TIA Daily -- September 2, 2005

By Robert Tracinski

It has taken four long days for state and federal officials to figure
out how to deal with the disaster in New Orleans. I can't blame them,
because it has also taken me four long days to figure out what is going
on there. The reason is that the events there make no sense if you think
that we are confronting a natural disaster.

If this is just a natural disaster, the response for public officials is
obvious: you bring in food, water, and doctors; you send transportation
to evacuate refugees to temporary shelters; you send engineers to stop
the flooding and rebuild the city's infrastructure. For journalists,
natural disasters also have a familiar pattern: the heroism of ordinary
people pulling together to survive; the hard work and dedication of
doctors, nurses, and rescue workers; the steps being taken to clean up
and rebuild.

Public officials did not expect that the first thing they would have to
do is to send thousands of armed troops in armored vehicle, as if they
are suppressing an enemy insurgency. And journalists--myself
included--did not expect that the story would not be about rain, wind,
and flooding, but about rape, murder, and looting.

But this is not a natural disaster. It is a man-made disaster.

The man-made disaster is not an inadequate or incompetent response by
federal relief agencies, and it was not directly caused by Hurricane
Katrina. This is where just about every newspaper and television channel
has gotten the story wrong.

The man-made disaster we are now witnessing in New Orleans did not
happen over the past four days. It happened over the past four decades.
Hurricane Katrina merely exposed it to public view.

The man-made disaster is the welfare state.

For the past few days, I have found the news from New Orleans to be
confusing. People were not behaving as you would expect them to behave
in an emergency--indeed; they were not behaving as they have behaved in
other emergencies. That is what has shocked so many people: they have
been saying that this is not what we expect from America. In fact, it is
not even what we expect from a Third World country.
When confronted with a disaster, people usually rise to the occasion.
They work together to rescue people in danger, and they spontaneously
organize to keep order and solve problems. This is especially true in
America. We are an enterprising people, used to relying on our own
initiative rather than waiting around for the government to take care of
us. I have seen this a hundred times, in small examples (a small town
whose main traffic light had gone out, causing ordinary citizens to get
out of their cars and serve as impromptu traffic cops, directing cars
through the intersection) and large ones (the spontaneous response of
New Yorkers to September 11).
So what explains the chaos in New Orleans?

To give you an idea of the magnitude of what is going on, here is a
description from a Washington Times story:
"Storm victims are raped and beaten; fights erupt with flying fists,
knives and guns; fires are breaking out; corpses litter the streets; and
police and rescue helicopters are repeatedly fired on.
"The plea from Mayor C. Ray Nagin came even as National Guardsmen poured
in to restore order and stop the looting, carjackings and gunfire....
"Last night, Gov. Kathleen Babineaux Blanco said 300 Iraq-hardened
Arkansas National Guard members were inside New Orleans with
shoot-to-kill orders.
"'These troops are...under my orders to restore order in the streets,"
she said. "They have M-16s, and they are locked and loaded. These troops
know how to shoot and kill and they are more than willing to do so if
necessary and I expect they will."
The reference to Iraq is eerie. The photo that accompanies this article
shows National Guard troops, with rifles and armored vests, riding on an
armored vehicle through trash-strewn streets lined by a rabble of
squalid, listless people, one of whom appears to be yelling at them. It
looks exactly like a scene from Sadr City in Baghdad.

What explains bands of thugs using a natural disaster as an excuse for
an orgy of looting, armed robbery, and rape? What causes unruly mobs to
storm the very buses that have arrived to evacuate them, causing the
drivers to drive away, frightened for their lives? What causes people to
attack the doctors trying to treat patients at the Super Dome?

Why are people responding to natural destruction by causing further
destruction? Why are they attacking the people who are trying to help
them?

My wife, Sherri, figured it out first, and she figured it out on a
sense-of-life level. While watching the coverage last night on Fox News
Channel, she told me that she was getting a familiar feeling. She
studied architecture at the Illinois Institute of Chicago, which is
located in the South Side of Chicago just blocks away from the Robert
Taylor Homes, one of the largest high-rise public housing projects in
America. "The projects," as they were known, were infamous for
uncontrollable crime and irremediable squalor. (They have since,
mercifully, been demolished.)

What Sherri was getting from last night's television coverage was a
whiff of the sense of life of "the projects." Then the "crawl"--the
informational phrases flashed at the bottom of the screen on most news
channels--gave some vital statistics to confirm this sense: 75% of the
residents of New Orleans had already evacuated before the hurricane, and
of the 300,000 or so who remained, a large number were from the city's
public housing projects. Jack Wakeland then gave me an additional,
crucial fact: early reports from CNN and Fox indicated that the city had
no plan for evacuating all of the prisoners in the city's jails--so they
just let many of them loose. There is no doubt a significant overlap
between these two populations--that is, a large number of people in the
jails used to live in the housing projects, and vice versa.

There were many decent, innocent people trapped in New Orleans when the
deluge hit--but they were trapped alongside large numbers of people from
two groups: criminals--and wards of the welfare state, people selected,
over decades, for their lack of initiative and self-induced
helplessness. The welfare wards were a mass of sheep--on whom the
incompetent administration of New Orleans unleashed a pack of wolves.

All of this is related, incidentally, to the apparent incompetence of
the city government, which failed to plan for a total evacuation of the
city, despite the knowledge that this might be necessary. But in a city
corrupted by the welfare state, the job of city officials is to ensure
the flow of handouts to welfare recipients and patronage to political
supporters--not to ensure a lawful, orderly evacuation in case of
emergency.

No one has really reported this story, as far as I can tell. In fact,
some are already actively distorting it, blaming President Bush, for
example, for failing to personally ensure that the Mayor of New Orleans
had drafted an adequate evacuation plan. The worst example is an
execrable piece from the Toronto Globe and Mail, by a supercilious
Canadian who blames the chaos on American "individualism." But the truth
is precisely the opposite: the chaos was caused by a system that was the
exact opposite of individualism.

What Hurricane Katrina exposed was the psychological consequences of the
welfare state. What we consider "normal" behavior in an emergency is
behavior that is normal for people who have values and take the
responsibility to pursue and protect them. People with values respond to
a disaster by fighting against it and doing whatever it takes to
overcome the difficulties they face. They don't sit around and complain
that the government hasn't taken care of them. They don't use the chaos
of a disaster as an opportunity to prey on their fellow men.

But what about criminals and welfare parasites? Do they worry about
saving their houses and property? They don't, because they don't own
anything. Do they worry about what is going to happen to their
businesses or how they are going to make a living? They never worried
about those things before. Do they worry about crime and looting? But
living off of stolen wealth is a way of life for them.

The welfare state--and the brutish, uncivilized mentality it sustains
and encourages--is the man-made disaster that explains the moral
ugliness that has swamped New Orleans. And that is the story that no one
is reporting.

"TNT" wrote in message
...
TIA Daily -- September 2, 2005

By Robert Tracinski

Do you know, that was the most "apt" and "reasonable" piece i have read
about the situation down in NO. I know there are some poor hapless people
who had no means to evacuate the city when the warnings came and some
probably just didnt believe it was going to be as severe as it was but my
god, do these people need to have everything spelled out in black and white
to warn them whats going to happen and need to be shown the best course of
action. The intelligent people got out. The "criminal" element could have
stolen cars and quite easily driven their familys out of danger.

The way a civilised society pulls together as you explained is true and cant
be blamed on anything else to pass the buck. Civilised people in times of
crisis pull together and help out anyone no matter what their race or creed.
There is absolutely NO JUSTIFICATION for the terrible things that are
happening to people in NO. A terrible situation made 100 times worse by the
scumbag criminal element and the apathy of some people who expect everything
to be done for them.

One thing suprises me though. Why was New Orleans built on land that was
under sea level?? Did no-one stop to think maybe it wasnt the best place to
build a sprawling city... The size the USA is surely there were much more
sensible places to build on. The land could have possibly been used for
farming or the like, where a natural"ish" disaster like this wouldnt have
had the devistating effect it has.. maybe theres a reason im not aware of
but would love to know the reason why...

Still as they say, hindsight is a very handy tool

The Magnum wrote:
"TNT" wrote in message
...

TIA Daily -- September 2, 2005

By Robert Tracinski


Do you know, that was the most "apt" and "reasonable" piece i have read
about the situation down in NO. I know there are some poor hapless people
who had no means to evacuate the city when the warnings came and some
probably just didnt believe it was going to be as severe as it was but my
god, do these people need to have everything spelled out in black and white
to warn them whats going to happen and need to be shown the best course of
action. The intelligent people got out. The "criminal" element could have
stolen cars and quite easily driven their familys out of danger.

after numerous car jackings i guess the pricks realized they could'nt
get anywhere with the streets being flooded.

The way a civilised society pulls together as you explained is true and cant
be blamed on anything else to pass the buck. Civilised people in times of
crisis pull together and help out anyone no matter what their race or creed.
There is absolutely NO JUSTIFICATION for the terrible things that are
happening to people in NO. A terrible situation made 100 times worse by the
scumbag criminal element and the apathy of some people who expect everything
to be done for them.

One thing suprises me though. Why was New Orleans built on land that was
under sea level?? Did no-one stop to think maybe it wasnt the best place to
build a sprawling city... The size the USA is surely there were much more
sensible places to build on. The land could have possibly been used for
farming or the like, where a natural"ish" disaster like this wouldnt have
had the devistating effect it has.. maybe theres a reason im not aware of
but would love to know the reason why...

think about it, where would a government put an export/import port on
the biggest river in north america but at its mouth.

Still as they say, hindsight is a very handy tool


NO isn't going to die. after the government pours in countless millions
and the army corp of enginnering does its thing the city will be better
off. that is if the corrupt city admin is booted...

"The Magnum" wrote in message
...

"TNT" wrote in message
...
TIA Daily -- September 2, 2005

By Robert Tracinski

Do you know, that was the most "apt" and "reasonable" piece i have read
about the situation down in NO. I know there are some poor hapless people
who had no means to evacuate the city when the warnings came and some
probably just didnt believe it was going to be as severe as it was but my
god, do these people need to have everything spelled out in black and
white
to warn them whats going to happen and need to be shown the best course of
action. The intelligent people got out. The "criminal" element could have
stolen cars and quite easily driven their familys out of danger.

The way a civilised society pulls together as you explained is true and
cant
be blamed on anything else to pass the buck. Civilised people in times of
crisis pull together and help out anyone no matter what their race or
creed.
There is absolutely NO JUSTIFICATION for the terrible things that are
happening to people in NO. A terrible situation made 100 times worse by
the
scumbag criminal element and the apathy of some people who expect
everything
to be done for them.

One thing suprises me though. Why was New Orleans built on land that was
under sea level?? Did no-one stop to think maybe it wasnt the best place
to
build a sprawling city... The size the USA is surely there were much more
sensible places to build on. The land could have possibly been used for
farming or the like, where a natural"ish" disaster like this wouldnt have
had the devistating effect it has.. maybe theres a reason im not aware of
but would love to know the reason why...

Still as they say, hindsight is a very handy tool



New Orleans was not built below sea level. Over the years, due to
subsidence, it sank below sea level. Many other major cities around the
world are now in the same or very similar situations. When you pump water
and hydrocarbons from beneath you, what do you expect to happen? Duh!

One thing suprises me though. Why was New Orleans built on land that was
under sea level?? Did no-one stop to think maybe it wasnt the best place
to
build a sprawling city... The size the USA is surely there were much
more
sensible places to build on. The land could have possibly been used for
farming or the like, where a natural"ish" disaster like this wouldnt
have
had the devistating effect it has.. maybe theres a reason im not aware
of
but would love to know the reason why...

Still as they say, hindsight is a very handy tool



New Orleans was not built below sea level. Over the years, due to
subsidence, it sank below sea level. Many other major cities around the
world are now in the same or very similar situations. When you pump water
and hydrocarbons from beneath you, what do you expect to happen? Duh!



I fail to see where the Duh comes from. You think it was a silly question? I
asked to find out why as i dont know. So your saying New Orleans has pumping
stations sucking out natural resources from beneath the city are you? I
havnt a clue as i dont live there so i ask the question as we have been told
on numerous occasions from the News that NO is below sea level.
Besides which i thought, and i maybe wrong, that when oil was pumped out of
the wells in the oil fields its replaced by sea water not just left empty.
Also id find it absolutely amazing if a city the size of NO has suddenly
sunk over the past 100 yrs or so with the theory you propose. Or are you one
of these people who go on about the ozone layer and we'll all be underwater
in the next 200 yrs as the ice caps will melt due to global warming.....
What a load of old b$%%$cks that is. I do agree though that we need to find
new sources of energy as our natural supplies can only last a finite time
before anyone chucks that comment in.

When New Orleans was "established" it wasn't below sea level. A
lot of the present day city was built below sea level. Some engineer
had the bright idea of pumping it out to extend the size of the city.
Yes, New Orleans has sunk over the past 100 or so years, along with
the levees.
Check out this USGS document:

http://dels.nas.edu/dr/docs/burkett.pdf

I see this as a college student type document to try to explain what might
happen with predicted change in patterns caused by global warming etc. Ive
seen all sorts of "expert" predictions and possible results many times and
they all seemed to have valid background theory but in reality.. like most
things on paper looked good but with no REAL SOLID proof figures, statistics
and charts can be made to say anything. The figure of 9mm subsidence per
year equates to 90cm over 100 years, or 3ft. Naff all really. I think its
more along your suggested second part where you say they pumped out the
water to expand the city then expanding it under sea level rather than the
whole place subsiding under sea level since being made. . I will do a bit
more investigating on this as its caught my imagination now and it might be
interesting to study it.
Many thanks,
Graham

The Magnum wrote:

One thing suprises me though. Why was New Orleans built on land that was
under sea level?? Did no-one stop to think maybe it wasnt the best place
to
build a sprawling city... The size the USA is surely there were much

more

sensible places to build on. The land could have possibly been used for
farming or the like, where a natural"ish" disaster like this wouldnt

have

had the devistating effect it has.. maybe theres a reason im not aware

of

but would love to know the reason why...

Still as they say, hindsight is a very handy tool



New Orleans was not built below sea level. Over the years, due to
subsidence, it sank below sea level. Many other major cities around the
world are now in the same or very similar situations. When you pump water
and hydrocarbons from beneath you, what do you expect to happen? Duh!




I fail to see where the Duh comes from. You think it was a silly question? I
asked to find out why as i dont know. So your saying New Orleans has pumping
stations sucking out natural resources from beneath the city are you? I
havnt a clue as i dont live there so i ask the question as we have been told
on numerous occasions from the News that NO is below sea level.
Besides which i thought, and i maybe wrong, that when oil was pumped out of
the wells in the oil fields its replaced by sea water not just left empty.
Also id find it absolutely amazing if a city the size of NO has suddenly
sunk over the past 100 yrs or so with the theory you propose. Or are you one
of these people who go on about the ozone layer and we'll all be underwater
in the next 200 yrs as the ice caps will melt due to global warming.....
What a load of old b$%%$cks that is. I do agree though that we need to find
new sources of energy as our natural supplies can only last a finite time
before anyone chucks that comment in.


its amazing that people dont realize what hydrocarbons and other
chemicals are doing to the atmosphere. the industrial revolution in the
uk caused cities (birmingham for example) to become black with soot.
since then how many millions of tons of particulates have been expended
and people believe it has no effect? the adirondack park north of me has
many lakes devoid of fish due to the acid rain from the midwest coal
firing plants. c'mon graham, fossil fuels like the iron maiden will come
and go. good riddance.

From: (The=A0Magnum)
When New Orleans was "established" it

wasn't below sea level. A

lot of the present day city was built below sea

level. =A0 Some engineer had the bright idea of

pumping it out to extend the size of the city.

Yes, New Orleans has sunk over the past 100

or so years, along with the levees.
=A0
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0Check out this USGS document:

http://dels.nas.edu/dr/docs/burkett.pdf

(I see this as a college student type document to try to explain what
might happen with predicted change in patterns caused by global warming
etc. Ive seen all sorts of "expert" predictions and possible results
many times and they all seemed to have valid background theory but in
reality.. like most things on paper looked good but with no REAL SOLID
proof figures, statistics and charts can be made to say anything. The
figure of 9mm subsidence per year equates to 90cm over 100 years, or
3ft. )

-
I concur with the above poster regarding the provided text. Glaciers
melt faster than that.

"I AmnotGeorgeBush" wrote in message
...
From: (The Magnum)
When New Orleans was "established" it

wasn't below sea level. A

lot of the present day city was built below sea

level. Some engineer had the bright idea of

pumping it out to extend the size of the city.

Yes, New Orleans has sunk over the past 100

or so years, along with the levees.

Check out this USGS document:

http://dels.nas.edu/dr/docs/burkett.pdf

(I see this as a college student type document to try to explain what
might happen with predicted change in patterns caused by global warming
etc. Ive seen all sorts of "expert" predictions and possible results
many times and they all seemed to have valid background theory but in
reality.. like most things on paper looked good but with no REAL SOLID
proof figures, statistics and charts can be made to say anything. The
figure of 9mm subsidence per year equates to 90cm over 100 years, or
3ft. )

-
I concur with the above poster regarding the provided text. Glaciers
melt faster than that.

Looking on a few sites so far i have concluded that the original part of NO
was built above sea level whereas as it was expanded they drained out the
water after building levies so it was under sea level when built.. It
averages between 12ft above to a couple of feet below on the whole.. unless
the site i was looking at was wrong.
The thing is that studies into possible future events are just that..
studies to what might happen, often depicting the worst case scenario. You
should have seen the" Cable and Wireless experts" carefully worked out
growth of the internet. The one that made them decide to drop Hong Kong
Telecom and go with an offshore net provider... the shares were at £15 each
and after the net crash in growth (although it is rising but nothing like
these "experts" predictions) they are now worth around £1.50. So much for
the experts growth predictions there... and this was a global thing.
Governments do all kinds of surveys and projections to how things might go
and a lot of them its a great way to raise revenues whereas no one knows the
real possible outcome until it happens and then of coure its too late. Its
like the Asian Bird flu and Mad cow disease. Only a very few people have
died of so called related symptoms. Like in the 70's for us it was Rabies
coming across from europe. How many people have died from rabies?? Now
compair those figures with people who have died with drink related problems
or cancer through smoking... yet theres nothing really done to stop these
things because its a huge money maker in taxes for the government. They put
up taxes saying its to persuede many of us to give up as its too expensive..
what a load of cobblers... they put the tax there because they know they can
make a mint out of it, like alcohol tax, even car tax. They sneakily shoved
an extra £5 on it per 6 months saying it was to help out with greenhouse
gasses... complete lies.
I live on the east coast of the UK and from when i was a kid the sea level
hasnt risen at all. Surely it would have as its the North sea and were
talking about 40 years.. some predictions ive seen say it could happen in
our lifetime... yea right...
Has anyone actually stopped to consider the hole in the Ozone layer is
actually naturally occuring and if it wasnt there we would be all stifled? A
lot of the different weather conditions people are saying "it was never like
this when i was a lad" are probably forgetting what it was really like.
On the odd occasion things are going to combine to cause "freak" conditions
which do look bad. In 1953 my town was flooded and people lost their lives..
they said then it was caused by the rising sea and glaciers melting so on...
it wasnt.. it was caused by tidal conditions caused by a high moon and a
storm which hapened at the same time. Its never flooded since...
Anyways... dont be alarmed and sleep well tonight )

"jim" wrote in message
...
The Magnum wrote:

One thing suprises me though. Why was New Orleans built on land that
was
under sea level?? Did no-one stop to think maybe it wasnt the best
place
to
build a sprawling city... The size the USA is surely there were much

more

sensible places to build on. The land could have possibly been used for
farming or the like, where a natural"ish" disaster like this wouldnt

have

had the devistating effect it has.. maybe theres a reason im not aware

of

but would love to know the reason why...

Still as they say, hindsight is a very handy tool



New Orleans was not built below sea level. Over the years, due to
subsidence, it sank below sea level. Many other major cities around the
world are now in the same or very similar situations. When you pump
water
and hydrocarbons from beneath you, what do you expect to happen? Duh!




I fail to see where the Duh comes from. You think it was a silly
question? I
asked to find out why as i dont know. So your saying New Orleans has
pumping
stations sucking out natural resources from beneath the city are you? I
havnt a clue as i dont live there so i ask the question as we have been
told
on numerous occasions from the News that NO is below sea level.
Besides which i thought, and i maybe wrong, that when oil was pumped out
of
the wells in the oil fields its replaced by sea water not just left
empty.
Also id find it absolutely amazing if a city the size of NO has suddenly
sunk over the past 100 yrs or so with the theory you propose. Or are you
one
of these people who go on about the ozone layer and we'll all be
underwater
in the next 200 yrs as the ice caps will melt due to global warming.....
What a load of old b$%%$cks that is. I do agree though that we need to
find
new sources of energy as our natural supplies can only last a finite
time
before anyone chucks that comment in.


its amazing that people dont realize what hydrocarbons and other
chemicals are doing to the atmosphere. the industrial revolution in the
uk caused cities (birmingham for example) to become black with soot.
since then how many millions of tons of particulates have been expended
and people believe it has no effect? the adirondack park north of me has
many lakes devoid of fish due to the acid rain from the midwest coal
firing plants. c'mon graham, fossil fuels like the iron maiden will come
and go. good riddance.

Fossil fuels will go, i agree. Im all for nucular power if theres a way it
can be handled safely. At the moment i still think were in our infancy but
because of "do gooders" continually bleating about its possible effects the
research done on it isnt sufficiant. We all know the natural fuels like coal
and oil will run out. My arguement is about this irreversable global effect
everyone goes on about with doom and gloom. Many cities were inundated with
smog and industruial plants managed by money making companys will always
happen but will recover. Think about all the crap that was thrown about in
Prehistoric times and our planet recovered. In fact it recovered perfectly
well.
Remember the long hot summer of 76.... in the UK it was so hot for weeks it
was amazing... Apart from the odd day here and there its never repeated
itself.
The other disbelief i had was when the guy earlier said New Orleans sank
under sea level due to continual pumping.... i dont believe that for a
minute.
Nice to discuss this in a civilised way though..
Good on you Jim