Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Tripper
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Sparks
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.
|
|
My comparison on L.H.O. wasn't on identification of shooters, thanks for quoting me out of context.
We don't know if Cho did it for himself, can anyone really say they knew what was going on in the mind of Cho as a young child, or five years ago, or five months ago, or five minutes before the first shooting.
Just because he wrote a few very harsh papers symbolizing hatred towards a father figure and a teacher figure doesn't really provide substational evidence to say we know what was going on inside his head.
I'm might be going out on a limb here, but I'm sure people say such harsh things too in journals/diaries. Should we go report them because their a shady figure and we snooped around their items? Where does the right to privacy come into play. I took a screen writing class and some kids wrote horrible stuff on girlfriend/boyfriend situations which involved mutilation and retaliation, some of those kids were shady figures too (shy and kept to themselves). Aside from it being a creative writing class, shouldn't they also feel that sense of privacy when writing stuff.
I wonder if Cho's family wanted those papers given to the media, or if the school violated his privacy rights and gave them out. Granted this is involving state and federal investigation, does the public really need to see those things word for word? Or are we part of a guinea pig scheme to take and swallow what's given to us without question.
If he being a nice guy or not is irrelevant, why bother to judge him? Why bother to post his English papers? As you said, he murdered innocent people, that's all we as the general public need to know.
As I said before, only the families of the victims will get a more in-depth knowledge of what went down.