what FEMA turned backed/didn't utlize re Katrina & flood

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

dazzledbylight

Blue Crack Supplier
Joined
Dec 5, 2003
Messages
35,004
Location
in the sound dancing - w Bono & Edge :D
since i can't afford the Net I only have so much time/money to spend I don't read very page-- I don't know if all this has already been enumerated or linked up elsewhere......( nor can i directly link you to source materials
quick timeline:
La Gov (anfd Miss} declared states of Emergency on Aug 26/ Bush delcared State of Emergency on 27th

Katrina made Landfall on 29th
/ Leeves breached-flood starts on 30th


# Several trucks from Walmart carrting tons of water - turned back

# A flotilla of 500 boats carrying various aid were turned back

# Coast Guard ship in the Gulf sailed to La with 1,000 gals of Diesel fuel....was told FEMA orders couldn't unload it

# The USA Baton ship had medical personel, some operating rooms AND the ability to make 100,000 gsals of FRESH WATER a day was NEVER called on

# Al Gore & a doctor freind charted 2 airplanes with medicaql supplies, docators and surgeons to help but were turned away. ONLY Bill Frist (Sen & doctor) was allowed in

# Finally Jefferson Parish {of NW ORL} President lines of Communications were cut by Fema. He had his people fix them and posted people to guard them......
 
This is ALL the Black Democratic Mayor and Female Democratic Govs fault. FEMA and Bush did nothing wrong. The investigation will prove this.
 
Did anyone see the video on CNN from the Duke students who went in to help? It's on the CNN main page right now in the "on CNN Tv" section entitled "Road Trip For Relief".

These guys, who had never been to NO and didn't know their way around, were able to get to and provide some assistance at the convention center while FEMA was saying they couldn't find a way to get in. On their way in, they watched buses pass them by in the opposite direction - completely empty.

It's just so maddening.


link to video:
http://www.cnn.com/video/partners/c...bestoftv/2005/09/07/katrina.students.help.cnn
 
Last edited:
U2dork said:
Did anyone see the video on CNN from the Duke students who went in to help? It's on the CNN main page right now in the "on CNN Tv" section entitled "Road Trip For Relief".

These guys, who had never been to NO and didn't know their way around, were able to get to and provide some assistance at the convention center while FEMA was saying they couldn't find a way to get in. On their way in, they watched buses pass them by in the opposite direction - completely empty.

It's just so maddening.


link to video:
http://www.cnn.com/video/partners/c...bestoftv/2005/09/07/katrina.students.help.cnn

:angry: :|
 
MrBrau1 said:


It's a trifecta!

sadly...so sadly...you guys got me to giggle though, which I guess is good.
I just keep thinking that this all seems so much more...impeachable...than even lying to start a war (which almost always has to get done at some level when doing such a thing). I want these guys out now; I don't trust his administration to take it from here at all, and why should we?
 
Who's to Blame for Delayed Response to Katrina?

NEW ORLEANS, Sept. 6, 2005 — In New Orleans, those in peril and those in power have pointed the finger squarely at the federal government for the delayed relief effort.

But experts say when natural disasters strike, it is the primary responsibility of state and local governments — not the federal government — to respond.

New Orleans' own comprehensive emergency plan raises the specter of "having large numbers of people … stranded" and promises "the city … will utilize all available resources to quickly and safely evacuate threatened areas."

"Special arrangements will be made to evacuate persons unable to transport themselves," the plan states.

When Hurricane Katrina hit, however, that plan was not followed completely.

Instead of sending city buses to evacuate those who could not make it out on their own, people in New Orleans were told to go to the Superdome and the Convention Center, where no one provided sufficient sustenance or security.
 
But experts say when natural disasters strike, it is the primary responsibility of state and local governments — not the federal government — to respond.

Experts say. Which experts? Different experts say different things.


But there's a problem with the White House's excuse: It's patently false. As Josh Marshall points out, Blanco declared a state of emergency on Aug. 26 -- a day before Bush declared a federal emergency in Louisiana. (You can see Blanco's official declaration in PDF format here; the Washington Post has corrected its article.) On Aug. 28 -- the day before Katrina made landfall -- Blanco followed her declaration with an official letter (PDF) to Bush that requested all manner of emergency supplies her state would need for the aftermath.

Haddow says that these requests should have been enough -- more than enough -- to prompt a full-scale federal response. Under the Clinton administration's FEMA, with Witt as the head, a storm of Katrina's magnitude would have prompted federal and state officials to actually meet in order to coordinate their response. "You were all working together to anticipate needs," Haddow says. "You're all sitting in the same room when the things happened -- the Midwest flood, the Northridge quake, the Oklahoma City bombing and all the disasters we responded to. We were in the same room together and nobody had to point fingers."

and

Under the law, Chertoff said, state and local officials must direct initial emergency operations. "The federal government comes in and supports those officials," he said.

Chertoff's remarks, which echoed earlier statements by President Bush, prompted withering rebukes both from former senior FEMA staffers and outside experts.

"They can't do that," former agency chief of staff Jane Bullock said of Bush administration efforts to shift responsibility away from Washington. "The moment the president declared a federal disaster, it became a federal responsibility…. The federal government took ownership over the response," she said. Bush declared a disaster in Louisiana and Mississippi when the storm hit a week ago.
 
Last edited:
This "shifting the blame game" going on with FEMA is ridiculous. The federal government has a crucial role to play in a deadly storm that practically wiped out towns in multiple states. It's called "passing the buck".
 
here's an interesting little tidbit from reuters.

Canadians Beat U.S. Army to New Orleans Suburb
A Canadian search-and-rescue team reached a flooded New Orleans suburb to help save trapped residents five days before the U.S. military, a Louisiana state senator said on Wednesday.

The Canadians beat both the Army and the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the U.S. disaster response department, to St. Bernard Parish east of New Orleans, where flood waters are still 8 feet deep in places, Sen. Walter Boasso said.

"Fabulous, fabulous guys," Boasso said. "They started rolling with us and got in boats to save people."

"We've got Canadian flags flying everywhere."

The stricken parish of 68,000 people was largely ignored by U.S. authorities who scrambled to get aid to New Orleans, a few miles (km) away. Boasso said residents of the outlying parishes had to mount their own rescue and relief efforts when Hurricane Katrina roared ashore on August 29. rest of text here
 
verte76 said:
This "shifting the blame game" going on with FEMA is ridiculous. The federal government has a crucial role to play in a deadly storm that practically wiped out towns in multiple states. It's called "passing the buck".

Do you (or any of us) have a full picture of the pre-storm local/state/federal responsibilities?

We spent more energy on blame than solutions for those affected.
 
kellyahern said:


You can't find solutions until you identify the problem.

And as we gather facts, we will move closer to identifying the problem. But, in politics, waiting for facts means less time on the soapbox.
 
If the Clinton Administration {pre-monica} had responded the way Team Bush has, I'm sure that alot more would already be calling for his impeachment and the firing of Top Fema person.

BTW under Clinton he elevated FEMA to Cabinate Level status, it was Bush43 who took it back down.
 
nbcrusader said:


And as we gather facts, we will move closer to identifying the problem. But, in politics, waiting for facts means less time on the soapbox.

Why is responding and sharing information "being on the soapbox."

The majority of the people aren't saying, "Impeach Bush! Fire the governor!" We're saying, "This thing is really screwed up and someone messed up big time. We need to find out what went wrong or it's going to happen again."

I find the "let's sit tight and be quiet" point of view kind of ridiculous. People have been quiet about FEMA long enough, and look where that's got us.

Sorry if I don't believe in "just be patient and everything will be allright" at the moment.
 
dazzledbylight said:
If the Clinton Administration {pre-monica} had responded the way Team Bush has, I'm sure that alot more would already be calling for his impeachment and the firing of Top Fema person.

BTW under Clinton he elevated FEMA to Cabinate Level status, it was Bush43 who took it back down.


The "would have been worse for Clinton" arguments are without merit and are a good example of the polarization of our country.
 
kellyahern said:


Why is responding and sharing information "being on the soapbox."

The majority of the people aren't saying, "Impeach Bush! Fire the governor!" We're saying, "This thing is really screwed up and someone messed up big time. We need to find out what went wrong or it's going to happen again."

I find the "let's sit tight and be quiet" point of view kind of ridiculous. People have been quiet about FEMA long enough, and look where that's got us.

Sorry if I don't believe in "just be patient and everything will be allright" at the moment.

I didn't say "responding and sharing information = being on a soapbox". I said it was political, and in another thread you seemed to acknowledge this point.
 
and this is why I'm not in the waiting mood:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9201397/

“We have to wait and see what (Ophelia) is going to do. The possibilities are endless,” said Steve Letro, a meteorologist with the National Weather Service in Jacksonville.

The possibilities are endless he says . . . . yay! :|


Yes, I know this whole mess isn't going to get fixed by next week.
 
nbcrusader said:


I didn't say "responding and sharing information = being on a soapbox". I said it was political, and in another thread you seemed to acknowledge this point.

I guess whenever I see the words "let's just wait", it sounds a lot like the spin that is being put out by some members of the administration. As if the anger people feel isn't justified. Like people are asking, "Why are you so angry? Why can't you be more patient. Don't point fingers, etc."

The obvious political statements aren't helpful, I agree. But it seems that if anything is said that is skeptical of the administration, you take it to mean we are on a witch hunt. What if we think that things are really, really wrong? The statements that federal officials have made have not helped mattters. They just make me more untrusting.

For example:

this is stupid:
"Reid demanded to know how President Bush's vacation had impacted hurricane relief"

this is not:
"while House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., pressed for the sacking of FEMA Director Michael Brown.

"There were two disasters last week: first, the natural disaster, and second, the man-made disaster, the disaster made by mistakes made by FEMA," Pelosi said."

I think there's been plenty of evidence by both Republican and Democrats that they are unhappy with the job Brown is doing, he isn't qualified, has had problems in the past as the head of FEMA and needs to go.

Commenting on Bush's vacation, on the other hand, is just stirring up emotions and isn't very useful, imho.

and comments like this:
"While countless Americans are pulling together to lend a helping hand, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are pointing fingers in a shameless effort to tear us apart," Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman responded.

are also stupid. Even though I think Reid's comments are not useful, I don't think he's trying to "tear us apart." That's just political b.s.
 
Last edited:
nbcrusader said:
I didn't say "responding and sharing information = being on a soapbox". I said it was political, and in another thread you seemed to acknowledge this point.

So do you think that those defending Bush are also doing so for "political" purposes?
 
kellyahern said:



Commenting on Bush's vacation, on the other hand, is just stirring up emotions and isn't very useful, imho.


I disagree strongly. Very strongly. It appears as if the deriliction of duty on behalf of nearly every top member of the Bush administration served only to worsen the crisis. We needed real, decisive leadership and decision making the most when it was absolutely nowhere to be found...
 
Back
Top Bottom