Posted: Thursday, December 6, 2007 6:00 pm
I’ve been glued to the TV for hours, anxiously waiting for identification of the victims in Omaha’s Westroads Mall tragedy. The safety of only one loved one still to be confirmed. I guess the police have a good reason for sitting on victim IDs and keeping hundreds in a state of suspended terror waiting to find out.
We are told the shooter left notes saying he was going to be “famous.” Why did he expect fame? Why didn’t he expect condemnation and revulsion instead?
Because, just as at Columbine, Virginia Tech and all the other copycats, the criminal gets great press. Not one of all of the talking heads today has uttered a single critical word of the killer.
Every report or interview has, without exception, characterized him favorably. A nice kid, well-behaved, funny, regular guy, maybe a target of some bullying, getting his life back on track.
He was “not allowed” to join the Army, rather than “failed to qualify.” Would he have been “not allowed” to be president of the United States if he’d wanted it?
Reporters carefully use words like “senseless” about the overall scene, but steer clear of words like “crime” and “murder.” They use “killed” about victims, but avoid tying “killer” or “killings” too closely to the culprit.
Sure, his loved ones are near the top of the list of victims, and most likely deserve support rather than harsh words at a time like this. And sure, his background must be examined carefully to see what can be done to prevent repetition.
But if we consistently report these heinous crimes casting the villain in a sensitive light, we are whetting the appetites of the wannabes.
This guy was a monster today, no matter how inoffensive he might have been at times in the past. That past doesn’t come close to rating even equal time with the enormity of his despicable crime, let alone taking precedence over over it.
Let’s hear angry condemnation of the killer and his crime, along with compassion for the victims. If Robbie Hawkins’ name is dragged through the mud his crime deserves, instead of enshrined on some scorecard, the lighthouse won’t shine so bright for imitators.
Tom deShazo, Lincoln
Killer was a coward
When Robert Hawkins wrote, “Now I’ll be famous,” he just gave other kids the same idea.
Maybe you should write another story saying now he will be famous as a coward … instead of the man he could have been.
Steven L. Moore, Lincoln
Ours is a nation of terrorists
Another tragic example of domestic terrorism hit very close to home.
A shooter — a terrorist — gunned down eight people in a mall in Omaha. Thus, he assaulted and terrorized an entire community.
I thought that we were in a war against terrorism. What is our government doing about this domestic terrorism?
Since 9/11, we have seen a dramatic increase of domestic terrorism: the snipers, the university in Virginia … the list goes on. Yet, none of the billions of dollars being spent on our war against terrorism is going to fight our domestic terrorism.
Somehow this terrorism is called the work of “troubled individuals.”
These troubled individuals have Web sites and networking. Through media, they have created an informal terrorist movement. Yet, no one is talking about it. No one is identifying it. Thus, no one is seeking responsibility for this movement.
These acts of terrorism are more dangerous than the threat from over the great ocean.
What is wrong with our culture and society that we are producing so many domestic terrorists?
Kim Matthews, Lincoln
Double standards of faith
I am puzzled by Section B of the Dec. 5 Lincoln Journal Star. Page 7 of this section contains an opinion column which decries the injustice of jailing a teacher in Sudan for allowing a teddy bear to be named “Muhammed,” thereby desecrating the faith of Islam.
On pages 1 and 2 is an article explaining the selection of Charles Bessey to the Nebraska Hall of Fame. In truth, it is a story about Nation of Islam leader (and civil rights leader) Malcolm X being not selected to this body. Among the reasons cited on page 2 are that as a Muslim “He … denigrated Christianity.” Presumably, only Christians (whatever that means) are allowed in the hall?
To be clear, if religious militancy is dangerous and wrong there, then it is also dangerous and wrong here. If your faith makes you hate people you don’t know, then you practice a false faith. It doesn’t matter what you call it — it is a false faith.
We need to oppose hatred masquerading as piety wherever it exists. Until we do, there will never be a meaningful peace anywhere.
Religion and spirituality are significant and meaningful things, but hatred is a different thing altogether.
We need to constantly remind ourselves that God loves the world and all that God created. So, we should try, too. Look it up. It doesn’t really matter what religious text you are looking in. It’s there.
Joe Gores, Lincoln