Wednesday, September 14, 2005

There Are TWO Stories: Katrina AND Iraq

ARIANNA HUFFINGTON makes a valid point in her blog today. National news coverage of the war in Iraq has seemed to fall to the waistside because of the Gulf Coast disaster. The ever-eloquent Ms. Huffington argues that the news networks "will just have to join the 21st Century and learn how to multi-task -- and cover two disasters at the same time."

I guess this means CNN will now have to be brought to you split-screen: the left for Iraq and the right for Katrina. The bottom will feature a running ticker-tape telling you the latest sports scores, national headlines, the latest fashion for "Bennifer 2.0" / Brad-Jen-Angelina affair / Michael Jackson or whatever god-awful celebrity news eats the headlines.

All news, of course, would be periodically interrupted by rambling, blithering commentary brought to you by Anderson Cooper.

Monday, September 12, 2005

9/11: Four Years Later

YESTERDAY marked the anniversary of the September 11th attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. As this monumental anniversary came about, I reflected on what exactly we learned about global terrorism, disasters, and our government's readiness to respond in a national emergency.

Apparently, after this month's Hurricane Katrina fiasco, we haven't learned all that much.

The largest restructuring of the federal government resulted in the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, an organization overseeing ready-response agencies such as FEMA and the Coast Guard, a former branch of the Department of Defense. This new cabinet-level department in the executive branch was supposed to facilitate coordination between federal, state and local governments to properly respond to an immediate national crisis (such as a terrorist attack or, in the case of New Orleans, a natural disaster).

Hurricane Katrina, a brewing storm that caught momentum in the Gulf of Mexico, developed into a Category 5 hurricane during the last weekend in August. This would be a true test to the federal response mechanisms set in place after 9/11.

It failed miserably.

I need not go into the details as to what happened and why--a myriad of articles can be found on this over the Internet. There are plenty of discussions all around about underfunded levees, lack of coordination and response logistics on all government levels, Bush playing the banjo while a city drowns, Governor Blanco refusing to turn over national guard control to the feds, and yes, even the conservatives found a way to blame Clinton for this one, too.

But the irrevocable fact remains that we found ourselves completely unprepared and with our knickers down when we were faced with an imminent oncoming storm where we had ample time for which to prepare.

What about terrorist attacks? Sure, we can look at the Weather Channel and predict that a storm is brewing and will reach shoreline pretty shortly, but we have no such accuracy when it comes to preventing terrorism. Sure, we can listen to chatter, gather plenty of intel, and hunt down the terrorists on foreign or domestic ground, but are truly prepared to respond to future attacks?

I would say some places are. New York, for example, has learned much since 9/11. Before September 11th, there were roughly a dozen or so NYPD officers covering terrorism. Now there are over 3,000 (or was it 13,000 I can't remember--anyway it was a lot more). New York's response to 9/11 was more focused than what happened in New Orleans.

I believe a lot of the courage, the focus, and the ready-response to national disasters and terrorist attacks boils down to leadership. Rudy Giuliani was a born leader--in the city's darkest hour, he shined brilliantly. I don't think anyone could say the same for Mayor Nagin or President Bush during this Hurricane Katrina fiasco.