"Two things are going on there, first, the phrase "report suspicious" implies that VA Tech officials knew the shooter was not in custody as they often claim to have believed, and second, the implication is that students ought to unlock their doors and patrol the campus looking for the murderer at large. This had special significance because August 21, 2006 sheriff's deputy had been murdered by a different shooter at large, so "report suspicious" deputized all students to roam the campus in the shoes and foot-steps of that **deceased** deputy! Now, do you see I am not exagerating to say those ORDERS(unlock doors, patrol campus, "report suspicious(KNOWN NOT IN CUSTODY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" ) make cannon fodder of all nappy-headed Hokies?" (excerpt, full text follows)
--- In cia-drugs@yahoogroups.com, "Vigilius Haufniensis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/0417071vtech1.html Virginia Killer's Violent Writings Play told of pedophilic stepfather, murder of 13-year-old boy APRIL 17--The college student responsible for yesterday's Virginia Tech slaughter was referred last year to counseling after professors became concerned about the violent nature of his writings, as evidenced in a one-act play obtained by The Smoking Gun. The play by Cho Seung-Hui, a 23-year-old English major, was submitted last year as part of a short story writing class. Entitled "Richard McBeef," Cho's bizarre play features a 13-year-old boy who accuses his stepfather of pedophilia and murdering his father. A copy of the killer's play can be found below. The teenager talks of killing the older man and, at one point, the child's mother brandishes a chain saw at the stepfather. The play ends with the man striking the child with "a deadly blow." (10 pages) -- Two of the four murder attempts on me since I joined this list involved a person who talked out loud, and received a phone call, both the internal second voice and the phone caller inciting the person to think of the target(me) as the dangerous person, and the assassin as a victim. Here in the VA Tech mass murderer's writing, you see the abuser perceiving, perhaps projecting, his victim as an abuser, which may or may not be true. Generally such a person does have an abuser in their past, such as the father written of as pedophile and grandfather-murder. In the Chinese context, the father being a murderer of a boy's ancestor is a defilement of psycho-cultural-religious heritage perhaps of greater import than the pedophile murder. Note that both crimes of the father in the story, the pedophile murder and grandfather-ancestor murder, ended in murder, not just pedophilia and non-lethal defilement of the grandfather. You would then like to know if the writer, as abuser(shooter) of fifty people at Va Tech was projecting his victims as his abusers, and if he was projecting that they were threatening to him, making his crime a preventative first strike, or revenge, or both. The protective personality talking to my assassin, as well as a man inciting her on the phone, both tried to convince the assassin that I was a threat to kill the assassin, as the VA Tech assassin wrote of a boy perceiving his father as a proven threat to his father, to a child victim, and to his mother, and to himself, as the STORY ended with the boy, with whom the VA Tech assassin identified, being killed by his father, programming the real person, the VA Tech assassin, to view himself the abuser as victim, and I suggest his victims as abusers, and thus the VA Tech assassin's acts as both preventative self-defense and revenge for past crimes. In detail, that is the mode the killer used on himself to depersonalize his victims, precisely according to Karl Rove's template of "guilt-projection role-reversal", deployed against black voters and Palestinians and Lebanese and Palestinians and Iraqis. Remember that in Faluja and Hit, US forces fired on ambulances and seized hospitals, according to "guilt-projection role-reversal". They were told that the hospitals were "treating enemy combatants", guilt-projecting to make hospitals enemy combatants and turning war criminals into angels of mercy and justice and revenge. Similarly, radio personality Imus guilt-projection role-reversed that the Rutgers women's basketball players are not basketball players at all, but "all nappy-headed hoes". In contrast to August 21, 2006, when they closed the school on the first day of the year because one person was shot off-campus, VA Tech officials did not close the school at 7:15am April 16, 2007, when two people were killed on campus. Rather than closing the school because they knew they did not have a shooter in custody, they left the school open because VA Tech students are all nappy-headed Hokies--they changed the August 21 policy to fit the Imus model and the VA Tech mass murderer's perception of victims as depersonalized and contemptible. After two hours and fifteen minutes, VA Tech officials sent an email out to nappy-headed menaces, telling the big dogs to get off their porch and roam around the campus "reporting anything suspicious". If VA Tech officials wanted big nappy-headed bitch dogs to unlock their doors and prowl the campus and report suspicious armed persons, VA Tech officials must have perceived them all as nappy-headed hokies, the big bitches(big dogs) on campus, exactly as the shooter perceived them. And the shooter would also want them to unlock their doors and roam around looking for a man with a gun, and to tell his tale. Same page, same script. If VA Tech officials told students two hours after the 911 call and first shooting to, by implication, unlock their doors and roam around, "reporting anything suspicious", officials cannot eat and have their cake, too, claiming they believed they had the shooter in custody. How then would the big bitch dog getting off the porch find anyone "suspicious", if the shooter was in custody? They therefore did not believe when they sent out the email that they had the shooter in custody, else there would be no one suspicious for Running Dogs of Imperialism to report, would there? That phrase in the email, "report suspicious", again has the administration on the same page of the same script as the shooter, as far as projecting that victims were Running Dogs of Imperialism. The 9:26am email, two hours after the first two deaths and the 911 call, ordered cloistered puppies to unlock their kennel doors and as big dog bitch, Running Dogs of Imperialism, to get off the porch and find that shooter, and "report suspicious" shooter of Running Dogs of Imperialism! Run, Spot, Run, instead of staying locked in room(kennel). Two things are going on there, first, the phrase "report suspicious" implies that VA Tech officials knew the shooter was not in custody as they often claim to have believed, and second, the implication is that students ought to unlock their doors and patrol the campus looking for the murderer at large. This had special significance because August 21, 2006 sheriff's deputy had been murdered by a different shooter at large, so "report suspicious" deputized all students to roam the campus in the shoes and foot-steps of that **deceased** deputy! Now, do you see I am not exagerating to say those ORDERS(unlock doors, patrol campus, "report suspicious(KNOWN NOT IN CUSTODY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" ) make cannon fodder of all nappy-headed Hokies? I still can't reach my VA Tech student cousin or mother, uncle or aunt. Three VA Tech Imuses fired would be the right thing to do, after an open examination like Imus went through with Al Sharpton and the Rutgers basketball team before Imus was fired. That process should start yesterday.
