Xref: utzoo talk.politics.misc:6823 misc.legal:3475 alt.flame:1476
Path: utzoo!hoptoad!ptsfa!pyramid!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!nrl-cmf!cmcl2!husc6!hao!gatech!udel!burdvax!sdcrdcf!ism780c!mikep
From: mikep@ism780c.UUCP (Michael A. Petonic)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,misc.legal,alt.flame
Subject: Re: The lawsuit of the year!
Keywords: about time, train engineer's revenge
Message-ID: <8692@ism780c.UUCP>
Date: 25 Jan 88 06:14:39 GMT
References: <2832@killer.UUCP> <1606@mind.UUCP> <11143@sri-spam.istc.sri.com> <1409@vaxwaller.UUCP> <354@genghis.UUCP> <8801241321.AA05248@ragu>
Reply-To: mikep@ism780c.UUCP (Michael A. Petonic)
Distribution: na
Organization: Interactive Systems Corp., Santa Monica CA
Lines: 47

In article <8801241321.AA05248@ragu> ragu!gsmith (Gene Ward Smith) writes:
>  Can someone explain to me why so many of the hate-Willson
>postings reek of this kind of profound ignorance and stupidity?

Perhaps it's because you're looking at it through a warped filter
in which anyone who feels strongly enough about something to
sacrifice his legs to is a martyr.

>Obviously this Sam Southard is a spamhead, but it is usually
>assumed something which passes for a brain is a requirement for a
>school like Cal Tech. 

I don't think his school has anything to do with what he posted.
``I thought that a faded blue jean jacket with a peace symbol and
pot leaves were a requirement for a school like Berkeley.''

Your conclusion may be obvious to someone with a mentality and
outlook like your own.  However, we don't all feel that way.
Surely you can realize this.

>I can only conclude that it somehow makes
>people like Sam feel better to believe, contrary to any logic or
>evidence, that Willson thought he could stop a train with his
>legs.

No.  It's an attempt to dish back some of your *own* stupidity and
lack of accurateness in drawing out analogies.

>But *why*? Does Willson make these people feel morally
>insecure, or what?

No - not for me.  I don't even know why Willson stuck his legs in front
of the train.  All I can assume is that he did it for some cause he
believed in strong enough to lose his legs for.  However, I got extremely
irate when he decided to sue the people running the train.  He knew
what the consequences were and yet, was so much of a wimp that he
didn't want to pay the price.  What a dope.

If he thought that sacrificing his legs would help the cause he believed
in (something I would have to disagree with), what's his bitch?  Perhaps
he's like most revolutionaries whose main cause is to raise controversy.
Even if it is on the wrong track (ouch!  No pun intended).  We are
losing track of what principles he donated his legs for.  It seems to
me that he believes more in being a celebrity than in what he was
fighting for.  It's sad to see a revolutionary become a victim of
fame.

-MikeP