930 Forums
=> GENERAL DISCUSSION => Topic started by: on May 04, 2007, 08:56:00 am
-
Virginia Tech's Professor of Hate (http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=28018)
Ever since South Korean immigrant Cho Seung-hui gunned down 32 people at Virginia Tech, there has been much comment that the university should have realized just from his two hate-filled and inept plays that the senior English major was a dangerous creep who needed to be taken away.
For a playwrighting class, Cho penned Mr. Brownstone and Richard McBeef (which, despite the Macbethian title, is a Hamlet-knock off about a young hero's lethal conflict with the new stepfather who murdered his real father).
Richard McBeef includes such sterling dialogue as:
"I hate him. Must kill Dick. Must kill Dick. Dick must die. Kill Dick."
Many have asked: "How could the English Department not recognize the horrific implications of these works?"
No one who wonders that, however, is familiar with the poetic oeuvre of one of Cho's own teachers, Virginia Tech's Distinguished Professor of English and Black Studies, Nikki Giovanni (for her website, click here).
Among the most celebrated figures of the Black Arts Movement of the 1960s and recipient of 21 honorary degrees, Giovanni has published poems strikingly similar to Cho's plays in both vileness and incompetence. For example:
The True Import of Present Dialog, Black vs. Negro, by Nikki Giovanni
Ni**er
Can you kill
Can you kill
Can a ni**er kill
Can a ni**er kill a honkie
Can a ni**er kill the Man
Can you kill ni**er
Huh? Ni**er can you
kill
Do you know how to draw blood
Can you poison
Can you stab-a-Jew
Can you kill huh? Ni**er
Can you kill
Can you run a protestant down with your
??68 El Dorado
(that??s all they??re good for anyway)
Can you kill
Can you piss on a blond head
Can you cut it off
Can you kill
A ni**er can die
We ain??t got to prove we can die
We got to prove we can kill
[More]
Ironically, the author of these lines was asked to deliver the closing remarks at Virginia Tech's convocation memorializing the 32 slaughtered by Cho. For some reason, Giovanni didn't read The True Import.
The above poem is not an isolated example. Cho's old professor has had, for example, a Molotov cocktail obsession:
Also a company called Revolution has just issued
A special kit for little boys
Called Burn Baby
I??m told it has full instructions on how to siphon gas
And fill a bottle
And, then there's this:
and it occurred to me
maybe i shouldn't write
at all
but clean my gun
and check my kerosene supply
She switched themes from kill-the-honkies to confessional self-obsession as the market for up-against-the-wall poetry dried up at the end of the 1960s, and now laughs off questions about her Cho-like early work.
Still, in 1997 the poetess had "Thug Life" tattooed on her arm to honor slain gangsta rapper Tupac Shakur, who was gunned down in a long-running fatal feud with other rappers. Wikipedia explains, with deadpan irony:
"She has stated that she would 'rather be with the thugs than the people who are complaining about them.' She also tours nationwide and frequently speaks out against hate-motivated violence."
Giovanni also writes prose:
RACISM 101; Giovanni, Nikki; $20.00; This book indicts higher education for the inequities it perpetuates, contemplates the legacy of the 60's, provides a survival guide for black students on predominately white campuses, and denounces Spike Lee while offering her own ideas for a film about Malcolm X. [From a list of "Books On The African American LGB Experience"]
She also has composed bon mots, such as:
"A white face goes with a white mind. Occasionally a black face goes with a white mind. Very seldom a white face will have a black mind."
And then there's her insight, "The honkie's whole sex thing is tied up to land."
As an anonymous commenter rhetorically asked on my blog:
"I wonder how many times Cho heard the phrase 'white privilege' while he was in college?"
(Click here to see how often the term appears in the Virginia Tech website.)
Giovanni is one of those sub-doggerel "poets" who has such Important Things to say that she can't be bothered to take the time to say them well. As she herself admitted to Brian Lamb on C-SPAN's Booknotes, "I'm not a very good rhymer." When she tries, it comes out like Cole Porter gone gaga:
if it's gum we can chew it
I hope it's love so we can do it
Perhaps her best-known poem is Ego Tripping (there may be a reason why), a slab of Afrocentrist drivel from 1973:
I was born in the Congo.
I walked to the Fertile Crescent and built the sphinx.
I designed a pyramid so tough that a star that only glows every one hundred years falls into the center giving divine perfect light.
I am bad.
Indeed.
Of course, Professor Giovanni, an elderly lady of 63, is not personally a danger to other people, no matter how bloodthirsty some of her poems are.
(What impact she has had over the years on earnest, impressionable young people might be a different question, however.)
Instead, she is a minimally talented self-promoter who has exploited various ideological fads over the decades, such as black radicalism, feminism, and Afrocentrism, to secure herself a comfy sinecure at Virginia Tech and to spend her spare time traveling around to hear herself be praised. Her own website lovingly lists 124 "Awards and Honors" she has garnered.
Giovanni's fee for a personal appearance runs from $5,000 to $10,000. That's pocket lint compared to the $40,000+ demanded by Maya Angelou (who is ensconced down the road from public Virginia Tech at posh private Wake Forest), but it's a living.
Giovanni is a small town version of New York City charlatan Al Sharpton, You might think that the ringmaster of the 1987 Tawana Brawley hoax whose racist rhetoric helped incite the Crown Heights pogrom of 1991 and the Freddie's Fashion Mart mass murder of 1995 might, like Don Imus, have talked himself out of a job by now.
And, yet, Sharpton not only endures, but prospers??elbowing his way back into the spotlights as the moral arbiter at the center of the recent Imus brouhaha.
Being a race hustler apparently means never having to say you're sorry.
-
I'll put this to the rest of the forum before merely deleting it.
Do posts like this have a place in this forum? Is more than just a link suitable? Anyone think Dupek needs to start a blog instead of treating this forum as one?
I'm curious...
-
why would you delete it? im curious?
-
Kosmo fancies himself as the scissor man, putting end to evil-doers plans.
Why are VT professors allowed to write:
"stab-a-Jew..." ???
Isn't this the least bit relevant to the facts of this massacre?
"A white face goes with a white mind. Occasionally a black face goes with a white mind. Very seldom a white face will have a black mind."
-Who could she be refering to? Dave Chappelle? :D
-
Originally posted by manimtired:
why would you delete it? im curious?
Because there are sacred cows in our society.
While I don't usually agree with much that Dupek posts (OK, this could be the first time), this article is an interesting read. Much is taken out of context, to be sure. It's certainly inflammatory and intended to preach to a choir that I don't care to sing in. But it does seem that this is certainly a case of the pot calling the kettle black (no pun intended. really. honestly.)
But there's something to be said for knowing your enemy. Whoever that may be. Which is why I don't think this stuff should be deleted - just debated and critiqued intelligently.
Oh, wait - this is the 9:30 Forum. Where the most often used phrase is "<insert name of band> sucks". :) Enjoy your weekend, kids. I'm off to Joe Louis arena to watch my wife go ballistic at the Wings game.
-
Are you implying that the killer read the professor's writings and was then helplessly compelled to go out and kill?
Originally posted by Dupek Chakra:
Kosmo fancies himself as the scissor man, putting end to evil-doers plans.
Why are VT professors allowed to write:
"stab-a-Jew..." ???
Isn't this the least bit relevant to the facts of this massacre?
"A white face goes with a white mind. Occasionally a black face goes with a white mind. Very seldom a white face will have a black mind."
-Who could she be refering to? Dave Chappelle? :D
-
cool charlie has to buy his own b-day this year... be sure to post the picture of the handmade NASCAR t-shirt you give yourself :D
xcanuck makes an excellent point regarding having the ability to debate on what Dupek posts. my point is that now a days this isn't the only place where that can happen. it's not that hard to setup and maintain a blog, create a discussion forum elsewhere, etc.
-
The article is from Frontpage.org. That's all I have to know to ignore it.
-
Microsoft Frontpage?
Originally posted by beetsnotbeats:
The article is from Frontpage.org. That's all I have to know to ignore it.
-
nope the type of site that has a huge picture of Tom Daley's latest book on the home page
-
Originally posted by kosmo:
it's not that hard to setup and maintain a blog, create a discussion forum elsewhere, etc.
Dupek knows he has an audience here; the vast majority of personal blogs go unread. He almost never (if ever?) posts original material; he's more like Drudge. If he was to post such material on community blogs such as DailyKos he would either be banned outright for copyright infringement or eventually banned as a troll.
I see his point about pushing the PC buttons of obstensibly liberal communities--John Waters said that's what Pink Flamingos was all about. But the audience for such commentary is pretty small; most people would rather participate in online communities of similar-minded folks, not just for the comfort of consensus among strangers but also for the sense of strength in numbers.
-
Originally posted by Charlie Nakatestes,Japanese Golfer:
Microsoft Frontpage?
Whoops, meant Frontpagemag.com.
-
Originally posted by beetsnotbeats:
Originally posted by Charlie Nakatestes,Japanese Golfer:
Microsoft Frontpage?
Whoops, meant Frontpagemag.com. [/b]
Edited by David Horowitz, the man who gave us this pearl of wisdom...
"Baghdad is liberated. In the days to come let us not forget that if it was not for one man, and one man alone??George Bush??the people of Iraq would not be celebrating in the streets and pulling down Saddam's statues today... We have entered the era of a new civil war between the forces of freedom and the powers of Islamo-fascist and communist darkness, and once again the left is clearly determined to take its stand on the other side. The good news is that America is back. Our military has performed superlatively. Our leadership has stood tall. We ourselves can celebrate over this and look confidently towards what lies ahead."
??FrontPageMagazine.com | April 9, 2003
-
so should this forum been seen as safe haven for troll behavior?
-
so should this forum been seen as safe haven for troll behavior?
Not at all, I see this forum as a place where you can share interesting material about music and pop culture. As I have said before, this Dupek guy loves to provoke, and he knows pretty well how to do it.
Now, as thatguy said once, I dont really know him at all (and I dont even want to), and he doesnt have any kind of relevance in my everyday life...
-
I read the first sentence and half then realized it was just his usual drivvel so stopped right at that point.
Kosmo, if you don't allow Dupek this outlet and he ends up taking out an elementary school or something, will you be able to live with the guilt?
-
dupek isn't the that sort of person... he's the guy that you'd rather not have sit down at your table in the crowded pub
will have to say that i wished his thread on the possible demise of internet radio would have gotten more attention... which i was in the process of adding to before getting distracted
-
You said it, not me.
Originally posted by Charlie Nakatestes,Japanese Golfer:
Are you implying that the killer read the professor's writings and was then helplessly compelled to go out and kill?
Originally posted by Dupek Chakra:
Kosmo fancies himself as the scissor man, putting end to evil-doers plans.
Why are VT professors allowed to write:
"stab-a-Jew..." ???
Isn't this the least bit relevant to the facts of this massacre?
"A white face goes with a white mind. Occasionally a black face goes with a white mind. Very seldom a white face will have a black mind."
-Who could she be refering to? Dave Chappelle? :D
[/b]
-
Originally posted by kosmo:
so should this forum been seen as safe haven for troll behavior?
No one wants that but Dupek's been doing this for years on this forum so he feels safe. Every forum has its level of tolerance for trolls, and that level can vary for different types of trolls and even who the trolls are. Fortunately, this forum doesn't get many and those that appear usually go away quickly.
If forum moderators wish to reign in behavior they see as trollish, that is their perogative. But I hope that any such policing is used consistently and fairly and doesn't single out particular individuals on ideological grounds.
-
One man's troll is another man's freedom fighter.
-
Because if that wasn't your point (a point that has no basis in fact as far as I can tell), I don't see what the point of starting the thread was.
Originally posted by Dupek Chakra:
You said it, not me. Originally posted by Charlie Nakatestes,Japanese Golfer:
Are you implying that the killer read the professor's writings and was then helplessly compelled to go out and kill?
Originally posted by Dupek Chakra:
Kosmo fancies himself as the scissor man, putting end to evil-doers plans.
Why are VT professors allowed to write:
"stab-a-Jew..." ???
Isn't this the least bit relevant to the facts of this massacre?
"A white face goes with a white mind. Occasionally a black face goes with a white mind. Very seldom a white face will have a black mind."
-Who could she be refering to? Dave Chappelle? :D
[/b]
[/b]
-
Originally posted by Charlie Nakatestes,Japanese Golfer:
Because if that wasn't your point (a point that has no basis in fact as far as I can tell), I don't see what the point of starting the thread was.
So you are in opposition to the pertinent fact that Chosen Hui attended her class? You look at 2+2 and you see three?
---
If you quote something inflammatory here you are a troll.
If you write something inflammatory at Virginia Tech you are a professor.
Now do you see the difference?
-
How do you know that Hui even read any of her writings? Do professors typically use their own writings as course material? Has someone claimed she used this material in her classroom? I never read any of the writings of my professors. And even if any of my professors did write inflammatory nonsense, they certainly wouldn't have made influenced me to the point where'd I'd go out and shoot up 30+ people.
Originally posted by Dupek Chakra:
Originally posted by Charlie Nakatestes,Japanese Golfer:
Because if that wasn't your point (a point that has no basis in fact as far as I can tell), I don't see what the point of starting the thread was.
So you are in opposition to the pertinent fact that Chosen Hui attended her class? You look at 2+2 and you see three?
---
If you quote something inflammatory here you are a troll.
If you write something inflammatory at Virginia Tech you are a professor.
Now do you see the difference? [/b]
-
Well Dupek old chap....you win again. You started a rather interesting discussion.
Nice one my friend, I bow before the master! ;)
-
Originally posted by Charlie Nakatestes,Japanese Golfer:
How do you know that Hui even read any of her writings?
Just the fact that he was in her class is important.
Heck, after Columbine Michael Moore called Littleton, CO a "city of death" because the Lockheed missile factory was located there too. Coincidence..?
-
The point of the article is not that this professor's writings influenced Cho. The point is that Cho's own writings should have been a clear sign that he was disturbed, and that this was mostly overlooked because the professor reading those writings is somewhat disturbed herself. That's the only reason the article discusses the professor's writings at all, to show that, based on her own work, she may not have really seen anything wrong with Cho's at all. Whether that's true or not, I can't say, but that's what the article is saying, not that Cho snapped because he read his professor's work.
Originally posted by Charlie Nakatestes,Japanese Golfer:
I never read any of the writings of my professors. And even if any of my professors did write inflammatory nonsense, they certainly wouldn't have made influenced me to the point where'd I'd go out and shoot up 30+ people.
But you're a normal, mentally balanced person (I assume). Cho obviously was not. There's no telling what can make someone like that snap and do something like what he did.
-
Originally posted by Reod Dai:
The point of the article is not that this professor's writings influenced Cho. The point is that Cho's own writings should have been a clear sign that he was disturbed, and that this was mostly overlooked because the professor reading those writings is somewhat disturbed herself. That's the only reason the article discusses the professor's writings at all, to show that, based on her own work, she may not have really seen anything wrong with Cho's at all. Whether that's true or not, I can't say, but that's what the article is saying, not that Cho snapped because he read his professor's work.
Originally posted by Charlie Nakatestes,Japanese Golfer:
I never read any of the writings of my professors. And even if any of my professors did write inflammatory nonsense, they certainly wouldn't have made influenced me to the point where'd I'd go out and shoot up 30+ people.
But you're a normal, mentally balanced person (I assume). Cho obviously was not. There's no telling what can make someone like that snap and do something like what he did. [/b]
Is Reod Dai the only one here who can put two and two together? Perhaps yes.
-
Wait a minute. There are a whole lot of factors here to consider. It's super easy to extract tiny little pieces of things and jump to full out assumptions of what happened or should have happened. Not to say that everyone doesn't have a full right to their own ideas and opinions and rights to say as much no matter how much one might disagree.
First off, our Constitution and Bill of Rights supposedly guarantees us the freedom of speech which includes freedom in written works. If my understanding is correct, this was some sort of creative writing class which is designed to offer instruction on how to write creatively. That's rather simple. The writer picks a topic; maybe instructor selected to suit an objective; and he then proceeds with his written project. If he was that bad, than it was up to the instructor to try to intervene with helping him improve his writing. If all attempts fail, then the guy should receive a failing grade. Subject matter and quality are two completely different issues.
Same, essentially, with the best of writers. Maybe Cho sucked at what he did but to our knowledge, he wasn't slandering anyone or breaking any kinds of laws via his written word. Neither Cho's nor his instructor's writings seem to suit my choice of reading material either but I will defend both's right to freedom of speech. I just won't bother to read their crap. Rather simple. If you want to go off on his or his instructor's subject matter, then you may as well throw in authors like Stephen King or Thomas Harris. Better yet, why not bring to life Farhenheit 451? It is generally understood that the instructor's intentions were to influence the students' writings, not their actions. Give me more proof in other forms to prove otherwise.
Another very important issue here is that there are many laws protecting one's rights to privacy though they are dwindling at an ever so rapid pace in this Police State mentality. From my understanding, Cho had a history of psychiatric problems. There are all kinds of HEPA(? - may have the letters wrong) laws, for your own personal protections, you better be glad are in place or you won't get some job or whatever because your genetic makeup predisposes you to cancer, or you are denied membership to some organization because they found you took some SSRI for a period of time while you were trying to deal with that messy divorce. Many of you are probably laughing right now but you better take this seriously because things like this are already happening in a few places! If you've read 1984, than you have a clue as to what I'm talking about. Oh, wait! By some people's thinking, Orwell should not have been allowed to publish that book. He should have been stopped because he was a crazy freethinker!
With that said, if and when a teacher/instructor notices something that indicates possible abuse or a potentially harmful situation, they are required by law to report such activity. With that said, this instructor had to make a judgement call as to whether this was (cheesey) artistic expression or indicative of something else. Keep in mind, we only know what has been released via the media, the odd personal connection or the rumor mill. For all we know, they may very well have made that report. Also, we don't know what the general assignments were for this class. He may have very well been following the guidelines.
Now, as a teacher myself, having many, many times come across situations of abuse or other noted concerns, I know full well how often nothing ever comes of such reports. Talk to any teacher in America or even many other countries these days. We are all loaded with these stories. We jump through all the hoops to document and report our observations only for the offices and powers that be to determine there is nothing they can or choose do. From there, rarely is there anything else the teacher can do. Back to privacy concerns, it must stay in house and personal issues not told to the public. Same exact kinds of laws when I worked in a nursing home though I've found the schools to be much worse regarding this matter.
Then we have the new fangled philosphy of 'the least restrictive environment' which reigns supreme in our society today. One could, and many probably have already done so, write a book on this alone. Basically, it involves the almost complete deinstitutionalization of everything. One of the very same reasons we have so many homeless. Getting right to the point, this theory and practice would have Cho as a (by their ideals) fully functioning member of society working on his degree and then off working full time somewhere. From what we know, prior to that fatefull day, he had committed no crimes and he hadn't been deemed dangerous enough to remove from society. They don't lock people up (yet) for bad writing or for their choice of subject matter. Same for his instructor and her choice of writing material regardless of what any of us think of it.
If you still don't get this, than don't bitch if Homeland Security gives you the extra search because you chose to take along a copy of In Cold Blood with you to pass the time during your flight out to some festival.
(Sorry about the length. Too many important issues involved.)
Btw, I once had to read an intructor written book for a class and it was fairly good and fit right in with our other reading material. It was for a class at Hopkins called something like Revolutions & Culture and the instructor was deeply involved with world politics outside of the classroom. In fact, so much so, one class had to be cancelled because the US government sent her over to Russia to help with some election. So, it happens and can be well placed.
-
Well put.
Why didn't the SWAT team charge the campus when the first shots were fired at the main crime scene? They already knew about the prior murders that occurred 90 minutes before. They knew a deranged killer was running loose. Isn't that what SWAT teams are for?
Maybe they didn't want to violate anyone's rights..? Maybe they were afraid of lawsuits? Yeah that's the ticket! It's better to enter the fray after-the-fact. Not only do dead men tell no tales, but they don't testify in lawsuits either.
-
Why does everyone quote the Constitution and Bill of Rights as if it's some sort of bible to live our lives by? Do you follow all the laws, just because they are laws?
-
How did they know there was a "deranged killer" on the loose? Do you send out a SWAT team for every murder that happens in the world? Can you assume that anyone who kills two people anywhere is going to follow it up with 30 more?
Originally posted by Dupek Chakra:
Well put.
Why didn't the SWAT team charge the campus when the first shots were fired at the main crime scene? They already knew about the prior murders that occurred 90 minutes before. They knew a deranged killer was running loose. Isn't that what SWAT teams are for?
Maybe they didn't want to violate anyone's rights..? Maybe they were afraid of lawsuits? Yeah that's the ticket! It's better to enter the fray after-the-fact. Not only do dead men tell no tales, but they don't testify in lawsuits either.
-
Originally posted by Charlie Nakatestes,Japanese Golfer:
Why does everyone quote the Constitution and Bill of Rights as if it's some sort of bible to live our lives by? Do you follow all the laws, just because they are laws?
Rhett, sometimes you scare me. You really scare me!
You, as outspoken as you are, should especially be concerned with our rights!
-
The point is that Cho's own writings should have been a clear sign that he was disturbed, and that this was mostly overlooked because the professor reading those writings is somewhat disturbed herself. That's the only reason the article discusses the professor's writings at all, to show that, based on her own work, she may not have really seen anything wrong with Cho's at all
I'm not entering the initial debate here but I do want to respond to this comment.
From what I have read in news articles on the situation, not only WAS Giovanni disturbed by Cho's writing, but she went to the English department chairperson and asked that he be removed from her class.
The chairperson started tutoring him independently and BOTH teachers (I am pretty sure both, but definitely the chairperson) went to the administration to express their concerns about his mental state and whether he was a danger to the community.
They were told that as long as he had not actually threatened anyone, there was nothing they could do about it.
-
A perfect case in point of both the teacher and the school observing a potential serious problem and following through on what they are, in fact, required to do, only to be met with a dead end. Sadly, this one was much more deadly than many others.
-
Still, the coincidence of 'hate prose/poetry' at VT, by both profs & students, is too great to ignore.
Originally posted by hijinksandsue:
The point is that Cho's own writings should have been a clear sign that he was disturbed, and that this was mostly overlooked because the professor reading those writings is somewhat disturbed herself. That's the only reason the article discusses the professor's writings at all, to show that, based on her own work, she may not have really seen anything wrong with Cho's at all
I'm not entering the initial debate here but I do want to respond to this comment.
From what I have read in news articles on the situation, not only WAS Giovanni disturbed by Cho's writing, but she went to the English department chairperson and asked that he be removed from her class.
The chairperson started tutoring him independently and BOTH teachers (I am pretty sure both, but definitely the chairperson) went to the administration to express their concerns about his mental state and whether he was a danger to the community.
They were told that as long as he had not actually threatened anyone, there was nothing they could do about it. [/b]
-
jESUS FUCKING cHRIST. tHE cONSTITUTION is a 250 year old piece of paper written by a bunch of fairies walking around in dresses and powdered wigs.
Originally posted by Jaguar:
Originally posted by Charlie Nakatestes,Japanese Golfer:
Why does everyone quote the Constitution and Bill of Rights as if it's some sort of bible to live our lives by? Do you follow all the laws, just because they are laws?
Rhett, sometimes you scare me. You really scare me!
You, as outspoken as you are, should especially be concerned with our rights! [/b]
-
That very same Constitution protects your rights to call them 'fairies'.
Now, when the overly PC crowd and homosexually sensitive come on here to attact you, I may not bother to chime in to take up for your Constitutionally given rights of free speech since I now know that you have no true understanding and respect towards it. Instead, I'll just sit back and delight in them picking you to pieces for your rude homophobic comment.
-
just so everyone knows. "all men are created equal" was written by a slave owner.
and your country was started by a bunch of dudes who wanted to overthrow the government they were living under so they could be rich and powerful.
or is that not the way they teach it in american schools?
-
Originally posted by Jaguar:
Instead, I'll just sit back and delight in them picking you to pieces for your rude homophobic comment.
i dont believe Rhett is homophobic.
-
Please go back to Canada.
-
What's obnoxious about this whole situation is the fact that everyone is looking at this and trying to blame professors and security at the school and all these other extraneous factors that can almost never be controlled.
You never know how high of a correlation there was between the student and the professor. Pointing the finger at the professor is the wrong thing to do. Interesting, maybe - but wrong. Regardless, she was protecting his rights.
Additionally, nobody metal detects you while walking into campus buildings, so yes. Anyone could have come in and shot the place up. Yes, SWAT teams should have arrived early. But they didn't.
I will possibly get shot by a few of you for saying this. And I am a firm believer in the Constitution and a believer in individuals' rights. I get pissy when the government takes stuff away from me. But the gun this kid had should have never reached him. It should have never been on THE MARKET. The only purpose of an automatic shotgun like the one he had is to kill. Why they are legal for anyone other than law enforcement in this country is completely beyond me; it should be beyond the NRA. And don't say "background checks," because you and I and everybody knows that in this country you can slip money under the table and get ANYTHING you want. Obviously, the system is flawed. So I ask, why is this product even on the market in the first place? If Cho had walked in there with a hunting rifle he would have been stopped before this many people were killed. And the only reason this number of people were killed was because of the rifle he was using.
Please stop looking to the past and targeting slightly-valid-but-irrational correlations with professors because it isn't solving anything. This shit will continue to happen if people only concern themselves with the professors.
-
Originally posted by le sonick:
just so everyone knows. "all men are created equal" was written by a slave owner.
and your country was started by a bunch of dudes who wanted to overthrow the government they were living under so they could be rich and powerful.
or is that not the way they teach it in american schools?
THAT. JUST. BLEW. MY. MIND.
i love how people use this puerile crap as a rhetorical argument, assuming that no one has ever thought about the contradictions of our founding fathers, and using them to discredit whatever they're looking to attack
-
Originally posted by you be betty:
I will possibly get shot by a few of you for saying this. And I am a firm believer in the Constitution and a believer in individuals' rights. I get pissy when the government takes stuff away from me. But the gun this kid had should have never reached him. It should have never been on THE MARKET. The only purpose of an automatic shotgun like the one he had is to kill. Why they are legal for anyone other than law enforcement in this country is completely beyond me; it should be beyond the NRA. And don't say "background checks," because you and I and everybody knows that in this country you can slip money under the table and get ANYTHING you want. Obviously, the system is flawed. So I ask, why is this product even on the market in the first place? If Cho had walked in there with a hunting rifle he would have been stopped before this many people were killed. And the only reason this number of people were killed was because of the rifle he was using.
i worked on the brady campaign and gun control issues for years, and i can tell you that the one thing that sets back the cause more than anything is people who know absolutely nothing about guns blindly railing against them
Cho didn't have an "automatic shotgun" or a "rifle", he had two semi-automatic pistols.
you'd have to really know what you're doing to make an "automatic shotgun", or somehow get your hands on something like this (http://www.techeblog.com/index.php/tech-gadget/a-look-back-fully-automatic-shotgun)
-
Thanks for more crediibly illuminating what I was alluding to.
And where did I say anything about homosexuals? I was making a (joking) slight toward men who affect an air of femininity; which has nothing to do with homosexuality.
Originally posted by le sonick:
just so everyone knows. "all men are created equal" was written by a slave owner.
and your country was started by a bunch of dudes who wanted to overthrow the government they were living under so they could be rich and powerful.
or is that not the way they teach it in american schools?
-
I'm sorry. I'm not going to pretend I know a whole lot about guns, because I don't. But don't you see what I'm getting at?
If he wouldn't have even had access to something semi-automatic...if the only thing on the market for us folks would have been some traditional sort of gun that required much reloading and shot less than his did in that amount of time...he wouldn't have gotten away with killing that many people.
-
Originally posted by you be betty:
I'm sorry. I'm not going to pretend I know a whole lot about guns, because I don't. But don't you see what I'm getting at?
If he wouldn't have even had access to something semi-automatic...if the only thing on the market for us folks would have been some traditional sort of gun that required much reloading and shot less than his did in that amount of time...he wouldn't have gotten away with killing that many people.
restricting the availability of semi-automatic weapons is definitely a valid viewpoint, but if you don't know what you're talking about then you do more harm than help, and feed the NRA stereotypes of liberal morons looking to take away all their guns
-
Betty's mistake is quite common and easily forgivable when the person has an open mind to learning more about the subject. It's a simple mistake to make. I'm with Hoya on this one though Betty has it right about the other stuff. Everyone is always trying to blame someone other than the one who committed the crime.
Now Sonick and Rhett are total morons. It's their type of thinking that continually contributes to the constant erosion of our Constitutional rights. Ironically, as much as they both whine, they will be the very first ones complaining about some right being taken away. Maybe very validly so but without the comprehension of how they themselves helped to contribute to it's demise. :roll:
Rhett, you are one greasy, sleazy bastard. You know damn well what you said and how the Constitution protects your rights to say so. Without them, the overly PC crowd would make what you said a crime, regardless of what you meant.
-
PSA: the hellenistic greeks had sex with little boys and kept slaves!! should we disregard their contributions to society?
-
Don't you have some investigative work to do on UFO's or the JFK conspiracy? :p
Originally posted by Jaguar:
Betty's mistake is quite common and easily forgivable when the person has an open mind to learning more about the subject. It's a simple mistake to make. I'm with Hoya on this one though Betty has it right about the other stuff. Everyone is always trying to blame someone other than the one who committed the crime.
Now Sonick and Rhett are total morons. It's their type of thinking that continually contributes to the constant erosion of our Constitutional rights. Ironically, as much as they both whine, they will be the very first ones complaining about some right being taken away. Maybe very validly so but without the comprehension of how they themselves helped to contribute to it's demise. :roll:
Rhett, you are one greasy, sleazy bastard. You know damn well what you said and how the Constitution protects your rights to say so. Without them, the overly PC crowd would make what you said a crime, regardless of what you meant.
-
and with that, i'm going to go give my wireless router to my neighbor and ask him not to give it back to me for a while :D
two exams in the next 48 hours absolutely blows.
-
Originally posted by Charlie Nakatestes,Japanese Golfer:
Don't you have some investigative work to do on UFO's or the JFK conspiracy? :p
You have nothing constructive to defend yourself so you pull out the old attack card.
Might I suggest that you go do some remedial Civics and US History lessons on our Constitution and the Bill of Rights?
-
SWAT teams are pretty useless in defending against most sudden violent acts; they are intended for imminent and stand-off situations. While a SWAT team could have been deployed between the dorm and Norris Hall shootings, there was no way that the Norris shootings could have been anticipated. If the dorm shootings had looked like more than a domestic dispute (e.g. more victims) then perhaps a lock-down would have been implemented and a SWAT team deployed.
-
Originally posted by le sonick:
just so everyone knows. "all men are created equal" was written by a slave owner.
and your country was started by a bunch of dudes who wanted to overthrow the government they were living under so they could be rich and powerful.
or is that not the way they teach it in american schools?
Before you criticize the US, take a look at your own miserable annals (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Upheaval) of oppression.
-
In 1787, two days before their work was done, the 55 delegates to the Constitutional Convention ??adjourned to a tavern for some rest, and according to the bill they drank 54 bottles of Madeira, 60 bottles of claret, 8 of whiskey, 22 of port, 8 of hard cider and 7 bowls of punch so large that, it was said, ducks could swim around in them. Then they went back to work and finished founding the new Republic.?
Note the 55 delegates and 54 bottles of Madeira. Which founder was slacking?
-
Originally posted by Hoya Paranoia:
Originally posted by le sonick:
just so everyone knows. "all men are created equal" was written by a slave owner.
and your country was started by a bunch of dudes who wanted to overthrow the government they were living under so they could be rich and powerful.
or is that not the way they teach it in american schools?
THAT. JUST. BLEW. MY. MIND.
i love how people use this puerile crap as a rhetorical argument, assuming that no one has ever thought about the contradictions of our founding fathers, and using them to discredit whatever they're looking to attack [/b]
i'm not looking to attack anything. it was just something i thought about the other day and it seemed slightly relevant to this conversation, excuse the snot out of me!!!
-
Originally posted by Jaguar:
Now Sonick and Rhett are total morons. It's their type of thinking that continually contributes to the constant erosion of our Constitutional rights. Ironically, as much as they both whine, they will be the very first ones complaining about some right being taken away. Maybe very validly so but without the comprehension of how they themselves helped to contribute to it's demise. :roll:
thanks for stating your opinion of me. i'll hold off on stating mine of you. and how was i whining? just making an observation! and please try to note that i posted that at 4 in the morning!
was what i said not true? if so, please correct me as i didnt grow up in this country and if i have it all wrong, let me know!
and lastly, i moved to this country voluntarily and have made quite an effort to stay here. i never said that i hated the founding fathers...i just dont see why they are looked at as such great humans....i think of them more like great businessmen, and this country as a huge company!
-
Originally posted by Jaguar:
Please go back to Canada.
awww, have i made the jaguar angry??? :roll:
:roll: :roll: :roll:
-
Dr. Burke, president of the American Historical Reference Society and a consultant for the Smithsonian Institute, counted seven early presidents as cannabis smokers: George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, James Monroe, Andrew Jackson, Zachary Taylor and Franklin Pierce. "Early letters from our founding fathers refer to the pleasures of hemp smoking," said Burke. Pierce, Taylor and Jackson, all military men, smoked it with their troops. Cannabis was twice as popular among American soldiers in the Mexican War as in Vietnam: Pierce wrote to his family that it was "about the only good thing" about that war.
Washington & Jefferson were said to exchange smoking blends as personal gifts. Washington reportedly preferred a pipe full of "the leaves of hemp" to alcohol, and wrote in his diaries that he enjoyed the fragrance of hemp flowers. Madison once remarked that hemp gave him insight to create a new and democratic nation. Monroe, creator of the Monroe Doctrine, began smoking it as Ambassador to France and continued to the age of 73.
-
I'm a "moron" AND "a greasy sleazy bastard", and I'M the one pulling the attack card? Hahahahaha you're funny!!!
Originally posted by Jaguar:
Originally posted by Charlie Nakatestes,Japanese Golfer:
Don't you have some investigative work to do on UFO's or the JFK conspiracy? :p
You have nothing constructive to defend yourself so you pull out the old attack card.
Might I suggest that you go do some remedial Civics and US History lessons on our Constitution and the Bill of Rights? [/b]
-
Originally posted by Charlie Nakatestes,Japanese Golfer:
I'm a "moron" AND "a greasy sleazy bastard", and I'M the one pulling the attack card? Hahahahaha you're funny!!!
Originally posted by Jaguar:
Originally posted by Charlie Nakatestes,Japanese Golfer:
Don't you have some investigative work to do on UFO's or the JFK conspiracy? :p
You have nothing constructive to defend yourself so you pull out the old attack card.
Might I suggest that you go do some remedial Civics and US History lessons on our Constitution and the Bill of Rights? [/b]
[/b]
jaguar is always right though. and i have found lately that as long as you can do two things:
a) articulate your posts in a fashion that no one can twist them around to mean something else
and
b) be able to twist other peoples posts around to make it mean something it obviously was not intended to mean
then you can be right all the time, too!
-
Originally posted by ggw?:
Dr. Burke, president of the American Historical Reference Society and a consultant for the Smithsonian Institute, counted seven early presidents as cannabis smokers: George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, James Monroe, Andrew Jackson, Zachary Taylor and Franklin Pierce...
and now it's illegal! look how far we have fallen...
-
Listen Sonick, you are the one who tore into me last week totally unprovoked which is far from the first time that you've done that to me. I've done nothing to you whatsoever yet you continue to periodically over the years throw ignorant jabs at me for no reason other than your own foul moods. If you can't handle it thrown right back at you, than stop being such a mean spirited prick.
Also, it appears to me that you are the one twisting words but at this stage, I don't even care anymore. I'm just sick of your nasty personality and I refuse to be your target.
Rhett was just being Rhett. I don't have a beef with him. That's just his provocative way.
Btw Rhett, I'm sorry that I got a little heavy on the names with you but I still stand by my statements otherwise. You can pass them over to Sonick who is much more deserving of them.
-
Originally posted by you be betty:
I am a firm believer in the Constitution and a believer in individuals' rights. I get pissy when the government takes stuff away from me.
yes
Originally posted by you be betty:
But the gun this kid had should have never reached him. It should have never been on THE MARKET. The only purpose of an automatic shotgun like the one he had is to kill. Why they are legal for anyone other than law enforcement in this country is completely beyond me; it should be beyond the NRA.
Wait, didn't you just say you get pissy when the government takes stuff away? But not when stuff is taken away from other people?
Originally posted by you be betty:
And don't say "background checks," because you and I and everybody knows that in this country you can slip money under the table and get ANYTHING you want. Obviously, the system is flawed. So I ask, why is this product even on the market in the first place?
[/b]
Interesting querey, but you seem to have answered it yourself. Perhaps this product is "on the market" precisely because you can slip money under the table and get anything you want? In other words, because there will still be a market for criminals to get this product regardless of legality, so maybe there should be a market for people to get said product legally to protect themsevles from those who will get it illegally?
Originally posted by you be betty:
If Cho had walked in there with a hunting rifle he would have been stopped before this many people were killed. And the only reason this number of people were killed was because of the rifle he was using.
Yep, that totally kept the University of Texas killer from shooting 44 people in 1966.
Originally posted by you be betty:
Please stop looking to the past and targeting slightly-valid-but-irrational correlations with professors because it isn't solving anything. This shit will continue to happen if people only concern themselves with the professors.
This was actually an excellent point, even for Dupek. It's not irrational at all to question the moral judgement of a professor who herself had a history of violence in her writings.
-
Originally posted by Dupek Chakra:
The True Import of Present Dialog, Black vs. Negro, by Nikki Giovanni
Ni**er
Can you kill
Can you kill
Can a ni**er kill
Can a ni**er kill a honkie
Can a ni**er kill the Man
Can you kill ni**er
Huh? Ni**er can you
kill
Do you know how to draw blood
Can you poison
Can you stab-a-Jew
Can you kill huh? Ni**er
Can you kill
Can you run a protestant down with your
??68 El Dorado
(that??s all they??re good for anyway)
Can you kill
Can you piss on a blond head
Can you cut it off
Can you kill
A ni**er can die
We ain??t got to prove we can die
We got to prove we can kill
[More]
Did she also write C-I-L-L my landlord?
-
Originally posted by Jaguar:
Listen Sonick, you are the one who tore into me last week totally unprovoked which is far from the first time that you've done that to me. I've done nothing to you whatsoever yet you continue to periodically over the years throw ignorant jabs at me for no reason other than your own foul moods. If you can't handle it thrown right back at you, than stop being such a mean spirited prick.
Also, it appears to me that you are the one twisting words but at this stage, I don't even care anymore. I'm just sick of your nasty personality and I refuse to be your target.
oh jaggy.
you've been a condescending little bitch to me JUST as often as i have been a prick to you.
in this thread, you attacked me and i defended myself. you attacked me unprovoked, as i attacked you unprovoked. and you defended yourself last week.
all i did last week was tell you to stay on topic. you called me a total moron.
its obvious you just dont like me....but dont make it seem thats its all my fault.
you're also the first person i've ever met in my 29 years that said i had a nasty personality, so i'll take that as a compliment. you act no differently than i do on here, for the most part! :)
-
Originally posted by TheREALHunter:
Originally posted by Dupek Chakra:
The True Import of Present Dialog, Black vs. Negro, by Nikki Giovanni
Ni**er
Can you kill
Can you kill
Can a ni**er kill
Can a ni**er kill a honkie
Can a ni**er kill the Man
Can you kill ni**er
Huh? Ni**er can you
kill
Do you know how to draw blood
Can you poison
Can you stab-a-Jew
Can you kill huh? Ni**er
Can you kill
Can you run a protestant down with your
??68 El Dorado
(that??s all they??re good for anyway)
Can you kill
Can you piss on a blond head
Can you cut it off
Can you kill
A ni**er can die
We ain??t got to prove we can die
We got to prove we can kill
[More]
Did she also write C-I-L-L my landlord? [/b]
Dude, you are old. Old enough to remember that SNL reference, anyway.
-
Originally posted by Dupek Chakra:
Originally posted by TheREALHunter:
Originally posted by Dupek Chakra:
The True Import of Present Dialog, Black vs. Negro, by Nikki Giovanni
Ni**er
Can you kill
Can you kill
Can a ni**er kill
Can a ni**er kill a honkie
Can a ni**er kill the Man
Can you kill ni**er
Huh? Ni**er can you
kill
Do you know how to draw blood
Can you poison
Can you stab-a-Jew
Can you kill huh? Ni**er
Can you kill
Can you run a protestant down with your
??68 El Dorado
(that??s all they??re good for anyway)
Can you kill
Can you piss on a blond head
Can you cut it off
Can you kill
A ni**er can die
We ain??t got to prove we can die
We got to prove we can kill
[More]
Did she also write C-I-L-L my landlord? [/b]
Dude, you are old. Old enough to remember that SNL reference, anyway. [/b]
IMAGES
by Tyrone Greene
-
Originally posted by TheREALHunter:
IMAGES
by Tyrone Greene
Dark and lonely on a summer's night.
Kill my landlord. Kill my landlord.
Watchdog barking. Do he bite?
Kill my landlord. Kill my landlord.
Slip in his window. Break his neck.
Then his house I start to wreck.
Got no reason. What the heck?
Kill my landlord. Kill my landlord.
C-I-L my land lord!
-
Originally posted by Dupek Chakra:
Originally posted by TheREALHunter:
IMAGES
by Tyrone Greene
Dark and lonely on a summer's night.
Kill my landlord. Kill my landlord.
Watchdog barking. Do he bite?
Kill my landlord. Kill my landlord.
Slip in his window. Break his neck.
Then his house I start to wreck.
Got no reason. What the heck?
Kill my landlord. Kill my landlord.
C-I-L my land lord! [/b]
Proof that I'm DEFINITELY old..."Gonna get me a shotgun and kill all the whities I see" HAHA
Word to Garrett.
-
is this just a venting rant or does the author have a point? seems to be an attempt at discrediting guised as "informing". a one-sided public service message without a purpose. does the author even go to VT? my daughter does and says there's no place for this kind of hate-mongering. besides, the target of this charming little ditty didn't take 2 guns and kill 32 people. the author is guilty of the same sin as the accused. take it somewhere else.
-
Originally posted by le sonick:
oh jaggy.
you've been a condescending little bitch to me JUST as often as i have been a prick to you.
in this thread, you attacked me and i defended myself. you attacked me unprovoked, as i attacked you unprovoked. and you defended yourself last week.
all i did last week was tell you to stay on topic. you called me a total moron.
its obvious you just dont like me....but dont make it seem thats its all my fault.
you're also the first person i've ever met in my 29 years that said i had a nasty personality, so i'll take that as a compliment. you act no differently than i do on here, for the most part! :)
Oh, Chubby Checker. You are so twisted up that your brain has lost its center of gravity. Extracting my throw back to you doesn't equate to me starting it all. Go back to the Starbucks thread where you came completely out of left field to take yet another one of your pot shots at me, completely out of the blue and unprovoked. Not the first time you've pulled one of your insults or snide remarks towards me.
To be honest, I have nothing against you nor do I dislike you. In fact, I have gone out of my way to try to get along with you; however, apparently, you have a history for snapping at me on occasion. That, I do not like at all. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand why. Whether it's personal, I don't know since I've seen you do the same to others when you get in your moods. Whatever...I'm sick of this crap. If you don't want shit slung back at you than don't fling it in the first place because some of us won't stand for it.