Professor, why would the president be the one to answer?

Be well, stay safe.
CT
 
C. S. Thomas
Managing Director
CACH International Ltd Co
"Planning to Keep You in Business"sm

-----Original Message-----
From: Natural hazards and disasters
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of ian davis
Sent: Monday, 05 September 2005 04:34
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Day by day graphics, chrono of Katrina & New Orleans

To the Editor, The Washington Post

Dear Editor

Almost thirty years ago, in the aftermath of the Guatemala earthquake that 
killed over 22,000 people, Professor Nick Ambraseys of Imperial College 
London suggested that "Today's act of God, will be regarded as tomorrow's 
act of criminal negligence".  He was referring to all the unnatural aspects 
of the disaster that contributed to the scale of deaths and damage. His 
words now ring true in relation to the chaos and acute suffering following 
Katrina.  Therefore, when the US Congress initiates some form of 
Congressional Commission to investigate this tragedy, to decide on who was 
responsible for the 'unnatural' aspects of Katrina as well as to report on 
any essential policy changes, they will have an extensive agenda before 
them. It could include the following questions:

  1.. Why were the levees built and maintained without regard to the impact 
of a storm surge of this scale, and specifically, why was the 2004 model 
that predicted 10-15 feet of water in New Orleans, as a result of hurricane 
flooding, ignored?
  2.. Why was the pre-event evacuation of the region so incomplete, without 
attention being given to citizens of the city without means of 
transportation?
  3.. Why was the Louisiana Superdome opened to provide 'safety' to between 
10- 20,000 persons without even minimal provision being made for such basic 
needs as sanitation, food, shelter, water, medical needs and human security?
  4.. Why in the current search and rescue operation is minimal reliance 
being given for the use of rescue boats to supplement helicopter rescue 
operations?
  5.. Why are the extensive resources of the Office of Foreign Disaster 
Assistance (OFDA) not being used?
  6.. Why did it take six days before international assistance was 
requested?  And finally,
  7.. Why did any disaster plans that might have been available for fully 
predictable severe hurricane winds accompanied by fully predictable severe 
flooding fail so miserably?
While working in forty five disaster situations within developing countries 
in over thirty five years, I have never seen anything approaching this level

of governmental failure in any country, however poor and undeveloped.  While

Mercy demands any action to reduce further human suffering, Justice demands 
that responsibility for failures be assigned and policies be reviewed to 
avoid further "acts of criminal negligence"


Yours sincerely

Professor Ian Davis
Resilience Centre
Cranfield University,
UK


Home address:
97 Kingston Road
Oxford
OX2 6RL
UK

Home Tel: 44 (0) 1865 556473

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "CACH Info Ctr" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, September 05, 2005 6:18 AM
Subject: Re: Day by day graphics, chrono of Katrina & New Orleans


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Natural hazards and disasters
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ilan Kelman
> Sent: Monday, 05 September 2005 00:32
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Day by day graphics, chrono of Katrina & New Orleans
>
>>Offers of assistance CAME from Canada and a dozen or more other nations -
>>voluntary OFFERS of assistance.
>
> It is unusual, though not impossible, in diplomacy for offers to be made
> without having first contacted the recipient privately.
>
>
> [CT] Apparently, neither of us, probably Wisner included, then know for
> sure.
>
>>A number of those offers - Venezuela's included - have political overtones
>>not even worthy of discussion.
>
> That sounds like a political diatribe!
> [CT] No, at worse a veiled political statement.
>
> Please provide some evidence,
> including the other examples implied, for this statement.  I am not making
> any claims regarding the motivations or possible sense of humour of Chavez
> and other leaders without significant popularity in DC.  I would request
> verifiable details of what actually happened and why the leaders made such
> offers.
> [CT] Information which I would not have access to.  Given your background,
> have a go and let us know.  My comments are far less threatening and 
> foster
> a better debate it seems than those of Wisner.
>
>>Your last paragraph is outrageous on its face and does little to further
>>the
>>discussion of natural hazards and disasters to which this list is
>>ostensibly
>>dedicated.
>
> The piles of literature on hazards and disasters from fields including but
> not limited to anthropology, geography, sociology, and philosophy strongly
> suggest that politics, inequity, social systems and conditions, poverty,
> ethnicity, and culture amongst other factors strongly influence what 
> happens
>
> before, during, and after natural hazard events and disasters.  While I
> appreciate that some might disagree with Ben Wisner's specific comments, 
> it
> would be a disservice to our field to assume that the issues he raises are
> irrelevant to this discourse.
>
> [CT] My statement did not discount relevance.  There is a polite manner in
> which to propose debate, Wisner's statements hardly followed any 
> reasonably
> acceptable form.
>
> Care to review some other possibilities?
> The response failure - and a failure it was - has a multitude of reasons
> including:
> a) State and Local (city) autonomy. It is sacrosanct or near to it.
> The National Guard cannot enter a jurisdiction before being called up and
> authorized by the local state and municipality.  Don't forget that 
> Louisiana
> Law is not the same as what you may be used to - it is founded on 
> Napoleonic
> Law and that does change things.
> b) Federal resources had started to deploy when the President signed
> emergency declarations for all three states (Louisiana, Mississippi, and
> Alabama).  Some people forget that this storm ravaged more than three 
> states
> and was moving south to north/northeast - the same route, but opposite
> direction, relief was supposed to use to come in to the area.  Do not 
> forget
> the devastation extends far beyond New Orleans both east and north!
> c) Local authority failed abysmally (I would like to see their plans
> if they had comprehensive plans and how much they actually followed
> them....) when communications was lost.  There was no Giuliani in New
> Orleans that day.  The Mayor was impotent at best and demonstrated it 
> quite
> ably on the radio and TV.  Further, the New Orleans PD is well known as 
> "NO
> PD" and "the best that money can buy."  When over 20% (allegedly) of the
> force bailed on Monday that was a crime in its own right.  Loss of
> communications resulted in loss of leadership and command & control.
> d) We live in a free society that endorses (and is proud of) the
> ability of its citizens to exercise free will. Unfortunately, so many of 
> its
> citizens don't understand that with free will come some obligations.  Two
> near-simultaneous disasters in New Orleans proceeded by voluntary and
> mandatory evacuations with some (albeit little) assistance in
> evacuating...hey, they knew where they lived. (If you think I'm personally
> being callous, we lost several houses, but no lives, in this event).
>
> Were there federal delays?  Probably but I expect hindsight will show
> (politics aside) that they were due more to a lack of local reaction (city
> and State) and communication than the willingness or ability of Federal
> resources to deploy.
>