On the Beach- contemplating the Tsunami disaster
New Year's Day. I have been feeling frustrated and guilty, as I seriously have no money to give to the relief funds (I have exactly $1.60 in my account), and have been unable to offer material support in the way of blankets etc. Most of the humanitarian agencies don't appear to want or need it- only cash. We were visiting Thunder Bay in Northern Ontario when the tsunami struck Asia at Xmas, killing thousands and displacing millons more and have since returned to Toronto. I am already too glued to the news at the best of times... to distract me, my boyfriend took me out for a walk on the beach beside Lake Ontario. The photos I took, upon retrospect, evidently reflect my ongoing thoughts and mood.
The first thing we encountered was a Polish memorial to their dead, who perished by the thousands in Russian camps. People are always laying fresh wreaths at the site. The snow has melted today, revealing another fatality in the form of a dead cat. Evidently run over on adjacent King Street, and then either dragged itself to the memorial to die or was placed here. But the memorial reads "Katyn", which leads me to believe that someone either found this to be a funny or ironic gesture and placed the cat here intentionally (not inconceivable), or thought it to be an appropriate resting place with the best of intentions (more hopeful, less likely).
We crossed the bridge to the lakeshore. Under it were several makeshift camps- lean-to's composed of sleeping bags, plastic sheets, garbage bags. How the homeless survive the sub-zero temperatures is a mystery. People treated like the debris they call home. It was impossible to tell if there was a person in the midst of the tumble of material. I thought of photos of the flotsam floating on the ocean in the wake of the tsunami- a similarly impersonal mixture of garbage and humanity. We later passed by one such man walking on the boardwalk carrying his bundle. Eyes determinedly downcast, jaw resolute.
We surprisingly came upon of all things a coconut lying on the icy shore of the lake. The label read Dominican Republic- naturally grown. It was frozen solid, covered in a coating of ice. People in the tsunami-affected areas have been forced to survive on coconuts for food and water. The fish have been contaminated by the dead bodies in the water. I lived off coconuts myself years ago. I had travelled to Hawaii with $20 and a one way ticket and been forced to do the same for several days. After two days of only coconut to eat, the pulp turns to a dry, flaky mush in your mouth, impossible to swallow. You suck it dry, then spit it out. At least it's a sterile source of liquid, nutritious and certainly better than nothing.
Further down the beach- with a view of a frozen lake and the break wall behind it- a phone on a pole which had the word "emergency: written on it. The phone read- "Distress phone- Push for Help".
There is no tsunami warning system in the Indian ocean- a problem which will now have to be addressed. Nevertheless, it could have been predicted in the case of several countries where there was a delay of up to several hours after the earthquake. Where, if any, were the tsunami warning calls directed to? Certainly not the ordinary people living near the beach. Or the precious tourists. Or perhaps in view of their presence, there were none... a Thai meterologist, name withheld, shed some light on the mystery...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4139435.stm
"Mr Thaksin's (the Thai Prime Minister) remarks follow allegations made by an unnamed member of the Thai meteorological department this week that a tsunami alert was not issued for fear of hurting the country's important tourism industry in case it turned out to be a false alarm. "
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4127927.stm
None of the countries affected by the tsunami issued a warning.
Sulamee Prachuab, head of the Thai Meteorological Department's Seismological Bureau, recalled that a tidal wave warning issued five years earlier after an earthquake in Papua New Guinea had led to complaints from the tourism authority that such alerts hurt the industry.
Geoffrey York, writing in the Toronto Globe and Mail ( F1 Jan.1.05 ) , spoke of a boat trip he undertook to the Thai Island of Phi Phi in the wake of the disaster. The yacht, owned by a wealthy businessman, was intact as it had been ordered to rest out the storm in the high seas as soon as its owner had heard of the disaster in Sumatra. He predicted the incoming tide based on the magnitude of the tremor, the magic number for the yacht owner being 6.2 and above. According to an article written by Paul Koring in Washington, Brian Atwater, a US geological expert, places the limit at 9. and above. Nevertheless, an hour's grace had saved his boat from destruction and yet no-one in the Thai government appeared to share his foresight and issue warnings of their own. The quake, whose epicentre was off the coast of Sumatra, was believed initially by the Pacific watch keepers to have been in the range of 8., whereas it was in fact 10 times that figure.
The front page of the Globe contained what they believe to be a clever headline- (oh please spare me the inappropriate puns of the media... )"The hell after high water". The photo which accompanies it is of a yuppie couple of western descent (ok- read white) sunbathing on a Thai beach in their little oasis of deckchairs, umbrella and snack table, while the clean-up of the utter devastation goes on behind them. The woman reclines clad in bikini and sunglasses while her overweight companion watches the activity intently from his chair. The design on its fabric is revealed to be an idealized tropical beach - a palm tree shadowed against a sunset. It is ironic- and absolutely abhorrent. A great photo though- depicting a couple who I hope someone had the guts to confront, overturn their perch and suggest that they make their way to the airport and ship out immediately. They shame us all.
In the same Toronto paper appeared a column written by a journalist who does not warrant the title. I sent the following letter to the editor, though I don't expect it will be published. I'm sad that in spite of the distance, a google search will probably reveal her vitriol and inaccuracies to the poor Australian woman she maligns in the piece. I'm including my letter below in the hope that it may also appear in the search and at least correct some of the slanderous comments. I will also include links to other articles which contain a more accurate account of the event Blatchford described. To find her original article, seek out her column if you will but be assured that it isn't worth reading.
To the Editor-
You have done the brave and traumatized people who have survived the tsunami disaster an incredible disservice by allowing Christie Blatchford (Globe and mail, A3, Jan.1, 2005) to misrepresent them so dreadfully. The victims were gracious enough to share their horrific stories with the media, something at least one family is now likely regretting.
In particular, Jillian Searle of Australia, who had the misfortune to get caught up in the first "wave" in Phuket with 2 small children, and found herself unable to swim with both. From the relative safety of her hotel room in North Dakota, Globe writer Christie Blatchford blithely condemns Searle for her unhappy decision to choose between the two boys in order to survive. She relinquished the eldest who, according to Blatchford, the mother allegedly, "marked for death" as he could not swim. Blatchford imagines herself in a more heroic, albeit maudlin, role- "I think I would have preferred to die, holding onto both small hands... ", later, "that wee hand.", for additional poignancy.
Blatchford attacks the poor woman further, stating, "I can't believe she was quite sane, for she offered herself no protection from the awfulness of the truth of what she did." Ah yes, truth. But who's "truth" are we really discussing? The reader is presented only with Blathford's slanderous allegations, which obscure "truth" through omission in a bid to feed the writer’s own maudlin fantasies and unfortunately available byline.
We are led to believe that Blatchford researched her story, as any respectable journalist would. As I read her version, I recalled a previous report that Searle had not, in fact, "let slip that wee hand" to the water, but passed him on to another woman’s care, who had unfortunately lost the child when the second wave hit. The boy managed to survive nevertheless. Quite a different scenario- less dramatic, more forgiving to the mother, and a happier ending for the Searles than many other families under similar circumstances. It took me all of 3 minutes searching on Google to uncover several articles supporting this version of the "truth". I have included the urls below to save you the time.
Which leads me to something I and other Globe readers in my acquaintance have been wondering aloud in recent times- what exactly is Christie Blatchford doing on the third page of a generally respected newspaper, and why was she recruited from the ranks of those we don't choose to read? Are you trying to incite a reaction from your readers, by publishing such diatribe, to stir them out of a perceived complacency? Perhaps you believe that by offering this reactionary drivel alongside exemplary writers such as Geoffrey York, you are somehow presenting a balanced form of journalism. You are in fact only succeeding in annoying me as a reader, and putting at ease my decision to subscribe to the Guardian Weekly and not the Globe and Mail.
L.Hammond, Montreal, Quebec
More articles-
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/12/29/1103996613128.html?oneclick=true
Jillian's choice, but with happy ending
By Natasha Granath
December 30, 2004
"I just can't believe they are still here." Bradley and Jillian Searle with their sons Blake, 20 months, and Lachie, 5, safe in their Perth home.
Jillian Searle was faced with an excruciating decision when she and her two sons were swept up in the tsunamis that hit Phuket on Sunday.
She knew Lachie, 5, could not swim and was afraid of water. But she also knew that if she tried to hold on to Lachie and 20-month-old Blake, they would all be lost.
She clung to him for as long as she could, but as her strength waned she appealed to a young girl nearby to grab Lachie so she could hold Blake.
Jillian thought she would never see her son again as he screamed for her not to let go and the water surged up to her neck.
When she next saw the young girl, she told Jillian she had been unable to keep hold of the boy and had lost him.
http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_1177929,001301540007.htm
Mother forced to choose which son to save when tsunami hit
Associated Press
Australia, December 31, 2005|22:30 IST
The tsunami that hit Phuket, Thailand, forced Jillian Searle to make a choice no mother should ever have to make: which son to hold on to in raging flood waters, and which to let go and hope he survived.
Searle, of Perth, Western Australia, was near her Phuket hotel pool with sons Lachie, 5, and Blake, 2, when the tsunami hit last Sunday.
"I knew I had to let go of one of them and I just thought I'd better let go of the one that's the oldest," she said.
"A lady grabbed hold of him for a moment but she had to let him go because she was going under. And I was screaming, trying to find him, and we thought he was dead."
Lachie was found safe two hours later after surviving the raging waters by clinging to a hotel room door.
"I cried for mom for a long time and then I was quiet," he later told his father, Bradley Searle.
With mud and watermarks up to his ears, his first words to his father were: "My hands are all dirty and I need to wash my clothes."
http://www.terradaily.com/2004/041230000751.93jj781s.html
More of the same.
The first thing we encountered was a Polish memorial to their dead, who perished by the thousands in Russian camps. People are always laying fresh wreaths at the site. The snow has melted today, revealing another fatality in the form of a dead cat. Evidently run over on adjacent King Street, and then either dragged itself to the memorial to die or was placed here. But the memorial reads "Katyn", which leads me to believe that someone either found this to be a funny or ironic gesture and placed the cat here intentionally (not inconceivable), or thought it to be an appropriate resting place with the best of intentions (more hopeful, less likely).
We crossed the bridge to the lakeshore. Under it were several makeshift camps- lean-to's composed of sleeping bags, plastic sheets, garbage bags. How the homeless survive the sub-zero temperatures is a mystery. People treated like the debris they call home. It was impossible to tell if there was a person in the midst of the tumble of material. I thought of photos of the flotsam floating on the ocean in the wake of the tsunami- a similarly impersonal mixture of garbage and humanity. We later passed by one such man walking on the boardwalk carrying his bundle. Eyes determinedly downcast, jaw resolute.
We surprisingly came upon of all things a coconut lying on the icy shore of the lake. The label read Dominican Republic- naturally grown. It was frozen solid, covered in a coating of ice. People in the tsunami-affected areas have been forced to survive on coconuts for food and water. The fish have been contaminated by the dead bodies in the water. I lived off coconuts myself years ago. I had travelled to Hawaii with $20 and a one way ticket and been forced to do the same for several days. After two days of only coconut to eat, the pulp turns to a dry, flaky mush in your mouth, impossible to swallow. You suck it dry, then spit it out. At least it's a sterile source of liquid, nutritious and certainly better than nothing.
Further down the beach- with a view of a frozen lake and the break wall behind it- a phone on a pole which had the word "emergency: written on it. The phone read- "Distress phone- Push for Help".
There is no tsunami warning system in the Indian ocean- a problem which will now have to be addressed. Nevertheless, it could have been predicted in the case of several countries where there was a delay of up to several hours after the earthquake. Where, if any, were the tsunami warning calls directed to? Certainly not the ordinary people living near the beach. Or the precious tourists. Or perhaps in view of their presence, there were none... a Thai meterologist, name withheld, shed some light on the mystery...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4139435.stm
"Mr Thaksin's (the Thai Prime Minister) remarks follow allegations made by an unnamed member of the Thai meteorological department this week that a tsunami alert was not issued for fear of hurting the country's important tourism industry in case it turned out to be a false alarm. "
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4127927.stm
None of the countries affected by the tsunami issued a warning.
Sulamee Prachuab, head of the Thai Meteorological Department's Seismological Bureau, recalled that a tidal wave warning issued five years earlier after an earthquake in Papua New Guinea had led to complaints from the tourism authority that such alerts hurt the industry.
Geoffrey York, writing in the Toronto Globe and Mail ( F1 Jan.1.05 ) , spoke of a boat trip he undertook to the Thai Island of Phi Phi in the wake of the disaster. The yacht, owned by a wealthy businessman, was intact as it had been ordered to rest out the storm in the high seas as soon as its owner had heard of the disaster in Sumatra. He predicted the incoming tide based on the magnitude of the tremor, the magic number for the yacht owner being 6.2 and above. According to an article written by Paul Koring in Washington, Brian Atwater, a US geological expert, places the limit at 9. and above. Nevertheless, an hour's grace had saved his boat from destruction and yet no-one in the Thai government appeared to share his foresight and issue warnings of their own. The quake, whose epicentre was off the coast of Sumatra, was believed initially by the Pacific watch keepers to have been in the range of 8., whereas it was in fact 10 times that figure.
The front page of the Globe contained what they believe to be a clever headline- (oh please spare me the inappropriate puns of the media... )"The hell after high water". The photo which accompanies it is of a yuppie couple of western descent (ok- read white) sunbathing on a Thai beach in their little oasis of deckchairs, umbrella and snack table, while the clean-up of the utter devastation goes on behind them. The woman reclines clad in bikini and sunglasses while her overweight companion watches the activity intently from his chair. The design on its fabric is revealed to be an idealized tropical beach - a palm tree shadowed against a sunset. It is ironic- and absolutely abhorrent. A great photo though- depicting a couple who I hope someone had the guts to confront, overturn their perch and suggest that they make their way to the airport and ship out immediately. They shame us all.
In the same Toronto paper appeared a column written by a journalist who does not warrant the title. I sent the following letter to the editor, though I don't expect it will be published. I'm sad that in spite of the distance, a google search will probably reveal her vitriol and inaccuracies to the poor Australian woman she maligns in the piece. I'm including my letter below in the hope that it may also appear in the search and at least correct some of the slanderous comments. I will also include links to other articles which contain a more accurate account of the event Blatchford described. To find her original article, seek out her column if you will but be assured that it isn't worth reading.
To the Editor-
You have done the brave and traumatized people who have survived the tsunami disaster an incredible disservice by allowing Christie Blatchford (Globe and mail, A3, Jan.1, 2005) to misrepresent them so dreadfully. The victims were gracious enough to share their horrific stories with the media, something at least one family is now likely regretting.
In particular, Jillian Searle of Australia, who had the misfortune to get caught up in the first "wave" in Phuket with 2 small children, and found herself unable to swim with both. From the relative safety of her hotel room in North Dakota, Globe writer Christie Blatchford blithely condemns Searle for her unhappy decision to choose between the two boys in order to survive. She relinquished the eldest who, according to Blatchford, the mother allegedly, "marked for death" as he could not swim. Blatchford imagines herself in a more heroic, albeit maudlin, role- "I think I would have preferred to die, holding onto both small hands... ", later, "that wee hand.", for additional poignancy.
Blatchford attacks the poor woman further, stating, "I can't believe she was quite sane, for she offered herself no protection from the awfulness of the truth of what she did." Ah yes, truth. But who's "truth" are we really discussing? The reader is presented only with Blathford's slanderous allegations, which obscure "truth" through omission in a bid to feed the writer’s own maudlin fantasies and unfortunately available byline.
We are led to believe that Blatchford researched her story, as any respectable journalist would. As I read her version, I recalled a previous report that Searle had not, in fact, "let slip that wee hand" to the water, but passed him on to another woman’s care, who had unfortunately lost the child when the second wave hit. The boy managed to survive nevertheless. Quite a different scenario- less dramatic, more forgiving to the mother, and a happier ending for the Searles than many other families under similar circumstances. It took me all of 3 minutes searching on Google to uncover several articles supporting this version of the "truth". I have included the urls below to save you the time.
Which leads me to something I and other Globe readers in my acquaintance have been wondering aloud in recent times- what exactly is Christie Blatchford doing on the third page of a generally respected newspaper, and why was she recruited from the ranks of those we don't choose to read? Are you trying to incite a reaction from your readers, by publishing such diatribe, to stir them out of a perceived complacency? Perhaps you believe that by offering this reactionary drivel alongside exemplary writers such as Geoffrey York, you are somehow presenting a balanced form of journalism. You are in fact only succeeding in annoying me as a reader, and putting at ease my decision to subscribe to the Guardian Weekly and not the Globe and Mail.
L.Hammond, Montreal, Quebec
More articles-
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/12/29/1103996613128.html?oneclick=true
Jillian's choice, but with happy ending
By Natasha Granath
December 30, 2004
"I just can't believe they are still here." Bradley and Jillian Searle with their sons Blake, 20 months, and Lachie, 5, safe in their Perth home.
Jillian Searle was faced with an excruciating decision when she and her two sons were swept up in the tsunamis that hit Phuket on Sunday.
She knew Lachie, 5, could not swim and was afraid of water. But she also knew that if she tried to hold on to Lachie and 20-month-old Blake, they would all be lost.
She clung to him for as long as she could, but as her strength waned she appealed to a young girl nearby to grab Lachie so she could hold Blake.
Jillian thought she would never see her son again as he screamed for her not to let go and the water surged up to her neck.
When she next saw the young girl, she told Jillian she had been unable to keep hold of the boy and had lost him.
http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_1177929,001301540007.htm
Mother forced to choose which son to save when tsunami hit
Associated Press
Australia, December 31, 2005|22:30 IST
The tsunami that hit Phuket, Thailand, forced Jillian Searle to make a choice no mother should ever have to make: which son to hold on to in raging flood waters, and which to let go and hope he survived.
Searle, of Perth, Western Australia, was near her Phuket hotel pool with sons Lachie, 5, and Blake, 2, when the tsunami hit last Sunday.
"I knew I had to let go of one of them and I just thought I'd better let go of the one that's the oldest," she said.
"A lady grabbed hold of him for a moment but she had to let him go because she was going under. And I was screaming, trying to find him, and we thought he was dead."
Lachie was found safe two hours later after surviving the raging waters by clinging to a hotel room door.
"I cried for mom for a long time and then I was quiet," he later told his father, Bradley Searle.
With mud and watermarks up to his ears, his first words to his father were: "My hands are all dirty and I need to wash my clothes."
http://www.terradaily.com/2004/041230000751.93jj781s.html
More of the same.
posted by Dawn One at 2:40 pm
0 comments
