Katrina Disaster

[shereads]

Doc, before replying to this, I reread the article carefully. At no point, does the author mention race, That I can see.

By calling it racist, you are making your own inference on his intention, based on your own assumptions.

I believe Coture pointed out he's a randyn. Rynd's objectivism is not inherently racist. In fact, some psychologists speculate her view demanding objective measures and rational thought and action are a direct backlash to the anti-semitism she witnessed as a child.

The object of his scorn isn't a race, nor even a class, nor even people really. He is taking this opportuinty to lash out at one of Ryndist's favorite bogie men, a welfare state. He dosen't blame people, he blames a government policy. One he violently disagrees with.

You're casting it as racist, because your working assumptions on the basics of life don't follow his. It strikes a chord with folks of my parent's generation, because it is attacking something they can't fathom, not working when you are able.

It seems odd to me, that you just don't seem to be willing to even question what assumptions lead to this article. You are just painting your own inferences over it and going on. We're using the same words, but we aren't speaking the same language.

You're ripping the article. I'm trying to say left & right can't seem to find common ground because we aren't working from the same assumptions. If we continue to demonize one another because we don't reach conclusions the other finds reasonable, it may well be because we start from vantage points and use points of reference we think of as universal, when in fact, they are assumptions that have as much to do with upbringing as they do with their universiality or truthfulness.

Am I failing utterly to get the point I am trying to make across?

Speaking just for myself, the assumption of racism comes from his assuming that the group of people involved are representative of the welfare state. Maybe he has a list of who they are and how many are on the welfare rolls.

If he doesn't, then he knows what I know about the evacuees: Most of them are black. A few of them were violent. A lot of them didn't make it through the week.

Where is the evidence that they are on welfare?

 

[rgraham666]

Colleen, I never felt more dependent in my life than when I was working.

I knew I was being watched every second to see if I fucked up. And the people with the power to make my life miserable were a lot closer than they are now.

I was dependent on those people for my job and my future. And my experience was that the things I would be judged on, my social skills, my sartorial ability, my courtly manner, are the things I was least good at. My ability to get the job done was relegated to secondary status.

I feel a lot less dependent on disability. The people in charge of that are so distant from my life that we rarely interact. I find this much more comfortable than the working world.

I'm afraid that I find one of our society's most common understandings, that there is a direct relationship between hard work and success, financial, emotional and spiritual, to be a rather large, stinky pile of horseshit.

It isn't dependency that keeps people on welfare from moving on, but lack of hope.

 

[Pure]

tracinsky is

{note to Colly, at end}

a near clone of our friend amicus, 'cept Tracinski knows that objective arguments support a woman's right to choose.

TIA {The Intellectual Activist], where he(T) published, is a periodical he edits as an 'objectivist'; the periodical, at one time, had Rand's blessing.

There is more than a grain of truth in the article, as a descriptive level: housing projects do not bring out the best in people; many welfare schemes are self perpetuating. Of course his conclusion is wrong (do less, forget them); there are functioning 'unemployment schemes' that actual do re train and re assign (in Europe).

Tracinsky: 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 incompetence of the city
government, which failed to plan for a total evacuation of the city,
despite the knowledge that this might be necessary. 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.

Aside from the usual 'blame the victim' is the rather stupendous claim that the city was 'corrupted by the welfare state.' It's pretty commonly known that the poor states have the least 'welfare safety net.' So LA, like MISS, is undoubtedly among the stingiest in welfare.

On a factual basis, then, Tracinski is quite mixed up. IF welfare corrupts, the people of the Old South should be the least corrupted. He is making the case that LA is among the most corrupt. Probably it is, but that's just rampant greed, cronyism, graft-- the stuff of American politics. In effect, it's a kind of amicus/Rand 'free market', where buying and selling are not controlled, hence, say, buying a police department is just like any other sale.

But we can ask a similar question to T: Why the outlawry in NO, that is not, apparently, in MISS. Why the firing on medical helicopters.

People being poor, or formerly in jail does not seem to account for this.

It makes me think of Watts (iirc) where firemen were not safe. It makes me think of Somalia, as in Black Hawk down. Essentially there is reversion to 'law of the jungle' and competing gangs and local (would be) crimelords (warlords, as they were called in Somalia).

So I say, one fires on 'aid' persons and planes because they are not in ones control, and, they are likely aiding those without clear allegiance (to the gang in question). A gang wants control of the resources: in Somalia and Miss, the food. They are doled out first to the gang soldiers, then to supportive civilians.

The other factor, imo, is the 'nothing to lose' syndrome; blind hatred of the 'white state' by those utterly dispossessed and being left to die.

PS to Colly:
I actually do not think that many Mississippians, in the final analysis, agree with Tracinski. I'd suppose belief in 'charity' (doing something helpful), even 'Christian charity' are not uncommon. The Randian concept of a godless world where there is a 'virtue of selfishness' does not seem like Red State thinking. There is an overlap is the 'low tax', minimal goverment area--as a popular set of beliefs. But I think the average Mississippian is not averse to churches playing a role in supporting the poor in an emergency.

 

[SlickTony]

First, they didn't leave; then, they couldn't.

Many of the people who didn't leave couldn't because they didn't have any transportation. New Orleans was the only city in the south that had any mass transit worth speaking of; of course the buses and trolleys wouldn't get you out of town, but they did enable people to lead a car-free existence, which you really can't do in Houston or Jacksonville. There were no arrangements in place to move mass quantities of people out of town who didn't have any means of their own.

Many of the ones who are refusing to leave now are refusing because of pets. Nobody who's being evacuated can take even a toy dog or a small cat. This is fucked. If evacuees are allowed to take their animals, that'll mean somewhat fewer sick, feral animals that will have to be killed.

Here is a story about a couple of EMTs who went down there to help and encountered appalling treatment at the hands of local authorities--and the so-called law enforcement in neighboring communities. The person who found this story and posted it in my other forum suggested that it should be disseminated as widely as possible.

 

[Pure]

Hey Slick

That is one helluv'an article. Essentially non political (left v right) but getting to the core of what I called, in the posting above yours, the 'warlord' problem.

Of course, unlike Tracinski, the authors have no interest in blaming victims, and are quite capable of seeing the best in people, and their extreme responses to wacky situations like those of the article.

Thanks, ST

 

[sophia jane]

Here is a story about a couple of EMTs who went down there to help and encountered appalling treatment at the hands of local authorities--and the so-called law enforcement in neighboring communities. The person who found this story and posted it in my other forum suggested that it should be disseminated as widely as possible.

Thanks for this. A very enlightening article. Also very very sad.

 

[davidwatts]

You see what you expect to see

So many people looking at the same event and witnessing the same things yet in the end, you see exactly what you expected to see.

If you expected to see a failed administration running a disaster of a rescue and recovery mission, that's what you saw.

If you expected to see a mob of people who have lived their lives being taken care of by the government act like animals when the shit hit the fan, that's what you saw.

I certainly haven't read all the threads, but I haven't read anyone saying they were shocked at what they saw from any of the players. Does this mean that we all had everything figured out right from the start, or have we all become so strident and set in our opinions that we only see what's in our own fancy?

Certainly not pointing fingers, just wondering...

 

[Guest]

I had no prior expectations of government intervention.

We all knew about the hurricane days in advance. In the aftermath, I expected to see destroyed homes and properties, some deaths.

I didn't expect to see American refugees in third world conditions begging for help because the press corp was able to get there before FEMA.

I didn't expect to see any of that.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

As an attempt to show you what that article made me feel, let me recast the whole thing from the other side.

Let's say I was posting something here, and I said: Here's an article that's being passed around up North. I'm not saying it's wrong or right, but a lot of people around here believe it.

The article says: Everyone knows that the Gulf Coast of Mississippi is inhabited by rich white bigots who made their money by screwing people. They chose to live where they did, knowing the perils, and they're bastards anyhow. Therefore, why should we give them any sort of aid for rebuilding? They brought this upon themselves.

Let that sink in. Try to imagine that as a "serious" piece of journalism.

Now I ask you, Colleen, what would be your response to such a post? Rational discourse?

What do you think of these people who think that Mississippians are rich white bigots who made their money by screwing people? Do you honor their opinions and try to meet them halfway? Do you say, "Well, maybe they have a point," and try to see things from their perspective?

The analogy isn't perfect, I admit, but the sweeping generalization, the fixing of blame, the sheer wrongheadedness of it, conveys a taste of what I felt when I read that article.

 

[shereads]

So many people looking at the same event and witnessing the same things yet in the end, you see exactly what you expected to see.

If you expected to see a failed administration running a disaster of a rescue and recovery mission, that's what you saw.

If you expected to see a mob of people who have lived their lives being taken care of by the government act like animals when the shit hit the fan, that's what you saw.

I certainly haven't read all the threads, but I haven't read anyone saying they were shocked at what they saw from any of the players. Does this mean that we all had everything figured out right from the start, or have we all become so strident and set in our opinions that we only see what's in our own fancy?

Certainly not pointing fingers, just wondering...

I didn't post when I was in shock. I sat and stared and trembled. Stridency comes from anger and frustration and disbelief that build up inside and explode.

Yes, we had the right to expect that after four years of Homeland Security p.r., there might actually have been some sort of plan for what to do if a major U.S. city had to be evacuated.

If terrorists had destroyed those levees with explosives, we would now be asking why the War On Terror President wasn't remotely ready to deal with the long-anticipated terrorist attack.

 

[Pure]

Any emergency team tale

David W said,

So many people looking at the same event and witnessing the same things yet in the end, you see exactly what you expected to see.

OK, to some extent. Tracinski believes in the evil welfare state and finds it and blames it in NO. Those of us who "have it in" for GWB and cronies, find bungling cronies like Brown.

But these emerg. workers accounts seem NOT to fit the mold, and they call attention to issues of federal, state and local politics which cross political lines; see below:

Tony, here's a similar account, from a Massachusetts team. Apparently less interfered with since dead body disposal is less political than food supply:

Beverly [Mass]-based team returns, reluctantly



By Chase Davis, Globe Correspondent | September 8, 2005


BEVERLY -- Tired, but frustrated after what some described as a too-brief deployment, members of a federal disaster response team based in Beverly returned yesterday from Mississippi, where they had spent three days searching the ravaged city of Waveland for survivors of Hurricane Katrina.

Gerry Giunta, the team's second in command and a Salem [Mass] fire captain, said that after about 36 hours of preparation and driving, it took the team just three days to finish its mission. Then they were promptly sent home, he said.

''There's a lot of frustration, but it's out of our hands," Giunta said. ''It's frustrating for us as responders . . . I think there was a lot more to do."

On Aug. 30, the Federal Emergency Management Agency deployed the 35-member team, from the Massachusetts Urban Search and Rescue Task Force, to conduct search-and-rescue operations in Mississippi.

Red-eyed and running on just a few hours of sleep, team members arrived last night at their headquarters near Beverly Municipal Airport, where loved ones waited with smiles and hugs.

Though glad to be home, they said they wished they had done more.

''It's just hard to leave people like that," rescue squad member Michael Polidoro said. ''Our job is done, but for those people, it won't be done for a long time."

Working with teams from across the country, the squad was assigned to search Mississippi's hard-hit Hancock County. They combed about 300 shattered homes in Waveland, searching for survivors who had not vacated the city.

They found an undisclosed number of bodies and only one survivor, a disoriented man whose catamaran had been dumped there by the storm and who was wandering the streets.

They gave him food and water, treated him for minor injuries, and directed him to a local shelter, Giunta said.

Although the team finished its mission quickly, Giunta said, some members also were frustrated that FEMA had deployed the 35-member hurricane response team rather than a full 80-member group.

The program manager, Mark Foster, acknowledged that the short deployment was ''tough" on some of his team members who wanted to do more, but said there weren't enough resources available locally to support a redeployment to another affected area.

Another team member, Winthrop Fire Department official Charles Flanagan, said the team brings only 72 hours worth of its own supplies and even just three days of search-and-rescue operations took their toll on equipment.

''The conditions aren't very good," Flanagan said. ''The water to [decontaminate] our boots came from 100 miles away."

FEMA has been rapped for what critics have called a sluggish and disorganized response to Katrina. Calls to FEMA's regional and national offices were not immediately returned yesterday.

Task force members described a chaotic scene in Waveland, with fallen trees strewn about the streets, large pontoon boats hurled blocks away from the beach, and personal watercraft dangling from power lines.

The town was mostly empty, Giunta said, except for the people who had returned home to salvage belongings in their mangled homes.

''It was surreal," Giunta said. ''There was nothing discernible left."

The task force might be redeployed in the coming weeks, members said, but nothing is certain. FEMA teams from other parts of the country were rotated into the region, but some members of the Beverly task force said they would sooner have stayed in Mississippi themselves.

''Most people who went on this trip would have stayed 30 days," said Paul Doughty, a Providence firefighter.

Ralph Ranalli of the Globe staff and Globe correspondent Tom Farmer contributed to this report.

© Copyright 2005 Globe Newspaper Company.

 

[CharleyH]

I didn't post when I was in shock. I sat and stared and trembled. Stridency comes from anger and frustration and disbelief that build up inside and explode.

Yes, we had the right to expect that after four years of Homeland Security p.r., there might actually have been some sort of plan for what to do if a major U.S. city had to be evacuated.

If terrorists had destroyed those levees with explosives, we would now be asking why the War On Terror President wasn't remotely ready to deal with the long-anticipated terrorist attack.

Hm. Not that I am beyond contadiction, for I never am, but .... why was not the US prepared? Terrorist or otherwise. Obviously you have money in a hotel. How many of the poor are you helping, now? How many poor did you drive bye to get where you are in a hotel?

 

[Pure]

Sher, you mentioned expectations of the Department of Homeland Security.

Probably you are aware its a 187 p. act, that appears rather hastily thrown together. Two key parts read as follows

http://www.dhs.gov/interweb/assetlibrary/hr_5005_enr.pdf


(1) IN GENERAL.—The primary mission of the Department
is to—
(A) prevent terrorist attacks within the United States;
(B) reduce the vulnerability of the United States to
terrorism;
(C) minimize the damage, and assist in the recovery,
from terrorist attacks that do occur within the United
States;
(D) carry out all functions of entities transferred to
the Department, including by acting as a focal point
regarding natural and manmade crises and emergency
planning;
(E) etc.

{{NOTE THAT "NATURAL CRISES" ARE FOURTH ON THE LIST}}


section 507 (p. 81) out of 1717 (total 187 pp)

does specify some of the obvious things involved in emergency response, but check the following section

SEC. 508. USE OF NATIONAL PRIVATE SECTOR NETWORKS IN EMERGENCY
RESPONSE.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Secretary shall use
national private sector networks and infrastructure for emergency
response to chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, or explosive
disasters, and other major disasters.

---
Overall, FEMA was downgraded and swallowed up into the vast security apparatus designed 'prevent terrorist attacks.' Mopping up after them *or after other crises* is purely secondary.

 

[Virtual_Burlesque]

So many people looking at the same event and witnessing the same things yet in the end, you see exactly what you expected to see. . . .

I had no expectation other than an anticipation of seeing victims of a major tragedy being rescued in an organized and timely fashion. I watched for this as it was being televised by network news.

I suppose, by your theory, I was expecting to see stereotyping, so I did see stereotyping when the media began to report on looting, even while the majority of their own images showed nothing more than scavenging. There was an obvious racial component to this stereotyping, but what I initially objected to most was the vilifying of victims.

As I checked around the internet, I discovered that not only was this flood not a surprise, but that it had been predicted with startling accuracy.

As the long, hundred-plus hours of waiting for rescue went on, I became more and more outraged by this re enactment of an atrocity with more similarity to the Black Hole of Calcutta than any rescue. Only the difference with this atrocity was that it had nearly a hundred times more victims, and seemed to be perpetrated by the indifference of their own government, rather than an enemy.

Authorities on television (likewise on this board) insisted that the best was being done, no one could get to those people, wiser heads were in charge, while anybody with eyes and a working television set could see that network and local televison reporters and camerapersons, press reporters and photographers, pop singers and movie stars, (and now we learn, college students with a touch of larceny) were rolling in and out of New Orleans every day.

Authorities with limitless access to information continued to congratulate themselves on a job well done, while it was obvious to this private former citizen 2,500 miles away, that they were undoubtedly living in some alternate reality than that from which CNN et al were reporting.

Every comment or suggestion I made about what should be done, was met with a pat on the head (or a kick elsewhere) and rigamarole rationalisations of why nothing could be done differently.

Now, I am seeing suggestions, remarkably similar to my initial reactions, coming from people with more authority, with greater access to information, and far higher education than I. Now, I am hearing reports about how inaccurate those self-congratulations and alibis’ of inability actually were.

Other than the obvious financial donations, I was also looking for somewhere to share my outrage, and possibly even to find some creative idea about a method of helping, no matter how minuscule. I had turned to this forum which I thought contained the most intelligent and sensitive group of online people that I knew, and what I found was apparent apathy.

Not apathy about the storm, not apathy about the storm’s victims, but apathy about those particular survivors, evacuees abandoned in their shelter of last resort.

They were, it seemed, expendable.

 

[Big_Drum]

All those people had relatives and friends.

Remember how it seemed everyone knew somebody who had died in the WTC attacks, or some kind of connection?

How many more people are finding that they had some sort of tie with the victims of Katrina and the New Orleans disaster. I suspect that when the shock wears off, as is just beginning, the anger is going to become truly explosive. I mean, what we see now is minor in comparison to what it will grow into. I don't know anyone who isn't shocked and pissed off with the authorities handling of the disaster, but most are still in shock, I'm sure.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

So many people looking at the same event and witnessing the same things yet in the end, you see exactly what you expected to see.

I think that's pretty true.

Cursed with bilateral vision, I can understand why Bush lingered on his ranch. Once we heard that Katrina was going to miss New Orleans, I figured it was just another hurricane and nothing unusual. I imagine he felt the same way.

I can also understand rescue services being swamped and overwhelmed by the task at hand. Of course it angered and frustrated me to see what was going on, but the disorganziation and confusion are understandable. I'll wait till the dust settles to find out who did or didn't do what.

My own reaction was emotional and irrational. It was like a huge traffic accident that you can't bear to watch, but can't look away from.

It finally occurred to me that what I was seeing was a graphic metaphor for all that's wrong with America today. We're absolutely brilliant at invasions and making war, but we couldn't ship food and water 50 or 60 miles to our own citizens who were stranded and dying inside their own borders. Instead, our best and brightest are over in Iraq trying to give away the best we have to offer to ungrateful people who don't even want it.

The image of those poor, elderly, and predominantly black people huddled in a mass at the Superdome as the flood waters rose around them and we did nothing was about as perfect a symbol of American society as you could ask for.

 

[Liar]

I had no prior expectations of government intervention.

We all knew about the hurricane days in advance. In the aftermath, I expected to see destroyed homes and properties, some deaths.

I didn't expect to see American refugees in third world conditions begging for help because the press corp was able to get there before FEMA.

I didn't expect to see any of that.

I've seen similar incidents in other places, especially with police and firefigters over here. TV teams reaching the site of an armed robbery long before the police, cameras filming buildings burning to the ground because something got messed up in the chain of command and information with the fire department.

Same thing down in NO, at a gargantulan scale. When the people whose mission it is to respond rapidly in a crisis doesn't... something is way off base, no matter how we spin it. To say that Bush didn't to this or the NO mayor didn't do that, or the LA govenor didn't to the third thing, is imo smoke and mirrors

There's structure errors here. Parallell commands, contradictionary coordination of efforts. Waiting instead of acting. I'd like to blame Reagan, and his decentralization evangelion. But I guess it's not that simple either.

 

[thebullet]

While most at the top of the federal government were extremely casual about responding to the hurricane, I'm becoming more and more convinced that the problems were endemic to the changing status of FEMA.

First FEMA was downgraded from a cabinet level agency to one that was just another department in Homeland Security.

Second, the man named as director of FEMA was a low level politcal appointee with no experience in disaster management.

Third, FEMA was underfunded. The war in Iraq and especially the massive tax cuts for the rich have led the administration to make major budget cuts in those departments that provide public service.

(IMO the administration believes the only real services that government should perform are related to increasing business profits.)

The first fact significantly reduced FEMA's clout in government circles. Although FEMA is authorized to run the show in major disaster situations, they didn't have the authority to run the show. Between reduction in rank and lack of funding, FEMA was emasculated and their hands were tied.

Michael Brown's woeful lack of experience and his very low standing in the administration made him the ideal guy to coordinate a disasterous relief effort. Even if his heart was in the right place (and there is very little proof of that!), he was definitely the wrong man in the wrong place.

 

[Pure]

right on,

bullet; that seems like an accurate, sane assessment (fairly non inflammatory, also)

i would add the GWB point, as much as I'd like to discard it, has a little bit of merit. local and state authorities do bear some blame, e.g., the so- called NO police force [esp. its leaders], who--assuming they weren't drowned--deserted en masse, and those who did report took too well to shooting 'looters.'

 

[dr_mabeuse]

i would add the GWB point, as much as I'd like to discard it, has a little bit of merit. local and state authorities do bear some blame, e.g., the so- called NO police force [esp. its leaders], who--assuming they weren't drowned--deserted en masse, and those who did report took too well to shooting 'looters.'

I've been thinking about this desertion by the NO police.

You know, once the flooding happened, they had no communications. None. No police radio, no telephone, no cell phone, no dispatcher, no cars, no back-up. Some of them didn't even have a way to get to their stations because of the flooding.

Under those circumstances, what are your responsibilities as a cop? How on earth do you do your job? They had no idea of the looting that was going on because they couldn't see it on TV or hear it on the radio. There was no one to tell them where to go or what to do, or who was in charge.

What does "deserting" even mean when you can't get to the station?

And what could they do if they did get there? They couldn't arrest anyone because there was no place to take them and no way to get them there. About all they could do was go out and take the law into their own hands and start shooting people. Is that what they should have done? You want them killing people for stealing diapers?

So I don't know whether they deserted NO or the city deserted them.

 

[Extreme Bohunk]

This JUST in:
Mike Brown has been pulled off the hurricane relief effort.

FEMA Chief Relieved of Katrina Duties

WASHINGTON - Federal Emergency Management Agency Director Michael Brown is being removed from his role managing Hurricane Katrina relief efforts.

Brown is being sent back to Washington from Baton Rouge, where he was the primary official overseeing the federal government's response to the disaster, according to two federal officials who declined to be identified before the announcement.

 

[Weird Harold]

You know, once the flooding happened, they had no communications. None. No police radio, no telephone, no cell phone, no dispatcher, no cars, no back-up. Some of them didn't even have a way to get to their stations because of the flooding.

Under those circumstances, what are your responsibilities? How on earth do you do your job? They had no idea of the looting that was going on because they couldn't see it on TV or hear it on the radio. There was no one to tell them where to go or what to do, or who was in charge.

What does "deserting" even mean when you can't get to the station?

I suppose it's an unrealistic expectation, but I'm reminded of T.Rosevelt Jr's answer to finding out that his troops had been landed some ten miles from where there were supposed to be on D-Day -- "Well, I guess we'll just start the war from right here."

Two thirds of the NO police force followed TR jr's philosophy, about 500 didn't and gave up. Personally, I have litle respect or sympathy for the police officers that didn't start the relief and recovery from where they were with what they had.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

I suppose it's an unrealistic expectation, but I'm reminded of T.Rosevelt Jr's answer to finding out that his troops had been landed some ten miles from where there were supposed to be on D-Day -- "Well, I guess we'll just start the war from right here."

Two thirds of the NO police force followed TR jr's philosophy, about 500 didn't and gave up. Personally, I have litle respect or sympathy for the police officers that didn't start the relief and recovery from where they were with what they had.

But if you're off helping people, is that what you're supposed to be doing? If someone thinks you should be guarding property downtown but you don't know that, are you deserting by helping people uptown? How are you supposed to know what you're supposed to do?

I mean, I don't know the details. Did these cops just up and leave town? Or were they dealing with crises in their own neighborhoods?

 

[Pure]

Or were they dealing with crises in their own neighborhoods?

or, 'there's gotta be a pony in here, somewhere'

 

[rgraham666]

According to an article in my morning paper, they fear a good number of those police may be dead.

I won't post the article as the web site for my paper won't display it unless you register, but apparently about 700 of the police were told to stay home until Katrina passed.

Now about 400 of those are unaccounted for.

I really think we ought to chill until we have a much clearer idea of what's going on. Better to do what we can to help, and pray for those who need it.