, is it?

Was it? That's debatable. Even if it was, violating the Boland Amendment isn't the equivalent of bombings, is it?

In this case, it was worse.  The long term damage done to America done by Ayers is very close to exactly none.    Compare it to the long term damage done to America's national security done by the Iran Contra affair--strengthened Iran, strengthened Hezbollah,  and pissed off Sunni bandits aligned with the Afghans.  Whoops!  

Given the comparison between a hippy black leftist thwarted terrorist and a drunk on power marine who helped subvert the constitution to aid America's enemies in actual, tangible ways,  I'll pick Ollie as the more controversial rehabilitation project.

"a drunk on power marine who helped subvert the constitution"

That's just silly.

"to aid America's enemies in actual, tangible ways"

The Weather Underground were explicity anti-American and on the side of American enemies. Misguided or not, the intent of Iran Contra was to advance US interests in Nicaragua by aiding anti-Communists in Nicaragua and free American hostages (which it did).  

Even if the operation had the unintended consequences you claim, North wasn't acting in a spirit of brotherhood with Hezbollah in hopes of helping Iran and hurt the United States (there's a distinction between someone who accidentally starts a brush fire while trying to do someone a favor and someone who intentionally but unsucessfully tries to burn someones house down because they hate them).  

That's just silly.


Its also true.  Your value judgment doesn't trump the actual truth.
The Weather Underground were explicitly anti-American and on the side of American enemies.

You will note that I didn't deny this.  I did truthfully state that they had zero negative impact on actual American national security.  Care to disprove that?
Even if the operation had the unintended consequences you claim, North wasn't acting in a spirit of brotherhood with Hezbollah in hopes of helping Iran and hurt the United States
I was careful to claim exactly that:  Ollie North didn't intend to fuck shit up. Did you fail to notice my italics?  I made pains to note that the end result of the whole operation was to fuck shit up for the US, despite the good intent of the White House.  You also haven't disproved that.
(there's a distinction between someone who accidentally starts a brush fire while trying to do someone a favor and someone who intentionally but unsucessfully tries to burn someones house down because they hate them).   Accidental arsonists are still punished. But Ollie North didn't do anything accidentally.  He knew the law, he broke it, and he got away with it.  Your partisan excuses of his actions have no bearing on what really happened, and what happened as a result.  

Frankly, I'm disappointed. I would have expected a true conservative to defend North's principles while damning his actions.   He broke the law.  Whether you feel he was justified ethically in doing so is a sideshow.  

"Its also true"

It's a left wing talking point with no substance.

"I did truthfully state that they had zero negative impact on actual American national security.  Care to disprove that?"

"Impact on actual American national security" isn't germane. To make a national security analogy, there's a distinction between a diplomat who compromises national security by losing a briefcase full of classified documents, and an unsucessful spy for North Korea.

"But Ollie North didn't do anything accidentally"

Evading the spirit of the Boland amendment was intentional. None of the terrible blowback you attribute to Iran Contra was intentional.

Who did I say was unfair?

It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine

C'mon Gord...I'm still waiting to see who I accused of being unfair.  Of course, it's August so maybe your staff is still on vacation...or maybe you were just bullshitting.

It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine

True, I don't know what America will be like in 30 years. Perhaps the country will massively veer to the right.

We can figure out what has happened to right-wing terrorists from the past. Has anyone on this list , for example, been rehabilitated in the manner of Ayers?

Reed is a type of political operative that's common in American politics. He's not an equivalent of Ayers: he once organized abortion clinic pickets, but not abortion clinic bombings.