September 9th, 2010
On this morning’s national news television shows it was reported the head of the planned NYC Ground-Zero mosque (Imam: Feisal Abdul Rauf) warned of likely violence/repercussions if the planned mosque is not allowed to be completed as planned. (Fox News, and either “The Early Show” or “The Today Show” I don’t remember which.)
Oh yea, I ask? Warnings of violence/repercussions, huh? This is from the “religion of peace” that had planned this “sanctuary of peace” near ground zero? Is that so??
Well I say, FUCK them!!! All the more reason to prevent this mosque from coming to fruition!!!! (See: http://adamvtrotter.blogspot.com/2010/09/concerning-muslim-mosque-near-ground.html.)
As for the head of the planned mosque's warnings of violence perpetrated by angry muslims, would such violence be perpetrated against more innocents of which their religion has a [recent] history? See: http://avt777.blogspot.com/2010/03/fuck-stupid-drug-war-lets-start-war-on.html. And see: http://avt777.blogspot.com/2010/03/stop-violence-on-our-streets-and-in-our.html
Warnings of violence, huh??? Does anyone think the United States populace evolved to what it is by fearing threats of violence from simpletons? Does anyone really think this country will become like the wimps in France that have allowed the Muslim population to take over the nation and then do whatever it takes to appease that portion of the population that puts their religion above individual freedom? I don’t think so!!!
Adam Trotter / AVT
PS. Should one care to put their religion above their individual freedoms, that is fine. However, dont get upset when others may not share your preferences/priorities!
Thursday, September 9, 2010
Monday, September 6, 2010
Is Sportsmanship Reaching a New Low with NCAA Football?
September 5th, 2010
Given the widespread and long-standing practice of running up the score in one-sided football games and the subsequent rewarding of such a practice in national press association rankings, one has to wonder does the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) truly care about sportsmanship in men’s college football?
I mean…, when a highly-ranked football program/team amasses a score on the level of fifty to nothing (50 to 0) against a team that is obviously out-matched and not ranked in the national standings, other than bolstering the winning team’s national rankings, is there anything to be gained by continuing to run the score up to a final score of seventy-two to nothing (72 to 0)? Case in point, Eleventh Ranked Oregon: 72, New Mexico: 0. Is the goal in college football now to humiliate the opposing team to better one’s national rankings? Does such a practice of padding the score help to foster sportsmanship on any level - as the NCAA claims sportsmanship as one of its goals? (http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/ncaa/about+the+ncaa)
Are we as a culture no longer to care about sportsmanship? Or has sportsmanship now evolved to a state of ultimate fighting clubs where the upright competitor betters his position by endlessly kicking the downed opponent until the out-matched competitor openly submits and removes himself from the competition, as if college football is now nothing more than a street fight between gangs of ignorant punks? I am aware that running up the score on the opponent for higher national rankings is nothing new: But….wtf ?!?!?
I commend the underdog school for playing such a highly ranked team, as well as the higher ranked program for allowing the other school a chance to play them. But, if the teams are so unevenly matched as displayed by the final score, maybe they shouldn’t be playing one another anyhow.
Other examples from yesterday’s season opener games which seem to display questionable sportsmanship and padding of the scores include (regardless of when the second string athletes took the field):
No. 1 Alabama: 48, San Jose State: 3
No. 2 Ohio State: 45, Marshall: 7
No. 8 Nebraska: 49, Western Kentucky 10
No. 13 Miami (FL): 45, Florida A&M: 0
No. 17 Arkansas: 44, Tennessee Tech: 3
No. 20 Florida State: 59, Samford: 6
No. 23 Georgia: 55, Louisiana-Lafayette: 7
No. 25 West Virginia: 31, Coastal Carolina: 0
Totals From Scores Listed Above:
Ranked Schools: 376, Smaller Unranked Schools: 36
I’m just wondering what’s going on with all this and how the NCAA views these outcomes to be in keeping with any goals of sportsmanship. Does anyone else share my concerns on this matter?
Adam Trotter / AVT
Given the widespread and long-standing practice of running up the score in one-sided football games and the subsequent rewarding of such a practice in national press association rankings, one has to wonder does the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) truly care about sportsmanship in men’s college football?
I mean…, when a highly-ranked football program/team amasses a score on the level of fifty to nothing (50 to 0) against a team that is obviously out-matched and not ranked in the national standings, other than bolstering the winning team’s national rankings, is there anything to be gained by continuing to run the score up to a final score of seventy-two to nothing (72 to 0)? Case in point, Eleventh Ranked Oregon: 72, New Mexico: 0. Is the goal in college football now to humiliate the opposing team to better one’s national rankings? Does such a practice of padding the score help to foster sportsmanship on any level - as the NCAA claims sportsmanship as one of its goals? (http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/ncaa/about+the+ncaa)
Are we as a culture no longer to care about sportsmanship? Or has sportsmanship now evolved to a state of ultimate fighting clubs where the upright competitor betters his position by endlessly kicking the downed opponent until the out-matched competitor openly submits and removes himself from the competition, as if college football is now nothing more than a street fight between gangs of ignorant punks? I am aware that running up the score on the opponent for higher national rankings is nothing new: But….wtf ?!?!?
I commend the underdog school for playing such a highly ranked team, as well as the higher ranked program for allowing the other school a chance to play them. But, if the teams are so unevenly matched as displayed by the final score, maybe they shouldn’t be playing one another anyhow.
Other examples from yesterday’s season opener games which seem to display questionable sportsmanship and padding of the scores include (regardless of when the second string athletes took the field):
No. 1 Alabama: 48, San Jose State: 3
No. 2 Ohio State: 45, Marshall: 7
No. 8 Nebraska: 49, Western Kentucky 10
No. 13 Miami (FL): 45, Florida A&M: 0
No. 17 Arkansas: 44, Tennessee Tech: 3
No. 20 Florida State: 59, Samford: 6
No. 23 Georgia: 55, Louisiana-Lafayette: 7
No. 25 West Virginia: 31, Coastal Carolina: 0
Totals From Scores Listed Above:
Ranked Schools: 376, Smaller Unranked Schools: 36
I’m just wondering what’s going on with all this and how the NCAA views these outcomes to be in keeping with any goals of sportsmanship. Does anyone else share my concerns on this matter?
Adam Trotter / AVT
Saturday, September 4, 2010
Concerning the Muslim Mosque Near Ground-Zero in New York City…
September 4th 2010
You know…, instead of time and time again expecting mainstream America to display unbiased and unfettered tolerance of differing opinions, religions, lifestyles, and the likes, maybe the Muslim group that wants to build a mosque near the National Memorial and Cemetery we all know as Ground-Zero (the site of the former World Trade Center Towers) could actually show a little sensitivity to the mainstream and move it all up-town or anywhere else for that matter. I mean…, any other group that cared anything about public relations or were less self-centered in their demands would surely have the awareness to show some amount of sensitivity to the concerns of the populace, right?
In general, the American people have not shown hatred towards Muslims as a result of the actions of a few zealots of their religion upon attacking our nation in an unprovoked manner on 9-11. Yet, if the supporters of this mosque show so little sensitivity to the wounds of the populace in determining the location of the site for their mosque, do we really care if we offend them by standing opposed to their planned location for their mosque? The planned site for the mosque is not Holy Ground for the Muslims, is it? Ground Zero for the mainstream American, on the other hand, is a National Memorial Cemetery, and for that matter, is Holy Ground for the mainstream American.
Are the supporters of the location of the planned NYC mosque near Ground-Zero too blind to see this reality or do they have no sensitivity to the concerns of the mainstream American populace, or both?
Adam Trotter / AVT
You know…, instead of time and time again expecting mainstream America to display unbiased and unfettered tolerance of differing opinions, religions, lifestyles, and the likes, maybe the Muslim group that wants to build a mosque near the National Memorial and Cemetery we all know as Ground-Zero (the site of the former World Trade Center Towers) could actually show a little sensitivity to the mainstream and move it all up-town or anywhere else for that matter. I mean…, any other group that cared anything about public relations or were less self-centered in their demands would surely have the awareness to show some amount of sensitivity to the concerns of the populace, right?
In general, the American people have not shown hatred towards Muslims as a result of the actions of a few zealots of their religion upon attacking our nation in an unprovoked manner on 9-11. Yet, if the supporters of this mosque show so little sensitivity to the wounds of the populace in determining the location of the site for their mosque, do we really care if we offend them by standing opposed to their planned location for their mosque? The planned site for the mosque is not Holy Ground for the Muslims, is it? Ground Zero for the mainstream American, on the other hand, is a National Memorial Cemetery, and for that matter, is Holy Ground for the mainstream American.
Are the supporters of the location of the planned NYC mosque near Ground-Zero too blind to see this reality or do they have no sensitivity to the concerns of the mainstream American populace, or both?
Adam Trotter / AVT
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)