Darrell Scott, the father of Rachel Scott, a victim of the Columbine High School shootings in Littleton , Colorado , was invited to address the House Judiciary Committee's subcommittee. What he said during this session of this sub-committee was painfully truthful.
"Since the dawn of creation there has been both good & evil in the hearts of men and women. We all contain the seeds of kindness or the seeds of violence. The death of my wonderful daughter, Rachel Joy Scott, and the deaths of that heroic teacher, and the other eleven children who died must not be in vain. Their blood cries out f or answers.
"The first recorded act of violence was when Cain slew his brother Abel out in the field. The villain was not the club he used.. Neither was it the NCA, the National Club Association. The true killer was Cain, and the reason for the murder could only be found in Cain's heart.
"In the days that followed the Columbine tragedy, I was amazed at how quickly fingers began to be pointed at groups such as the NRA. I am not a member of the NRA. I am not a hunter. I do not even own a gun. I am not here to represent or defend the NRA - because I don't believe that they are responsible for my daughter's death. Therefore I do not believe that they need to be defended. If I believed they had anything to do with Rachel's murder I would be their strongest opponent.
I am here today to declare that Columbine was not just a tragedy -- it was a spiritual event that should be forcing us to look at where the real blame lies! Much of the blame lies here in this room. Much of the blame lies behind the pointing fingers of the accusers themselves. I wrote a poem just four nights ago that expresses my feelings best.
Your laws ignore our deepest needs,
Your words are empty air.
You've stripped away our heritage,
You've outlawed simple prayer.
Now gunshots fill our classrooms,
And precious children die.
You seek for answers everywhere,
And ask the question "Why?"
You regulate restrictive laws,
Through legislative creed.
And yet you fail to understand,
That God is what we need!
" Men and women are three-part beings. We all consist of body, mind, and spirit. When we refuse to acknowledge a third part of our make-up, we create a void that allows evil, prejudice, and hatred to rush in and wreak havoc. Spiritual presences were present within our educational
systems for most of our nation's history. Many of our major colleges began as theological seminaries. This is a historical fact. What has happened to us as a nation? We have refused to honor God, and in so doing, we open the doors to hatred and violence. And when something as terrible as Columbine's tragedy occurs -- politicians immediately look for a scapegoat such as the NRA. They immediately seek to pass more restrictive laws that contribute to erode away our personal and private liberties. We do not need more restrictive laws. Eric and Dylan would not have been stopped by metal detectors. No amount of gun laws can stop someone who spends months planning this type of massacre. The real villain lies within our own hearts.
"As my son Craig lay under that table in the school library and saw his two friends murdered before his very eyes, he did not hesitate to pray in school. I defy any law or politician to deny him that right! I challenge every young person in America , and around the world, to realize that on April 20, 1999, at Columbine High School prayer was brought back to our schools. Do not let the many prayers offered by those students be in vain. Dare to move into the new millennium with a sacred disregard for legislation that violates your God-given right to communicate with Him. To those of you who would point your finger at the NRA -- I give to you a sincere challenge. Dare to examine your
own heart before casting the first stone!
My daughter's death will not be in vain! The young people of this country will not allow that to happen!"
I have modified this because Snopes says this is partially correct and states he had no facts to back up his statement. I thought this statement said it all for me:
As transcripts of the proceedings demonstrate, Darrell Scott did make the statement attributed to him in the e-mail reproduced above, but virtually everything framing his statement in that e-mail is false. Darrell Scott wasn't speaking to "national leaders" present at a "special session of Congress," people who were "not prepared for what he was to say" and "did not receive it well." He was simply one of eight people who presented statements to a small House subcommittee meeting in an office building that day, and his statement wasn't received any differently than any of the others. Most Congressmen likely didn't hear or read what he said (or even know that he had testified), and his words certainly didn't prompt outrage from an unreceptive audience. Moreover, his words were probably the least relevant of all the statements given that day: He presented no facts or statistics relating to the issues of gun control and gun law enforcement, as others did; he merely gave a rambling opinion that gun control laws wouldn't have stopped the Columbine High School shootings and that those shootings were somehow related to a lack of religion in schools (along the way repeating the erroneous assertion that prayer is "banned" in U.S. public schools).
Finally, contrary to the coda of the e-mail, the "media" did not prevent anyone from hearing Darrell Scott's words. The subcommittee hearing at which he spoke was covered by the Associated Press and reported in several big-city newspapers — actually an atypically large amount of general media coverage for a House subcommittee hearing.
Last updated: 3 January 2007
http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/scott.asp :wink:
I still think that the contex and meaning of this email says it all: The fact he represented was that his daughter was killed. I am drowning in facts everyone comes up with to make their point. You can't ignore his fact, or can you? Snopes says it is partly tur not completely false. Even sub committee members are national leaders if they serve in the Senate or House??????
But the distortions that are contained in the email place it squarely in the realm of propaganda. That's what I was pointing out.
Propogandra?? Or just someones opinion? You have the choice to not believe it and pick it apart. I have the right to believe the essence of the message.
Given the fact that a certain segment of the population is posting (and/or emailing) somewhat false information surrounding the events as they actually transpired, all in an effort to blame Columbine on the fact that the nation has become more secular, definitely makes propaganda an appropriate term to describe it. :wink:
And lest there be any doubt about it:
prop⋅a⋅gan⋅da [prop-uh-gan-duh] Show IPA
–noun
1. information, ideas, or rumors deliberately spread widely to help or harm a person, group, movement, institution, nation, etc.
2. the deliberate spreading of such information, rumors, etc.
3. the particular doctrines or principles propagated by an organization or movement.
4. the systematic propagation of a doctrine or cause or of information reflecting the views and interests of those advocating such a doctrine or cause.
See the modification I made to the Post. I wouldn't want anyone to think I was spreading propaganda and that the American people are too ignorant to see it, only you. I still stand by the statement and am 100% behind it,
Sadly, I do think that a large segment of the population is clearly ignorant and are spoon fed propaganda (which they think is the truth) on an almost daily basis. I'm not happy with that assessment, but I think it's fair. When you have media outlets like Fox News, which is clearly a mouthpiece for the Republican party, and MSNBC which is clearly liberal, pumping distortions into the homes of many Americans in the stead of simply the facts of the news, that's clearly dangerous for the country and empowers the masses to be ignorant.
Despite what you may think, many people are unable to discern the difference.
I disagree with your view about Fox News. I quit watching CNN after they took a definite left liberal turn, I would even say socialistic. I respect and watch Fox because I think they tell the truth more than the others and don't just slant the news to fit their point of view likd NBC, ABC, CBS, MSNBC and others. I have seen them report their mistakes when facts prove them wrong. I have lost all respect for the New Media as it is after this last election. They were snide,condensending and only told what news they wanted to. I think they have forgotten that their job is to report the news not their opinion. Not only Republicans watch Fox. Watch it for a week and let me know what you think
I routinely watch several news outlets, including Fox, and if you don't think Fox distorts either by omission or commission, you must be watching a different Fox News than I am.
And yes, by doing what they do, they're enabling igorance.