who did the six-year-old 'save'? as far as i can tell, he and the other children were loaded onto a helicopter for rescue. the children were separated from their mothers because the helicopter never returned to pick them up. the six-year-old didn't actually do anything to save anybody. it's an interesting story, but to spin it as a tale of boyish heroism is just outright misrepresentation.
Wednesday, September 07, 2005
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
i guess i'll make things up. had he not been there, the four year olds would have sat there and drooled without their glorious leader? maybe his presence kept them together because they looked up to him. "save" is a stretch. but he did carry around his younger sibling, so he was the primary caretaker for at least a few hours. heh.
how was he the primary caretaker for a few hours, though? they were picked up by rescue workers from their flooded home. as far as I can tell, they were in the care of adults the whole time, unless i missed something in the article that indicated otherwise.
because the adults who picked them up didn't supervise them after they dropped them off. from what i read, they were found wandering in a small pack on the interstate.
ah. i see that now on a second reading. that's pretty fucked up.
anyway, i think they just stuck together because when you're a kid, you look up to the oldest one to look out for you. remember when you were a kindergartener and you thought fourth graders were old and wise? so these two and four year olds were looking to a six year old for leadership and safety.
FUCKED UP! AAAAAAAAAAAAAa!!!!
oh wait... i think i know how he "saved" them. he was the only kid old and articulate enough to state his name and address. otherwise, the rest of them would be unidentifable.
Post a Comment