JediDefender.com Forums
Community => Watto's Junk Yard => Topic started by: Morgbug on April 16, 2007, 03:44 PM
-
Another ******* with a gun (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070416/ap_on_re_us/virginia_tech_shooting).
31 dead or thereabouts. :-\
-
Yeah, pretty upsetting news. Very sad and prayers go out the victims and their families.
:P
-
just read about that now. my prayers are for them.
-
I'm not a man who does much praying, but I will say I hope he burns in hell.
-
On my to do list for today was to call a colleague there in student housing and arrange a meeting on his campus for next week.
Saw the news before I called him. Figured he had more important things on his plate.
Have heard from him and other friends that work there today, though. They are doing ok...in shock and hustling to respond. He did not know at the time if all of their student staff were safe, though.
-
My wife's stepmother works at VT. Luckily, we have heard from her, and she is safe.
-
What is it about the middle of April that makes all the crazies finally flip their wigs?
OKC bombing - April 19, 1995
Columbine - April 20, 1999
V-Tech - April 16, 2007
And also the Waco Branch Davidian thing, that was on April 19, 1993. Not exactly the same as the others, but it's still a bizarre, entirely unnecessary incident worth mentioning.
-
What is it about the middle of April that makes all the crazies finally flip their wigs?
OKC bombing - April 19, 1995
Columbine - April 20, 1999
V-Tech - April 16, 2007
And also the Waco Branch Davidian thing, that was on April 19, 1993. Not exactly the same as the others, but it's still a bizarre, entirely unnecessary incident worth mentioning.
(http://www.abacusefile.com/efile-screen-shots/efile-1040.gif)
Definitely horrible, especially since they were all innocent bystanders to some nutjob's psychosis
-
Considering were I live, this was all over the local news, very sad. My brothers friend was in the same building as the gunman, and heard shots, but was okay.
-
We don't even really know what happened still, but the only account of the shooter that has come out so far is an "asian man in his 20's in a black leather jacket and a red beret".
I don't even want to speculate why this is taking so long, but I'm not sure I buy the "a guy was looking for his girlfriend" explanation for the pile of 33 bodies we have at this hour.
2 gunman at Columbine armed to the teeth were only able to claim 10 victims. How did a single shooter get 32 others? That is unheard of.
We wait.
-
I'm watching the news on MSNBC right now and it's all I can do to not just turn the damn thing off. There is nothing to go on for teh story yet, so they are just making a story up out of nothing....
they insist that the police cheif and president is "refusing" to confirm whether the shooter in the res hall is the same shooter that they found dead in the engineering bldg. He has answered "we are awaiting ballistic info to confirm that". He can't factually say it's the same shooter yet! Give him a break.
They continue to harp and armchair quarterback that it took two hours to shut down the campus between the two shootings. I just heard a reporter say "Why couldn't they shut the school down when they can shut a high school down so immediately!" here's a thought....VA Tech isn't a high school! It's an organization of some 36000 people on 26 acres. If a murder of two individuals is found at 7:15 AM, there is NOTHING to indicate a campus attack. 36K people is the size of a lot of the TOWNS that we live in...does a city shut down when two murders are discovered?
The campus did the best they could with the info they had. They found a murder. They secured the immediate area and began an investigation. They notified the students as quickly as they could once they had the info. And then, when things escalated, they ramped up their response appropriately.
The media is really making me sick with their attempts to place blame on the university for the actions of one insane person. They've spent the day gathering gossip from students who heard from a friend what happened, and now their trying to catch the university in some sort of cover up lie.
-
+1, name. From what I read early (and certainly things could have changed since then), that there was some shooting on one end of campus, and then some at the opposite end. Either he did part of the deed in one place and finished in another or there was more than one, I don't know... and for the media to blame the university lack of action is preposterous! How did they know what was happening? And it's a large campus, it's hard to spread the word unless they had some central lock-down button which they don't.
It's a shame that someone has to take out their frustrations by killing innocent people. Even worse shame that the coward killed himself afterwards. My heart goes out to the families, friends and loved ones.
-
What is it about the middle of April that makes all the crazies finally flip their wigs?
OKC bombing - April 19, 1995
Columbine - April 20, 1999
V-Tech - April 16, 2007
And also the Waco Branch Davidian thing, that was on April 19, 1993. Not exactly the same as the others, but it's still a bizarre, entirely unnecessary incident worth mentioning.
The weather gets a tadbit warmer and they go nutty apparently.
-
I will say I hope he burns in hell
I second that. I hope the death toll doesn't go up more then where it is now. Can't see how he could of been the only shooter with the amount of distance and number of dead/injury with this case. I wish they would find out if the two shootings are related or not. Hopefully no one decides to copy this *******.
-
Having lived within 10 minutes of Virginia Tech for nearly 4 years, I am absolutely bewildered at what has happened. For those who have never been to Blacksburg or the surrounding area, it is unbelievable that something this tragic would happen there. You will never find a more beautiful area, with some of the nicest people you could ever hope to meet. To see these same people struck with this horror fills me with a large emptiness I can't really describe. The most equivalent feeling is as if I've been kicked in the stomach, and I've been crying off and on all day since it first happened. The national news is literally the local news, and vice versa.
I'm stunned. I guess that's all I can say. :'(
-
My heart goes out to the families of everyont at VT. I won't Monday quarterback this one, everyone can say what should have been done to save the few and protect the many. The Blacksburg area will need some time to get over this one. It's always sad to hear of these ever when you are thousands of miles away.
-
Not sure if this made the news anywhere else, but this event looks to have inspired a bomb threat at St. Edward's U here in Austin. I'm pretty sure it's just a bunch of ******** trying to be "cool" but you can never be too sure.
As for VT, terrible, just terrible. Thoughts and prayers go out to the victims families & friends.
-
There was a scare at OU today when a woman reported seeing a man walking around campus with a rifle on his shoulder.
After locking all the buildings down, and after the man was tracked down and tackled, it was determined that the "rifle" he was carrying was actually a closed umbrella.
-
Whenever I read of a tragedy such as this, I immediately get this sickening dullness in my gut. I try to resist the urge to watch, listen to and read all about the horror, but inevitably I'm drawn back. I want to know what could possibly motivate someone to be so hateful. Was it one event? Was it a horrible childhood? The loss of loved ones? And these are all aimed not by just simple curiosity, but instead by a need to prevent anything like this from happening to the people around me.
From what I've read, this troubled shooter wrote about his hate toward women, rich kids and religion, specifically Christianity. Also, all the descriptions of this guy say he was just socially inept, scary and disturbed. He wouldn't talk to anyone, and all his "poetry" and writing was filled with disturbing violence. My knee-jerk thoughts point to his upbringing and his relationships with his parents (specifically the mom), but it could be anything else. I just hope that they eventually piece together the reasons why this guy did this.
-
My heart goes out to the friends and families of the victims. So horrible.
Now all of the other nutcases are crawling out of the woodwork. A kid in the Charlotte area just this afternoon pulled into a school parking lot and waved a gun. The story is still unfolding. He's been caught but someone -- don't know if it was the kid w/the gun or not -- is in critical condition.
The elementary school a mile from our neighborhood is now on lockdown -- there apparently is someone in the area with a gun. My kids aren't even in school yet and I have to keep them inside when there's trouble at a school now ???
Update: apparently this situation involves an inmate on a work/road crew who has escaped and hasn't been caught yet. He was working near the school.
-
Am I supposed to care about the shooter? The news seems to think so. It seems like they're trying to make me care about his past and all that. What ever happened to shunning bad people?
Also, I know last year Virginia Tech became a gun free campus. I can't help but think this could have been a less tragic event if some law abiding citizen with a CHL put two in his chest and one in his head.
Sad really.
Kevin
-
Gen Y shaped, not stopped, by tragedy (http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-04-17-millenials_N.htm)
Interesting article.
More worrisome is the idea that some young people have come to view these tragedies as just "a part of life," says Robert Thompson, a professor of media and popular culture at Syracuse University.
"It's something that happens now and then," Thompson says. "They consume it to the point that they don't want to anymore, and then they quit consuming it."
Logan Stommel, 18, of Washington says he feels somewhat desensitized by all these tragedies, to the point where it doesn't affect the way he thinks about life.
"We tend to avoid the news — it's all bad — and we're pretty mellow about it," he says.
"We probably know some people who are more emotionally invested. They think we're a little cold toward situations like these."
Shocked and saddened as they are about Virginia Tech, "it's almost as if it's become the norm to expect the outrageous," says Kelvin Driscoll, 21, of Lakewood, Calif., a senior at the University of Southern California who wants to run for the state Senate.
I have to say it's true. Growing up amid a constant media/Internet barrage of shuttle explosions, terrorist attacks, cult deaths, and school massacres has made me a little dead to all of it. Intellectually, I appreciate that this sort of thing never happened back in the '80s/'70s/'60s'/'50s when you other guys were kids so it's different for you--but for my entire conscious lifetime, that's just how the world has worked.
I mean, the majority of these tragedies couldn't really be prevented (hindsight being 20/20) and the odds of any of them happening to any given individual are extremely slim. So there's no sense in getting all paranoid about it, and after a point you have to just get on with life. I'm more worried about things like dying in a freeway accident, or falling and cracking my skull open on the toilet rim, since statistically those are far more probable. You gotta prioritize what you worry about.
In addition, of course, there's the geographical distances and the fact that I didn't know anyone personally involved in any of these tragedies, which makes it a lot easier to emotionally detach, but that's human nature I think.
Am I wrong? I'm genuinely interested in hearing other points of view on this--am I making a realistic risk assessment or am I just a callous self-centered prick? (http://media.ign.com/boardfaces/33.gif)
-
Did anyone else read the 'plays' he wrote for a college course?
Richard McBeef (http://news.aol.com/virginia-tech-shootings/cho-seung-hui/_a/richard-mcbeef-cover-page/20070417134109990001)
Can students pass a course with this kind of work these days?
Oh, there's another play entitled Mr. Brownstone -- it can be found at the above link.
-
Intellectually, I appreciate that this sort of thing never happened back in the '80s/'70s/'60s'/'50s when you other guys were kids so it's different for you--but for my entire conscious lifetime, that's just how the world has worked.
Am I wrong? I'm genuinely interested in hearing other points of view on this--am I making a realistic risk assessment or am I just a callous self-centered prick?
I wouldn't be too quick to say these things never happened in those years though Nathan. I recall: US hostage situations in Iran, a guy walking into a McDonalds and shooting to death several folks, a man with an AK rifle going to a grade school and shooting up a bunch of kids, assasinations/attempts at Olympics or on presidents, how about a loon holed up in a tower in Texas sniping a bunch of folks long ago?-just to name a few.
Anyway, I think the media these days is ridiculous and wants to inset into your brain background character information on bad guys ::), why we should feel sorry for them-or the Columbine killas ::), telling us how it's our fault by 3's-coulda,woulda,shoulda's ::) and talking about all of this for long periods after these incidents occurred ::).
It's getting ridiculous now and..after reading Famines' intelligent post I totally agree with him on this issue. Don't try to get me to care about the killer or give him any more attention as he deserved none-- he gave up any chances of that when he started pulling the trigger. Call me 'old school' but I turn my back on freaks like that while I grieve for folks that didn't even have a chance or see it coming. >:(
But I won't sit here (like others have said) and wonder/point fingers at how this should/could have been prevented-it's pointless. These kinda things are freakish in nature and 'lessons learned'-(were there?) aren't applicable to future unique situations anyway.
--it's sad
Slothus
-
I agree with people who think that trying to point fingers at someone else, try and understand "why" he did it, how it could have been prevented, etc. is pointless. This blatant murderer should be scorned not felt sorry for. We live in a society that is too politically correct. The guy had issues and the media is trying to politicize the situation and find someone to blame. Makes me sick. There's a lot of nuts out there, and you never really think that someone would actually go through with this if it's someone you know. So you can only blame one person - the killer.
And what really sucks is this kind of hanus killing spree doesn't surprise me. I'm not saying I want the news to portray everything as "Pleasantville" but with really nothing but negative news covered these days, I can't help but become somewhat desensitized to this sort of thing. Which is a shame. It's a terrible tragedy and my heart does go out to the victims and to this guy's family.
But do I feel sorry for the killer? Hell no. Absolutley not, not under any circumstances unless he was possessed by the Devil himself and had no choice. And remember these things do happen thoughout history. A certain percentage of the population are psychopaths. The higher population, the more psychopaths are out there. And I agree, it would have been better if some student with a gun license had blown this guy's head off before he could have taken more lives.
But you can't live your life living in fear. Awareness and fear are two totally different things. One should be aware that things like this can happen, but don't go living your life in fear of it.
:P
-
Focusing on a killer's past is a completely natural thing for the media to do after a senseless tragedy like this. It doesn't mean they want people to feel sorry or sympathetic for them. People want to try and better understand why events like these happen, what caused them, and to do that you have to delve into the killer's past, his backstory, to try and learn more. I mean, the guy removed himself from the planet, so it's not like he's around to put on trial or interview after. So all we have left is to dig into his past. That doesn't mean we should feel any sympathy for him.
:P
-
What is it about the middle of April that makes all the crazies finally flip their wigs?
OKC bombing - April 19, 1995
Columbine - April 20, 1999
V-Tech - April 16, 2007
And also the Waco Branch Davidian thing, that was on April 19, 1993. Not exactly the same as the others, but it's still a bizarre, entirely unnecessary incident worth mentioning.
Here's a few other noteworthy, horrible, mid-April events:
Abraham Lincoln shot/died - April 14/15, 1865
Hitler born - April 20, 1889
San Francisco earthquake - April 18, 1906
Mark Twain died - April 21, 1910
Titanic hit/sunk - April 14/15, 1912
Albert Einstein died - April 18, 1955
Joey Lawrence born - April 20, 1976
U.S. Embassy in Beirut bombed - April 18, 1983
USS Iowa disaster - April 19, 1989
I'm sure there's a few other events out there worth mentioning, too. Weird how many awful things have occurred in the middle of this month.
-
add:
Chernobyl nuclear disaster 26-Apr 1986
96 killed in stadium rush - Sheffeild, England 15-Apr 1989
-
Or end of April, Saddam Hussein on the 28th (who had shared his birthday with me until earlier this year).
-
And now a gunman has barricaded himself inside NASA's Johnson Space Center in Houston.
::)
-
And now a gunman has barricaded himself inside NASA's Johnson Space Center in Houston.
::)
Happens every single day man. This is only being reported because it's the theme of the week.
You know - Anna Nicole Week, Imus Week, The Alberto Gonzales Non-Story, Non-Crime, Non-Controversy Week.
This week - Psychos With Guns!
Next week - ?
-
What is it about the middle of April that makes all the crazies finally flip their wigs?
OKC bombing - April 19, 1995
Columbine - April 20, 1999
V-Tech - April 16, 2007
And also the Waco Branch Davidian thing, that was on April 19, 1993. Not exactly the same as the others, but it's still a bizarre, entirely unnecessary incident worth mentioning.
Let's not forget April 14th, 1865: Lincoln's assasination.
(plus, April 4th for MLK's assasination, if you want to stretch it out a couple weeks earlier)
And now a gunman has barricaded himself inside NASA's Johnson Space Center in Houston.
CNN's reporting 2 dead there now.
Buncha ******' psycho idiots out there...
-
Let's not forget April 14th, 1865: Lincoln's assasination.
Yes, let's not. (http://www.jedidefender.com/yabbse/index.php?topic=15184.msg296575#msg296575)
::)
(plus, April 4th for MLK's assasination, if you want to stretch it out a couple weeks earlier)
What if I don't?
>:(
-
Yes, let's not. (http://www.jedidefender.com/yabbse/index.php?topic=15184.msg296575#msg296575)
You actually expect me to read page 2 of this thread? ****. Instead, how 'bout you try to summarize your thoughts more cohesively, in one place, rather than spilling them sporadically all over the thread. Thanks. But since I was attending a history lecture tonight with a fair amount of discussion on Lincoln included, I still get credit for coming up with that one on my own, dammit. Wild Friday night, I know... ::)
What if I don't?
I agree. April 4th was stretching it a bit. My bad.
I wholeheartedly concur with your Joey Lawrence inclusion however, despite it being lost deep within page 2 there.
-
I wholeheartedly concur with your Joey Lawrence inclusion however, despite it being lost deep within page 2 there.
(http://img.consumating.com/photos/10234/large/72250.jpg)
Whoa
-
Of course this happened because some nut job got pissed at his GF. ::)
Nutjobs should have no contact with chicks, it always ends up in a massacre.
-
Of course this happened because some nut job got pissed at his GF. ::)
Nutjobs should have no contact with chicks, it always ends up in a massacre.
I'm not sure where you heard that, but apparently he's not so much as ever really spoken to a female in romantic fashion. Everyone right down the line has testified that not only has he never had a girlfriend in his entire life, but he's never even had a date.
He was reprimanded for a couple "stalking" incidents, but the girls didn't know him prior to that.
-
I have to say it's true. Growing up amid a constant media/Internet barrage of shuttle explosions, terrorist attacks, cult deaths, and school massacres has made me a little dead to all of it. Intellectually, I appreciate that this sort of thing never happened back in the '80s/'70s/'60s'/'50s when you other guys were kids so it's different for you--but for my entire conscious lifetime, that's just how the world has worked.
I'm going to respectfully disagree with you Nathan. I'll agree that the inundation of information is much, much faster now, but honestly, the real difference is you get the information within minutes whereas we saw it either hours later on the evening news or in all it's glory/gory in the print media the following day.
Where I disagree is if "you" think just because you get it faster and from maybe a couple more sources than us old farts did, that you have some right to become numb and uncaring faster. To me, and no real offense is intended at you, it's a cop out. You're numb and don't care too much because you didn't know anyone directly affected? You're not numb, you're ******* cold and near dead if you give so little of a **** about it. Really.
The attitude is typical bull**** that everyone of your age has, regardless of which generation we're speaking of. Bluntly put your generation hasn't yet pulled their heads out of their asses long enough to accept any sort of responsibility or reality just yet. I wasn't much different at 19, the world revolved around me. Still does in certain respects.
You're right, it's isolated and rare and largely out of your control. That you write it off on that basis and ignore it is a little disturbing. That you're ignorant about historical events of the past five decades and so easily suggest this sort of thing never happened previously is pretty much jaw dropping. Wow. But that's just my opinion.
-
I'd listen to Brent, since I think he's even experienced a couple of World Wars in his day.
-
I'd listen to Brent, since I think he's even experienced a couple of World Wars in his day.
Nah, maybe just Viet Nam :-*
BTW, I don't like Mondays.
-
BTW, I don't like Mondays.
Tell me why
-
BTW, I don't like Mondays.
Looks like someone has a case of the Mondays.
(http://www.markaelrod.net/wp-content/uploads/2007/01/mondays.jpg)
;)
-
I'd listen to Brent, since I think he's even experienced a couple of World Wars in his day.
Yeah but that was a long time ago back in his prime. He burst onto the scene experiencing the Revolutionary War followed by the plight of The Civil War.
;)
-
Where I disagree is if "you" think just because you get it faster and from maybe a couple more sources than us old farts did, that you have some right to become numb and uncaring faster. To me, and no real offense is intended at you, it's a cop out. You're numb and don't care too much because you didn't know anyone directly affected? You're not numb, you're ******* cold and near dead if you give so little of a **** about it. Really.
The attitude is typical bull**** that everyone of your age has, regardless of which generation we're speaking of. Bluntly put your generation hasn't yet pulled their heads out of their asses long enough to accept any sort of responsibility or reality just yet. I wasn't much different at 19, the world revolved around me. Still does in certain respects.
You're right, it's isolated and rare and largely out of your control. That you write it off on that basis and ignore it is a little disturbing. That you're ignorant about historical events of the past five decades and so easily suggest this sort of thing never happened previously is pretty much jaw dropping. Wow. But that's just my opinion.
While I agree with you for calling out Nathan on historical inaccuracies (if you think school violence didn't happen in the 60s, think University of Texas at Austin in 1966), I think you're mistaken for calling him a cop-out and writing him off as the typical self-righteous teen who cares for no one other than himself. I'm probably closer to him than I am to you in age (25), but the bottom line is the world is a *far* more dangerous place than it was even 10 years ago. "Our generation" may not have collectively pulled out heads out of our asses yet, but for those of us that have, we really wish there were a way we could shove 'em back in. Yeah, it's that bad.
September 11. The war in Afghanistan. Daily violence in Iraq. Terrorist attacks all over the world. Oklahoma City. Columbine. And now, VT. And these are just the things we *know* about going on in the world, the events the media covers regularly and with a lot of thunder. Can't you have a little bit of understanding for growing nonchalant about near-daily reports of another 30 people killed in Baghdad?
I worked in counterterrorism for three years and had to switch. Why? Because I was starting to think like the terrorists, a necessity to try to understand their next move, but it turned me into a person I didn't like. I'd read reports of this attack foiled and that attack foiled, or what they were up to next. I'd read about the x number of villagers in (insert generic Afghan village) pulled out of their cars and beheaded on the sidewalks for being suspected coalition supporters.
I switched to counternarcotics because I thought it would be a less depressing field - but the war on drugs is every bit as dirty as the war on terrorism, if not moreso. Now, I wake up, go to work, read about the Cali drug cartel's torture method against Colombian policemen, and I don't feel anything. I go to bed, wake up, and do it again the next day.
The world's a pretty ******* evil place and I'd be careful to write off those who aren't shocked into silence by these tragedies as callous. I don't think callousness is what they feel. More like helplessness.
-
Of course this happened because some nut job got pissed at his GF. ::)
Nutjobs should have no contact with chicks, it always ends up in a massacre.
I'm not sure where you heard that, but apparently he's not so much as ever really spoken to a female in romantic fashion. Everyone right down the line has testified that not only has he never had a girlfriend in his entire life, but he's never even had a date.
He was reprimanded for a couple "stalking" incidents, but the girls didn't know him prior to that.
It was maybe the day after it happened that I heard that on the news, maybe it was stalking not a GF problem. I haven't been that up to date on this anymore. Except, I heard his sister appologized for what he did.
-
I'd listen to Brent, since I think he's even experienced a couple of World Wars in his day.
Yeah but that was a long time ago back in his prime. He burst onto the scene experiencing the Revolutionary War followed by the plight of The Civil War.
;)
Don't forget his earlier years during the Crusades.
-
I was talking with my brother and his family yesterday and heard that my sister-in-law's niece goes to VT and one of her friends was wounded, but expected to recover.
I wish these sick bastards would just shoot themselves first instead of last in these homicidal rampages.
-
... I think you're mistaken for calling him a cop-out and writing him off as the typical self-righteous teen who cares for no one other than himself. I'm probably closer to him than I am to you in age (25), but the bottom line is the world is a *far* more dangerous place than it was even 10 years ago. "Our generation" may not have collectively pulled out heads out of our asses yet, but for those of us that have, we really wish there were a way we could shove 'em back in. Yeah, it's that bad.
So you think it's worse now than it used to be? Hmm, interesting. I'll certainly agree that I was unfair to Nathan, but that was probably spurred on by drinking (post sober) and the fact I interviewed 12 of his generational cohort that were so apathetic we're hiring none of them. "I'm owed...." "We have to work so hard..." "It's so much more dangerous..." No. No. And no.
September 11. The war in Afghanistan. Daily violence in Iraq. Terrorist attacks all over the world. Oklahoma City. Columbine. And now, VT. And these are just the things we *know* about going on in the world, the events the media covers regularly and with a lot of thunder. Can't you have a little bit of understanding for growing nonchalant about near-daily reports of another 30 people killed in Baghdad?
Ever heard of Vietnam? How about Eritrea? Uganda? Rwanda? Sorry, just because you're actually paying attention because Americans are getting killed doesn't make it any more dangerous today than it used to be. Mass murders, terrorist attacks, pointless wars are what history is made of. Nothing has changed.
Well, maybe not quite. It comes faster, but I'll stick to my guns. Just because I'm older than dust doesn't mean bad news came by stage coach. It came that night or the next day, much as the VT information that was accurate did. All we got immediately was speculation mixed with fact. The accuracies followed the next day, much as they did when dinosaurs (and me) roamed the earth.
Can I have understanding for being nonchalant? Nope, I have no time for apathy regardless of the driving force. Can I understand how it would depress the hell out of Nathan? Sure, absolutely. But here's Nathan's statement that caught my attention:
I have to say it's true. Growing up amid a constant media/Internet barrage of shuttle explosions, terrorist attacks, cult deaths, and school massacres has made me a little dead to all of it. Intellectually, I appreciate that this sort of thing never happened back in the '80s/'70s/'60s'/'50s when you other guys were kids so it's different for you--but for my entire conscious lifetime, that's just how the world has worked.
So I guess I can be entirely numb to, because I grew up under the literal specter of nuclear war. Go watch the horrid movie The Day After. It was released in 1983 and it scared the frickin' crap out of just about everyone. You think Afghanistan and Iraq are depressing? How about constant media barage about the end of the world? Just because you're starting to see it now doesn't mean it hasn't happened before.
The world's a pretty ******* evil place and I'd be careful to write off those who aren't shocked into silence by these tragedies as callous. I don't think callousness is what they feel. More like helplessness.
Helpless is fine, but don't come off as being callous, because that's what Nathan did. He's assuming us old ***** have never experienced anything and that it's fine to be numb, or that's the impression he left. That's all and I'm calling him to task on it. I actually happen to think he's not a bad guy at all. If I didn't give a ****, I would have kept quiet.
Tell me why
Thank you Tracy, at least someone picked up the reference. But be careful, I think that you understood what I said makes you officially ancient. I wanna shoot the whole day down. :-*
Now, to get this locked down, let's talk about gun control. Or not gun control :-X ;)
-
I don't like Mondays.
Tell me why
I wanna shoot the whole day down.
And he can see no reasons
'Cause there are no reasons
What reason do you need to die?
-
Happens every single day man. This is only being reported because it's the theme of the week.
You know - Anna Nicole Week, Imus Week, The Alberto Gonzales Non-Story, Non-Crime, Non-Controversy Week.
This week - Psychos With Guns!
Next week - ?
Shark Attacks.
-
Yup closely followed by this new phenomenon that the media has just picked up on called "hurricanes".
-
Which relates to...
$4 gas.
-
I don't like Mondays.
Tell me why
I wanna shoot the whole day down.
And he can see no reasons
'Cause there are no reasons
What reason do you need to die?
Same guy, different song of indifference:
I don't care if you sink or swim
Lock me out or let me in
Where I'm going or where I've been
I don't mind at all
I don't mind if the government falls
Implements more futile laws
I don't care if the nation stalls
And I don't care at all
Does that make me old too, Brent? Or just old at heart?
I agree with Brent on so much of this. When you guys check out The Day After have Netflix send you Red Dawn. The Day After was a TV mini series, so block out 6-8 hours to take that **** in.
-
Ahh yes, Red Dawn one of my favorites
-
So you think it's worse now than it used to be? Hmm, interesting. I'll certainly agree that I was unfair to Nathan, but that was probably spurred on by drinking (post sober) and the fact I interviewed 12 of his generational cohort that were so apathetic we're hiring none of them. "I'm owed...." "We have to work so hard..." "It's so much more dangerous..." No. No. And no.
Hmm - I'd say "no," "no," and "yes." I still stand by my statement that the world is more dangerous than it was 10 years ago. Of course I cannot speak for the 60s or even the 70s, and I know **** hit the fan just as badly back then. Munich, Iran, the Cold War, etc. But there is something different in the post September 11 world. Perhaps I feel this way because for the last three years I've been bombarded with weekly reports of the terrorist's next plans, in addition to the regular news reports of 23 more Iraqis gunned down for believing/not believing that Ali is Muhammed's rightful heir. But also, as an American, this is the first time I can recall in our history when there has been a determined, nongovernmental group sworn to kill us anytime and in any place simply based on our nationality. That's why I feel the world is more dangerous.
Ever heard of Vietnam? How about Eritrea? Uganda? Rwanda? Sorry, just because you're actually paying attention because Americans are getting killed doesn't make it any more dangerous today than it used to be. Mass murders, terrorist attacks, pointless wars are what history is made of. Nothing has changed.
You bet I've heard of those things. But genocides and civil wars have happened for thousands of years, and will continue to happen. That's not what makes the world more dangerous, as I stated above.
Well, maybe not quite. It comes faster, but I'll stick to my guns. Just because I'm older than dust doesn't mean bad news came by stage coach. It came that night or the next day, much as the VT information that was accurate did. All we got immediately was speculation mixed with fact. The accuracies followed the next day, much as they did when dinosaurs (and me) roamed the earth.
Can I have understanding for being nonchalant? Nope, I have no time for apathy regardless of the driving force. Can I understand how it would depress the hell out of Nathan? Sure, absolutely. But here's Nathan's statement that caught my attention:
I have to say it's true. Growing up amid a constant media/Internet barrage of shuttle explosions, terrorist attacks, cult deaths, and school massacres has made me a little dead to all of it. Intellectually, I appreciate that this sort of thing never happened back in the '80s/'70s/'60s'/'50s when you other guys were kids so it's different for you--but for my entire conscious lifetime, that's just how the world has worked.
So I guess I can be entirely numb to, because I grew up under the literal specter of nuclear war. Go watch the horrid movie The Day After. It was released in 1983 and it scared the frickin' crap out of just about everyone. You think Afghanistan and Iraq are depressing? How about constant media barage about the end of the world? Just because you're starting to see it now doesn't mean it hasn't happened before.
I know all about the Cold War. The really interesting part of it all is that, as a kid in Russia, we never heard anything about the Americans planning a nuclear attack on us. We never had bomb drills. We had bomb shelters, but most were leftovers from WWII and would have been useless in a nuclear attack. And we all know how this story ends - the principle of mutually assured destruction kept us from nuclear war. The difference between the 60s and today, as I see it, is that in those days, they were reporting on things that *might* happen, whereas today they're reporting on things that *do* happen.
Helpless is fine, but don't come off as being callous, because that's what Nathan did. He's assuming us old ***** have never experienced anything and that it's fine to be numb, or that's the impression he left. That's all and I'm calling him to task on it. I actually happen to think he's not a bad guy at all. If I didn't give a ****, I would have kept quiet.
It's not OK to be numb, but I'd be lying if I said it didn't happen to me. It's happened to me because I couldn't do my job if I got choked up every time I heard about a Mexican policeman being beheaded by a drug gang in Tijuana. It doesn't make me callous. It's just human nature. Do you also call callous the homicide detectives who no longer flinch when they arrive to a crime scene and see a bullet-riddled corpse?
-
The world has always been a dangerous place, but I think we hear about it more now due to faster media coverage, and that bad news gets more ratings these days.
I do think it's more dangerous now because of the threat of some Middle Eastern countries maybe getting nukes at some point, but overall the general population (civilians) hasn't changed too much, at least not in my opinion.
:P
-
I don't think the world is any more or less violent than when I was a kid. The only difference is that now the coverage is almost instant and in HD which is better resolution than real life.
-
I don't think the world is any more or less violent than when I was a kid. The only difference is that now the coverage is almost instant and in HD which is better resolution than real life.
When my father was a child, violence was always in black and white on television. If it was on at all.
-
I don't think the world is any more or less violent than when I was a kid. The only difference is that now the coverage is almost instant and in HD which is better resolution than real life.
When my father was a child, violence was always in black and white on television. If it was on at all.
Lordy, that cinches it. I am older than dust. I grew up in a house that had only a black and white TV until I was about 13 or so. No cable either. Of course my parents were rather frugal, but that's a different story altogether. BTW, is the metaphor really there, or am I imagining it?
But there is something different in the post September 11 world. Perhaps I feel this way because for the last three years I've been bombarded with weekly reports of the terrorist's next plans, in addition to the regular news reports of 23 more Iraqis gunned down for believing/not believing that Ali is Muhammed's rightful heir. But also, as an American, this is the first time I can recall in our history when there has been a determined, nongovernmental group sworn to kill us anytime and in any place simply based on our nationality. That's why I feel the world is more dangerous.
I'll respectfully disagree again. I do think the world is different post 9/11, but only because the terrorist organizations finally succeeded rather than tried and failed. It's not at all unique NOW that there's a determined, nongovernmental group out to get Americans. And frankly they're not out to get just you guys, they're out to get Western Society, and Canada and Europe fit that mold pretty darn well. You're just more aware post 9/11. Jeez, when I was traveling back in the 1980s (y'know, when we had to fly on propeller airplanes) America was largely despised abroad (and it still is). People couldn't tell Canadians from Americans, but once they found out we weren't from the US, almost invariably we received an apology for assuming we were Americans because we sound similar (think about the difference between New Zealanders and Australians in spoken word). It's a fact. Why? People always hate the "team" in power and since the early to mid part of the last century that's been the US. Previously it was England. But as for any difference, it's only because they succeeded. They busted a group of about 20 radical Muslims in Canada last year that were trying to duplicate Oklahoma on a scale roughly four times as large. It ain't all about the US. Naturally Canadians feel we're not part of the target group, but that will change once someone blows up something on our soil.
And I'm not surprised the terrorists succeeded, given the lax security at airports in the US. I mean really, Canada didn't even allow people to walk up to the gate without a ticket, then or now. Our security was better than yours overall with respect to airports and airlines. That's lame. But it was an infringement upon people's rights to not greet at the gate and some jackass probably proposed a lawsuit because he couldn't meet his kid at the gate rather than waiting five more minutes outside a secure area. The disaster is of your own creation in part. Note I didn't say you deserve it, you and none of those people did. Period.
Ever heard of Vietnam? How about Eritrea? Uganda? Rwanda? Sorry, just because you're actually paying attention because Americans are getting killed doesn't make it any more dangerous today than it used to be. Mass murders, terrorist attacks, pointless wars are what history is made of. Nothing has changed.
You bet I've heard of those things. But genocides and civil wars have happened for thousands of years, and will continue to happen. That's not what makes the world more dangerous, as I stated above.
Actually yes it does, but your perspective is to view only actions directly affecting your country. There are spillover consequences of those events. By the way, how exactly is Vietnam in the category of civil war or genocide with respect to the US? The average age of American combatant in Vietnam was 19 or so and the death rate was higher than Iraq. You're the one that brought up Iraq/Afghanistan as being relevant to this generation, why isn't Vietnam the same?
I know all about the Cold War. The really interesting part of it all is that, as a kid in Russia, we never heard anything about the Americans planning a nuclear attack on us. We never had bomb drills. We had bomb shelters, but most were leftovers from WWII and would have been useless in a nuclear attack. And we all know how this story ends - the principle of mutually assured destruction kept us from nuclear war. The difference between the 60s and today, as I see it, is that in those days, they were reporting on things that *might* happen, whereas today they're reporting on things that *do* happen.
You might know about it from a historical perspective, but you didn't live through it. You said you're 25, meaning you were born in 1982/83. The Berlin Wall came down in '89 when you were maybe 6 and the Iron Curtain fell fully in '91 when you'd be about 8. Now you may have been a lot more precocious as a child than I was but I'm doubting that you were really that aware of the Cold War as a child. So I very, very seriously doubt that your age is helping you understand the cold war. There weren't any bomb drills or bom shelters when I was a kid, but the specter of mass destruction of humanity was very, very palpable and real for those of us living it.
Oh, and we didn't have the advantage that you do: hindsight. It was over before you had your first real erection; none of us knew how the story would end or that it would end happily. Don't kid yourself. No one living through either World War knew how it would end either, but we all know how those stories end too, don't we? Might happen is pretty frickin' real when you're living it. Doesn't the notion of Middle Eastern countries having nuclear capabilities scare you? It's not in the news on a daily basis. What if it was?
I think your fear is real and justified, especially because you're far more involved than I'll ever be. But don't assume that because I've never worked in an intelligence field like you that I'm ignorant of what happens. Don't assume that you understand what previous generations lived through. It's the same mistake Nathan made with his statement about things not happening the same in decades previous. Information is faster now, but it's not that much faster. The media lives to scare the snot out of us, it's how they get our attention; it's how they get advertisers; it's how they make money. Always have, always will.
-
I'll respectfully disagree again. I do think the world is different post 9/11, but only because the terrorist organizations finally succeeded rather than tried and failed. It's not at all unique NOW that there's a determined, nongovernmental group out to get Americans. And frankly they're not out to get just you guys, they're out to get Western Society, and Canada and Europe fit that mold pretty darn well. You're just more aware post 9/11. Jeez, when I was traveling back in the 1980s (y'know, when we had to fly on propeller airplanes) America was largely despised abroad (and it still is). People couldn't tell Canadians from Americans, but once they found out we weren't from the US, almost invariably we received an apology for assuming we were Americans because we sound similar (think about the difference between New Zealanders and Australians in spoken word). It's a fact. Why? People always hate the "team" in power and since the early to mid part of the last century that's been the US. Previously it was England. But as for any difference, it's only because they succeeded. They busted a group of about 20 radical Muslims in Canada last year that were trying to duplicate Oklahoma on a scale roughly four times as large. It ain't all about the US. Naturally Canadians feel we're not part of the target group, but that will change once someone blows up something on our soil.
I can respect that. I've always been able to avoid being lumped into the category of the "stereotypical American" when traveling overseas because a.) I don't look American, whatever that means, and b.) I'm ethnically not American. But I do agree that it's the "in" thing right now to bash Americans in most countries for our foreign policy, however I maintain that, particularly the Westerners who do this, are selling us short. Like you said, the Canadians, British, French, Spanish etc. are just as much in this as we are. And you're right, the fact that 9/11 was a success for the terrorists has opened many of our eyes when they should have been opened before.
But events that have followed 9/11 are truly what I believe have made America more dangerous. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have pitted Muslims all over the world not only against us, but also against each other. It's rekindled jihadist movements all over the world - in the Philippines, Malaysia, Thailand, the Middle East, Central Asia - and now, more worrisome, in Europe. Sure, there was always Chechnya, but only the most dedicated jihadists cared to join the never-ending movement there. There is no denying that Islamic terrorism has become a far more dedicated, interconnected, and global movement than it's ever been in its history.
Actually yes it does, but your perspective is to view only actions directly affecting your country. There are spillover consequences of those events. By the way, how exactly is Vietnam in the category of civil war or genocide with respect to the US? The average age of American combatant in Vietnam was 19 or so and the death rate was higher than Iraq. You're the one that brought up Iraq/Afghanistan as being relevant to this generation, why isn't Vietnam the same?
You're mistaken. I really try my damndest to look at things from a global perspective. I've even lived close to 10 of my 25 years outside the United States. But I'm trying to make the argument that the world has become more dangerous by refuting your assertion that the presence of civil wars is proof the world has always been just as ******. Perhaps I can't do that, since it's a matter of opinion. Maybe I'll amend my statement to this: "The world has become more dangerous for Westerners, particularly in the last decade." Do we agree?
You might know about it from a historical perspective, but you didn't live through it. You said you're 25, meaning you were born in 1982/83. The Berlin Wall came down in '89 when you were maybe 6 and the Iron Curtain fell fully in '91 when you'd be about 8. Now you may have been a lot more precocious as a child than I was but I'm doubting that you were really that aware of the Cold War as a child. So I very, very seriously doubt that your age is helping you understand the cold war. There weren't any bomb drills or bom shelters when I was a kid, but the specter of mass destruction of humanity was very, very palpable and real for those of us living it.
To avoid uncertainty, I was born in October 1981 (in Arizona), but moved back to our family's dacha north of Moscow in mid 82. I may not have lived through the Cold War as you know it, but I certainly was affected by it. Just as I was getting old enough to realize what was going on in the world, the war in Afghanistan was going poorly (1986 or so), and everyone was wondering why thousands of men weren't coming home, yet the news always reported the latest victory over the mujahiddin and the latest advancement of our forces. Nobody was allowed to say anything, and they didn't. I remember waiting in line for hours to get milk, even though our family was privileged by Soviet standards, and I even remember seeing tanks and ICBMs rolling through Red Square on one of our many Victory Day trips to Moscow. I also remember my dad having to scurry us back to the U.S. in early 1990 because it was obvious things were going nowhere but down. Remember, the "Cold War" meant something else to Russians.
When our troops finally pulled out of Afghanistan, when our economy was crushed, and when the same political and economic system that we had banked our livelihood on (albeit not by choice) collapsed, it was a moral shock of immeasurable proportions. Perhaps my age isn't helping me understand the Cold War, but I'd wager just about anything somebody who lived through the collapse of the Soviet Union - young or old - at least has some idea of what being on the losing side of the Cold War was like. In a word - devastating.
Oh, and we didn't have the advantage that you do: hindsight. It was over before you had your first real erection; none of us knew how the story would end or that it would end happily. Don't kid yourself. No one living through either World War knew how it would end either, but we all know how those stories end too, don't we? Might happen is pretty frickin' real when you're living it. Doesn't the notion of Middle Eastern countries having nuclear capabilities scare you? It's not in the news on a daily basis. What if it was?
Fair enough, but this argument started when you called out Nathan for being callous about reported events. You grew up in the 60s and 70s. Did you never once tune out all the rhetoric about the possibility of nuclear war because you'd heard it so many times? Did you never once get complacent?
For the record, a nuclear armed Middle East scares the **** out of me. A nuclear Pakistan is bad enough.
I think your fear is real and justified, especially because you're far more involved than I'll ever be. But don't assume that because I've never worked in an intelligence field like you that I'm ignorant of what happens. Don't assume that you understand what previous generations lived through. It's the same mistake Nathan made with his statement about things not happening the same in decades previous. Information is faster now, but it's not that much faster. The media lives to scare the snot out of us, it's how they get our attention; it's how they get advertisers; it's how they make money. Always have, always will.
I don't assume you're ignorant, however I do have the misfortune of knowing a lot of things about the war on terror that few other people know. At first it was cool knowing about a plot that was foiled, knowing how it was foiled, knowing who we used to foil it, and how we got them to foil it. Of course, for the safety of everyone involved, these things are kept secret 99% of the time and no one gets any recognition. Fine - we all knew that was how it has to be when we signed on. But one of the first things I was told when I started was this: if the public knew about everything going on, they'd never be able to sleep at night. I always thought that was the stupidest thing to tell a new recruit. I believe if the public really knew about every success we had in the war on terror, or the war on drugs, they'd forget that occasionally we're bound to screw up and not be able to connect all the dots in time, and innocent people are going to be killed. They'd become complacent.
This is becoming a problem already, more than a half decade after 9/11. And, morgbug, you can't honestly tell me it's only the young whipper snappers who are bitching at the airport when they have to take their shoes off.
-
you can't honestly tell me it's only the young whipper snappers who are bitching at the airport when they have to take their shoes off.
I know you directed that at Morgbug but this is an open forum. I, for one, never complain at the airports' recent security rules(taking off shoes,jackets ect). I know why we do it so I don't ever complain for the slowdown. Am I dissapointed that I can't go all the way to the terminal anymore to greet my family coming off a plane? Sure-it's sad our previous freedoms are removed from us, but I get why we do it so no complaints.
DS
-
you can't honestly tell me it's only the young whipper snappers who are bitching at the airport when they have to take their shoes off.
I know you directed that at Morgbug but this is an open forum. I, for one, never complain at the airports' recent security rules(taking off shoes,jackets ect). I know why we do it so I don't ever complain for the slowdown. Am I dissapointed that I can't go all the way to the terminal anymore to greet my family coming off a plane? Sure-it's sad our previous freedoms are removed from us, but I get why we do it so no complaints.
DS
I travel a lot, and have the trip through airport security down to a science. Travel determines which shoes I wear, my watch and whether I'll be wearing a belt or not. Not everyone knows to remove their laptops and camcorders, and that's alright too. There's a learning curve to getting the process down. People still don't understand they cannot take liquids through the security screening area, which is hard to understand based on the news coverage and the many, many signs prior to the cue. Waiting for them to be talked down from their morning soda is irritating, especially given the TSA's lack of tack in dealing with the public.
Mostly though it's not the inconvenience of taking off ones shoes, it's the absurdity of what they are checking vs. what they are not and can not. Combine that with the general TSA employee mentality (one step above entry level retail employees, and it's a low step) and you get a pretty stressful environment for people unfamiliar with it.
I'm grateful for the express line for business and medallion level fliers.
-
the TSA's lack of tack in dealing with the public.
Yes, they do exhibit a lack of tact to be sure. If it is purposeful then I can understand why-but I'm not a TSA so I can't attest if they are trained this way.
-
Slothus, are you ******* kidding me? Glass houses, ass wipe.
you can't honestly tell me it's only the young whipper snappers who are bitching at the airport when they have to take their shoes off.
I know you directed that at Morgbug but this is an open forum. I, for one, never complain at the airports' recent security rules(takingoff shoes,jackets ect). I know why we do it so I don't ever complain for the slowdown. Am I dissapointed that I can't go all the way to the terminal anymore to greet my family coming off a plane? Sure-it's sad our previous freedoms are removed from us, but I get why we do it so no complaints.
DS
It's probably for the best you cannot meet your family at the gate. The way you brag about slapping your sister around the TSA would lock you up if you pulled that crap in a terminal.
-
People still don't understand they cannot take liquids through the security screening area, which is hard to understand based on the news coverage and the many, many signs prior to the cue.
Whew...glad I read the update before posting...I was all ready to get into the queue to pick at DP's post some more.
:-*
I still await the day when we all are handed paper gowns at the airport check-in.
-
Slothus, are you ******* kidding me? Glass houses, ass wipe.
you can't honestly tell me it's only the young whipper snappers who are bitching at the airport when they have to take their shoes off.
I know you directed that at Morgbug but this is an open forum. I, for one, never complain at the airports' recent security rules(takingoff shoes,jackets ect). I know why we do it so I don't ever complain for the slowdown. Am I dissapointed that I can't go all the way to the terminal anymore to greet my family coming off a plane? Sure-it's sad our previous freedoms are removed from us, but I get why we do it so no complaints.
DS
It's probably for the best you cannot meet your family at the gate. The way you brag about slapping your sister around the TSA would lock you up if you pulled that crap in a terminal.
They'd lock him up only after he tried to toss them through a plate-glass window ::)
-
Slothus, are you ******* kidding me?
Yes, duh* ::)
From where I stand..the way you dish it...you live in glass house
definately Whatta puss
-
The Day After
Thanks, Brent, for bringing that movie up... I'll be having frakkin nightmares again. I don't know how that would affect me now, but as a 6-7 year old (don't remember when it came out)... that had left an impression on me. That really got the Cold War embedded into me... and the fact there was Red Dawn, Firefox and the Rambo movies... Commies were bad dudes and needed to be blown away...
...at least before I decide to get to know the "enemy" better.
-
You guys have it easy when it comes to security cheacks at airports. My dad has a nerve disease called CMT. He'll be 67 this year, and in order for him to stand, even with crutches, he wears leg braces that run from his ankes all the way up to the top of his thighs. He has to TAKE THESE OFF AND HAVE THEM SCANNED each time he flies. He has to essentially take his pants off! My parents are patient and tolerent, so they understand the reason. Last time they flew it took the about 45 minutes to get through security, after waiting on the line for 20-25 mintes.
-
good insight Mike; that must suck..it opens my eyes wider to folks with special situations and how much harder the new rules are on them.