some of it is molded even then i wondered if there's anything we can do about that. the second part to my question is i find that wal-mart sometimes when i go to get it is frozen and you bring it home and if you don't cook it that day or put it in the freezer if you think it hasn't been frozen and many take it out, that's been frozen 20 and i know that they have to truck it in. they don't have a butcher at wal-mart. is there any way around all of that? ..

thanks for being on book tv. >> well, next up is one of our panel sessions live from the "los angeles times" festival of books. we've been telling you about 150,000 people expected to visit here over the course of the two-day weekend. we're in the nonfiction area. the next panel list called nonfiction narrating disaster. here are the authorities. the hole in the bottom of the sea. the great american, and amy. rain any season. live coverage begins now. >> okay. we can begin. welcome to the narrating disaster panel.

before we start make introduction, the festival folks ask that i read a couple of things to you, please turn off your crrn cell phones and any other devices that might make a noise or interrupt. we'll -- there will be a signing after the panel at book signing following the session located the assigning area seven, area noted on the festival map in the center of the event program. personal recording of this session is not allowed. you'll see these two mikes here. we'll have a q and a session at the end. we encourage you to perhaps. that's where you come up to the mikeses if you want to ask any questions. that's it. that's the rules. welcome, again, let me introduce myself. i'm barry segal. the former national respond for

the los angeles "los angeles times." i think we're all former corp. dents. i'm presently on the faculty where i direct a degree program in literary journalist. i'm the author of six books, both fiction and nonfiction. the latest was about a plane crash and the rise of state secrets. i guess that's why i was asked to moderate this panel. my book has not one but two disasters. a terrible plane crash and a terrible resulting supreme court decision which recognized the secret privilege forever changing the balance of power in america. all of our panelist in one fashion or another are concerned with narrating disasters. so let me introduce them to you. first sitting next to me is

amy. celebrated author of the "rainy season" i feel earthquakes more often than they happen. amy's newest book out next january is farewell, in which she visits haiti and the aftermath and the devastating earthquake. he's the winner of the writing award, and the nonfiction award, and the american academy award. also 1990 book critic. amy has written for the "new york times," thyme mag diseeg, new republican, mother joans, harpers and many others. she's the former jerusalem pane a long time contributing editor at the nation. most important, she teaches in the literary journalism program

at the university of california. >> no corruption in the panel selection. >> she shares the office right next to mine. it's a great pleasure to be sitting next to a. my. robert, editor of the -- award winning magazine truth dig has built a reputation for -- [applause] already, robert? has built a rep reputation for strong social and political writer over his third years as a journalist. i'll revisit the past first between 1964 and '69. was in the editor in chief from 1976 to 1993. he served as a major respond for the "los angeles times," or i'm happy to say we were colleagues

and sat together for awhile on a literary journalism team. in 1993, he launched a nationally sinned calletted column based at the "l.a. times" where he was named a contributing editor. weekly for the next twelve years and is now based at truth dig. he can be heard on the political radio program on kcrw. he's a professor of communications at the use am berg school of communication of journalism. won an award, best coul mist writing about economic affairs. it's written nine books, the latest one, the great american stickup, how region republicans and clinton democrats and rich wall street while mugging main street. joel, a new friend and

colleague. has been a staff writer for the "washington post" since 1993 where he started the news room's first online column rough draft in 1999. and started washington -- the "washington post".com first blog into. author of seven books. his most recent a whole at the bottom of the sea. the race to kill the bp oil gusher. his syndicated column wide -- which he began when he worked at the miami herald appeared in 50 newspapers. three collections were columns were published by valentine books. he writes on science and politics now. he has has taught journals at price ton and georgetown university. pretty distin wished group. privileged to be with you. let me set the table about the idea of narrating disasterrers.

i was trying to figure out all of our books are on different topics. but, you know, i guess they do involve disasters. not they were disasters but -- the literary journalism, the program we run had a long standing relationship with disasters, if you will. back in the -- if you look back as forward as the storm, the hurricane devastated much of england and wailings in 1703. the list goes on. i think of david and joan stone flood. reconstruction of the burst dam flood that devastated a pennsylvania town. eric larson, isaac storm. the hurricane. the last man out, story of the spring hill mine disaster. these are all natural disasters.

writers, though, are also attracted to disasters catastrophe, collapse, all the forms. even man-made. and environmental political, economic, and not just the raw story, the disaster but the impact the lived experiences of those who suffered traumatic experiences. and also, perhaps most important the causes. how it happened. as joe said in the e-mail to me, what the f happened? it often takes us to the political and culture context. and certainly all of our panelist here today are interested in those contexts as much as they are in the disasters its. joe on the bp oil spill, amy on the earthquake, and cheryl on the recent economicdown. why don't we start there? i'd like to ask the panel members. why don't we talk about what drew you to your disasters

stories, amy. how you came to the and what you saw there. >> bell, what true drew me to the haitian earthquake, i had had written had a book about haiti about fifteen, twenty years before the earthquake. i had been going there. i had an ongoing enbasementment with haiti. i tried not to go down for the earthquake. i was trying to sort of say, okay, i should do other things besides haiti. so i didn't want to go. i don't like earthquakes. i know, that all of you from california will agree with me. the little exciting but mostly horrible. the haitian earthquake was particularly terrible. i don't like earthquakes, i don't like aftershocks, i don't like crowds, blood, death. i don't like to leave home, i hate flying. there were lots of reasons for me not to go down within e will say eventually it was about a week and a half i said i have to

go. i can't not go and see what essentially happened to my second country when it's suffering like this. i did go down. i can't avoid the story. i'm a journalist too. i wanted to have my hands in the story. i saw the earthquake, and i'm sure you saw on it's what it's like. of course, when you're in the -- this is the great value ofying and narrating. when you're in it, i think you can convey to people much more deeply and profoundly the entire sensory experience of what it's like to be in the situation as opposed to the visual and sound that you just get with video. so there's that it. i also found that what interested me about the haitian earthquake was not so much the huge scope of the disaster, what lead to the disaster because as barry said, you know, we look for cull prettieds many man-made disasters. you can look for culprits or

cultural reasons for the mag add of disaster. i think that haiti was already ab ongoing disaster. it's a historical disaster. it's -- it's a brilliant country. it's a great place. slavery is what started the nation. it went on to have a premature revolution in the eyes of the rest the world. the geography lead to political disasters. and i always like to say about haiti people talk about post-traumatic stress disorder. in haiti there's ongoing. it's not post anything. it goes on and on. the earthquake was another trauma for them to deal with. one of the things that i really wanted to talk about, when i wrote about the earthquake, was the american plan for haiti which was put in place by the bush administration. and can which, essentially dumped subsidized product into the haitian market especially

sub sighed rice went into the haitian market undersold haitian produced rice. and caused what was a virtual forced migration from country side into the city where people came to live in sub standard. when i say that, it's not that it wasn't rebolted. it wasn't built according to any kind of code. they were living in the sub standard homes. in essence, by electing our president we participated in the great dissection of human life in the haitian earthquake. and what my book is about. my new book is about our engagement after such a disas we are the people who suffered the disaster, the crisis caravan that comes down. the good-hearted people often very good people, making résume points by helping out in the situations. and the kinds of disaster pornography that journeyist can

end up participating in -- journalist end up participating in when we cover these things. >> i got into the -- of the crazy group at the "l.a. times." i interviewed presidential candidates. i got totally suckered by bill clinton when he was running and still the governor of alaska. arkansas. this was the welfare reform. i believed him he had made progress, unfortunately, our bureau down in little rock was fully well versessed on his sexual affaired in the world. allegations we had nothing on what he done as governor in terms of affecting the lives of people. he hoodwinked me. i printed the article. he became president. he started the waive of

deregulation. trying alation. i'll do one better than the republicans. he betrayed basically liberalism. and i say this without wrangler, he's the president that invited me to the white house dinner. he's funny, nice, but in represent rough spect, i think he was a disaster. i think this is a wrong season to be criticizing democrats. later to be the i'm the keynote speaker at the democratic party convention. how this will be received? i don't know. one of the things we have in common is journalist. we have to call it as we see it. i remember coming back and suddenly we had welfare reform on the national scene. it was a total violation of the two things that bill cling ton told me. he told me welfare reform has to be national other side you leave poor people. there's the competition to get them to go somewhere else. it has to cost more money.

70% of the people on welfare are children. you have to have child care, job training so forth. he betrayed both of those. and the disaster is 46 million people living under poverty. and the welfare are not a safety net. we use -- one of the thicks welfare is not generally available and there's not been any significant increase. that was followed by the tell commune i telecommunications act. i was running back and forth to with a writing about these things. i didn't know why anyone wanted change. i know, our publishers wanted it. they wanted synergy. they beat the drums for telecommunications reform as a result the "l.a. times" is in bankruptcy because the synergy didn't pan out. and the savages from the chicago tribune bought us. and so much for that. and the next thing by now i was

becoming -- because i was writing such a way, i became a columnist. i was invited to become one rather than a reporter. we had the financial services modernization ability known as the gram-leech act. for the life of me i couldn't understand why we wanted this. there were plenty of principle conservatives who couldn't understand it. the regulatory system put in place the time of the great drpg. it worked out. we hadn't come close to such a disaster. we were changing the rules because the banking industry was spending $300 million bucks a pop lobbying for this. and try angulation lead clinton to -- this removes the barrier. you know this. my book is about this. removed the barrier between commercial banking and the high rollers and the investment. and a year leader bill clinton signed off on the act which had

the new things. and the few others were complaining about and books he was -- that these things should be free of all title three and four say free of all government regulation and regulatory agency as a result you have the packages of toxic packages that are lead to the disaster. yesterday morning i was in my office, two buildings away from here talking to students three year after they graduate wondering where the job market is. how they're going to pay off the loans. we live in the city, i gave way two books. people told me they no long her a job. we know what the situation is. it's a disaster. it's not god's work, you know, it's not we can't blame it on the ills of the third world. we can't blame it on some lunatic, you know, somewhere. we have to blame it on the best and the brightest. it's like vietnam war again, the

people who graduate with the best s.a.t., acted. abandoning ethics, abandoning concerns for others and worrying how you can get the greatest profit short term and rewarded. the media was -- the nighttimes lead the way cheering on all the radical deregulation without concern from consumer interest of ordinary people. so my point on the panel, which i'm only on the panel because i claimed there was not a panel on the economy. and so i was told it will be a place for you. [laughter] embarrass everybody else. [applause] there's been twenty to thirty really good books on the economy this year. and we've had some very good ones. we don't seem to have a panel on afghanistan, iraq war. which i have to tell you is still going on.

so i feel little bit annoyed. my wife started the festival seventeen years ago. i think the high point was the panelist. [applause] thank you. i think i've taken my time. thank you. [applause] >> what do you really think about things? [laughter] >> i have a few more points. i'm wishing i written a book about the imply. it would be okay for me to be on the panel as well. >> we were going to be nice to the festival folks. we'll get back to you. joe, at the moment -- >> i'm a newspaper reporter, so i got into my disaster because they asked me to work the weekend. i was told i needed to write for the web about the oil spill. what happened was two years ago yesterday, that at about ten minutes to 10:00 at night. there was the explosion on the

oil rig in the gulf of mexico. the deep water horizon. that story did not make the front page of the "washington post" for nine days. reason is we didn't really understand what was going on for a long time. at first we thought it was a fire. and there were -- we knew eleven people were missing. it took awhile for us to grasp what we were dealing with in part because deep water drilling. who knew anything about? i didn't know anything about it. i read about science and technology a fair amount. i didn't know anything about the industry. out of sight, out of mind. deep water, you can't see it. it took days to realize there was a gusher at the bottom of the sea. it was uncontrolled. and and it garagely dawned on us how big it was going to be. it was the e x x on. very quickly. you remember this, very quickly,

it became the biggest story in the country. you had bp trying to solve the problem, and in succession, they used the robotic submersible. the remotely operative vehicles to operate the blowout preventing. who heard of that? suddenly we're becoming experts. they tried it for two weeks, it didn't work. it was automobile to prevent or stop this blowout. then they tried something called the riser insertion tube tool, which was like a little dentist drill they stuck in the bottom of the pipe that was gushing oil. it didn't work. they tried an containment dome. they tried to lower the dome over it. that facilitied up -- it filled up and they began to float up towards the ship that lowered it. there was a chance it could

explode and destroy the ship. they tried to top -- they tried a lot of things. bp never measured the flow of the gusher. i think they didn't want to know. as it turned out, we know in hindsight that many of these things they were trying could not have worked. they t.j. could not have worked because the well was gushing. you know, it's a highly litigated point. it's something like 50,000 barrels of oil a day. or maybe more. 53,000. it was really -- then we saw the video. and the great pressure -- under great pressure bp let people see the video they saw. it was disturbing. it was deeply does tissuing. it became my life. i was writing about it every single day. people would say, have you fixed the oil spill yet? [laughter] people couldn't sleep at night

thinking about the ugly volcano in the bottom of the gulf. as a reporter, you're trying to figure out what's the truth here. you call up experts who know. there was a one guy, he was a big proponent of the idea of the oil -- which is in a hurricane was going to come in and grab up the oil and fling it into shore all throughout the gulf. we worry about the lube current. it was going to take the current down around the florida keys and up to the outer banks of north carolina. i asked this guy do you think the soil going to hit north carolina? he said north carolina? ireland! it was the absolutely rivetting story. just as a journalist, and my editor called me up, from simon and said do you want to do a book? that was the next year of my life doing the oil spill. i did my book.

to say that in doing the book, i think i can link this to what bob was talking about a little bit. this is not just simply a story of one screw up by one company and the single oil well. it's a story about complex systems can fail. the interesting thing for me about deep water horizon was that a lot there was obvious mistakes made, and the hole industry of deep water drilling, i think, is -- i think they went down to the deep water without the right technology. they didn't grasp what could go wrong. when you go a mile deep it's a different realm. we live in a society now that has all these complex technologies ranges from the grid to the cloud, the nuclear power. there's a lot of things we have that can fail in complex ways.

it doesn't actually require that someone be, you know, motivated by greed or they're stupid. this can happen pretty much anywhere any time. the question is, how do we cope with that? how do we become a society at the same time enjoy the blessings of technology, and the blessings of having the big elaborate highly plaited society. there's a lot of us. there's 70 billion of us. we have a lot of property. how can we survive a world that has major natural disaster and complex technologies that can fail at any given moment? you'll hear a lot in the future about resilience. about overcoming taking the punch getting past it and being resilient and rebuilding quickly. this is going to be the century, i believe, where disaster is

going to be part of the fabric of our lives, you know, it's -- every few months there's going to be another one. it's going to come down the pipe. >> we were talking about that earlier, joe was predicting exactly the century of disasters that was -- it does seem that we seem to be having disasters, suffering disasters every six months now or so. respond to that. i think it's true. greed is the given. stupidity is also the given, probably. okay. the issue in the oil spill is the same of the issue in the banking. where's the regulation. who's the adult watching the store? what's the roll of government. what is the public interest. my view, i think it is true of the bureau of minds as well as banking regulation. the people who were greedy also controlled the political system that was supposed to regulate their greed. they could buy the laws to make their crimes legal, you know,

they were representing at every -- i remember just this one example. i went in, i had a lot of respect for barney frank in many ways. i remember plopping down as a "l.a. times" reporter. i had been in graduate school in economics. i just read all the stuff. i had had marked. i knew the guy for quite awhile. what is it about. it's something you should not be doing. he said, this is complicated. you got to talk to my staffer. david, i have to go to a cocktail meeting or something. i talked to david the next day. he said this is complex stuff, you know, you got to talk to harry over there. well, harry, i said david, harry is a lobbyist. you know, this is what he does. he's representing another interest. when you look at how the bills become laws. you look at everything, we do not have a political system that

can speak for the consumer 0 the ordinary person. that's the real issue. and the reason what you're yes, there will be disasters. some of them can be prevented. some can't. some are the works of god, some of are the works of human ignorance and greed. we don't have an agency in this protecting the public interest. unfortunately, the media, which i singled out before is too often going along with the crime. because the people who own the media tend to be the same people who benefit from the system who benefit from the other large corporations. the same large corporations. [applause] >> can i just say one thing, joe. can i say one thing before you disagree. i want to say what's interesting to me and listening to bob talk about the complicity of the system in deregulation, is that had he sounds like a haitian. he could be a haitian. that's what we're that's what's happened to us.

haiti has, for so long, not had a properly functioning government that really the foxes are minding the chicken coop. that's what the country has come to too through may more management systems. >> i think bob's view pessimistic as it sounds is utopian. which is that -- [laughter] how am i going to explain that? [laughter] it made sense to me when i said it. [laughter] because i'll just assert, he's totally right about regulation of the oil industry. deep water drilling, i mean, hay had the joke agency called the minerals management service. which did not survive more than a few weeks after the deep water horizon disaster. they ab bollished it and they replace it with the ocean management regulation and

enforcement. it sounded much more impressive. they're going to manage it and regular trait. enforce it. the same problem, would you rather work for the federal court for $50,000 a year or would you work for the oil company for $200 ,000 a year? the best talent was working for the companies. and the agencies, they had scandal, you know, it was they had all kinds of corruption and, you know, drugs and parties. it was like the secret service. [laughter] but i'll assert that if you had bob's you top yan society which you were to extract the corruption, the bias, the interest, the conflict of interest, the money, the media, you still people -- presumably --

might have blown out. it is impossible to say one way or the other. these thicks fail in complicated ways. the question i guess with the financial crisis is you know what point in that whole process do you prevent it from unraveling exploding. because again, the complex instruments that no one person can see how they work. we create systems that no one can see the different lines of communication. so anyway. you want to say something. >> you had me until the last one. [laughter] you're implying these things were complex because in order to achoaf some greater goal, you know, medicines complex, that's not what happened here. >> with the oil spill? >> you asked about regulation. it's the scam. this was con coblghted. you've had one seal go before congress saying the money was flowing. some banding over there in the

london bureau were selling the junk and matching it with phony insurance policy and the money was pouring inspect i wasn't going to question it. my obligation is to the stock holder. it is true of housing agencies. they were making $10-$15 million a year at the top. they were trading on wall street like the other companies. it was all depended upon the stock. what they did, they got the brilliant long-term capital management folded. it was when clinton was president. there were two guys who had nobel prizes on the board. they turned to the best and the brightest. the smartest guys, and they said, give us the formulas that no one can understand so we can rob people blind. this is what -- because if anyone understood it you wouldn't buy the packages. you wouldn't buy the securities and the thing will never go and the market will increase. you put the crap in and you change the variables whatever you want. it was a scram. if the mafia did it they would

be hung. that's what it is. in terms of regulation, i think, you know, yes, you know, things get complex but, you know, for instance even in japan you don't build a nuclear powerplant where there's going to be the flooding. we have one down here in san diego. do you have to be a genius to figure out we should be looking a little more critly at the thing. you know, so it seems to me, i got back to the things of adults watch the story. i act you top yan. i think i'm jefferson yan. i don't understand this idea the country was based on the you top yan. a wonderful idea of public accountability. this was the idea. this is why they wanted state's rights. people can comprehend the issues they had to deal with. they would make decisions. it could be kept as local as possible. that's why george washington wander against the pate yofm because if you said you become imperial lying will be the

norm. you'll become the empire. they all understood this. they understood that for democracy to work you had to have a public that was informed. not bought, and so with the disagree with on this. we should discuss it. we can't assume that the media is not and it hasn't changed. free press that was guaranteed in our constitution. it was a town crier. it was a pamphlet. anyone could do. it as a.j. said, the freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one. what happened is people who owned the main instruments of education were complies it. they didn't have mentality than the people. they were sharing boards of directsers. and as a result we didn't have anyone representing the public interest. i think that's the critical thing. now let me be optimistic since you think i'm negative. we can have our internet taken

away. that could be crazy to think it's here to say. i think the scoundrels will try to destroy it. as long as we have the internet. i think we caught them napping, the manipulators. right now we have a chance to bring life into the democracy. we get 100,000 a day. for good stuff, you know, and we're not alone. i actually applaud "huffington post" getting a poser. i think they did a great job addition piet many nay sayers in this community. she put money into investigative journalism. she's not alone. right now we have a champions to do what the founders had in mind which is to hold the people accountability. to speak truths to the power. that's let's rely on bring back the old media. but i think this democracy thing is a very shaky proposition, and i want to add one thing really

pessimistic point. if you look at the greatest disaster of the befallen democratic society it has been economic society germany was the most disciplined and it wasn't even the place in europe where where we had the hardest time. the thing we never figured out is how the civilization descended into the basherrism. you can't deliver, and you outsource all your good jobs, you have ge which is celebrated in two out of three jobs -- you look at apple. don't create jobs here they create them in china. and you're creating a prescription for disas netter country of a kind we've never imagined. we're in an unstable situation. i'm worried about the country. i think we have to address that behavior.

not that the guy here has, but a failure of or our system to function. our political system which was the greatest contribution to the world. it has been bought, sold, and corrupted beyond recognition. [applause] [laughter] >> thought amy had something lined up. can i ask, i wanted to go back to something you said earlier when you were making your opening remarks. you talked about disaster porn in passing. i'm wondering for you can revisit that and tell us what you were talking about particularly. >> i will first, i wanted to say what bob was discussing. that the one thing that will be regulated where they will find means to regulate things, the internet.

the deregulation. that will apply to the internet. yeah, i talked about disaster porn. it is like the thing i read about in my book is the other book that i wrote an essay for. it was published by time magazine books. it was tragedy and hope in hay tip. and it's a book of pictures by time magazine photographers of the earthquake. and it's just all these very devastating pictures. i where in the book -- i try to imagine who's buying the book. time magazine thought they would do well on the book. it said something like 10% -- it said a percentage of they didn't want to be specific. a percentage of our profits will go to the red cross. they managed not to spend the millions of dollars that it made on the haitian earthquake yet

about two and a half years after the earthquake. but they didn't make enough to meet their goal, so they ended up spending more of their profit for the memorial exemtive book than they meant too. i try to imagine in my book who would be the person reading haiti tragedy and hope. and i imagine, you know, an average american time reader, kind of middle aged sitting on the couch nut suburbs somewhere with a beer, and the tv is maybe on. and he opens up the book. his wife can bought it. you can buy it at the supermarket. he's looking at pictures of dead haitians. oop -- i'm trying to imagine what is he thinking with what are we thinking by analogy. what we're thinking is i'm glad i'm not them. which is a thought i frequently have in haiti. i think a lot of the relationship between the crisis caravan, all the people that come down to help and the

disaster affected community, is about this one fact, i'm glad i'm not them. the other thing i wanted to say, there's all the writing inside the photographs. so it's really like old playboy magazine. you have good writers in there. writing the serious things about haiti's history and the fabulous pictures of, you know, piles of dead bodies and white people trying to help. it's an amazing book. of course, i probably will never be hired to blog for time magazine again. but let's see if i can follow my train of thought. so what happeneds is we go down, we want to help. but a friend of mine said, you know, people talk about we go down. we want to help. yak, yak, yak, this is a guy who knows a lot about in hay. what we're really seeing in haiti is our future. completely deraglated.

completely overplaited country with no checks and balances. no control after what happens within the own borders. we're seeing our children or grandchildren's future on the planet. that really scares me too. i think it's an interesting reason. we go down to try to prevent our future from happening. >> i want to followup on that, actually. i think that there is an idea out there that the things like climate change, maybe we can solve it with gee yo engineering that we can osh it terl or that we can -- deceive the oceans to ash issue some of the carbon by boosting the population. and any kind of management of the environment like that itself

is a complex technological system that is prone to failures in things like the fukushima plant had a failure. why did something go wrong? you never know how one of these things is going to erupt suddenly. bob mentioned what happened with the tsunami in japan and passing. and that is the case there where they actually, you know, had all kinds of regulations and, you know, scientific estimates behalf kind of earthquake could have on the japan trench to the, you know, just east of the place you have the plate boundary where one tech tonic plate the historical records of the earthquake there. there was a bloap you could have up to a 8.4 earthquake. everyone here knows about this phenomena. but there was a 9.0. it is six times more powerful

that happened march 11th of last year. why were they off scientifically? the answer is there a tendency to think that we have figured out the world. better than in fact we have figured it out. i didn't say that well, i think you grasp the concept. the hazard maps were off. the estimate maps were off in earthquake science seismologies has only been around for about 100 years or so. the last time this fault ruptured the way it did march 11th 2011, was in the ninth century. the hazard maps underestimated what could happen. the waive that came on shore, as you saw in the incredible videos, it overtopped the

tsunami walls. so they have the walls, i mean, they understand that the tsunami can happen. but the walls weren't tal enough. they weren't high enough. in the case of the powerplant. six nuclear reactors that are working off the grid. if they lose power, they have backup jeb generators. but they were too low. the waive destroyed the backup. you have no electricity and you have the nuclear powerplant that relies on the electricity to cool the reactors and the nuclear cooling ponds for the nuclear rods. there is actually technology for moving water around without electricity. it's called gravity. you can create -- they make systems that are gravity-based that can circulate water. but they just simply presume we'll never lose power we have backup generators. we have batteries. but the whole electrical switch

got destroyed by the waive. i think it's a little bit of metaphor for the future is to understood that as marvelous as our technology is, and as well-conceived it might be here even in l.a., the earthquake readiness and the way it is designed. there is a limit to what we know. and the thing that is going to get us is not going to be the thing that we thought was going to get us. >> i want to agree very much with that. i think what has app -- happened the argument has been technology will solve everything. let the market be, the technology be. we'll find solutions. we find that the risks in some of these things are too high. i remember interviewing someone who was a proponent of peaceful of nuclear power.

i was convinced until i went to -- and i i remember going into them a year after the explosion it was the first person to go in. and even then people didn't know what -- which way was up. these were brilliant scientists. you know, they were equal in the world. and what the main story was one of confusion once the disaster was underway. no one knew what to do. no one knew which way to go. no one was knowing what you could measure or what. it was a group of scientist a leading guy from harvard who was writing a book about it. and the joke we were making, sick joke jokes in the car going in and out. it was a year after. and so it seems to me, in that case, and perhaps in the case, not perhaps. in the case of deep water drilling that maybe the

technology logical solution is too costly. that maybe what you have to do is focus on conservation of family planning, you know, greener planet. and that maybe it's time to come to grips with the limits of technology and recognize, you know, there has to be, you know, maybe old geri brown when he was talking about the champing is beautiful. maybe it was a logical message. when you add the other thing that i've been talking about here it's okay to take the technological risks who's going to be the adult monitoring it. that's when it gets scary. i would argue in the cases that we've described as you can see, we can't count on the political system to do it. so that becomes the real deal breaker. yes, maybe you can build a good nuclear powerplant. maybe you can regulate it. maybe you can make it safe. are you really going to trust

these guys who have the morality and ethics who is lower than the secret service agency who won't pay a prostitute her due. >> $150 he wouldn't pay! i wanted to say one thing. i think a lot of these discussions about disaster or disaster narrative and and how these things happen come down -- we're having a discussion here about what is the nature of man? is man a -- as i wrote? is a depraved human beast that tends to be what i believe. or is he or she perfectible? does she tend toward grand, christian all all the rich, or does she tend to set out for the own good. these are ideas that underlie debates between the left and

right and communism and capitalism. so i think that, you know, the concerns of all of us have to do with very grand sill soft call issues. what is the problem with disaster narration. >> thank you. we have about ten -- [applause] we have time for questions now. we have about ten minutes to go. i want to say first of all. it was the easiest panel for me to moderate. in fifteen years of doing this, at the festival. i figured so who was on l panel. but we have some time for you guys to get in on it too. let's start. beth? >> well, this is for robert. there's an article written about you on u.s. hijack.com, and you supported ron paul. you are a democrat, yeah, and you dig it because i'm also a

ron paul supporter because he's the only antiwar candidate. he knows the attacks on 9/11, he is trying to change -- >> i don't want to interrupt you. >> -- here is the point. >> do you have a question? >> yeah. because it was our foreign policy u.s. support for israel and the sup registration. >> i said question, or move aside. >> do you think president bush -- >> thank you. thank you. >> stop! i'd like to respond to this, because -- >> did you hear it? >> first of all. i supported ron paul that he wanted to edit the feds. and he pushed through a bill, i thought it was terrific. i'm a supporter of ron paul he was taking the mrs. and previous administration on the militarism. and that he is a a leader. i want to give him his due. let me tell you, i haven't

figured out. my whole reputation, if i can switch in the california primary, in the protest, if he's on the ballot, i'll write him in. however, do i want ron paul to run the country? no. for the very reasons that my book talks about the need for regulation. sensible regulation in the public interest, and that is aning argument i'm willing to have with libertarians. i think it's a serious argument. i'm willing to move a will the of these to the state level. i have no confidence that we can gain control of the federal court. i think most of what the federal court does is support the big military and the big banking bailouts. something ron paul opposed. i can give him high marks for consistency for sure. do i want public schools? yes. i want to spend more money on public schools, poor people, housing. you know, --

i'm with you part of the way. there's a panel tomorrow and i have to remind tom, the slogan of the is seen as radical is part of the way with lbj. that ended up escalading the vietnam war and it wasn't a great thing. i'm a little squeamish here, i guess i'm kind of parted away with obama. only because i think romney, likely candidate is much worse on every single thing. you probably would agree. [applause] >> again, i want to remind you for the opportunity is to ask questions and not make statements. bile brief. >> i actually heard i wanted to pose a question to you as well. the second question on the coming attack of iran and the ramification of that. one of the news shows you're involved with it mentioned you're going change your registration for republican so

you can vote for ron paul. i was a republican and i left the party because it's crazy. i'm an independent. first of all, is that true. you can change to become a republican for one day. -- >> okay. >> which is what i'll do in the june 5th primary. the second question is along the line of ron paul said cutting off aid to foreign countries including israel. they got attacked on 9/11. there was a 9/11 -- >> support for israel. >> football finish it. >> talk about why we were attacked on 9/11. there was a 9/11 panel here today. >> thank you. >> sit down! >> last question. >> sit down! what the economic ramifications of being attacked on iran? >> okay. let's go on. >> wait minute. >> i just want to --

okay. i think you have people representing a or not. i don't think you're doing ron paul a service. i think he has presented a coherent argument on the comip. he should be treated with respect. i don't think it should degenerate the way it is here. i wish obama had a little bit of ron paul in him when it came to regulating the economy and stops the wars, that's all. [applause] i'm almost afraid to ask a question. >> please. i'm hoping it comes out a question. this is for both robert and joe. robert, first you -- you know, i i've read a lot of books this year. i read about fifty or sixty books this year. yours is the only book where a person showed up on the panel. i was wondering, do you think

that the deck has been stacked against progressive pride. for you joel, if there are the problems with the technologies, and they're so complex, what about the nuclear plant just on the coast where there's fault lines surrounding it with no wall and and no planned, do we accept technology and just accept disasters or do we do something about it? >> thank you. >> joel, i'll say that i think that we in fact, we do accept technology to some extent. every time we switch on a light or drive a car. something like that. we are embedded in the system. but i think you're right about the nuclear powerplants. i would question the has around maps, not because i think that they're necessarily, you know, insincerity put together. i think the amount of knowledge we have about size mick has

around is lower than some that experts think. it should get everyone paused to understand how might the system fail. there's an overwhelming incentive for executives of companies, and for regulators and politicians to think in the short-term. what's the best move for me? in the next three months. how are we going make the stock price go up? how am i going to get re-elected. that's a ready -- that's a real problem when you have long-term problems. >> i want to respond to the question about the festival. some of my best friends work at the "l.a. times". i love the "l.a. times." i'm sorry, it's like a marriage gone sour sometimes. but i really respect the history the paper when it was conservative, when was it was more liberal. i do know it was a paper, as all

great papers are put out by people willing to make great sacrifices. they risk their lives. some get killed. they they are hard working. i don't go down with putting down the paper with con conspiracity. they are understaffed. i think it is hard to put things on like this. things get lost. i think it is great that the festival it was moved. it's not domination position. i love the fact that the "l.a. times" made a commitment to take books to people who love in this part of lax los angeles and not just center it and all other culture things on the west side. applaud that decision. i'm happy. [applause] just have a couple of minutes. those of you who don't get to ask the question. if you come to the signing area at 7. you talk to the authors there. >> amy, what do you --

am i right to feel i'm not nationalistic in 9/11 by not hanging a flag out my window. i don't want to contribute to the red cross. >> are you asking me if i advise those? >> you were involved in 9/11. i think you were living in new york. >> yeah. the beginning of my other book is about it. >> is it right for me to feel an aversion to donate because of a disaster. no. i think, you know, it's all always the best to follow your heart for other people. that's one thing i believe. sometimes your money is not going to the best charity. sometimes the charity is kind of self-perpetuating, and charities, ease especially disaster -- who has the most rape