Thanks, John. I used the opportunity to post a good sized piece of a
Wall Street Journal editorial that discusses how our legal heritage has
gotten in the way of large scale disaster response. I'm also posting my
last paragraph here since it may help those outside the US comprehend
the scale of the disaster.
------------------------------------------
My mention of "redcoats" reminded me of our UK brethren and the
president's statement that the size of the Katrina disaster area was
larger than Great Britain. I think this is probably a bit of an
exaggeration but not by much. The combined land area of Louisiana,
Mississippi and Alabama is about 150,000 square miles. The land area of
Great Britain is roughly 90,000 square miles. Maybe the area that has
been *totally devastated* is only about the size of England or only
50,000 square miles. Perhaps this will help Europeons put the scope of
the problem in perspective.
Chuck Norcutt
John A. Lind wrote:
> Thought that might get your attention.
>
> In the interest of relieving the list of heated debate about the
> hurricane, I've set up an area on one of my web sites where you can
> opine, comment and debate the causes, consequences, appropriateness of
> relief response, and anything else about Hurricane Katrina.
>
> http://www.johnlind.net/News/catid=3.html
>
> I've opened up public comments there; you need not be a "User" nor do
> you need to "Log In" to post comments. (There's only ONE "registered"
> user, me and that's all there will be.)
>
> Please read my initial posting and the Rules of Engagement there. Near
> zero restrictions except for an intolerance for blatant profanity.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|