[TheForge] blame the french ( was Re: Getting absurb - OT Katrina)

[terry l. ridder]

On Thu, 9 Feb 2006, Walter Mullett wrote:

<snip>
>
> Earthquakes, tornados, hurricanes and other natural catastrophes are
> predictable, they will happen.  If we knew when and where, most people
> wouldn't put their families directly in harms way and this would be a
> non-issue.  But generally we don't know when or where and when so we should
> all feel compassion for those affected by Katrina because any of us could be
> the victim of something similar on some scale.
>

actually, the geologists have a good handle on predicting volcanic
eruptions.

http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/edu/predict/

earthquakes are not as predictable.

back in 2004, we had a small earthquake, is was centered just southwest
of me, in troy grove, illinois. a previously unknown fault. shook the
house better good.

http://www.indiana.edu/~pepp/earthquakes/illinois6_28_04.htm

also california does not have a monopoly on earthquakes.
please read about the new madrid fault in the midwest.

usgs fact sheet: the mississippi valley - "whole lotta shakin' goin' on"
http://quake.wr.usgs.gov/QUAKES/FactSheets/NewMadrid/

to quote a brief section.

<begin quote>
In the winter of 1811-12, the central Mississippi Valley was struck by
three of the most powerful earthquakes in U.S. history. Even today, this
region has more earthquakes than any other part of the United States
east of the Rocky Mountains. Government agencies, universities, and
private organizations are working to increase awareness of the earthquake
threat and to reduce loss of life and property in future shocks.
<end   quote>

<begin quote>
The New Madrid seismic zone is so named because the town of New Madrid,
Missouri was the closest settlement to the epicenters of the 1811-1812
quakes. At that time, St. Louis and other major cities in the central U.S.
were sparsely settled. At least 3 of the series of earthquakes were felt
throughout much of the U.S. and as far away as Quebec. The potential for
the recurrence of such earthquakes and their impact today on densely
populated cities in and around the seismic zone, has generated much
research devoted to understanding earthquakes. By closely monitoring the
earthquake activity, scientists can hope to understand their causes,
recurrence rates, ground motion and disaster mitigation. The probability
for an earthquake of magnitude 6.0 or greater is significant in the near
future, with a 50% chance by the year 2000 and a 90% chance by the year
2040. A quake with a magnitude equal to that of the 1811- 1812 quakes
could result in great loss of life and property damage in the billions of
dollars. Scientists believe we could be overdue for a large earthquake and
through research and public awareness may be able to prevent such losses.
<end   quote>

>
> I wish our founding fathers had written the "Bill of rights" as the "Bill of
> rights and responsibilities".  To many times the statement is raised "it's
> my right".  BULL!!!!
>

give it a break.
the only ones with rights are those with megabucks to lobby the
politicians.

reminds me of an old joke;

"the united states of america has the best congress money can buy."

<snip>
>
> With regard to property "rights", I believe you have the right to use your
> property as you wish within the limits that society places on you.  I
> believe that we (society) have the right to prevent you from using your land
> in a manner that harms us (society) or future generations.  Building on land
> that has a higher than normal risk of damage could be just your own $$$
> problem.  But your living in such areas affects the rest of society.  When
> catastrophe occurs and whether you want it or not, we have the
> responsibility of trying to save those that you also put at risk as well as
> yourself.
>

google for superfund.
remember love canal?

http://columbia.thefreedictionary.com/Love+Canal

if you have the megabucks you can do anything you want to the
land. visit the southside of chicago and the former steel mill area
south of chicago. large areas polluted with hazardous and toxic waste.

>
<snip>
>
>
> The building of the levees around the below sea level areas of N.O.
> by the feds was a mistake that should not be repeated. By building
> those, the Feds made all of us responsible.
>

actually, you should be blaming the french because they are the ones who
started building the levees back in 1718.

from orleans levee district web site :
http://www.orleanslevee.com/History1.htm

<begin quote>
   From the beginning, the site Bienville had selected for New Orleans
   in 1718 created problems. One year after the little town was laid
   out, the Mississippi overflowed and a low levee had to be constructed
   to protect the city from flooding. Bienville had his military engineer,
   Pierre le Blond de la Tour, build the first series of protective levees
   on the Mississippi River so a city could be built. De la Tour's levee
   system was 5,400 feet long and two or three feet high. From that day
   to this, drainage has been a continual, expensive problem, which has
   only begun to be solved in the first years of this century.
<end   quote>

the leeves were being built long before there even was a united states
of america. granted, the federal government bought the problem from the
french in the lousiana purchase back in 1803.

<begin quote>
Robert Livingston and James Monroe closed on the sweetest real estate
deal of the millennium when they signed the Louisiana Purchase Treaty
in Paris on April 30, 1803. They were authorized to pay France up to $10
million for the port of New Orleans and the Floridas. When offered the
entire territory of Louisianan area larger than Great Britain, France,
Germany, Italy, Spain and Portugal combinethe American negotiators,
swiftly agreed to a price of $15 million.
<end   quote>

the french were getting rid of the headache of new orleans that would
come back to haunt the newly founded republic of the united states of
america.

the usa was eager to purchase the land because of the whole 'manifest
destiny' idea.

>
> For those living in acceptable areas of risk but still affected by Katrina
> or other disasters, I believe our governments have a responsibility to
> assist you but not to the point of making you whole.
>

wait a minute here. what about all you said about personal
responsibility above? you cannot have it both ways. if someone
demands/wants/desires to live in an area of risk and they either cannot
or will not properly insure their home and belongings, they are on their
own. perhaps the local or state governments' would help out but as far
as the federal government goes it should be hands off.

>
> Walt
>

-- 
terry l. ridder ><>