NationStates Jolt Archive

Because as you know, heroes are not worth commemorating - they don't represent what a university student should become...

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=48808

The University of Washington's student senate rejected a memorial for alumnus Gregory "Pappy" Boyington of "Black Sheep Squadron" fame amid concerns a military hero who shot down enemy planes was not the right kind of person to represent the school.

Student senator Jill Edwards, according to minutes of the student government's meeting last week, said she "didn't believe a member of the Marine Corps was an example of the sort of person UW wanted to produce."
Ashley Miller, another senator, argued "many monuments at UW already commemorate rich white men."


We will duly note that Boyington was not a rich man - he was born poor, raised poor, served in the military, and didn't have any real money to speak of until he sold his book rights to a TV studio, who proceeded to take "creative license" with his accomplishments.

Nice sendup for a man who won the Medal of Honor, and who spent 20 months in a Japanese prisoner of war camp.

While one may argue that only a few soldiers are actual heroes, Boyington is someone who actually walked the walk - and I believe he's a good example of what a university should produce. Not that all university students should become war heroes - but all university students should find some way to sacrifice towards the greater good.

I find it odd that the university in question is so close-minded. Someone asked me the other day to point out where I might find an instance of the military being a disadvantaged minority - well, here's the first piece of evidence.

Universities are nothing more, by and large, than the lickspittle apologists of the capitalist class. At best they are staffed by deluded fools; at worst by those who would co-conspire with capitalisms elite to keep the underclass oppressed.

Who cares what they think. It's all farcical anyway.

Student senator Jill Edwards, according to minutes of the student government's meeting last week, said she "didn't believe a member of the Marine Corps was an example of the sort of person UW wanted to produce."


Translation: War is Evil, Evil! We shouldn't glorify those dirty baby-killers!

Student senator Jill Edwards, according to minutes of the student government's meeting last week, said she "didn't believe a member of the Marine Corps was an example of the sort of person UW wanted to produce."
But damn sure come crying to when their buts are in a sling. :headbang:

About the only admirable thing about Boyington's life was his brief service to his country. Maybe the University is looking for role models with more redeeming qualities than excelling as a warrior for a few years.

Boyington was a heavy drinker and fought for fun. He began his fighting against the Japanese not out of patriotic ideals but as a paid mercenary.

I think a institute of higher learning is entitled to pass on putting a memorial for him on their campus.










Let the local VFW handle that...
a plaque above their bar would be more fitting to how he lived his life anyway...

About the only admirable thing about Boyington's life was his brief service to his country. Maybe the University is looking for role models with more redeeming qualities than excelling as a warrior for a few years.

Boyington was a heavy drinker and fought for fun. He began his fighting against the Japanese not out of patriotic ideals but as a paid mercenary.

I think a institute of higher learning is entitled to pass on putting a memorial for him on their campus.

Let the local VFW handle that...

Hmm. How many heavy drinkers graduate from university... who never make anything out of their lives....

As a college student, all a statue would be to me is one more place to hang jockstraps from. :)

Meh. Keep your war heros- I'll take my University's James Joyce any day. ;)

Tension between academe and the military seems to be a sort of constant.

Militant countries usually suppress their students and intellectuals, who most often turn out to be dissidents.

It may in the US be the fact that a good number of people people, upon reaching a certain age, either get an education or join the military.

An interesting story, which illustrates some of what's at play here, is that of Ted Westhusing, a Colonel with a PhD in Philosophy who shot himself in the head in Iraq last year.

Because as you know, heroes are not worth commemorating - they don't represent what a university student should become...

oh, boo hoo. however shall we prevail against the awful opression of universities not opting to build monuments to honor every war and each of the individual people who fought in them?

War Heores make for the coolest statues. They'll regret their mistake when they've got some washer woman or mathematician standing up in the Quad.

Universities are nothing more, by and large, than the lickspittle apologists of the capitalist class. At best they are staffed by deluded fools; at worst by those who would co-conspire with capitalisms elite to keep the underclass oppressed.

Who cares what they think. It's all farcical anyway.

And that's why the university I am going to is funded by the state and why the state also gives me some money each month to do with as I choose for as long as I study. That's also why I just need a pass in my finals to get in.

Oh wait, that's not capitalist, is it?

Uh...isn't a military base or something a more suitable place to honour military heroes? I would have thought a college should be place where academic heroes should be honoured.

Honestly, what is it with America and the pressure on people to constantly praise military folk in every part of life?

Uh...isn't a military base or something a more suitable place to honour military heroes? I would have thought a college should be place where academic heroes should be honoured.

Honestly, what is it with America and the pressure on people to constantly praise military folk in every part of life?

Academics rarely are known to make the ultimate sacrifice for others. A Great Part of being a hero is knowing the consequences and following through anyway, knowing what you accomplish is greater than what you risk.

Try saying that about the guy who invented elastic bands or discovered the circumference of the Sun.

And that's why the university I am going to is funded by the state and why the state also gives me some money each month to do with as I choose for as long as I study. That's also why I just need a pass in my finals to get in.

Oh wait, that's not capitalist, is it?

No, but the state is, obviously.

Try thinking about it.

Academics rarely are known to make the ultimate sacrifice for others. A Great Part of being a hero is knowing the consequences and following through anyway, knowing what you accomplish is greater than what you risk.

Try saying that about the guy who invented elastic bands or discovered the circumference of the Sun.

The philosophers of Greece.

The thinkers of the enlightenment.

The people persecuted by the church.

We don't have many academic "heroes" nowadays, do we? Just academic geniuses I guess.

No, but the state is, obviously.

Try thinking about it.

The state is a socialist capitalist state, which believes in trying to provide all the socialist benefits, through efficient capitalist means.

So is Sweden, so is Norway, so is Finland and probably Iceland.

It's working so far: free healthcare, high average income, free education and so forth.

The state is a socialist capitalist state, which believes in trying to provide all the socialist benefits, through efficient capitalist means.

So is Sweden, so is Norway, so is Finland and probably Iceland.

It's working so far: free healthcare, high average income, free education and so forth.

Which country are you from? I gather you are not from the US.

Which country are you from? I gather you are not from the US.

No, and this is starting to border on thread hijacking (oops), but I am from Denmark.

Let's not hijack the thread :p start a new one if you will about this issue.

No, and this is starting to border on thread hijacking (oops), but I am from Denmark.

Let's not hijack the thread :p start a new one if you will about this issue.

We are comparing apples and oranges, most likely, anyway. Last post on this.

Academics rarely are known to make the ultimate sacrifice for others. A Great Part of being a hero is knowing the consequences and following through anyway, knowing what you accomplish is greater than what you risk.

Try saying that about the guy who invented elastic bands or discovered the circumference of the Sun.


You're completely wrong.

A lot of academic dissidents in the USSR, in today's iraq and in other oppressive countries have been tortuted and murdered for doing and saying what is right.

Nothing seperates this from the sacrifice a soldier makes.

You're completely wrong.

A lot of academic dissidents in the USSR, in today's iraq and in other oppressive countries have been tortuted and murdered for doing and saying what is right.

Nothing seperates this from the sacrifice a soldier makes.

And here we have the modern version of the Academic hero.

A shame that I didn't think of it earlier.

Honestly, what is it with America and the pressure on people to constantly praise military folk in every part of life?

if we don't then the communi...terrorists will win. why do you hate america?

if we don't then the communi...terrorists will win. why do you hate america?

ROFL, my yoghurt almost went up my nose because of you. You're clearly a terrorists who uses the internet to cause yoghurt induced terror.

I find it odd that the university in question is so close-minded. Someone asked me the other day to point out where I might find an instance of the military being a disadvantaged minority - well, here's the first piece of evidence.

Actually, it was two senators on the university senate who had a differing opinion than you do, not the university itself.

I would like to know how three comments from two college students represents or signifies a marginalisation of the military in society.

The philosophers of Greece.

The thinkers of the enlightenment.

The people persecuted by the church.

We don't have many academic "heroes" nowadays, do we? Just academic geniuses I guess.

And the Nowadays is very critical. This statue they were going to put up was one of their own alumni. Putting up statues of ancient, famed intellectiual heroes will come off as being very standard or possibly even mundane. What this statue might have been would have said, "hey, look what an everyday guy like you or me could do for a cause."

I don't doubt that there are intellectual heroes, but they are fewer and further between these days, and by and large don't illicit the same emotion.

And the Nowadays is very critical. This statue they were going to put up was one of their own alumni. Putting up statues of ancient, famed intellectiual heroes will come off as being very standard or possibly even mundane. What this statue might have been would have said, "hey, look what an everyday guy like you or me could do for a cause."

I don't doubt that there are intellectual heroes, but they are fewer and further between these days, and by and large don't illicit the same emotion.

He's a soldier. I accept it for a medic or a nurse. I might accept a "let's not have other people become like him" statue for a soldier, even if he was a hero, he's still a soldier.

ROFL, my yoghurt almost went up my nose because of you. You're clearly a terrorists who uses the internet to cause yoghurt induced terror.

yoghurt? that sounds foreign to me. and like something dirty long-hairs would eat - get a job, hippie. real americans eat steak.

yoghurt? that sounds foreign to me. and like something dirty long-hairs would eat - get a job, hippie. real americans eat steak.

Nah, I like my jobless situation :p I still have to wait a bit before I get paid though. Must... finish... school... then go to more school :D

And how can you never have heard of yoghurt? every True american has heard of yoghurt. It's the new tool to combat the rise in obesity that terrorism has caused us. By not using it, you are committing treason!

He's a soldier. I accept it for a medic or a nurse. I might accept a "let's not have other people become like him" statue for a soldier, even if he was a hero, he's still a soldier.

Most soldiers do not join up because they want to kill people. They join up because they want to protect people. The final line, after everything is exhausted, is very often killing someone you don't know to protect the people you do know from that person. Even if he was a soldier, he's still a hero.

Nah, I like my jobless situation :p I still have to wait a bit before I get paid though. Must... finish... school... then go to more school :D

And how can you never have heard of yoghurt? every True american has heard of yoghurt. It's the new tool to combat the rise in obesity that terrorism has caused us. By not using it, you are committing treason!

So are you, by spelling it with an H. An H for HIPPIE.

Yogourt!

Most soldiers do not join up because they want to kill people. They join up because they want to protect people. The final line, after everything is exhausted, is very often killing someone you don't know to protect the people you do know from that person. Even if he was a soldier, he's still a hero.

Possibly, but let's celebrate his life as a person and intellectual then, rather than when he was out fighting. As you said yourself, most don't join up because they want to kill people, why make a statue that glorifies that aspect?

Make a statue of him then, but let us commemorate his intellectual spirit and courage. I won't deny he probably had those. Let's not just make another petty glorifying war memorial.

And how did you know!? I have been found out! Nooo!

ps - hippies will destroy you all :)

Firefighters risk death. Policemen risk death. Doctors who treat patients with infectious diseases risk death. LOTS of people risk death in their professions. Furthermore, a person who excells in his or her profession should be praised depending on what good their work does, not whether they risked death doing it. Who would you say is more of a hero? A soilder who goes to war for which isn't really fought for noble reasons, and he doesn't join for noble reasons, or a person who devotes their whole life to discovering the cure to a certain disease and saving thousands of people in the process?

Most soldiers do not join up because they want to kill people. They join up because they want to protect people.

I'd have to say that the ones who join, or try to join, just because they want to kill people, are usually turned away - or they are found out and discharged. The military doesn't want people that want to kill people - they want people who understand that killing is the step of last resort, not something to have fun with.

Someone who is there to kill is likely not going to be there for the rest of his squad - they'll be too busy enjoying their psychotic pursuits to worry about watching over the rest of the team.

Because as you know, heroes are not worth commemorating - they don't represent what a university student should become...

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=48808



We will duly note that Boyington was not a rich man - he was born poor, raised poor, served in the military, and didn't have any real money to speak of until he sold his book rights to a TV studio, who proceeded to take "creative license" with his accomplishments.

Nice sendup for a man who won the Medal of Honor, and who spent 20 months in a Japanese prisoner of war camp.

While one may argue that only a few soldiers are actual heroes, Boyington is someone who actually walked the walk - and I believe he's a good example of what a university should produce. Not that all university students should become war heroes - but all university students should find some way to sacrifice towards the greater good.

I find it odd that the university in question is so close-minded. Someone asked me the other day to point out where I might find an instance of the military being a disadvantaged minority - well, here's the first piece of evidence.


I would agree that the reasons given for not wanting to commemorate Boyington seem specious, however there may also have been some VALID reasons given: his actions as a mercenary, his alcoholism, his lack of any other substantitve contributions to society derived from his education at UW, and - worst yet - allowing a TV show in his name to give Leif Garret a brief acting career.

I would have liked to have heard all the comments rather than a couple of cherry-picked examples before I condemed the university as a whole. However, if that were the prevailing sentiment then I would agree that these particular students are... well ..... idiots.

However, I also fail to see where a decision not to erect a statue for someone is indicitive of service personel being a "disadvantaged minority" either.

Because last I checked there are very few careers in which bronzed imortalizations are the norm rather than the exception.....

Indeed, beyond being born to royalty, I can't think of ONE career where there is an expectation that all requests for statuary are summarily accepted.

Possibly, but let's celebrate his life as a person and intellectual then, rather than when he was out fighting. As you said yourself, most don't join up because they want to kill people, why make a statue that glorifies that aspect?

Make a statue of him then, but let us commemorate his intellectual spirit and courage. I won't deny he probably had those. Let's not just make another petty glorifying war memorial.

And how did you know!? I have been found out! Nooo!

ps - hippies will destroy you all :)

I think the decision to take up arms to protect people is an incredibly courageous decision. A statue or etching of a man in uniform, flanked by a model of the plane he piloted or some similar icon, is not glorifying death. People stand up to injustice in many different ways. Mankind is at least as much of a physical thing as an intellectual thing.

Who would you say is more of a hero? A soilder who goes to war for which isn't really fought for noble reasons, and he doesn't join for noble reasons, or a person who devotes their whole life to discovering the cure to a certain disease and saving thousands of people in the process?

Except that Boyington won the Medal of Honor in World War II. I don't think that your "noble reasons" criteria applies there.

I find it odd that the university in question is so close-minded. Someone asked me the other day to point out where I might find an instance of the military being a disadvantaged minority - well, here's the first piece of evidence.
FWIW, the UW is completely schitzophrenic, and the people that run student government are generally stereotypes. Most of the some 35,000 people on the campus just go about their lives and leave the crazy few to be crazy and few. The UW has a ROTC program, and through the technical departments (physics engineering applied math etc) has EXTENSIVE ties to the military.

I think the decision to take up arms to protect people is an incredibly courageous decision. A statue or etching of a man in uniform, flanked by a model of the plane he piloted or some similar icon, is not glorifying death. People stand up to injustice in many different ways. Mankind is at least as much of a physical thing as an intellectual thing.

Courageous perhaps, but often stupid. Often, not always. I admit, WWII was a series of events that forced many hands. Still, everytime I go the US, I see these memorials saying "yaaaay, we won WWII, how great! woot!" which is okay, but I find it really ignores a lot of WWII when you glorify it that way, compared to here where every memorial typically portrays the soldiers going through hardship, either dead or dying, with angels taking them away.

I somehow feel that the US war memorials often ignore the horrors of war. The families that are left behind. The people who have their lives ruined by it. And everything else that is horrible in war.

That's why I personally would prefer if the university didn't make a war memorial out of this guy. Statue, perhaps, but I fear they'll make a war memorial out of him if they get the chance.

I'd have to say that the ones who join, or try to join, just because they want to kill people, are usually turned away - or they are found out and discharged. The military doesn't want people that want to kill people - they want people who understand that killing is the step of last resort, not something to have fun with.

Someone who is there to kill is likely not going to be there for the rest of his squad - they'll be too busy enjoying their psychotic pursuits to worry about watching over the rest of the team.

I think you should argue this point with Deep Kimchi (the original poster who seems to know a lot about the military), for he has said that he joined the military so he could legally kill people and could care less about the politics of war. He also claims to have excelled in the military and he went thru extensive psycological testing.

Except that Boyington won the Medal of Honor in World War II. I don't think that your "noble reasons" criteria applies there.

I wasn't referring to this specific example - I was merely pointing out that being in the military doesn't automatically make you deserve more respect than others - it depends on the context. I also suggested that many researchers try to help everyone and devote their whole lives to it, which is pretty heroic.

I actually understand why this guy might be considered for a statue now - I didn't read the part about him being an alumi. However, I don't like the anti-intellectualism view that anyone in the military is automatically worthy of more respect than anyone who contributes without risking their life.

Firefighters risk death. Policemen risk death. Doctors who treat patients with infectious diseases risk death. LOTS of people risk death in their professions. Furthermore, a person who excells in his or her profession should be praised depending on what good their work does, not whether they risked death doing it. Who would you say is more of a hero? A soilder who goes to war for which isn't really fought for noble reasons, and he doesn't join for noble reasons, or a person who devotes their whole life to discovering the cure to a certain disease and saving thousands of people in the process?

Firemen and Policemen, and several doctors, get such monuments as well. I'm not sure what you mean concerning noble wars or noble reasons. regardless of the motivations of a war, assuming it's one that affects your own country, joining the service is rarely for ignoble reasons. Just as a policeman is there to serve and protect, a soldier is guarding the door to his family's, friends' and countrymens' safety. if this college does indeed have other famed and inspiring alumni who saved lives, righted wrongs or otherwise were comparably heroic, they deserve some monument as well.

For people who are not aware of Boyington's history, a short bio can be read here. (http://wa.essortment.com/gregpappyboyin_rlqr.htm)

Having read his autobiography, I can attest that it is fairly accurate according to his own words. As noted, if you are looking for a well-rounded model citizen to commemmorate, Pappy is probably not the guy.

Oh yes, and the minutes of that UW meeting are available online (http://senate.asuw.org/secretary/minutes/senate/12/02-07-2006.pdf)

The notations on this issue are:


B. Old Business
R-12-18 A Resolution to Calling for a Tribute for Col. Gregory “Pappy”
Boyington, USMC
Andrew Everett, sponsor of the legislation, summarized the resolution.
He said he wasn’t interested in a large statue, but rather something on a
small scale.

Jill Edwards moved to table the resolution until next meeting. Seconded.
Objection.

Jill Edwards said other legislation needed to be considered as other
resolutions have been on the docket longer.

Mikhail Smirnoff said he didn’t see the issue as controversial and that
because Senate had voted it to the top of the agenda it should be
considered immediately.
The motion failed.

Travis McCoy asked how the construction of the memorial would be
funded.

Andrew Everett said he had drawn up funding proposals for the UWAA,
several UW departments, and other private sources of funding.

Jono Hanks asked why Andrew Everett was interested in honoring this
particular alumnus.

Andrew Everett said he had read about Colonel Boyington and thought
his achievements warranted recognition.

Tyler Dockins asked why the monument shouldn’t commemorate all the
alumni who fought in the war.

Andrew Everett noted that several statues around campus already serve
such a purpose and that Colonel Boyington had many of the qualities the
University of Washington hoped to produce in its students.

Jill Edwards questioned whether it was appropriate to honor a person
who killed other people.
She said she didn’t’ believe a member of the Marine Corps was an
example of the sort of person UW wanted to produce.

Ashley Miller commented that many monuments at UW already
commemorate rich white men.

Karl Smith amended the first ‘whereas’ clause to strike the section “he
was credited with destroying 26 enemy aircraft, tying the record for most
aircraft destroyed by a pilot in American Uniform for which he was” and
leaving the reference to the Navy Cross. Seconded. Objection.
He said the resolution should commend Colonel Boyington’s service, not
his killing of others.

Andrew Everett said a destroyed aircraft was not necessarily indicative
that a pilot had died. He said the statistic on aircraft downed explained
Colonel Boyington’s achievements and why his performance was
noteworthy.

Deidre Lockman said she was in favor of the resolution and approved of
Karl Smith’s amendment.

Sam Al-Khoury moved to close debate on the amendment. Seconded.
Passed without objection.
The amendment passed.

Erin Shields asked what the process is for erecting a memorial on
campus.

Andrew Everett said it was a process he would push through personally.
He said it would go to the university administration, then to the Capital
Projects Committee for placement consideration, and back to the
administration for a final discussion on the monument.
Niki Iglesias moved to close debate. Seconded. Objection.
The motion failed.

Shawn Fisher moved to amend the second ‘that’ clause and strike the
deadline of 11 January 2008.
He said he was against the resolution, but that if it did pass, he wanted the
statue to be of a high quality and said the project shouldn’t be rushed.

Mikhail Smirnoff noted the resolution didn’t require the statue to be
finished, but merely have the process started by that time.

Melissa Aar said she was against the amendment because of the
significance of the date.

Shawn Fisher moved to close debate. Seconded. Passed without
objection.
Debate was closed. The amendment failed.

A Senator said he feared Senate was rubber stamping a project that it
didn’t know enough about. He noted that Senate didn’t have any
specification for the statue’s appearance or details on its placement.

Jon Lee said he didn’t want to see a campus inundated with memorials.
He said he feared this would open the invitation to multiple other
memorials.

Andrew Everett said he envisioned a monument similar to the Lincoln
Brigade outside of the HUB. He said he respected the history of the UW
institution and the people it has produced and that the UW owes it to
students to honors those from the past.

Deidre Lockman moved to strike the quote from President Roosevelt.
Seconded. Objection.
She said the resolution focused more heavily on the negative aspects of
war and should instead focus on more positive aspects such as the
awarding of the Medal of Honor.

Travis Grandy moved to amend the amendment to restore “whose
citation was signed by pres. Franklin D Roosevelt in March 1944”.
Seconded. Passed without objection.

Shawn Fisher said he thought the quote was unnecessary and reflected
badly on the resolution.

Alex Kerchner said the issue was clear cut and that it didn’t make any
sense to commend Colonel Boyington for his Medal of Honor, and yet
remove the reason it was awarded.

Mikhail Smirnoff said it was important to note what the Colonel actually
achieved. He said it didn’t make sense to not acknowledge why he was
awarded the Medal of Honor.

Jon Evans moved to close debate on the amendment. Seconded.
Objection.
The motion passed. Debate was closed on the amendment.
The amendment failed.

Mikhail Smirnoff said he supported the resolution. He said the resolution
does not support a final product, but that it only supports the concept of
the monument. He said he understood the sentiment of not wanting to
reward those who fought in the war, but that he thought those who fought
in WWII were heros and that it was a much different war than the
controversial war in Iraq.

Evan Roberts moved to close debate. Seconded. Objection.
The motion failed.
Division was called. The motion passed.
Debate was closed on the resolution.
Division was called on the resolution. The vote was tied 45-45-10

Alex Kim noted that in the case of a tie, the Senate Chair cast the tiebreaking
vote.
Alex Kim voted nay. The resolution failed.

Zachary Tobin called for a roll call vote.

Alex Kim called the motion out of order as the results of the vote had
already been announced.


So, it was one student who read about Pappy and said "Hey! We need a statue!" He had no firm funding, although some ideas on how to get it together, there was also some debate as to if Pappy was deserving when they already have several memorials to WWI/II servicemen, and debate on to what exactly should he be comemmorated for.

And the vote went to a tiebreaker.


And yes there were a couple of people who's remarks were... dumb.


Forgive 'em. they're young.


Still, the fact that a notion by one student with no FIRM funding made it to a tie-break is pretty good if you ask me. Hardly a slight on the studen body at all. I'd bet if he got some sponsors arranged he could push it through no problem.

Karl Smith amended the first ‘whereas’ clause to strike the section “he
was credited with destroying 26 enemy aircraft, tying the record for most
aircraft destroyed by a pilot in American Uniform for which he was” and
leaving the reference to the Navy Cross. Seconded. Objection.
He said the resolution should commend Colonel Boyington’s service, not
his killing of others.

Andrew Everett said a destroyed aircraft was not necessarily indicative
that a pilot had died.

I agree with Karl Smith. That is actually what I have been trying to convince people of.

I can't forgive that last part by Andrew Everett. Almost every pilot shot down usually died in WWI and WWII. If not, they usually got caught and imprisoned.

Karl Smith amended the first ‘whereas’ clause to strike the section “he
was credited with destroying 26 enemy aircraft, tying the record for most
aircraft destroyed by a pilot in American Uniform for which he was” and
leaving the reference to the Navy Cross. Seconded. Objection.
He said the resolution should commend Colonel Boyington’s service, not
his killing of others.

Andrew Everett said a destroyed aircraft was not necessarily indicative
that a pilot had died.

I agree with Karl Smith. That is actually what I have been trying to convince people of.

I can't forgive that last part by Andrew Everett. Almost every pilot shot down usually died in WWI and WWII. If not, they usually got caught and imprisoned.

Especially in the South PAcific where the battles were largely over water.

Still, I lump that under my "forgive 'em. They're young" category. I admire his convictions to want to commemmorate Pappy on his war record. I understand the reservations of the council to move forward on an unfunded project for a person of questionable history. And I especially commend those who honestly stated a desire not to vote for putting energy towards a project without knowing more about the details and funding.


When you go to sell a proposition, you best have all your points covered in your proposal - especially when asking a school to spend money these days.... if people don't feel that they have enough information - you aren't likely to close the deal.

And he didn't.

I think a institute of higher learning is entitled to pass on putting a memorial for him on their campus.
Hey, genius. It's "an" before words beginning with a vowel. "I" is a vowel.

Hey, genius. It's "an" before words beginning with a vowel. "I" is a vowel.

It's "an" before words beginning with a vowel sound. Such as "an hour".

It's "an" before words beginning with a vowel sound. Such as "an hour".
True, true. But then again, I never claimed to be a genius. :p

It's "an" before words beginning with a vowel sound. Such as "an hour".

So what's up with people saying "An Historical"? i.e. "An historical moment".

No vowel sound there, but everyone does it and they sound like a pompous ass.

So what's up with people saying "An Historical"? i.e. "An historical moment".

No vowel sound there, but everyone does it and they sound like a pompous ass.

"People" often have a less than stellar grasp of the English language.

So what's up with people saying "An Historical"? i.e. "An historical moment".

No vowel sound there, but everyone does it and they sound like a pompous ass.
Not sure, but I suspect that's an archaic useage.

I thought it odd that a soldier from WWII would cause controversy. So I looked up their website and here I found

"Veterans memorial expands -Those killed in war on terrorism honored"

"Due to the limited size of WSU Pullman’s veterans memorial, there is nowhere to inscribe their names and permanently recognize their sacrifice.

Recently, the university designated $15,000-$20,000 to have the memorial (located east of Thompson Hall and north of Murrow Hall) expanded to honor the recent and future sacrifices by WSU students.

Helping lead that effort were students, faculty and staff, including Charii Higgins, WSU Veterans Affairs coordinator."
Original Article (http://www.wsutoday.wsu.edu/completestory.asp?StoryID=2635)

Not very indicative of an anti-war, "anti-american" etc campus, is it?

It seems, going by the minutes others have graciously supplied, somebody pulled an idea out of nowhere and it was shot down. Enter the "journo" of Worldnetdaily, where WMD exist and Osama lurks in every bush and zap - them crazy anti-American liberal hero haters are at it again. Total bollocks.

It seems, going by the minutes others have graciously supplied, somebody pulled an idea out of nowhere and it was shot down. Enter the "journo" of Worldnetdaily, where WMD exist and Osama lurks in every bush and zap - them crazy anti-American liberal hero haters are at it again. Total bollocks.


That's DK for ya... after a while you just get used to it.

I thought it odd that a soldier from WWII would cause controversy. So I looked up their website and here I found

"Veterans memorial expands -Those killed in war on terrorism honored"

"Due to the limited size of WSU Pullman’s veterans memorial, there is nowhere to inscribe their names and permanently recognize their sacrifice.

Recently, the university designated $15,000-$20,000 to have the memorial (located east of Thompson Hall and north of Murrow Hall) expanded to honor the recent and future sacrifices by WSU students.

Helping lead that effort were students, faculty and staff, including Charii Higgins, WSU Veterans Affairs coordinator."
Original Article (http://www.wsutoday.wsu.edu/completestory.asp?StoryID=2635)

Not very indicative of an anti-war, "anti-american" etc campus, is it?

It seems, going by the minutes others have graciously supplied, somebody pulled an idea out of nowhere and it was shot down. Enter the "journo" of Worldnetdaily, where WMD exist and Osama lurks in every bush and zap - them crazy anti-American liberal hero haters are at it again. Total bollocks.


It certainly is indicative of anti-Americanism if you read the comments the student representatives made about Boyington.

Too bad for you the story isn't bollocks.

So what's up with people saying "An Historical"? i.e. "An historical moment".

No vowel sound there, but everyone does it and they sound like a pompous ass.


Some people dont pronounce the H, and that dialect became conventionally written.

It would be unnatural for me to say "a historical" or "a honor" because I dont pronounce those Hs.

English spelling is only a vague approximation of spoken english ;)

It certainly is indicative of anti-Americanism if you read the comments the student representatives made about Boyington.

Too bad for you the story isn't bollocks.

Anti-militarism is not anti-americanism.

It isnt a war college, and i'm sure someone from that university has won a nobel prize or made some other significant contribution to scholarship, which, in the context of a university, makes him more deserving of a statue.

I vouchsafe that university would rather inspire more nobel laureates &c than war heros. It isnt a military institution.

"The University of Washington's student senate rejected a memorial for alumnus Gregory "Pappy" Boyington of "Black Sheep Squadron" fame amid concerns a military hero who shot down enemy planes was not the right kind of person to represent the school."(From Worldnet Daily, where toilet paper is just a humming printer away).
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=48808
Does that strike you as representative of an institution where both students and faculty have commemorated WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Gulf 1 and are now donating time and energy (and most importantly money) to add the names of those who've died since in the "war on terror"? Or as a piece of banter taken out of overall context to create a false impression? Consider the following -

"Brent Ludeman, president of the university's College Republicans, told WND in an e-mail the decision "reflects poorly on the university."

"Pappy Boyington went beyond the call of duty to serve and protect this country – he simply deserves better," Ludeman said. "Just last year, the university erected a memorial to diversity. Why can't we do the same for Pappy Boyington and others who have defended our country?" (from Worldnet again).

Obviously "Brent" (snigger) there hasn't a fucking clue whats what in his university, as there he asks for a memorial which in fact is already there. And of course old Worldnet doesn't bother to correct the impression that there is no such monument either. Thats disengenuity, which caters to the preconceptions of the idiots who take this stuff at face value, and provides a false impression to the casual reader. Thats why its bollocks.

So what's up with people saying "An Historical"? i.e. "An historical moment".

No vowel sound there, but everyone does it and they sound like a pompous ass.

I think it is something to do with whether or not the H word is "h" acute, or "h" aspire, originally. (Or adopted into english from a non-french source). There is a similar thing in french; e.g. le heros but l'hopital. (sorry for the lack of accents, I am not very good at this interwebbery thing).

However, I would imagine that it is always wrong, also.

"The University of Washington's student senate rejected a memorial for alumnus Gregory "Pappy" Boyington of "Black Sheep Squadron" fame amid concerns a military hero who shot down enemy planes was not the right kind of person to represent the school."(From Worldnet Daily, where toilet paper is just a humming printer away).
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=48808
Does that strike you as representative of an institution where both students and faculty have commemorated WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Gulf 1 and are now donating time and energy (and most importantly money) to add the names of those who've died since in the "war on terror"? Or as a piece of banter taken out of overall context to create a false impression? Consider the following -

"Brent Ludeman, president of the university's College Republicans, told WND in an e-mail the decision "reflects poorly on the university."

"Pappy Boyington went beyond the call of duty to serve and protect this country – he simply deserves better," Ludeman said. "Just last year, the university erected a memorial to diversity. Why can't we do the same for Pappy Boyington and others who have defended our country?" (from Worldnet again).

Obviously "Brent" (snigger) there hasn't a fucking clue whats what in his university, as there he asks for a memorial which in fact is already there. And of course old Worldnet doesn't bother to correct the impression that there is no such monument either. Thats disengenuity, which caters to the preconceptions of the idiots who take this stuff at face value, and provides a false impression to the casual reader. Thats why its bollocks.

Does the world net daily internet page strike you as the kind of place reasonable people go for "news" ?

its a laugh riot of an internet page, honestly.

O its dire - and the guy who runs it is a bit of a nut, if I remember. Its just that I prefer to shoot the "message" before the messenger.

O its dire - and the guy who runs it is a bit of a nut, if I remember. Its just that I prefer to shoot the "message" before the messenger.


After years of having its messages shot, quite a few bullets have his world net daily, and its become clear that everyone should have been aiming at it to begin with.

But will that stop people like the person who started this thread eating up every word of it? Like fuck it will.....

Academics rarely are known to make the ultimate sacrifice for others. A Great Part of being a hero is knowing the consequences and following through anyway, knowing what you accomplish is greater than what you risk.

Try saying that about the guy who invented elastic bands or discovered the circumference of the Sun.

So, killing people is always more comendable than trying to improve their lives?
Interesting point of view, really...