Cutting through the bullshit.

Saturday, 15 December 2012

Our children

Just weeks after humiliating himself with his notorious quip that 'no country on Earth that would tolerate missiles raining down on its citizens' while unleashing just such a deluge himself, President Obama is grieving the fatal shooting of some 20 children and 7 adults at Sandy Hook School in Newtown Connecticut, allegedly at the hands of one Adam Lanza, described by the Newtown Patch as 'developmentally disabled'. The president is heartbroken

...for the parents and grandparents, sisters and brothers of these little children, and for the families of the adults who were lost. Our hearts are broken for the parents of the survivors as well, for as blessed as they are to have their children home tonight, they know that their children’s innocence has been torn away from them too early, and there are no words that will ease their pain.

After all, 'As a country, we have been through this too many times...these children are our children.' [my emphasis]

Nor is it just 'our' American children he mourns, although only their deaths bring tears to his eyes. He also empathises with the parents of the children traumatised by the ceaseless torrent of Qassam rockets in

...the border town of Sderot, which had experienced missiles raining down from Hamas. And I saw families there who showed me where missiles had come down near their children’s bedrooms, and I was reminded of what that would mean if those were my kids.

They too have 'their entire lives ahead of them -- birthdays, graduations, weddings, kids of their own.' Unlike Palestinian kids, Pakistani kids, Afghan kids... who don't have lives ahead of them; who unfortunately found themselves in the wrong place at the wrong time; who he can shoot and not cry; whose parents don't grieve and above all, don't have the right 'to come together and take meaningful action to prevent more tragedies like this'. That would be terrorism.


  1. The typical kneejerk response to incidents like the Newtown massacre is to call for stricter gun control. In this connection, consider:

    What proportion of firearms related deaths and injuries are carried out by 'law enforcement' personnel?
    What proportion of firearms related deaths and injuries are carried out using guns obtained illegally?
    If firearms are illegal, only criminals will be armed
    Other countires with widespread gun ownership do not experience anything close to the number of gun related deaths and injuries in the US

    Also, I highly recommend Jeff Sparrow's article from August, which may shed some light on the social context in which a Newtown massacre can occur:

  2. Yes, quite. "Gun control" is not about disarmament. I'd support a general disarmament because, if it was general, it would include the police and the army. Of course, there isn't a snowflake's chance in Hell of that, because the point of the exercise is to disarm the people but not the State.

    And the crocodile tears of Barack Obama are well exposed by his drone attacks in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia & elsewhere.

  3. It seems that George Monbiot is thinking similarly to Ernie:

    Perhaps he's a reader.