I'm with Fitz.

"Improper and Wrong" hardly covers it. <img src="/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" />

I am so disgusted I will say no more about this post, poster or Rudolph for fear of having my behind booted off the board, where a lot of seemingly sane, decent and caring people do hang out and whose electronic company I do enjoy.

This board is decent. We also have forum guidelines. If someone posts a patently offensive remark I delete it. If they pursue same I delete them. If a member finds offense they can PM me or the poster. None of us are immune from making ill thought out, or more usually the case, ill written posts.The internet is hardly a fluid medium of exchange in spite of high speed dial up. Sometimes you have to get to know a person, just like reading a horse's idiosyncrosies or a girlfriend confronting childhood demons. If you just get angry you miss the fun both offer. <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Look at these three quotes from Scotts original post.





Why are we being so hard on Scott? I thought he made it clear that did not approve of these peoples' actions. If I understand correctly Scott wants us to be intellectually mature enough to look as this strictly from the prospective of EE and longterm wilderness survival. Why is that so hard to do? Maybe there are better examples of long term EE and/or survival situations. These were however highly pubicized and we are all familiar with them to some degree so why is it such a bad topic for discussion other than the fact that we don't seem to be intellectually mature enough to separate the survival from the actions that made it necessary.

Just a thought... maybe I am misreading things... anything is possible.

Since many of us seem to need a more socially/politically correct example of long term survival might I suggest this excellent book.



If you order it from Doug's Book List then a portion of the proceeds go to ETS which is even better. The author of this book spent many years living very primitively in the wilderness and went on to teach what he knew to many others including people that many of us are familiar with such as Cody Lundin. It's a great book and very fun and easy read and best of all its garunteed to not offend even the most easily offened.

As far as EE goes... well you will never find a real life story off EE that can be discussed without offense to someone as long as people are unable to differentiate be the cause and the effect, or more specifically are unable to discuss the effect without ranting about the cause. That's sort of the very nature of EE isn't it? I mean if youre escaping and evading then there must be someone that doesn't agree with you... right?

Brian is correct in distilling Scott's post. Brandtb responded with a reference to Rudolph's camp showing very little occupancy. So have we learned anything? Some people or 'causes' push those big, red buttons Radio Shack should be marketing. It's a nasty taste of the notoriety these criminals live for.So, lets hope their meatloaf continues to have to much salt and move on.

I think both Scott and Brian are both trying to show that it is possible to separate the action from the actor, and to learn something even if the actor is one whom you find to be morally wrong. In Germany in WW2, POWs and concentration camp prisoners were subjected to ghastly medical experiments such as being immersed in ice water. If this experiment led to a better way to treat hypothermia, would you hesitate to use it because of the way it was discovered?

"Fas est et ab hoste doceri" - It is right to learn even from an enemy.

I'm really sorry Bradtb, but my sorry jewish ass will just have to freeze. I read german. I've read the texts. No thanks.

Chris, I've read enough of your posts to know you're a good guy and pretty fair when it comes to things like this. So, if you saw fit to delete my post, so be it. <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> I just really have no idea what you found offensive about what I said.

Now, here's a quote from the original message:



If you don't find that offensive, I guess our heads are screwed on differently. I've never found anything to like or admire about a mass murderer... your milage may vary...

I'll agree with your "nothing to see here, move along folks" assessment.

But so many people associate "survival" with wacko conspiracy theorizing militia-loving nuts that I think it's important we vocally condemn criminals like Rudolph rather than look for reasons to admire them.

My $.02 and I'm done with this thread.

Why so hard?

"-I nevertheless find myself considerably Liking and Admiring this guy, -along with his Experience. This largely entails, but is not solely limited to, -the Survival Aspects involved."

Well, gee, i dunno, maybe because the man he finds himself considerably liking and admiring happened to have killed and maimed innocents? And, if I remember his court appearances correctly, said he was sorry ... he only meant to target law enforcement, not bystanders.

Good enough for me.

Re intellectually mature enough to separate the deed and the doer, I don't buy it.

Sometimes evil, pure and simple, walks on two feet and needs to be recognized and labeled as such, and I believe the object of admiration in this case to be such a man.

In my career, I've met one serial killer and listened to another guy who, by his own admission, stuck up crack dealers for a living. (He was being tried on murder charges at the time). There was not a glint of humanity in either. They were, in short, the most dangerous of animals.

One raped and killed hookers and the other held up crackheads and dealers, so I suppose one could argue there is something to be examined, analyzed and even admired in their actions and their planning ... but not by me.

I'd argue that "intellectual maturity" surpasses chat-board analysis and one upsmanship ... perhaps sometimes it involves simply recognizing that you are in the presence of something quite bad and turning to face it for what it is.

But I could be wrong.