What Happened

[an American in Texas]

Strife: "Okay, this I couldn't help but laugh at a bit, simply because...yes, I'm aware that the soldier died. But the soldier is dead...what exactly would you have people do? I dare say he wouldn't really notice whether or not people were paying attention to his corpse."

Sweetie, please don't say things like this. Yes, it's realistic, but it's also insensitive and disrespectful both to the soldier's memory and to his or her family, which one assumes is in the Kearny area.

You're quite correct. The soldier will not notice. But everyone else will. There is little point in uselessly alienating people.

Leigh

(And yes, I call you sweetie because you're younger than I am and I like you and I'm from Texas. So there)

[Strife767]

I specifically quoted you.  That entire quote was a callous remark made by an insensitive baffoon.

Let's hope that even Paul will condemn you for it.

Looks like you didn't read most of what I wrote.

The point the person was trying to make is that not one person on here had previously acknowledged this young man's death because the Dave P./LaClair issue has over run the board and it is time to pay attention to other issues.

People in Kearny die almost every day. Is it disrespectful not to make a topic on this forum every time someone dies? Also, is this person so much better than everyone else who dies in this town that he should be singled out on this forum? Be realistic--that's all I ask. You mistake my realism for insensitivity.

I also would ask you be realistic about the discussion of such a topic (namely, a local death) on a public forum. What is there to say, especially from people who never even knew this person? Nothing but generic expressions of pity devoid of any actual emotional attachment. And that, I think, is an insult to the people who are _truly_ mourning the death of this individual.

So before any more legs break from all the wild knee-jerking, please think a little more about _why_ I said what I did, instead of jumping to conclusions so quickly. *sighs* It really seems like a lot of people who seem sore at my stance on the Paszkiewicz issue are frantic to make me look as bad as possible with everything I say.

My opinion in the original post, re-worded is this: the Paszkiewicz issue is a dynamic one which needs action and affects every single person in this community who pays taxes or attends a public school in Kearny. On the other hand, a death is not, and does not--it is a static event which only directly impacts the people he knew and who knew him. To be upset at people for focusing more time and thought on the former than the latter shows a lack of perspective, imho.

I ask once more--what would you have me, or anyone else who never even met the recently deceased, say? Or do?

[Strife767]

I would hope he had to register.   Most of the news about him more or less dropped off the radar as soon as it popped on.

I've only found one person in town in the NJ registry, however. (unless there are more and I just haven't looked closely enough)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I saw two people (unless you're not counting the one in custody), one on Elm St. and one in custody who has like five aliases.

[Strife767]

The soldier will not notice.  But everyone else will. There is little point in uselessly alienating people.

Well, for what it's worth, it was not my intention. I go into more detail about exactly what I meant to convey and why here: http://forums.kearnyontheweb.com/index.php...indpost&p=46745

Leigh

(And yes, I call you sweetie because you're younger than I am and I like you and I'm from Texas.  So there)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Fine by me.

[Guest Guest]

Well, that's part of it. The other part is that there are certain events, like someone's death, that can only be reacted to up to a certain extent. There really isn't much that can be DONE about someone's death, after all.

As has happened several times in this thread already. A lot of people just can't handle frank, direct statements anymore.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Strife, c'mon. If you expect Mr. P to apologize for doing something wrong, you should at least hold yourself to the same standard. (I know, I know ... but I didn't do anything wrong ... I just give what I get ... I'm just direct and frank ... ). It's the same thought process going through Mr. P's head, who feels totally justified in what he said, and feels no need to apologize for same. (I know, I know ... but he violated the Constitution ... but he said "burn in Hell" ... but he said "you got the big fish" ...). It's a matter of degree, not substance. There are many on here who are NOT trying to hold your feet to the fire on this, but who feel as though the comment was in poor taste. Take a look at the posts ... no one is supporting you on this. At least if you exercise questionable judgment, you should be as critical of yourself as you would of someone else. Own it. Own up to it. And move on. You have more useful commentary in you - no point in wasting it trying to defend a random comment which is clearly capable of offense.

[RonD]

And young men and women die every day - soldiers and civilians. I realize that this is a death from a local family and that Kearny seems to /very patriotic/ and full of veterans, but really what is the real difference in the end between one of many soldiers who is dead, a deceased family member, or even you when you pass on one day.

What was that scripture about the dead being conscious of nothing at all? They are now a corpse - a dead soul. Nothing can be done for them now. 

As sad as it may be, while remembering the deceased, it's good to focus on those still living.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes, young men and women do die every day, and each one is a sad occasion not to be taken lightly.

You ask, "what is the real difference in the end between one of many soldiers who is dead, a deceased family member, or even you when you pass on one day". Maybe as you grow older, and I truly hope you do, you will realize the thrills and wonders of life that this young man, and many others, will not be able to experience. Those are the differences. Burying your child, not the normal chain of events, is the difference.

You also mentioned it's good to focus on the living. This I could not agree with more, but perhaps you should have directed these words to Strife767. Do you think the family left behind by this brave young man would appreciate his disrespect for their loved one? Was he focusing on them as he put his words down? I think not.

[Guest bewildered]

Strife:  "Okay, this I couldn't help but laugh at a bit, simply because...yes, I'm aware that the soldier died. But the soldier is dead...what exactly would you have people do? I dare say he wouldn't really notice whether or not people were paying attention to his corpse."

Sweetie, please don't say things like this.  Yes, it's realistic, but it's also insensitive and disrespectful both to the soldier's memory and to his or her family, which one assumes is in the Kearny area.

You're quite correct.  The soldier will not notice.  But everyone else will.  There is little point in uselessly alienating people.

Leigh

(And yes, I call you sweetie because you're younger than I am and I like you and I'm from Texas.  So there)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Gee, no one has ever called me sweetie online. Is it because I'm too old ?

Leigh, thanks for being another voice of reason on KOTW. Your input is always right on.

[Guest bewildered]

Strife:  "Okay, this I couldn't help but laugh at a bit, simply because...yes, I'm aware that the soldier died. But the soldier is dead...what exactly would you have people do? I dare say he wouldn't really notice whether or not people were paying attention to his corpse."

Sweetie, please don't say things like this.  Yes, it's realistic, but it's also insensitive and disrespectful both to the soldier's memory and to his or her family, which one assumes is in the Kearny area.

You're quite correct.  The soldier will not notice.  But everyone else will.  There is little point in uselessly alienating people.

Leigh

(And yes, I call you sweetie because you're younger than I am and I like you and I'm from Texas.  So there)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Gee, no one has ever called me sweetie online. Is it because I'm too old ?

Leigh, thanks for being another voice of reason on KOTW. Your input is always right on.

[Strife767]

Strife, c'mon.  If you expect Mr. P to apologize for doing something wrong, you should at least hold yourself to the same standard.  (I know, I know ... but I didn't do anything wrong ... I just give what I get ... I'm just direct and frank ... ).  It's the same thought process going through Mr. P's head, who feels totally justified in what he said, and feels no need to apologize for same.  (I know, I know ... but he violated the Constitution ... but he said "burn in Hell" ... but he said "you got the big fish" ...).  It's a matter of degree, not substance.

Yes, substance. It's not like the Constitution is the rulebook of some fan club he happens to be a part of. It's the highest law in this country, and his violation of it should not be trivialized.

I think those of you who do not have reputations for slinging mud at me on this forum but have also criticized me for it have simply misunderstood me. I humbly ask that you read the end of this post--I did my best to re-convey what I was trying to say all along with as 'sensitive' language etc. as I could come up with. Please read that and tell me--was I so wrong to feel that way?

There are many on here who are NOT trying to hold your feet to the fire on this, but who feel as though the comment was in poor taste.

Which is exactly why I organized my thoughts and 'put them on paper' a second time.

Take a look at the posts ... no one is supporting you on this.

At least one person had nothing worse to say than he thought I phrased the opinion poorly, which I may have--I'm not perfect. But he also said this:

"I, and anyone willing to be honest with themselves, will recognize that what you're laughing at is the poster's apparent implication that one should expect this news to stir the same kind of ongoing debate as the Paszkiewicz business. But this will not prevent the lying bigots on this board from seizing this opportunity to accuse you of laughing at a soldier's death."

I think he understood my original 'expression' best of anyone who's posted thus far. Hopefully my 're-wording' will allow more people to understand, too.

At least if you exercise questionable judgment, you should be as critical of yourself as you would of someone else.  Own it.  Own up to it.  And move on.  You have more useful commentary in you - no point in wasting it trying to defend a random comment which is clearly capable of offense.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

(I think "capable of offense" is a description that can be applied to practically anything)

I just want to know if you and the other reasonable people who have expressed concern over what I said still feel the same way after reading my other post, especially the end of it. Once again, it's here: http://forums.kearnyontheweb.com/index.php...indpost&p=46745

[Guest Guest]

Looks like you didn't read most of what I wrote.

I read your entire post and took offense to the callous part that I quoted.

It really seems like a lot of people who seem sore at my stance on the Paszkiewicz issue are frantic to make me look as bad as possible with everything I say.

Don't assume that I am on the opposite side of that issue than you are. You would be wrong.

My opinion in the original post, re-worded is this: the Paszkiewicz issue is a dynamic one which needs action and affects every single person in this community who pays taxes or attends a public school in Kearny. On the other hand, a death is not, and does not--it is a static event which only directly impacts the people he knew and who knew him. To be upset at people for focusing more time and thought on the former than the latter shows a lack of perspective, imho.

You continue to be disrespectful to the family of a young man who was serving his country to help protect the freedoms you are enjoying.

I ask once more--what would you have me, or anyone else who never even met the recently deceased, say? Or do?

You should have said nothing. You do not have to respond to every post on KOTW.

[Strife767]

My opinion in the original post, re-worded is this: the Paszkiewicz issue is a dynamic one which needs action and affects every single person in this community who pays taxes or attends a public school in Kearny. On the other hand, a death is not, and does not--it is a static event which only directly impacts the people he knew and who knew him. To be upset at people for focusing more time and thought on the former than the latter shows a lack of perspective, imho.

You continue to be disrespectful to the family of a young man who was serving his country to help protect the freedoms you are enjoying.

Where is the disrespect there? I'm not seeing it.

You should have said nothing.

Okay, so first you say I'm disrespecting the memory of a man who fought for the freedoms I'm enjoying, and then you basically tell me I should have kept quiet? Newsflash: the freedom of speech is one of the freedoms that soldier fought to protect too, you know! How hypocritical--so you would suggest I should only enjoy the rights you want me to? How dare you?

You do not have to respond to every post on KOTW.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What gave you the idea that I have felt obligated to respond to any of the posts I respond to? But I know what you're really suggesting, and I think that's incredibly arrogant of you.

[RonD]

I just want to know if you and the other reasonable people who have expressed concern over what I said still feel the same way after reading my other post, especially the end of it. Once again, it's here: http://forums.kearnyontheweb.com/index.php...indpost&p=46745

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Nothing short of an apology for your statement would make me change my opinion of you.

[Guest Guest]

Yes, substance. It's not like the Constitution is the rulebook of some fan club he happens to be a part of. It's the highest law in this country, and his violation of it should not be trivialized.

I think those of you who do not have reputations for slinging mud at me on this forum but have also criticized me for it have simply misunderstood me. I humbly ask that you read the end of this post--I did my best to re-convey what I was trying to say all along with as 'sensitive' language etc. as I could come up with. Please read that and tell me--was I so wrong to feel that way?

Which is exactly why I organized my thoughts and 'put them on paper' a second time.

At least one person had nothing worse to say than he thought I phrased the opinion poorly, which I may have--I'm not perfect. But he also said this:

"I, and anyone willing to be honest with themselves, will recognize that what you're laughing at is the poster's apparent implication that one should expect this news to stir the same kind of ongoing debate as the Paszkiewicz business. But this will not prevent the lying bigots on this board from seizing this opportunity to accuse you of laughing at a soldier's death."

I think he understood my original 'expression' best of anyone who's posted thus far. Hopefully my 're-wording' will allow more people to understand, too.

(I think "capable of offense" is a description that can be applied to practically anything)

I just want to know if you and the other reasonable people who have expressed concern over what I said still feel the same way after reading my other post, especially the end of it. Once again, it's here: http://forums.kearnyontheweb.com/index.php...indpost&p=46745

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I can see I'm pumping a dry well on this ...