• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Hundreds sign petition calling OSU administrator to be fired

Ockham

Ockham

Noblesse oblige
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2009
Messages
23,909
Reaction score
11,003
Location
New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
OSU administrator called to be fired after Facebook post asking 'compassion' for Abdul Artan | Daily Mail Online


Snopes said:
Abdul Razak Ali Artan was a BUCKEYE, a member of our family. If you think it is okay to celebrate his death and/or share a photo of his dead body and I see it in my timeline I will unfriend you. I pray you find compassion for his life, as troubled as it clearly was. Think of the pain he must have been in to feel that his actions were the only solution. We must come together in this time of tragedy. #BuckeyeStrong #BlackLivesMatter #SayHisName

Yes, he was trying to murder Infidels in the name of Allah and Islam — after all, he said, “By Allah, I am willing to kill a billion infidels” — but it isn’t as if he was a right-winger or a member of some other morally suspect group. On the contrary, he was a triple victim: a Muslim, a refugee, and a racial minority. That means that for addled leftists such as Stephanie Clemons Thompson, he is the real victim, no matter what he did.
Click to expand...

Ohio State University Staffer Asked for Sympathy for Campus Attacker : snopes.com


Snopes identifies that this cannot be verified, simply because the administrator cannot be contacted to verify, yet the screenshots show she did in fact post this message, and then subsequently delete it due to the viral outrage.

First this is not a BLM spokesperson, so I do not think BLM would back such a view. Second, she obviously saw the flaw in her sympathy for a terrorist who attempted to kill other OSU Buckeyes by removing the post. Third, I do not think BLM wants to associate themselves with Islamic Terrorists who failed in their attempt to kill Americans but maybe I'm wrong there. No I do not have sympathy for terrorists. No he is not a victim, he's a dead terrorists and the world is better off without him in it.
 
Ockham said:
OSU administrator called to be fired after Facebook post asking 'compassion' for Abdul Artan | Daily Mail Online




Ohio State University Staffer Asked for Sympathy for Campus Attacker : snopes.com


Snopes identifies that this cannot be verified, simply because the administrator cannot be contacted to verify, yet the screenshots show she did in fact post this message, and then subsequently delete it due to the viral outrage.

First this is not a BLM spokesperson, so I do not think BLM would back such a view. Second, she obviously saw the flaw in her sympathy for a terrorist who attempted to kill other OSU Buckeyes by removing the post. Third, I do not think BLM wants to associate themselves with Islamic Terrorists who failed in their attempt to kill Americans but maybe I'm wrong there. No I do not have sympathy for terrorists. No he is not a victim, he's a dead terrorists and the world is better off without him in it.
Click to expand...

This is the problem with Snopes and Polifact. They use increasingly subjective methods to call something true or false.

Access Denied
 
I really do want to see this person removed from OSU. It would send a message that supporting terrorists by attempting to paint them as a victim because they black, is a mental sickness. Such views are twisted and horribly infect the young.
 
Ockham said:
OSU administrator called to be fired after Facebook post asking 'compassion' for Abdul Artan | Daily Mail Online

Ohio State University Staffer Asked for Sympathy for Campus Attacker : snopes.com

Snopes identifies that this cannot be verified, simply because the administrator cannot be contacted to verify, yet the screenshots show she did in fact post this message, and then subsequently delete it due to the viral outrage.

First this is not a BLM spokesperson, so I do not think BLM would back such a view. Second, she obviously saw the flaw in her sympathy for a terrorist who attempted to kill other OSU Buckeyes by removing the post. Third, I do not think BLM wants to associate themselves with Islamic Terrorists who failed in their attempt to kill Americans but maybe I'm wrong there. No I do not have sympathy for terrorists. No he is not a victim, he's a dead terrorists and the world is better off without him in it.
Click to expand...

I understand what she was trying to say however misguided and inappropriate her words. Shared with a friend or friends is one thing. Posting to social media in her position is quite another. "...I'll unfriend you..." sounds like a 13-year-old.

Calling him a triple victim is ridiculous. You're a victim because you're Muslim? A refugee? A racial minority? A victim of MENTAL ILLNESS...Perhaps. These are the types that are teaching our young people that they need pacifiers, safe spaces and puppies to deal with the real world. Scary.
 
The problem I have with stories like this is they point to some trends which represent the nature of modern communication.

First, some people think they need to tell the "world" how they feel about everything. Somethings/thoughts are better kept to oneself.

Second, it points to how people react when such "stream of consciousness" posts are made. Rather than just dismiss the post as some misguided application of sympathy, there becomes an all out effort to destroy the person who posted the comments.

Beyond the stunning hypocrisy such efforts likely reveal, is this how we want to operate in our society? Are we to think very carefully about every thought we might put in writing in case we could bring down the wrath of the populace and destroy ourselves?

Is that what we want?
 
ocean515 said:
First, some people think they need to tell the "world" how they feel about everything. Somethings/thoughts are better kept to oneself.
Click to expand...
Agreed - including the compulsion to post pictures about every meal they have.

ocean515 said:
Second, it points to how people react when such "stream of consciousness" posts are made. Rather than just dismiss the post as some misguided application of sympathy, there becomes an all out effort to destroy the person who posted the comments.
Click to expand...
Sometimes outrageous comments require an outrageous reply. I don't want her destroyed, I want her fired and removed from infecting others with her ignorance.

ocean515 said:
Beyond the stunning hypocrisy such efforts likely reveal, is this how we want to operate in our society? Are we to think very carefully about every thought we might put in writing in case we could bring down the wrath of the populace and destroy ourselves?
Click to expand...
Our society has always operated in such ways. The only thing that's changed is the method of conveyance. In the past it was done through the newspapers or in town halls, today it's done over twitter and social media.
 
Ockham said:
Agreed - including the compulsion to post pictures about every meal they have.

Sometimes outrageous comments require an outrageous reply. I don't want her destroyed, I want her fired and removed from infecting others with her ignorance.

Our society has always operated in such ways. The only thing that's changed is the method of conveyance. In the past it was done through the newspapers or in town halls, today it's done over twitter and social media.
Click to expand...

I suppose I should add that I too want to rid the halls of academia from morons like the one who may or may not have posted the words reported in the OP.

We have not experienced a time when immediate response can be initiated when the call goes out to attack. I have difficulty removing memories of historic times, when thought police became a tool of the state in some foreign countries.

I don't want to see such times return, and social media is providing a foundation for such efforts to do so.
 
Damn her for trying to show a level of Christ-like compassion for someone who was clearly disturbed.


Honestly though, her words actually shame me to some degree because my instant reaction to attackers like this guy is often to curse them and take some degree of pleasure in their death. I try to be compassionate even toward those who act in abhorrent ways, but I often fail, especially in situations where the person harms others. There's nothing wrong with someone trying to add more compassion and sympathy to this world. And it's easy to have compassion and sympathy for people who do good things. It's easy to have it for children with cancer or the innocent victims of a disturbed individuals attacks.

It takes a truly exceptional individual to have it for the dregs of society, though. To show compassion and sympathy for the people who behave in abhorrent ways that are anathematic to a civil society. Showing compassion and sympathy for a person does not mean you condone their behaviors or refuse to give them consequences for those behaviors.

When the families of the victims of the Charelston shooting demonstrated exactly this level of compassion to the murderer of their loved ones, I was so impressed by their ability to live in the fashion that Jesus taught. We need more people like that in this world, because people like that make this world a better place to live in.
 
reinoe said:
This is the problem with Snopes and Polifact. They use increasingly subjective methods to call something true or false.

Access Denied
Click to expand...
Yep, both organizations are worthless, and nothing more than left wing shills for the democrat party.
 


Was Dylan Roof a racist? Did Dylan Roof act in the name of racism?
 
MaggieD said:
I understand what she was trying to say however misguided and inappropriate her words. Shared with a friend or friends is one thing. Posting to social media in her position is quite another. "...I'll unfriend you..." sounds like a 13-year-old.

Calling him a triple victim is ridiculous. You're a victim because you're Muslim? A refugee? A racial minority? A victim of MENTAL ILLNESS...Perhaps. These are the types that are teaching our young people that they need pacifiers, safe spaces and puppies to deal with the real world. Scary.
Click to expand...

Reminds me of people who sexually abuse children then claim they are the victim themselves because they were sexually abused as children. Hogwash.
 
ocean515 said:
The problem I have with stories like this is they point to some trends which represent the nature of modern communication.

First, some people think they need to tell the "world" how they feel about everything. Somethings/thoughts are better kept to oneself.

Second, it points to how people react when such "stream of consciousness" posts are made. Rather than just dismiss the post as some misguided application of sympathy, there becomes an all out effort to destroy the person who posted the comments.

Beyond the stunning hypocrisy such efforts likely reveal, is this how we want to operate in our society? Are we to think very carefully about every thought we might put in writing in case we could bring down the wrath of the populace and destroy ourselves?

Is that what we want?
Click to expand...
She deserves it for expressing sympathy for this shooter. I wouldn't be surprised if she had detailed plans on this man's killing spree but chose not to do anything about it because she believed in his cause.
 
reinoe said:
She deserves it for expressing sympathy for this shooter. I wouldn't be surprised if she had detailed plans on this man's killing spree but chose not to do anything about it because she believed in his cause.
Click to expand...

What shooter?
 
reinoe said:
"Shooter" has a nicer ring than "cutter". But I should have said "killer".
Click to expand...

Well, he wasn't shooter, so you shouldn't confuse the issue.
 
The victims were those random OSU folks that became the target of the terrorist's rage. Calling a homicidal moron a victim is turning the true victims of this Jihadi into "oppressors" simply because they may not have been Muslim, refugees or racial minorities. It is sad when any person must be put down like a rabid dog - but to call it a bad outcome when only the "oppressed" dog dies is insane. One must pause to consider how the vast majority of such "triple victims" manage to resist their (just?) urges to kill perfect strangers that happen to be nearby.
 
reinoe said:
This is the problem with Snopes and Polifact. They use increasingly subjective methods to call something true or false.

Access Denied
Click to expand...

Apparently US News didn't like that article, access to it has been denied. Interesting.

However, it's still in the Google cache, here, but no telling for how much longer.
 
Ockham said:
OSU administrator called to be fired after Facebook post asking 'compassion' for Abdul Artan | Daily Mail Online




Ohio State University Staffer Asked for Sympathy for Campus Attacker : snopes.com


Snopes identifies that this cannot be verified, simply because the administrator cannot be contacted to verify, yet the screenshots show she did in fact post this message, and then subsequently delete it due to the viral outrage.

First this is not a BLM spokesperson, so I do not think BLM would back such a view. Second, she obviously saw the flaw in her sympathy for a terrorist who attempted to kill other OSU Buckeyes by removing the post. Third, I do not think BLM wants to associate themselves with Islamic Terrorists who failed in their attempt to kill Americans but maybe I'm wrong there. No I do not have sympathy for terrorists. No he is not a victim, he's a dead terrorists and the world is better off without him in it.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, Snopes is suffering from scale these days. They've gotten big, try to take on too much, and have a lot of different writers of varying quality. They used to be pretty rock-solid, but more and more errors and shoddy work are sneaking in.

Take this one, for example:

Christian-Owned Airlines Change Wing Light Colors to Celebrate Christmas? : snopes.com

About some dumb meme concerning the navigation lights on airplanes.

This was the meat paragraph:

We contacted the Federal Aviation Administration to determine what (if any) colors were standard on passenger jet wings. They told us that "for generations," the port (left) wing has borne a red light, and the starboard (right) wing a green one. The representative said this had been standard in aviation for decades, antedating even the FAA itself, and is not related to Christmas or any other season.
Click to expand...

They act like they've never even noticed navigation lights on planes or ships before, nor that they've always been red and green. (This writer may not have.) And this paragraph is changed from the original; she originally wrote it as the port wing having the green light and the starboard wing having the red light, which, of course, is opposite of reality. She could have just looked at the photo, or any photo of an airplane, and seen which light was red and which light was green. I think they probably got a lot of e-mails about that.

It's hardly the end of the world, but it's representative of how their quality has suffered.
 
I understand what spurred her to do it. People posting messages rejoicing in his death and posting pics of his body. Regardless of who the dead person is that is in bad taste. But she took it too far.
 
VanceMack said:
Click to expand...


The amount of stupid on this campus is overwhelming. "Uhh... I'm not sure." "Umm.........It depends on your definition of terrorism is." "I don't know what happened yet, I don't know what it's about."


The real question is, are these people just not saying what they really think because if they DO say it's terrorism they will be harassed on campus with repercussions from not only the other students (oppression) but also the administrators and profs. Some of it sounds like fear of telling the truth.... so maybe it's not stupid, maybe it's fear.

Was Dylan Roof a racist? Did Dylan Roof act in the name of racism?[/QUOTE]

Yes. Yes.
 
Ockham said:
The amount of stupid on this campus is overwhelming. "Uhh... I'm not sure." "Umm.........It depends on your definition of terrorism is."
Click to expand...

Actually, it does depend on the definition of "terrorist" that is being used.

22 U.S. Code § 2656f defines terrorism as follows: "the term “terrorism” means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents." (emphasis mine)

If this guy was a "lone wolf" he doesn't qualify as a terrorist by US standards.

If we use the definition from Websters, we get "the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion" where "terror" is defined as "violent or destructive acts (as bombing) committed by groups in order to intimidate a population or government into granting their demands". (emphasis mine again)

Again, a lone wolf would not qualify in this instance.

If we use the dictionary.com definition of terrorism, however, we get: "the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes." With this definition, he would qualify as a terrorist.

So it isn't stupid to say "it depends on your definition of terrorist".

One thing that is certain, however, is that it doesn't make it better or worse to be labeled as "terrorism" or not. Its just as horrific regardless of the verbiage you use to describe it.
 
Tucker Case said:
If this guy was a "lone wolf" he doesn't qualify as a terrorist by US standards.
Click to expand...
Why can't a clandestine agent be a lone actor, ie., "lone wolf"?

I'm sure if we want to get into the bowels of etymology we can have a debate about what the definition of "is" is, but that's a road to nowhere as a means of distraction. In my view a clandestine agent can be someone who was an agent before they came into the US to cause harm or one that was converted on US soil who caused harm.
 
Tucker Case said:
Damn her for trying to show a level of Christ-like compassion for someone who was clearly disturbed.


Honestly though, her words actually shame me to some degree because my instant reaction to attackers like this guy is often to curse them and take some degree of pleasure in their death. I try to be compassionate even toward those who act in abhorrent ways, but I often fail, especially in situations where the person harms others. There's nothing wrong with someone trying to add more compassion and sympathy to this world. And it's easy to have compassion and sympathy for people who do good things. It's easy to have it for children with cancer or the innocent victims of a disturbed individuals attacks.

It takes a truly exceptional individual to have it for the dregs of society, though. To show compassion and sympathy for the people who behave in abhorrent ways that are anathematic to a civil society. Showing compassion and sympathy for a person does not mean you condone their behaviors or refuse to give them consequences for those behaviors.

When the families of the victims of the Charelston shooting demonstrated exactly this level of compassion to the murderer of their loved ones, I was so impressed by their ability to live in the fashion that Jesus taught. We need more people like that in this world, because people like that make this world a better place to live in.
Click to expand...

Compassion is one thing. "Triple victim" is something else entirely. She started out OK but totally went off the rails. There is no excuse for being "willing to kill a billion infidels.
 
Ockham said:
The amount of stupid on this campus is overwhelming. "Uhh... I'm not sure." "Umm.........It depends on your definition of terrorism is." "I don't know what happened yet, I don't know what it's about."


The real question is, are these people just not saying what they really think because if they DO say it's terrorism they will be harassed on campus with repercussions from not only the other students (oppression) but also the administrators and profs. Some of it sounds like fear of telling the truth.... so maybe it's not stupid, maybe it's fear.

Was Dylan Roof a racist? Did Dylan Roof act in the name of racism?
Click to expand...

Yes. Yes.[/QUOTE]

Actually, they are exactly right. One person's terrorist is often another's freedom fighter. For instance, the French Resistance were considered terrorists and bandits by the Nazis but freedom fighters by the Allies.

So in reality, they are exactly right. It does depend on how one defines "terrorism".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom