Brad Wardell's views about technology, politics, religion, world affairs, and all sorts of politically incorrect topics.
Some observations
Published on September 3, 2005 By Draginol In Current Events

I've been working massive hours these past two weeks so I haven't had much time to pay attention to the Katrina situation.  From what little I've seen, it's incredibly tragic and my thoughts definitely go to the families and friends of those who are involved in that terrible situation.

It's also amazing to see how the situation brings the best and worst out of people.  I've read a lot of articles on the subject this evening and I'm just amazed at the vitriol and emotion involved on it.

I thought I'd chime my 2 cents.

There was an article called "Why are all the looters black?".  I'm not sure what the point of it is.  Okay, the looters featured on television have more pigment in their epidermis than I do.  On average, the men and women seen looting on television are genetically a mixture of around 75% African ("African-Americans" have, on average, quite a bit of European genes in them).  So, okay, what's the point? Is the argument that that genetic mixture is more prone to stealing? It is a commentary on culture? It doesn't really say.  What's the point?  It seems to me that those who are economically not capable of leaving are probably more likely to be of that genetic type because several hundred years ago Europeans decided to have slaves that were visually easier to identify and collaborated with African tribes who were willing to collaborate with them to sell them slaves.  In turn, having only been released from slavery only a bit over a century ago -- but still very restricted in rights and being at a severe disadvantage due to not having an intact family structure have tended to be poorer.  Thus, if it's mostly poor people left in devastated areas and most poor people are genetically predisposed to having more pigment (i.e. "being black") then yea, they're going to be the ones looting.

I could just as easily say "Why are so many of the looters male?" or "Why is so much of the violence there being done by men?" 

On a similar vein, there's "Why are so many corporate criminals, white?"  I'd argue that it's pretty much the same as above but in reverse.  Most wealthy people are white, therefore most criminals who are wealthy will tend to be white as well.

Then there are numerous posts making the rather absurd argument that somehow this whole mess is the result of the Federal government.  Please.  First, not to be unsympathetic but for better or worse, the people who didn't evacuate when they were told to evacuate bear some of the burden.  This didn't sneak up on us, we knew for days that a category 5 hurricane was going to hit the area.  Second, the mayor of New Orleans sucks. The city busses should have been evacuating people before the storm hit.  Third, the governor of Louisiana sucks.  Why didn't they have their act together?  Why wasn't the national guard activated in full before it hit?  There have been plenty of studies that said that a good hurricane hit would wipe out New Orleans because of its levies.  They had days to prepare.  It's not the federal government's job to wipe the asses of the state and local authorities. Blaming Bush (or Clinton or whoever) is asinine.  It's as bad as blaming the weather on them (which would be funny except there are people out there who blame them for the weather).

This situation isn't quite like the Tsunami and I doubt it'll get anywhere near the outpouring of support it did.  For one thing, there was plenty of warning about this one. I did watch the coverage just hours before it hit and there were people on Bourbon street having a "Hurricane party". Come on.  The other issue is how out of control the situation is.  Regardless of how much pigment the looters have, images of people looting, shooting at police, raping, etc. do nothing to instill sympathy. 

The violence and mayhem going on in what is left of New Orleans also helps drive home (to me) how biased the reporting in Iraq has been.  Look how quickly Americans can turn on each other in time of crisis and when there is a vacuum or order.  Is it really any shock that there's violence in Iraq?  It really demonstrates how pathetic the "insurgency" in Iraq must be.  They should send over some New Orleans looters and gang members to Baghdad to teach the "insurgency" how to conduct a proper uprising.


Comments (Page 1)
5 Pages1 2 3  Last
on Sep 03, 2005
The violence and mayhem going on in what is left of New Orleans also helps drive home (to me) how biased the reporting in Iraq has been. Look how quickly Americans can turn on each other in time of crisis and when there is a vacuum or order. Is it really any shock that there's violence in Iraq? It really demonstrates how pathetic the "insurgency" in Iraq must be. They should send over some New Orleans looters and gang members to Baghdad to teach the "insurgency" how to conduct a proper uprising.


Interesting, and quite poignant, observation.
on Sep 03, 2005

To emphasize the point about the mayor of New Orleans being an idiot, check out hurricane blogger Brendan Loy who wrote on the 27th, days before Katrina hit:

http://brendanloy.com/page2.html#112518974279674259

to quote:

I can't emphasize enough what a bad decision I think it is for New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin to delay the mandatory evacuation order until tomorrow morning. According to the Weather Channel, lots of tourists in the French Quarter are happy the evacuation is only "voluntary," and are planning to stay in town until it becomes mandatory. Idiots. Those people may find themselves stuck on a highway with 180 mph wind gusts howling around them. (Of course, if that happens, they won't actually be "stuck" for long. Nor will they be on the highway.)
 
 Landfall is expected to occur around midday Monday. So by waiting until tomorrow morning, Mayor Nagin will be giving people scarcely 24 hours to get out. Perhaps he's hoping to ease the evacuation traffic jams by starting things off with a trickle, but that's awfully risky.
 
 Will Ray Nagin go down in history as the mayor who fiddled while New Orleans drowned? Could be.

on Sep 03, 2005

An aerial view of flooded school buses in a lot, Thursday, Sept. 1, 2005, in New Orleans, LA. The flood is a result of Hurricane Katrina that passed through the area last Monday.(AP Photo/Phil Coale)

To the right is a picture of unused busses just sitting there.  There is a villain in this tragedy I think and it is the Mayor of New Orleans who didn't even order an evacuation until the very last second and didn't even make use of what was obviously a lot of resources that coudl have been used to move people.

on Sep 03, 2005
Well looking at the bigger picture, if this is the globally warmed future, is this cost worth it in return for gas guzzling behemoths, conspicuous overconsumption of energy resources and protecting large corporates from the global consequences of their production wastes? It really means that half-baked compromises like Kyoto really need to supplanted by some serious emissions and energy reduction strategies at a global level.

regards
Michael

Never argue with an idiot.
They drag you down to their level then beat you with experience.
on Sep 03, 2005
Hurricanes are not caused by global warming. 
on Sep 03, 2005
I beg to differ... hurricanes may not be CAUSED by global warming but they may be getting WORSE because of it.

From the MSNBC website
By Michael Schirber

Updated: 3:19 p.m. ET June 16, 2005
Climate change could make future hurricanes stronger, but whether the effect is measurable is still a matter of debate. It is also unknown whether it will change the total number of storms.

Kevin Trenberth from the National Center for Atmospheric Research claims that warmer oceans and increased moisture could intensify the showers and thunderstorms that fuel hurricanes.

"Trends in human-influenced environmental changes are now evident in hurricane regions," Trenberth said. "These changes are expected to affect hurricane intensity and rainfall, but the effect on hurricane numbers remains unclear. The key scientific question is how hurricanes are changing."

Sea-surface temperatures in the tropical North Atlantic — the breeding ground for most U.S. hurricanes — have been the warmest on record over the last decade. Across the globe, the amount of water vapor over the oceans has increased by about 2 percent since 1988.

Computer models show that these climate changes will push hurricane intensities toward extreme hurricanes, Trenberth said. Moreover, the added moisture in the air will produce heavier rains and increased flooding when the hurricanes make landfall.

on Sep 03, 2005
Seems to me you're missing a couple key points in what he said, magentasyd.

Right at the beginning of the article it says theres no way to tell if its effects are even measurable or even if it could change the total number of storms.

And it should be noted that apparently the sea-surface temps in the north atlantic have been the warmest in a decade...a decade...thats not long a all in a global scale, tell him to come back after they have aatleast a hundred years or so of temp readings to go by before he starts acting like chicken little and telling us the sky is falling...
on Sep 03, 2005
Interesting, and quite poignant, observation.


it's piffle, not poingant

But certainly, everyone in the Big Easy was having a big ol' party down on Bourbon. I mean, I remember reading just last year in the Times-Picayune that an estimated 100,000 people didn't have transportation and wouldn't have it in the event of a hurricane.

But they were probably just doing jell-o shots.

You know how far it is to the high ground of Baton Rouge? How far you'd have to get without a car or money? 80 miles. Through pure dank swamp. And the roads were quickly washed out. Anyone of you that thinks this is "poingnant" is now challenged, by me, to go walk 80 miles. With children. And old people. And the sick.

My counter is: no wonder we can't take Iraq if our President is so lame and stupid he can't even take New Orleans. How's that for poingnant?
on Sep 03, 2005
Hurricanes are certainly not caused by global warming but super hurricanes are. the water temperature in the Gulf of Mexico is now approaching 30 degrees celcius, and the convection and icreased evaporation of water is amplifying hurricanes. Sure, hurricanes have always been there and always will, and there may have been stronger and more destructive hurricanes in the past but in the future there will be more hurricanes like this one or worse. Imagine if it had still been category 5 when it hit the coast, or hadn't changed course in the Gulf of Mexico?
Sure, we can wait 500 years or perhaps 1,000 years to detect a long-term climate trend, but by the time every cynic and vested interst has been convinced beyond any doubt the world will be a real mess. Still, you'll have your SUV and your gun so why worry
regards
Michael

Never argue with an idiot.
They drag you down to their level then beat you with experience.
on Sep 03, 2005
http://www.counterpunch.org/flaherty09032005.html
for a personal blog of events around the evacuation. Of course for the determindly blind, this is from a 'left wing' site so you can dismiss it as a fabrication
on Sep 03, 2005
Michael: I meant no slander against anyone who found him or herself unable to evacuate.

I thought it was an interesting point that we expect so much from the people of Iraq when we can't manage it ourselves.
on Sep 03, 2005
About those buses - if you'll look closely, you'll see they're UNDERWATER.... that's why they're not being used. It's not easy to drive a vehicle that's been underwater for 300 to 500 miles. Even if it starts and runs, the axle bearings, etc, will often not last the trip.

As far as to Draginol.... Since you haven't been following the situation, I'll forgive your overlooking some key issues here. The reason people are blaming Washington is simple: Bush declared a disaster area before Katrina struck. What was SUPPOSED to happen at that time is that these resources, food, water, etc, where supposed to start being prepped before the storm even hit. That happened in every hurricane of any magnitude in the 90s (under Bush Sr. and Clinton). It did NOT happen this time - nothing was put in place before the storm struck, despite the disaster area declaration. The reason for this confusion is that when FEMA was folded into the Department of Homeland Security, they wrecked most of the plans that had worked well in previous storms.

People are upset because it took 5 days for aid to finally reach the majority of people. People on the ground - Mayor Nagin, and many others, saw that nothing was being done. Meanwhile, Washington was lying to the American public, saying that aid HAD been sent. Only today (Friday) did Bush admit, very quietly, that no, aid had not reached people in time.
on Sep 03, 2005
buses


Thank you for spelling that correctly. Jesus Christ, you seem to be the only person in the world who knows how to spell it.

Busses = kisses

Buses = plural of bus
on Sep 03, 2005
About those buses - if you'll look closely, you'll see they're UNDERWATER.... that's why they're not being used. It's not easy to drive a vehicle that's been underwater for 300 to 500 miles. Even if it starts and runs, the axle bearings, etc, will often not last the trip.

--------

You kidding right? The buses were not... I repeat NOT under water BEFORE the storm hit. The people could have been evacuated BEFORE the sorm hit. Then, of course, the very same buses could be used to get the others when it was safe.


"Why are all the looters black?"
"Why are so many corporate criminals, white?"




Those were knee jerk reactions. That's all.




I'm curious; do you think they should rebiuld New Orleans? I don't. I think they should let it return to the delta of the Mississippi. Money and lives will only continue to be lost. What happens if another storm hit there in a week? 2 weeks? How about another Cat5? There is more to the problem then just biulding a levee. The city is sinking, the water table is rising, and so forth. This makes it dangerous to rebiuld. if the do, it will be in the trillions of dollars and maintenance of the system for the years after its biult will be in the billions.

on Sep 03, 2005
Meanwhile, Washington was lying to the American public, saying that aid HAD been sent. Only today (Friday) did Bush admit, very quietly, that no, aid had not reached people in time.


Aid being sent and reaching it's destination are different things. Oops my mistake...I forgot we have new super transporters.

5 Pages1 2 3  Last