Jump to content

Have it your way


Stixx3969
 Share

Recommended Posts

I would like to hear from all of those who are angry with Matt for blowing the whistle on Mr. P.

  If you had your way how would you like to have seen that particular situation unfold?

I would have liked to see the entire class requesting Mr P's dismissal for his inappropriate preaching.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would have liked to see the entire class requesting Mr P's dismissal for his inappropriate preaching.

That sure would have been a much better reflection on the Kearny school system...hopefully, at least Matthew set an example, and the next time a teacher crosses the line like that, it won't be just ONE student rising up against him/her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Mr Kotter
I would like to hear from all of those who are angry with Matt for blowing the whistle on Mr. P.

  If you had your way how would you like to have seen that particular situation unfold?

I would like to hear from all of those who are angry with Matt for blowing the whistle

I would like it all to die.

It's over now.

The year ended in June

Why do you keep pushing???

This will not spill into another school year.

I had children eligable for schlorships while this was going on.

I makes for interesting conversation with the recruiters

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to hear from all of those who are angry with Matt for blowing the whistle

I would like it all to die.

It's over now.

The year ended in June

Why do you keep pushing???

This will not spill into another school year.

I had children eligable for schlorships while this was going on.

I makes for interesting conversation with the recruiters

I would love to watch a student trying to impress a recruiter by trying to explain Paszkiewicz's illegal behavior.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to hear from all of those who are angry with Matt for blowing the whistle

I would like it all to die.

It's over now.

The year ended in June

Why do you keep pushing???

This will not spill into another school year.

I had children eligable for schlorships while this was going on.

I makes for interesting conversation with the recruiters

It's an important issue that people obviously still want to talk about.

Nobody made you read or respond to this post. So, up your nose wit a rubba hose!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to hear from all of those who are angry with Matt for blowing the whistle

I would like it all to die.

It's over now.

The year ended in June

Why do you keep pushing???

This will not spill into another school year.

I had children eligable for schlorships while this was going on.

I makes for interesting conversation with the recruiters

I hope college recruiters will ask the students in Matthew's class why they did nothing to defend him while he was being attacked, especially the students in his class who defended the teacher and claimed he had done nothing wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Patriot
I would like to hear from all of those who are angry with Matt for blowing the whistle on Mr. P.

  If you had your way how would you like to have seen that particular situation unfold?

I would like to see Matt join the Marines out of high school. Benefits: 1) Become a man. 2) Get away from **** ******* *****. 3) Get far away from **** ******* *****.

KOTW Note: The above post was edited for content.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to hear from all of those who are angry with Matt for blowing the whistle on Mr. P.

  If you had your way how would you like to have seen that particular situation unfold?

It had nothing to do with blowing a whistle. This was all premeditated and orchestrated well in advance. I would have liked to see the little troublemaker expelled from school. It is a disgrace to how lad and dad try to use the Constitution as a cause to stir trouble. And that is all he is and has been to the Kearny School System. People seem to forget that in the magical tapes the boy made that Matthew was a much a part of the discussion, inquiring and probing more and more to get his desired result. And I guess junior got it since he is now famous. But at what cost to the rest of the students who had to suffer through all this turmoil.

Was it worth it? No! At least he got his scholarships paid for by fanatical organizations. Congrats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It had nothing to do with blowing a whistle. This was all premeditated and orchestrated well in advance.  I would have liked to see the little troublemaker expelled from school. It is a disgrace to how lad and dad try to use the Constitution as a cause to stir trouble. And that is all he is and has been to the Kearny School System.  People seem to forget that in the magical tapes the boy made that Matthew was a much a part of the discussion, inquiring and probing more and more to get his desired result.  And I guess junior got it since he is now famous. But at what cost to the rest of the students who had to suffer through all this turmoil. 

Was it worth it?  No!  At least he got his scholarships paid for by fanatical organizations.  Congrats.

You're not going to get away with this. You can distort this as many times as KOTW will allow you to do it, but I will respond with the truth, which will mean that you will not get away with making it look as though people don't understand what happened. You're not going to change the facts at Matthew's expense.

It was not premeditated. It was not orchestrated. That is a ridiculous claim on his face. There probably isn't another teacher in our school system who could be baited, goaded, prodded or cajoled into a discussion like this because with the sole exception of David Paszkiewicz, every other teacher in the system knows better. Answer that if you think you know so much.

Paszkiewicz opened topic after topic on his own because he was on an evangelical mission, which he openly acknowledged in that very classroom. Matthew asked questions that challenged him and that obviously surprised him. Any student who chose to challenge this renegade teacher might have asked those questions. The community's central legitimate concern is to know how far this teacher would go; and he showed us, going so far as to tell non-Christians that they belong in hell - and why, because he was challenged on the views he had already expressed.

You know perfectly well that Matthew violated no law or rule, and therefore could not have been expelled or disciplined in any way. And it's quite a distortion to say that insisting the Constitution be obeyed is "using" it to stir trouble. The person responsible for the trouble is the one who violated the Constitution. Defending the Constitution is not "stirring trouble."

Perhaps you could enlighten us as to the turmoil the other students have suffered. They should be ashamed of themselves allowing this to happen to a classmate while they remained silent.

Finally, you are absolutely right that my son is now in demand as a speaker and is being contacted by universities and colleges because of what he did. He has won enough awards and earned enough accolades to propel him toward a career. He is on a speaking basis with several powerful people who usually call him right back if he reaches out to them. That is because these successful, intelligent and powerful people respect and honor him for what he did. They recognize how rare his actions were, and how important they are to the maintenance of a free and democratic society under the rule of law and a Constitution. Sometimes people who do the right thing are rewarded, and that is what happened here. Get used to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It had nothing to do with blowing a whistle. This was all premeditated and orchestrated well in advance.  I would have liked to see the little troublemaker expelled from school. It is a disgrace to how lad and dad try to use the Constitution as a cause to stir trouble. And that is all he is and has been to the Kearny School System.  People seem to forget that in the magical tapes the boy made that Matthew was a much a part of the discussion, inquiring and probing more and more to get his desired result.  And I guess junior got it since he is now famous. But at what cost to the rest of the students who had to suffer through all this turmoil. 

Was it worth it?  No!  At least he got his scholarships paid for by fanatical organizations.  Congrats.

So you're saying Mr. P was outsmarted by the kid? Not a particularly astute guy, then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing changed. It was a non issue to begin with. One of many that Matt has found to pursue every year. Mr. P will continue to teach the same way he has in the past. The teachers probably won't attend the seperation of church and state seminar. And life goes on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It had nothing to do with blowing a whistle. This was all premeditated and orchestrated well in advance.

You mean like, before the school year started? The preaching began right at the beginning of the school year--how far in advance could it have possibly been planned, speaking in purely practical terms?

I would have liked to see the little troublemaker expelled from school.

For exposing a teacher preaching in class? Forget "your bias is showing," this is like streaking with nothing but it on.

It is a disgrace to how lad and dad try to use the Constitution as a cause to stir trouble.

Fact: If Paszkiewicz had been doing his job properly, nothing would have happened, the media wouldn't have cared, Matthew wouldn't have gotten any recognition or awards, etc. It wasn't even just that he crossed the line in class, but that he refused to apologize and even went so far as to lie about what both he did (denying most of his statements in the meeting) and what Matthew did (falsely accusing him of twisting his words).

And that is all he is and has been to the Kearny School System.

Merely your opinion, based on your biases.

People seem to forget that in the magical tapes

The nature of the recordings (tapes? Please, this is the 21st century :D) were quite mundane, actually.

the boy made that Matthew was a much a part of the discussion, inquiring and probing more and more to get his desired result.

So it's Matthew's fault that Paszkiewicz has no control over the discussion in his own classroom (either that, or he willfully chose to put and keep the discussion where it was--this is actually more likely)? Hold on a second...

BAAAHAHAHAHAHAH!

And I guess junior got it since he is now famous. But at what cost to the rest of the students who had to suffer through all this turmoil.

If Paszkiewicz had apologized for his obvious transgressions, it would have ended quickly.

If the Board had acted promptly, it would have ended almost as quickly.

Either way, there would have been no press, no embarassment of the town or the school system, none of that.

Was it worth it?  No!  At least he got his scholarships paid for by fanatical organizations.  Congrats.

It's telling that you label every organization that gave him recognition "fanatical." Do you even know anything about any of those organizations?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest CrypticLife
It had nothing to do with blowing a whistle. This was all premeditated and orchestrated well in advance.  I would have liked to see the little troublemaker expelled from school. It is a disgrace to how lad and dad try to use the Constitution as a cause to stir trouble. And that is all he is and has been to the Kearny School System.  People seem to forget that in the magical tapes the boy made that Matthew was a much a part of the discussion, inquiring and probing more and more to get his desired result.  And I guess junior got it since he is now famous. But at what cost to the rest of the students who had to suffer through all this turmoil. 

Was it worth it?  No!  At least he got his scholarships paid for by fanatical organizations.  Congrats.

You clearly know nothing about the legal system or teacher responsibility. The teacher is responsible for what he says in the classroom. It would have been quite easy to decline to speak on the matter. It also would have been his legal responsibility.

"Little troublemaker"? No -- Paskiewicz was the troublemaker here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing changed.  It was a non issue to begin with.  One of many that Matt has found to pursue every year.  Mr. P will continue to teach the same way he has in the past.  The teachers probably won't attend the seperation of church and state seminar.  And life goes on.

Uh-huh, a non-issue covered nationally and internationally. It doesn't work that way.

As for Paszkiewicz, that depends on how lucky he feels. He got the message.

Thanks for the heads-up, though on the teachers' seminar. I'll make sure attendance is mandatory. I believe it is already, but I'll make sure now. Anything else you'd like to offer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing changed.  It was a non issue to begin with.  One of many that Matt has found to pursue every year.  Mr. P will continue to teach the same way he has in the past.  The teachers probably won't attend the seperation of church and state seminar.  And life goes on.

So he'll do it again-and when the next student complains, they'll have an incredibly easy time suing the crap out of the school system. There will be NO deniability-the world noticed already, so it isn't like the BOE can feign ignorance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing changed.  It was a non issue to begin with.  One of many that Matt has found to pursue every year.  Mr. P will continue to teach the same way he has in the past.  The teachers probably won't attend the seperation of church and state seminar.  And life goes on.

If Mr P continues to teach the same way he should be dismissed as the arrogant SOB he is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're not going to get away with this. You can distort this as many times as KOTW will allow you to do it, but I will respond with the truth, which will mean that you will not get away with making it look as though people don't understand what happened. You're not going to change the facts at Matthew's expense.

It was not premeditated. It was not orchestrated. That is a ridiculous claim on his face. There probably isn't another teacher in our school system who could be baited, goaded, prodded or cajoled into a discussion like this because with the sole exception of David Paszkiewicz, every other teacher in the system knows better. Answer that if you think you know so much.

Paszkiewicz opened topic after topic on his own because he was on an evangelical mission, which he openly acknowledged in that very classroom. Matthew asked questions that challenged him and that obviously surprised him. Any student who chose to challenge this renegade teacher might have asked those questions. The community's central legitimate concern is to know how far this teacher would go; and he showed us, going so far as to tell non-Christians that they belong in hell - and why, because he was challenged on the views he had already expressed.

You know perfectly well that Matthew violated no law or rule, and therefore could not have been expelled or disciplined in any way. And it's quite a distortion to say that insisting the Constitution be obeyed is "using" it to stir trouble. The person responsible for the trouble is the one who violated the Constitution. Defending the Constitution is not "stirring trouble."

Perhaps you could enlighten us as to the turmoil the other students have suffered. They should be ashamed of themselves allowing this to happen to a classmate while they remained silent.

Finally, you are absolutely right that my son is now in demand as a speaker and is being contacted by universities and colleges because of what he did. He has won enough awards and earned enough accolades to propel him toward a career. He is on a speaking basis with several powerful people who usually call him right back if he reaches out to them. That is because these successful, intelligent and powerful people respect and honor him for what he did. They recognize how rare his actions were, and how important they are to the maintenance of a free and democratic society under the rule of law and a Constitution. Sometimes people who do the right thing are rewarded, and that is what happened here. Get used to it.

I would like to know what truth you are talking about. How can you say that this was not premeditated when he secretly taped class conversations without prior consent and did not approach the students or the teacher he taped on it instead of going public with it first? I do find it funny that in the post two days ago you said you loved David Paszkiewicz and today you call him a renegade teacher. I guess in your religion this is the definition of love? No one said that Matthew broke any law. It's just that the methods he used were underhanded. If you want to commend him on it and give him accolades, that is your business. And if you thought that was the right thing, then all the power to you. I am sure you are proud that the Constitution that you hide behind works for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to know what truth you are talking about. How can you say that this was not premeditated when he secretly taped class conversations without prior consent

Unless you consider reacting to the preaching to be "premeditated" (then duh, by that definition almost everything everyone does is "premeditated"), it wasn't. He didn't even record the first day of class--if he did, then just maybe you'd have something to go on.

and did not approach the students or the teacher he taped on it instead of going public with it first?

Liar. Matthew's meeting with Paszkiewicz, Somma, etc. happened long before he "went public" with the recordings, and it was at that meeting that he gave copies of them to everyone in the meeting.

I do find it funny that in the post two days ago you said you loved David Paszkiewicz and today you call him a renegade teacher. I guess in your religion this is the definition of love?

If you have a close friend who was arrested for shoplifting, does it automatically mean you have no love for them anymore if you call them a "thief?" Being honest is not equal to being unloving--in fact, one's truest friends are often those who are willing to be honest about one's flaws, instead of pretending they don't exist.

No one said that Matthew broke any law. It's just that the methods he used were underhanded.

Fact: If he didn't have the recordings to back him up, Paszkiewicz would have gotten away with his preaching, because his lying about what he said would have been believed over Matthew's truthful account.

Let me ask you something--do you find no fault in Paszkiewicz's blatant lies in that meeting? Is THAT not "underhanded," much moreso than gathering evidence to back oneself up, for a reason that Paszkiewicz himself proved was absolutely justified?

I am sure you are proud that the Constitution that you hide behind works for you.

What a disgusting and unpatriotic thing to say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to know what truth you are talking about. How can you say that this was not premeditated when he secretly taped class conversations without prior consent and did not approach the students or the teacher he taped on it instead of going public with it first?  I do find it funny that in the post two days ago you said you loved David Paszkiewicz and today you call him a renegade teacher. I guess in your religion this is the definition of love?  No one said that Matthew broke any law. It's just that the methods he used were underhanded.  If you want to commend him on it and give him accolades, that is your business.  And if you thought that was the right thing, then all the power to you. I am sure you are proud that the Constitution that you hide behind works for you.

See Strife's response, which is spot on in every way. Matthew's methods were the only ones that would have resulted in a just outcome. Justice is the best response for all concerned under the circumstances. Letting a renegade teacher get away with violating the Constitution would not have been justice. Exposing a wrongdoer's wrong actions so as to put a stop to them is justice. That is why I reject your claim that Matthew's methods were underhanded. What is underhanded is breaking the law and then lying about it.

As for loving a renegade - you never heard of the prodigal son? Do you people ever read the Bible you claim to believe in?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless you consider reacting to the preaching to be "premeditated" (then duh, by that definition almost everything everyone does is "premeditated"), it wasn't. He didn't even record the first day of class--if he did, then just maybe you'd have something to go on.

Liar. Matthew's meeting with Paszkiewicz, Somma, etc. happened long before he "went public" with the recordings, and it was at that meeting that he gave copies of them to everyone in the meeting.

If you have a close friend who was arrested for shoplifting, does it automatically mean you have no love for them anymore if you call them a "thief?" Being honest is not equal to being unloving--in fact, one's truest friends are often those who are willing to be honest about one's flaws, instead of pretending they don't exist.

Fact: If he didn't have the recordings to back him up, Paszkiewicz would have gotten away with his preaching, because his lying about what he said would have been believed over Matthew's truthful account.

Let me ask you something--do you find no fault in Paszkiewicz's blatant lies in that meeting? Is THAT not "underhanded," much moreso than gathering evidence to back oneself up, for a reason that Paszkiewicz himself proved was absolutely justified?

What a disgusting and unpatriotic thing to say.

How can you accuse me of being a liar when you weren’t in the classroom the first day of school? Religion wasn't even a topic on the first day of school, so he had no reason to record it. You throw out the words "liar" like you were there, but you weren't, so you really do not know what went on in the classroom. Other than being a mouthpiece for the LaClairs <_< there is nothing that you offer in this reply and it has no substance. And for your information Matthew did not meet with Paszkiewicz before he went to Somma so where ever you got your facts from is wrong. So please do not come across calling people liars without knowing the facts yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How can you accuse me of being a liar

Easy. You asserted that Matthew "secretly taped class conversations without prior consent...and did not approach the...teacher he taped on it instead of going public with it first," and that's a lie. What part aren't you understanding?

when you weren’t in the classroom the first day of school? Religion wasn't even a topic on the first day of school, so he had no reason to record it.  You throw out the words "liar" like you were there, but you weren't, so you really do not know what went on in the classroom.

Care to tell me what the hell you're talking about, since your lie had nothing to do about what went on in the classroom?

Other than being a mouthpiece for the LaClairs  :o there is nothing that you offer in this reply and it has no substance.

Saying it doesn't make it so--and at least I don't make up lies about people I don't agree with.

And for your information Matthew did not meet with Paszkiewicz before he went to Somma

Sorry, I'm not the kind of person who won't notice you moving the goalposts. You said "went public," not "before he went to Somma (not to mention that the meeting with Somma was anything but public)." The recordings were only made available publicly over a month later.

so where ever you got your facts from is wrong. So please do not come across calling people liars without knowing the facts yourself.

I think it's clear which of us has been caught lying here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How can you accuse me of being a liar when you weren’t in the classroom the first day of school? Religion wasn't even a topic on the first day of school, so he had no reason to record it.  You throw out the words "liar" like you were there, but you weren't, so you really do not know what went on in the classroom.  Other than being a mouthpiece for the LaClairs  :o there is nothing that you offer in this reply and it has no substance.  And for your information Matthew did not meet with Paszkiewicz before he went to Somma so where ever you got your facts from is wrong. So please do not come across calling people liars without knowing the facts yourself.

You're missing the point. If Matthew had premeditated an attack on Paszkiewicz he would have begun recording him on the first day of class. Instead, he went to class and after two days of the man's ramblings on politics if not religion (I don't recall, but I don't trust any of the other students in that class to state the matter accurately either, given their abysmal track record of inaccuracy about what happened), Matthew determined that Paszkiewicz was out of control and decided to record him. The recordings proved that Matthew was right.

Strife is not our mouthpiece. Strife has his/her own views and opinions, and expresses them as he/she sees fit. There is no discussion back and forth between us about it, although I have met Strife since this started and do know who the person is.

Strife's point was that Matthew did not take the matter public until after he met with Paszkiewicz. That is true. You attacked Strife for something he/she did not write.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Easy. You asserted that Matthew "secretly taped class conversations without prior consent...and did not approach the...teacher he taped on it instead of going public with it first," and that's a lie. What part aren't you understanding?

Care to tell me what the hell you're talking about, since your lie had nothing to do about what went on in the classroom?

Saying it doesn't make it so--and at least I don't make up lies about people I don't agree with.

Sorry, I'm not the kind of person who won't notice you moving the goalposts. You said "went public," not "before he went to Somma (not to mention that the meeting with Somma was anything but public)." The recordings were only made available publicly over a month later.

I think it's clear which of us has been caught lying here.

So you are saying that Matthew had the consent of the teacher to tape this? You can say anything you wish here but the truth still remains. There was no censent and the teacher knew nothing of it. That is the undeniable truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...