タイ紙ネーション
投稿者： usagigamemaimai 投稿日時： 2004/12/31 02:43 投稿番号： [1966 / 7270]
どこかに元記事がないか探してみました。
「Ｎａｔｉｏｎ」タイの英字紙、対訳はついていましたが・・・よけい解らん！（涙）
http://ocn.amikai.com/amiweb/browser.jsp?f_color=009933&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nationmultimedia.com%2F&display=3&c_id=livedoor&langpair=EN%2CJA
それらしきところコピペしますのでどなたか検証お願いしますｍ（_ _）ｍｍ（_ _）ｍｍ（_ _）ｍ
＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿
THAI TALK: Horrendous failure of our national warning system
タイの話:私たちの全国警告システムのものすごい失敗
Published on December 30, 2004
2004年12月30日に公表されました
?Why weren?t we warned?? This question has been echoing around the tsunami-wrecked coast in the South ever since Sunday. The answers, none of which is very satisfactory, are at best evasive.
?なぜweren?t、私たちは警告しました??この質問は日曜日以来、南部の津波に破壊された海岸の近くで反復していました。答え、無、どれが非常に満足かの、せいぜい回避的です。
Based on interviews given by senior officials from the Meteorological Department and the Geological Resources Department, though, the official response could be paraphrased thus:
?The public was not warned because we weren?t sure. Tsunamis have rarely been reported in the Indian Ocean. We?re more familiar with tsunamis in the Pacific.?
Not very convincing. The very rationale for a warning system is to expect the unexpected. That?s what forecasters are there for. That?s what monitoring natural disasters is all about.
A much more tell-tale explanation of the massive failure given by another Weather Bureau official would go something like this:
?Since we haven?t had a tsunami in the Indian Ocean for decades, we were reluctant to issue a warning. Six years earlier, the then director-general of the Weather Bureau issued a tsunami warning for off of the coast of Phuket. One never materialised. A lot of people there condemned him for making a prediction that they claimed could scare off tourists. The public outcry there at the time practically banned him from ever visiting Phuket again. Frankly, we had this very bad memory in mind when we were considering whether or not to issue a warning.?
Tragic but true. Absurd and eerily surreal. A lot of lives could have been saved on that day had the country?s main weather warning agency been operating on a strictly professional basis ? and not on the subjective judgement of the officials in charge.
It was out of fear of being subjected to social and political pressure that the government agencies concerned decided to resort to negligence of duty ? to expose hundreds of thousands of people to grave danger ? in order to protect their own social status. This is just one aspect of Thai society?s currently fast-deteriorating professional standards in almost every field of public service. It is a testament to the erosion of courage and commitment to professionalism throughout the entire country.
The standard procedure, as laid down by the Pacific Tsunami Warning Centre in 1965, dictates that any underwater earthquake with a magnitude of greater than 6.5 must automatically trigger the tsunami warning system. That morning, the seismological monitoring section noted an earthquake initially registering 8.6 on the Richter scale. But bureaucratic inertia and timidity ? instead of a clear sense of alertness and emergency management ? reigned.
−−続く
＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿
「Ｎａｔｉｏｎ」タイの英字紙、対訳はついていましたが・・・よけい解らん！（涙）
http://ocn.amikai.com/amiweb/browser.jsp?f_color=009933&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nationmultimedia.com%2F&display=3&c_id=livedoor&langpair=EN%2CJA
それらしきところコピペしますのでどなたか検証お願いしますｍ（_ _）ｍｍ（_ _）ｍｍ（_ _）ｍ
＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿
THAI TALK: Horrendous failure of our national warning system
タイの話:私たちの全国警告システムのものすごい失敗
Published on December 30, 2004
2004年12月30日に公表されました
?Why weren?t we warned?? This question has been echoing around the tsunami-wrecked coast in the South ever since Sunday. The answers, none of which is very satisfactory, are at best evasive.
?なぜweren?t、私たちは警告しました??この質問は日曜日以来、南部の津波に破壊された海岸の近くで反復していました。答え、無、どれが非常に満足かの、せいぜい回避的です。
Based on interviews given by senior officials from the Meteorological Department and the Geological Resources Department, though, the official response could be paraphrased thus:
?The public was not warned because we weren?t sure. Tsunamis have rarely been reported in the Indian Ocean. We?re more familiar with tsunamis in the Pacific.?
Not very convincing. The very rationale for a warning system is to expect the unexpected. That?s what forecasters are there for. That?s what monitoring natural disasters is all about.
A much more tell-tale explanation of the massive failure given by another Weather Bureau official would go something like this:
?Since we haven?t had a tsunami in the Indian Ocean for decades, we were reluctant to issue a warning. Six years earlier, the then director-general of the Weather Bureau issued a tsunami warning for off of the coast of Phuket. One never materialised. A lot of people there condemned him for making a prediction that they claimed could scare off tourists. The public outcry there at the time practically banned him from ever visiting Phuket again. Frankly, we had this very bad memory in mind when we were considering whether or not to issue a warning.?
Tragic but true. Absurd and eerily surreal. A lot of lives could have been saved on that day had the country?s main weather warning agency been operating on a strictly professional basis ? and not on the subjective judgement of the officials in charge.
It was out of fear of being subjected to social and political pressure that the government agencies concerned decided to resort to negligence of duty ? to expose hundreds of thousands of people to grave danger ? in order to protect their own social status. This is just one aspect of Thai society?s currently fast-deteriorating professional standards in almost every field of public service. It is a testament to the erosion of courage and commitment to professionalism throughout the entire country.
The standard procedure, as laid down by the Pacific Tsunami Warning Centre in 1965, dictates that any underwater earthquake with a magnitude of greater than 6.5 must automatically trigger the tsunami warning system. That morning, the seismological monitoring section noted an earthquake initially registering 8.6 on the Richter scale. But bureaucratic inertia and timidity ? instead of a clear sense of alertness and emergency management ? reigned.
−−続く
＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿
これは メッセージ 1965 (usagigamemaimai さん)への返信です．
固定リンク：https://yarchive.emmanuelc.dix.asia/1835396/bdibf4bcta4na4bfa4aa4nffc4z5doc0bel_1/1966.html