|
Originally Posted by Sparks
c312 just proved my point. I'm pretty sure the families will soon find out later that Cho himself teased people or even harassed his girlfriend, but we'll never know because of gag-orders.
We only see what the media and government wants us to see. I'll use a case that's more closer to a college student wielding a gun... Lee Harvey Oswald. We all know how he was part of the Fair Play For Cuba Committee, had a troubled childhood, had connections with Russia and did some spy work. What we don't hear is that he was young bright man growing up who wanted to serve his country, he was a loving husband, a wonderful father to his two children, his close friends and co-workers said he wasn't a bad guy... yet all we hear from the government is that he was a lunatic with a gun who decided to off the president someday for no apparent reason without even benefiting from it. Keeping in mind he is just a "suspected" assassinater, but people are led to believe it was him because they get all the bad rep on him.
Lee Harvey Oswald comparison doesn't work - There wasnt any question on whether Cho was the killer or not, he would have been positively ID'd by several students who saw his face clearly as he rampaged through their school - Whereas Oswald sniped the President from a distance, his killing was done in a matter of seconds from a distance. Plus there is a conspiracy theory about Oswald not being the killer for several reasons surrounding the fact that the victim was the PRESIDENT. Why would the media need to warp the story against Cho? He did it for himself. This is an open and shut case, whether he was a nice guy or not is totally ireelevant - He killed 32 innocent randomly selected people he'd probably never met before.
The terrorists on 9/11 were doing what they were because of their religious duties and beliefs, what does that have to do with being lonely, manic depressive, or even crazy.You're right, what does that have to do with being lonely and manic depressive? Another stupid comparison - The terrorists had religous causes, what was Cho's driving intention? Somehow I don't think it was jihad or anything similar.
You guys are so one sided on this and simply like to take the easy route on outrage. I bet none of you guys personally knew Cho. Granted I didn't either, but I'm pretty sure you didn't as well. And the school doesn't know the Cho that's walking down the street on Saturday nights so don't even go there about the English papers gestapo crap, because pa-leaze, you're going to tell me Cho is the only person in the entire school to ever write a paper with guns or chainsaws in it.
So what point are you trying to make, and why? It makes no sense. You definitely didn't read the paper because there were a few words in their I'd be embarrased to say out loud in a public place. Like someone else said there was no gun either, and the chainsaw part isnt even that crazy, its more the entire topic and the way Cho portrays human emotion and conflict. People are trying to rationalize after an event like this. Its been one day and you're already crying out conspiracy theories. Really, what could the media possibly be denying you about this case?
|