Is it a little ... I dunno ... melodramatic and selfish of the trapped miners' families to keep making the company drill hole after hole into the mountain? Forgive me for being heartless, but aren't they already buried? What's the point of spending all this money and putting more lives at risk to bring their bodies above ground just so they can be put into coffins and put back into the ground somewhere else? Can't they find something else to talk about on the Today show, like fall fashion or apple tarts or something? I mean, damn. It's depressing.
ed [email] said at 12:35 PM 08-23-2007: You know, I'm so with you on this one. Not on the news coverage part, although I'm sure I would be if I ever watched the news.
But seriously, their family members are gone. Dead. Deceased. Ex-parrots. What happens to their shells means absolutely nothing, in the Big Picture. Putting others at risk in order to get CORPSES out of a collapsed mine is just asinine.
That said, I am intimately familiar with the trauma - a state of shock, really - that comes right after the death of a loved one. (As are most people; I'm not claiming exclusivity!) People do some seriously deranged things when their husband/father/wife/daughter/son/whatever dies... especially when it's sudden, and there's no chance for closure.
I empathize with these families. But they need to stop before they get some other poor sap killed trying to assuage their grief.
katie [email] said at 12:45 PM 08-23-2007: Yeah, that's all I'm saying. Not belittling their grief. I think the families of the rescuers that died last week trying to get the corpses out are grieving pretty hardcore, too.
I just think that exhuming corpses only to bury them again "ceremonially" and "for closure" has such staggering, idiotic irony as to warrant a front-page post.
brandon [email] said at 3:23 PM 08-23-2007: Eh, I'm on the fence about this. I mean, Baby Jessica got at least this much time. Reeks of sexism, or ageism to deny them airtime.
Anyway, my problem with not extracting the bodies is that the families need the bodies to get better settlements. You can't support a family on a hero tag and whatever pennies the company and its insurance deign to toss their way. And there's a reason that the mine-owner has screeched "earthquake" since the beginning. An earthquake is an act of god, and if the jiggle was jiggly enough you can't haul his ass into a court. They need to go establish cause of death, especially if it's death by causes other than "crushed by a billion tons of coal." Did they starve because of lack of emergency provisions? Were rebreathers available and clearly marked? Were exit shafts available, were they well marked? Was any kind of early warning/noxious fume warning there? Most importantly, was the dig up to code, even after the sign off by the mine inspectors.
The best thing that could have happened to the mine owner was the death of those three rescue workers. He needs that mine declared a tomb and un-excavatable. The more information the families have about the actual cause of death, the more he's going to owe (or possibly serve in prison). Past him, whose pockets are limited, they need the bodies and more information to get more than the mere pittance they're going to get from his insurers.
So, for that reason, I don't mind it too much. If it can help these families, and more importantly, help improve working conditions for miners, its worth keeping media attention on the mine owner and his contracted insurerers to continue excavating the disaster site.
Capitalism has its risk side. The media attention helps guarantee that this asshole doesn't get to sidestep that part of the game.
I'd have a lot more sympathy for him, if he didn't from the get-go attempt to shirk his responsibility.
ed [email] said at 4:01 PM 08-23-2007: Big Boss owners and Insurance Companies will never pay their share; that's how they stay in business.
But when "rescuers" lose their lives trying to extract random splotches of DNA, that's when it's time to call bullshit and call off the dig.
Let the damnable lawyers sort this one out.
PS - I read somewhere after this happened that the Chief Muckymuck in charge of Mine Safety (Richard Stickler) was a Bush appointee who twice failed passing senate approval due to his prior ineptitude, but Bush appointed him anyway in one of his infamous "The senate is on vacation, so I can do whateverthefuck I want to" spells.
You're doing a heckuva job, there, Sticky!
(citation:) Bush first nominated Stickler to head the Mine Safety and Health Administration in September 2005. He received renewed attention from lawmakers following the Sago disaster. By May 2006 it was clear that Byrd and other Senate opponents would not allow Stickler's nomination to pass, and Republicans withdrew a scheduled vote on his job.
In July 2006, Labor Secretary Elaine Chao hired Stickler as a consultant and adviser, but insisted through a spokeswoman that she was not attempting to circumvent the nomination process.
In August and September of the same year, the Senate twice voted to send the Stickler nomination back to the White House.
In October 2006, Bush used a recess appointment to install Stickler -- a decision that was quickly denounced by senators from both sides of the aisle.
Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter, a Republican, told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette that he "didn't think Mr. Stickler was the right man for the job." Another Pennsylvania Republican, Rick Santorum, also told the paper he was "disappointed" the White House had not let senators debate and vote on the nomination.
Yes, from the decidedly left-leaning Huffington Post - but facts is facts.
reggie [email] said at 9:52 PM 08-23-2007: I know this is totally an inappropriate place to make this observation but just wanted to say that I seriously wouldn't mind banging Ms. Huffington.
