🚀 go-pugleaf

One significant difference being that the boy in San Diego was an
impressionable 15 years of age.  And learning.  Learning from educators.
You were an educator.  Look at your track record.  2 brief paragraphs of
your track record are below...

You mention that you didn't plan to kill anyone during your 'shooting
rampage'.  Why brings weapons to a University?  You should have left them at
home, or, as you obviously realized you were unstable, not owned any at all.
Here's an idea:  Find a different job.  One where people don't pick on the
'poor associate professor of engineering with impressive credentials'....

http://www.uwaterloo.ca/web-docs/documents/cowan

"The police arrested Dr. Valery Fabrikant and escorted him from the campus
of Concordia University on the afternoon of  Monday, August 24, 1992. They
left the institution from which  they had removed him awash in a sea of
fear, regret, guilt and blame."

http://www.kipawa.com/universi.htm
"A 7.65-mm bullet pierced Phoivos Ziogas's abdomen and ricocheted inside his
body, severing two major arteries and destroying a kidney. Four bullets
struck Matthew Douglass in the head, face and hand. Michael Hogben was cut
down by three shots, fired at short range into his head, throat and back.
Aaron Jaan Saber was hit twice, once in the head and once in the side. A
single bullet lodged in Elizabeth Horwood's thigh. All five victims were
employees of Montreal's Concordia University, and all had the misfortune on
Aug. 24 to encounter a gunman who went on a shooting rampage last week at
the university's downtown campus. ``The gunman appears to have been
searching for vengeance,'' said Pierre Sangollo, director of the Montreal
police department's major crimes unit. ``And it looks as if most his targets
were deliberately selected.'' Police charged Valery Fabrikant, a 52-
year-old Soviet-trained associate professor of engineering with impressive
credentials and a long history of aberrant behavior, with murdering Douglass
and Hogben, and with the attempted murder of Saber, who died the next day."






"Isaac Fabrikant" <hollyric@colba.net> wrote in message
news:9903mf$1ap$1@news.colba.net...
> My heart sinks each time I hear in the news this: yet another shooting,
two
> are killed and 13 wounded, and yet again the yellow media pretends not to
> know why it happened.  I quote a typical passage from a newspaper:
>
> "Santana High School did everything right: anonymous sign-in sheets for
> students to report threats, SWAT training for the principal, program to
help
> youngsters to get along, including one called "Names can really hurt us".
A
> sheriff s deputy was assigned part-time to the school.  Seven full-time
> campus supervisors roamed the grounds.  Extra phones, radio and speakers
> were installed to spread word of trouble quickly across the 1,900-student
> campus.  Somehow, it wasn't enough."
>
> Yellow media take people for stupid: we know from other reports that Andy
> Williams was bullied on a daily basis, was called "dork", "freak", "geek",
> "nerd", his shoes were taken off his feet, etc.  There were 7 (seven!)
> supervisors "roaming the grounds", how on earth could they not notice a
boy,
> without shoes?  What is the point to have those supervisors, if they do
not
> see and do not stop bullying?  Santana school did nothing right: what is
the
> point to SWAT train the principal, what is the point to install phones and
> radios?  All they had to do was to stop abuse of Andy Williams, and then
> they would not need anything else.
>
> School officials claim that Andy never complained to them.  I do not buy
> this: he even told a number of people of his intentions to bring a gun and
> to shoot his abusers, clearly, he tried less radical means earlier; it is
> March now, and school abuse started in September.
>
> Numerous talk shows have various professionals invited, and all of them
are
> saying that the matter of school violence is too complicated, each case is
> different, there is no quick solution and other general and meaningless
> phrases.  We see on TV screens that police investigators "found no motives
> for shooting". We see a picture with big WHY written on the wall.  I can
> tell you why: IT IS THE ABUSE, STUPID!!!  Stop the abuse, and there will
be
> no shootings anywhere.
>
> I also read in newspapers that Andy Williams did his shooting to get his
"15
> minutes of fame". Nothing could be more stupid than this: he did not look
> very happy about all the publicity around him.  The yellow media wrote the
> same thing about me, that I shot 4 people "to attract attention" to my
feud
> with the university officials.  Noone in his right mind would shoot anyone
> just to attract attention.  Andy Williams is not insane, and neither was
I.
> What he felt was extreme pain and utter desperation, I know, I was there.
>
> There is though a big difference in our cases: I did not plan to kill
> anyone, and I was lucky that not a single innocent person was hurt in my
> case, but I think, I can explain why Andy Williams shot passersby, some of
> them he probably did not know.  In his head, they were as guilty as direct
> abusers, because they saw him being abused, and probably laughed at him
> instead of telling his abusers to stop.  It is as simple as that everybody
> understands that no abuser can exist unless he sees an audience which
> explicitly or implicitly approves his actions, and Andy understood it as
> well.  So, if you see someone being abused, try to stop it or tell someone
> and demand it to stop, because when the abused person goes berserk, it is
> you who might get killed.
>
> I think, I can also explain, why some of the children, involved in school
> shootings, killed one or both parents first. Parents are there to protect
> their children, and if they not only refuse to protect, but also humiliate
> their children and laugh at them, when their children tell them that
someone
> is bullying them, this creates extreme hatred towards parents. In eyes of
> the children, such parents are traitors, and traitors in every society are
> hated more than the enemy: they are usually hanged or shot, while the
enemy
> is taken as a prisoner and kept alive. So, if this is the case, do not be
> surprised, when you hear that one or both parents were killed first.
>
> There is in Canadian jurisprudence the defense of battered woman syndrome.
> It originates from the case of a woman in Western Canada, who was severely
> abused by her husband for a long time.  One day, he threatened to kill
her.
> She took a rifle and shot him dead.  At the time of shooting, he was
leaving
> the room, and had no weapon with him.  She was acquitted on the basis of
> battered woman syndrome which states that a woman, subjected to a long and
> severe abuse, feels that she, in order to protect her life, has no
> alternative but to kill her abuser. I accept this, and even if it was not
> so, I mean, even if this battered woman syndrome was a fantasy created by
> psychiatrists, a woman killing an abusive husband should be acquitted for
a
> very simple reason: to send a message to all abusers - start behaving or
> risk of being killed.  I guarantee that this would be the best way to stop
> significant part of family violence.
>
> The same should be applied to Andy Williams: if we accept the battered
woman
> syndrome, why can not we accept a battered child syndrome?  If you want to
> stop shootings at schools, you should stop bullying, and the best way to
do
> so, is to send a clear message to the bullies: stop bullying or risk of
> being killed.  I guarantee this would cool them off.  If Andy Williams had
> the money of O.J. Simpson, his lawyers most certainly would revoke the
> battered child syndrome defense, but since he does not, I am pretty sure,
> his lawyers would not defend him at all.
>
> I have seen on TV funeral of one of the children shot at Santana school,
and
> one of his friends was reading from a prepared sheet of paper: "Somewhere,
> down the road, we shall have all the answers ..." Children do not speak
like
> that; some grown-ups have prepared this speech for him, taking into
> consideration that the whole thing was to be bradcasted to the nation.
> Hello, WAKE UP, we have all the answers, many years ago.
>
>  V.I. Fabrikant
>
>
>