Visitors at the War Memorial on the evening of April 21. Photo Courtesy of Ivan V. Morozov
Flowers and mementos at West Ambler Johnston Hall. Photo taken April 22. Photo Courtesy of Ivan V. Morozov
In Memory of the Virginia Tech Massacre Victims
Being a student myself on a campus that is similar in size to the one of Virginia Tech, I have thought a lot about what happened there this Monday. I know that it could just as easily have happened at BYU, and I feel the pain of all those who were directly or indirectly affected by this tragedy. This is the photo from the candlelight vigil held at BYU this evening in honor of the victims. Our thoughts and prayers are with all of you. May you all rest in peace. Original source: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ivanomak/466722915/ Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5
Permissions Contact: Ivano Mak (http://www.flickr.com/photos/ivanomak/) Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.0
by J Lee | April 19, 2007 When I was growing up in the 80s, it often seemed that the world was holding its breath, keeping its fingers crossed to prevent some sort of nuclear disaster. The apocalypse that I imagined then had to do with the world going up in a mushroom cloud, because of polarization along national and political lines. But this next generation's experiences (as E Wesp pointed out in his comment) have been punctuated by violence of a different type, enacted by one or a few individuals and relatively low technology. I want to pick up a few threads of conversation, starting with the comment by ms which addresses the idea of narrative and also points out that we have started this conversation with race. In our discussion and in many of the blog comments I have been reading on this side of the world, the use of the label "Korean" has been hotly debated, some arguing that the shooter's ethnicity may offer clues to his motivations, others charging that to invoke the term is racist. I am curious about how this label "Korean" gets deployed and what meaning it has. In other words, does it matter that he was Korean? What are the conditions under which someone's ethnicity becomes "visible" and how it gets worked into the stories we tell about why something happened, about who is responsible, and about our emotional relationships to the subject? In a basic way, the label "Korean" subverts the popular stereotype of the angry white middle class male shooter. It provides a potentially different kind of explanatory factor, complicating questions about Cho's mental health, his upbringing, ideas about the expression of masculine anger, etc. What I find interesting from our own discussion as well as other articles is how minorities have reacted. Personally, I heard "Korean," "parents own a dry-cleaning business," "sister at Princeton," and "Centreville, VA" and unconsciously began constructing my own narrative of Cho's life, filling in the blanks with my own experiences growing up not far from Centreville (in a similar kind of suburb) and the experiences of friends. Parents sacrifice themselves for their children's education, teaching their kids to value educational success above all other types and in doing so lower their own status in their children's eyes. Cultural divides open between the generations. The children don't quite fit into mainstream American life but have lost touch with and respect for their parents' culture. The alienation I imagine him to have felt confirms and strengthens my sense of my own alienation and my distance from what I see as the cultural center (however imaginary that notion of a cultural center may be). And on and on... In trying to understand his actions I construct for him an entirely fictitious reality which makes me feel (as he has become an extension of myself, my brothers, my sons, etc.) empathetic, invested, responsible, and guilty about the whole thing. I think there's a certain extent to which these incidents become cautionary tales to support our individual and cultural fears: video games inducing violence, fears about repressed male emotion, xenophobia, education without moral center, etc. We all explain the world in the terms we understand, I suppose. But, for the more difficult task... how does the label of "Korean" function on a cultural level, particularly here in Korea? This is a hard question to address, and I am a little hesitant to try to answer it, to (by virtue of having my little soapbox and being in Korea) seem like I have the answers. But, as E Hayot says (sorry to quote you here, E) "pontificating wildly about stuff you barely understand is what the internet is all about!" So here goes, my attempt to create context for you all out there. Kids, don't try this at home. Why the ownership of this man as Korean by those here in Korea? Why not the urge to dismiss him as Americanized, or as a deranged individual, why the urge to place him within the boundaries of the label "Korean"? I'll throw out three contexts here. Context 1: Koreans abroad (read: anyone with Korean blood), on the international stage, function in the popular imagination here in Korea in a way that Americans may find surprising. The average American probably doesn't know who Park Chan-ho, Hines Ward, Hwang Woo Suk, or Ban Ki-moon are, but they are important figures in the public imagination here, evidence of Korea's place in the global order, for better or for worse. I was in the bookstore a few months ago, shortly after Ban Ki-moon was named the new UN Secretary General, and there was already a biography of him written for children, using his life as an inspirational example of what kids could achieve. Where does this mentality come from? From a genre of history writing in which Korea is the passive victim of stronger foreign powers (China, Japan, the U.S.)? From some Park Chung-hee era idea of self-reliance? From some notion of the purity and homogeneity of Korean culture and language? From media which constantly rate Korea's performance in any number of arenas to other world powers? From the strength of the notion of blood? From a sense of social responsibility? Context 2: The educational system here is under a lot of fire for various reasons which I won't go into. Many parents feel they have no option but to send their kids abroad, often alone or with only one parent. There has been a lot of discussion recently on the various pressures these families and kids have to face at a young age. Cho came to the U.S. in elementary school, with both his parents. Any speculation about the pressures on him as a foreigner, on difficulties adapting to life in the U.S., and about the potential reasons for his mental breakdown and feelings of alienation are going to flow towards the grooves already cut by the larger social worry about educational pressures and the education diaspora. Context 3: I think the fear of reprisals against Koreans and Korean-Americans in the U.S. has to be read against the incidents of U.S. military personnel violence against Koreans in Korea. Every time a U.S. soldier is involved in an act of violence (rape, murder) there are protests and reprisals here (not widespread, from my experience, but I don't live near the army base). When an English teacher is caught using drugs or sexually assaulting a student, it is big news here, followed by calls for more regulation of foreign teachers. I think there's a kind of logic that is created by the way these cases have been treated here that would shape the expectation of what will happen to Koreans in the U.S. Thus Koreans may imagine, consciously or subconsciously, that Americans will similarly judge/ demand/protest against Koreans as Koreans do against Americans, if not in action then in belief and idea. When it comes down to it, we have to accept that something about Cho was an aberration, an anomaly; we have to talk about his mental health. Mental health itself is, I think, inseparable from environment and personal history, but the fact is that very few people ever do something this horrendous. But an act like this, like the boogeyman in the closet, has a way of heightening and illuminating our fears and discomforts. And, to go back to the question ms asked: What kind of story will we make him a part of? And how does the label "Korean" play into that story? -- Original Source: http://www.printculture.com/index.php?itemid=1365 Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.0.
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.0
Virginia Tech: It's Not About Gun Control, and You're a Fool or a Monster If You Say It Is
Apr. 18th, 2007 at 12:02 AM Virginia is, if memory serves, one of the states that had a particularly malevolently horrible 2004 national election, one marked by substantial Republican chicanery and vicious suppression of the minority vote, so the last thing on earth that I could ever have imagined myself doing was cheering for Virginia's Republican governor, Tim Kaine. But Tuesday afternoon I not only cheered out loud over something he said, I was so glad he said it that I was waving my fist over my head and very nearly jumped out of my chair. And it wasn't just what he said, but how he said it; I wish I could find a way to show it to you. But at the end of the Tuesday press conference, some sleazebag in the audience, knowing how pro-gun Kaine is, tossed him what he probably thought was a softball question, namely, did the governor think that some of the deaths could have been averted if Virginia Polytechnic students had been allowed to carry concealed firearms on campus? Instead of the reaction the so-called "reporter" was expecting, what happened was that governor Kaine's face twisted up as if he had bitten into a bug. And with disgust dripping from his voice, he said something to the effect that the only response he had to anybody who would try to use this tragedy to make any kind of a point about gun control was "total loathing." And he's right. So I don't feel good that I've let some of you prod me into having to defend my statement from last night that neither more guns on campus, nor fewer guns, would have made things any better. That some of y'all are sliming up this horrible but essentially random tragedy, that some of you are dragging your muddy political bootprints all over this while the corpses aren't even yet in the ground, that so many of you are so sick as to seek to twist this massacre into proof that your side should win in the literally pointless debate over gun control before even one family can bury their dead in peace, both sickens me and lowers my opinion of some of you. It lowers my opinion of your collective intelligence, too, because both arguments are so trivially disposed of that I'm having to struggle to maintain my faith in your sincerity -- or even your basic decency, your humanity. If you're one of the people who's been doing so, whether pro-gun or anti-gun, you should be ashamed of yourself. Fewer Guns Wouldn't Have Prevented the Massacre. I'd like to thank xiphias for being the first to point out to me, in the replies to somebody else's journal posting, that while the Virginia Tech massacre is the worst school shooting in American history, it is only the second worst school massacre. The worst school massacre in American history was in Bath Township, Michigan, and its murderer used no guns at all, but instead a pair of bombs. It was in 1927, before the Depression even really began, when a farmer about to lose his farm because of rising property taxes decided to vent his wrath on the community by destroying the public building they were taking his farm to pay off, the local school. With the students still in it. He then waited at the scene, and made history as the first ever suicide car bomber, blowing up the first wave of would-be rescuers who rushed to the scene. This is probably also a good time to remind you that it is, perhaps, a good thing that Eric Harris and Dylan Kleibold had guns. They had not planned to shoot up Columbine High School. They had planned to level it, and to that end had planted two ill-designed propane bombs. Their original plan was to use the guns only to pick off any survivors of the blast that escaped the rubble, before killing each other. Had they not had guns, they might have come back another day with better bombs instead of wandering around shooting at random, and the death toll would probably have been substantially higher. I know that Seung Cho didn't do anything at Virginia Tech on Monday that he couldn't have done just as easily and even more effectively with a machete or a good kitchen knife and a couple of ordinary pipe bombs. England's got pretty strict gun control, you know. During the Troubles, this caused neither the Irish Republican Army nor the Ulster militias any difficulty whatsoever whenever they got the urge to slaughter a large number of people in British-occupied Ireland, either. Oh, once in a rare while they used guns smuggled to them (depending on which side they were on) either from the British army or from sympathizers here in the US. But more often, they used explosives. It's also worth pointing out that, since we destroyed their government, Iraqis have had a Virginia-Tech-sized school massacre at least once a month for the last four years. Even though the Iraqi people are some of the most heavily armed in the world, even more heavily armed than your average American, none of their school massacres have involved guns, either. When al Qaeda wants to slaughter high school or college students, they use suicide bombers, just like at Bath Township, just like the Columbine killers tried to do. For that matter, when Timothy McVeigh decided to slaughter a ton of federal employees in Oklahoma City in revenge for the Waco massacre, he didn't need any guns to do it, either, remember? Just some ammonium nitrate fertilizer, a couple of barrels of diesel fuel, and a few blasting caps. Throughout history, we've been lucky when the sickos take up guns rather than bombs; the bombers were the ones that produced the truly horrific death tolls. So you should count yourself lucky that Seung Cho had decided to buy two handguns when he was indulging his violent fantasies to himself over the last month or so, one of them a weeny little .22 that he probably didn't manage to kill anybody with, rather than the dynamite or pipe bombs or other improvised explosive devices he might have bought or built if he hadn't had guns. More Guns Wouldn't Have Prevented the Massacre, Either. I grant that this case is a little harder to make, but the only reason that this isn't obvious is that too many of you have failed to think through what would have happened if some armed student had tried to use his own handgun to overpower Seung Cho. So let's roll back the clock to Monday morning, or roll it forward to the next school shooting, and pit Rampaging Killer against some hypothetical John Q. Student, both of them armed with handguns. It's 9:45 on a Monday morning, and it has slowly dawned on John that that banging noise down the hall isn't construction, but some guy with a gun and a ton of ammunition working his way from classroom to classroom. Or maybe John gets a text message on his phone from someone who tells him that there's a pistol-wielding maniac in a bullet-proof vest full of ammo heading his way. John, being a responsible type, draws his weapon, pulls the firing pin out of his wallet and resets it, removes the safety, chambers a round, and somehow miraculously gets this all done in time to draw a careful bead on the door, waiting for Rampaging Killer to enter. We will even give him the unlikely credit for having thought to look for the flak jacket and the gun, so he doesn't accidentally shoot any of his fellow students who are fleeing from the shooter into this room. So the door bangs open, and John Q. Student sees a flak jacket and a gun, and then one of only three possible things happens: 1. Remember that John Q. Student has not just spent the whole morning practicing shooting at real human beings. On the contrary, shooting at an actual human being is something that he's never done before. In fact, the odds against his having ever fired a pistol at any moving target are astronomical. Also, we know that John Q. Student has at least some humanitarian impulse, at least some urge to not shoot at people. I say this because, frankly, if he's been carrying this gun with him everywhere he goes for long enough that he happened to have it on him when he needed it, if he didn't have that hesitation to shoot another person, he would have shot somebody by now and would be in jail, not in a classroom waiting for Rampaging Killer. So I flatly guarantee you that he shoots late, and that he jerks the weapon when he shoots as his body reflexively tries to stop him from shooting someone, and the round goes completely wild. How can I guarantee this? Because this situation has come up over and over again since the invention of the gun, and it is what everybody except for a few combat veterans has done, the first time that they've fired a gun at a criminal. And that's if he fires the gun at all. In example after example, we have seen that what John Q. Student is much more likely to do is the stupidest thing he could possibly do: shout "drop the weapon" or yell "stop or I'll shoot" or fire a warning shot, wanting to give Rampaging Killer a chance to surrender. All that this achieves is to tell Rampaging Killer, now a practiced shooter, exactly where to aim. If Rampaging Killer hadn't made up his mind whether or not to shoot up this particular room, he does now, starting with emptying his clip at John and thereby gunning down everybody between John and the wall behind him, and everybody for three feet on either side. 2. Or else, when John Q. Student sees a flak jacket and a gun come through that door, he's thought of this possibility. Or maybe he's a combat veteran himself. So knowing better than to try to get Rampaging Killer to not shoot, he immediately opens fire the instant he has a target, and let's give him the benefit of the doubt and assume that he shoots improbably accurately. Only guess what? More doors were banged open by the SWAT team, who covered more of the building looking for Rampaging Killer, than were banged open by Rampaging Killer. So the odds are that John Q. Student shoots Officer Friendly, and now we have at least one more corpse. And at least one more killer. 3. Or else maybe this particular John Q. Student is a combat veteran, and an Olympic quality pistol shot, and has faster reflexes than your average Olympic athlete and thinks faster and more clearly than any college aged student you've ever met in your life or that you ever will. So in the 1/10th of a second between when the flak jacket and gun crash through that door and when he would need to pull the trigger, he recognizes Officer Friendly's police uniform, and therefore holds his fire. Officer Friendly makes his combat entry into the room, sweeping his weapon across it in a practiced move, knowing that if Rampaging Killer is in the room and waiting for him then he absolutely must get a shot into Rampaging Killer fast or he's going to die. Officer Friendly sees John Q. Student's gun barrel, mistakes John Q. Student for Rampaging Killer, and empties an assault rifle into the area where John Q. Student is sitting, killing John, everybody within 3 feet either side of him, and everybody behind him for at least two rooms. Alas, Rampaging Killer was two floors away. Now we have an entire roomful of more victims. No other outcome is even vaguely humanly possible. Frankly, if he had any impulse to fight the Rampaging Killer rather than to jump out a window or bar the door, John Q. Student would have been safer and just as effective if he had used his bare hands. And to again draw the parallel to Iraq, I've read that virtually every adult male Iraqi owns an assault rifle, and has since long before Saddam was overthrown. If "more guns" are the solution to school violence, then why are the Iraqis having at least one Virginia-Tech-sized school massacre every month? So What Are the Politicians Supposed to Do? Voters in a democracy are prone to an obnoxious fault: when something truly awful happens, they demand that every elected official do something about it, right now. It doesn't matter whether or not there is anything that elected official can do that would be at all useful. All that matters is that the voters see every politician prove that he or she cares about the same things the voters care about by doing something, however futile or counter-productive. So in a way, while it's sick and tragic and pointless and futile and stupid and inhumane to the families of the victims that we're having a gun control argument now, I suppose it is sadly inevitable. So what do I think the politicians should do to prevent the next massacre like the one at Virginia Tech instead of arguing about gun control? Nothing. Let's face facts. One third of the nation is mentally ill. Of that hundred million people, there are probably at least 10,000 who are sick, twisted loners who are total losers with their preferred sex, prone to stalkerish behavior, and altogether too fond of really sick violent imagery. Heck, I've known at least two of them personally. Every eight years or so, one of those 10,000 people goes off. And there is still no way to predict which of those 10,000 people are going to go off, and no way to coral or herd or manage or contain or even disarm those 10,000 sickos without setting even more of them off than already go off. Learn elementary first aid, practice building evacuations, live a good and loving and full life, and if you have dependents pay your life insurance. Not because every eight years or so you have a one in 10,000,000 chance of being the victim of a rampaging mass murderer, but because you run a much higher probability of at least once in your life of being involved in some kind of random disaster, whether from dangerous weather, or other natural disaster, or a building fire, or an act of war, or any of a long long list of things that can go wrong in this life. Sometimes death just comes at random. Sometimes there just isn't anything useful we can do about that other than to do what you political carrion eaters aren't allowing us to quietly do instead of getting dragged into your pointless argument, and that's to comfort the survivors and rebuild. * Mood: aggravated -- Original Source: http://bradhicks.livejournal.com/328865.html licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution, NonCommercial, ShareAlike 2.5 License.
Creative Commons Attribution, NonCommercial, ShareAlike 2.5
Confessions of a Would-Be School Shooter
By now the subject of Virginia Tech has been much publicized and probably hackneyed. We talk about lax gun control laws, wasted lives, disturbed young men and how we wish things like these would never happen again. In my previous entry[link], I talked about how problematic Cho Seung-Hui is and the difficulty with which we tend to see the minds of these people. We always talk about things like these happening to someone else. However, as Bill Watterson once said in his great comic strip series Calvin & Hobbes, "We are all someone else to someone else." And so instead of talking about Cho from a distance and saying how crazy he was, I'd like to talk about how I was probably just like him. As I read through TIME's articles on the VTech massacre, I began reflecting on my own past and how disturbingly close I came to becoming a school shooter. In real life, I'm a very quiet person—meaning I don't speak much. If I have something to say and feel it's absolutely necessary, I have a very loud voice. Most of the time, though, I prefer to keep to myself and do not really talk. This habit caused one of my co-teachers to remark "You know, if one of us is going to become a psychopath, it would be Joey." Of course, I'd just laugh and shrug off the remark. It was only today that I realized how close I was to this. In one of my earlier posts I talked about how I was so maligned by my classmates in grade school. I really hated them; there were times I'd think about seeing their corpses hanging from a large weeping willow tree on campus. Seriously. I think this started after my parents' marriage was annulled, but I don't blame it entirely on them (and I presently harbor no bitterness toward them in this matter). There were a lot of events that led to certain, er, emotional imbalances I had in the past, I myself am not really sure how they add up to one another. Regardless, I was a young boy who was full of hate and I can very clearly remember that at one point I really thought about shooting my classmates. Dad had bought an air rifle at that time and I was beginning to learn how to use it, and I remember telling them to stop bugging me because I had a gun. Of course they mocked me even more, at which point I just kept quiet and seriously thought about blowing their brains out. How old was I then? Ten. The next year, I was beginning to move closer and closer toward rebellion, and my mind began to darken. I just have an eerie feeling that if the events of my life did not transpire as they have, I would have ended up walking onto campus with deadly weapons and making away with the lives of those who I saw as inferior, then myself. The difficulty in getting weapons aside, I certainly had the potential to be a school shooter. I don't know how it happened, but God somehow dealt with the events of my life at that point and eventually brought me to Him. There were times I'd still feel that I was alone against the world (I still sometimes do) but I cannot deny that it was something much more dangerous before. I wanted to lash out against a world I thought was inferior to me, a world that I felt worthy to judge, a world that oppressed me. Later on in college, I met the very guy who I had really felt like killing several years before. We were both waiting for a cab outside the university, and since we were both going in the same direction we just decided to take the cab together. We talked a bit about how the other was doing in college, where we planned on going when we graduated, and so on. I really don't think this would have been possible had my Lord Jesus not wiped away the bitterness that so stained my soul at a young age. When I was a child, I felt like killing children. Now that I have grown in the grace of the Lord, I feel it is my calling to help them truly live. And this would all not be possible without my God working in my life. In His death I died to myself, and in His resurrection I rose again to a new life. Thus I have come to appreciate even more what He has done for me. "And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God." -Romans 12:2 Teaching and not Shooting, Your Black Lion PS: I'm going on a short hiatus starting Tuesday night until Saturday. I'll be going to Pagudpud with Martin, Arghs and Fil. Yes, I'll finally be going to the beach. ~ by J. R. R. Flores on April 23, 2007. -- Original Source: http://aslancross.wordpress.com/2007/04/23/confessions-of-a-would-be-school-shooter/ This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License.
Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License
Justify it as you like, I cannot think of Cho Seung-Hui as anything other than a murderer. A lot has already been said about the subject, so apart from the links to his plays here[link], I won't be saying much. The content of his plays being sophomoric aside (in all honesty my high school freshmen have written richer and deeper material than this), I don't think the content of his plays immediately says that he "fits the profile of a school shooter." As a previous entry said, there is no such thing as a profile; each situation is born of unique circumstances mingling with the unique turmoil in each unique individual. However, it is a definite warning sign of a person being disturbed, coupled with his general attitudes and way of pushing others away. Help was offered, but he refused it and did what he wanted to do anyway. One can't help but feel powerless when confronted with a person like this. The other school shootings we had in the past were perpetrated by children who I think could have been talked to—just that insufficient attention was given to their behavior. However, this guy was already an adult—like many other instances of adults going on a rampage, they have already made up their minds and will no longer respond to reason. This is why it is imperative that schools should take events like this seriously. Sure, they are aberrations, but this implies that somewhere, something went wrong. The most immediate problem seems to be security, of course. Students will not be able to bring firearms (or poison, as in the case of Gelyn Fabro) if the security weren't so lax. Guards search bags, yes, but do they know what they're searching for? Of course, there's also the whole issue with of how the person is treated. The school can only do so much—personal and parental problems are already beyond the reach of guidance counselors—but still, the school can provide the student with an environment where he or she can express his or her frustrations in a harmless way. Cho's situation was different—this guy was already an adult, and that's why I believe that his problems were already beyond reasoning. He had to deal with them by himself, and he couldn't. He had to choose the worst possible option. But for high school students, I believe that something can be done. Of course, people are different. There are university students who might be receptive to counseling. Cho's case is indeed an aberration, but aberrations do not excuse the school from not taking any action. In his case, action was indeed taken. Schools just have to be sure that they've done everything in such cases. I've always believed that elementary students need a teacher who they could see as a parent. In high school, they need a teacher who they could see as a friend or elder sibling. In college, a student needs a teacher who he or she could see as a mentor. Thankfully I've had such teachers in all my years in the academe. On a less serious note: Another Mario parody[link] ~ by J. R. R. Flores on April 20, 2007. -- Original Source: http://aslancross.wordpress.com/2007/04/20/in-the-mind-of-a-murderer/ This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License.
Employees at the Virginia Department of Transportation preparing for a moment of silence. VT Graduate Mike Branham speaking.
This is a panoramic picture taken the day of the Community Vigil/Picnic on the Drill Field just after the vendors had setup and food was served. Chief Wendell Flinchum is in the foreground with his back turned and was met enthusiastically by the students and visitors.
NBC Should Never Have Aired the Virginia Tech Video
By: Jack Myers / Jack Myers Think Tank (Blog) May 07, 2007 The more I think and talk to people about NBC's handling of Cho Seung-Hui's videos following the tragedy at Virginia Tech, the more convinced I am the decision was mishandled and wrong. Roger Delaney of Zephyr Media Group commented "I think that, even knowing that the data would make it into the public domain though other channels, NBC erred when they decided to air Cho's 'multimedia manifesto'. There is no question that he accomplished exactly what he'd hoped to - his heinous actions gave him a forum through which he could spew his venomous message to the entire nation. Did any of us need to see that? Did airing that footage do anything other than grant Cho the postmortem glory he was clearly seeking? And was there any way for NBC to air that footage without appearing to be chasing ratings? The answer to all those questions is, in my mind, unequivocally 'no'." Neale Martin of Ntlec, whose daughter is a sophomore at VT, added, "NBC should never have provided a platform for this lunatic; it will encourage every sociopath to strive toward even more carnage. Even posted on YouTube, it would not have the same impact as being put on broadcast news. My daughter is a sophomore at VT and three classmates from her Monday 8 am class were killed the next period. As a former journalist I am sickened by how low this profession has sunk." There are endless arguments about free speech, about how the videos would have found their way into the public eye and, of course, NBC's responsibility not only to the audience but to shareholders as well, for whom any ratings opportunity is more important than issues of the public good. My initial instinct was to accept that NBC aired the videos, but to criticize both NBC and other networks for the gratuitous promotions they ran and the hype leading up to the news reports. In retrospect, I believe NBC has done great harm to the NBC network news brand, to Brian Williams, and to the overall public perception of network broadcast news. What an extraordinary opportunity NBC had to stand above the obvious commercial opportunism and draw a line in the sand. This is not about military action about which there is ongoing national debate. This is not about a major ongoing news story or about a celebrity or political figure. This was about one mass murderer broadcasting his message of hate in America's most prestigious and trusted environment. This was a classically disturbed person who saw the media as his road to immortality - murder was the affect but media exposure was the cause. And NBC, through its actions, fell prey to the most base instincts of tabloid media upon which Cho depended. What would have been the end result if NBC has moved the videos onto the NBC news website, losing the ratings opportunity? Or what if NBC had simply refused to air the video at all and had turned it over to the FBI? Jeff Beliveau of Consumer Networks asked "Before acting, did my fellow human beings ask themselves 'Is what I'm about to do creating good? Or evil? Am I doing nothing other than causing harm by pursuing my own narrow self-interests?'" There are many arguments being used to justify NBC's decision, and it's unlikely any other network would have responded differently. But what's missing in the aftermath of Virginia Tech is a true industry debate and dialogue on NBC's decision and the role of network broadcast news in a media environment in which news is ubiquitous and all-pervasive. Do the broadcast networks - ABC, CBS and NBC - have a responsibility to stand above the onrush of tabloid journalism? Is it their responsibility to air or not to air the rantings of crazed killers? Is it appropriate to give those people who have no further rights to be a part of our society the credibility that broadcast network television infers? Be a part of the debate. Let me know your opinion. Share your comments at MediaVillage SoundOff. -- Original Source: http://blogs.mediavillage.com/jack/archives/2007/05/nbc_should_neve.html Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 2.5.
Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 2.5
April 20, 2007 By Jack Salisbury The last two weeks have been rough on the world of sports. Meat-headed Don Imus, thinking he was being clever and funny, showed us that race and racism is still a paramount issue in today's America with his description of the Rutgers women's basketball team as "nappy-headed hos." Then, NBA superstar and supposed role model Tim Duncan was challenged to a fight by veteran referee Joey Crawford. The scene had its comic elements to it, but it was still fairly disgusting with the raw angst and hate between the old Crawford and the robust Duncan. In a time when nuclear weapons programs abound, people are killed over the outcomes of Little League games and enormously wealthy NBA players' demand salary hikes citing the "need to feed their family," you sometimes have to wonder where our neurotic society is going. And then Virginia Tech happened. Virginia Tech. The Hokies have been a mainstay of college athletics for years. Head football coach Frank Beamer built his program based on hard work and excellent special teams play. By the time a kid named Michael Vick stepped onto the Blacksburg campus in the fall of 1998, Beamer's program had reached the status of national power. Since then, Virginia Tech has always been a mainstay of college football, competing in the national championship and appearing at numerous New Year's Day bowl games. Under Seth Greenberg, Tech's basketball program has also risen, beating both Duke and North Carolina this year in ACC play and making the NCAA Tournament as a five seed. It has never been hard to root for the Hokies; they have up-and-coming programs. And after all, who can resist rooting for a Hokie? Part of the allure in rooting for the Hokies was that you often didn't know what a Hokie was. For the record, Hokie is a fictional mascot masquerading itself as a maroon bird. But there's even more reason to root for the Hokies now. We all know about the tragedy that took place this Monday. I can't imagine what it's like to be a student at Virginia Tech right now, to know someone who was shot or injured, to be around the university or to even be an alumnus. The inexplicable tragedy has moved our nation, brought people together, but most of all, it's left us asking: Why? There isn't an answer, though. That's the hardest part. It's times like these when sports are therapeutic, taking people away from the harsh reality of the world we live in. A touchdown, last-second shot or an interception can make people forget, for just a moment, what has happened. What I'm saying is: Sports can be trivial, but for the most part, they're not. A 45-yard touchdown run or a 50-yard field goal? Sure, they're pretty meaningless in the long run, but when you realize who they're affecting and how they're affecting them, they suddenly take on a whole new meaning. After the city of New Orleans experienced the devastating disaster of Hurricane Katrina, it rallied around the hometown Saints. The Saints received coverage around the country for their heart-warming story; and unlike a lot of things dramatized in sports, the Saints' story was truly heartwarming. Drew Brees, Reggie Bush and Marques Colston rejuvenated a city, a region and a country by bringing the Saints to the doorstep of the Super Bowl. They understood the responsibility on their shoulders and acted accordingly, being active in their communities and setting new standards for what it meant to be role models. And in the process, they showed that sports aren't just sports. Sports bring people together. They may not seem to have that same effect in a place like California, but trust me: If you go to Tuscaloosa, Chapel Hill, or even Blacksburg, sports are a huge thing. They're more than just a game. I'll be rooting for the Hokies every chance I get next year. I can only hope that the city of Blacksburg, the state of Virginia and the whole country will rally around Virginia Tech and its athletic program in moving on from this senseless tragedy. It was hard to not root for the Hokies before. Now? It's impossible. Jack Salisbury is a freshman. Contact him at jack24@stanford.edu. -- Original Source: Stanford Daily - April 20, 2007
Permissions granted by James Hohmann Editor-in-Chief The Stanford Daily <jhohmann@stanford.edu>
University will focus on solving issues involving wages, safety through transition to Gene Block By Jackie Barber Wednesday, May 9, 2007 Acting Chancellor Norman Abrams addressed myriad staff concerns such as Chancellor-elect Gene Block, employee compensation, and campus security on Tuesday afternoon during a staff meeting. About 100 staff members attended the meeting, hosted by Staff Assembly President Shelley Brown. Abrams began his speech by praising the staff's contributions to UCLA, calling the unique sense of community fostered on campus "a treasure" for such a large university and said he is impressed with Block. "You will find him open, a quick study, and one whose values are all in the right place," Abrams said. "I'm confident he will make a great chancellor." Abrams said the biggest challenge for Block will be "recruitment and retention of both staff and faculty." He cited the high cost of housing in Los Angeles as an obstacle in attracting employees from elsewhere, as potential employees have expressed concern about their ability to afford quality local housing. Each year the university attempts to increase the salaries of its faculty and staff, but these salaries have fallen below market, Abrams said, adding that a long-term goal for the university is to bring salaries back to market value. Raises for the university's lowest-paid workers is also a current focus, Abrams added. He said the university has been working with the unions toward this goal. Abrams called the salary concern "a work in progress," but said he believes Block is up to the task and is familiar with similar issues because of his experience serving as president of the University of Virginia. UCLA employee compensation is a major concern not only for the UCLA community, but also for the Los Angeles area, said Nicole Moore, lead organizer for the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees union Local 3299. "Custodians (at UCLA) are paid 25 percent below what community college custodians are paid, and many people here are without a living wage," she said. "We have many concerns about the budgeting process. We want to make sure UCLA is not creating poverty in the Los Angeles community." She said the university must address its role in providing quality jobs and affordable health care. Abrams enlisted Karl Ross, chief of university police, to address campus security in light of the recent Virginia Tech shootings. Ross said there are 61 campus officers, and after the Columbine shootings in 1999, these officers have been trained for active-shooter situations. The department is also "tied into a terrorism early-action task force," Ross said. Ross said a group from the department meets with Student Psychological Services weekly to monitor possible threats. The most likely disaster on campus, though, is an earthquake, Ross said. Abrams pointed to the new Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center, which is not yet open, as a positive development this year. "It's going to be the most technologically advanced hospital in the United States, and possibly the world," he said. Brown read anonymous questions submitted for Abrams by the staff, including a question on the "lingering challenge" of course and space availability. The session also gave Abrams the opportunity to speak about the renovation of Pauley Pavilion, and he said a committee has formed to raise money and make decisions on the project. The building's name will not change, nor will the basic structure, but the committee has hired a firm to do preliminary designs, which Abrams has seen and called "very exciting," he said. Design ideas include reconstructing the bleachers to create better viewing angles and building a concourse to encase the building. Digging underneath Pauley to build a practice court is also a possibility, though an expensive one, he said. The renovation may be constructed by John Wooden's 100th birthday in about three years, Abrams said, prompting enthusiastic chatter from the audience. Dinora Duarte, Staff Assembly historian and secretary and an organizer of the event, said though there were no surprises, she was pleased with Abrams' presentation. "Considering he won't be here after July 31, I thought he had a good grasp on where the university is going," she said. She added she believes the assembly gave the staff a valuable opportunity to hear ideas firsthand from the chancellor. "We actually really look forward to the event," she said of the annual assembly. -- Original Source: The Daily Bruin - May 9, 2007
Sick Sad World: A lesson from Virginia Tech
April 20, 2007 Opinion article By Jackie Bernstein It's time for a game of Funny/Not Funny. First: A joke overheard in the CoHo on Monday referencing the Virginia Tech massacre. Not Funny. No one laughed, and someone said, "Too soon, too soon." Next: An off-hand comment made at the gym on Wednesday, poking fun at the ethnicity of the Korean shooter responsible for the assault, Cho Seung-Hui. Funny? At least, I heard people laugh in response. "Oh, man... that's so wrong. Hahahahaha." How soon is too soon to use a tragedy as fodder for comedy? "Homer loves Flanders," a Simpsons episode in season five, parodies Charles Whitman, the University of Texas tower-sniper: Ned Flanders guns down multiple Homers from atop a bell tower. About 25 years after the massacre, FOX executives found the scene funny enough to air. How long will it take for South Park to run an episode satirizing the events at Virginia Tech? I think that the amount of time it takes for someone to find humor in tragedy is directly related to his connection to the incident. It is unlikely that the man who sold Sueng-Hui his gun will ever find anything humorous about the shooting. The student in the CoHo who made his joke last Monday probably doesn't know anyone at Virginia Tech. I doubt that he feels any kind of personal connection to the event. However, we as Stanford students are actually deeply connected to the Virginia Tech massacre. Seung-Hui exploded at Virginia Tech. Maurice "Mo" Morsette imploded at Stanford. Both students' lives ended in tragedy. Maurice Moisette's suicide is one of at least three reported at Stanford this academic year. Ranked in 2005 by The Princeton Review as the university with the "Happiest Students Overall" in the country, Stanford doesn't seem to be living up to its reputation any longer. The Virginia Tech tragedy will undoubtedly lead the Stanford administration and various support groups on campus to reexamine how issues of mental health are handled on campus. This response seems to deal with only part of a greater problem. No matter how many aggressive programs a school funds, no matter how many 24-hour hotlines they provide or psychologists they hire, nothing can change without a change in the student culture itself. Unfortunately, the type of student elite universities admit is not going to change anytime soon. We are a nation obsessed with getting into college. And the most obsessed end up here. As a result, we are a campus full of top-heavy people. We are world-class debaters, writers and chemists, fully actualizing our intellectual potential. But these skills have come at the loss of developing more basic skills. By the end of winter quarter of my freshman year, 40 percent of my all-frosh dorm had never been kissed. Throwing these types of kids into the collegiate world is bound to result in extreme feelings of alienation, confusion and anger. College is a place where many get their first taste of freedom, but learning how to handle independence isn't part of any AP Physics textbook. I know that this article goes to print during Admit Weekend, and, as such, I was reluctant to write this week about our collective failings as members of the academic world. As a tour guide who couldn't imagine having gone anywhere else (and who enthusiastically tells this to hoards of high school juniors on a regular basis), I want to make sure that I am very clear: I have had a remarkable experience at Stanford, and I know that I made the right choice in coming here. Quite a few of my friends feel the same way. The problems of socially handicapped hyper-achievers are not unique to a few schools. Rather, this situation is endemic across the country. I decided to write this article after I watched a mother and her ProFro daughter walk through the activities fair yesterday. The daughter was texting on her cell phone, and her mom kept on taking papers from the student tables, asking the students working the booths a slew of questions: "How many hours a week do you volunteer? How many other activities do you do? Do you put your activities on your resume? How many activities should my daughter do?" The mother was so involved in her daughter's life that I wondered if she had opened her daughter's acceptance letter for her. My hope is that the mother I overheard reads this week's column. I hope that she realizes that her daughter is probably exhausted from pushing herself through four incredibly difficult years and almost certainly will need guidance on how to be a well-adjusted citizen, not how to build a resume, as she enters adulthood. My hope is that ProFros read this column and realize that coming to college is not going to be easy, wherever they choose to go. Part of growing up is facing failure and difficulty, and there is no shame in asking for help, even if it seems as though everyone else is doing fine. They aren't. Our complete inability to cope with the pressures of today may eventually be funny. But for now, it's definitely too soon to turn the tragedy of our extreme emphasis on academic intelligence and achievement into a quick one-liner glibly delivered at the Manzanita brunch table. Jackie Bernstein can be reached at jaber@stanford.edu. -- Stanford Daily - April 20, 2007
Statement by Virginia Tech Board of Visitors regarding the Virginia Tech Action Plan
By Jacob Lutz BLACKSBURG, Va., September 23, 2007 -- Following the release of the Report of the Virginia Tech Review Panel on August 30, 2007 and three separate internal review reports, Virginia Tech President Charles Steger and senior administrators have led an effort to examine the recommendations contained in these reports with the goal of meshing them and adopting best practices and procedures for all relevant areas on a forward-looking basis. The Board believes that goal was accomplished in the development of the Virginia Tech Action Plan presented today at a special meeting of the Board of Visitors. The Virginia Tech Action Plan sets forth the process of tracking all recommendations made from these reports and determining priorities, internal responsibility, procedures for evaluation, alternative solutions, action timelines, and financial analysis. The recommendations included in the Virginia Tech Action Plan are extensive and implementation will require substantial effort and expense. Virginia Tech has already taken action on a number of items with an immediate priority, some of which were discussed at today's Board of Visitors meeting. Examples include: multiple redundant notification systems for students, faculty, and staff; additional security devices and measures; additional counseling resources; and many other steps to improve the safety, security, and well-being of the Virginia Tech community. The Board of Visitors commends President Charles Steger in the adoption of the Virginia Tech Action Plan and for his leadership in these most difficult times. The Board of Visitors would also like to thank the students, staff, faculty and administrators of Virginia Tech for their outstanding service and commitment in responding to the events of April 16, 2007. Their leadership, devotion, and cooperative spirit have been instrumental in moving Virginia Tech forward. The Board of Visitors also extends its wishes for ongoing recovery to the families of the deceased and the survivors, their families and all of those affected by the terrible events of April 16, 2007. The magnitude of losses and injuries suffered by these victims, their families, the Virginia Tech community, and our Commonwealth is immeasurable. By adopting the Virginia Tech Action Plan with the goal of implementing changes that will reduce the risks of future violence and promote the well-being of our students, faculty, and staff, we are honoring the lives and sacrifices of all who have suffered and advancing the notion of service that is fundamental to Virginia Tech's mission. Contact Jacob Lutz at unirel@vt.edu or 540-231-5396. -- Original Source: Virginia Tech News http://www.vtnews.vt.edu/story.php?relyear=2007&itemno=554
This became my final exam for one of my classes. It had a word count but I did not follow it. I wrote this in one sitting, without going back or revising- it just flowed out because it had to. The reason I choose to attach the document file instead of copy paste is because it felt right for me to attach the ribbon at the bottom. Thank You. -Jacob Lee Stowers (You may put this at the end if you wish)
It's scary really, when you're truly thankful for your life and the well being of the ones you love every single day, yet you still slip up and take all of that for granted for just one second. It happens to all of us; sometimes we just get caught up during the hectic grind of life and forget all the wonderful things we are, except for that moment, gratified to have. And in that second, when an occurrence takes you and suddenly you realize this terrible, tragic error-the world stops. The thing that makes this unbearably painful though is that for everyone else, life keeps moving forward, and you now suddenly have so much to say and do about what WAS, it becomes impossible to catch up and cope with what IS. I know my final exam reflection has a suggested word count of 800 words; I am however, not going to make that requirement in hopes that you will understand why... I, like thousands of other Virginia Tech students, have had an experience of the events that occurred on April 16, 2007. My experience was a fortunate one because of the fact that I did not lose a loved one on that day. Of course, I felt a lot of emotions that day, starting with anger. The following day, I attended the ceremony at Lane Stadium, and like many of us Hokies, my thoughts were temporarily distracted by all the media sharks looking to record peoples pain for money. I was selected out of a group to talk to a man because he wanted to put me on T.V. with Katie Couric, I declined. Blacksburg was so strangely unwelcoming and depressing to me after that ceremony because many people had left and the only people who remained were locals obviously shocked with tragedy or media who seemed to not care. I had to get out because everything was so surreal it was slowly eating me from inside every time I tried to grasp the full weight of what had happened. When I returned for classes, I don't know if it was just me but I felt like the entire campus was dead silent for the entire day. My anger was finally replaced with sorrow, I was glad because until then, I had only been able to feel a rage towards what happened at MY school. I had to pay my respects for those 32 souls that would have continued to make this world a brighter place had they been given a chance to do so. I don't do it often, but I cried as I stood there in front of those memorials thinking about how easily that could have happened to somebody I knew and loved. During this entire time I have been feeling guilty, I felt guilty crying in front of those memorials and I am almost afraid that some day I will not be able to contain it. I turned down that interview for the same reason I won't let myself share every single thing that happened to me with all of this...Who am I to cry? Who am I to even talk about it? I didn't lose anybody during this terrible misfortune. Sure, I have lost loved ones without being able to say goodbye, but it didn't happen April 16th, and it didn't happen like that so who am I to try to empathize and compare my sorrows? Who am I to try to imagine what those Moms, Dads, Sisters, Brothers and friends feel like right now? The question asked to me from the reporter was, "Did I know anybody or do I know anyone that knew someone who was lost?" I didn't, I tried talking about the many people I knew who soon had funerals to attend to but no sooner than I let those words leave my mouth did I realize that I was a nobody in all of this. I am just a friend who wants to lend a hand and be there for other friends that need it right now. Although I have always desperately wanted to be on T.V. if even for a second, I said to myself, "Not right now, not like this, this isn't for me to say" then I walked away to show support and blended into a large crowd of orange and maroon, like all of my other fellow Hokies. -Jacob Lee Stowers
MEADOR: Heroes arise out of tragic events at Virginia Tech
By: Jake Meador / Freshman English major Posted: 4/25/07 The heroes of the Protestant Reformation had an old saying that man is simultaneously both saint and sinner, and the truth of this statement is impossible to argue. In the 20th century alone there lived people as awful as Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin and as wonderful as Mother Teresa and Martin Luther King Jr. The irony of the saying is that it's often when the sinners are at their worst that we get the clearest picture of the saints. The lives of great men and women become most beautiful when confronted with great tragedy. Mother Teresa would be an unknown if it weren't for the horrors of poverty, the oppressive caste system and the ruins of India left behind by British imperialism. Likewise, King would be long forgotten if it weren't for the horrors of racism and segregation. We saw one more example of this truth last week in the tragedy at Virginia Tech. By now everyone has heard the name Cho Seung-Hui, and we should call him by his name, not by some title we make up to avoid the harsh reality that a human being committed this crime. We've heard of how the 23-year-old senior English major killed 32 individuals and then himself in the worst school shooting in U.S. history. Some have even seen the disturbing video he made prior to the massacre. We've heard about his dark, sad life that ended so violently. But few have told the story of another man involved in the tragedy. 76-year-old engineering professor Liviu Librescu was one of the 32 to be killed by Seung-Hui. But if it weren't for a courageous act of sacrifice on Librescu's part, there may have been more casualties. Librescu was teaching a class in Norris Hall when gunshots were first heard in a distant corner of the building. Students in the classroom initially hid, but as the sound came closer and closer, Librescu instructed students to flee through the window. He then, in the ultimate act of sacrifice, braced the door with his own body, being shot through the door several times as his students escaped. When police entered the room, they found the professor dead by the door with five bullet wounds. Additionally, 32-year-old Egyptian doctorate student Waleed Muhammad Shaalan, who had been shot once already, distracted Seung-Hui long enough to allow several other students to escape. Seung-Hui reminds us of all that is broken in our world: the fractured relationships, the alienation so many of us feel, the violence we often witness and the self-centeredness that so often characterizes us. Librescu and Shaalan, on the other hand, are a heroic reminder of all that is good in life and all that is a cause for hope. And Librescu didn't just become that with his act of sacrifice. His whole life was characterized by bravery, generosity and love. Born in 1930 in Romania, he lived through the Holocaust as an adolescent. Despite such difficulties, he excelled in school, studying aerospace engineering and becoming one of the finest engineering students in Romania. He earned his doctorate degree in the late 1950s and then taught various engineering courses for 20 years before losing his job in the 1970s due to his opposition to the ruling Communist party. Thanks to the intercession of the Israeli government, he was allowed to leave the country, and he moved to Tel Aviv, Israel, to teach at the university there for several years. After Tel Aviv, he moved to the United States to teach at Virginia Tech, which he had done since 1986. Throughout his career at Virginia Tech, he was known for being one of the finest researchers in the world, as well as a great man. As one colleague put it, "He was a very pleasant, jolly fellow who enjoyed joking around a little with the staff. An everyone's-friend sort of guy." One student said he treated all of his students like his own children. So it isn't surprising that last week when the lives of his students were threatened, Librescu did what a father would do in such a situation. He sacrificed his own safety to protect the lives of his students, and for that Librescu is a hero. And it's important we remember that during these dark days following such a tragic event. There's no shortage of darkness in our world, and consequently there's no shortage of negativity and cynicism. But Librescu's example reminds us that ultimately love triumphs over all these things. There is something about human beings that cannot be kept down by hatred, violence or oppression, and Librescu's life is the perfect portrait of that something: narrowly escaping a young death at the hands of Hitler, resisting an oppressive Communist regime in his home country and ultimately giving up his own life in order to save others. So as we reflect on the tragedy at Virginia Tech and have conversations about how to prevent a similar tragedy from happening again (and we need to have those conversations: We need to talk about gun control and loving the hard-to-love and additional safety measures to protect students), we also must remember Librescu's heroic sacrifice. It is because of his selfless act that today 20-30 students are still alive and 20-30 families aren't burying their sons or daughters. -- Original Source:Daily Nebraskan - April 25, 2007
Josh Swartzlander <jdwriter19@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 22:00:00 -0400 From: Unirel@vt.edu To: Multiple recipients <LISTSERV@LISTSERV.VT.EDU> Subject: Security Update August 16, 2007 Dear Students, Faculty, and Staff, With the return to school and the beginning of the new academic year, I know that you may be wondering what will be different on the Virginia Tech campus. Our university experienced violence and sorrow of unimaginable proportions this past spring. Many members of our community are still struggling physically and emotionally from direct or indirect involvement in that April tragedy. I trust that our mutual support and respect for each other will help the entire university community emerge stronger and full of Hokie Spirit. Soon, we will be announcing the results of the three Presidential working groups on security infrastructure, telecommunications, and inter-departmental protocols related to the events of April 16. However, I have received many questions about the status of classrooms and I am pleased to share with you now changes that are already underway. Classroom locks General assignment classrooms have had locks installed on the doors. These locks are designed so occupants can lock the door from inside the room in times of emergency. These locks are also designed so that the door does not remain locked after someone leaves the room. This feature will prevent people from locking the door as a prank or accidentally locking the door as they exit. Police, EMS, and some departmental personnel will have a key that will unlock these doors from the outside. Building door hardware In an effort to prevent unauthorized securing of interior and exterior pairs of doors in major academic and administrative buildings, the hardware on door pairs deemed susceptible to chaining, cabling, or being tied together are being removed and replaced. This work is currently ongoing and will be completed in accordance with the building priorities established by the Virginia Tech Police Department. Emergency protocols So that students, faculty and staff know how to respond during various types of emergencies, instructional posters will be placed in all academic buildings on campus. These posters are in production and will be mounted in all general assignment classrooms early in the Fall semester. Emergency Management personnel are also evaluating hanging the posters in other high-traffic areas on campus. Residential Programs is in the process of customizing this emergency notification poster for placement in all residence halls with protocols unique to residence life. VT Alerts Virginia Tech uses several channels when communicating to the greater university community in an emergency or weather event such as campus e-mail, the HotLine, telephone trees, and the web. We have added VT Alerts, a system in which you can receive notification on any mobile device. The subscriber-only features of VT Alerts allows you to receive urgent notifications where and how you want, even if you're away from your computer or university phone. VT Alerts allows you to list up to three contact methods including text messages (SMS) to mobile devices, instant messages (AOL, ICQ, MSN, and Yahoo), calls to non-Virginia Tech phone numbers, or e-mails to non-Virginia Tech addresses. Since YOU must provide us with your non-university contact information (e.g. cell phone number) we strongly suggest that everyone subscribe to VT Alerts at www.alerts.vt.edu. We are also actively considering several other emergency communication methods and will keep you informed of these developments. In the meantime, if you have specific questions about these changes or other security infrastructure initiatives, please contact Heidi McCoy at 231-8118 or by email to heidim@vt.edu. You will be hearing additional information from the university on these topics, but I wanted to provide you with a brief update prior to the beginning of the semester. Welcome back and I hope you have a successful year. Sincerely yours, James A. Hyatt Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer cc: Dr. Charles Steger Dr. Mark McNamee
Observer Viewpoint Issue date: 4/19/07 Section: Viewpoint Anyone old enough to speak coherently at the time still remembers the moment, over forty years ago, when they heard about JFK's assassination. Our grandparents can tell us how they listened to the radio accounts of Pearl Harbor on a December day, more than six decades gone. Every single one of us here at Notre Dame can recall where we were on the day of Sept. 11, 2001 - what we were doing, how the horribly tragic events of that morning unfolded for us and our personal feelings on the matter. Any time someone shares a personal story of That Day, I'm always amazed at the details people recall. I remember listening to Paul Harvey's show on my AM radio while driving to school when he announced the first plane crash. I remember talking about it with my friend before the start of first-hour Biology, and I remember the girl who came in and told us the other tower had been hit. I remember conversations I had that day, things different teachers said and talking with my grandparents in the evening. That was my experience, half a country away, without a personal connection to anyone involved. The mass media of the past century gave rise to a new, shared cultural experience, a common reference point that breaches distance and background: the generation-defining event. When we hear 9/11 described this way, it is absolutely on-target. This week, we have another national tragedy. News of the massacre at Virginia Tech on Monday spread like wildfire throughout both national and international outlets, even reaching most of us studying abroad in Europe within the hour. We learned of the catastrophe over television stations, through quickly formed Facebook groups, on Internet news sites and during instant messaging conversations. Solid facts came slowly, but no report could sanitize away the fear, confusion, anger, torrential grief and host of other emotions that assault us all in such times. This is the great curse of our generation's hyper-awareness and the awesome power of modern media. We cannot escape the sentiments swirling around the tragedies, and they cannot remain anonymous or distant to us. It is hard to ignore the images of grown men and women crying as dead college students are carried away, the surreal sounds of gunshots being fired on a peaceful college campus or the first-hand accounts of courage and action during the Virginia shootings. I hesitate to compare this with 9/11; the numbers, circumstances, impact, source, scope and means are worlds apart. Yet both incidents serve to painfully remind us that these events always seem to be associated with sorrow, tragedy and death. The events of Monday, though still fresh in my mind, will probably not stick with me as do those of 9/11. Sadly, the thousands of students and faculty and staff connected with the university, the thousands of parents worrying at home and the thousands of residents in the surrounding community don't have that luxury of separation. For them, this will become a "where were you when..." event. Monday will haunt their minds and stay with them for the duration of their lives. Healing can take place, and God willing, can come soon, but memories of all the little details from Monday will stick. Meanwhile, the rest of us are stuck asking ourselves: How many more of these "defining" events can we plan on seeing in the coming years and decades? And when can we expect one judged not by the body count or human toll, but by the rewards and human joy brought about? Some may say any event that becomes constantly discussed, like 9/11, does not develop its crystalline clarity in the moments of its occurrence, but rather slowly cements itself during the constant regurgitation of facts and satellite details in the months and years following. Even if this were the case, we are still left empty-handed trying to think of a ubiquitous positive event. I firmly believe that such events, incredibly wonderful instead of shockingly horrific, are entirely possible. Unfortun-ately, we are still waiting to see what such an event would look like. The consistently negative nature of these events can be explained to some degree. "Good events," for one, rarely culminate in one triumphant moment. Tragedy, on the other hand, catches us unaware. In the shock, the horrific facts come slowly and there are a thousand unknowns. With triumphant accomplishments, the event is often merely symbolic and known well in advance. The closest models I can call to mind are the fall of the Berlin Wall - which I and most of my classmates were too young to remember - and the moon landing, decades before we were born. Our generation, already exposed to so much death and murder and war and evil, still waits for its anti-9/11. We have yet to gather around our televisions and computers to share joy instead of sorrow, fulfillment instead of shock, pleasure instead of anger. We are the waiting. But for the moment, in respect for the Virginia Tech community, let us remember that we are also among the mourning. James Dechant is a junior studying abroad in Rome this semester. Questions, complaints and rude remarks can be sent to jdechant@nd.edu The views expressed in this article are those of the author and not necessarily those of The Observer. -- Original Source: http://media.www.ndsmcobserver.com/media/storage/paper660/news/2007/04/19/Viewpoint/Still.Waiting.For.Our.Victory-2852060.shtml http://media.www.ndsmcobserver.com/media/storage/paper660/news/2007/04/19/Viewpoint/Still.Waiting.For.Our.Victory-2852060-page2.shtml
Take time to reach out to someone at Virginia Tech
Posted: 4/26/07 TO THE EDITOR: In the wake of the tragedy at Virginia Tech, we have the opportunity to reach out and touch the lives of the students affected by this tragedy. Eve Carson made the suggestion to find someone at Virginia Tech to "adopt". For student groups, search for a "sister organization." Student leaders, look up your counterparts in Blacksburg. Then, make some contact with them. Let them know they are in our thoughts. Need somewhere to get started? Get a shoe box, throw some candy and some pictures in it, and then write a letter. Be creative. Be genuine. Be yourself. If you need any help, we are personally available and extremely willing to do anything we can. We are not experts, but we will call upon what resources we have. We are available by e-mail, Facebook and phone. We also urge you to call upon your fellow students here in Chapel Hill and take advantage of this opportunity to grow closer to those in the UNC community as well. As the school year draws to a close, keep in mind that time is of the essence. This is a call to action. We know many people feel helpless, but this is simple, cheap and easy yet personal way to positively affect the Virginia Tech community. James F. Eby Carolina Advocacy, Executive Branch Logan Liles Carolina Advocacy, Executive Branch -- Original Source:The Daily Tar Heel - April 26, 2007