Hurricane Katrina was the deadliest, costliest, most destructive natural disasters in the United States. It struck the U.S. on August 9th of 2005, killing at least 1,833 people by the hurricane and subsequent floods, making it the deadliest U.S. hurricane since 1928. Hurricane Katrina caused severe destruction along the Gulf coast from central Florida, Texas, and Louisiana, adding up to almost $81 billion in property damage.
After the Hurricane Katrina struck, the city of New Orleans had more than just the flood waters to address.
The Memorial Medical Center in New Orleans was located three miles southwest of the city's French Quarter and three feet below sea level. By the time Katrina hit New Orleans, around 2,000 people were bunking in the hospital, including more than 200 patients and 600 workers. Within days after the Hurricane flooding, an investigation into what happened at Memorial Medical Center was launched. The hurricane knocked out power and running water and sent the temperatures inside above 100 degrees. Despite circumstances, investigators filed charges against a doctor and a few nurses for the treatment of patients by injecting them with lethal doses of drugs. Mortuary workers carried 45 corpses from Memorial Hospital, more than any other comparable-size hospital in the flooded city. In 2006, nearly a year after Katrina, Louisiana Department of Justice agents arrested Anna Pou, a doctor at the hospital and four other nurses who were all connected to the deaths of four patients. Pou defended herself on television, saying her role was to "help patients through their pain", a comment she still defends today. She has since been released from her second-degree murder charges. The story of Memorial Medical Center raises other questions: Which patients should get a share of limited resources, and who decides? What does it mean to do the greatest good for the greatest number, and does that end justify all means? Where is the line between appropriate comfort care and mercy killing? How, if at all should doctors and nurses be held accountable for their actions in the most desperate of circumstances.
Outside of the hospital, another conflict was facing the city. Ten days after the storm, the New York Times reported "New Orleans has turned into an armed camp, patrolled by thousands of local, state, and federal law enforcement officers, as well as National Guard troops and active-duty soldiers." Immediately after the flood hit, civilian aid was scarce, but private security forces were as armed as they would be in Iraq, with automatic rifles, guns strapped to legs, and pockets overflowing with ammo. The security officers drove around in SUVs and unmarked cars with no license plates. Locals asked what authority they were operating under and the response was, "We're on contract with the Department of Homeland Security.'
If African American men were caught outside, they ran the risk of being shot at will by passing patrols. The Common Ground Collective is a decentralized network of non-profit organizations offering support to the residents of New Orleans. In the dangerous environment, the Common Ground began to rely on white volunteers to move through a city that had become to perilous for blacks. According to the New Orleans Times-Picayune, the Camp Greyhound jail "was constructed by inmates from Angola and Dixon state prisons was was outfitted with everything a stranded law enforcer could want, including top-of-the-line recreational vehicles to live in and electrical power, courtesy of a yellow Amtrak locomotive. There are computers to check suspects' backgrounds and a mug shot station-complete with heights marked in black on the wall that serves as the backdrop." In his latest book Zeitoun, Dave Eggers tells the story of a local Syrian immigrant who stayed in New Orleans to protect his properties and ended up organizing makeshift relief efforts and rescuing people in a canoe. He continued right up until he was arrested by a group of unidentified, heavily armed men in uniform, thrown into Camp Greyhound, and questioned as a suspected terrorist. In an interview, Eggers said: "Zeitoun was among thousands of people who were doing 'Katrina time' after the storm. There was a complete suspension of all legal processes and there were no hearings, no courts for months and months and not enough folks in the judicial system really seemed all that concerned about it."
People act desperately in desperate times. When the immediate needs of food, clothing, and shelter are threatened, people tend to act in ways that would normally seem out of character. When a city faces disaster, more smaller scale disasters will begin to surface. When left un-addressed these small scale emergencies could begin to grow much bigger over time. It's important to accurately and truthfully assess everything that happens, so the city itself and other cities in the U.S. can be more equipped to handle a similar disasters in the future.
Saturday, December 7, 2013
Media Representation: Thailand's Disappearing Elephants
Anyone who's been to Thailand will agree that elephants are a huge part of Thai culture. As the country's national symbol and ideal snapshots of 'exoticness', elephants are essential to Thailand's tourist trade. Visitors are absolutely bombarded by the elephant experiences on offer when browsing tourist attractions: elephant shows and elephant trekking draw in enormous numbers of travelers all searching for that 'authentic' and up close interaction with these gentle giants, unobtainable back home with only artificial looking zoos on offer.
The disturbing and brutal reality that breeds these 'must see' elephant attractions is not widely known by tourists or Thais. The fact is that mahouts and elephant trainers use what is known as the 'torture training method' to make these wild creatures obedient and tourist friendly. This method involves tying or chaining the elephant up in a confined pen that is too small for the animal to move. True to its name, the elephant is then tortured constantly with beatings, often involving sharp instruments, and left without food or water for days or even weeks. This is designed to break the animal's spirit which often takes its sanity too. Used for centuries to domesticate wild elephants, the torture training method is still accepted as the only viable training method for elephant handlers and is used in almost every elephant attraction in Thailand. Unlike the elephant populations of India and Africa, 95% of Thailand's elephants are domesticated working elephants. Furthermore, only wild elephants have any legal protection in Thailand leaving the vast majority of Thai elephants vulnerable to abuse and neglect by their owners. Deeply rooted in Thai culture, elephant training has traditionally been familial heritage passed down through the generations. Domesticated elephants were often used for logging, which became illegal as widespread destruction of Thailand's forests resulted in worsening monsoons. This left hundreds of elephants out of work and many were simply abandoned by their owners. Unable to survive in the wild, some died and many were used as tourist attractions or for street begging. Street begging elephants are dragged around cities in chains by their owners who charge tourists to feed them. Needless to say the elephants are clearly distressed by the traffic and noise and this practice became illegal due to the traffic dangers posed, however street begging elephants are still a common sight in Bangkok and Chiang Mai. Unlike the mahouts that grew up around elephants and inherited their profession, most of the elephant handlers operating today are opportunists with little or no knowledge of the nature of elephants or what they require to survive.
While some are doing good work, the vast majority of elephant camps are commercial enterprises, making money from tourists keen to have their photos taken with the young ones, bathing with the elephants, riding them, or watching their pain. Some camps even dress up their elephants and have them perform unnatural and demeaning tricks, all in the name of entertainment. But beyond the happy smiles of tourists posing with elephants, there is a hidden dark reality of murder, smuggling and torture for the calves on show. The booming Thai tourist industry is fueling a huge illegal trade in baby elephants that are taken from the wild in Burma, beaten, starved and tortured to break their spirit before being paraded in front of fee-paving holidaymakers. The reports we have recently received indicate that at least 50 to 100 elephant calves are still being taken from the forests of Burma every year to supply the tourist camps. Even worse, it is estimated that for every calf smuggle across the country's 200 mile border with Thailand, up to five adult female and adolescent elephants from the calf''s immediate family group are gunned down in cold blood. The forests of Burma are one of the last strongholds for Asian elephants and second only to India. But such is the scale of the trade, it is thought that the endangered wild elephant population there-estimated up to 5,000 individuals-could be wiped out or damaged beyond repair within ten years or so.
The Asian elephant is facing extinction and is listed as 'endangered' on the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List, the world's most comprehensive inventory of the conservation status of species. With an estimated 25,000 to 35,000 left in the wild, there is roughly one Asian elephant to every 20 African elephants. While ivory poaching has recently escalated to alarming levels again, threatening many African elephant populations, the crisis facing their Asian relatives is still being overlooked-something we've set out to change. The illegal and brutal cross-border trade in endangered wild Asian elephants continues to thrive. Entire families of elephants are routinely being rounded up and the adults shot dead so that babies can be dragged back to Thailand illegally. Undercover cameras filmed the elephants as they endured the dreaded phajaan, a cruel, spirit-breaking ritual where the baby calves will be tied up, with no food and water, and beaten relentlessly for days on end. It is pure torture and according to experts very often the calves will die from their injuries or from stress, starvation, or the sheer heartbreak of seeing their family killed in front of their eyes. After they have been taught to be afraid of humans, the calves that do survive are smuggled across Thailand. When they reach the tourist elephant parks, many of them will be chained to a surrogate mother in an attempt to suggest they have been bred in captivity. Telltale signs can be a complete lack of bonding between 'mother' and calf, the inability of a calf to suckle (because the 'mother' is not actually producing milk), as well as the scars from their "spirit breaking ritual".
The current market price for a healthy broken-in baby elephant is $14,000 to $20,000 and with the rapid growth of tourism and demand for elephants in entertainment-the tourism industry is calculated in Thailand to employ up to 2,000 elephants-there are strong incentives for the trade. The Thai government is eager to claim it has solved the problem, but the intelligence, testimonies and images included in the film and shot in recent months overwhelmingly suggest that the trade still continues. Earlier this year, Thai enforcement officials launched a nationwide crackdown on elephant camps in response to a series of poaching incidents. Unregistered (and therefore illegal, and potentially wild-caught) elephants were confiscated.
Elephant Nature Park, based in Chiang Mai, serving as a sanctuary for sick and injured working elephants and runs on donations. "Education is the key" explains Daeng Chaidee, the park's representative, "Much like the western world forty years ago, there is very little awareness about animal cruelty in Thailand. We host a number of Thai student groups and are starting to see more Thai support, but more is needed before a general population consensus can be established".
The disturbing and brutal reality that breeds these 'must see' elephant attractions is not widely known by tourists or Thais. The fact is that mahouts and elephant trainers use what is known as the 'torture training method' to make these wild creatures obedient and tourist friendly. This method involves tying or chaining the elephant up in a confined pen that is too small for the animal to move. True to its name, the elephant is then tortured constantly with beatings, often involving sharp instruments, and left without food or water for days or even weeks. This is designed to break the animal's spirit which often takes its sanity too. Used for centuries to domesticate wild elephants, the torture training method is still accepted as the only viable training method for elephant handlers and is used in almost every elephant attraction in Thailand. Unlike the elephant populations of India and Africa, 95% of Thailand's elephants are domesticated working elephants. Furthermore, only wild elephants have any legal protection in Thailand leaving the vast majority of Thai elephants vulnerable to abuse and neglect by their owners. Deeply rooted in Thai culture, elephant training has traditionally been familial heritage passed down through the generations. Domesticated elephants were often used for logging, which became illegal as widespread destruction of Thailand's forests resulted in worsening monsoons. This left hundreds of elephants out of work and many were simply abandoned by their owners. Unable to survive in the wild, some died and many were used as tourist attractions or for street begging. Street begging elephants are dragged around cities in chains by their owners who charge tourists to feed them. Needless to say the elephants are clearly distressed by the traffic and noise and this practice became illegal due to the traffic dangers posed, however street begging elephants are still a common sight in Bangkok and Chiang Mai. Unlike the mahouts that grew up around elephants and inherited their profession, most of the elephant handlers operating today are opportunists with little or no knowledge of the nature of elephants or what they require to survive.
While some are doing good work, the vast majority of elephant camps are commercial enterprises, making money from tourists keen to have their photos taken with the young ones, bathing with the elephants, riding them, or watching their pain. Some camps even dress up their elephants and have them perform unnatural and demeaning tricks, all in the name of entertainment. But beyond the happy smiles of tourists posing with elephants, there is a hidden dark reality of murder, smuggling and torture for the calves on show. The booming Thai tourist industry is fueling a huge illegal trade in baby elephants that are taken from the wild in Burma, beaten, starved and tortured to break their spirit before being paraded in front of fee-paving holidaymakers. The reports we have recently received indicate that at least 50 to 100 elephant calves are still being taken from the forests of Burma every year to supply the tourist camps. Even worse, it is estimated that for every calf smuggle across the country's 200 mile border with Thailand, up to five adult female and adolescent elephants from the calf''s immediate family group are gunned down in cold blood. The forests of Burma are one of the last strongholds for Asian elephants and second only to India. But such is the scale of the trade, it is thought that the endangered wild elephant population there-estimated up to 5,000 individuals-could be wiped out or damaged beyond repair within ten years or so.
The Asian elephant is facing extinction and is listed as 'endangered' on the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List, the world's most comprehensive inventory of the conservation status of species. With an estimated 25,000 to 35,000 left in the wild, there is roughly one Asian elephant to every 20 African elephants. While ivory poaching has recently escalated to alarming levels again, threatening many African elephant populations, the crisis facing their Asian relatives is still being overlooked-something we've set out to change. The illegal and brutal cross-border trade in endangered wild Asian elephants continues to thrive. Entire families of elephants are routinely being rounded up and the adults shot dead so that babies can be dragged back to Thailand illegally. Undercover cameras filmed the elephants as they endured the dreaded phajaan, a cruel, spirit-breaking ritual where the baby calves will be tied up, with no food and water, and beaten relentlessly for days on end. It is pure torture and according to experts very often the calves will die from their injuries or from stress, starvation, or the sheer heartbreak of seeing their family killed in front of their eyes. After they have been taught to be afraid of humans, the calves that do survive are smuggled across Thailand. When they reach the tourist elephant parks, many of them will be chained to a surrogate mother in an attempt to suggest they have been bred in captivity. Telltale signs can be a complete lack of bonding between 'mother' and calf, the inability of a calf to suckle (because the 'mother' is not actually producing milk), as well as the scars from their "spirit breaking ritual".
The current market price for a healthy broken-in baby elephant is $14,000 to $20,000 and with the rapid growth of tourism and demand for elephants in entertainment-the tourism industry is calculated in Thailand to employ up to 2,000 elephants-there are strong incentives for the trade. The Thai government is eager to claim it has solved the problem, but the intelligence, testimonies and images included in the film and shot in recent months overwhelmingly suggest that the trade still continues. Earlier this year, Thai enforcement officials launched a nationwide crackdown on elephant camps in response to a series of poaching incidents. Unregistered (and therefore illegal, and potentially wild-caught) elephants were confiscated.
Elephant Nature Park, based in Chiang Mai, serving as a sanctuary for sick and injured working elephants and runs on donations. "Education is the key" explains Daeng Chaidee, the park's representative, "Much like the western world forty years ago, there is very little awareness about animal cruelty in Thailand. We host a number of Thai student groups and are starting to see more Thai support, but more is needed before a general population consensus can be established".
Friday, December 6, 2013
Media Representation: Thailand Tiger Temple
Deep in Western Thailand, in the forests near the border with Myanmar (Burma), rests a forest monastery, but not just any monastery, Wat Pha Luang Ta Bua, better known as -Tiger Temple. It is a temple that has grown from a simple place of worship by a handful of Buddhist monks who took in a single tiger in 1999, into an expansive "sanctuary" with 122 tigers to date. Since then it has become one of the most popular, and controversial, tourist destinations in all of Southeast Asia. Any Google search or internet perusing will yield countless articles and widely varying accounts and opinions on this mysterious place-from Animal Planet's video series in 2004 showcasing the Indochinese tigers and the wonders of the monks nurturing and interacting with these mythical and threatened creatures. But red flags have been raised against the temple, which range from physical abuse and malnourishment to drugging and even partaking in the illegal, black market tiger trade. The close proximity in which tourists are able to interact with the tigers lends itself to both a unique, yet potentially dangerous experience, and at the same time a criticism of the animal's rights. Coming into close proximity with any wild animal, particularly tigers, poses and inherent danger. To address this danger tourists are required to sign a wavier relieving the Tiger Temple of responsibility before entering the grounds and are instructed not to wear bright clothes, sunglasses, hats or kneel in front of the tigers. Despite this, there still remain several instances of injuries and mailings every year. The temple's transformation from a modest forest monastery serving as a simple place of refuge, to a full-blown wildlife sanctuary housing a myriad of animals along with a volunteer program run by Westerners, which includes a full-time veterinarian and a large organization of local staff to run the visitor operations has raised eyebrows among observers and begs the obvious question: Why is a Buddhist monastery operating a full scale wildlife project? Conservation groups, wild life experts, and an assortment of international journalists-claim that the temple is nothing more than a tiger farm for profit, whose "conservation" claims are not only unfeasible, but are completely baseless. The most damning of reports comes from Care for the Wild which sites an entire gamut of offensives against the temple, ranging from the illegal tiger trade to the cruel treatment and conditions in which the tigers are held. The type of tiger that is being bred there is in fact captive of a hybrid genetic type that does nothing to support increasing the wild tiger population now, or in the future-and if anything-may lead tourists to leave thinking that tigers are not in fact reaching critically low numbers in the wild. While some visitors leave happily with their cute tiger photos, other leave with an entirely different impression. "Glorified petting zoo", "tourist trap", and "circus" are not uncommon interpretations by more critical visitors. One of the most condemning voices of the temple and its project is not a tourist, but a former volunteer, Sybeell Foxcroft, who volunteered at the temple in 2007 and worked undercover with Care for the Wild foundation to investigate the conduct of staff and the treatment of tigers. Here is what she had to say, "Part of a documentary made over 4 years, throughout 2007 Australian wildlife conservationist, I worked within the Tiger Temple in Thailand and became a key witness to the wildlife trade and the abuse of the tigers and other creatures within the Temple. I worked as a pivotal undercover investigator for a conservation agency to expose this place. After the final report was release to the public in 2008, little was done. Dismayed at the missed opportunities to save these tigers and other animals, and halt the wildlife trade within the Temple, but not disheartened, I continued to investigate the temple on my own and gather evidence through my own wildlife investigation business, CEE-4 Life. On my last trip back in 2010, the reality of this place is apparent, it is a Tiger Farm. The other animals trapped in this place lead horrid lives. I try to bring to light the truth on animal abuse and trade in a 13 part documentary- Behind the Cloak of the Buddha. This is the beginning, that set everything in motion."
There are believed to be about 3,200 tigers left in the wild and more than 13,000 in captivity-half of which are in China. Tigers found in the wild are down 97% compared with a century ago. Thailand is thought to be home to between 250 and 300 wild tigers, but they are vulnerable. The biggest threat is a loss of habitat. Although nominally protected, Thailand's national parks are being encroached upon by human development, particularly monoculture plantations, roads and second homes for Bangkok's rich. Many locals also subsidize their incomes by poaching and illegal logging aloe and tropical hardwood. Park managers and police are worried that poachers and illegal traders would target the tigers once news gets out about their numbers in the area. The stakes are high. According to conservationists and police, poachers are paid 7,000 to 15,000 baht per kg for a tiger carcass. Middlemen than sell the animals on for about 10 times that amount, mostly to customers in China and Vietnam, where the animal's bones and penis are used in tonics and aphrodisiacs. Yet penalties for wildlife offences remain absurdly low, with fines ranging from 500 to 40,000 baht. Raids have shown Thailand has become a hub of the tiger trade, due to its location between other range nations in south-east Asia and China, the main market. The business is also supplied by Thailand's many tiger farms, some for which claim to operate as zoos while covertly breeding animals for sale. The most notorious is the Sri Racha zoo near Pattaya, which police have raided on several occasions, confiscating hundreds of animals. Tourists still flock to watch the farm-bred tigers jump through flaming hoops, suckle at pigs and walk around on their hind legs to the music of the Can-Can and laughter from the audience. Police and conservationists believe "zoos" encourage poaching, both as a source of breeding stock and by sustaining the market for tiger products.
There are believed to be about 3,200 tigers left in the wild and more than 13,000 in captivity-half of which are in China. Tigers found in the wild are down 97% compared with a century ago. Thailand is thought to be home to between 250 and 300 wild tigers, but they are vulnerable. The biggest threat is a loss of habitat. Although nominally protected, Thailand's national parks are being encroached upon by human development, particularly monoculture plantations, roads and second homes for Bangkok's rich. Many locals also subsidize their incomes by poaching and illegal logging aloe and tropical hardwood. Park managers and police are worried that poachers and illegal traders would target the tigers once news gets out about their numbers in the area. The stakes are high. According to conservationists and police, poachers are paid 7,000 to 15,000 baht per kg for a tiger carcass. Middlemen than sell the animals on for about 10 times that amount, mostly to customers in China and Vietnam, where the animal's bones and penis are used in tonics and aphrodisiacs. Yet penalties for wildlife offences remain absurdly low, with fines ranging from 500 to 40,000 baht. Raids have shown Thailand has become a hub of the tiger trade, due to its location between other range nations in south-east Asia and China, the main market. The business is also supplied by Thailand's many tiger farms, some for which claim to operate as zoos while covertly breeding animals for sale. The most notorious is the Sri Racha zoo near Pattaya, which police have raided on several occasions, confiscating hundreds of animals. Tourists still flock to watch the farm-bred tigers jump through flaming hoops, suckle at pigs and walk around on their hind legs to the music of the Can-Can and laughter from the audience. Police and conservationists believe "zoos" encourage poaching, both as a source of breeding stock and by sustaining the market for tiger products.
Humanitarian Aid and Politics: Faces of Agent Orange, Post Vietnam War
Agent Orange, a substance long forgotten by most Americans in this fast life of 2013 but the afterlife of such an encounter seems almost post Apocalyptic for those who survived the Vietnam War. There were 3 million Americans to survive the Vietnam War but to most their survival came at a cost.
On March 11, 2013, The American Cancer Society gave an updated medical review stating: "The US military used large amounts of mixtures known as defoliants, which are chemicals that cause the leaves to fall off plants. One of these defoliants was Agent Orange, and some troops were exposed to it. During the Vietnam War, US military forces sprayed millions of gallons of herbicides (plant-killing chemicals) on lands in Vietnam, Laos, and other nearby areas to remove forest cover, destroy crops, and clear vegetation from the perimeters of US bases. This effort, known as Operation Ranch Hand, lasted from 1962 to 1971. Exposures could have occurred when the chemicals were breathed in, ingested in contaminated food or drink, or absorbed through the skin. Exposure may have been possible through the eyes or through breaks in the skin, as well."
Marjorie Cohn, a professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law and former president of the National Lawyers Guild and Jeanne Mirer, a New York attorney and president of the International Association of Democratic Lawyer are both on the board of the Vietnam Agent Orange Relief & Responsibility Campaign and are avidly distraught at the lack of responsibility the US is taking for the victims of agent orange. They state, "While this struggle continues, the three million surviving Vietnamese victims have received no such compensation or any humanitarian aid from the U.S. government. Nor have the children of the vast majority of U.S. veterans suffering from agent Orange-related birth defects received any medical assistance. The United States does not want to admit that its use of chemicals with poison as weapons of war on civilian populations violates the laws of war, which recognize the principle of distinction between military and civilian objects, requiring armies to avoid civilian targets. These laws of war are enshrined in the Hague Convention and the Nuremberg principles, and are codified in the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the Optional Protocol of 1977, as well as the International Criminal Court statute. Taxpayers pick up the tab of the Agent Orange Compensation fund for U.S. Veterans at a cost of 1.52 billion dollars a year. The chemical companies, most specifically Dow and Monsanto, which profited from the manufacture of Agent Orange, paid a pittance to settle the veterans' lawsuit to compensate them, as the unintended victims, for their Agent Orange-related illnesses. But the Vietnamese continue to suffer from these violations with almost no recognition, as do the offspring of Agent Orange-exposed U.S. veterans and Vietnamese-Americans."
While in Vietnam, the veterans were told not to worry, and were persuaded the chemical was harmless. After returning home, Vietnam veterans began to suspect their ill health or the instances of their wives having miscarriages or children born with birth defects might be related to Agent Orange and the other toxic herbicides to which they were exposed in Vietnam. Veterans began to file claims in 1977 to the Department of Veterans Affairs for disability payments for health care for conditions they believed were associated with exposure to Agent Orange, or more specifically, dioxin, but their claims were denied unless they could prove the condition began when they were in the service or within one year of their discharge. By April 1993, the Department of Veterans Affairs had only compensated 486 victims, although it had received disability claims from 39,419 soldiers who had been exposed to Agent Orange while serving in Vietnam. Women had higher rates of miscarriage and stillbirths, as did livestock such as cattle, water buffalo, and pigs. Children in the areas where Agent Orange was used have been affected and have multiple health problems, including cleft palate, mental disabilities, hernias, and extra fingers and toes. In the 1970s, high levels of dioxin were found in the breast milk of South Vietnamese women and in the blood of U.S. soldiers who had served in Vietnam. The most affected zones are the mountainous area along Truong Son (Long Mountains) and the border between Vietnam and Cambodia. The affected residents are living in substandard conditions with many genetic diseases.
Some studies showed that veterans who served in the South during the war have increased rates of cancer, and nerve, digestive, skin and respiratory disorders. Veterans from the south had higher rates of throat cancer, acute/chronic leukemia, Hodgkin's lymphoma and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, prostate cancer, lung cancer, colon cancer, soft tissue sarcoma and liver cancer.
Military personnel who loaded airplanes and helicopters used in Ranch Hand probably sustained some of the heaviest exposures. Members of the Army Chemical Corps, who stored and mixed herbicides and defoliated the perimeters of military bases, and mechanics who worked on the helicopters and planes, are also thought to have had some of the heaviest exposures.
Agent Orange and it's victims in most of today's Americans could be considered out of sight, out of mind. However, the lack of responsibility by the US government and the chemical companies involved is not something to turn a blind eye too. When war strikes again and the US citizens experience the backlash of war, can we count on the government to take care of it's people? We stand up for things to win our race of earning a place in the history books but the war isn't over for so many others. The victims of the Vietnam War and especially agent orange, will wage this war for the rest of their lives. When is war considered a success? What scenario/'s entice the US government to take responsibility for their own mistakes and what scenario's do not?
On March 11, 2013, The American Cancer Society gave an updated medical review stating: "The US military used large amounts of mixtures known as defoliants, which are chemicals that cause the leaves to fall off plants. One of these defoliants was Agent Orange, and some troops were exposed to it. During the Vietnam War, US military forces sprayed millions of gallons of herbicides (plant-killing chemicals) on lands in Vietnam, Laos, and other nearby areas to remove forest cover, destroy crops, and clear vegetation from the perimeters of US bases. This effort, known as Operation Ranch Hand, lasted from 1962 to 1971. Exposures could have occurred when the chemicals were breathed in, ingested in contaminated food or drink, or absorbed through the skin. Exposure may have been possible through the eyes or through breaks in the skin, as well."
Marjorie Cohn, a professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law and former president of the National Lawyers Guild and Jeanne Mirer, a New York attorney and president of the International Association of Democratic Lawyer are both on the board of the Vietnam Agent Orange Relief & Responsibility Campaign and are avidly distraught at the lack of responsibility the US is taking for the victims of agent orange. They state, "While this struggle continues, the three million surviving Vietnamese victims have received no such compensation or any humanitarian aid from the U.S. government. Nor have the children of the vast majority of U.S. veterans suffering from agent Orange-related birth defects received any medical assistance. The United States does not want to admit that its use of chemicals with poison as weapons of war on civilian populations violates the laws of war, which recognize the principle of distinction between military and civilian objects, requiring armies to avoid civilian targets. These laws of war are enshrined in the Hague Convention and the Nuremberg principles, and are codified in the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the Optional Protocol of 1977, as well as the International Criminal Court statute. Taxpayers pick up the tab of the Agent Orange Compensation fund for U.S. Veterans at a cost of 1.52 billion dollars a year. The chemical companies, most specifically Dow and Monsanto, which profited from the manufacture of Agent Orange, paid a pittance to settle the veterans' lawsuit to compensate them, as the unintended victims, for their Agent Orange-related illnesses. But the Vietnamese continue to suffer from these violations with almost no recognition, as do the offspring of Agent Orange-exposed U.S. veterans and Vietnamese-Americans."
While in Vietnam, the veterans were told not to worry, and were persuaded the chemical was harmless. After returning home, Vietnam veterans began to suspect their ill health or the instances of their wives having miscarriages or children born with birth defects might be related to Agent Orange and the other toxic herbicides to which they were exposed in Vietnam. Veterans began to file claims in 1977 to the Department of Veterans Affairs for disability payments for health care for conditions they believed were associated with exposure to Agent Orange, or more specifically, dioxin, but their claims were denied unless they could prove the condition began when they were in the service or within one year of their discharge. By April 1993, the Department of Veterans Affairs had only compensated 486 victims, although it had received disability claims from 39,419 soldiers who had been exposed to Agent Orange while serving in Vietnam. Women had higher rates of miscarriage and stillbirths, as did livestock such as cattle, water buffalo, and pigs. Children in the areas where Agent Orange was used have been affected and have multiple health problems, including cleft palate, mental disabilities, hernias, and extra fingers and toes. In the 1970s, high levels of dioxin were found in the breast milk of South Vietnamese women and in the blood of U.S. soldiers who had served in Vietnam. The most affected zones are the mountainous area along Truong Son (Long Mountains) and the border between Vietnam and Cambodia. The affected residents are living in substandard conditions with many genetic diseases.
Some studies showed that veterans who served in the South during the war have increased rates of cancer, and nerve, digestive, skin and respiratory disorders. Veterans from the south had higher rates of throat cancer, acute/chronic leukemia, Hodgkin's lymphoma and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, prostate cancer, lung cancer, colon cancer, soft tissue sarcoma and liver cancer.
Military personnel who loaded airplanes and helicopters used in Ranch Hand probably sustained some of the heaviest exposures. Members of the Army Chemical Corps, who stored and mixed herbicides and defoliated the perimeters of military bases, and mechanics who worked on the helicopters and planes, are also thought to have had some of the heaviest exposures.
Agent Orange and it's victims in most of today's Americans could be considered out of sight, out of mind. However, the lack of responsibility by the US government and the chemical companies involved is not something to turn a blind eye too. When war strikes again and the US citizens experience the backlash of war, can we count on the government to take care of it's people? We stand up for things to win our race of earning a place in the history books but the war isn't over for so many others. The victims of the Vietnam War and especially agent orange, will wage this war for the rest of their lives. When is war considered a success? What scenario/'s entice the US government to take responsibility for their own mistakes and what scenario's do not?
Media Representation: Vietnam War, a Lasting Impact
Media can have a profound and lasting impact on culture and society for better or for worse. The imprint of images stay with us, long after the story has passed a new one has taken it's place. The Vietnam War was the start of a new era of media coverage. Radio was no longer the number one, television was now taking the lead. The intensely negative coverage of the war influenced both politicians and the public. Americans depended on television to see and understand the war, but the death and destruction they saw appeared as irrational killing when prospects for the war became increasingly negative. Therefore, the majority of Americans withdrew their support for the war after the Tet Offensive. War coverage declined from 90 percent of all newscasts to 61 percent from Richard Nixon's election through February 1969. Though the media had been covering the anti-war movement before 1968, it now overshadowed the war itself. Draft-card burning and demonstrations provided television with fresher conflict, human impact, and moral issues. With the massive loss of public support for the war, politicians initiated withdrawal policies. Television no longer focused on combat, but on the political process.
John Laurence, a CBS reporter who covered the Vietnam War from 1965 to 1970 admits that the truth rarely got reported: "We decided where to go, what to observe, what to film, what not to film, what questions to ask, and how to describe what we saw and were told. Veterans referred to atrocities committed by the North Vietnamese (NVA) and Viet Cong (VC) armies, which outnumbered U.S. committed atrocities by "one thousand to one". "The North Vietnamese thought nothing of attaching a bomb to a little kid and sending that kid into a group of American soldiers." Veterans claim that the media only covers what makes a profit: "The media tends to cover what they think they will sell."
"The North Vietnamese thought nothing of attaching a bomb to a little kid and sending that kid into a group of American soldiers." From an american viewpoint, the Vietnam War is not well understood. Even though it was part of the American daily life for some fifteen years, there is no consensus as to its purpose and result. Some Americans believe that Vietnam was a national policy blunder costing some 58,000 American lives and billions of tax dollars. That it divided the country at a time when it most needed to be unified, leaving scars that are yet to be healed. Others believe the war was a noble cause similar to the United Nations effort that kept South Korea free. During the war, America dropped 8 million ton of bombs between 1965 and 1973. Bombs that failed to detonate on impact became de facto land mines. The Vietnamese government estimates that more than 100,000 people have been killed or injured by exploded ordnance since the war ended.
We are influenced by what the media says, whether we want to be or not. What if people were given the opportunity to discover war for themselves and war through falsely leading eyes.
John Laurence, a CBS reporter who covered the Vietnam War from 1965 to 1970 admits that the truth rarely got reported: "We decided where to go, what to observe, what to film, what not to film, what questions to ask, and how to describe what we saw and were told. Veterans referred to atrocities committed by the North Vietnamese (NVA) and Viet Cong (VC) armies, which outnumbered U.S. committed atrocities by "one thousand to one". "The North Vietnamese thought nothing of attaching a bomb to a little kid and sending that kid into a group of American soldiers." Veterans claim that the media only covers what makes a profit: "The media tends to cover what they think they will sell."
"The North Vietnamese thought nothing of attaching a bomb to a little kid and sending that kid into a group of American soldiers." From an american viewpoint, the Vietnam War is not well understood. Even though it was part of the American daily life for some fifteen years, there is no consensus as to its purpose and result. Some Americans believe that Vietnam was a national policy blunder costing some 58,000 American lives and billions of tax dollars. That it divided the country at a time when it most needed to be unified, leaving scars that are yet to be healed. Others believe the war was a noble cause similar to the United Nations effort that kept South Korea free. During the war, America dropped 8 million ton of bombs between 1965 and 1973. Bombs that failed to detonate on impact became de facto land mines. The Vietnamese government estimates that more than 100,000 people have been killed or injured by exploded ordnance since the war ended.
We are influenced by what the media says, whether we want to be or not. What if people were given the opportunity to discover war for themselves and war through falsely leading eyes.
Disaster Journalism: Japan, the Aftermath
The 9.0 Japan Earthquake resulting in a tsunami that tore through the country's north-eastern coastal communities killed almost 16,000 people and destroyed the lives of thousands more. In Miyagi, Iwate, and Fukushima whole communities were wiped out by the ferocious power of the tsunami. On top of the current known death toll, further 3,000 people are still listed as missing. Even among those that survived, many were unable to return home. According to the Japanese authorities, more than 333,000 are still living in some kind of temporary accommodation, including those staying with friends and family or in hotels.
National Police Agency of Japan figures show 300,000 buildings were destroyed and a further one million damaged, either by the quake, tsunami or resulting fires. Almost 4,000 roads, 78 bridges and 29 railways were also affected. Patrick Fuller, of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies and who was there in the immediate aftermath of the disaster, tells of the "complete and utter devastation". "The only way I can describe how it was is that it was just like out of the Terminator movie-a futuristic scene of mangled and twisted wreckage." The Japanese authorities estimate a staggering 25 million tonnes of debris was generated in the three worst-affected prefectures. This is many times greater than the amount created by the 2010 Haiti earthquake.
Much of the rubble and waste has been cleared from the streets, but the Japanese environment ministry last month revealed only 5% had been disposed of and 72% was still being stored at temporary sites. Officials explained the delays had been caused by a number of factors, including difficulties finding sites for incinerators in affected areas and the reluctance in other prefectures of Japan to take the waste amid fears of radiation contamination. Environment Minister Goshi Hosono said the ministry's original goal of completing disposal by the end of March 2014 was unrealistic and urged other parts of the country to help out. However, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) says the Japanese authorities have made remarkable progress considering the upheaval and disruption caused by the disaster. The organisation praised Japan's emphasis on waste segregation and recycling and said lessons could be learned from the way the country had managed the quake and tsunami debris. The task for the Japanese government now is to help its people get back on their feet, given the inevitable crippling economic cost of such a disaster.
Japan has struggled to rebuild communities and to clean up radiation from the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear plant, whose reactors melted down after its cooling systems were disabled by the tsunami. The government has yet to devise a new energy strategy-a central issue for its struggling economy with all but two of the country's nuclear reactors offline. About half of those displaced are evacuees from areas near the nuclear plant. Hundreds of them filed a lawsuit demanding compensation from the government and the now-defunct plant's operator, Tokyo Electric Power Co., or TEPCO, for their suffering and losses. "Years after the disasters, neither the government nor TEPCO has clearly acknowledged their responsibility, nor have they provided sufficient support to cover the damages," said Izutaro Managi, a lawyer representing the plaintiffs.
Throughout the disaster zone, the tens of thousands of survivors living in temporary housing are impatient to get resettled, a process that could take up to a decade, officials say. "What I really want is to once again have a 'my home,'" said Migaku Suzuki, a 69-year-old farm worker in Rikuzentakata, who lost the house he had just finished building in the disaster. Suzuki also lost a son in the tsunami. Further south, in Fukushima prefecture, some 160,000 evacuees are uncertain if they will ever be able to return to homes around the nuclear power plant, were the meltdowns in three reactors spewed radiation into the surrounding soil and water. The lawsuit filed by a group of 800 people in Fukushima demands an apology payment of 50,000 yen ($625) a month for each victim until all radiation from the accident is wiped out, a process that could take decades. Another 900 plan similar cases in Tokyo and elsewhere. Managi said he and fellow lawyers hope to get 10,000 to join the lawsuits. Evacuees are anxious to return home but worried about the potential, still uncertain risks from exposure to the radiation from the disaster, the worst since Chernobyl in 1986. While there have been no clear cases of cancer linked to radiation from the plant, the upheaval in people's lives, uncertainty about the future and long-term health concerns, especially for children, have taken an immense psychological toll on thousands of residents.
Towns want to rebuild, but they face the stark reality of dwindling, aging populations that are shrinking further as residents give up on ever finding new jobs. The tsunami and nuclear crisis devastated local fish processing and tourism industries, accelerating a decline that began decades before. Meanwhile, the costly decommissioning the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear plant could take 40 years as its operator works on finding and removing melted nuclear fuel from inside, disposing the spent fuel rods and treating the many tons of contaminated waste water used to cool the reactors. Following the Fukushima disaster, Japan's 50 still viable nuclear reactors were shut down for regular inspections and then for special tests to check their disaster preparedness. Two were restarted last summer to help meet power shortages, but most Japanese remain opposed to restarting more plants.
Yuko Endo, village chief in Kawachi, said many residents might not go back if they were kept waiting too long. Restrictions on access are gradually being lifted as workers remove debris and wipe down roofs by hand. "If I were told to wait for two more years, I might explode," said Endo, who is determined to revive his town of mostly empty houses and overgrown field.
Last year, the Cabinet Office of Japan estimated it cost the country 16.9 trillion yen. But the country's national and local authorities believe the reconstruction will actually cost more than 23 trillion yen over a decade. Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said that the government intends to make "visible" reconstruction progress and accelerate resettlement of those left homeless by streamlining legal and administrative procedures many blame for the delays. "I pray that the peaceful lives of those affected can resume as soon as possible," Emperor Akihito said at a somber memorial service at Tokyo's National Theater. Since taking office in late December. Abe has made a point of frequently visiting the disaster zone, promising faster action and plans to raise the long-term reconstruction budget.
National Police Agency of Japan figures show 300,000 buildings were destroyed and a further one million damaged, either by the quake, tsunami or resulting fires. Almost 4,000 roads, 78 bridges and 29 railways were also affected. Patrick Fuller, of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies and who was there in the immediate aftermath of the disaster, tells of the "complete and utter devastation". "The only way I can describe how it was is that it was just like out of the Terminator movie-a futuristic scene of mangled and twisted wreckage." The Japanese authorities estimate a staggering 25 million tonnes of debris was generated in the three worst-affected prefectures. This is many times greater than the amount created by the 2010 Haiti earthquake.
Much of the rubble and waste has been cleared from the streets, but the Japanese environment ministry last month revealed only 5% had been disposed of and 72% was still being stored at temporary sites. Officials explained the delays had been caused by a number of factors, including difficulties finding sites for incinerators in affected areas and the reluctance in other prefectures of Japan to take the waste amid fears of radiation contamination. Environment Minister Goshi Hosono said the ministry's original goal of completing disposal by the end of March 2014 was unrealistic and urged other parts of the country to help out. However, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) says the Japanese authorities have made remarkable progress considering the upheaval and disruption caused by the disaster. The organisation praised Japan's emphasis on waste segregation and recycling and said lessons could be learned from the way the country had managed the quake and tsunami debris. The task for the Japanese government now is to help its people get back on their feet, given the inevitable crippling economic cost of such a disaster.
Japan has struggled to rebuild communities and to clean up radiation from the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear plant, whose reactors melted down after its cooling systems were disabled by the tsunami. The government has yet to devise a new energy strategy-a central issue for its struggling economy with all but two of the country's nuclear reactors offline. About half of those displaced are evacuees from areas near the nuclear plant. Hundreds of them filed a lawsuit demanding compensation from the government and the now-defunct plant's operator, Tokyo Electric Power Co., or TEPCO, for their suffering and losses. "Years after the disasters, neither the government nor TEPCO has clearly acknowledged their responsibility, nor have they provided sufficient support to cover the damages," said Izutaro Managi, a lawyer representing the plaintiffs.
Throughout the disaster zone, the tens of thousands of survivors living in temporary housing are impatient to get resettled, a process that could take up to a decade, officials say. "What I really want is to once again have a 'my home,'" said Migaku Suzuki, a 69-year-old farm worker in Rikuzentakata, who lost the house he had just finished building in the disaster. Suzuki also lost a son in the tsunami. Further south, in Fukushima prefecture, some 160,000 evacuees are uncertain if they will ever be able to return to homes around the nuclear power plant, were the meltdowns in three reactors spewed radiation into the surrounding soil and water. The lawsuit filed by a group of 800 people in Fukushima demands an apology payment of 50,000 yen ($625) a month for each victim until all radiation from the accident is wiped out, a process that could take decades. Another 900 plan similar cases in Tokyo and elsewhere. Managi said he and fellow lawyers hope to get 10,000 to join the lawsuits. Evacuees are anxious to return home but worried about the potential, still uncertain risks from exposure to the radiation from the disaster, the worst since Chernobyl in 1986. While there have been no clear cases of cancer linked to radiation from the plant, the upheaval in people's lives, uncertainty about the future and long-term health concerns, especially for children, have taken an immense psychological toll on thousands of residents.
Towns want to rebuild, but they face the stark reality of dwindling, aging populations that are shrinking further as residents give up on ever finding new jobs. The tsunami and nuclear crisis devastated local fish processing and tourism industries, accelerating a decline that began decades before. Meanwhile, the costly decommissioning the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear plant could take 40 years as its operator works on finding and removing melted nuclear fuel from inside, disposing the spent fuel rods and treating the many tons of contaminated waste water used to cool the reactors. Following the Fukushima disaster, Japan's 50 still viable nuclear reactors were shut down for regular inspections and then for special tests to check their disaster preparedness. Two were restarted last summer to help meet power shortages, but most Japanese remain opposed to restarting more plants.
Yuko Endo, village chief in Kawachi, said many residents might not go back if they were kept waiting too long. Restrictions on access are gradually being lifted as workers remove debris and wipe down roofs by hand. "If I were told to wait for two more years, I might explode," said Endo, who is determined to revive his town of mostly empty houses and overgrown field.
Last year, the Cabinet Office of Japan estimated it cost the country 16.9 trillion yen. But the country's national and local authorities believe the reconstruction will actually cost more than 23 trillion yen over a decade. Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said that the government intends to make "visible" reconstruction progress and accelerate resettlement of those left homeless by streamlining legal and administrative procedures many blame for the delays. "I pray that the peaceful lives of those affected can resume as soon as possible," Emperor Akihito said at a somber memorial service at Tokyo's National Theater. Since taking office in late December. Abe has made a point of frequently visiting the disaster zone, promising faster action and plans to raise the long-term reconstruction budget.
Thursday, December 5, 2013
Disaster Journalism: Haiti Revisited
The earthquake in Haiti was one of the top five deadliest disasters in contemporary history, claiming more than 315,000 lives. The disaster was also one of the most widely covered events in modern history; international media attention helped raise $5.6 billion in funds in the two years following the earthquake. What happened? Where did the money go? Nearly four years after the earthquake, media attention on Haiti has significantly diminished. And yet, living conditions there have improved only slightly and are among the worst in the world: 325,000 people are still living under tents in scores of camps. Haiti is the third hungriest country in the world after Somalia and Afghanistan and the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere. 78% of Haitians live on less than $2 US per day. Coverage of issues in Haiti has often been accompanied by media distortion leading to effects such as minimal or no coverage of problems and massive human rights violations.
Today, the country is still seething with problems and yet because the disaster is a thing of the past, Haiti is no longer a primary concern. Humanitarian aid assistance that we helped to provide has fallen away and Haitian's are left to deal with these problems on their own. In a country where there is a lack of literacy and education, a fallen economy, and no solid leadership, rebuilding on their own is a step towards a second disaster. A few situations recently have surfaced, calling attention back to the victims of the earthquake.
Today, the country is still seething with problems and yet because the disaster is a thing of the past, Haiti is no longer a primary concern. Humanitarian aid assistance that we helped to provide has fallen away and Haitian's are left to deal with these problems on their own. In a country where there is a lack of literacy and education, a fallen economy, and no solid leadership, rebuilding on their own is a step towards a second disaster. A few situations recently have surfaced, calling attention back to the victims of the earthquake.
Garment factories in Haiti, the backbone of an effort to revive the country's earthquake-shattered economy, have deprived workers of their wages to keep costs of their T-shirts and other export goods low, according to a report to be issued by a labor rights group. It said that offenders included the Caracol Industrial Park in northern Haiti, which the United States helped build and has cited a centerpiece of reconstruction efforts, and factories that make products for prominent retailers like Gap, Target, and Walmart.
Cholera has killed more than 8,300 Haitians and sickened more than 650,000 in the earthquake-ravaged country, the poorest in the Western Hemisphere, since it first reappeared in October 2010. While the worst of the epidemic has eased, it still kills about 1,000 Haitians a year. Advocates for Haitian victims of the deadly cholera epidemic that first afflicted their country three years ago, said they were taking the step of suing the United Nations, asserting that the organization's peacekeeping force in Haiti was responsible for introducing the disease through sewage contamination from its barracks. United Nations officials have said they are committed to eradicating the cholera, but they have not conceded that the organization was inadvertently responsible for causing it.
The media has a prime role in how much attention we give at any given time to those in need. Once a story is considered old news, the media and the attention of those watching, direct their energy to the newest or most troubling news. What is the answer here? How much attention should be given to old stories? When is it safe to turn our eyes off of victims and those surviving from natural disasters?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)