PDA

View Full Version : Why Haven’t We Heard About "Failure" in Mississippi?



AmericanMe
September 12th, 2005, 09:55 AM
Maybe it's because people there were doing their jobs:
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Sep2005/20050908_2648.html (http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Sep2005/20050908_2648.html)


The day before Hurricane Katrina came ashore in Mississippi on Aug. 29, the Mississippi National Guard had already been planning for the likelihood of a disaster.

"During hurricane season our operations personnel are constantly monitoring storms in the Atlantic," Mississippi Guard spokesman Lt. Col. Tim Powell said. "The Friday before the storm hit, we were tracking the storm. "

Two days before the storm hit, the Mississippi soldiers knew the storm's path would take it through the state's coastal communities and officials began alerting units, primarily military police and engineers, Powell said.

Officials initially activated 750 people, and the Guard also activated its emergency operations center in Jackson, Miss. Members of the forward EOC, a team that moves into a disaster area and coordinates operations with other agencies, were also notified and reported for duty by noon the day before the storm landed.

Less than a day after the storm slammed into the coast, military police and engineers from the Mississippi Army National Guard were moved to the state's three coastal counties.

"The military police were there to provide support to local law enforcement, and the engineers were used for search-and-recovery mission support and evacuation support," Powell said.

Instead we hear stories fro NOLA like this:
Cops trapped survivors in New Orleans (http://www.washtimes.com/upi/20050908-112433-4907r.htm)

Louisiana's Disaster plan says the following:

The primary means of hurricane evacuation will be personal vehicles. School and municipal buses, government-owned vehicles and vehicles provided by volunteer agencies may be used to provide transportation for individuals who lack transportation and require assistance in evacuating

http://img3.buzznet.com/assets/users8/gojackarmy12/default/gallery-msg-1125709527-2.jpg?695413520
Hmmm....

Valnorran
September 12th, 2005, 10:15 AM
I think the only ones really surprised by this are the ones who don't live here. One look at some of the clowns we've elected over the years tells an observer all he needs to know. Louisiana has a long and well-established political tradition of corruption and incompetence, and New Orleans was probably the very worst.

DragonsChest
September 12th, 2005, 10:20 AM
This just re-establishes the fact that the failure began at the local and state level, not the federal level. N.O. screwed up and so did the state of LA, but good ole Miss seemed to be able to get their act together.

Branwyn
September 12th, 2005, 11:12 AM
This just re-establishes the fact that the failure began at the local and state level, not the federal level. N.O. screwed up and so did the state of LA, but good ole Miss seemed to be able to get their act together.

I completely agree with that assessment.

paygun
September 12th, 2005, 02:47 PM
I saw an interview with some survivors in Mississippi. They were watching a NG helicopter drop MREs and water. One of the people there said they appreciated the help but they didn't need food or water, they needed gas to run generators. They said they'd been through this before and were well stocked on food and water.

It's obvious that the state and local government were better prepared in Mississippi, but the people were better prepared and that's where it starts. There are always going to be limits to what you can do to be prepared but the responsibility starts with the individual. Especially now after New Orleans it should be apparent that relying on the government to take care of you can get you killed.

Ben Gruagach
September 12th, 2005, 03:53 PM
How much of the populated part of Mississippi is below sea level? (I'm a Canadian so I don't really know a huge amount about American geography.) Did Mississippi have any critical levees that burst?

I looked on a map of Mississippi at Mapquest.com and the only sizeable town at the coast of Mississippi is Gulfport. According to this webpage about Gulfport (http://www.city-data.com/city/Gulfport-Mississippi.html) their population is about 72,500 and the city has an elevation of 25 feet ABOVE sea level. Does anyone know if any portion of Gulfport is below sea level?

(And according to Wikipedia's entry on New Orleans (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Orleans,_Louisiana), the population there is 484,674 -- or 1,337,726 if you consider the greater NO region.)

Perhaps these differences account for why things are so much worse in New Orleans.

Valnorran
September 12th, 2005, 04:16 PM
How much of the populated part of Mississippi is below sea level? (I'm a Canadian so I don't really know a huge amount about American geography.) Did Mississippi have any critical levees that burst?

I looked on a map of Mississippi at Mapquest.com and the only sizeable town at the coast of Mississippi is Gulfport. According to this webpage about Gulfport (http://www.city-data.com/city/Gulfport-Mississippi.html) their population is about 72,500 and the city has an elevation of 25 feet ABOVE sea level. Does anyone know if any portion of Gulfport is below sea level?

(And according to Wikipedia's entry on New Orleans (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Orleans,_Louisiana), the population there is 484,674 -- or 1,337,726 if you consider the greater NO region.)

Perhaps these differences account for why things are so much worse in New Orleans.
Those are factors, to be sure, but it is also undeniable that state and local officials made several serious mistakes.

WokeUpDead
September 12th, 2005, 04:21 PM
I don't think there is anyone along the way that didn't screw up something.

AmericanMe
September 12th, 2005, 04:22 PM
Ben: True, New Orleans is below sea level and Mississippi isn't. But you see there still buildings and roads standing in New Orleans, in Mississippi the effected areas have largely been flattened by Katrina. NTM Mississippi is largely rural, and the damage to the roads has made many areas unaccessable by truck.

semi
September 12th, 2005, 04:35 PM
In answer to the question in the title of this thread, it's because it makes for a more exciting news piece to focus on something negative than on something positive or at least less negative. For example, Oprah didn't go to Mississippi, she went to NOLA where the better photo ops were. There was more suffering and misery there and that's what makes good tv, that's what'll get her more viewers and more money from her sponsors. All the good media opportunities where in NOLA, not Mississippi, so there wasn't much reason to talk about Missisiippi and their more successful response to the storm. It's all Hollywood, baby, get with the program.

Ben Gruagach
September 12th, 2005, 05:13 PM
Let's do some quick math:

72,500 people in Mississippi's biggest costal town, Gulfport.
484,674 in New Orleans alone (not looking at the greater New Orleans area at all.)

That makes Gulfport 15% of the population affected. New Orleans is 85% of the affected people.

And since New Orleans is below sea level, while Gulfport is not, which one should logically get more attention if they both had equal impact from the storm?

AmericanMe
September 12th, 2005, 05:34 PM
Let's do some quick math:

72,500 people in Mississippi's biggest costal town, Gulfport.
484,674 in New Orleans alone (not looking at the greater New Orleans area at all.)

That makes Gulfport 15% of the population affected. New Orleans is 85% of the affected people.

And since New Orleans is below sea level, while Gulfport is not, which one should logically get more attention if they both had equal impact from the storm?

Except this involves not just Gulfport and New Orleans. It's an area the size of Great Britain stretching from Pensacola to just west of where Valnorran lives. Biloxi took a direct hit, and Mobile took some damage too.

Ben Gruagach
September 12th, 2005, 05:48 PM
Except this involves not just Gulfport and New Orleans. It's an area the size of Great Britain stretching from Pensacola to just west of where Valnorran lives. Biloxi took a direct hit, and Mobile took some damage too.

So what's the population of that area, compared with the population in Louisiana that was affected by Katrina?

And how much of Mississippi was below sea level (and is now underwater) due to Katrina?

What was the estimated monetary damage done in Mississippi compared to Louisiana?

Let's compare apples to apples here if it's going to make any sense.

AmericanMe
September 12th, 2005, 06:09 PM
So what's the population of that area, compared with the population in Louisiana that was affected by Katrina?

And how much of Mississippi was below sea level (and is now underwater) due to Katrina?

What was the estimated monetary damage done in Mississippi compared to Louisiana?

Let's compare apples to apples here if it's going to make any sense.

For one, your missing the point. Mississippi is rural, and harder to get supplies into, and have less resources than New Orleans (like *cough* school buses *cough, cough*) Plus those people are spread out over a larger area, making logistics even harder. It's easier to deal with a concentrated population in a built-up area than one spread out over a larger area that's 'in the twigs'.

But for information's sake, I'll play ball and post the statistics (found by a 5 second search on Google):

According to the Census Bureau (http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/hurricanes_tropical_storms/005672.html):

Population estimates for July 1, 2004, for impacted states:
Louisiana 4,515,770
Mississippi 2,902,966
Alabama 4,530,182


Population estimates for July 1, 2003, for impacted metropolitan statistical areas:

New Orleans-Metairie-
Kenner, La. 1,317,541
Gulfport-Biloxi, Miss. 248,965
Baton Rouge, La. 722,646

Population estimates for July 1, 2004, for impacted cities:

New Orleans 462,269 (35th largest U.S. city)
Baton Rouge, La. 224,097 (80th largest U.S. city)
Gulfport, Miss. 71,851
Biloxi, Miss 50,115
Pascagoula, Miss. 25,873

Now granted these figures are probably for metropolitan areas, not all the small towns that dot the southern landscape.

Devi
September 12th, 2005, 06:24 PM
I've heard some reports of mississippi residents being equally upset with the governments response to this disaster. Wasn't it in mississippi that someone shouted go f*** yourself to Dick Cheney? I thought I heard Senator Trent Lott had some negative things to say about how the government agencies responded also. I have a friend who lives in gulfport and she said it was awful. For days they couldn't get into stores to get essential items and there was no help in sight. People couldn't leave because there was no gas. Thankfully she had put gas aside and that was enough for her to drive out of town where she re tanked and made it to atlanta. To me the big factor on less chaos in mississippi is the fact that they were not underwater. It does not matter how much water you've packed or food you've stored if your home is suddenly flooded most of that is gone or unusable. Although much destruction spans across mississippi including my friends home she says thank God she wasn't in New Orleans!

semi
September 12th, 2005, 06:29 PM
Someone shouting "go (bleep) yourself" to Cheney probably happens everywhere he goes.

Devi
September 12th, 2005, 06:35 PM
For one, your missing the point. Mississippi is rural, and harder to get supplies into, and have less resources than New Orleans (like *cough* school buses *cough, cough*) Plus those people are spread out over a larger area, making logistics even harder. It's easier to deal with a concentrated population in a built-up area than one spread out over a larger area that's 'in the twigs'.




Actually Mississippi being more rural is part of the reason people may have been more prepared. Because of this people often have stacked goods in there homes or in there barns. Lots of people have land or know someone who does..... many times these land owners will have pumps on there property which helps when there is no water source immediately available. Lots of rural people also have wood burning stoves along with more modern ones which also helps in times like this. These are things not usually found in cities. Again many of these rural areas are not underwater... which is a big factor.

Ben Gruagach
September 12th, 2005, 07:05 PM
Someone shouting "go (bleep) yourself" to Cheney probably happens everywhere he goes.

Cheney said when it happened that it was the very first time.

Really.

WokeUpDead
September 13th, 2005, 11:49 PM
Probably because the ones that don't like him aren't invited to attend anything he does.

~*Ginger*~
September 14th, 2005, 05:35 AM
Hmmm....

First, I do not know if Oprah W. was in Mississippi or not, but I do know that she had a crew on the MS coast, and that she did send supplies, and food to help.

NO, bless their hearts are undersea level, where Mississippi isn't, that I know of.
And the city of NO's, is way over populated compared to the MS cities.
Most people being city dweller's, rather than rural dweller's.

There's a big difference in living in the city, basically having 'everything at hand' if it can be afforded.
Living in the country is much different, totally different way of life.
(heck, my father's parents didn't even have an indoor bathroom until I was 13 years old.)

Mississippi has taken many a hit from a hurricane, and basically if they take the time, and put forth the effort, they know how to prepare.

Also, remember, that even though we may have pumps, if we have no electric, or generator, those pumps do not work, and when using a generator, you have to becareful, or you may burn it up, by to much of an energy serge, that comes with using a generator. That goes for just about anything that you use while using a generator.

But, here at least we do have what we call artisian wells, natural underground springs of water. There are many ponds that are fed by these, and there is one close by that has been 'developed', meaning the county crew has gotten out there and fixed it up so that you can get to it easier than just walking around in the woods. (it's been piped up, and concreted around for easier use, and acsesability.)

Many of us in rural communites, have gardens, and some raise their own meat, milk and eggs.
Many build up thier food supply by means of a freezer, and canning of food.

Some store water, (which is a good thing for all to do, imo, no matter where they live....)

Didn't this hurricane hit on the east of NO, east is always gonna take a beating when a hurricane hits, no matter where it hits.

I've seen pictures, (from a link here on this site? Someone had left...) and they show that NO, is still standing, though flooded.

and how many of us wouldn't be highly upset if we were locked up in a great big building full of stranger's?
I would be!

I'm totally disgusted with how alot of folks acted when help did arrive!
why when someone has come to be your saviors, pull them down out of the air, shooting at them?
to my way of raising, (army brat, and damn well proud of it!) those who hindered the way, should have been shot on site. End of problem!!!
And with that being the example of treason, many other's would have thought long and hard before getting in the way of those trying to help.
They should be very ashamed of the way they reacted to help coming to them.

*sweeps hand*

All other garbage aside...

You'd be suprised how resilient some folks are!

Things got rough, but we're still standing, and we are still helping each other, regardless of a bunch of other hoowie, that some folks are using to bitch about.

Some issues are just a useful outlet for someone to bump their gums, or rattle their heads with, just to hear their own voice!

and I for one, thank all the higher powers that some of those folks do not live any where around me!!!!!

It should be taken into consideration, that there are those that have been able to show up, even with little resourses left here, (at this time...) even with the highways congested with poor souls left there because of no gas.

We that have recieved any help whatsoever from anywhere are very thankful for the help that we have gotten!

Just in the state of MS, there have been people coming from 14 different states to help get the trees off the powerlines, and our power back on.
And many countless others...

Thank you!!!!!
:hugz:

There are folks who do know what to do, and how to prepare for these type situations.
There are always losses in some way or the other.

There are always among the dead, survivors!

And there are always people here, that do have care for other's and do reach out and help in anyway they possibly can.

And there are always those who may be far and wide who send all the love, prayers, energy and positive thoughts that help all that are in need!

With things the way they are, it is only natural that there are some negative thinking, selfish people who take advantage of any situation that comes within their vision, but they do not have the same power as those who are positive, and they may be easier to be seen from spewing their garbage, but they will not prevail in the end!

They are always out weighted by the positive, and always will be, and they do not like it very much, but that's alright, they need a bit of something to hold themselves together as well.

Sending positive energy to any area is always a good thing, so keep on sending any that can be given, it is appreciated!

And I'm thankful for not living any closer to the coast than we do.
So many are left with nothing but their lives, and thankful to be here as well.

Compared to so many other's we are blessed!
Not much to complain about considering the lifes of so very many who are still suffering.

~ ~ ~

Something that ran thru my mind, when I first got to see on TV, the pictures of the coast, and NO, what is left of them...

Some places were wiped almost clean!
There are places where there is nothing but the beautiful air giving trees.
Some places where only the foundation can be seen.

This was a cleansing!
This was a warning!

This is a message to straighten up!

There are many people who will be leaving this area, never, ever to return.

One day there will come a time when the coast line is up here where I am, or even farther north.
This is an opportunity for many survivors to get out, and far away so that they may be able to keep surviving, so their family lines are not totally destroyed!

In all of this devistation, there is a beam of healing light!
A healing light for the land!

A help to carry on in other places, places that may not be under water one day...

At least that's what ran thru my head, watching the scenes of this cleasning.

I know it's hard, and may sound sort of brash, but this is a blessing as well...

Wyrdsister
September 14th, 2005, 06:59 AM
I know it's hard, and may sound sort of brash, but this is a blessing as well...
Tell that to the dead, dying, raped, beaten, shot, starved, and mourning.

Good luck.

Wyrdsister

~*Ginger*~
September 14th, 2005, 07:04 AM
I do believe that I just did...

And what makes you think that I wasn't any small part in that group as well?




Compared to so many other's we are blessed!
Not much to complain about considering the lifes of so very many who are still suffering.

Blessings to all!

Wyrdsister
September 14th, 2005, 08:48 AM
And what makes you think that I wasn't any small part in that group as well?
You are dead, dying, raped, beaten, shot, starved, or mourning? I can see mourning, but the others I'm not so sure about. I guess I assumed you weren't in that group as you're able to be here posting on an Internet message board.

I guess I'm just not ready for "let's believe it's for the best" about this yet. :sadman: The "this is a blessing, too" statement just sounds to much like Pat Robertson and other right-wing Christians rejoicing over Katrina removing the "stain" that is New Orleans. While I agree you have a point - there is something positive that can come out of anything - I don't know if I and many others are ready to hear it yet.

Hugs to you!! _pounce_

Wyrdsister

LacyRoze
September 14th, 2005, 09:09 AM
Ginger, you were in the path of Katrina in Miss. correct??

Going thru a hurricane is never easy and certainly not one like Katrina. Blessings to you for being able to be positive about the situation...:hugz:

Ben Gruagach
September 14th, 2005, 11:45 AM
Check out this interesting Katrina-in-Mississippi (http://www.hattiesburgamerican.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050911/NEWS05/509110304) news story about priorities in getting things fixed up after the hurricane.

I guess when there is a disaster like Katrina it's more important to make sure that Mississippi gas and oil can get to the northwest than worrying about hospitals and the like in Mississippi that need help after the storm.

~blood raven~
September 14th, 2005, 12:30 PM
you should have never gone to hollywood.....

Alaiyo
September 14th, 2005, 01:03 PM
As said before New Orleans is below sea level. Most of Missississippi and Mobile (Alabama) are not. Cities and towns along the Gulf coast in Mississippi and Alabama are used to hurricanes and flooding and have much experience in dealing with the situation. Mobile is definitely not a rural city, though it is not the size of New Orleans.

It seems to me that the critical piece to why the hurricane was much more devastating to New Orleans has to do with the levees breaking. The sense I got is that many in New Orleans made preparations just as those in Mississippi and Alabama did but no one foresee that the rickety levees would not be able to withstand the strentgh of th hurricane. The rushing flood waters killed scores of people.

~blood raven~
September 14th, 2005, 01:13 PM
the levees we're built to with stand a level 3 hurricane. not a level 5. that is why they gave way. I am amazed everyday I am out to see as MANY Louisiana license plates as I do... just terrible

DebLipp
September 14th, 2005, 03:14 PM
Take a look at this story (http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-09-12-two-governors_x.htm). As this article on Kos (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/9/14/133346/616) points out, the Republican gov. of MS got plenty of support at the federal level, whereas the Democratic gov. of LA couldn't get her phone calls returned.

Do you suppose that made a difference?

Alaiyo
September 14th, 2005, 04:40 PM
Interesting.

~*Ginger*~
September 14th, 2005, 05:16 PM
Well, thankful I am to know I've been blessed!


I was not jumping up and down, clapping my hands in joy, while that thought went thru my head, I was in total tears, my heart broken for all that has been lost.

I have no control over how the lands lay, no more than anyone here...

Lumped into such a group, as was named, I am thankful to still be here...
And just because there is no record here, or anywhere else, of every single, little thing that this hurricane brought to my door, does not mean that it hasn't affected my own.

And honestly I don't waste my time trying to listen to, or figure out what some christian, or anyone else, who might have to say about all that other garbage (I was not judging anyone.), I was speaking of the land.
And the people who will be leaving, and it being a blessing to not be totally destroyed, their linage. (somewhere down the road.)

Never was it meant as something hurtful, and if it's taken that way then perhaps the words should be re-read.

Of course, to totally understand each other completely, we'd have to use the heart and mind it came from, and not nessasarily our own...

AmericanMe
September 14th, 2005, 08:50 PM
Take a look at this story (http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-09-12-two-governors_x.htm). As this article on Kos (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/9/14/133346/616) points out, the Republican gov. of MS got plenty of support at the federal level, whereas the Democratic gov. of LA couldn't get her phone calls returned.

Do you suppose that made a difference?

No. Govenor Blanco had the same type of resources available to her as the Govenor of Mississippi did, i.e National Guard, Red Cross, and the state disaster plan. Unfortunately she mismanaged the first, barred the second, and ignored the last until it was too late. Unlike Mississippi's Govenor, who followed the plan and used resources in a timely manner. Blanco is just trying to shift blame instead of owning up to it.

Ben Gruagach
September 14th, 2005, 09:26 PM
No. Govenor Blanco had the same type of resources available to her as the Govenor of Mississippi did, i.e National Guard, Red Cross, and the state disaster plan. Unfortunately she mismanaged the first, barred the second, and ignored the last until it was too late. Unlike Mississippi's Govenor, who followed the plan and used resources in a timely manner. Blanco is just trying to shift blame instead of owning up to it.

Not according to this report from the nonpartisan Congressional research branch (http://www2.dccc.org/docs/conyersgaokatrina.pdf) that was asked to look specifically at Gov. Blanco's actions with regards to the Katrina response.

(Please note: the link is to a PDF file.)

AmericanMe
September 15th, 2005, 08:37 AM
Not according to this report from the nonpartisan Congressional research branch (http://www2.dccc.org/docs/conyersgaokatrina.pdf) that was asked to look specifically at Gov. Blanco's actions with regards to the Katrina response.

(Please note: the link is to a PDF file.)

There are many presumptions and errors in that report, a report that basically amounts to another attempt to shift responsibility, this time by a Congressman (John Conyers) in an attempt to discredit his party's political enemies.

I could attempt to address the specific things wrong with that report, but others have beat me to it (http://www.qando.net/details.aspx?Entry=2571).

For example:


Anyway, to the claims made by Conyers in the press release:

"This report closes the book on the Bush Administration's attempts to evade accountability by shifting the blame to the Governor of Louisiana for the Administration's tragically sluggish response to Katrina. It confirms that the Governor did everything she could to secure relief for the people of Louisiana and the Bush Administration was caught napping at a critical time."
Actually Congressman, it barely opens the book on the questions of responsibility. When all is said and done, the primary responsiblity for disaster relief managment remains at the state level, a cold hard fact that most of those who want to throw "failure" at the feet of FEMA and the fed choose to ignore.

But to the "evidence":

In addition to finding that "...it would appear that the Governor did take the steps necessary to request emergency and major disaster declarations for the State of Louisiana in anticipation of Hurricane Katrina. (p.11)" The report found that:

— All necessary conditions for federal relief were met on August 28. Pursuant to Section 502 of the Stafford Act, "(t)he declaration of an emergency by the President makes Federal emergency assistance available," and the President made such a declaration on August 28. The public record indicates that several additional days passed before such assistance was actually made available to the State;
Several days passed before such assistance was actually made available? You mean like 72 hours of "several days". That is within the time frame in which state planners are told to operate before they should expect FEMA to have the flow going into their area. So if we expect a 72 hour lag, then FEMA should have been beginning to get its flow of people and stuff into the area on Sept. 1st.

Valnorran
September 15th, 2005, 10:23 AM
Take a look at this story (http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-09-12-two-governors_x.htm). As this article on Kos (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/9/14/133346/616) points out, the Republican gov. of MS got plenty of support at the federal level, whereas the Democratic gov. of LA couldn't get her phone calls returned.

Do you suppose that made a difference?
Bush wanted to send her help before the storm even hit. She refused it.

DebLipp
September 15th, 2005, 10:59 AM
Bush wanted to send her help before the storm even hit. She refused it.
Not so much: http://www.snopes.com/politics/katrina/nagin.asp

If you believe Karl Rove's spin and don't do simple fact-checking, it's hard to know the truth.

merlo
September 15th, 2005, 11:48 AM
Aint reading this whole thread, cause I'm sick of the fussing. I'm just gonna put my 2 cents in. I live in Ocean Springs Ms, next town east of Biloxi on the coast. Thanks to all the christian churches around here, without you guys and the community spirit of your congregation and the network you started, maintained, and STILL maintain, many of us would have had it much, much harder than it was. I have a new admiration for the people. THEY DON'T ALL SUCK!!! Right now the anger here is directed towards the insurance companies who either cannot, or will not pay what people need to rebuild. Fema may help, but as of yet, I don't know of anyone who has received anything close to what is needed. That may change. New Orleans is a different situation from us. The death toll that is being broadcasted, at least from here, is maybe a 1/2-1/4 of acuality. My brother is a fireman in Biloxi. For the first week only the firemen were doing body recovery. Then there's the bodies that washed out into the gulf, or the alligators ate. I know this is a pg13 site, but that's the reality. No one in my family, or even extended family, was hurt in any way (thank the GODS). I'm happy to finally be back here on M/W. :chattin:

DragonsChest
September 15th, 2005, 11:59 AM
Bless you, merlo, and your family and hometown. I'm so glad that you are receiving help. And thank you for saying that not all Christians suck! I really appreciate that. I pray you all recover quickly.

:hugz:

Valnorran
September 15th, 2005, 12:19 PM
Not so much: http://www.snopes.com/politics/katrina/nagin.asp

If you believe Karl Rove's spin and don't do simple fact-checking, it's hard to know the truth.
All right. But how is

On Saturday (27 August), Governor Blanco did indeed request that President Bush "declare an emergency for the State of Louisiana due to Hurricane Katrina." The White House responded to Governor Blanco's request that same day (Saturday) by declaring the emergency and authorizing FEMA "to identify, mobilize, and provide at its discretion, equipment and resources necessary to alleviate the impacts of the emergency."

an example of Bush not responding to the disaster? More to the point, why didn't New Orleans evacuate?

DebLipp
September 15th, 2005, 01:29 PM
All right. But how is <quote>

an example of Bush not responding to the disaster?Bush declared a state of emergency, but FEMA and Homeland Security didn't mobilize, and Bush, their boss, didn't oversee and make sure; nor did anyone at the highest level make themselves available (Cabinet, Chief of Staff, VP).


More to the point, why didn't New Orleans evacuate?I beg your pardon? New Orleans did evacuate. 80% of New Orleans residents evacuated. That's extraordinarily high in the history of ordered evacuations. Of those who didn't evacuate, many went to the Superdome as instructed by Nagin--the FEMA plan called for an in-city location of last resort and Nagin followed that plan and sent them to the Superdome.

Of the remainder; some were in the hospital, or in nursing homes, or were too ill to move, or didn't have transportation and were too poor to rent or buy. (Busing was provided to the extent of available bus drivers, but that was limited.) Many, many tourists were trapped because the airports and train stations shut down. Many tried to leave on foot over the bridge into the town of Gretna, where they were met by the Gretna police who sent them back at gunpoint. All of this is documented.

narleymarley03
September 15th, 2005, 02:35 PM
We have not heard much about Mississippi because New Orleans has been the big news story. Those in MS have suffered greatly from Katrina and it will also take alot of money and time to rebuild these beautiful coastal communities. Let's not forget there has also been alot of damage inland from the winds. There are many people in need of help. Perhaps we should let the news organizations know we would like to hear more about whats going on in MS and AL.

Ben Gruagach
September 15th, 2005, 02:36 PM
All right. But how is [Blanco declaring disaster on Aug 27, and Bush declaring disaster on Aug 28]
an example of Bush not responding to the disaster? More to the point, why didn't New Orleans evacuate?

So Bush declared the disaster on Aug. 28th -- which put the federal government (FEMA etc.) in charge.

WHY then did Bush's people not do anything until days later? It wasn't until Aug. 31st that Bush "cut short his vacation" to do something.

When I call 911 I'd sure be concerned if it took them days to get around to showing up at my door.

Valnorran
September 15th, 2005, 04:27 PM
So Bush declared the disaster on Aug. 28th -- which put the federal government (FEMA etc.) in charge.

WHY then did Bush's people not do anything until days later? It wasn't until Aug. 31st that Bush "cut short his vacation" to do something.
Or the locals could've evacuated.

When I call 911 I'd sure be concerned if it took them days to get around to showing up at my door.
In some places it can take over an hour for them to respond. That's what you get when you rely on the government (or anyone else) for your own safety.

Valnorran
September 15th, 2005, 04:30 PM
I beg your pardon? New Orleans did evacuate. 80% of New Orleans residents evacuated. That's extraordinarily high in the history of ordered evacuations. Of those who didn't evacuate, many went to the Superdome as instructed by Nagin--the FEMA plan called for an in-city location of last resort and Nagin followed that plan and sent them to the Superdome.
Which left how many thousands? They knew the levees were not up to a cat. 4 or 5 storm. The knew that if the levees fail, the city's in big trouble. Staying in the city was not a smart move.

Of the remainder; some were in the hospital, or in nursing homes, or were too ill to move, or didn't have transportation and were too poor to rent or buy. (Busing was provided to the extent of available bus drivers, but that was limited.)
Anybody who can drive a standard transmission can drive a bus. Apparently that never occurred to the bureaecratic minds running things. Following their own pointless procedures is so much more important than saving lives.

AmericanMe
September 15th, 2005, 04:54 PM
Anybody who can drive a standard transmission can drive a bus. Apparently that never occurred to the bureaecratic minds running things. Following their own pointless procedures is so much more important than saving lives.

Which is one more example of why one should not place their lives in the hands of government bureaucrats.

~*Ginger*~
September 15th, 2005, 04:55 PM
Your right, anyone who can drive a standard could drive a bus...
I could do it even.

One of my cousin in-law works for a bus company, and told us that they were ready to help, and when the shooting started that the workers changed their minds for concern of their own safety. (which, think about it, would anyone here like to be shot when trying to help other's from losing their life?)
Driver's would be the most likely, and easiest target...

They also had other bus companies bring their buses to the company (based at St. Charles, LA) grounds when they decided that it was to personally dangerous to be of help.

So, basically who ever ('private citizen's) had the guns, and shooting at help coming to them, they should carry the responsibility for there being no buses in there to help with the evacuations...

Sad...very sad.

merlo
September 15th, 2005, 05:34 PM
Here on the coast we live knowing a huge one could come anytime during the season. In recorded memory, Camille is the gauge by which the standard of bad is set. There were worse storms before, the Galveston storm, around the turn of the century, but there was no way to judge the strength of that storm. Camille brought 33 inches of water into my father's wood shop. Katrina brought 9 FEET of water. Nobody expexted, or believed this could happen. ANY government sucks, just because of it's size. New Orleans is a different situation than us. We here did what we had to do and we made out, with ALOT of help from people all around the community and country. That's the way it ought to be. I'm not going into the New Orleans thing. FUBAR is what everyone sees and is the actuality. I'm not in favor of big government, because it takes away from people's sense of self preservation. Call it confederate nostalgia or whatever, I call it realism. Everyone expects someone else to do for them. Get on your own for awhile, no one to watch your back, and you think of the shit you need to do to get by. Your senses get sharper, your intuition developes.

Doctor Jeep
September 15th, 2005, 05:53 PM
That's what you get when you rely on the government (or anyone else) for your own safety.

Don't forget that Bush's re-election campaign was all about how he could keep people safe and the other guy couldn't.

Ben Gruagach
September 15th, 2005, 06:16 PM
Don't forget that Bush's re-election campaign was all about how he could keep people safe and the other guy couldn't.

Exactly.

And as others have pointed out, if Bush can't handle a natural disaster then why on earth should we trust him to do things differently if it were a terrorist attack?

What was all that money put into "Homeland Security" for?

If it's truly "every person for themselves" and they shouldn't be relying on Bush or any form of government, then why should we care about stupid color-coded terrorist alerts, or even listening to things like evacuation orders?

And if the government is really so pointless, why should anyone be supporting Bush with even one penny of support?

DebLipp
September 15th, 2005, 06:42 PM
Which left how many thousands? They knew the levees were not up to a cat. 4 or 5 storm. The knew that if the levees fail, the city's in big trouble. Staying in the city was not a smart move.
I don't know how many thousands were left after the disabled, ill, injured, poor, and trapped are subtracted. Why does this matter? Do people who are not smart deserve to be left to die?


Anybody who can drive a standard transmission can drive a bus. Apparently that never occurred to the bureaecratic minds running things. Following their own pointless procedures is so much more important than saving lives.I don't know the details of this; I've read some of the interviews with Nagin, it seems there were as many bus runs as he could schedule with drivers willing to return to the city for the job, but it could certainly also be true that he didn't seek more options.

Thing is, it is clear that multiple parties at all levels were responsible. I don't live in Louisiana, and I didn't vote in elections for Nagin or Blanco. I don't pay New Orleans city taxes or Louisiana state taxes, so those people aren't my employees. I pay federal taxes, though, and Bush IS my employee. To the extent that the feds are accountable, I will hold them accountable, as is my right as a citizen.

AmericanMe
September 15th, 2005, 06:49 PM
Don't forget that Bush's re-election campaign was all about how he could keep people safe and the other guy couldn't.

Are you saying that Bush should be able to control the weather?

Suzette
September 15th, 2005, 06:53 PM
Do people who are not smart deserve to be left to die?

I don't know the details of this; I've read some of the interviews with Nagin, it seems there were as many bus runs as he could schedule with drivers willing to return to the city for the job, but it could certainly also be true that he didn't seek more options.
.

I have to agree, these people did not deserve to die just because they were not sure of the severity of the situation.

As far as the busses... I have a really bad feeling about that because from what I saw, there was a news copter flying over the lot where literally dozens of school buses were parked and they were in perfect, uniform little rows, side by side, with water up to their roofs. There's NO way those buses went anywhere and I think it's just BS about how the mayor deployed them like he's claiming... There's no way they could have parked them back like that with the water.

Suzette
September 15th, 2005, 06:54 PM
Are you saying that Bush should be able to control the weather?

Oh jeez. :rolleyes:

No, he should do what he's in office to do. SERVE the American people and hire an administration who is QUALIFIED.

DebLipp
September 15th, 2005, 07:23 PM
As far as the busses... I have a really bad feeling about that because from what I saw, there was a news copter flying over the lot where literally dozens of school buses were parked and they were in perfect, uniform little rows, side by side, with water up to their roofs. There's NO way those buses went anywhere and I think it's just BS about how the mayor deployed them like he's claiming... There's no way they could have parked them back like that with the water.

The bus photo is troubling. Here is an article about the lies that have been told about it, and some accurate numbers about how many people could have been evacuated: http://mediamatters.org/items/200509120005.

Despite the inaccuracies of the stories that have been told, and despite the grossly exaggerated numbers, the buses still should have been used, IMO.

DebLipp
September 15th, 2005, 07:24 PM
Are you saying that Bush should be able to control the weather?
One of the scenarios that Homeland Security had been running as a possible threat was a terrorist attack on the N.O. levees, possibly during a hurricane.

And we now see how well they would have done.

dragoncrone
September 15th, 2005, 07:55 PM
Or the locals could've evacuated.

So...the extremely poor, the sick, those trapped in hospitals, the elderly, and the rest of the 'locals' who own no transportation in which to evacuate...well, they're just a bunch of slackers, is that what you're saying?


That's what you get when you rely on the government (or anyone else) for your own safety. Funny...I just looked up the word 'federal' in my Websters...you know, Federal...AS IN FEMA?..."...of or constituting a form of government..." Maybe we should change it to 'Failure to Effectively Manage Anything,' under the Bush administration.

Ben Gruagach
September 15th, 2005, 07:59 PM
There's some other interesting bus stuff that is very troubling. Check out this account of the three college students who drove down to New Orleans to help (http://www.ajc.com/sunday/content/epaper/editions/sunday/issue_34324de371fa111a00ee.html). They apparently took some video footage on their drive down of what they estimated to be about a hundred buses driving away from New Orleans EMPTY when there were still plenty of people there who needed to be evacuated.

The bus part is about halfway down the page.

I understand that the footage was shown on CNN a few days ago too.

AmericanMe
September 15th, 2005, 08:34 PM
One of the scenarios that Homeland Security had been running as a possible threat was a terrorist attack on the N.O. levees, possibly during a hurricane.

And we now see how well they would have done.

Again, FEMA are not first responders. Their Modus Operandi is to follow-on within 72 hours, bottom line is that it is up to the local and state leaders to react first, not the federal government.

DebLipp
September 15th, 2005, 09:51 PM
Again, FEMA are not first responders.
...and FEMA told first responders not to respond, and prevented first responders from doing so:

http://info.interactivist.net/article.pl?sid=05/09/13/1651245

AmericanMe
September 15th, 2005, 10:11 PM
...and FEMA told first responders not to respond, and prevented first responders from doing so:

http://info.interactivist.net/article.pl?sid=05/09/13/1651245

Ah, there is a reason why you don't trust activist sites for reliable information.

Some of those stories have been pulled. Others I didn't check because of the registration requirements, however:

It wasn't the federal Dept. of Homeland Security that barred the Red Cross, it was the Louisiana Department of Homeland Security, a state agency. Easy miss, but the journalist should know better.

BTW, morticians are not first-responders, and one mortician being barred is hardly worth flipping out about, unless your an activist with an agenda.

It also was the local police and National Guard that barred some from entering the city.

Did FEMA screw up? Yeah it did. However, they do not bear the responsibility for the debacle at the superdome, nor do they bear sole responsibility for the levies. You cannot just concentrate at the failures of the feds in this, there is blame to go around, and much of it lies below the federal level.

Doctor Jeep
September 15th, 2005, 11:17 PM
Are you saying that Bush should be able to control the weather?

:lol: I'm surprised Rove hasn't come out and said this, actually. Anything to deflect blame from Georgie, huh?

No, Bush obviously can't control the weather. But he does control who he has working for him and thus is responsible for how they perform (no doubt if everything went well we'd be hearing about how great a job he did, right?). As someone who has ranted on and on about keeping Americans safe, I'd say he and his administration have failed their first real test since they supposedly started making us safer.

AmericanMe
September 16th, 2005, 07:43 AM
:lol: I'm surprised Rove hasn't come out and said this, actually. Anything to deflect blame from Georgie, huh?

No, Bush obviously can't control the weather. But he does control who he has working for him and thus is responsible for how they perform (no doubt if everything went well we'd be hearing about how great a job he did, right?). As someone who has ranted on and on about keeping Americans safe, I'd say he and his administration have failed their first real test since they supposedly started making us safer.

Again, the failure started with those on the local levels. Why are people so wrapped-up in their half-baked political idealism to ignore this?

DebLipp
September 16th, 2005, 09:42 AM
Ah, there is a reason why you don't trust activist sites for reliable information. .
Here's a link to FEMA's own site: http://www.fema.gov/news/newsrelease.fema?id=18470

That's right, the feds told first responders to STAY AWAY on Aug. 29.

Overall, there's a pattern, isn't there?


You cannot just concentrate at the failures of the feds in this, there is blame to go around, and much of it lies below the federal level.Sure I can. I'm a citizen of New York. When my governor screws up, I call, I write. But I don't vote in Louisiana elections.

The federal government is MY employee. They are accountable to ME as a U.S. citzen. The inexperienced cronies populating the leadership of FEMA are Bush appointees. The inability of Homeland Security to respond to a known threat is federal, and the head of that agency, too, is a Bush appointee. Bush is my employee and is accountable to me.

AmericanMe
September 16th, 2005, 03:32 PM
Here's a link to FEMA's own site: http://www.fema.gov/news/newsrelease.fema?id=18470

That's right, the feds told first responders to STAY AWAY on Aug. 29.

Overall, there's a pattern, isn't there?

Yeah, FEMA didn't want a mass of yahoos running around New Orleans getting themselves stuck and forcing the professonals to rescue more people, compounding the problem.

Consider this quote:

“The response to Hurricane Katrina must be well coordinated between federal, state and local officials to most effectively protect life and property,” Brown said. “We appreciate the willingness and generosity of our Nation’s first responders to deploy during disasters. But such efforts must be coordinated so that fire-rescue efforts are the most effective possible.”

You know, a smaller military force that is well-coordinated, well-trained, and well-equipped is better than a larger force that is poorly-coordinated, poorly-trained, and poorly-equipped. FEMA did the right thing by telling people this.


Sure I can. I'm a citizen of New York. When my governor screws up, I call, I write. But I don't vote in Louisiana elections.

The federal government is MY employee. They are accountable to ME as a U.S. citzen. The inexperienced cronies populating the leadership of FEMA are Bush appointees. The inability of Homeland Security to respond to a known threat is federal, and the head of that agency, too, is a Bush appointee. Bush is my employee and is accountable to me.

So what your tying to tell me is that you can only hold your elected officials for mistakes, even though they didn't make them? Would you send a nasty letter to Senator Clinton if a train derailed into a Wal-Mart in California? What kind of twisted logic is that?

Fact is fact, and the fact is that those levees were ignored by the local governments for decades in favor of projects like theMardi Gras fountain. The fact is that they had the capacity to evacuate everyone but didn't, the fact is that too many N.O. cops either ran off or were too busy looting themselves to make a difference.

It's interesting to note that after President Bush's speech last night, one of the major networks interviewed some of the refugees at the Astrodome. They blamed their local leadership, not Bush (http://newsbusters.org/node/1201).

DebLipp
September 16th, 2005, 04:07 PM
Yeah, FEMA didn't want a mass of yahoos running around New Orleans getting themselves stuck and forcing the professonals to rescue more people, compounding the problem. So you're saying that Brown did a bang-up job? You may be the only one in America who feels that way, including whoever fired him (not Bush, since Bush didn't even know that Brown was out, and found out from a CNN reporter who asked him about it--that's how on top of things the man is) . Did you see yesterday where he said the reason he had difficulty managing a hurricane was because there was a hurricane?


So what your tying to tell me is that you can only hold your elected officials for mistakes, even though they didn't make them? Would you send a nasty letter to Senator Clinton if a train derailed into a Wal-Mart in California? What kind of twisted logic is that?
If you honestly believe the federal government bears no responsibility for this fiasco of mismanagement, then I clearly cannot get through from here, where the sky is blue.

PropheticMonkey
September 16th, 2005, 04:24 PM
Well considering that a large population of New Orleans is poor, filthy, and had to deal with a nortoriously corrupt police force no wonder why they are blaming the local government. Bush has been in office for 5 years give or take, the conditions and the notoriety in New Orleans have been there ever since it was founded.

The national government is not their concern, because people havnt really been treating them as a part of the nation. People have been refering to New Orleans as they would a 3rd world country. Its isolated and seperated from the rest of the United States, and the victims along with them. The local government is the only thing that is reality for them now.

AmericanMe
September 16th, 2005, 04:41 PM
So you're saying that Brown did a bang-up job? You may be the only one in America who feels that way, including whoever fired him (not Bush, since Bush didn't even know that Brown was out, and found out from a CNN reporter who asked him about it--that's how on top of things the man is) . Did you see yesterday where he said the reason he had difficulty managing a hurricane was because there was a hurricane?

Do I have to quote myself now? Are you out of a cognitive arguments? I already told you that FEMA made mistakes. To me, you seem so consumed with laying fault on your ideological enemies (i.e Bush) that you can't step back and admit to what was done right. I really don't see what you are arguing for, I only see what you are arguing against.


If you honestly believe the federal government bears no responsibility for this fiasco of mismanagement, then I clearly cannot get through from here, where the sky is blue.

The federal goverment bears responsiblility for only what it has done wrong, not for the wrongs of state and local officials.

DebLipp
September 16th, 2005, 04:57 PM
Do I have to quote myself now? Are you out of a cognitive arguments? I already told you that FEMA made mistakes. To me, you seem so consumed with laying fault on your ideological enemies (i.e Bush) that you can't step back and admit to what was done right. I really don't see what you are arguing for, I only see what you are arguing against. I responded to your praising of FEMA's rightness and efficiency. You say you are open to hearing that they made mistakes, but you are very interested in shooting down my examples of those mistakes, if they are in any way connected to Republicans being the ones who made the mistakes. You repeatedly turn around and point at Democrats or Democratically-controlled organization.


The federal goverment bears responsiblility for only what it has done wrongThen what was the point of your Clinton/California analogy? I said I hold the federal government responsible, and your comparison of 'it's like Sen. Clinton being responsible for an problem in California' certainly indicated that I was holding people responsible who had NO CONNECTION to the problems. The federal government F@#$@#$KED UP! They were NOT PREPARED. The Dept. of Homeland Security had ALREADY RUN THE SCENARIO and yet sat on its hands. The senior staff and cabinet WEREN'T HOME. Bush DIDN'T DISCUSS the problem with Chertoff while it was occuring. Bush, Brown, and Cheney all claimed that the newspapers said it was all clear and there was no problem in New Orleans. "Dodged a bullet", remember? The White House issued PROVEN LIES about "begging Blanco" to declare a State of Emergency (when in fact she already had) and about "not having the authority" to step in (which it already had). In what way is this ANYTHING like blaming a New York Senator for a California emergency? In what way is ignoring all of this and deflecting blame onto Mayor Nagin anything OTHER than partisan?

Ben Gruagach
September 16th, 2005, 05:13 PM
This CNN article that was just posted on the web (http://edition.cnn.com/2005/US/09/15/katrina.response/) gives some interesting concrete examples of how well (or in this case, how poorly) the federal authorities did in handling the Katrina response.

Doctors and other medical experts who showed up to help were given mops by the federal authorities rather than letting them do what they are trained to do. Firefighters who came to help were sent into "sensitivity training" and were given jobs handing out pamphlets to try and promote the image of the federal government rather than letting them do what they were trained to do. Clean drinking water was held up for DAYS before it was delivered because of FEMA paperwork.

And how many people died in New Orleans while this was going on?

AmericanMe
September 16th, 2005, 05:20 PM
I responded to your praising of FEMA's rightness and efficiency. You say you are open to hearing that they made mistakes, but you are very interested in shooting down my examples of those mistakes, if they are in any way connected to Republicans being the ones who made the mistakes. You repeatedly turn around and point at Democrats or Democratically-controlled organization.

Then what was the point of your Clinton/California analogy? I said I hold the federal government responsible, and your comparison of 'it's like Sen. Clinton being responsible for an problem in California' certainly indicated that I was holding people responsible who had NO CONNECTION to the problems. The federal government F@#$@#$KED UP! They were NOT PREPARED. The Dept. of Homeland Security had ALREADY RUN THE SCENARIO and yet sat on its hands. The senior staff and cabinet WEREN'T HOME. Bush DIDN'T DISCUSS the problem with Chertoff while it was occuring. Bush, Brown, and Cheney all claimed that the newspapers said it was all clear and there was no problem in New Orleans. "Dodged a bullet", remember? The White House issued PROVEN LIES about "begging Blanco" to declare a State of Emergency (when in fact she already had) and about "not having the authority" to step in (which it already had). In what way is this ANYTHING like blaming a New York Senator for a California emergency? In what way is ignoring all of this and deflecting blame onto Mayor Nagin anything OTHER than partisan?


No reason to shout. If we cannot have a reasonable discussion then there is no point in talking.

Sounds to me like you are taking my points out of context and assigning your own meaning to them. What is really going on is that I am reacting to this silly misallocation of responsiblility that the left is attempting to use in order to blame our (yes, our) President for things that he did not direct. There is plenty of things that either went wrong, or that could have been done better. At least we can show an ounce of reason in the aftermath of this.

The fact remains, state and local officials are responsible for first response to any disaster, natural and man-made. All this hoopla started with the disorganization that was at the Superdome. Was that the responsibilty of the federal government? Nope. Was the evacuation of the residents of NOLA the responsibility of the feds? Nope, that's a local duty. The federal government is responsible for additional assistance after 72 hours. If you want to talk about that, then lets. But sorry, we don't need hundreds of civilians off the street with their boats to keep track of.

However, I'm off to take the kids to that bastion of unabashed capitalism, Disney World. I'll be back on Monday.

indebted
September 16th, 2005, 05:38 PM
AmericanMe and Valnorran have hit the nail on the head! Thank you for being a voice of reason!

Doctor Jeep
September 16th, 2005, 06:30 PM
Again, the failure started with those on the local levels. Why are people so wrapped-up in their half-baked political idealism to ignore this?

I've said all along that there's blame for everyone involved. The point is, wherever it may have started, it ended with Bush and those he has working for him.

Idealism? I would say that it's people like yourself, who somehow are convinced that Bush should escape with no blame whatsoever, that are the idealists. I mean, come on, what kind of a lame excuse is "can Bush control the weather?"

As I said before, if things had gone better, there no question you'd be in here telling us all what a bang-up job Bush did.

Doctor Jeep
September 16th, 2005, 06:30 PM
AmericanMe and Valnorran have hit the nail on the head! Thank you for being a voice of reason!

Your definition of reason is scary.

Valnorran
September 16th, 2005, 06:33 PM
So...the extremely poor, the sick, those trapped in hospitals, the elderly, and the rest of the 'locals' who own no transportation in which to evacuate...well, they're just a bunch of slackers, is that what you're saying?
*pinches nose and sighs*
No. What I'm saying, what I've been saying from the very beginning, is that it is the responsibility of state and LOCAL governments to see about their populations' safety. If the LOCAL and state government had actually employed some sort of evacuation plan (they only had thirty something years to come up with one) a lot of suffering could have been avoided.

Valnorran
September 16th, 2005, 06:35 PM
Your definition of reason is scary.
You're totally incapable of discussing things like a rational grown-up, aren't you?

Doctor Jeep
September 16th, 2005, 06:37 PM
You're totally incapable of discussing things like a rational grown-up, aren't you?

I'm struggling to find the rationality in some of what's being said here.

DragonsChest
September 16th, 2005, 09:15 PM
Your definition of reason is scary.

The same could be said of yours.

Doctor Jeep
September 16th, 2005, 09:35 PM
The same could be said of yours.

If you're a Bush apologist, sure.