REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Katrina-related accusations and the info behind them

POSTED BY: GEEZER
UPDATED: Tuesday, February 14, 2006 17:57
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 4253
PAGE 1 of 3

Saturday, September 10, 2005 4:49 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


There have been a bunch of accusations of malfeasance since the Katrina disaster. The most widely quoted, that I've seen anyway, is this list:

Quote:

Why did FEMA block Wal-Mart shipments of water to the New Orleans area?
Why did FEMA block fuel shipments to the New Orleans area?
Why did FEMA cut emergency communication lines from the New Orleans area?
Why wouldn't FEMA let the Red Cross deliver food to the New Orleans area?
Why wouldn't FEMA let the people in downtown New Orleans leave?
Why wouldn't FEMA let others come in to deliver relief supplies or
transportation out from New Orleans?
Why did it take the government 5 days to give a "yes" to airlines who had asked to
ferry refugees out of New Orleans for free, immediately after the storm?



When I look at this list, I see two direct assumptions, and one implied:

1. These events actually happened as stated
2. FEMA was the responsible party
3. (implied) There was no good reason to take the action.

Let's start with the first three, since I already did some research on these.

Why did FEMA block Wal-Mart shipments of water to the New Orleans area?
Why did FEMA block fuel shipments to the New Orleans area?
Why did FEMA cut emergency communication lines from the New Orleans area?


These three claims apparently come from a Meet the Press interview with Aaron Broussard, the Jefferson Parish (La) President. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9179790/ That's the only source I can find online. Jefferson Parish is south of New Orleans about 10 miles and extends down to the mouth of the river, so it's not really the city proper. Anyone have a confirming source for these, either that they occured or that FEMA was the prime mover?


The "Why wouldn't FEMA let the Red Cross deliver food to the New Orleans area?" one has already been disproven as to FEMA involvement. It was local authorities who did this. Their rationale was that Red Cross presence in the city would encourage people to stay, or even return. Not a good idea, as it turned out, but not intended to harm.

Haven't seen much either way about the remaining accusations. Anyone have cites to original sources?



"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 10, 2005 2:55 PM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Hello?

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 11, 2005 11:19 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Any comments?

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, September 12, 2005 3:17 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Okay no one wants to get into this apparently.

Also, with a bit more checking, I found that Ruxton's entire post containing the above claims was lifted verbatim from this blog.

http://www.antiwar.com/blog/index.php

So unless Ruxton is the Jeremy Sapienza who either authored it or copied it from somewhere else, looks like just another case of internet plagerism. If he can't take the time to either attribute or paraphrase, I guess actually backing up his assertions is out of the question.

Guess this thread can just die then.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, September 12, 2005 3:47 AM

BARNSTORMER


No, don't let it die. I've been waiting for an "Official" history of events to come out. My opinion to date has been that the blame goes in many directions, but tends to center on the state and local governments.

But it is very difficult to sort out what is real with all the blatant partisanship in the stories out there.

God, I miss the good old days when you could more or less depend on reporters to give the facts with a minimum of spin.

Am I a Lion?... No, I think I'ma tellin' the truth.

BarnStormer

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, September 12, 2005 4:26 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by Geezer:
Guess this thread can just die then.



We don't have to let it die. How about we label Ruxton a troll and discuss why we should ignore him?

Here, I'll go first:

I don't agree with what he says. He's a troll. Ignore him. He's in the paid employ of the Democratic Party and tasked with infiltrating this board to post his propaganda. So you better ignore him or I'll say mean things about you. Call you a troll. (Shakes fist at screen.)

There. I leave the rest to you.

H

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, September 12, 2005 5:30 AM

BARNSTORMER



By the way.....

What is, in your opinion, the most reliable nonpartisan factchecker website.

Am I a Lion?... No, I think I'ma tellin' the truth.

BarnStormer

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, September 12, 2005 5:33 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by Hero:
We don't have to let it die. How about we label Ruxton a troll and discuss why we should ignore him?

Here, I'll go first:

I don't agree with what he says. He's a troll. Ignore him. He's in the paid employ of the Democratic Party and tasked with infiltrating this board to post his propaganda. So you better ignore him or I'll say mean things about you. Call you a troll. (Shakes fist at screen.)

There. I leave the rest to you.

H



Actually, I was considering opening a thread titled "Please Don't Tease the Loonies" suggesting that we either leave the fringe de la fringe alone, or bug them so unmercifully that their screeds get higher and higher pitched until they go ultrasonic and we can't hear them any more. But I decided not to do that.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, September 12, 2005 5:42 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by BarnStormer:

By the way.....

What is, in your opinion, the most reliable nonpartisan factchecker website.

Am I a Lion?... No, I think I'ma tellin' the truth.

BarnStormer



Actually, Factcheck.org, the Annenberg Foundation's site, is pretty good, although they only discuss a few topics. They actually look at both sides and provide cites and links for all their info.

They only have one article about Katrina, relating to the levee issue.
http://www.factcheck.org/article344.html


"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, September 12, 2005 5:51 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


I posed a link to a comprehensive LA Times story yesterday. It answers some of these questions, and it raises and answers a whole bunch more. www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-plan11sep11,1,6089432.st
ory?ctrack=1&cset=true


At various times, people have posted links to the

NOLA Emergency Preparedness Plan www.cityofno.com/portal.aspx?portal=46

and to the FEMA National Response Plan www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/interapp/editorial/editorial_0566.xml.

These documents will provide the details of who was supposed to do what, when. My quick read of the NOLA Plan leave Nagin fairly unscathed. My quick read of the FEMA Plan leaves FEMA holding the bag... but I suggest that you read and interpret the article and the respective Plans for yourself. The State seems to be a whole 'nother can of worms. In some cases they did the right thing (asking for National Guard from other states beforehand, routing "counterflow" traffic etc.) in other cases (such as not allowing the Red Cross into the Superdome BEFORE the levees broke) it was the wrong thing. This site may provide some answers, I haven't had time to look at it yet www.loep.state.la.us

A couple weeks back, I suggested that we construct a timeline. Glad to see that you're on-board with the idea of finding out what REALLY happened. Also, I would be interested to see what Bush, Cheney, Townsend, Chertoff and Brown were doing spefically. Have at it!

Please don't think they give a shit.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, September 12, 2005 7:59 AM

CANTTAKESKY


Don't have a lot of time to expound now, but here are links I posted on another thread.

Aid thwarted by FEMA
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/05/national/nationalspecial/05blame.htm
l


Aid refused
http://www.suntimes.com/output/hurricane/cst-nws-daley03.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/05/opinion/05krugman.html

Can't Take My Gorram Sky

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, September 12, 2005 9:06 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Oh, and PS- I hope to get LOTS of insight from the various perspectives on these links, and others.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, September 12, 2005 11:30 AM

SEVENPERCENT


Quote:

We don't have to let it die


I notice you're keen to keep this one alive, Hero, but never responded to my 'Leadership' thread. What's the matter, only like to play the game when the odds are in your favor? And I'd post several of the links I've found in this one, Geezer, but Signy should do a fine job. It's not like you all read them anyway (even the Pres admits he doesn't read; the only folks in this administration that seem to are folks like Chertoff and Brown, who get their disaster news from the paper).

------------------------------------------
He looked bigger when I couldn't see him.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, September 12, 2005 11:41 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by SevenPercent:
Quote:

We don't have to let it die


I notice you're keen to keep this one alive, Hero, but never responded to my 'Leadership' thread.



I never responded to your 'leadership' thread because I just wasn't inspired. Maybe if you were a better leader....

As for my humble contribution to this thread, I admit, I was poking the Ruxton. Poke, poke. Thats all.

Part of being a good leader is laughing at those who oppose you. I'm sure you get that alot, although you might not know it...

H

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, September 12, 2005 12:33 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Well, does anyone have anything MEANINGFUL to say? If not, then this thread really DOES deserve to die. I'll play taps...

Please don't think they give a shit.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, September 12, 2005 2:50 PM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
Well, does anyone have anything MEANINGFUL to say? If not, then this thread really DOES deserve to die. I'll play taps...

Please don't think they give a shit.



Sorry, been busy with the real world.

The LA Times article you cite is is interesting, and raises lots of questions. The whole thing will take some time to digest and research. I notice that all the politicians quoted, from all sides, seem to be making what could be interpreted as political rather than humanitarian statements. Maybe they all don't give a shit. The disaster plans will need further study.

CANTTAKESKY's first NY Times link repeats the claims made by Jefferson Parish President Boussard on Meet the Press, but provides no validation of his claims.

I have no idea why FEMA would reject Chicago's offer of aid. Did anyone ask them for an explanation, or just assume there was something wrong with it?

The NY Times Editorial is an editorial, not news, IMHO.

All I'm really looking for is some verification or refutation of the seven accusations listed at the beginning of this thread. General discussions of the Katrina disaster are being covered quite well elsewhere.



"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, September 13, 2005 4:57 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


I saw a news report on CBS the other day that had serious timeline errors (declaration of national emergency). It also highlighted selected bits of information while ignoring others (said Nagin waited to call 'an evacuation' rather than saying a voluntary evacuation was ordered, followed by a mandatory one), and in addition expressed dubious legal opinions (for example, that the Insurrection Act needed to be invoked).

You have to be careful, for too many network news shows the news means simply parroting either the administration or what some other drone said longer and louder than anyone else.

It is most helpful to read original documents (NOLA, FEMA) and original legal decisions (National Guard). In my experience, the media depend on the fact that virtually no one will fact-check them.

Failing that, foreign English-language media is a generally good source of information.

Other than that, all of the to-the-minute news sources have generally been archived, so it's not possible to go back to unfiltered sources. It would be nice if the news links from before landfall through the first few days I provided are still active, though I suspect not.

So, smooth move Geezer. You will not find many active links from when it matters.



Please don't think they give a shit.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, September 14, 2005 4:18 AM

CANTTAKESKY


Quote:

Originally posted by Geezer:
CANTTAKESKY's first NY Times link repeats the claims made by Jefferson Parish President Boussard on Meet the Press, but provides no validation of his claims.

What do you mean by validation? You want an internal memo from FEMA on the internet that shows they rejected offers of aid? The NYTimes article quotes Boussard's claims *in addition* to others who reported FEMA's rejection of aid. I'm wondering what isn't good enough for you here. What would be good enough to convince you that FEMA did indeed reject offers of aid while people were dying? I need to know so I don't waste time sending you links to the NYTimes. (And yes the last link was to an editorial. It says "opinion" right there in the link.)

Can't Take My Gorram Sky

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, September 14, 2005 4:44 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by canttakesky:
What do you mean by validation? You want an internal memo from FEMA on the internet that shows they rejected offers of aid? The NYTimes article quotes Boussard's claims *in addition* to others who reported FEMA's rejection of aid. I'm wondering what isn't good enough for you here. What would be good enough to convince you that FEMA did indeed reject offers of aid while people were dying? I need to know so I don't waste time sending you links to the NYTimes. (And yes the last link was to an editorial. It says "opinion" right there in the link.)

Can't Take My Gorram Sky



What I said above.
1. Some independent source that it actually occurred. Aside from Pres. Broussard's statement, has there been any other report of this? Did he know it first hand or was he repeating hear-say? I don't know.

2. Verification that it was actually FEMA. Remember, it was originally stated in several places that FEMA blocked the Red Cross shipments to the Superdome. Turns out it was the State Homeland Security instead.

3. If it did occur, what was the reason behind it? Did FEMA, or whoever, have what they considered a good reason for their actions? Was the road the Wal-Mart water trucks needed to use already impassable? Was the fuel needed more somewhwere else? Was the Jefferson Parish communications net not compatible with the emergency standard everyone else was using?

I'm not saying anything did or didn't happen, I'd just like more information. Some things may have happened as described, some may have been different, and some may be political theatre, such as Mayor Nagin's request for 25,000 body bags.




"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, September 14, 2005 4:48 AM

CANTTAKESKY


On the Wal-Mart water trucks, I found this:

http://mikewas.redstate.org/story/2005/9/6/114926/3369

Quote:

Sharon Weber of Wal-Mart called back. She said that last week, FEMA diverted those water trucks to "another location, which [FEMA] felt was in greater need than where they were headed." Weber emphasized that Wal-Mart would not override any FEMA decisions made in emergency situations. So Broussard, who claimed that Wal-Mart's aid was ourtight rejected, was wrong. Based on Wal-Mart's information, their trucks were taken where FEMA thought they were needed most.

So according to this commentator, diverting the truck to an undisclosed location is not the same as "rejection." I'd buy it if they disclose the location so we can judge whether that location came anywhere near the need of 30-40K people trapped without water in the Superdome and Convention Center. I'm really scratching my head here, but I can't think of any location that would have a greater NEED, can you?

At any rate, here appears to be corroboration of the wal-mart water truck rejection, oh I mean "diversion." Whatever excuse-speak you prefer, the fact remains that 1) Wal-mart offered the water, 2) people at the Superdome and Convention Center did not get a drop to drink.

Can't Take My Gorram Sky

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, September 14, 2005 4:52 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by rue:
I saw a news report on CBS the other day that had serious timeline errors (declaration of national emergency). It also highlighted selected bits of information while ignoring others (said Nagin waited to call 'an evacuation' rather than saying a voluntary evacuation was ordered, followed by a mandatory one), and in addition expressed dubious legal opinions (for example, that the Insurrection Act needed to be invoked).

You have to be careful, for too many network news shows the news means simply parroting either the administration or what some other drone said longer and louder than anyone else.

It is most helpful to read original documents (NOLA, FEMA) and original legal decisions (National Guard). In my experience, the media depend on the fact that virtually no one will fact-check them.

Failing that, foreign English-language media is a generally good source of information.

Other than that, all of the to-the-minute news sources have generally been archived, so it's not possible to go back to unfiltered sources. It would be nice if the news links from before landfall through the first few days I provided are still active, though I suspect not.

So, smooth move Geezer. You will not find many active links from when it matters.



So you've just explained how you can feel free to continue to believe things that can't be verified. Smooth move, Rue.



"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, September 14, 2005 5:54 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


I heard, but have not had time to verify, that Blanco asked for 700 buses from FEMA for evacuaiton, and FEMA only sent 100. Add this to your list- it should be easy to verify or disprove.

Please don't think they give a shit.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, September 14, 2005 6:29 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
I heard, but have not had time to verify, that Blanco asked for 700 buses from FEMA for evacuaiton, and FEMA only sent 100. Add this to your list- it should be easy to verify or disprove.

Please don't think they give a shit.



From a Boston Globe article.

http://www.boston.com/news/weather/articles/2005/09/11/chronology_of_e
rrors_how_a_disaster_spread/?page=1


"Bureaucratic glitches slowed progress from the beginning. On Sunday, the day before the storm, the Louisiana National Guard asked FEMA for 700 buses to evacuate people. It received only 100."

That's the extend of the info I could find. This says the state National Guard, not the Gov. requested the busses. It assumes (without providing any evidence) that "bureaucratic glitches" were the problem, but doesn't give any indication of where the busses were for, or why only 100 of 700 requested were sent. Maybe by Sunday, all the busses FEMA had available were already assigned. Maybe they couldn't find drivers (New Orleans couldn't). Lots of unanswered questions.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, September 14, 2005 6:58 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
I heard, but have not had time to verify, that Blanco asked for 700 buses from FEMA for evacuaiton, and FEMA only sent 100. Add this to your list- it should be easy to verify or disprove.

Please don't think they give a shit.


"Bureaucratic glitches slowed progress from the beginning. On Sunday, the day before the storm, the Louisiana National Guard asked FEMA for 700 buses to evacuate people. It received only 100."


We saw hundreds of buses sitting unused in bus depots in New Orleans, any local school district in NW Louisiana could have and should have been tapped to provide buses. Maybe FEMA thought that she could look out her window and find a few of those big, yellow ones on her own. Why should FEMA maintain huge, unused bus depots in select locations unused but ready to duplicate services available on a daily basis to local officials.

Gee, maybe FEMA should have a wharehouse filled with Louisiana National Guardsman that it can use for an emergency (since the real ones are too busy escorting Democratic Congressmen to clean out their New Orleans homes or blocking relief supplies headed for the Superdome). FEMA could then send its own New Orleans local police and trash collectors. Perhaps a FEMA mobile City Hall. FEMA Parks and Rec lifeguards for the pools. FEMA weights and measures inspectors to make sure the gas pumps are properly calibrated. Duplicate state and local services and resources for every level since in the event of an emergency state and local officials have no power or ability and their existing infrastructure and resources simply evaporate in the hours before they might be needed. Uh, oh, Gov Blanco's pen is out of ink. Sure, she's got a bunch sitting in her desk drawer, but she gets on the phone and calls FEMA asking for 700 special, Federal ink pens, sure they only send her 100, but she doesn't even use those for three more days while complaining that she can't write anything because she needs help.

H

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, September 14, 2005 10:59 PM

CANTTAKESKY


Quote:

Originally posted by Geezer:
1. Some independent source that it actually occurred.
2. Verification that it was actually FEMA.
3. If it did occur, what was the reason behind it?

First, thank you for responding to my annoyed post so rationally. I respect that. These are very good points, and it is important to think critically, especially when the media reports merely hearsay. Having said that, Rue makes a good point too that hearsay is sometimes all the media has to go on. In a situation where communications are down, and exit and entry is controlled by martial law, sometimes second-hand accounts are as good as it gets.

Here is an excerpt of a shocking first-hand account. There is a lot more at the original link. The blame in this story definitely goes to local "authorities," though much of this suffering here would not have happened had FEMA had not obstructed relief in the first few days. It is unclear which "military" was involved in turning away the chartered buses and why--I doubt that the authors themselves know. The highlights in bold are my emphasis.
Quote:

http://www.livejournal.com/users/sfsocialists/3687.html
On Day 2, there were approximately 500 of us left in the hotels in the French Quarter. We were a mix of foreign tourists, conference attendees like ourselves, and locals who had checked into hotels for safety and shelter from
Katrina. Some of us had cell phone contact with family and friends outside of New Orleans. We were repeatedly told that all sorts of resources including the National Guard and scores of buses were pouring in to the City. The buses and the
other resources must have been invisible because none of us had seen them.

We decided we had to save ourselves. So we pooled our money and came up with $25,000 to have ten buses come and take us out of the City. Those who did not have the requisite $45.00 for a ticket were subsidized by those who did have
extra money. We waited for 48 hours for the buses, spending the last 12 hours standing outside, sharing the limited water, food, and clothes we had. We created a priority boarding area for the sick, elderly and new born babies. We waited late into the night for the "imminent" arrival of the buses. The buses never arrived. We later learned that the minute the arrived to the City limits, they were commandeered by the military.

By day 4 our hotels had run out of fuel and water. Sanitation was dangerously abysmal. As the desperation and despair increased, street crime as well as water levels began to rise. The hotels turned us out and locked their doors,
telling us that the "officials" told us to report to the convention center to wait for more buses. As we entered the center of the City, we finally encountered the National Guard.

The Guards told us we would not be allowed into the Superdome as the City's primary shelter had been descended into a humanitarian and health hellhole. The guards further told us that the City's only other shelter, the Convention
Center, was also descending into chaos and squalor and that the police were not allowing anyone else in. Quite naturally, we asked, "If we can't go to the only 2 shelters in the City, what was our alternative?" The guards told us that that was our problem, and no they did not have extra water to give to us. This would be the start of our numerous encounters with callous and hostile "law enforcement".

We walked to the police command center at Harrah's on Canal Street and were told the same thing, that we were on our own, and no they did not have water to give us. We now numbered several hundred. We held a mass meeting to decide a course of action. We agreed to camp outside the police command post. We would be plainly visible to the media and would constitute a highly visible embarrassment to the City officials. The police told us that we could not stay. Regardless, we began to settle in and set up camp. In short order, the police
commander came across the street to address our group. He told us he had a solution: we should walk to the Pontchartrain Expressway and cross the greater New Orleans Bridge where the police had buses lined up to take us out of the City. The crowed cheered and began to move. We called everyone back and explained to the commander that there had been lots of misinformation and wrong information and was he sure that there were buses waiting for us. The commander
turned to the crowd and stated emphatically, "I swear to you that the buses are there."

We organized ourselves and the 200 of us set off for the bridge with great excitement and hope. As we marched pasted the convention center, many locals saw our determined and optimistic group and asked where we were headed. We told them about the great news. Families immediately grabbed their few belongings and quickly our numbers doubled and then doubled again. Babies in strollers now joined us, people using crutches, elderly clasping walkers and others
people in wheelchairs. We marched the 2-3 miles to the freeway and up the steep incline to the Bridge. It now began to pour down rain, but it did not dampen our enthusiasm.

As we approached the bridge, armed Gretna Sheriffs formed a line across the foot of the bridge. Before we were close enough to speak, they began firing their weapons over our heads. This sent the crowd fleeing in various directions. As the crowd scattered and dissipated, a few of us inched forward and
managed to engage some of the sheriffs in conversation. We told them of our
conversation with the police commander and of the commander's assurances. The sheriffs informed us there were no buses waiting. The commander had lied to us to get us to move.

We questioned why we couldn't cross the bridge anyway, especially as there was little traffic on the 6-lane highway. They responded that the West Bank was not going to become New Orleans and there would be no Superdomes in their
City. These were code words for if you are poor and black, you are not crossing the Mississippi River and you were not getting out of New Orleans.

Our small group retreated back down Highway 90 to seek shelter from the rain under an overpass. We debated our options and in the end decided to build an encampment in the middle of the Ponchartrain Expressway on the center divide,
between the O'Keefe and Tchoupitoulas exits. We reasoned we would be visible to everyone, we would have some security being on an elevated freeway and we could wait and watch for the arrival of the yet to be seen buses.

All day long, we saw other families, individuals and groups make the same trip up the incline in an attempt to cross the bridge, only to be turned away. Some chased away with gunfire, others simply told no, others to be verbally
berated and humiliated. Thousands of New Orleaners were prevented and prohibited
from self-evacuating the City on foot. (emphasis mine)
Meanwhile, the only two City shelters
sank further into squalor and disrepair. The only way across the bridge was by vehicle. We saw workers stealing trucks, buses, moving vans, semi-trucks and any car that could be hotwired. All were packed with people trying to escape the misery New Orleans had become.

Our little encampment began to blossom. Someone stole a water delivery truck and brought it up to us. Let's hear it for looting! A mile or so down the freeway, an army truck lost a couple of pallets of C-rations on a tight turn. We ferried the food back to our camp in shopping carts. Now secure with the two necessities, food and water; cooperation, community, and creativity
flowered. We organized a clean up and hung garbage bags from the rebar poles. We made beds from wood pallets and cardboard. We designated a storm drain as the bathroom and the kids built an elaborate enclosure for privacy out of plastic, broken umbrellas, and other scraps. We even organized a food recycling system
where individuals could swap out parts of C-rations (applesauce for babies and
candies for kids!).

This was a process we saw repeatedly in the aftermath of Katrina. When individuals had to fight to find food or water, it meant looking out for yourself only. You had to do whatever it took to find water for your kids or food for
your parents. When these basic needs were met, people began to look out for each other, working together and constructing a community.

If the relief organizations had saturated the City with food and water in the first 2 or 3 days, the desperation, the frustration and the ugliness would not have set in.

Flush with the necessities, we offered food and water to passing families and individuals. Many decided to stay and join us. Our encampment grew to 80 or 90 people.

From a woman with a battery powered radio we learned that the media was talking about us. Up in full view on the freeway, every relief and news organizations saw us on their way into the City. Officials were being asked what they
were going to do about all those families living up on the freeway? The officials responded they were going to take care of us. Some of us got a sinking feeling. "Taking care of us" had an ominous tone to it.

Unfortunately, our sinking feeling (along with the sinking City) was correct. Just as dusk set in, a Gretna Sheriff showed up, jumped out of his patrol vehicle, aimed his gun at our faces, screaming, "Get off the fucking freeway".
A helicopter arrived and used the wind from its blades to blow away our flimsy structures. As we retreated, the sheriff loaded up his truck with our food and water.

Once again, at gunpoint, we were forced off the freeway. All the law enforcement agencies appeared threatened when we congregated or congealed into groups of 20 or more. In every congregation of "victims" they saw "mob" or "riot". We felt safety in numbers. Our "we must stay together" was impossible because
the agencies would force us into small atomized groups.

In the pandemonium of having our camp raided and destroyed, we scattered once again. Reduced to a small group of 8 people, in the dark, we sought refuge in an abandoned school bus, under the freeway on Cilo Street. We were hiding from possible criminal elements but equally and definitely, we were hiding from the police and sheriffs with their martial law, curfew and shoot-to-kill policies.

The next days, our group of 8 walked most of the day, made contact with New Orleans Fire Department and were eventually airlifted out by an urban search and rescue team....



There is corroboration by Geraldo Rivera on FOX news, crying and begging, "Let them walk out of here! Let them walk out of here!...Let them go!" Shepard Smith continues, "The government has locked them in there. They have set up a checkpoint...and anyone who walks out of the city is turned around...Over there is food and water...and the government will not allow you to do it." Download the video here: http://www.crooksandliars.com/2005/09/02.html#a4763

The DA has no place charging the nursing home owners who did not evacuate 34 residents without charging the authorities who created this concentration camp responsible for untold deaths and rapes.


Can't Take My Gorram Sky

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 15, 2005 3:36 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by canttakesky:
I'd buy it if they disclose the location so we can judge whether that location came anywhere near the need of 30-40K people trapped without water in the Superdome and Convention Center. I'm really scratching my head here, but I can't think of any location that would have a greater NEED, can you?



Neither the Superdome or the Convention center are in Jefferson Parish, where Mr. Broussard is president, So reallocating the water didn't impact those sites negatively. I too would like to know where it went.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 15, 2005 4:59 AM

CANTTAKESKY


Quote:

Originally posted by Geezer:
Neither the Superdome or the Convention center are in Jefferson Parish, where Mr. Broussard is president, So reallocating the water didn't impact those sites negatively. I too would like to know where it went.

Where do you think the residents of Jefferson Parish were? They were flooded out and relocated to the Superdome and Convention Center. I'd say refusing those water trucks impacted those sites negatively.

Can't Take My Gorram Sky

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 15, 2005 2:58 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Geezer, here's one possible verification (or, at least a source claiming to be first-hand):

Quote:

FEMA halted tractor trailers hauling water to a supply staging area in Alexandria, Louisiana, The New York Times quoted William Vines, former mayor of Fort Smith, Arkansas, as saying. "FEMA would not let the trucks unload," he told the newspaper. "The drivers were stuck for several days on the side of the road" because, he said, they did not have a "tasker number." He added, "What in the world is a tasker number? I have no idea. It's just paperwork and it's ridiculous.
www.cnn.com/2005/US/09/15/katrina.response/index.html

However, there is a lot more info in the article than just this one item. It's an interesting read.

Please don't think they give a shit.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 15, 2005 3:37 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


"So you've just explained how you can feel free to continue to believe things that can't be verified. Smooth move, Rue."

Actually, I said to use 1) original documents (rather than news commentary on what might or might not be in the documents), 2) foreign news sources (generally have less bias) and 3) original news items from the time period in question (along with links, I posted extended quotes which could be googled to pull up secondary sources.) If worse came to worse, one could always pay the fee for an archived item. It would just not be freely available to anyone via link.

I base my beliefs on verifiable information. And you?


Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 16, 2005 1:29 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
Geezer, here's one possible verification (or, at least a source claiming to be first-hand):

Quote:

FEMA halted tractor trailers hauling water to a supply staging area in Alexandria, Louisiana, The New York Times quoted William Vines, former mayor of Fort Smith, Arkansas, as saying. "FEMA would not let the trucks unload," he told the newspaper. "The drivers were stuck for several days on the side of the road" because, he said, they did not have a "tasker number." He added, "What in the world is a tasker number? I have no idea. It's just paperwork and it's ridiculous.
www.cnn.com/2005/US/09/15/katrina.response/index.html

However, there is a lot more info in the article than just this one item. It's an interesting read.




Alexandria, Louisiana is about 100 miles NW of New Orleans, so It probably wasn't the same water that Jefferson Parish ordered from Wal-Mart, but it's troubling nonetheless.

I wonder if FEMA has been influenced to have all the paperwork, know exactly where everyone is, who's doing what, etc. by their association with (and subserviance to) Homeland Security. Security agencies are notably anal about that sort of stuff, often to the detriment of effective function.

It has been proposed since Katrina that FEMA be made a seperate cabinet-level agency, to give it more independence. DOesn't sound like a bad idea to me.



"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 16, 2005 1:38 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by rue:
"So you've just explained how you can feel free to continue to believe things that can't be verified. Smooth move, Rue."

Actually, I said to use 1) original documents (rather than news commentary on what might or might not be in the documents), 2) foreign news sources (generally have less bias) and 3) original news items from the time period in question (along with links, I posted extended quotes which could be googled to pull up secondary sources.) If worse came to worse, one could always pay the fee for an archived item. It would just not be freely available to anyone via link.

I base my beliefs on verifiable information. And you?



Oh. I thought you said all the original sources had already been corrupted or archived, and were no longer available to validate anything. Perhaps it was the insult at the end which made me be less than 100% objective in my reading.

I also try to base my beliefs on verifiable information, and suspend judgement until I have it. In this world of 24/7 news, blogs, reposts of reposts, "news" sites with obvious political agendas, politicians of all stripes making political rather than factual statements, etc. it sometimes takes a while for the facts to shake out. Some probably never will.

Edit to add: It was so much easier back when Walter Cronkite gave you all the news you needed to know in 30 minutes a day.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 16, 2005 1:48 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by canttakesky:
Quote:

Originally posted by Geezer:
Neither the Superdome or the Convention center are in Jefferson Parish, where Mr. Broussard is president, So reallocating the water didn't impact those sites negatively. I too would like to know where it went.

Where do you think the residents of Jefferson Parish were? They were flooded out and relocated to the Superdome and Convention Center. I'd say refusing those water trucks impacted those sites negatively.

Can't Take My Gorram Sky



But the trucks were supposedly turned away from Jefferson parish for another destination. Maybe the Superdome, since there were lots of folks there? Just supposition, since I don't have that info. I'd still like to know where the trucks went.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 16, 2005 3:37 AM

CANTTAKESKY


Quote:

Originally posted by Geezer:
But the trucks were supposedly turned away from Jefferson parish for another destination. Maybe the Superdome, since there were lots of folks there? Just supposition, since I don't have that info. I'd still like to know where the trucks went.

Right, they were diverted to somewhere with a greater need. I reiterate my question: where was there a greater need than the SD/CC? Why didn't they get that water? (We know they didn't because their first supplies were those highly publicized military convoy trucks 5-6 days later.)

Whether Jefferson Parish and the SD/CC were the same population or different is neither here nor there. The fact of the matter is SD/CC didn't get the water they could have gotten had those Wal-Mart trucks been let through.

Can't Take My Gorram Sky

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 16, 2005 3:51 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by canttakesky:
Right, they were diverted to somewhere with a greater need. I reiterate my question: where was there a greater need than the SD/CC? Why didn't they get that water? (We know they didn't because their first supplies were those highly publicized military convoy trucks 5-6 days later.)

Whether Jefferson Parish and the SD/CC were the same population or different is neither here nor there. The fact of the matter is SD/CC didn't get the water they could have gotten had those Wal-Mart trucks been let through.

Can't Take My Gorram Sky



Okay, let's try again.

Jefferson Parish is south of New Orleans. They were the ones who ordered the water from Wal-Mart. Jefferson Parish does not contain either the Superdome or the Convention Center. The water was not originally bound for the Superdome or Convention Center, so it couldn't have been diverted from them.

I got no idea so far where the water went. Maybe to hospitals, maybe to people who were trapped elsewhere, maybe to fill FEMA hot tubs. Assuming that because it didn't go to Jefferson Parish or the SD/CC it wasn't well-used is just that, an assumption.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 16, 2005 4:12 AM

FIVVER


Quote:


The fact of the matter is SD/CC didn't get the water they could have gotten had those Wal-Mart trucks been let through.



It's worse than that. The Red Cross and Salvation Army had relief convoys ready to go to the SD/CC before Katrina hit. They were deliberately kept out by the STATE Dept. of Homeland Security.

Here's a link to the story as reported by Fox's Major Garrett:

http://www.radioblogger.com/archives/september05.html

You need to click on the September Archives link and then find on this page "Major Garrett" (twice)

Here's an excerpt:

Quote:


Thursday, September 8

Major Garrett updates us on the Red Cross AND the Salvation Army being blocked from helping by Louisiana state officials

HH: Making an encore appearance, and we're very grateful for it, Major Garrett of Fox News Channel. Major, you certainly made waves yesterday. Perhaps the most reported story in America was yours. You followed up on it tonight. What has your investigation into the Red Cross relationship with the Louisiana Department of Homeland Security revealed today?

MG: A couple of things. First of all, it established on tonight's Special Report, that it wasn't just the Red Cross. It was the Salvation Army. Both agencies, both organizations were ready, prepared, pre-positioned, eager, but were thwarted in their efforts to bring supplies, basic supplies...not everything these people needed, but core supplies to the Superdome, and then eventually, the convention center. Why? Because the New Orleans Department of Homeland Security said look. Our plan is to evacuate these people. Marty Evans, the President and the CEO of the American Red Cross, said on camera...you don't have to believe me. Believe her. You can read her own eyes, saying look. We were told if we came in, we would create an atmosphere that would lead people to stay, and give them the feeling that they should stay. And the state did not want that.




And for those of you who wouldn't believe Fox News if they said the sun was going to rise in the east tomorrow, this is from the American Red Cross web site:

Quote:


Hurricane Katrina: Why is the Red Cross not in New Orleans?
• Acess to New Orleans is controlled by the National Guard and local authorities and while we are in constant contact with them, we simply cannot enter New Orleans against their orders.
• The state Homeland Security Department had requested--and continues to request--that the American Red Cross not come back into New Orleans following the hurricane. Our presence would keep people from evacuating and encourage others to come into the city.




I don't have a date for this post, but it was early last week while the people were cut off.



Fivver

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 16, 2005 6:18 AM

CANTTAKESKY


Quote:

Originally posted by Geezer:
Okay, let's try again.

Yes, let's do try again.

1. Jefferson Parish is both west and south of Orleans Parish. Orleans Parish is where the SD/CC are located. Check out map here:
http://www.jpso.com/jp-map2.htm
According to a map I found in Time magazine, the eastern side of Jefferson Parish, the part adjacent to Orleans Parish, was flooded as well. This map online can give you an idea of the areas impacted by the hurricane, which includes Jefferson Parish.
http://www.publichealth.hurricane.lsu.edu/convert%20to%20tables/New%20
Orleans%20Study%20Areatf.htm


2. Which parish the SD/CC were physically located in is neither here nor there. The question is WHO was living inside the SD/CC? It is reasonable to assume that the evacuees at the SD/CC were not only residents of Orleans Parish, but also residents of the rest of the New Orleans metropolitan area, including Jefferson Parish which also suffered flood damage.

3. Imagine for a second that you are the President of Jefferson Parish. A water truck arrives for your residents. Where ARE your residents? Most have evacuated the city. Some are in their undamaged homes with running water. Some are in their damaged homes with no water. And the rest are, yes you guessed it, in the Superdome and Convention Center. Now let's say you are in the position to accept this water. Where are you going to send it? The folks in undamaged homes don't need it. The folks in the damaged homes are either waiting to be rescued or are free to leave the city to search for water. The Jefferson Parish residents who most desperately need the water are, yes you guessed it, in the Superdome and Convention Center. If you are lucky, you might be able to deliver some to the folks still stuck in their damaged homes, but the most efficient thing to do is to send the water to your residents dying of thirst in the Superdome and Convention Center.

4. The rest of the parishes in the New Orleans metropolitan area are in the same position. Their residents are either evacuated, free to evacuate now, staying in undamaged homes, or (uh huh) dying of thirst in the Superdome and Convention Center.

5. So you, the president of Jefferson Parish, are told FEMA turned the water truck away, presumably to send to someone who needs it more than you. Now wouldn't you ask, "Who the hell needs it more than the Jefferson Parish residents in the Superdome and Convention Center. ?" Thirsty Orleans Parish residents? Well, they are in the Superdome and Convention Center. Thirsty St. Bernard parish residents? They in the Superdome and Convention Center. Thirsty St. Tammany parish residents? Yep, they are in the Superdome and Convention Center. So where could they have sent it that had a greater need for the water than the Superdome and Convention Center?

6. Now finally, for argument's sake, let's imagine there were no Jefferson parish residents in the SD/CC. Let's imagine they were all evacuated or living in their damaged/undamaged homes. FEMA tells you, listen, there are people who need the water more than your parish--we're going to send it there. Where do you imagine those needier people are? Uh huh...the thirsty folks in the Superdome and Convention Center. Did they send it there? No. Either way you slice it, that water should have gone to the SD/CC, either intended directly or diverted there. And FEMA prevented that from happening.

[Amended to add: My husband just thought of a much simpler way to explain what I'm trying to say. The water trucks were not sent to Mississippi. They were not sent to Baton Rouge. They were sent to New Orleans, and turned away by FEMA. Maybe it did go to an area of greater need than New Orleans. But it remains that it was intended for the people of New Orleans, and the people of New Orleans (the most desperate of whom were in the SD/CC) did not get it. ]

I just saw a story on Headline News about the medical personnel and patients evacuated from the hospital in NO. They didn't get any supplies either until they were evacuated to the airport. (Not that they needed 3 whole trucks of water anyway--if the diverted water was intended for them, they could have just diverted 1 truck.) And get this, while at the airport, the doctors and nurses saw hundreds of people lying on the floor, desperately ill, and volunteered their services. The doctor was told by FEMA officials they couldn't do a thing, for "liability" reasons, and that if they wanted to help, they could mop the floor. The doctor said he sat down and cried.

I don't mind if the government is incompetent--I expect it. I do mind when the government refuses to let people leave, refuses to let others in to help, and effectively created a concentration camp with worse living conditions than those enjoyed by POW's.

Can't Take My Gorram Sky

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 16, 2005 9:49 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


FEMA ice truck convoy sent on twisting, weeklong route to hurricane storage depot

Quote:

WOODY BAIRD Associated Press Writer

(AP) - MEMPHIS, Tennessee-About 200 (TWO HUNDRED!) tractor-trailer trucks with ice and water for victims of Hurricane Katrina took a convoluted, weeklong trip to a storage depot in Memphis, partly because of what the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers called "miscommunication."

They'll get it right one of these days!

http://news.findlaw.com/ap/o/51/09-13-2005/5c2d000aa3064d5d.html

Please don't think they give a shit.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 17, 2005 4:54 AM

JAIF


Everyone,

With all due respect I think you are focussing your lens in the wrong direction, like most of the media. While I agree that FEMA made errors and their response could be improved (particularly in coordinating *all* assets), the proper place to point your lens is at the local and state govts. For example:

- An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Improving the levee system around New Orleans has been a problem for at least a generation. That's all on the state and local government's plates.

- What about the city busses? The mayor could easily have mobilized busses before the storm and moved people out. As a tangent, I find this mayor long on talk (particlulary blame) and short on action.

- What about the national guard? The federal govt does not typically deploy troops into a state until the governor requests. It is the governor's job to call up the guard, as well to request help from neighboring states and the feds. The delay on the governor's part is practically criminal, in this regard.

So yes, we can play "let's browbeat bush" some more if you want, but I think a better perspective is to look locally first.

-jeff

P.S. Since this discussion is so politically charged - I didn't vote for Bush, and have very dim views of some of his policies. But I think it's important *in this case* for future generations to show the real failures at the local level, rather than playing politics and attacking the feds.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 17, 2005 5:06 AM

CANTTAKESKY


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
FEMA ice truck convoy sent on twisting, weeklong route to hurricane storage depot

Good God. $900 x 200 trucks x 7 days = $1.26 million. If they hadn't "miscommunicated," think of what that $1 million could have gone to.

Can't Take My Gorram Sky

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 17, 2005 5:22 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
FEMA ice truck convoy sent on twisting, weeklong route to hurricane storage depot

Quote:

WOODY BAIRD Associated Press Writer

(AP) - MEMPHIS, Tennessee-About 200 (TWO HUNDRED!) tractor-trailer trucks with ice and water for victims of Hurricane Katrina took a convoluted, weeklong trip to a storage depot in Memphis, partly because of what the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers called "miscommunication."

They'll get it right one of these days!

http://news.findlaw.com/ap/o/51/09-13-2005/5c2d000aa3064d5d.html

Please don't think they give a shit.



Please read some more.

"No one went without water because of the mix-up, Anderson said.

"Our supply of ice and water is exceeding the demand right now," Anderson said. "The ice and water will not be wasted."

The 18-wheelers, under contract for up to $900 a day, are part of a relief operations that already has sent more than 5,300 trucks of ice and water to New Orleans and the Gulf Coast, Anderson said."

So they had 200 out of 5300+ trucks (less than 4%) that were re-routed, because their loads weren't needed where they were originally sent(for whatever reason). No one suffered any water or ice shortage due to this, and the rerouted water and ice will be used. I'd consider this not bad for an emergency situation. I wish I only got things wrong 4% of the time.



"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 17, 2005 5:44 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Canttakesky:

Not everyone in southern Louisiana was evacuated to the SD/CC. It wasn't the only place water was needed. Until we find out where the three trucks of water actually went, we can just take guesses as to whether it would have been better to leave it in Jefferson Parish, send it to the SD/CC, or send it where it actually went.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 17, 2005 6:08 AM

CANTTAKESKY


Quote:

Originally posted by jaif:
- What about the national guard?... The delay on the governor's part is practically criminal, in this regard.

The report that the governor did not request federal help until after the hurricane was later proven to be erroneous. Blanco DID formally request federal help before the hurricane struck. The link is on one of the Katrina threads somewhere. Maybe I'll find it for you later.
Quote:

With all due respect I think you are focussing your lens in the wrong direction, like most of the media...the proper place to point your lens is at the local and state govts.
First of all, I have seen the media point the lens at all three levels, all over the place. For example, TIME magazine had a whole issue devoted to "system failure," where they analyzed the failures at all 3 levels. The federal level is not exactly blameless in prevention either, since they cut funding for levee work as well. All 3 levels had failures both in preventing and in responding to this disaster.

The focus of this thread is to verify accusations against FEMA. In investigating Geezer's question whether FEMA was indeed the responsible party, we discover that local and state authorities were responsible for some of the post-hurricane malfeasance, rather than FEMA. Geezer was absolutely right in asking us to verify our facts before hurling blame. I don't see how this could be looking in the wrong direction.

The more I read, the more I see a pattern. If one looks at the actions and results only (ignore the rhetoric and excuses), the pattern is not one of incompetence or confusion amongst the 3 levels of government. It is a highly cooperative network at the local, state, and federal levels that accomplished the same results: 1) contain the evacuee population, and 2) deny them relief--until such time that the powers that be decided it was enough.

To contain the evacuee population, the local police refused exit out of the city. The national guard refused entry into the city. FEMA refused private and extra-departmental rescue efforts. Nobody comes in, and nobody goes out. They all worked together to accomplish this.

To deny the evacuees food, water and medical attention, the local police shot looters and confiscated what little food and water the homeless were able to get. The state dept of homeland security refused the Red Cross, and probably the other relief organizations as well. The national guard [correction: it was FEMA officials] at the airport would not allow the doctors and nurses to provide medical aid. FEMA blocked (ahem, "diverted") private relief efforts such as the Wal-mart water trucks. The highly publicized military convoy arriving in the city 6 days after the hurricane still had not distributed their relief supplies by nightfall. (See Geraldo Rivera's and Shepard Smith's news broadcast in a link in a previous post.)

Whether they had good reasons or not for what they did individually, they did seem to cooperate and coordinate well to accomplish the same results. There were no reported fights amongst the 3 levels of government on this matter. It was as if they were all following the same invisible response policy: no exit and no relief aid for the evacuees. The horrifying outcome was the creation of a squalid, violent, concentration camp for 40K innocent American citizens in modern day America.

Now you can say we should focus on disaster prevention rather than disaster response. I say the response was so wrong and so unnatural that it would be immoral for the rest of us to not question it.

Can't Take My Gorram Sky

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 17, 2005 6:22 AM

CANTTAKESKY


Quote:

Originally posted by Geezer:
Not everyone in southern Louisiana was evacuated to the SD/CC.

We are not talking about southern Louisiana. We are talking about the city of New Orleans. Jefferson Parish is a section INSIDE the city of New Orleans, right next to downtown! The water trucks were sent to the city of New Orleans, and turned away from the city of New Orleans. How does that not impact the residents of the city of New Orleans in the SD/CC?

This is my last post on this argument. If you don't understand that Jefferson Parish is a subsection of the city of New Orleans, then you are either beyond my ability to communicate or being deliberately obtuse.

Can't Take My Gorram Sky

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 17, 2005 8:54 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by canttakesky:

This is my last post on this argument. If you don't understand that Jefferson Parish is a subsection of the city of New Orleans, then you are either beyond my ability to communicate or being deliberately obtuse.

Can't Take My Gorram Sky



Fine with me. You apparently think the water was dumped in the sewer or otherwise wasted. I don't know, and so reserve judgement.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 17, 2005 9:08 AM

CANTTAKESKY


Quote:

Originally posted by Geezer:
You apparently think the water was dumped in the sewer or otherwise wasted.

The only reason you keep harping about where the water went is because it could possibly justify FEMA decision to keep New Orleans residents from getting the water offered to them. Their given reason sounds like a load of horseshit to me, so I don't really care where the water went. I only care where the water DID NOT GO.

Read my lips. Wal-Mart offered water to New Orleans. FEMA turned it away from New Orleans. At least forty thousand residents in New Orleans continued to be without water for 6 days after the hurricane, despite being offered 3 truckloads of water. None of these are assumptions.

Maybe they had a good reason, maybe they didn't. I don't much care. I just want them to be accountable for their decision, and let a jury decide if they were justified or not. Preferably in criminal court.

Can't Take My Gorram Sky

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 17, 2005 12:54 PM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by canttakesky:
Read my lips. Wal-Mart offered water to New Orleans. FEMA turned it away from New Orleans. At least forty thousand residents in New Orleans continued to be without food and water for 6 days after the hurricane, despite being offered private aid. None of these are assumptions. Where the water actually went doesn't concern me. It only matters where it didn't go.

You want to give FEMA the benefit of the doubt that they had a good reason for keeping 40K American citizens from getting the water offered to them. I want to put FEMA officials (and all local and state officials as well) on criminal charges, and let the jury decide if they had a good reason or not.

Can't Take My Gorram Sky



Well, actually Jefferson Parish ordered 3 truckloads of water, based on Mr. Broussard's comments on Meet the Press. Wal-Mart didn't offer them. FEMA redirected it from Jefferson Parish. Maybe to another area of Metro New Orleans, maybe not. Maybe it saved more lives where it went than where it was originally supposed to go. At this time we don't know. Your statements are just guesses.

Does your "guilty until proven innocent" philosophy apply only to the government, or to everybody? Have you stopped beating your husband? Where were you when the California power grid went down? Explain yourself. If not, it's your fault.





"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 17, 2005 3:33 PM

CANTTAKESKY


Quote:

Originally posted by Geezer:
Maybe to another area of Metro New Orleans, maybe not...your statements are just guesses.

I think then it is obvious we don't have any common ground upon which to continue this discussion.
Quote:

Does your "guilty until proven innocent" philosophy apply only to the government,
I never said they were guilty. That requires a conviction, which is up to the jury. I only want to see them indicted. Oh, hell, at least investigated.

Can't Take My Gorram Sky

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 17, 2005 5:39 PM

JAIF


Quote:

The report that the governor did not request federal help until after the hurricane was later proven to be erroneous.


Which has nothing to do with the statement you quoted; "federal help" has nothing to do with "national guard". The governor is the commander of the state's national guard, and it is the governor's job to call them up and give them orders.

Quote:

The focus of this thread is to verify accusations against FEMA


The subject and opening sentance were not FEMA specific. The OP then went on to ask FEMA related questions. I'm pointing out that I believe this is misdirection.

This is the United STATES of America. We have states for a reason. This automatic reaction I've seen in the media to immediately jump at the federal level is dangerous, IMO.

I'll go farther, though. I think you in this thread, and the media in general, are micro-managing decisions that you shouldn't. I think we, the public, should reserve our criticism for the big decisions that arch over the little ones. Things like:

- When did the governors declare a disaster?
- When did the president declare a national disaster
(note both of these open purse-strings, and both appear to have been done at a reasonable time)

- When did FEMA (edit: bah, had FEMA on the brain. I meant homeland security) declare an event of national significance. (This is the key failure for FEMA. Pretty much all of the rest follows this.)
- When did the various governors call up their national guard? Note that a governor's first priority, by definition, is security. This decision, therefore, provides key insight into how a governor is doing their job.
- When did the Mayor issue a mandatory evacuation order? Note that by most reports that I've seen the Mayor delayed this order by half-a-day, at least.

I'm not going to worry too much about the mis-steps below this level. I firmly believe in putting people in charge, and letting them manage. If mistakes were made by their organizations, then they should correct them, not the court of public opinion.

However, I do feel it's very important to hold these officials accountable for the key decisions that they make that start the process. In all cases - fed, state, and local - I can see what appear to be key failures that should, IMO, be the direction of public inquiry. Furthermore, it appears that all three simply could not grasp the potential scope for disaster that should have been abundantly clear before the hurricane hit.

One last note; unfortunately our media is pathetic, focussing on New Orleans and virtually ignoring other areas that were also devestated. However, the little I've seen seems to indicate that Mississipi's Governor, Haley Barbour (Not sure how that's spelled, I just know that he's someone I don't like politically), seemed to make the right calls that a Governor should make, though he too seemed unaware of the scope (e.g. he pre-positioned 1000 guard but later needed roughly 10,000 or so).

-Jeff



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 17, 2005 6:19 PM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by canttakesky:
I think then it is obvious we don't have any common ground upon which to continue this discussion.



I agree. You want to hang someone out to dry, proof or not. I want to find out what really happened. No common ground. Let's drop it and go on to something else. We're just wasting bandwidth.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 18, 2005 4:33 AM

CANTTAKESKY


Quote:

Originally posted by Geezer:
I want to find out what really happened. No common ground.

I want to find out what really happened too. Our lack of common ground comes not from our different intentions, but from our interpretation of available evidence. I choose to take into account that Metro New Orleans was mostly evacuated, and therefore it is reaching to entertain the possibility that 3 truckloads of water might have gone to a needier section of New Orleans that is NOT the SD/CC. We weigh different parts of the same information differently. Our premises differ, so our conclusions will never cross paths. That is what I meant by no common ground.
Quote:

You want to hang someone out to dry, proof or not.
Now who's making groundless accusations? Tell me I'm wrong, but don't attack my intentions or my character. You're right--we're done.

Can't Take My Gorram Sky

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Russian losses in Ukraine
Sat, April 27, 2024 19:28 - 1015 posts
Russian War Crimes In Ukraine
Sat, April 27, 2024 19:27 - 15 posts
"Feminism" really means more Femtacular than you at EVERYTHING.
Sat, April 27, 2024 19:25 - 66 posts
Cry Baby Trump
Sat, April 27, 2024 19:21 - 79 posts
Welcome Back
Sat, April 27, 2024 19:20 - 2 posts
Putin the boot in ass
Sat, April 27, 2024 18:53 - 85 posts
Another Putin Disaster
Sat, April 27, 2024 18:34 - 1513 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Sat, April 27, 2024 18:28 - 3571 posts
Elections; 2024
Sat, April 27, 2024 18:10 - 2312 posts
Punishing Russia With Sanctions
Sat, April 27, 2024 18:09 - 505 posts
14 Tips To Reduce Tears and Remove Smells When Cutting Onions
Thu, April 25, 2024 23:52 - 8 posts
Scientific American Claims It Is "Misinformation" That There Are Just Two Sexes
Thu, April 25, 2024 20:03 - 17 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL