A one-time school project gone terribly, terribly wrong.

02 October 2006

A Credible Threat?

I have long believed that the character of a nation is reflected in its leaders.

The United States groans under the excrable Twit from Massachusetts (yes he is).

Since the introduction and passage of the bill which allows the detention and torture of anyone the president chooses, three school shootings have made headlines:

In Colorado, a drifter took six high-school women hostage, molested them, and shot one, then killed himself.

In Wisconsin, a 15-year-old shot and killed his principal.

And today a truck driver killed three Amish girls and then himself in Pennsylvania.

National character may begin at the top; But it often finds expression at the bottom. What example could these killers have been following? Strange that this sort of slaughter of the innocents took place under the beady and ever-so watchful eye of Dubya and his "culture of life (and torture, and assasination ...)".

But let's not feel too smug here: Canada has Stephen Harper--a man anxious to ally himself with Mr. Bush in his War on Whatever He Don't Like.

We've already had one school shooting.


At 4:51 p.m., Anonymous Anonymous said...

I was wondering how long it would take you to link the school shootings to President Bush.

You make some good points on your blog (sparse as they are) but when you leap to the conclusion you do in this shows just how rediculous and biased your thought process has become.

How anyone takes you seriously is a mystery.


At 5:58 p.m., Blogger Metro said...

Nony: Glad to see you back here.

I tried to give Dubya a pass, I honestly did. I left him alone for a while, trying to get behind the idea that he might really believe that what he's doing does any good for the United States or anywhere else, or anyone besides His Imperial self.

Then he went and shoved all my good intentions straight up my ass by legalizing torture.

All I tried to say in this post is that when the president sets an example as bad as this one has, it ripples.

Is he somehow responsible for the shootings--no. Are they connected to the example he's set? I don't know. What I offered was pure speculation, and as such I'll stand by it. If I'm truly making too much stew from one oyster I'm sure you'll keep me honest.

But I've tried being nice to the Occupant, and I can't do it. How am I expected to be respectful of anyone who condones torture?

I don't like it from Al-Qaeda. Why should I like it from the people who are supposed to be the good guys?

Do you have an answer for me?

At 7:41 p.m., Anonymous raincoaster said...

We've actually had quite a few school shootings, three of them in Quebec (and one attempted school shooter arrested in Quebec this year, besides Kimveer Gill).

The attack on the Amish follows, quite frankly, the Montreal Massacre model, although the one in Colorado appears to have been differently motivated, in that he singled out girls of a single description.

I think this explosion of violence has more to do with 9/11 and the overreactive War Against Terror, quite frankly, than with anything else. It's Unabomber-like hatred against authoritarian structures, but schools, of course, have fewer barriers to entry than federal buildings of ANY nation now, and more pliable victims.

At 11:09 p.m., Anonymous Anonymous said...

How many people have died in car accidents this week?

Just wondering...

At 5:32 a.m., Anonymous Anonymous said...

Raincoaster - This even had nothing to do with 9/11. The guy called his wife moments before and said it was revenge for something that happened to him TWENTY years ago with the Amish.

Not that it makes it any better. But let's PLEASE not try to link the President, 9/11 to school shootings.

Clinton was President during the worst school shooting in our nation's history. Are we to blame him?

Let's all be mad at Bush for legalizing torture (yeahhhh!!!) and debate that instead of using our anger to speculate that Bush is breeding school killers.


At 8:55 a.m., Blogger Metro said...

Certainly Bush neither pulled the trigger nor counselled these people to murder.

I just feel that there is an atmosphere about the place these days, like some sort of moral pollution, and that its source is Washington.

When air pollution accumulates in the skies, the vulnerable (asthmatics, other lung patients, the elderly) react. The pollution didn't cause the conditions they're suffering from, but aggravates it, and causes visible symptoms.

When the rot is corruption, it spreads from a centre and poisons a nation just as surely as hydrogen sulphide. The vulnerable (the powerless, the unstable, the mean and angry) react in unpredictable ways.

In its quest for power the ruling party has corrupted itself beyond redemption.

Out of interest: what means "Yeaaaah!"? Are you supporting the suspension of the fourth, fifth, sixth, eighth, ninth, and tenth Amendments?

At 9:20 a.m., Blogger Lori said...

There's something to be said for the brutalization of a culture, ie. when the State legalizes brutality of any sort, the public follows suit. (Is it an ad hoc ergo propter hoc argument, or is it a real connection?)

Some statistics about the death penalty in the USA (from

There are some indicators that it [Capital Punishment] acts as an anti-deterrent i.e. the death penalty actually increases the homicide rate:
* In 1996, those states which had the death penalty had an average murder rate of 7.1 per 100,000 population; those states which do not execute people had a homicide rate of 3.6.
* Comparing adjacent states where one state has the death penalty and the other does not, frequently shows that the states with capital punishment have a much higher homicide rate.
* A report of the Bureau of Justice Statistics showed that during 1996, Southern states, where about 81% of the executions are performed, have an average murder rate of 9 per 100,000 population. States in the Northeast are responsible for 1% of the executions and have a murder rate of 5.4
* A 1980 study of homicides in New York found that the average numbers of murders increased in the month following an execution
* A 1995 study of the annual percentage increases in homicide rates in California showed that murders increased 10% a year during 1952 to 1967 when the state was executing people. When the state performed no executions (1968-1991) the average rate of increase was less (4.8%)



Post a Comment

<< Home