High school friend of Loughner's: He wasn't shooting at people..."he was shooting at the world"

[cynatnite]

This morning on “Good Morning America,” ABC’s Ashleigh Banfield sat down with Zach Osler, a high school friend of Jared Loughner, the suspect in the Tucson massacre.

Osler says his friend wasn’t shooting at people, “he was shooting at the world.” Regarding the high-pitched talk radio and cable news political rhetoric, Osler says his friend didn’t even watch the news.

He did not watch TV. He disliked the news. He didn’t listen to political radio. He didn’t take sides. He wasn’t on the left. He wasn’t on the right.

http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/jared-loughners-friend-says-suspect-did-not-watch-tv-disliked-the-news_b48040

[stray cat]

1. He had a target but maybe in name only -he enjoyed killing anyone near by

His picture after the fact seems to make that clear. He was rage filled mass murderers rather than just a thoughtful assasin

[atreides1]

2. I caught this "interview"

But, it was never made clear if Mr. Osler and Mr. Loughner were currently friends. He knew him in high school, but that was at least 4 years ago.

What was their current realtionship, if any?

[TwilightGardener]

3. Here come all the Kato Kaelins.

[Maru Kitteh]

7. +1

[cali]

21. wtf? did you even watch this?

[TwilightGardener]

24. Yep.

[cali]

26. then shame on you for calling this articulate heart wrenched kid

a "Kalo Kaelin".

[TwilightGardener]

28. I didn't get the same impression you did.

[cali]

31. so you think he was faking crying?

[TwilightGardener]

34. Seemed a bit forced. Someone's getting his 15. I don't think he genuinely loved this guy.

Edit to add: I cringe when the media trolls for old friends and acquaintances like this. It usually turns out to be cheesy, unhelpful, and a vehicle for those who want to be on the teevee.

[bemildred]

25. +2.

Me! Me! I knew the assassin!

[gatorboy]

4. Yeah, if this wasn't political then why are Republicans falling over themselves to get security?

[Javaman]

5. Yeah people just got in the way...

:eyes:

[seabeyond]

6. havent seen him for two years.... i bet the highschool didnt watch news....

what? we take this to the bank, to prove?????

yet threads like

where is the evidence are put out by those that will hold this up and say, see

[warrior1]

8. but he had a computer

this young man didn't live in a vacuum.

[deutsey]

29. I knew someone who was very much into Rand Paul but didn't see himself as either left or right

He hated the political establishment in general (Democrat and Republican), was very impassioned about Rand Paul and the monetary system, and believed a tyrannical conspiracy has taken over and controls America.

He didn't watch TV or listen to radio, but got his ideas from the Internet and from Rand Paul's writings.

This guy wasn't threatening, but he was way out on the fringe and I grew to dread bumping into him. I knew I'd be stuck listening to him rant for a while.

Anyway, I agree with you. The shooter didn't have to listen to "political radio" or watch TV pundits to be influenced by fringe political currents.

[snooper2]

30. yeah, and he spent all his time on video games

SOME people out there don't watch the news...

Half the country doesn't even vote

Most 22 year olds couldn't name their Senator

MOST People don't spend HOURS and HOURS every day on political forums

[Zax2me]

9. Wow...

This is the same video from ABC I think. The guy was very sincere, didn't appear to have any horn to blow, really spoke from the heart.
I hope that people will now chill out on the finger pointing (on both sides) and see this warped individual for what he is - unstable.

[Broderick]

11. Naw

the allure of making it political, which will only backfire in my humble opinion, is too tempting for most.

[Zax2me]

13. I don't know the reason, honestly

I come HERE for reason. Surprised in this case, but, I'm certain more educated heads will prevail as these facts continue to come out.

[Johonny]

22. are people rushing to judgment?

Why must people create strawmans like the majority of liberals have rushed to judgment? Most liberals have not rushed to judgment.

Anyways its funny because here you are rushing to judgment that the guy is unstable based on... what a video from a guy who knew him in high school. The guy is in custody and no doubt will speak for himself. We are going to get way better information if people only wait.

[reformist2]

10. He knew him when he was (relatively) healthy.

It's no clearer to me after watching this interview what Jared had been reading/listening to in the past two years.

[Upton]

12. I see this friend's comments

of Loughner having no real political persuasion, are being immediately dismissed by those who want to believe otherwise. You know, I bet if this friend had claimed Loughner was a teabagger or an extreme RW Pub, we'd see quite a different reaction on this thread...

[Broderick]

14. No way

How can you say that? sarcasm of course.

[seabeyond]

17. i dont get this. the self rigteous of all knowing. you jab at people challenging this kid two year

out, assume the shooter made no changes in his life adn insult people because they dont go along with an unknown.

do you KNOW the shooter didnt become immersed in politics anymore than we know he didnt?

[Upton]

27. I think this is purely and simply a mental health issue..

that's all. His political beliefs, if you wish to call them that, seem to be all over the place. Since there is no real evidence one way or another, I refuse to join those who have gone into outright hysterics in their zeal to indict anything and everything to the right of the Democratic party..

[seabeyond]

33. i can respect that you think it is purely mental. my issue now, on du.... hysterical?

zeal? to indict anything and everything right....

i am really having issue now with the rhetoric... from people that have issue with people that see it differently.

i dont see hysteria. i dont see any more of a zeal from people thinking rhetoric influenced than those that feel it is purely and simply a mental health issue.

i am seeing such a force of belitting people, to demean adn degrade a person, because they differ in opinion.

what happens to, i see it as a health issue. not a political issue.

that simple. without belittle people that see it differently than you.

another thread.... like rabid rwer, lynch mob, irration, mythical and mystical, emotional,

what is it with these attacks on differing opinion

i say without zeal or hysteria

[Imajika]

44. Seabeyond...

We argued about this on another thread the other day, and now it appears your feeling defensive.

The problem is, it appears blatantly obvious that you are seriously over eager in your efforts to link this guy to the right wing or some of its spokespeople in any way possible - whether there is evidence to support it or not. Your replies in the past simply provide no evidence to back up your assertions in any serious way.

You argued Laughner was a rightwinger, yet present no reasonable evidence as such. Then you argued he was influenced by rightwing, and again present zero evidence to back up your case. You have nothing to link Laughner to any teabagger, conservative or any other righty, nor do you have anything to suggest that the "the hateful tone of the debate" had even the slightest thing to do with Laughner's assassination attempt.

That is not saying the right isn't vicious and venomous - they are. But just because right wing idiots like Palin, Beck, etc, say and do nasty things does NOT mean those things are in any way related to Laughner's assassination attempt.

Some of the attempts here on DU to create such linkage have gone far beyond the level of doing due diligence to see what this Laughner person was all about. Much of it has been obvious, and at times comical, attempts make such a connection for no other reason than to win a few media cycles and the hope we'd suddenly have a cudgel to beat up teabaggers with.

In my view, and I think over time most people are going to view these last few days this way, it is counterproductive and downright vile to attempt to link people or groups to a likely paranoid schizophrenic's orgy of murder without having at least some evidence to back such claims up.

As time passes, your case is only getting weaker as the evidence mounts that Loughner was simply insane and apparently influenced by none of the people and groups you really do appear almost desperate to want to link him to.

[seabeyond]

45. defensive, over eager.... no. quit attributing emotions without any evidence, please.

quit thinking you can decide what i feel and what motive is, unless you have evidence. otherwise, you are doing exactly what you accuse me of doing, firstly.

secondly.... did you read my post? there was nothing in it that is my pressing my case. nothing. that is not what my post is about. that is not what i was addressing. so out of the blue, you give an irrelevant reply to what i was talking about.

i didn't even talk about connection to the right until enough info came out and that was monday. so i hardly think that is over eager to present case. i stopped talking about it yesterday, because it is clear people are sitting in each of their camp and they are not listening nor being swayed. so my "over eager" was very short lived. do i also get to say, you are over eager in presenting your point of view? isn't that a little dismissive of your opinion? of course it is.

i listen to the self righteous declare there is no concrete evidence, as they precede to use belittling rhetoric to shut people up. that is now the topic i am over eagerly addressing.

i think there are clear connections to rw. i think it is so fuckin clear, i am amazed people like you post.... there is no evidence. but whatever. i get it. what is evidence to me is none to you

i think he is nuts. but there is no evidence that he is nuts, anymore than your perceived no evidence that he is rw. yet you and all the others have diagnosed the dude, as has all the media, without an iota of evidence.... doctors from a distance. i haven't done that. he may be. he may have been drugged while making those films and that is why he appears. i dont know. so i dont make that declaration. but that is yawl drawing absolute conclusions that you have no evidence of. it just really appears he is so you connect the dots.

dont tell me my motive. they are not clear to you. i have not stated motive. it is irresponsible of you, and a horrible way to argue to try to read my mind on the little info you have.

i have NEVER tried to connect shooter to watching rw mouth pieces. you assume. lots assume when i show he is rw, that is what i am doing. but i haven't. that is you making assumptions. you wont find a post where i say there is a connection to either teabaggers or rw media. though i do state his ideas all match teabaggers. that is not the same. if you cant differentiate, that is your issue. yet here you accuse me of saying there is a connection with the mouths, and i haven't.

still.... that is not what my post is about that you responded to. thumbs up on an inaccurate critique of who i am and what i think without info and filling in your own blanks.

[Celeborn Skywalker]

38. The evidence points

more toward his being right-wing than left-wing. The fact that he owned Karl Marx books is the only evidence to suggest he's left-wing.

On the other hand, he called a woman who got an abortion a "terrorist", ranted about illegal immigrants, talked about the monetary system, gold standard, etc., and was generally anti-government, not to mention the fact that he chose to shoot up a gathering with a Democratic congresswoman. So the evidence points more to right-wing/libertarian thinking than to anything resembling left-wing.

[JuniperLea]

15. I can't buy that...

He had asked a question of the Representative earlier, blasted her in his InterTube writings for not giving the right answer, and then went to another event and shot her. He's been listening to something. I call bullshit.

That's not to say he didn't just latch onto the first bit of angry whipped up froth he found and used it to vent his own anger. It's not about ideology, it's about anger and the unhinged with anger.

[MadHound]

16. Wow, the light of reason and sanity, thank you

But this simply won't make a dent in the opinion of those who want to hyper-politicize this tragedy.

What's worse is that there is a problem with hyperbolic political language on the right, and it does need to be addressed. But by choosing this case with which to address such language, everything that we say on the left will be negated and later ignored as it becomes clearer and clearer that Loughner was deeply disturbed and not politically motivated.

[cali]

19. no it won't.

I feel for the kid in the interview.

[seabeyond]

20. do you KNOW what the shooter did for two years? do you KNOW he was not politically motivated?

prove it.

evidence.

you make a statement, back it up

[Celeborn Skywalker]

37. And how do YOU know either way?

You're castigating people for rushing to judgment, yet you say we will be proven wrong "as it becomes clearer and clearer that Loughner was deeply disturbed and not politically motivated". Sounds like you're the one rushing to judgment.

BTW, you can be "deeply disturbed" and still incited by violent rhetoric.

[MadHound]

39. It is called evidence

Testimony of friends, family, professors, administrators, acquaintances.

But hey, just keep on believing your faith based opinions, I'm sure all will turn out right in the end:eyes:

[TwilightGardener]

40. We haven't seen any real evidence yet. Probably will take years.

I can't make conclusions until then. But neither can you.

[MadHound]

42. I do know one thing,

That a college, concious of litigation as they are, is not going to kick out a student with the condition that said student can't return until he is cleared as not dangerous to himself or others by a mental health professional, I know that somebody, a psychiatrist or psychologist, probably faculty member, had a conversation with Loughner at some point and came to the conclusion that he was deeply and dangerously disturbed. Colleges don't make stipulations like that unless they are on solid legal footing.

Combine that with what his friends, family, and acquaintances are saying, and it stacks up to a hell of a lot more evidence that what the "he was driven nuts by RW rhetoric" crowd has.

[TwilightGardener]

43. I think he was out of his mind. I don't know to what extent, if at all, that he

absorbed RW rhetoric. I will err on the side of caution and say that politicians should ESPECIALLY NOW stop using gun language and imagery, hints of upcoming violence, etc. as a means to "inspire" people. They should also stop insisting that government officeholders and employees are enemies to be hated and feared (death panels, take away your guns, socialist takeover, encampments, UN plotting to take us over, etc.--paranoid shit promoted by the RW).

[disillusioned73]

46. "he was driven nuts by RW rhetoric"

nice try, nobody is saying he was DRIVEN nuts by the rhetoric - only influenced. Get your spin at least factual.

[Celeborn Skywalker]

41. The consensus

from them is that he is disturbed and unbalanced. Clearly, that's correct. That doesn't mean he's not susceptible to violent, vitriolic rhetoric. It's also pretty clear that he holds much more right-wing/libertarian opinions than he does left-wing opinions.

[cali]

18. this is an incredibly wrenching interview

[Zax2me]

32. Wasn't it?!

You could tell this guy felt guilt for not being able to help him. I suppose a lot of it though was the tragic loss of life was hitting him quite hard.
Emotional just to watch.

[disillusioned73]

23. “he was shooting at the world.”

so taking that into context, his world amounted to a small political gathering in a parking lot... got it

[reformist2]

35. It sounds possible, but how does he know that?

[chemenger]

36. And those darn people just got in the way

Yea, that's the ticket.