At last, some good news out of New Orleans:
In New Orleans, hopes rose that the number of dead might not be as catastrophic as predicted. Rescuers were only now beginning a methodical house-by-house search of the city for victims’ bodies.Thousands had been feared trapped in the poor, blue-collar neighborhoods, where people had no means to evacuate ahead of the Aug. 29 storm.
“There’s some encouragement in the initial sweeps. … The numbers (of dead) so far are relatively minor as compared with the dire predictions of 10,000,” Col. Terry Ebbert, director of Homeland Security for the city of New Orleans said.
There is similarly good news in Mississippi, where the death toll is at 151 — “far fewer than some had initially feared” — and while it is expected to rise further, a massive “surge in the body count” is no longer expected. (This report puts the current toll at 200, but the basic point is the same: we’re no longer thinking in terms of 500+ dead along the Mississippi coast.)
Unlike my much-ballyhooed “prediction” (really just a warning) two weeks ago today that Katrina was a grave threat to New Orleans — which I dearly wish had been wrong — this is one instance where I’ll be happy to say I told you so:
It’s true, of course, that death tolls in natural disasters tend to rise. But wild early estimates of death tolls, formulated when everything seems utterly bleak and based on guesswork rather than facts, are sometimes wrong. As I recall, the headline of one of the New York papers on September 13, 2001 was “10,000 FEARED DEAD.” So let’s not get ahead of ourselves here.
That’s what I wrote last Wednesday, shortly after Mayor Nagin said he suspected that “probably thousands” were dead, a bit of idle speculation that was, predictably, plastered on the front pages of newspapers all over the world the following day. (For example…) That was followed in the ensuing days by statements from Governor Blanco and others that the toll might exceed 10,000.
Of course, Katrina’s final toll — even if, to be wildly optimistic, the number of bodies found floating in New Orleans is “only” in three figures, rather than four or five — will still be absolutely horrific. It will still be “more than we can bear,” in the wise and well-chosen words of Mayor Giuliani on 9/11. (Giuliani, unlike Nagin, Blanco and others, instinctively understood that his position of authority necessitated eschewing the sort of wild speculation about the death toll that, say, a blogger or TV pundit might engage in.) Even before today’s “sweep,” 118 were confirmed dead in Louisiana, and at least 151 in Mississippi. That’s 269 before they started plucking bodies out of the toxic lake that now covers New Orleans. So, undoubtedly, the combined total will eventually rise at least high enough to put Katrina in the Top 5, and probably the Top 3, deadliest hurricanes since 1900. But now at least there is reason to hope Katrina might not “top” the Great Galveston Hurricane — and for that small blessing, if indeed it comes to pass, we should thank God (or whomever each of us prefers to thank for such things).
|
Categories: Hurricane Katrina
|
September 9th, 2005 at 3:44:27 pm
So is Nagin still a dickhead if the death toll ends up being 500 instead of 10,000?
To be fair, I think Nagin said the death toll could be in the 1000s. It was the Republican Senator from LA who said 10,000.
Also, don’t forget that Guiliani said the death toll would be “more than we can bear” and the speculation then was up to 50,000.
September 9th, 2005 at 3:52:59 pm
So is Nagin still a dickhead if the death toll ends up being 500 instead of 10,000?
Yes.
To be fair, I think Nagin said the death toll could be in the 1000s. It was the Republican Senator from LA who said 10,000.
I know… I post says that. (Well, not the part about the senator, but I said the governor and other officials, which I believe is right — I believe Landrieu and Blanco both bandied about the 10,000 figure.)
Also, don’t forget that Guiliani said the death toll would be “more than we can bear” and the speculation then was up to 50,000.
I didn’t forget that. What’s your point? The fact he said “more than we can bear” instead of making like Nagin, Blanco & Landrieu and saying “it could be in the tens of thousands” (which I’m sure he, like everyone else, was thinking) is exactly why I think it’s so admirable that he had the good sense to keep his mouth shut and not give the media an obvious headline “MAYOR: 50,000 FEARED DEAD” that is based on nothing but speculation.
September 9th, 2005 at 3:54:53 pm
And on Sept. 12, Giuliani said the death toll could be in the thousands.
September 9th, 2005 at 4:13:40 pm
Brendan-
Don’t get me wrong. Nagin is no Guiliani, but not based on the “thousands” remark.
Crying on the radio. Appearing totally out of his depth. Not following a plan. THOSE are the things that make Nagin pale in comparison to Guiliani, not the “thousands” remark.
September 9th, 2005 at 4:18:47 pm
“Laura Bush described as “disgusting” comments by rapper Kanye West and Democratic chairman Howard Dean blaming her husband for the disproportionate numbers of black hurricane victims.”
So what does she think of her mother-in-law’s statement that it’s a “scary” idea that the poor people of New Orleans might stay in Texas, but losing their homes and sleeping on cots in the Astrodome has “worked out for them.”
Talk about disgusting.
September 9th, 2005 at 4:31:13 pm
Max,
Any idea of the context of Barbara Bush’s statement??
Links?? Transcripts???
I didn’t think so.
September 9th, 2005 at 4:34:32 pm
Texican-
It’s been all over the damn news. Sorry if Newsmax forgot to mention it…
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/09/08/politics/wh/main829057.shtml
…it was a headline on Drudge the other day.
September 9th, 2005 at 4:38:04 pm
pure spec. but why did the mayor spout that number. could it be that he knew the aprox. number of citizens he/his administration failed to evacuate??
September 9th, 2005 at 4:54:35 pm
http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/dhenninger/?id=110007230
A good article on the Pentagon response and laws which are on the books.
just FYI
(I may be posting this “off topic.”)
September 9th, 2005 at 4:58:31 pm
Angrier,
Your right. I am wrong. How dare that woman be so callous with the truth. The nerve of her.
Of course, her statement can be proven true, Kenye’s(sp)cannot.
Still, rather odd comment though.
September 9th, 2005 at 5:16:52 pm
Why do so many continue to get hung up on the plethora of ignorant statements made by politicians? For example, who cares what Barbara Bush or Mary Landrieu said! In an emergency/crisis, accurate information often takes hours and days to wind its way to the top of any bureaucracy.
For me, the issue is what have they done, failed to do, or proposed that we do in order to improve our response to the next big disaster (natural or otherwise) that will befall our country? As a Cat 4 hurricane survivor myself (Charley last year), I would much rather have people making decisions even if they turn out be wrong. Errors can be corrected quickly and results achieved. Words mean nothing when you lose your home, business or both.
September 9th, 2005 at 5:18:46 pm
Texican,
I’d rather dip my rocks in molten lead than argue with you. You’re like a child that rails against the world that 2+2=10, then when shown indisputable evidence that it is in fact 4, you throw up your arms and say “I was just testing you.”
Hint: old lady Babs Bush is a bitch who’s got about as much compassion as Himmler. Anyone whose head hasn’t been resident in his lower GI tract for the past 20 years knows this. Ask Nancy Reagan, for Christ’s sake.
You’ve managed to sully the reputation of two separate groups of people. Keep it up, Forest.
September 9th, 2005 at 5:43:32 pm
You tell ‘em coach
September 9th, 2005 at 5:55:04 pm
Keep preachin’ rev. Cheers.
September 9th, 2005 at 6:02:59 pm
Oh no, they’ve formed an alliance!
Soon there’ll be little Coach Asshats and Reverend Leahys running around… OH THE HUMANITY!!!
[Just kidding… not implying anything… not that there’s anything wrong with that… :)]
September 9th, 2005 at 6:24:10 pm
Over-estimating death tolls has one significant boon, for all the worry and heartache it brings. Maybe Nagin realises this. Basically the bigger the toll the more the media and the more the charity and resources.
Personally, I reckon 2,500 to 5,000. Anything less is a Godsend.
September 9th, 2005 at 6:56:57 pm
Loy,
Judge not, lest ye be judged.
I’ll be thinking about you tonight (not) while I’m sipping champagne and watching the Sox maul the Empire in the toilet, along with my harem.
-Coach
September 9th, 2005 at 7:20:32 pm
when the wtc went down there was a banner on the tv that flashed ,”40,000 dead)”
September 9th, 2005 at 7:33:37 pm
when the wtc went down there was a banner on the tv that flashed ,”40,000 dead)”
-Gee. Let me guess. Fox.
We Report, You Decide…if it’s Correct
September 9th, 2005 at 7:46:08 pm
What’s wrong with what Barbara Bush said? Aside from the personal trauma of having to live through the Superdome, Katrina, and bumbling gov’t response, the poorest folks of New Orleans will greatly benefit from this. Not only are they going to be fed and housed for free for a while, but they’ll get training and other benefits to get them back on their feet–much more than they were getting or could hope to get before Katrina hit.
September 9th, 2005 at 7:50:11 pm
Andrew,
I’ll take it one step further. These people should consider themselves luck this calamity befell them. After all, pecuniary benefit is the most important thing in life, right?
I pray you didn’t go to Notre Dame. If so, the university failed you in so many ways.
September 9th, 2005 at 8:26:21 pm
Geez, I hate to step into the toxic comments section of this blog — but here goes. On the numbers game, it is interesting how one news service was looking at this. On Sunday Sept 4, AFP (a French news service) had an article on Katrina in which they had federal officials “admit[ting] for the “first time” that the death toll would be in the thousands, implying (to me anyway) that they had been denying it. The writer also stated that “authorities have REFUSED (my emphasis) to give an official toll.” The tone annoyed me enough I wrote the AFP and pointed out that I hadn’t seen *anyone* denying a high death toll. Secondly, for all their failings, we did not normally appoint or elect psychics to serve as “federal authorities” and I was certainly glad that they were honest enough NOT to give an “official toll” since there could not possibly be one on Sept 4. By describing this as a “refusal,” the tone again was one of implied resistance. So it seems like the press (or at least this French source) was rooting for big numbers. (Maybe they were tryng to minimize their thousands dead in the inconveniently timed heat wave last summer?) Just another perspective.
September 9th, 2005 at 9:26:42 pm
I post says that.
Very eloquent Brendan :)
September 10th, 2005 at 3:24:55 am
Brendon, For clarification, are we certain that the initial house searches have included searches of attics?