Like so many bloggers, I feel a little powerless where it comes to assisting with the Hurricane Katrina effort.

What I'd say again, is GIVE, GIVE, GIVE.

I donated to Catholic Charities, and I also plan to donate to the American Red Cross.

Animal lover that I am, I have just donated to the American Kennel Club's Hurricane Katrina Relief Fund (recommended by Greg Hlatky), because there are many abandoned, sick or injured animals (which often had to be left behind by owners prevented from bringing them to shelters).

In the case of New Orleans, I thought it might help for people to see in graphic form what it is that's at the heart of the problem. There's an excellent map here, showing the layout of New Orleans from different vantage points, with very easily understood cross sectional diagrams.

Like this ground elevation map -- which shows that New Orleans is really a gigantic soup bowl:

The height of levee walls was increased following Hurricane Betsy in 1965. I don't know why there hasn't been more discussion of this hurricane, but it left the city flooded for as long as three weeks. A 2003 USA Today article recalled the event:

As the hurricane moved ashore south of New Orleans it destroyed almost every building in Grand Isle, where the Coast Guard station reported gusts up to 160 mph.

Winds up to 125 mph were measured in New Orleans.

Betsy drove storm surge into Lake Pontchartrain, which is just north of the city and is connected to the Gulf of Mexico, pushing water over levees around the lake. Flood water reaches the eves of houses in some places in the city.

A U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Web site notes that "Betsy prompted Congress to authorize a ring of levees 16 feet high around the city — a project the Corps of Engineers is completing today. This level of protection was based on the science of storm prediction as it existed in the 1960s. The question remains, however, whether this level of protection would be sufficient to protect the city from a category 4 or 5 hurricane today — or even a category 3 storm that lingered over the city."

Betsy, of course, was a drop in the bucket compared to Katrina.

Aside from my concern about the dead and injured, I'm really worried right now about the wisdom of cooping people up in stadiums for an extended period of time. Agoraphobe that I am, I can only imagine how horrible it must be to be forced to leave the security and sanctity of one's home for a huge public arena. (A small room the size of a prison cell would be better in many ways....)

I'd want to stay in my home and defend it if necessary, and I'm glad to see that honest citizens are protecting themselves. As Glenn said:

If you've got a week's supplies, and a gun, you'll usually do okay after a disaster. If you don't, you're in much bigger trouble, because it generally takes that long for some sort of order to be restored. We saw that after Andrew, and we're seeing it again.

Since I'm into being "graphic" lately, I thought I'd share a picture of a looter from today's Philadelphia Inquirer.

(This is not to suggest that I favor "reverse discrimination" against whites or anything like it. I'd love nothing more than to upload a picture of armed black store-owners, but I have a sneaking suspicion that MSM photographers would avoid taking such pictures, and that if they did they'd be unlikely make it into the New York Times.)

Anyway, in the Inquirer's accompanying story, reporter Lisa Herndon shares an observation worth keeping in mind:

For television reporters, shots of blacks looting are quick, easy and downright expected.

New Orleans is more than a party-time tourist destination. It's a city where two-thirds of the population is black, so I'm not surprised to see black people looting. Many are poor: The median income for whites is a low $31,971; for blacks it's a subterranean $11,332. Truth is, life in the Big Easy has never been that way for many.

My question is, are blacks really the only looters? Or are they the only ones deemed worthy of camera time? Does 30 seconds of tape, rewound and replayed, tell the whole story? If pictures of looters never made it onto the air, would viewers be deprived of crucial information? Do these images advance the story of the plight of people?

Or do they play to stereotype, prejudice and fear?

Yes, stealing for profit and personal gain is wrong. And I hope those who decided to take advantage of a disaster to haul off flat-screen televisions and DVD players find no way to profit from their theft.

But during a devastating disaster like this, good, law-abiding citizens may do things they would never do normally. On TV I saw people carrying what appeared to be groceries, water, and bags of ice. With no water, power, or way out of town, it looked to me that the "looters" were trying to survive rather than upgrade their stereo system.

Before you say "I would never," just remember that's pretty easy to say and believe as we sit in our comfortable, dry, air-conditioned homes with ice, water and food a few steps away. Hunger to us means we haven't eaten in a couple of hours.

I'm sure there's a lot more of that going around than is being reported.

MORE: Via Instapundit, I have learned that thanks to my contribution to Catholic Charities, I qualify for a free refrigerator magnet from The Raving Atheist.

Gee I'm thrilled! And may I be the first to say, God bless the Raving Atheist!