yes I read that, but it sounds like the usual ill-informed press at it again.
Think about it: if its highest point is 22 feet then any warning would be superfluous as wave heights topped out at over 30 feet; DG would have been scrubbed clean. So I think that our original theory of seamount vs continental shelf is more likely to be correct. Also, the Pacific Tsunami centre works off seismographical data and readings from wave amplitude buoys etc, the latter of which there are none in the indian ocean.
This seems like another "criticise the USA article" of which there have been a worrying amount recently. I for one fear for a world where the US doesn't hold its position of pre-eminence.
But so as to not go off-thread, I'll let that one rest - for now.
But please - don't believe everything you read in the newspapers. I doubt half the journos in the british press could even spell Tsunami before Boxing day, never mind give an analysis as to why DG can breathe a big sigh of relief.