Placing blame

[Soybomb]

Some of the survivor stories talk about students in classrooms playing dead and hiding under bodies as cho walked the room executing survivors. I'm not sure what it is but I think there's a strong poster in those stories.

 

[sm]

Re: Pictures to promote agendas.

-JFK being assassinated in Dallas, Showing the motorcade over and over again.
Jackie covering John, The Secret Service Agent coming up the back of the car...
Little Kennedy standing there in his little suit and flag in his little hand at his daddy's funeral.


-Sarah Brady and Jim being shot the day Reagan was shot.

How many times has Sarah used those images to promote her agenda?

Did Ronald Reagan? One of his comments was " I forgot to duck".

-Oklahoma City Bombing.
How many times did that graphic get shown and how many agendas by various factions used those graphics.

-9/11 and how many times did the media play those over and over again?


Hey, can't the heat, get the hades out of my country!

 

[rainbowbob]

sm:

I don't think it's about tolerating the heat. Most of us know that the real images are far worse than what Oleg portrays in his poster. And most of us have seen far worse images.

I do think it's about - at least in part - the question of whether this is an effective way of using imagery to advance our agenda (the right to CCW on college campuses).

Does anyone believe that a bloody image placing the blame for Cho's violence on the VT administrators is going to advance that agenda?

I think we sometimes make the mistake of "preaching to the choir" - when what is needed is to convince those who are either undecided or uneducated regarding this issue. Alienating those folks might give some satisfaction - but it doesn't get the job done.

 

[Oleg Volk]

The purpose of this graphic is to scare college administrators into doing the right thing.

 

[shdwfx]

Powerful photograph, but I know it will repulse your target audience. 80% of people will be angry - not at the VT administration - but at the pro-gun/life crowd for being "insensitive."

Don't like it but that's reality. I would wager my NRA membership that the VT authorities will only dig in their heels and be more sure of their anti-gun position after seeing this. "In your face" is a turn off and will have an adverse effect.

 

[basicblur]

I like that...

Thanks...I got a million of 'em!
Well, actually that's it...I got nuttin'.
(Don't really remember who I heard say that)

AFA making folks uncomfortable...isn't that the purpose of the poster?
One should-no, make that MUST feel uncomfortable about what happened at VT-trying to whitewash it by not thinking about it is what allows history to repeat itself.

I saw a program on The History Channel ‘bout a year ago on The Holocaust. The Russians were the first to find/report the camps, but no one believed them, claiming they were just trying to create sympathy for themselves. When allied forces did find them, Eisenhower ordered as many officers, enlisted men, AND townspeople to tour the camps as they were found-even made the townspeople help with the disposal of bodies.
His reason was that unless we force as many people to see this as possible, he predicted that in the future some would start to deny it ever happened.
Even after his steps to prevent such, we still have genocide and there are those who deny The Holocaust ever happened.

If people are not forced to remember the horrors of VT, they will allow it to happen again.

 

[rainbowbob]

The purpose of this graphic is to scare college administrators into doing the right thing.

Oleg:
I sympathize with the intent. I just don't believe that even a single VT administrator - or anybody else in a position to change the rules - will have their heart and/or mind changed by your indictment. At least not changed in the direction we want them to go. It may even work against us.

So that leaves us with some satisfaction of our moral outrage - and little else.

 

[Nolo]

I sympathize with the intent. I just don't believe that even a single VT administrator - or anybody else in a position to change the rules - will have their heart and/or mind changed by your indictment. At least not changed in the direction we want them to go. It may even work against us.

So that leaves us with some satisfaction of our moral outrage - and little else.

Okay.
It is a tightrope act.
Ultimately, our goal is to influence public opinion.
The question is, what is needed to accomplish that?
Oleg has toed the nicey side of things quite frequently, even with the VT issue (which he has covered extensively).
This image is a sort of covering our bases if you will.
I don't know what outcome it'll have.
Sometimes you have to compensate for other people being wimps, and sometimes you have to slap them in the face.
Now we have the resources to do both.

 

[yenchisks]

Life is in the blood: what do you think would happen if you had this picture on a t-shirt and walk around campus?

 

[george29]

The purpose of this graphic is to scare college administrators into doing the right thing.

You Know You're a Liberal ....


If you think Rob Reiner had to stretch to play the liberal in "All in the Family"


If you think the answer to ANY crime, infraction, or injustice is counseling.


If you've spent no less than 30 years in the walls of academia and don't see how today could be too much different from the '60s.


If you think the criminal has more rights than the police who arrest this criminal, unless the crime is sexual harassment, or racism.


If you use the term 'open-minded' and don't care that it can't be defined in absolute terms.


If you think only white people can be racist.


If Clarence Thomas made you sick, Bob Packwood made you protest, but Bill Clinton is a victim of partisan politics.

Added before I started keeping track of when I added new items

If you think that teenager's sexual behavior is uncontrollable, but hardened violent criminals should be released on parole after serving a cut sentence in a "correctional institution".


If you think Maxine Waters and Sheila Jackson Lee are articulate geniuses but Justice Clarence Thomas, Dr. Alan Keyes and Dr. Walter Williams are dolts.


If you think Rush Limbaugh and Michael Reagan are mean spirited racists and promote hate crime but Maxine Waters, John Conyers and Louis Farakahn aren't and don't.


If you think that the Constitution is a living document and should be changed but the writings of Karl Marx are "written in stone".


If you think burning the United States flag should be Constitutionally protected but burning a cross should be outlawed.


If you think that tax cuts hurt poor people and are uncompassionate but taking 30% from their paychecks is compassionate


If your idea of hell is having to mind your own business and not meddle in other people's lives.


If you believe that posting the "Ten Commandments" in schools will hurt the children, but putting "Heather Has Two Mommies" or "Ask Alice" (on the internet) won't.


If you think that the American Dream could have only been accomplished in the '60s.


if you think that conservatives have no sense of humor then shudder at the idea of a Clinton joke.


If you actually do believe that Clinton doesn't know the definition of the words "alone", "is", or "correct".


If you believe that Columbus is a mean-spirit bringer of genocide, and never should have explored to the new world, which meant that no one would have religious or taxation freedom whatsoever.


If you think that the only way the tragedy in Littleton, CO could have been avoided was to restrict the access of the guns, two of which were bought on the black market.


If you actually think the multicultural movement of the '90s works better than organized religion.


If you don't want the Christian Right imposing their morality on you, but you want to impose big government on everyone else because they won't do the right thing.


You're a liberal if you can't see the irony in your own beliefs.


If you believe Peter Jennings is a very educated and intelligent man.


If you can actually believe everyone around Bill Clinton is lying, but Bill Clinton himself is telling the truth.


If you point to God's forgiveness of King David in reference to Bill Clinton but "forget" to read the rest of the scripture about the ruin that he inflicted on his family, his kingdom and himself.


If you think that the only acceptable hate crime is Christian bashing.


If you want to make the rich "pay their fair share" but leave Ted (more people have been killed in my car than in an American nuclear power plant) Kennedy and Dick Gebhardt out of the definition of the rich.


If your idea of compassion is giving a homeless person a shopping cart but expecting them to accept the responsibilities of life is mean spirited, racist, bigoted, etc. ad nauseum.


If you think Princess Diana was compassionate for hugging poor children and children with AIDS (while "forgetting" about her getting in her limo and driving away) but Mother Teresa makes you uncomfortable.


If you think that "dumbing down" America's school kids is compassionate but holding them to high educational standards is "mean spirited", racist, bigoted, etc. ad nauseum.


If you think that Teddy Kennedy, Jesse Jackson and the KKK don't have anything in common (at least the KKK is honest about their goals).


If you think that people need to be punished for good choices and rewarded for bad ones.


You're a liberal if you think what Hitler did to the Jews is horrible but the "Christian Right" is dangerous and needs to be done away with.


If you don't see the parallel between yourself, Adolph Hitler, Josef Stalin and Chairman Mao.


If you believe that the "700 Club" are a group of fakes or actors but the people on "The Jerry Springer" show are real people.


If you actually refer to the Reagan and Bush Presidencies as one Presidency.


If you think that affirmative action is the only way to solve racial problems in America.


If you think the best way to care about a disease is to wear a ribbon.


If you think that pouring blood on a $1,500 fur coat is a sure-fire way to get your message across, but if anyone protests outside an abortion clinic, they're extremists!


If Sean Hannity makes no sense and Alan Colmes makes perfect sense.


If you voted for Mondale in 1984 thinking that raising your taxes was a good idea.


If you refer to listening to Jesse Jackson or Sam Donaldson as "equal time".


If you make snide remarks to guys for looking at women but champion Clinton's right to do whatever he wants with his interns.


If you think the impeachment vote was 'just about sex'.


If you think all the attacks against Republicans are justified, but got outraged about the Willie Horton incident.


If you actually think Clinton 'only inhaled'.


If the last 'good old president' you remember was Carter.


If you condemn Dan Quayle for misspelling potato and then ignore the witticisms of Al Gore (who are these people?)


If you think Alec Baldwin was justified in his protest on the Jay Leno show.


If you actually think there IS a way that the Republicans can poison the water supply to certain people, and destroy the ozone layer.


If you believe any of the conspiracies such as that the AIDS virus was started by the government or that certain products cause sterility in black males, but think "The X-files" is too far fetched.


If you think that Watergate and Iran-Contra was a travesty of justice, but anything against Clinton is partisan!


If you believe VH-1 when they tell you that warning labels were put on by "Conservatives led by Tipper Gore".


If you believe Clinton's 'change of heart' after the sudden switch in the 1994 election.


If you use the words "right wing extremist" at least four times in any given day.


If you think that bombing on Iraq couldn't have possibly had anything to do with the impeachment vote... then why did they stop as soon as the vote was done?


If you think that the four cops who beat Rodney King should have been thrown in jail forever, but the four thugs who beat Reginald Denny should have fair justice.


You complain that your community has too many white people and the Catholic church you go to doesn't have enough ethnicity, but you're the first one with a for sale sign in your yard when blacks start moving in.


You called Vietnam Veterans "baby killers" but think that allowing a woman to suck her baby into a sink is a constitutionally protected right.


You think that Joe Camel and big tobacco are out to kill your babies, but allowing a babies brain to be sucked out of its skull when it's 1/3 of the way out of the birth canal is paramount to a free society.


You scream if a CEO sleeps with an employee but think that Clinton receiveing oral sex from an Intern is just fine.


You believe that Clinton was forced to lie under oath by the "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy"


You think that Ken Starr is the devil's helper for calling Monica's mother to testify but believe that Ollie North's wife and minister being called before the grand Jury was fair.


You believe Clinton's numbers about the number of jobs created and don't credit it to the businesses given opportunities in the 1980s.

You know no recorded economic history (e.g. the massive stagflation and recession) before the Reagan Era.

You think sexual harassment is rampant, date rape pervasive, domestic violence common and Paula Jones is lying.

You get mad when rape victims' sexual history is plastered all over the news media, but think Paula Jones' sexual history "must be made public."

You hate Hillary jokes.

You hate Monica jokes.

You pale at the execution of child killers, but defend the killing of unborn children as an expression of choice.

You fully support women who have "exercised their right to choose" when they abort in the 3rd trimester, but think Amy Grossberg should get the death penalty before the trial even goes to court.

You think trees have feelings, animals can conceptualize and the fetus is a blob of protoplasm.

You wear a red ribbon to show your support for a cure for AIDS but oppose all animal experimentation needed to find that cure

If you hear a news report of a man beat nearly to death because he is a minority or gay and you rally about punishing the bigot who committed the terrible act BUT, if you hear a news report of a man beat nearly to death for his money, and you start talking about the poor disadvantaged person who is forced to commit such acts to survive.

You are convinced that Frank Capra films and Norman Rockwell paintings are lies and distortions but "Platoon," "Dances with Wolves" and "Thelma and Louise" are realistic.

You thought Walt Disney was saccharine sweet and terminally cutesy-pie - until it made Pocahontas.

You think a moment of silent prayer at the beginning of the school day constitutes government indoctrination and an intrusion on parental authority, while sex education, condom distribution and multiculturalism are values-neutral.

You agonize over threats to the natural environment (acid rain, toxic waste) but are oblivious to threats to the social environment (pornography, promiscuity, and family dissolution).

You are appalled at all the money being spent investigating the alleged illegal activities of Bill Clinton, but insist that investigating 75 charges (74 which were dismissed as unfounded) charges against Newt Ginrich was "the only just thing to do."

You want to outlaw cigarrettes and legalize marijuana

You want to legalize cocaine and outlaw handguns. You think cops are pigs and criminals are products of their environment.

You believe the National Rifle Association helps criminals while the American Civil Liberties Union protects the innocent.

You think Rush Limbaugh is responsible for the Oklahoma City bombing but are outraged by suggestions that Ted Kaczynski (the suspected Unabomber) and Al Gore have anything in common.

You just know that everything Rush Limbaugh says is a lie but you have never listened to him.

Jesse Jackson makes sense to you. Barbra Streisand makes even more sense.

You think Herblock cartoons are funny and Janet Reno is totally hot.

You believe corporate profits are obscene but government spending is too low and the American people are undertaxed.

You see cartoons condemning religions and making fun of Christianity as funny and an expression of free speech, but think the cartoon B.C. should be banned.

You think deficits are caused by tax loopholes.

You think AIDS is spread by insufficient funding.

You consider the Catholic bishops noble and idealistic when they oppose capital punishment and welfare cuts but dangerous fanatics trying to legislate their theology when they defend the right to life.

You are convinced that proponents of welfare reform hate the poor and opponents of affirmative action hate minorities, but AIDS activists who bash the Pope and People for the American Way types who go psycho over Protestant "fundamentalists" are guardians of democracy.

You attribute every minority problem to entrenched, institutional racism and the legacies of slavery and segregation.

You think the black middle class is a myth created by Newt Gingrich.

You view race riots as justifiable expressions of rage over injustice and fail to see the similarities between a black mob burning a Korean store and a white mob in the Jim Crow era lynching a black man.

You don't understand all of the whining about affirmative action and are more than willing to sacrifice someone else's employment or education opportunity to assuage your guilt.

You marched against American involvement in Vietnam, thought the Gulf war was unnecessary but believe 25,000 U.S. troops in Bosnia are vital to our national interests.

You see no correlation between welfare and the rise of illegitimacy, judicial leniency and surging crime rates, or addiction and an entertainment industry that glorifies drug abuse. But you believe Richard Nixon is responsible for everything horrible that's happened in the past quarter-century.

You think those child-abusing, religious fanatics at Waco had it coming but the illegal immigrants roughed up by California deputies - after leading them on a high-speed chase - are the victims of the decade.

You continually say that conservatives have no sense of humor, but after reading this page, think that I am cold and mean-spirited.


Lastly, you're a liberal if - you don't get the point of my web page!


Liberals, the last bastion of serious nonsense.

 

[3KillerBs]

Excellent!

Its high time that people be MADE to realize that actions have consequences and that the consequence of preventing people from defending themselves is that you get to share the guilt with the nutcases who take advantage of your criminal empowerment zone.

 

[Travis McGee]

IMO, it's too bloody/graphic to reach the intended audience (fence sitting students) in an effective way.

Also, perhaps a "no guns allowed" sign might be on the ground near the victim's hand? To tie the photograph to the message directly. That is, to include the message in the photo, not only in the caption.

 

[akodo]

The blood is on their hands, too!

While you may pause there for inflection while speaking, I am pretty sure no comma is the correct punctuation.

 

[3KillerBs]

BTW -- anyone who thinks that image would disturb the college age students, especially the guys, has never seen anyone playing a video game.

The administrators who put that policy in place and the politicians who refused to pre-empt it NEED to be disturbed.

 

[akodo]

Also, I'd love to see one that was a dark wooden floor with a pool of blood coming in from one edge, partial bootprint in the pool, a scattering of college papers with some empty casings strewn about and the stamp of that bloody partial boot print making a path across the floor

 

[orionengnr]

Oleg--
As always, I like your style. My opinion only, that waiting this long is too long (and yes, I understand that the day after is way too early).

Much as the real story behind 9/11 was seldom seen and never heard about except for one movie (what horrors occurred onboard those jets?) our MSM chooses to gloss over the real issues and lead us into arguments over red herrings....

I hope the VT students take this and run with it.

BTW, legal on-campus carry will be on the agenda of the Texas State Rifle Association next year. Our legislature only convenes bi-annually, to limit the amount of damage they can do...

 

[stevemis]

How about getting 32 students into a bus and driving them to each of the administrators houses at 3am? They can stand outside and beg and plead for their lives at the tops of their collective lungs.

That would cause some sleepless nights.

 

[Oana]

The image, IMHO, isn't too disturbing.

I do think it's likely to widen the gulf between the anti- and pro-gun camps. It may not win over fence-sitters at all; accusing administrators who probably *were* just trying to do the right thing (as they saw it) of having blood on their hands is a very accusatory tactic. I might still say it, just in a different way.

But as Oleg said, it's in the hands of VT students, let them decide. I think they tried the nice, polite method before the shootings, when they tried to get CCW allowed on campus. Maybe another approach will work now.

 

[loneviking]

Good one, Oleg! The administrators of VT need to have the results of their liberal, misguided, bleeding heart agenda rubbed into their faces, and they need it done on a daily basis until they accept that the fact that gun control laws absolutely fail to protect anyone.

 

[AStone]

The image is compelling.

The msg is correct.

Grammar aside, it's one of your best.

However, it would be more powerful with
"The blood is also on their hands."
in smaller font with no exclamation mark.

Here, understated is more powerful.
Sometimes, less is more. In this case,
shouting is less effective than cold assertion.

That also leaves "their hands" as the final words.

The purpose of this graphic is to scare
college administrators into doing the right thing.

As a former college faculty, I assert that most college admins
are corporate executives driven by FTE's and bottom lines
instead of either enlightened education or compassion.

The purpose of this graphic is to motivate students and their families
to exert pressure on college administrators to do the right thing.

 

[jakemccoy]

I like it.

 

[3KillerBs]

accusing administrators who probably *were* just trying to do the right thing (as they saw it) of having blood on their hands is a very accusatory tactic. I might still say it, just in a different way.

"Trying" to do the right thing is not justification for doing the wrong thing.

Those who hold authority also bear responsibility. Their choices have consequences. When those consequences include the loss of innocent life they SHOULD be accused of wrongdoing. They SHOULD be held responsible. They should have their personal responsibility for the shedding of innocent blood driven home to them and to all observers in a way that makes it impossible for anyone to ever again claim ignorance and good intentions in the same situation.

We say that "The road to hell is paved with good intentions" for a reason -- to remind people that intentions aren't good enough. Actually results must be considered as well when making our choices.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

accusing administrators who probably *were* just trying to do the right thing (as they saw it) of having blood on their hands is a very accusatory tactic. I might still say it, just in a different way.

They were not trying to do the right thing. They were trying to do the wrong thing -- deprive students of their civil rights. And people died as a result.

 

[rainbowbob]

Here is a thought exercise in alternative reality:

Let's suppose the VT administrators had seen the light and permitted CCW on campus prior to the massacre.

I submit that the number of students and/or instructors actually carrying anywhere in the vicinity of the shooter would have probably been very small. Maybe one or two at the most

But let's assume at least one person was within range and had a firearm.

I realize we here are all certain we would have stepped right up with no thought for our personal safety and heroically made the perfect head-shot.

In reality, it would have taken an extraordinary amount of courage, luck, and skill for that armed citizen to successfully take out the determined shooter and avoid being killed.

In the unfortunate absence of any one of those elements (either courage, luck, or skill) - the outcome might have been pretty much the same as it actually was.

In this alternative reality - who do you blame?

 

[Oleg Volk]

Most of the blame goes to the killer in any case. But, as the events showed, the moment Cho faced armed opposition, he suicided. So any return fire, even inaccurate, would have driven him off.