Lord of the Flies

[lance]

Here is some good news:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/stor ... Id=4836525

Way to go Canada!

Bosnia gave over $6,000 dollars in relief assistance.



Yet for some reason the State Department blocked aid from Sweden.

-LanceMan

[emmie]

I read somewhere that the city of New Orleans requested funding from the federal government two months ago in order to strengthen the levees. But GWB denied them the funding.

Interesting. I read that the cuts to that specific funding were made 3 years ago, while a report sat on his desk stating that the third biggest threat to the USA came in the form of a large hurricane striking New Orleans. Instead funds were diverted to fight terrorism and a war in Afghanistan (remember that one?) and in Iraq. I read that he authorised building on flood plains, and made or authorised a host of stupid decisions which increased the risk of loss of life significantly.

I'm sorry to say this in such strong terms, but I hate him. That's what it's come to for me now. I cannot bear to look at his smirking little cowboy face, or listen to another 'caring word of concern' come out of his stupid little mouth. I think it is his fault (though not only his fault) that the casualty rate will be so high. I think he could have done far more to prevent and mitigate the disaster. Today I read that the death toll could be as high as 10,000. Show some accountability, 'President'. What was done came too little and too late, and now people are dead. Your own people, who put their trust in you (or not), who pay the taxes you demand even though it cripples them at the expense of the oil oligarchs you love so much, the people who need you to react and move mountains they cannot move themselves. It makes me shake with rage.

And by the way, *surprise*!! Halliburton is getting the contract to rebuild the energy and oil pipelines in New Orleans. Vomit.

Rage on Starbug, rage on.

I really, really try to be an optimist. I try and see the best in people, in humanity but to quote that line from Billy Jack, sometimes what goes on just makes me want go beserk.

Nearly 2,000 American soliders are dead in Iraq. More than 13,000 are wounded some for life. No WMDs, period. Iraq tetters on the edge of civil war with Al Queda and other terroist groups flock to Iraq where before they did exist. Nearly 200 billion, BILLION spent. An undercover CIA operatives cover blown for political revenge.

Is someone fired for this mess? Is someone facing criminal charges? Is someone going to do serious time in prison?

No. In fact the people who screwed up get promotions and medals (George "Slam Dunk" Tenet).

(Sigh)

There is no accountability from the current regime, nor at this point can it truly be expected. Instead the right in this country does what it always does when faced with a monumental disaster, blame everybody else. Blame the cops and the EMS people who have had a decent nights sleep in more than a week. Blame looters. Blame black people. Blame the poor. Blame, blame, blame.

George Bush could recovery his approval ratings and some modicum of crediblity if he simply said, "I' m sorry". Expectations are soooo low in the US that's all it will take.

Sadly I think no one in the Federal Goverment will be held accountable. Its just not gonna happen. Rightly or wrongly the voters in the US, notwithdstanding allegations of fraud, gave this regime a blank check last November.

Screw the poor, screw gay people, screw illegials, even screw the soliders. As long as Bush and co make money hand over fist nothing else matters. This is sadly what this comes down: greed, evil and incompentance. The first two are bad enough without the third.

Please events, God, the Cosmos prove me wrong. Impeach Bush, send Rove to jail and send Rumsfeld to the Hauge.

-LanceMan

right on starbug, lance and kristin!!! couldn't have said it better myself. I've begun to censor my news intake of late because I simply get sick with rage. it's so incredibly frustrating. and then to top it off, I went home for the weekend where everyone is a Bush supporter in my family. nothing I said, and nothing they saw on tv would change their minds that he's doing a good job.

[SanDeE*]

I've read some articles about the recovery effort for New Orleans, and some of them are referring to the people who lived through hurricane Katrina "refugees". This makes me so MAD! They are American citizens, people who were born here, raised here, work here, live here. They are NOT refugees. They are victims, survivors. Why not call them that?

[Natasha (candygirl)]

There have been several articles about the vocabulary being used. You guys know I'm a grammar nut, but at this point I feel like of all the things to be worried about, this is the least of the survivors' concerns.

This one is from a few weeks ago.

What do you call people who have been driven from their homes with only the clothes on their backs, unsure if they will ever be able to return, and forced to build a new life in a strange place? News organizations are struggling for the right word.

Many, including The Associated Press, have used "refugee" to describe those displaced by the wrath of Hurricane Katrina.

But the choice has stirred anger among some readers and other critics, particularly in the black community. They have argued that "refugee" implies that the displaced storm victims, many of whom have been black, are second-class citizens — or not even Americans.

"It is racist to call American citizens refugees," the Rev. Jesse Jackson said, visiting the Houston Astrodome on Monday. Members of the Congressional Black Caucus have expressed similar sentiments.

Other terms under fire
Others have countered that the terms "evacuees" or even "displaced" are too clinical and not sufficiently dramatic to convey the dire situation that confronts many of Katrina's survivors.

President Bush, who has spent days trying to deflect criticism that he responded sluggishly to the disaster, weighed in on Tuesday. "The people we're talking about are not refugees," he said. "They are Americans, and they need the help and love and compassion of our fellow citizens."

The 1951 U.N. Refugee Convention describes a refugee as someone who has fled across an international border to escape violence or persecution. But the Webster's New World Dictionary defines it more broadly as "a person who flees from home or country to seek refuge elsewhere, as in a time of war or of political or religious persecution."

Some papers refuse to use ‘refugee’
The criticism has led several news organizations to ban the word in their Katrina coverage. Among them are The Washington Post and the Boston Globe.

"We haven't used the word since the beginning of the crisis," said Kenneth Cooper, the Globe's national editor. "Some of us had different reasons, but we all came to the same conclusion: not to use it."

The AP and The New York Times are among those continuing to use the word where it is deemed appropriate.

"The AP is using the term ‘refugee’ where appropriate to capture the sweep and scope of the effects of this historic natural disaster on a vast number of our citizens," said Executive Editor Kathleen Carroll. "Several hundred thousand people have been uprooted from their homes and communities and forced to seek refuge in more than 30 different states across America. Until such time as they are able to take up new lives in their new communities or return to their former homes, they will be refugees."

The Times was adhering to a similar policy.

"We have not banned the word ‘refugee,’" said spokeswoman Catherine Mathis. "We have used it along with ‘evacuee,’ ‘survivor,’ ‘displaced’ and various other terms that fit what our reporters are seeing on the ground. Webster's defines a refugee as a person fleeing ‘home or country’ in search of refuge, and it certainly does justice to the suffering legions driven from their homes by Katrina."

William Safire, who writes the weekly "On Language" column for The New York Times Magazine, said he did not believe the term "refugee" had any racial implications.

"A refugee can be a person of any race at all," he said. "A refugee is a person who seeks refuge."

He first suggested using the term "hurricane refugees." After thinking it over, though, he said he would probably simply use the term "flood victims," to avoid any political connotations.

Here is another article:

I am sure that you have been watching the hurricane recovery effort in New Orleans. It is a slow, painstaking process that can be excruciatingly hard to watch. At times it seems so surreal...is this happening in the United States? Yes it is. Before I comment further the people who are attempting to leave New Orleans are American citizens. They are evacuees, not refugees.

I realize that the news media likes to pick up on popular, “for the moment” terms to describe events as they unfold. Still, like wildfire, the wrong terms are given and repeated over and over again until they become the most commonly used and accepted phrases. Might I say that the description of many of our fellow Americans as refugees is repugnant?

When the term is used in its proper sense, refugee means the following as per the Merriam-Webster Legal Dictionary of 1996:

A refugee is an individual seeking refuge or asylum; especially : an individual who has left his or her native country and is unwilling or unable to return to it because of persecution or fear of persecution (as because of race, religion, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion)

Um, excuse me...there is no persecution going on in New Orleans. There was a hurricane, the levees were breached, and the city was flooded. Yes, there is lawlessness going on but the people are leaving because their homes were destroyed. The lawlessness is a side issue; if there was law and order New Orleans residents would still be leaving. The evacuees are leaving one city or state for another. They are not leaving the United States!

I like to give people the benefit of the doubt when terms are used erroneously, but part of me wonders if the term “refugee” would have been used if the evacuees were white. I certainly hope that I am wrong, but it is a thought that has crossed my mind.