FEMA appears to have underestimated the storm, despite an extraordinary warning from the National Hurricane Center that it could cause "human suffering incredible by modern standards." The agency dispatched only 7 of its 28 urban search and rescue teams to the area before the storm hit and sent no workers at all into New Orleans until after the hurricane passed on Monday, Aug. 29.
Looks like they were waiting for a formal invitation to help.
FEMA's deference was frustrating. Rather than initiate relief efforts - buses, food, troops, diesel fuel, rescue boats - the agency waited for specific requests from state and local officials. "When you go to war you don't have time to ask for each round of ammunition that you need," complained Colonel Ebbert, the city's emergency operations director
posted on September 10, 2005 08:19:31 PM
""(I'm getting off now, though. There's a movie I want to watch before I get too sleepy to see it. Busy day today...)"""
What are you "getting off" on? Pulling wings off flies
""Busy day today" WHAT! AWW did you have to get up????
"" I am busy Babbling them all out to pasture in the other thread!""
posted on September 10, 2005 08:33:49 PM
LOL.....nope, helen, you're wrong once again. Isn't it getting embarassing for your yet? All these mistakes you keep making when you ASSUME.
I posted MY article from the NYT in full. Nothing left out...both pages posted.
Better luck next time....you might get something right yet.....years from now....but keep the faith.
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
posted on September 10, 2005 08:48:58 PM
LOL....and here comes old cmsspu......stuttering away...or maybe having a senior moment and forgot he already posted that nonsense once before.
Hey...that's it. In the other thread a topic had already been posted twice....and he was insisting HE was the FIRST to post it.
Yep...that's it....his mind is fried.
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
posted on September 10, 2005 08:51:17 PM
Well, LindaKKK , don't be too hard on him...after all keeping up with YOUR racist statements IS a full time job
Linda, you should be embarrassed. While our nation and the rest of the world has determined that FEMA bungled their response to hurricane Katrina resulting in a colossal tragedy... you sit back and hold only the Governor responsible. I have posted documents in which the governor requested assistance over and over which you ignore. Fema's lack of a timely response has sent a message to the entire world that this country is unprepared to handle a crisis...including a terrorist attack.
It's true that there was probably some fault on a local level but regardless of how the governor performs, when the state is overwhelmed FEMA, as organized within DHS is required.in the event of a natural disaster or terrorism to assume PRIMARY responsibility.
In the event of a terrorist attack, natural disaster or other large-scale emergency, the Department of Homeland Security will assume primary responsibility on March 1st for ensuring that emergency response professionals are prepared for any situation. This will entail providing a coordinated, comprehensive federal response to any large-scale crisis and mounting a swift and effective recovery effort. The new Department will also prioritize the important issue of citizen preparedness. Educating America's families on how best to prepare their homes for a disaster and tips for citizens on how to respond in a crisis will be given special attention at DHS.
posted on September 11, 2005 06:06:28 AM
Yes, but just remember, Helen, the president is ONLY responsible for starting wars and going on vacation (according to the neocons) .
NOTHING else is his responsibility.
And they seem to be right! It's about all he can handle and it WAS the reason he was placed where he is.
posted on September 11, 2005 06:25:05 AM
helen.....some like you will always deny the truth of the situation in your constant attempt to bash this President.....just doesn't make it so is the problem.
Lack of plan hurt Katrina-hit states' response
By Dara Kam, Alan Gomez
Palm Beach Post Staff Writers
Saturday, September 10, 2005
UPDATED: 3:50 p.m. September 10, 2005
TALLAHASSEE — One thing Florida knows is hurricanes.
Florida emergency planners criticized and even rebuked their counterparts -- or what passes for emergency planners -- in those states for their handling of Hurricane Katrina.
Gov. Jeb Bush, the head of Florida AHCA and the head of Florida wildlife (which is responsible for all search and rescue) all said they made offers of aid to Mississippi and Louisiana the day before Katrina hit but were rebuffed.
After the storm, they said they've had to not only help provide people to those states but also have had to develop search and rescue plans for them. "They were completely unprepared -- as bad off as we were before Andrew," one Florida official said.
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
[ edited by Linda_K on Sep 11, 2005 06:27 AM ]
posted on September 11, 2005 06:40:50 AM
Again....Gov. Blanco dropped the ball BIG time.
---
The governor had the power to call out the National Guard in advance of the storm.
Indeed, it was imperative that she do so if troops were to be available in the immediate hours after the hurricane hit since it takes 72 hours to fully mobilize.
Gov. Blanco delayed taking crucial actions -- in fact, it was the president who called her to plead that she declare an emergency.
"Gov. Kathleen Blanco, standing beside the mayor at a news conference, said President Bush called and personally appealed for a mandatory evacuation for the low-lying city, which is prone to flooding," the Associated Press reported Aug. 28.
The city had hundreds of vehicles at its disposal: school buses, city buses, garbage trucks, and city cars. But the mayor failed to mobilize these or to set up procedures for all city employees to be available to assist in keeping order and organizing evacuation.
For those unlucky enough to end up at the Superdome, no plans were in place to get thousands of desperate people out of there once the winds died down.
In our federal system of government, the national government does not step in -- even in dire emergency -- until state officials request that help. But what do you do when those officials are dysfunctional, as they clearly were in Louisiana?
According to The Washington Post, federal officials have asked the governor for "unified control over all local police and state National Guard units reporting to the governor. Louisiana officials rejected the request after talks throughout the night, concerned that such a move would be comparable to a federal declaration of martial law." And, the Post reported,
"Louisiana did not reach out to a multi-state mutual aid compact for assistance until Wednesday, three state and federal officials said."
No doubt, the federal response to this crisis was far from flawless, but at the end of the day, it was federal troops that restored order, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers that plugged breaches in the levees, and federal forces that ultimately evacuated thousands of those trapped. Instead of blaming federal authorities, the country ought to be giving thanks.
Linda Chavez
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
posted on September 11, 2005 06:47:37 AM
This just in from the UK. What an image we now have!
SAVE ME!
Bush begs Blair for support over Katrina
By Vincent Moss
EMBATTLED George Bush is begging Tony Blair to "pull him out of a hole" by backing his handling of the New Orleans crisis.
The Prime Minister flies to New York on Tuesday for a United Nations summit where he will meet the US President.
Mr Blair's allies are desperately urging him to avoid publicly supporting Mr Bush who has faced an avalanche of criticism over the bungled relief operation after Hurricane Katrina.
But the White House is determined to use the huge respect Mr Blair commands in the States to bolster Mr Bush by supporting his stewardship of the disaster.
Officials at Number Ten were this weekend trying to find a solution to the diplomatic minefield.
One senior Government source admitted: "There is pressure from America to pull Bush out of a hole over New Orleans. But is very difficult to pour praise on a relief operation which was so clearly flawed. It would make us look ridiculous."
Advertisement
Falk AdSolution
Downing Street ordered ministers last week not to get drawn into criticising Mr Bush or the relief effort.
But Deputy Premier John Prescott broke ranks yesterday by signalling America was partly to blame for the crisis by shunning requests to help combat climate change.
He criticised the US for failing to sign up to the Kyoto Protocol, which aims to reverse global warming by cutting greenhouse gasses.
Mr Prescott said: "There has been resistance by the United States Government to Kyoto - which I believe is wrong."
-President Bush's approval rating among the American public has dipped below 40 per cent for the first time in a new opinion poll.
posted on September 11, 2005 06:54:35 AM
Maybe bush will just say there's terrorists in the south and nuke the whole area .....people will forget about it once it's gone
Good article, Cheryl! And, since linda has engaged her tactic of burying a reply that she can't answer with copy paste I'll restate my comment. And she will probably copy paste some more with added insults...and so it goes.
Linda, you should be embarrassed. While our nation and the rest of the world has determined that FEMA bungled their response to hurricane Katrina resulting in a colossal tragedy... you sit back and hold only the Governor responsible. I have posted documents in which the governor requested assistance over and over which you ignore. Fema's lack of a timely response has sent a message to the entire world that this country is unprepared to handle a crisis...including a terrorist attack.
It's true that there was probably some fault on a local level but regardless of how the governor performs, when the state is overwhelmed FEMA, as organized within DHS is required.in the event of a natural disaster or terrorism to assume PRIMARY responsibility.
Preparing America
In the event of a terrorist attack, natural disaster or other large-scale emergency, the Department of Homeland Security will assume primary responsibility on March 1st for ensuring that emergency response professionals are prepared for any situation. This will entail providing a coordinated, comprehensive federal response to any large-scale crisis and mounting a swift and effective recovery effort. The new Department will also prioritize the important issue of citizen preparedness. Educating America's families on how best to prepare their homes for a disaster and tips for citizens on how to respond in a crisis will be given special attention at DHS.
posted on September 11, 2005 07:07:13 AM
"You go to hurricanes with the government you have, not with the government you might want or wish to have at a later time."
posted on September 11, 2005 07:09:58 AM
Cheryl, you're really ignorant if you think the UN Summit has'nt been planned for months already. I cant believe you can read a tabloidic article like this and believe it!!!
.."Blair is headed to the UN Summit to help EMBATTLED Bush from Hurricane Katrina????"
posted on September 11, 2005 07:10:42 AM
helen you seem to be clinging to those simple form letters that would of been sent out whether it was a Cat 1 or a Cat 5.
Writing a letter does not relieve them of responsibility to get ready.
posted on September 11, 2005 07:18:22 AM
I guess the UK has as many wacko people living there as we do here. Now??? the hurricane is Bush's fault because of Global warming treaty he wouldn't agree to signing. LOL \
oh brother
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
posted on September 11, 2005 07:24:26 AMI cant believe you can read a tabloidic article like this and believe it!!!
I can, this isn't the first time cheryl has come up with this garbage....and she believes it all is the problem. How do you spell g-u-l-l-i-b-l-e? If it's negative about anything relating to this President, she'll buy it hook, line and sinker.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
[ edited by Linda_K on Sep 11, 2005 07:28 AM ]
posted on September 11, 2005 07:25:10 AM
Ron, get real....Do you really believe that FEMA had to rely on the governor to inform them that an impending disaster was imminent???
WASHINGTON (AFP) - One million evacuees, and up to 350,000 left homeless:.... that would be the results of a hurricane hitting New Orleans, according to a year-old document from the US, Federal Emergency Management Agency made public.
The government document appears to contradict claims by top US officials that nobody had anticipated the outcome of a powerful hurricane hitting Louisiana as Hurricane Katrina did last week.
The 2004 FEMA document was made public by opposition Democrats in the US House of Representatives.
It explains that a hurricane of between category three and five in strength (on the Saffir-Simspon scale) hitting the southern state of Louisiana would create "a catastrophe with which the state would not be able to cope without massive help from neighboring states and the federal government."
State and federal emergency management officials "believe that the gravity of the situation calls for an extraordinary level of advance planning to improve government readiness to respond effectively to such an event."
In the event of a hurricane hit "over one million people would evacuate from New Orleans. Evacuees would crowd shelters throughout Louisiana and adjacent states."
The hurricane water surge "would block highways and trap 300,000 to 350,000 persons in flooded areas. Storm surge combined with heavy rain could leave much of New Orleans under 14 to 17 feet (six meters) of water. More than 200 square miles (518 square kilometers) of urban areas would be flooded."
The document also warned that it would take weeks to drain the water out of New Orleans because "inundated pumping stations and damaged pump motors would be inoperable" and because the flood protection levees "would prevent drainage of floodwater."
It also noted that rescue operations "would be difficult because much of the area would be reachable only by helicopters and boats," and that hospitals "would be overcrowded with special-needs patients," noting that "backup generators would run out of fuel or fail before patients could be moved elsewhere.
"The New Orleans area would be without electric power, food, potable water, medicine, or transportation for an extended time period," the document read, and warned that "damaged chemical plants and industries could spill hazardous materials."
It added that "standing water and diseases could threaten public health," and that there "would be severe economic repercussions for the state and region."
posted on September 11, 2005 07:38:38 AM."Blair is headed to the UN Summit to help EMBATTLED Bush from Hurricane Katrina????"
Where in that article does it state that? Improve your reading comprehension skills. How you got that from this line: "The Prime Minister flies to New York on Tuesday for a United Nations summit where he will meet the US President", is beyond any reason. Do you think he'd be in the U.S. and put the president on ignore? And the article doesn't say he's helping Bush. It's says Bush has asked for his help.
posted on September 11, 2005 07:39:45 AM
Linda, the fact that the very beginning premise is entirely false should give somebody a clue the rest of it is pure hyperbole.
And you dont have to be a tabloid to write something tabloidic. It just has to be written with distorted facts, and its purpose nothing other than sensationalism.
posted on September 11, 2005 07:44:44 AMEMBATTLED George Bush is begging Tony Blair to "pull him out of a hole" by backing his handling of the New Orleans crisis.
LOL! Reading 101, Cheryl. Take your own advice. Its the caption of your article.
Mr Blair's allies are desperately urging him to avoid publicly supporting Mr Bush who has faced an avalanche of criticism over the bungled relief operation after Hurricane Katrina. But the White House is determined to use the huge respect Mr Blair commands in the States to bolster Mr Bush by supporting his stewardship of the disaster.
The whole thing implies alot of b*lshit and you bought it hook, line and sinker, because youre not smart enough to read through the crap.
But keep hanging around with me, I'm sure eventually you'll learn how.
.
lol edit!
[ edited by dblfugger9 on Sep 11, 2005 07:47 AM ]
posted on September 11, 2005 07:49:15 AM
I know, dbl. Just cracks me up how cheryl's always so willing to 'buy' anything she reads - no proof needed - no verification that it's ever true, as long as it shows this President in what she believes is a negative way.
Like 'Bush begs for Blair's support'. LOL Oh yea, he really needs Blair's support to impress American's, or anyone for that matter. Plus he doesn't impress me as a man who 'begs' for anything.
posted on September 11, 2005 07:54:17 AM
LOL, I know, Linda! Sounds like it was written by kiara! ..Embattled,,,, desperately,,, Blair to pull bush "out of a hole"
I mean, come on! It's almost comical. And this is why Blair is going to the UN Tuesday?
Not that there was a summit planned to begin with, right? LOL!!!
.
[ edited by dblfugger9 on Sep 11, 2005 07:54 AM ]
posted on September 11, 2005 07:55:31 AM
Yes, all UK newspapers are tabloids. From the Sunday Times.
The more you look the worse everything gets
Andrew Sullivan
Katrina has exposed the rotten state of government
Here’s an interesting question. Who said the following: “For the last week, the federal government and its state and local counterparts have consistently been behind the curve. The American people overwhelmingly know that the current situation is totally unacceptable,” and “It is a mistake to get trapped into defending the systems and processes which clearly failed.” Hillary Clinton? John Kerry? Howard Dean? No: Newt Gingrich, in private memos to fellow Republicans leaked to The Washington Post.
For those in Washington, this is not that surprising. In private, Gingrich has been scathing about the Bush administration’s handling of the war in Iraq, the Republican Congress’ fiscal profligacy and sleaze.
But he does put his finger on what you might call the three Cs dogging this administration in the wake of Hurricane Katrina: competence, cronyism and conservatism.
What happened after Katrina hit — the complete failure of local, state and federal authorities to seize control of the situation — was not about right or left, Democrat or Republican. It was about simple competence.
Take the latest spin from the White House public relations operation, now in overdrive. The White House blames Kathleen Blanco, the governor of Louisiana, for not specifically requesting federal troops to impose law and order (as opposed to search and rescue), and so clearing away legal hurdles for the federal government to help.
An anonymous source — Andy Card? Karl Rove? — told The New York Times: “Can you imagine how it would have been perceived if a president of the United States of one party had pre-emptively taken from the female governor of another party the command and control of her forces, unless the security situation made it completely clear that she was unable to effectively execute her command authority and that lawlessness was the inevitable result?” Well, actually, at that point it was completely clear that the state authorities were overwhelmed and “lawlessness was the inevitable result”. Emergencies such as Katrina are precisely why the federal executive branch exists. It exists to take control and do things swiftly. Instead, the White House worried about gender politics and public relations while people drowned and corpses littered the streets of a city.
And Blanco’s defence? “I need everything you have got,” she said she told the president last Tuesday. Alas, she didn’t specify which type of soldier and for which purpose: “Nobody told me that I had to request that. I thought that I had requested everything they had.” If this weren’t a human catastrophe, it might be a comedy.
Suddenly, I understand the situation in Iraq a little better. I understand a little better why two years after the invasion, the road from the Baghdad airport to the Green Zone is still insecure. I understand why, when looting broke out immediately after Saddam was toppled, the US military simply watched.
I understand why barely a fraction of reconstruction funds have been spent. And judging from the completely clueless things the president and vice-president said last week, I also understand why I have become unable to trust anything they say about the reality on the ground in Iraq.
Last week, Dick Cheney called the response to Katrina “very impressive”. Yes, and the insurgency is in its “last throes”.
Then there’s cronyism. We now all know that Michael Brown, the head of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (Fema), had little or no experience of managing major emergencies. Neither had his deputy. Nor his predecessor, when appointed. But they were all Bush campaign operatives and cronies. The Senate approved his appointment after a 42-minute hearing.
What does it tell you — that the last two Fema heads were college room-mates? And that the previous head was already down on the Gulf coast last week, advising “private clients” on helping with the recovery? You don’t think any of the $100 billion in aid might end up in the hands of a few well-connected businessmen, do you? Meanwhile, even conservative commentators had to concede that Brown was in way over his head. He’d even padded his CV. In normal times, this kind of cronyism is not exactly shocking. It happens all the time — in administrations Democrat and Republican. Bill Clinton was a master at it. But after 9/11, to place a complete hack in charge of response to a national emergency is criminal negligence.
Last: conservatism. Some have argued this past week that the underlying problem is that America doesn’t have enough government spending or a big enough government. Given the explosion of spending under Bush — the biggest increase since Lyndon Johnson — this makes no sense at all. The US has spent billions on homeland security — and what we now know is that if Al-Qaeda had blown up a couple of levees in New Orleans, they could have killed far more people than they did on 9/11.
The issue is not how big government is, but how effective it is. Conservatism has never meant abandoning the basic task of government: the common defence and law and order. Even classical liberals, like yours truly, who like their government extremely lean, have no problem with spending what it takes to secure basic infrastructure and a police and military to protect private property. That basic infrastructure didn’t exist last week.
The blame goes back for years, several administrations, and multiple mayors of New Orleans and governors of Louisiana. The state has actually been the biggest recipient of federal funds for this kind of infrastructure under Bush, with California a distant second.
But corruption, elaborate layers of authority and simple failure to prepare for the worst scenario (they had organised drills for hurricanes without a breach of the levees) made Katrina’s devastation possible.
They were spending hundreds of millions on a new lock for one of New Orleans’ breached canals, to make way for more barge traffic. But barge traffic declined, according to The Washington Post. If that money had been spent raising the levee, some lives might have been saved.
What Bush has done to conservatism is align it with big government moralising, big government spending and big government inefficiency. He hasn’t vetoed a single spending bill. Pork-barrel spending — on projects often unneeded — has taken precedence over real needs in a Republican-run Congress with a Republican president.
Republicans and Democrats in gerrymandered districts have siphoned public money for pet projects to reward donors and constituents, rather than prioritising for the public good. There’s plenty of blame to go round. Government in America is bloated and broken at the same time. A true conservative would be cutting and prioritising it.
George W Bush isn’t that person. If that isn’t clear by now, you have blinkers on. And, ultimately, he’s the one responsible. He campaigned fundamentally on his ability to run the country in wartime, on emergency management, on protecting Americans from physical harm. That was his promise. It was swept away as the waters flooded New Orleans. And Al-Qaeda was watching every minute of it.
Cheryl
[ edited by cblev65252 on Sep 11, 2005 07:57 AM ]
