It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Airman shot by anti war activist on JUly 4th

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 13 2007 @ 08:59 AM
link   
On the 4th of JUly, while home celebrating the holiday, a serviceman was shot in front of his home by someone who wanted to make a statement and kill a US soldier. Is this terrorism or the start of a civil war?



The Pennsauken man who shot and wounded a member of the U.S. Air Force before killing himself left suicide notes that indicated he was “angry at the government and wanted to make a statement” on Independence Day, one of the man’s relatives said yesterday.

Matthew J. Marren, 22, of Walnut Avenue, drove to a home on Windsor Lane rented by Senior Airman Jonathan Schrieken, 22, at about 5:30 p.m. Wednesday. Marren got of this vehicle, found Schrieken outside the house, shot him once in the chest with a small-caliber firearm, then turned the gun on himself, said Burlington County First Assistant Prosecutor Ray Milavsky.

www.phillyburbs.com...


THankfully the soldier was not killed. However, this is a statement that is more than a letter to a congressman or a protest outside a government building. My question is, why has the mainstream media not picked this up. If this was a soldier home from Iraq who went nuts and killed someone this would have been on every major media outlet there is.

Our soldiers are safer in Iraq with body armor and an AR-15.

Mod Edit: External Source Tags – Please Review This Link.


[edit on 13/7/2007 by Mirthful Me]




posted on Jul, 13 2007 @ 10:10 AM
link   
He was angry at the government so he shot an innocent man? What a loser and a coward. He didn't even have to guts to face what he had done, he just shot himself. Yeah, way to make a statement.

Activist, schmactivist....he's no activist - just a dead wack job.

Sure hope there aren't too many more out there like him.



posted on Jul, 13 2007 @ 10:21 AM
link   
Yes, good post!


This is one of the seldom-heard stories out there. Can you imagine if it was the other way around and a soldier shot a peace activist to make a social statement? Wow, that'd be wall to wall 24/7 news coverage I bet.



posted on Jul, 13 2007 @ 11:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77
This is one of the seldom-heard stories out there.


Well, how often does this happen?



Originally posted by djohnsto77
Can you imagine if it was the other way around and a soldier shot a peace activist to make a social statement? Wow, that'd be wall to wall 24/7 news coverage I bet.


Frankly, there might be a difference.

A soldier's action might share a nexus with government policy. Whereas, in the case of a civilian, you likely just have a nut-job on your hands.

Absent any evidence that the civilian was tied to some greater organization, (or in the hypothetical, absent any evidence of a nexus to government policy), I'd say they should share about the same news value .

[edit on 13-7-2007 by loam]



posted on Jul, 13 2007 @ 11:30 AM
link   
After the way all the idiotic anti war losers treated the soldiers coming home from Vietnam with the taunting, spitting on them, burning American flags in their faces, spreading lies about the conduct of US forces, etc I would not put this past them.



posted on Jul, 13 2007 @ 11:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by ChrisF231
After the way all the idiotic anti war losers treated the soldiers coming home from Vietnam with the taunting, spitting on them, burning American flags in their faces, spreading lies about the conduct of US forces, etc I would not put this past them.


I don't see widespread evidence of that now. In fact, what I do see is a government that has exhausted the troops for very little gain.

I see a government who often sent those troops ill equipped.

I see a government who increased their risk because of moronic political decisions.

I see a government who claims to support those troops, but then abandons them (and their families), in shockingly, disgraceful ways when they return home to become our war veterans.

Why isn't there more railing on that?



posted on Jul, 13 2007 @ 12:22 PM
link   
Loam, please create a thread about the hopelessness of the VA and the veterens that are returning. The families and the soldiers who are forgotten. that would be a fanatastic cause to tackle, but in this thread I am simply trying to show that there is more interest in David Beckham and Pso coming to the states then a shooting that had cause. He was a known loony who kept talking and talking and finally he did something about it.

We need to indentify these people and make people aware that all protestors are not Cindy Sheehan and make sure that the streets are as safe in the US as in downtown Fallujah for our soldiers. If this however was a soldier coming home and killing a few people it would be all over CNN and the left would have a field day stating that "Bush is driving our boys to kill after killing innocents overseas". as the lead by-line.

The fact that this person was known to have these feelings and prior arrests make me think that law enforcement is watching to much and needs to take more action. Oh, that's right, the ACLU won;t allow that to happen even when you can prove terror ties in court. (sorry for the rant)



.



posted on Jul, 13 2007 @ 02:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by loam

Originally posted by ChrisF231
After the way all the idiotic anti war losers treated the soldiers coming home from Vietnam with the taunting, spitting on them, burning American flags in their faces, spreading lies about the conduct of US forces, etc I would not put this past them.


I don't see widespread evidence of that now. In fact, what I do see is a government that has exhausted the troops for very little gain.

I see a government who often sent those troops ill equipped.

I see a government who increased their risk because of moronic political decisions.

I see a government who claims to support those troops, but then abandons them (and their families), in shockingly, disgraceful ways when they return home to become our war veterans.

Why isn't there more railing on that?


Talk to Slick Willy, hes the one who reduced the size of the US Army from over a million to less then 500,000 and bear in mind only 1 in 10 of those belongs to a combat unit.

To put it simple, the US Army should not have been downsized post Cold War except to eliminate the excess numbers of armored and artillery units and reform them into infantry and mechanized infantry (cavalry).



posted on Jul, 13 2007 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by ChrisF231
Talk to Slick Willy, hes the one who reduced the size of the US Army from over a million to less then 500,000 and bear in mind only 1 in 10 of those belongs to a combat unit.


What a mindlessly partisan response.


So in other words, the lack of equipment, the poor political decisions and the treatment of veterans, today, are all Slick's fault?

I see Bush has done a remarkable job of repairing the ills of that administration.



posted on Jul, 13 2007 @ 04:17 PM
link   
No, that is not entriely his fault since he sold alot of technology abroad also. His problem was not doing something about the Cole bombing. I am sure that is one decision that weighs on his mind nightly.



posted on Jul, 13 2007 @ 05:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by esdad71
His problem was not doing something about the Cole bombing.


Are you referring to some sort of talking points sheet?


I'd suggest you trash them.

It doesn't take a genius to see that when the Cole bombing happened, October 12, 2000, Clinton did 'nothing' (as you say) for the remaining three months of his term, while Bush explicitly ignored the problem for the first two years of his and still hasn't resolved it during the whole SIX YEARS of his administration.


How can you still defend him?


[edit on 13-7-2007 by loam]



posted on Jul, 13 2007 @ 06:13 PM
link   
I am not defending anyone however I am pointing blame. He should have kept the hunt going instead of pardoning his buddies. tsk tsk...

Anyway, do you feel that this shooting was justified based on the foriegn policy of the current administration? That is what is sounds like...



posted on Jul, 13 2007 @ 07:29 PM
link   
Well I can see the motivation behind this thread. A lame attempt to smear anti-war protesters. An old tactic.

Yeah lets not focus on the real issues, just focus on the 'nut-job' and the connection you're making to the peace movement....


Do you really think this guy represents all protesters? You would love us all to think he does, wouldn't ya?

He could call himself a Buddhist Monk if he wanted, he would still be a nut-job.



posted on Jul, 13 2007 @ 09:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by esdad71
Anyway, do you feel that this shooting was justified based on the foriegn policy of the current administration? That is what is sounds like...


I think, based on that, I'm done with you.

Next.




posted on Jul, 13 2007 @ 10:59 PM
link   
Seriously esdad, have you no shame?
May I ask, are you American?
Your post is very slanted. You attempt to portray true Americans in a bad light.
To use a slang; Whats up with that?

Lets disect what you have done here.


Originally posted by esdad71
On the 4th ...... a serviceman was shot in front of his home .......... Is this terrorism or the start of a civil war?


What?
Terrorism or the start of a civil war?

Are those the only two choices esdad?


My question is, why has the mainstream media not picked this up.


Its some nut that thought he could get airtime if he killed a soldier before killing himself. He failed to kill a soldier, but Ill be damned if you dont want to give this nut his airtime.
Very classy of you and the hard right.


If this was.........blah blah.



Why are you playing 'what if'?



Our soldiers are safer in Iraq with body armor and an AR-15.



You did not just say that!
Back that up with some stats or kindly STFU!
Over 3000 of my brothers dead, thousands more maimed, and you say they are 'safer in Iraq'?


You obviously have an agenda here, and that is to associate this lone nut, manic depressive, multi-med taking suicidal psycho with the anti-war movement.





Yes, good post!


This is one of the seldom-heard stories out there. Can you imagine if..........


I agree with Loam, its seldom-heard BECAUSE IT SELDOM HAPPENS.

WHats with more 'what if' game here?
Are you trying to speculate this into something its not?

Lets look at more of what you wrote, shall we?


...... in this thread I am simply trying to show that there is more interest in David Beckham and Pso coming to the states


OK, I'll bite. Who is David Beckham and what is Pso?


then a shooting that had cause.


What cause esdad? For all you know there was a love triangle going on somewhere in there. Seems odd that he would drive to one particular house amoung many and then only shoot one man when there were more in the house. I dont know the whole story, but I think the guy was just a loon off his meds.


He was a known loony who kept talking and talking and finally he did something about it.


There you go, you admit it. He was a KNOWN loony.

Again I ask, why are you trying to associate this KNOWN loony with the anti-war movement? Why do you want to portray my fellow Americans in a bad light?
I must tell you, I dont like it one bit.



We need to .... make sure that the streets are .... in the US as in downtown Fallujah for our soldiers.


WHAT? You want the US streets to be 'safe for our soldiers' like downtown Fallujah?



If this however was ..........blahdy blah blah


Esdad, do you have anything to say other than 'What if'?
What if he had dressed up as Captain America? OR Uncle Sam?
What if he had screamed 911 was an inside job? WHat if he had painted himself blue?
What if all you want to man, its still just one loony dude who wanted to commit suicide and draw some attention to himself at the same time.

YOu get my low-life of the year award for giving this guy already more attention then he deserved and then topping it off by attempting to associate him with every person that is against the never-ending war.




Originally posted by ChrisF231
After the way all the idiotic anti war losers treated the soldiers coming home from Vietnam with the taunting, spitting on them



Chris, thats an urban legend.



posted on Jul, 14 2007 @ 01:29 AM
link   
First, I have no agenda, I am simply pointing out that there was no mainstream coverage.

Second, I am not smearing anti-war protestors. Can you show me where I do that?

thrid, he has a history so we should do something sooner rather than letting people like this kill someone.

Fourth, I was asking if this is an act of terror or the beginning of a trend against soldiers. I am asking a question not baiting you #ing morons.

Fifth, safer in Iraq is a metaphor. There have been multiple cases of people who came home and then died in random violent acts.

Sixth, you are done with me? Thanks, but I don;t care.

Seven, I am not painting Americans in a bad light, this guy did it hinself.

Eight, Thank you so much for knowing my agenda and posting it without me knowing what it was. I am so much more educated about myself now.

LAstly, 11 Bravo, you are so far offbase about me that it is pathetic. I am painting no one in a bad light. Also, if you are going to try and say that the soldiers coming home fron Vietnam being harrassed was an urban legend, then you are not worth the time to talk to and more than likley are not out of high school. Did you know anyone who fought in Vietnam? Iraq? WW2? I do, and it is not urban legend. Now that is unAmerican and ignorant.

[edit on 14-7-2007 by esdad71]



posted on Jul, 14 2007 @ 02:55 AM
link   
It seems that some people may be getting too involved in conspiracy theories and anti-US propaganda.....now there's usually nothing wrong with that regardless of how irrational it is... except...when all that rage, paranoia and frustration they feel comes out in the form of violent action. The last thing I would want to see is concerned Americans shooting at each other...that is exactly what the terrorists would want more than anything. That shooter just did what the terrorists wanted him to do.
It's no surprise this isn't on the news....they're too busy bush bashing 24/7.



posted on Jul, 14 2007 @ 04:04 AM
link   
All I see going on here is an attempt to smear the anti-war movement as a whole. Is it tragic that one man decided to shoot a soldier to make a point? Yes, it is. But what I personally think is equally tragic is that things ever escalated to this point at all. If the Government would simply do what it was set up to do (listen to the desires and positions of the people), we would not have this problem.
Instead, we have Mr. Bush who decides to continue the war regardless of the opinion of the majority of Americans, and who has failed to deal with al-Quaida.

Did this soldier deserve to be shot? Absolutely not. Can I understand why the shooter would have a desire to make such a statement? Yes, in a way, I can. Drastic times call for drastic measures, and when we have a Government that refuses to listen to its people, than maybe someone should bring up the idea of open revolt.

As it is quoted so frequently, "Governments should be afraid of their people, people should not be afraid of their Governments,"

This is a Government that not only does not fear the people, they wont even acknowledge their overwhelming opinions. Again, I must make it clear, I do not condone what this man did; however, I ask all of you to consider, as misguided as this attempt was, is the right to bear arms and revolt coming closer?

I think the answer is yes, and God help us all when that day comes.



posted on Jul, 14 2007 @ 01:05 PM
link   
I didn't have to associate this guy with the anit war movement, the article did. I am not trying to smear anyone as in this case it would be too easy.

Protesting is one thing, killing someone for a belief is another.



posted on Jul, 14 2007 @ 02:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by esdad71
First, I have no agenda, I am simply pointing out that there was no mainstream coverage.


No agenda huh?
Then why did the accurate headline from the newspaper, which reads "Suicidal gunman 'angry at government'", become "Airman shot by anti war activist on July 4th" when it passed through your hands?


Second, I am not smearing anti-war protestors. Can you show me where I do that?


Your baited title, like I just pointed out.


third, he has a history so we should do something sooner rather than letting people like this kill someone.

I agree with you here. He had a history....of arrests and problems.
There is no way to predict which person with a history of arrests and problems will snap. He snapped esdad, and in response you want all anti-war protesters to be rounded up and put through the ringer.
How ignorant.


Fourth, I was asking if this is an act of terror or the beginning of a trend against soldiers. I am asking a question not baiting you #ing morons.

As I asked earlier, why are those the only two choices? Because he was an 'anti-war' activist?

Why couldnt he have just been a loon?



Fifth, safer in Iraq is a metaphor. There have been multiple cases of people who came home and then died in random violent acts.


Pisspoor metaphor.
I seem to recall a few reports of Vets getting shot by cops. Are those the cases you are talking about?
Do you have anything I could read about those 'random violent acts'?



Sixth, you are done with me? Thanks, but I don;t care.


Nope, that wasnt me that said that. Im not done with you yet.


Seven, I am not painting Americans in a bad light, this guy did it himself.


This guy was a nut, and you say he paints Americans in a bad light?



Eight, Thank you so much for knowing my agenda and posting it without me knowing what it was. I am so much more educated about myself now.


You're welcome.



LAstly, 11 Bravo, you are so far offbase about me that it is pathetic.

I am? How do you know?
All I asked was if you were American. Which Im guessing your not. Atleast not a patriotic American or else you would have a 'Buy American' banner in your sig.



I am painting no one in a bad light.


Yes, you are. When you say things like
"Airman shot by anti war activist on JULY 4Th" when the correct title is "Suicidal gunman 'angry at government'" you are attempting to demonize the 'anti war' movement.
When you say things like
"We need to indentify these people and make people aware that all protestors are not Cindy Sheehan and make sure that the streets are as safe in the US as in downtown Fallujah for our soldiers."
What you are suggesting is that anti-war people are dangerous and need rounded up and questioned. Very UNAMERICAN thing to even think about doing.


Also, if you are going to try and say that the soldiers coming home fron Vietnam being harrassed was an urban legend,


Harrassed? I have no doubt a few were.
Spat on? I cant find any evidence that occured, but thats a different thread.


Did you know anyone who fought in Vietnam?


Yes I do. I know a few and none of them were ever spat on.

Iraq?


Yes, Me. Is that good enough?


WW2?


Yes, My Grandfather.

You forgot Korea (its called the forgotten war for a reason you know) my Father served in Korea. Thanks for asking

Now that is unAmerican and ignorant.


UNAMERICAN and ignorant is the title of this thread.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join