The NRO's John Derbyshire - on the VT tragedy:

http://corner.nation...

Spirit of Self-Defense  [John Derbyshire]

As NRO's designated chickenhawk, let me be the one to ask: Where was the spirit of self-defense here? Setting aside the ludicrous campus ban on licensed conceals, why didn't anyone rush the guy? It's not like this was Rambo, hosing the place down with automatic weapons. He had two handguns for goodness' sake-one of them reportedly a .22.

At the very least, count the shots and jump him reloading or changing hands. Better yet, just jump him. Handguns aren't very accurate, even at close range. I shoot mine all the time at the range, and I still can't hit squat. I doubt this guy was any better than I am. And even if hit, a .22 needs to find something important to do real damage-your chances aren't bad.

Yes, yes, I know it's easy to say these things: but didn't the heroes of Flight 93 teach us anything? As the cliche goes-and like most cliches. It's true-none of us knows what he'd do in a dire situation like that. I hope, however, that if I thought I was going to die anyway, I'd at least take a run at the guy.

And what he said on the British hostages:

http://corner.nation...

Brit Wimps  [John Derbyshire]

Once again, it's me and Ralph Peters on the same wavelength, deploring the cowardice of the British sailors and marines kidnapped by Iran. When it happened, I said I hoped the ones who'd shamed their country would be court-martialed on return to Blighty, and given dishonorable discharges after a couple years breaking rocks in the Outer Hebrides (which, believe me-I've been there-have a LOT of rocks). Now, I confess, I wouldn't shed a tear if some worse fate befell them.

The only coherent response I get to these sentiments is: "How do you know what they've been through? How would YOU stand up?" To which the obvious reply is the one Dr. Johnson gave in some similar case: "I may criticize a carpenter who makes me a bad table, though I cannot make a table myself. It is not my job to make tables." It is the job of a Royal Marine to fight, and if necessary suffer and die, for his country. They know that when they go in. It's what they are told! I nurse a quiet hope that if put to the test, I would stand up as well as any Marine. Whether or not I would, however, is irrelevant. Whether or not I could stand up well to torture, I expect Marines to.

A sample of her bile:

**** UPDATE #2: The shooter has now been identified as a Chinese national here on a student visa. Lovely. Yet another reason to stop letting in so many foreign students. ****

**** UPDATE: Shootings appear professional, says expert; VTU Alum on school's "Asian" Population; 2nd Amenment-Free Campus/VTU lobbied against students having guns on campus for personal protection ****

Here's what we know about the murderer of at least 32 students and maimer of at least 28 more at Virginia Tech, today:

* The murderer has been identified by law enforcement and media reports as "a young Asian male."

* The Virginia Tech campus has a very large Muslim community, many of which are from Pakistan (per terrorism investigator Bill Warner).

* Pakis are considered "Asian."

*******

So who is the shooter? What is the shooter's nationality? What is the shooter's religion? Waiting to find out. And wondering why the police and media are referring to the shooter as "Asian" and not by specific nationality.

Another comment she made, on the Washington Post's picture of the convocation, which had some Muslim students in the front row:

Hmmm . . . I'm sure of all the thousands of students at the memorial mourning the dead at Virginia Tech's convocation, today, the Washington Post took this and chose this particular one at random for its cover shot at its website, WashingtonPost.com. Just a random photo, right? . . .

And another comment she made while she was convinced the killer was Chinese:

So, the perpetrator of the Virginia Tech massacre is a Chinese national here on a student visa. And, today, this alien did "the job that Americans just won't do."

Remember that the next time you hear President Bush and Condi Clueless waxing lyrical about how we need more foreign students in America. We do not. Remember the Mana Saleh Almanajam and Shaker Mohsen Alsidran, two Saudi students in Tampa, last year, who hijacked a school bus full of kids while wearing trench coats in 90-plus degree weather?

Questions:

  * How did a Chinese national get two 9 MM guns and plenty of ammo to go with it?

  * Where did he learn such excellent marksmanship?

Can't she just stop for a moment and have honest empathy towards the victims, instead of seeing them as another opportunity to advance her twisted world view?

Ban him, Lowell.

Every time I've asked for examples and even provided email addresses, no one seems to want to debate substance or specific points.  I don't use bad language, I don't insult people or call them names (although I've been accused of this with no one being able to find any).  So, not having any examples to work with, how can not conclude that you are permitting others to personally attack me in a far worse and disrespectful manner than anything I've ever written.  (Unless you believe allowing all your guests to be referred to as "evil" or "vile"?  You know as well as I do I'm treated far worse than anyone else on this board)  The reasoning for this seems to be a strong, vehement disagreement with my position on issues since the other so-called "reasons" have been unsubstantiated. I can live with that--all people of good will can disagree.

But, by encouraging people to rate me as a "troll" simply because my views are disliked seems to contradict your own forum rules of engagement which will surely result in the "monolithic forum" you warn of. (Ref: "Don't give out negative ratings based on whether you agree or disagree with the arguments in the comments - this leads to a monolithic forum that lacks new ideas and input. Instead, save the lower ratings for true "trolls"! Comments with low ratings will eventually be deleted.) The intent clearly appears to be the justification of expunging and censoring alternative viewpoints to ensure the groupthink is protected. As I've written before, if that's what you want, then cool.  But, if that's the case, please have the intellectual honesty to admit it and drop any silly pretense that this board is an open, objective forum that welcomes alternative viewpoints. 

Yes, my writing style is direct, blunt and lacking in the polished elitism you might be used to.  But I've been civil and only addressed issues where I believed the writer either has omitted an alternative consideration or where I believe another view could help expand and widen the discussion.

You or anyone is free to write me and tell me where you believe I've shown "nastiness, condescension, and a complete unwillingness to listen" but since I keep asking and no one is writing, I have to wonder if it's the truth or a simple pretext for eventual censorship.  If you want a "monolithic forum" just drop me a note off-line and tell me so and I'll go away.  Once again, I'm at clearmines@yahoo.com and the coffee's always hot.

Cheers! 

This isn't a partisan question, it's a matter of class.

This would be a little bit like dropping off advertising flyers in a high school hallway saying: Check out our awesome coverage of the killing spree in Blacksburg.

That's just classless and disrespectful.

To this question you raised the point that "other people were covering this incident, so why are you turning this into a partisan issue by focusing on Fox News".  Well, excuse the expletive, but that wasn't the f-cking question.

Who else is targeting ads at college students and high schoolers trying to use this incident to attract new viewers?

None that I'm aware of.  Certainly no one else on Facebook.

But rather than taking 2 minutes to find out what "Facebook" was, you figured, "Hell, they're just applying a double-standard.  Why are they being so partisan?"

Well, why is Fox News inviting high schoolers and college kids to come watch the "massacre" on its network?  That's the question.  Not why is Fox covering this incident.

I'm just guessing it's because they're not in the habit of inviting viewers to watch coverage elsewhere.  Every channel I watched calls it a "massacre" so that's certainly not unique to Fox.

"Who else is targeting ads at college students and high schoolers trying to use this incident to attract new viewers?"

I wouldn't know, I've tuned out...too painful to watch day in and out.  On the face of it, I certainly see your point about it being somewhat crass but leveraging the increased desire for coverage from a target market that's always hard to reach seems like a smart business decision if nothing else.  If the kids are "offended" they'll tune out.  These kids aren't fools, they'll sort it out for themselves and make up their own minds.

I admit I know nothing of Facebook.  My kids talk about it.  I really don't care.  So for this, I'll take you at your word and wonder if, in the long run, it really makes a hill of beans.  Who knows?

One can only hope that this is a sign of desperation for an audience.

While I admit I do not like Fox News, I would find this ad equally offensive if PBS was running it.

www.godhatesamerica.com

Unbelievable.

I understand why people don't like Fox and their perceived bias but this is still a free and open country where the marketplace of ideas is alive and well allowing blogs like this and media to say whatever they want to whomever they want.  Therefore, the response to Fox is as obvious as the nose on your face.  It's all in the message.

The American people know what they believe in and what they want to read and watch and treating them like they're stupid has never worked in the capitalist system.  Fox draws viewers because of their content, pure and simple.  The other "messages" and alternative views are simply not being "bought" (watched, viewed, etc) by the public as much because they've made a choice. 

Banning Fox and banning alternative voices is something Goebbels was very good at but it's certainly not something we want to start considering in America.  If you want to beat Fox in this open marketplace of ideas, simply have a better idea.  How hard can that be? 

And by the way, if you believe that our increasingly corporatized, consolidated media is really a "free marketplace of ideas," I've got some nice swampland in western Iraq I'd like to sell you.  Cheap!

I

Four large bombs exploded across Baghdad on Wednesday, killing at least 127 people and wounding scores as violence climbed toward levels seen before the U.S.-Iraqi campaign to pacify the capital began two months ago.
*****

n the deadliest of the attacks, a parked car bomb detonated in a crowd of workers at the Sadriyah market in central Baghdad, killing at least 82 people and wounding 94, said Raad Muhsin, an official at Al-Kindi Hospital where the victims were taken.

Here's the Tuesday story, which was sort of passed by:
http://www.msnbc.msn...

All in all, as hard as it is to believe, the situation in Iraq actually seems to be deteriorating, not improving.  As an American first and a Democrat second (or is it a human first, American second and Democrat third?) this makes me very sad.  No good is going to come out of this entire situation, and that sucks, plain and simple.

The ad reminds us of a Condi Rice quote from September 2006: "The time for action has come."

Here's the Post story: http://www.washingto...

Yes, it's a complicated situation, but I think this sentiment expressed in the story is worth highlighting:

"Our experience is that the president's actions have not kept pace with his words," said David C. Rubenstein, the executive director of the Save Darfur Coalition.

This is another issue beyond politics.  I don't care who's in the White House -- and I don't think those 100 or so religious groups do either -- they just want action.

Actually, yes.  I do believe this is a free and open marketplace of ideas until convinced with evidence to the contrary.  "Corporatized and consolidated" or not, they still depend on the fredom of the American viewer with the remote in their hand to buy what they sell.  We all make our own choices.  No one forces us to watch or read anything.  Disagree?

That said, I would still argue that "free and open" applies to them as well because we all have access to a wide spectrum of "controlled" media.  I can read the "controlled" content of the Washington Times and then click a button and read the exact opposite views in the "controlled" NY or LA Times. All of them are "free and open" to print whatever they believe...but here's the "rub" as Shakespeare would say.  They all rely on the judgement of the American consumer to stay in business.  The power of the people relies on the choices they make.  If the American people aren't buying what they're selling, they cease to exist.  Quite different from Xinhua, or Pravda.

Thus when I say "free and open" I'm focused not so much on the production of content but on the consumption of that content.  So even if you are seeing less and less diversity in the MSM, that diversity still exists and the American people are making the choices.  Fox doesn't exist without viewers.  Limbaugh doesn't exist without listeners.  It's the content that people want that keep them in business.  provide an alternative view that people want, and they'll go there.  It's what Americans do, they use their freedom of choice.

While I would agree the blogosphere, writ large, contains a diversity of views, individual blogs do not exist to support a diversity of views.  Blogs rely on like-minded people searching for others who believe as they do to affirm and validate their own homogenous views of the world.  It's why we all don't go to the same church.  Like a Baptist preacher walking into a synagogue, "diversity" on a particular blog is hardly welcomed or encouraged and alternative views are frequently requested to be "banned."  It's that "free and open" marketplace of ideas that allows us to make this choice and to purge and reject alternative voices we disagree with.  We are only better informed Americans and make better choices when we make a sincere effort to balance what we read and watch.  Once that effort has been made, it all comes down to the greatest of all American attributes...a free choice.

We need to be supportive of healing.

The youngsters are our teachers right now. I am 50, and I acknolodge that I still have much to learn.

paul