Pat Robertson explains the Haitians' pact with the Devil. It was Napoleon the First, and the island is called Hispaniola. There are a few clips on YouTube, but I like this one.
This might actually be more helpful.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8456730.stm
Last edited by bindeweede; 14th January 2010 at 10:13 PM.
And although I had not heard of Rush Limbaugh,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rush_Limbaugh
or indeed Keith Olbermann,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keith_Olbermann
I quite like this also.
I have just returned to Washington DC after a long drive down the I-95 and listening to the radio. As I randomly tuned the radio I hit on a station where the reverent Bigot of Maryland - or whatever, came out with the utter crap about the earthquake being the wrath of God on a people who had made a pact with the devil. I returned home angry and depressed but somehow not surprised that this country harbours such people, if if only in a small minority.
Thanks for the above postings because it puts a little bit of faith back into human kind. (And don't start on about faith again, figure of speech, you know what I mean).
Collection tins are already appearing outside the shopping Malls and for the most part, the American compassion is shining through. On the other hand, why they tolerate such bigotry is beyond me.
On the other hand, when some natural disaster strikes decent, god-fearin' folk, it is clearly the almighty testing his chosen people to give them the chance to show that their faith is strong and pureOriginally Posted by Graham Lappin
Seeing people sitting around, walking past bodies in the street and picking at rubble with their hands at a time when co-ordinated action is all that can help, shows I think just how important state and community organisers are. Many here and in the US in particular like to complain about the self serving nature of state institutions, few if ever consider how necessary the structures put in place are vital to respond to disasters. Where no effective command and control exists people really are quite helpless.
One may always criticise the actions taken, they often have unintended or counter-productive consequences, but in the end of the day it is difficult to think of a planned response to calamity that could be worse than the inertia now being shown in Haiti.
I've often thought anarchists should be given a one way ticket to Somalia.
We are outrageously lucky. I don't get why help hasn't arrived though, I remember after the Tsunami getting reports about difficult access slowing things up but I've not seen anything here as to why Obama's 5000 haven't actually turned up yet and don't we in the UK have an international rescue team?
Bodies need burying or burning, doctors need to get in - have I just missed why that isn't happening?
It appears that the docks suffered serious damage so transport by ship is problematic. There is just one runway at the airport and worries about congestion - probably the air traffic control isn't up to much. And even before the quake, getting anywhere by road was iffy (especially from the Dominican Republic). The entire infrastructure which we take for granted is a mess where it exists at all.
The problems the USA experienced in getting aid to New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina show that such major disasters can be difficult to cope with even in the richest nations.
I'm glad I just missed that bit - thanks Tony. Not that it helps those on the ground much but it helps restore a little of my faith in human nature (is faith the right word there?).
The Tracy brothers?
UK Specialists, equipment and supplies were delayed on Wednesday by snow at Gatwick but were flying over yesterday (Thurs) as fast as Haiti's infrastructure could cope with their arrival. As far as I'm aware, with something of an inside perspective, the UK Govt's response has been impressive.
Slightly OT, but part of the problem is that Haiti has been a basket case for decades (at least) - it's practically the epitome of a failed state. I sometimes wonder why it is that some countries fail when others, with similar backgrounds, succeed. Some succeed but then lose the plot; Argentina a century ago was as wealthy and cultured as any European state but slid backwards considerably through most of the last century.
I wonder if anyone has worked out a formula for success as a nation? It isn't necessarily linked to natural resources - take Singapore for instance, it's way ahead of its much bigger neighbours.
Singapore's natural resource is its geography. The pre-eminent trading post in SE Asia,established by the East India company, by the time of its independence it was one of the biggest ports in the world and the manufacturing centre for the entire region. The post-colonial government have built upon good foundations.
Haiti by contrast is situated on an impoverished corner of hispaniola with few economic or geographical advantages. Without the benefit of a benevolent colonial administration to guide and protect it throughout the ninteenth and twentieth centuries it became a pawn of the big powers, particularly America, which occupied it on a number of occasions. It's governments have mostly been self-serving venal and corrupt. Having Gained independence from Spain and then France very early, it was not bequeathed the kind of legacy many of it's carribean neighbours were by the British and Dutch, in the form of an educated cadre, a sensible system of government and continued international ties and assistance from the former colonial power.
I think also that many Countries, Haiti being a case in point, simply exist because of dividing lines drawn on a map by colonial administrators in the 18th and 19th century rather than beacause of any pressing historical or geographical reasons, and in many ways do not represent viable nation states. Many of the African counrties also suffer this fate.
Geographers spend a lot of time studying this exact question and indexes of failed states are produced and published, as to why they fail, I don't think there is any set formula and you would probably find there are as many causes of failure as there are failed states.
I had not thought of it in this way before. As the song goes "you don't what you've got 'till it's gone".
According to this from The Times, Rush Limbaugh suggested that the earthquake was "made to order" for Obama. How weird do people get?
http://timesonline.typepad.com/comme...-by-obama.html
Last edited by bindeweede; 15th January 2010 at 10:28 PM. Reason: correction.
For me, the most depressing information to come out of Haiti is this: the country is not just a failed state which is the poorest in the Western World, already overpopulated and suffering the consequences of massive deforestation, but also 46% of the population is under 15. I don't need to spell out what that means for the future population and the problems that will cause.
The effect of this quake seems to be the equivalent of a severe beating for a person who is already in the advanced stage of a terminal illness.
Quite what can be done about this mess is hard to see.
There is an interesting article on the BBC's site "Why does God allow natural disasters?"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8467755.stm
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks