On Mon, 2005-09-05 at 21:53 -0700, Dave Laird wrote: > Good evening, Bill... > > Since some of the message(s) you have quoted were from other folks, I'm > going to be somewhat selective about what I quote back to you in this > message.
Works for me. > Bill Anderson wrote: > > > Yup his what, 200 year old home is now a slab. Why do I suspect you and > > I will be paying for at least some of it's reconstruction? > > You mean Trent Lott's family are among the homeless of New Orleans, and > are now on the dole for bottled water and K-Rats? <GASP> Do you think they > had insurance? Nah, I'm sure he's got one or two more houses somewhere. ;) > >> I just judge the people by their actions. At one point the ratio of press > >> conferences to on-site visits were running at 6-to-1, based upon CNN's > >> coverage. That is why so many of the statements being made by the > >> bureaucrats weren't even close to being in line with the harsh facts. As > >> of this morning, it is the FIRST time in six days that anyone at the FEMA > >> level even knew that there were thousands of starving people huddled at > >> the Convention Center. > > > > Funny, I heard FEMA people talking about it and mentioning it in the > > early days. > > I thought they were talking about the people at the Super Dome, not the > Convention Center. I thought they were/are the same place? > > >> Yesterday was the first time that helicopter > >> transportation was being provided for nursing home and hospital patients, > >> some of whom had been without food or water for FIVE days. > > > > Funny, I saw this going on as well during the early days. I even saw > > complaints about the choppers not getting back to them. > > This one I am certain of, because a radio ham living outside Baton Rouge > whose house was still intact and managed to get a generator and a > temporary radio mast working was talking about trying to get help for the > nursing home in Baton Rouge at day five. He finally managed to reach > someone in Cleveland, OH who relayed his message onward to FEMA and last > Thursday morning he reported two helicopters had delivered food, water and > were taking out the critically-ill patients. While that may be to one specific one, to claim that base don this one event none of this was happening is folly. > > >> NO. Most of those who stayed behind were *unable* to escape for a variety > >> of reasons. True, a certain percentage of those who stayed behind CHOSE > >> their options, but the vast majority, including hospital patients, > >> nursing home patients and others incapable of exercising any options, > >> were capable of choosing a way out. > > > > I remember the press interviews and reports from before it hit. That > > percentage is quite high. > > Based upon Camille, yes, the percentage of those unable to flee was very > high, indeed. As of tonight, CNN is reporting they are housing over > 100,000 people being housed in Houston, alone. Holy crap, that is a lot of > people when they show up for breakfast! Uhhh yeah. "Who ordered the ham and eggs?" > > >> So much for the vast planning capabilities of Homeland Security. > > > > Heheh, no kidding. However, that isn't their job. Remember they are just > > "to coordinate". ;) DHS does not and should not have anything to do with > > natural disaster recovery. The missions are entirely distinct and trying > > to combine them is a sure way to abysmal failure. Indeed my first > > reaction to reports from local DHS bureaucrats was "WTF is he talking > > about?!". It ain't their job, nor should it be. > > Well, what would have happened *differently* if this had been a terrorist > attack, rather than an act of nature? Would we be seeing anything > different if terrorists were able to level a major area the size of the > hurricane path? Yes. Think of what it would take to produce this level of devastation. First, I'd expect zero warning. Second I'd expect shedloads of radiation (to put it mildly). Quite possibly one or more EMP bursts knocking out communication. But none of those prevent basic vehicle movement. You can still drive in rad-hardened and sheltered vehicles to restore communications. Those within the blast/detonation radius would likely be flat out dead to start with. Alternatively consider biological release on such a scale. Assume for the moment it was effective. Again, this does not obliterate the ability to fly in, drive in, and truck in supplies, manpower, and equipment. The key to this whole scenario we've seen unfolding is the floods. it is the deciding factor. That and the people shooting at rescuers. But mainly the water. IMO to expect the HDS to be prepared for that (storm/massive flood) is just wrong. One woudl hope FEMA might stand a chance, but then again FEMA is about organizing a response, not maintaining the assets. It is one of my biggest gripes about FEMA. IMO FEMA is bad for the country and it has nothing to do with liberty. FEMA provides a false sense of security on a major scale. FEMA will do this FEMA will do that, after all that is what it is for. Quite frankly, no it is not. FEMA is a bureaucracy at the highest order. It has never been about actual emergency assets. it has been about making people feel they are secure. In many ways, FEMA is a mini-UN on the disaster front. > > Remember, the guard is not a naval force. They are not prepped for > > floods such as this. On coastal areas the primary point of relief is the > > Coast Guard. And they did splendidly with what they had. Overloading the > > Guard with two primary responsibilities is a recipe for failure in both. > > Yes, but the USCG did an INCREDIBLE job of rallying their forces and > providing aid to those in danger. Damned straight they did! But that is what they are designed for. That is what they practice and do every day. > Add to that, they also did a pretty > nifty trick of creating their own communications network using two Coast > Guard cutters they parked off Biloxi's coast and deploying temporary > transmitters and relays inland. My god, I could hear them loud and clear > (late nights only) right here in the Pacific Northwest from day two. Yup, unlike Army commo, Coast Guard has equipment designed for long range and has more power at their disposal. > > Apples and orangutans. 9/11's inability to intercommunicate was > > mismatched (*cough*proprietary*cough*) equipment protocols. In this > > Oh, you mean the Motorola equipment versus the rest of the pack? <evil > grin> Hehehe what, me say anything? Never! I was actually part of interoperation exercises in TX for the SINCGARS communication set. > > event it was the loss of the equipment and the infrastructure that lead > > to the loss of communications. We both know the government can only work > > on one such change at a time. Even then, what do you do when your radio > > doesn't work? > > Dig my "spare" out of the basement? The basement under 12 feet of water? > > They did have an aircraft carrier group just outside of the area. There > > are shall we say, a few resources to be had there? This is one of the > > reasons I argue for a small to nonexistent ground force consisting of > > primarily Marines, no Air Force whatsoever, and a Navy with perhaps > > double the carrier fleet. Carrier groups are truly impressive. > > You just said a mouthful! Once the Navy arrived in-theater outside Biloxi > all kinds of things just suddenly started working again, including the big > maritime transmitters at the base of the Mississippi that everyone, > including river pilots, ships at sea and even little fish rely upon for > their navigation. I've personally *seen* those big transmitters. Getting > them functional (probably with replacement antennas) is an incredible feat. I've never failed to be impressed by Carrier groups. Not only are they terribly effective and powerful, they are just damned cool. > > *LOCAL* agencies and the ACE, sure. And they've been requesting it since > > *1965*. How exactly can you fault the current or even the previous > > administration for that? > > I'm an equal fault kinda guy. I fault ALL the agencies who had knowledge > of these predictive reports and either did nothing or chose to ignore them > entirely. Of course, I don't have much use for bureaucracy anyway. What about those who could not do anything despite knowing? > > Excellent, several days later power is restored to some places. While I > > applaud the upgrading of that part of the infrastructure, I also must > > note that it is a far less daunting and challenging, not to mention > > costly, undertaking than the levee and flood control ones. > > <sigh> Yes, I have looked at the levee systems in the past of my life and > wondered just how well they would hold up in a Cat-4 direct hit from a > hurricane. I guess I've got my answer now. Of course, I once asked the > same question about the Cities of Brownsville and Galveston, as they both > have extensive histories of major hurricane disasters. I suspect, although > I don't really KNOW, that were a direct hit of a Cat-5 hurricane hit > Galveston head-on, we might see the same results as we did in New Orleans > and Biloxi. For Galveston, I suspect not given what I've learned about Galveston. That said, TX is prepared for that event to happen ...again. As my other post notes, the levees actually weathered the storm, it was the secondary surge from the lake that took out the flood walls in the shipping canals. > > Ah the wonders of private companies who depend on these things. ;) > > Actually, they are well ahead of even my predictions as far as being back > online. Utterly and completely amazing to me, but they have managed to get > *some* of the infrastructure functional in less than 7 days. Amazing what you can do w/o the bureaucracy and with a capitalist need to get stuff done, ain't it. ;) > > > I've actually been quite suprised by the talk of many in the area > > (officials, people and reporters) who are questioning the sanity of > > doing so. That it is even being discussed is progress IMO. > > You mean I will have to travel to Houston to eat REAL home-cooked Cajun > Gumbo next year? GOD, I loathe Houston! 8-) yeah pretty much. :) > >> You mean we should dump FEMA? > > > > HELL YEAH! > > If nothing else it'd make my wife happy as I'd finally quit griping and > > bitching about FEMA. :) > > [ROARING with laughter!] Mine too. :) > > Some will think that harsh, and some will disagree. But nonetheless it > > is my position and I stand by it. > > Well, once I examined your position VERY closely, I must admit you have a > valid point, even within the confines of the Libertarian philosophy, as I > understand it. Thank you, it's good to hear that from someone who analyzed it. > Hospitals, for the most part, are private entities, albeit > sustained by federal and state stipends, no? They should therefore be > privately responsible for creating and maintaining a cogent, carefully > thought-out emergency plan well in advance of it arriving. They, not the > government, should be responsible for being prepared. > Yup. Even if they were a government entity, all local establishments of such size should have their own plans. We've gotten lazy since the fall of the Berlin Wall though. > > > HAH! :D Probably. Dammit I should have known he had a hand in this. I > > bet he really had his house secretly moved by the Prometheus just before > > Katrina hit. ;) > > Yeah, sure. ;-) > > > I take it Slidell is not underwater, and thus not below sea level to an > > appreciable degree? > > No, Slidell WAS under water after the storm. However, unlike New Orleans, > they are above sea level, and thus dried out pretty quickly. Another > factor that played an important role is that MOST modern buildings are > required to refit to what they call the Category 4 Hurricane building > codes. Another factor is multiple redundancy in core functions, such as > how the electrical grid is designed. Slidell is really a pretty impressive > city when it comes to preparedness, despite the fact that 60% of the > residences in town are simply not there anymore. Impressive indeed. > >> Wait a minute here... You mean to suggest that people shouldn't rebuild > >> their homes in Tornado Alley? Now let's see here <Dave scratches his head > >> in frustration>, just how are we going to quantify what is and is not > >> tornado alley? Remember, I've lived there. <grin> > > > > I didn't know that, but pretty much, sort of. If they want to pay for > > it, let them rebuild. But I shouldn't have to. :D > > Ah, I see your point. FWIW, I moved OUT of the Midwest largely because of > a CAT-4 tornado that tore up a piece of the real estate right down the > street from where I lived. We had a CAT-3 that had just torn up my > friend's farm, where he had less than 3 minutes' warning, which is one of > the reasons I became a Storm Chaser for quite a few years. However, NEXRAD > radar, not Storm Chasers, really has made a difference in predicting > tornado paths and severity. We have something in common! I was a tornado chaser for a while in Pocatello. But you likely saw more real storms. ;) > > "What about the poor <insert minority> who can't afford the cost of > > flood insurance, you racist bastard?". > > Well, I don't squall too loudly at the rising cost of welfare in this > great nation. We might as well give them free flood insurance and let them > rebuild homes along the levees, no? (seriously ducking) No (seriously swinging) ;) > >> > [Side note: the French quarter will likely be the first rebuilt. > >> > Why?It's flooding was far, far less than the rest. Why? You guessed it, > >> > it's mainly above sea level.] > >> > >> Huh? The French Quarter is *below* sea level, I believe. Maybe I'm wrong. > > > > According to the reports and images, it isn't. Indeed one report on the > > potential looming rebuild has it that the FQ may become much of if not > > the new center of NO. > > The OTHER side of the coin is that one of the FIRST priorities in Biloxi > is the rebuilding of the floating gambling casinos. WHY? The justification > I've heard from everyone, from the Governor downward, is that the gambling > casinos generate so much tax revenue for the entire state. Of all the > justifications I've heard, this one takes the book! Well that jives with the NO Mayor after Kat was declared a Cat4 or so talking about how this will impact the oil industry and that the rest of us really need to think about that! > > Well, it's pretty damned cool IMO. I know I've posted on it here before > > (I tend to proselytize E85 ;) ). Basically, E85 is 85% ethanol, 15 > > percent petrogasoline. The ethanol we are using is locally produced from > > "potato waste". The remaining 15% is from domestic oil (which BTW is > > supplied by refineries in the Utah and GC area -and the Utah ones are > > down for maintenance- so in that respect it hits the Treasure Valley). > > I just tried some E85 purchased at a Cenex dealer here in Eastern > Washington, and although I did notice a little bit of "pinging" from my > fuel-injected turbocharged van, I felt a little less pain at the pump. I > also understand that there are certain tuning specifications for my van > which may help with the pinging, but even so, I got 18 MPG overall, so I'm > fairly happy. Thanks for the tip! I dunno I'd run it much unless it was made for it. Gas lines and tuning are the main thing. > > > That said, I did love the video of the natural gas fire boiling and > > bursting out from the floodwaters. That was just too cool. :) > > Yes, that was quite a hoot, indeed! Made me appreciate rewind even more. ;) My wife was saying "See if they had a boat and some pans they could be boiling water". Man I love her. > > Well, enough for now - got some coding to do. > > Well, it's time for the bed if I stand a chance of getting up in time for > tomorrow morning. 8-) Sleep well. Cheers, Bill _______________________________________________ Libnw mailing list Libnw@immosys.com List info and subscriber options: http://immosys.com/mailman/listinfo/libnw Archives: http://immosys.com/mailman//pipermail/libnw
