"reconair" <reconair@staffnet.com> wrote in message
news:11i5nsk5nf72l5b@corp.supernews.com...
> Here's a pretty good take.
>
> Blame Amid the Tragedy
> Gov. Blanco and Mayor Nagin failed their constituents.
>
> BY BOB WILLIAMS
> Wednesday, September 7, 2005 12:01 a.m. EDT
>
> As the devastation of Hurricane Katrina continues to shock and sadden the
> nation, the question on many lips is, Who is to blame for the inadequate
> response?
>


Note the date of this article (09/07/05), there have been a lot of startling
revelations since then.

There is plenty of blame to go around and despite what Scott McClellan says,
now is the time to play the "blaming game".
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q...e+game&spell=1

This guy seems to be a big fan of the blame game (victim)..
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...tem=7712202734

Another opinion from Jane Bullock, former Chief of Staff for FEMA (democrat)
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/...in817893.shtml

And another from Colin Powell, former Secretary of State (republican)
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L09651428.htm

Governor declares State of Emergency (08/26/05)
http://gov.louisiana.gov/Press_Relea...ail.asp?id=973

Bush declares emergency, a measure that "allows" federal aid to be deployed
(08/28/05)
http://english.epochtimes.com/news/5-8-28/31701.html

Katrina makes landfall (08/29/05)
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/...in798725.shtml

Federal aid saunters in 4 days later (09/02/05)
http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/09/02/katrina.impact/

Far be it from me to point fingers, afterall, I have as much experience in
handling disaster management as Michael Brown. I will say however this
disaster appears to be;

1. lack of funding to prevent flooding (federal)
2. mis-management of insufficient funding (state)
3. wait and see management style (fed,state,city)
4. bureaucracy (everywhere)
5. FEMA bungling

It seems to me the heroes in this affair have been Supt. Compass, Gen. Honre
and their charges. Local, National and International volunteers. Countries
around the world offering support including of all places Sri Lanka - still
struggling from the tsunami. I have the mental image of someone in Sri Lanka
watching the news and thinking 'why would they have a city below
sea-level?'.

It also pains me to admit this but the media has done a great job with
coverage and foremost, reuniting evacuees. They still have their painfully
obvious political agendas however.

-Brian

 

"Lon" <lon.stowell@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:PqednZ2dnZ2ksKKsnZ2dnfqYvt6dnZ2dRVn-y52dnZ0@comcast.com...
>
> Unfortunately folks too far down the totem pole will become the
> scapegoats to protect the real culprits.
>

I tend to disagree. As the totem poll nears the ground there are far more
citing of heroism and competency. The media has done a pretty good job
focusing on "the good guys" and I don't think the public will soon forget
the incompetence of the elected officials.

-Brian

 

"Lon" <lon.stowell@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:PqednZ2dnZ2ksKKsnZ2dnfqYvt6dnZ2dRVn-y52dnZ0@comcast.com...
>
> Unfortunately folks too far down the totem pole will become the
> scapegoats to protect the real culprits.
>

I tend to disagree. As the totem poll nears the ground there are far more
citing of heroism and competency. The media has done a pretty good job
focusing on "the good guys" and I don't think the public will soon forget
the incompetence of the elected officials.

-Brian

 

"Lon" <lon.stowell@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:PqednZ2dnZ2ksKKsnZ2dnfqYvt6dnZ2dRVn-y52dnZ0@comcast.com...
>
> Unfortunately folks too far down the totem pole will become the
> scapegoats to protect the real culprits.
>

I tend to disagree. As the totem poll nears the ground there are far more
citing of heroism and competency. The media has done a pretty good job
focusing on "the good guys" and I don't think the public will soon forget
the incompetence of the elected officials.

-Brian

 

"Lon" <lon.stowell@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:PqednZ2dnZ2ksKKsnZ2dnfqYvt6dnZ2dRVn-y52dnZ0@comcast.com...
>
> Unfortunately folks too far down the totem pole will become the
> scapegoats to protect the real culprits.
>

I tend to disagree. As the totem poll nears the ground there are far more
citing of heroism and competency. The media has done a pretty good job
focusing on "the good guys" and I don't think the public will soon forget
the incompetence of the elected officials.

-Brian

 

I watched an interview with the author of Bayou Farewell (2003) and he cited
that the levees were a cause in the city sinking. It was a rather brief
explanation about disrupting the natural flow of water and dispersing of
sediment... it made sense on the surface as he described it. He states the
solution is diversion and it's not too late. The cost would be about 14B
prior to Katrina, about the same as the Boston dig or a month of spending in
Iraq. The Iraq comparison was spine tingling.

I'm not a big fan of the "greenies" or other extremists but this guy is only
one of hundreds that foretold this nightmare through research and writings.
I have a lot of compassion for people that try so hard to get their message
out and despite devoting their lives to what ever cause they probably feel
that they haven't done enough to get the word out.

Here is another interview originally aired 06/22/03
http://www.paulagordon.com/shows/tidwell/

-Brian

"Lon" <lon.stowell@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:PqednZ2dnZ2lsKKsnZ2dnZSYvt6dnZ2dRVn-y52dnZ0@comcast.com...
> Dave Milne proclaimed:
>> So what's the crack on New Orleans ? Is it an administration screwup in
>> not
>> rescuing the people more efficiently or just an inevitable catastrophe as
>> a
>> result of building below the water table ?
>>
>
> Over 10 years ago, Scientific American ran a feature article on that
> area being a disaster just waiting to happen. The natural barrier
> islands that helped protect the mainland were being washed away. The
> city was pumping water out from under the city, which caused the
> marshy soil to sink below the levels of the surrounding rivers and
> lakes. The greenies wouldn't let the Corps of Engineers redredge the
> rivers and canals. The same greenies wouldn't let the Corps of
> Engineers rebuild and strengthen the levies. The government cut the
> budget for even maintaining the dikes and levies. The article did
> miss-call the source of the flooding, however if the article had
> been correct it would be even worse than it is. Then you have to
> ask how come all those special terrain vehicles, large rescue and
> support ships, and military personnel weren't placed on standby
> with over two days advance warning that a Category 4 to 5 storm was
> drawing a bead on the gulf coast--even if the target wasn't known
> that accurately, whatever ended up being a target would be reasonably
> expected to be a disaster with that big a storm. And I guess if you
> appoint your old drinking buddy as an emergency coordinator, you might
> want to make sure he could handle the job... and with over two days
> warning it wouldn't be that difficult to see if he was preparing for
> the worst or sitting on his ***.
>

 

I watched an interview with the author of Bayou Farewell (2003) and he cited
that the levees were a cause in the city sinking. It was a rather brief
explanation about disrupting the natural flow of water and dispersing of
sediment... it made sense on the surface as he described it. He states the
solution is diversion and it's not too late. The cost would be about 14B
prior to Katrina, about the same as the Boston dig or a month of spending in
Iraq. The Iraq comparison was spine tingling.

I'm not a big fan of the "greenies" or other extremists but this guy is only
one of hundreds that foretold this nightmare through research and writings.
I have a lot of compassion for people that try so hard to get their message
out and despite devoting their lives to what ever cause they probably feel
that they haven't done enough to get the word out.

Here is another interview originally aired 06/22/03
http://www.paulagordon.com/shows/tidwell/

-Brian

"Lon" <lon.stowell@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:PqednZ2dnZ2lsKKsnZ2dnZSYvt6dnZ2dRVn-y52dnZ0@comcast.com...
> Dave Milne proclaimed:
>> So what's the crack on New Orleans ? Is it an administration screwup in
>> not
>> rescuing the people more efficiently or just an inevitable catastrophe as
>> a
>> result of building below the water table ?
>>
>
> Over 10 years ago, Scientific American ran a feature article on that
> area being a disaster just waiting to happen. The natural barrier
> islands that helped protect the mainland were being washed away. The
> city was pumping water out from under the city, which caused the
> marshy soil to sink below the levels of the surrounding rivers and
> lakes. The greenies wouldn't let the Corps of Engineers redredge the
> rivers and canals. The same greenies wouldn't let the Corps of
> Engineers rebuild and strengthen the levies. The government cut the
> budget for even maintaining the dikes and levies. The article did
> miss-call the source of the flooding, however if the article had
> been correct it would be even worse than it is. Then you have to
> ask how come all those special terrain vehicles, large rescue and
> support ships, and military personnel weren't placed on standby
> with over two days advance warning that a Category 4 to 5 storm was
> drawing a bead on the gulf coast--even if the target wasn't known
> that accurately, whatever ended up being a target would be reasonably
> expected to be a disaster with that big a storm. And I guess if you
> appoint your old drinking buddy as an emergency coordinator, you might
> want to make sure he could handle the job... and with over two days
> warning it wouldn't be that difficult to see if he was preparing for
> the worst or sitting on his ***.
>

 

I watched an interview with the author of Bayou Farewell (2003) and he cited
that the levees were a cause in the city sinking. It was a rather brief
explanation about disrupting the natural flow of water and dispersing of
sediment... it made sense on the surface as he described it. He states the
solution is diversion and it's not too late. The cost would be about 14B
prior to Katrina, about the same as the Boston dig or a month of spending in
Iraq. The Iraq comparison was spine tingling.

I'm not a big fan of the "greenies" or other extremists but this guy is only
one of hundreds that foretold this nightmare through research and writings.
I have a lot of compassion for people that try so hard to get their message
out and despite devoting their lives to what ever cause they probably feel
that they haven't done enough to get the word out.

Here is another interview originally aired 06/22/03
http://www.paulagordon.com/shows/tidwell/

-Brian

"Lon" <lon.stowell@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:PqednZ2dnZ2lsKKsnZ2dnZSYvt6dnZ2dRVn-y52dnZ0@comcast.com...
> Dave Milne proclaimed:
>> So what's the crack on New Orleans ? Is it an administration screwup in
>> not
>> rescuing the people more efficiently or just an inevitable catastrophe as
>> a
>> result of building below the water table ?
>>
>
> Over 10 years ago, Scientific American ran a feature article on that
> area being a disaster just waiting to happen. The natural barrier
> islands that helped protect the mainland were being washed away. The
> city was pumping water out from under the city, which caused the
> marshy soil to sink below the levels of the surrounding rivers and
> lakes. The greenies wouldn't let the Corps of Engineers redredge the
> rivers and canals. The same greenies wouldn't let the Corps of
> Engineers rebuild and strengthen the levies. The government cut the
> budget for even maintaining the dikes and levies. The article did
> miss-call the source of the flooding, however if the article had
> been correct it would be even worse than it is. Then you have to
> ask how come all those special terrain vehicles, large rescue and
> support ships, and military personnel weren't placed on standby
> with over two days advance warning that a Category 4 to 5 storm was
> drawing a bead on the gulf coast--even if the target wasn't known
> that accurately, whatever ended up being a target would be reasonably
> expected to be a disaster with that big a storm. And I guess if you
> appoint your old drinking buddy as an emergency coordinator, you might
> want to make sure he could handle the job... and with over two days
> warning it wouldn't be that difficult to see if he was preparing for
> the worst or sitting on his ***.
>

 

I watched an interview with the author of Bayou Farewell (2003) and he cited
that the levees were a cause in the city sinking. It was a rather brief
explanation about disrupting the natural flow of water and dispersing of
sediment... it made sense on the surface as he described it. He states the
solution is diversion and it's not too late. The cost would be about 14B
prior to Katrina, about the same as the Boston dig or a month of spending in
Iraq. The Iraq comparison was spine tingling.

I'm not a big fan of the "greenies" or other extremists but this guy is only
one of hundreds that foretold this nightmare through research and writings.
I have a lot of compassion for people that try so hard to get their message
out and despite devoting their lives to what ever cause they probably feel
that they haven't done enough to get the word out.

Here is another interview originally aired 06/22/03
http://www.paulagordon.com/shows/tidwell/

-Brian

"Lon" <lon.stowell@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:PqednZ2dnZ2lsKKsnZ2dnZSYvt6dnZ2dRVn-y52dnZ0@comcast.com...
> Dave Milne proclaimed:
>> So what's the crack on New Orleans ? Is it an administration screwup in
>> not
>> rescuing the people more efficiently or just an inevitable catastrophe as
>> a
>> result of building below the water table ?
>>
>
> Over 10 years ago, Scientific American ran a feature article on that
> area being a disaster just waiting to happen. The natural barrier
> islands that helped protect the mainland were being washed away. The
> city was pumping water out from under the city, which caused the
> marshy soil to sink below the levels of the surrounding rivers and
> lakes. The greenies wouldn't let the Corps of Engineers redredge the
> rivers and canals. The same greenies wouldn't let the Corps of
> Engineers rebuild and strengthen the levies. The government cut the
> budget for even maintaining the dikes and levies. The article did
> miss-call the source of the flooding, however if the article had
> been correct it would be even worse than it is. Then you have to
> ask how come all those special terrain vehicles, large rescue and
> support ships, and military personnel weren't placed on standby
> with over two days advance warning that a Category 4 to 5 storm was
> drawing a bead on the gulf coast--even if the target wasn't known
> that accurately, whatever ended up being a target would be reasonably
> expected to be a disaster with that big a storm. And I guess if you
> appoint your old drinking buddy as an emergency coordinator, you might
> want to make sure he could handle the job... and with over two days
> warning it wouldn't be that difficult to see if he was preparing for
> the worst or sitting on his ***.
>

 

On Sat, 10 Sep 2005 12:39:06 GMT, "Dave Milne"
<jeep@_nospam_milne.info> wrote:

>So what's the crack on New Orleans ? Is it an administration screwup in not
>rescuing the people more efficiently or just an inevitable catastrophe as a
>result of building below the water table ?
>
>Dave Milne, Scotland
>'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ

The 'big picture' is that New Orleans should not exist in its present
location at all. In hurricane country, surrounded by water and
partially below sea level all suggest that New Orleans is a very
dangerous place to live.

In the US, the Federal government has no say in where people may or
may not live. If populations settle in poor locations, it is up to
that population, in concert with their local and state governments, to
provide the infrastructure necessary to protect and preserve public
health and safety.

New Orleans and Louisiana have failed miserably in that regard. They
have not built the levees and sea walls sufficient to prevent
catastrophic flooding despite billions of dollars of federal
assistance and they cannot protect against hurricane winds and
flooding produced by hurricanes.

With one and half million people living in an inherently dangerous
location with inadequate protection from storm surges and no
protection from high winds and massive rains, New Orleans should at
the very least have had the contingency planning to provide food,
water and transportation sufficient to evacuate the area should the
inevitable hurricane wreak its destruction.

The above protective construction, and contingency plans, supplies and
transportation are the responsibility of New Orleans, Louisiana and
their citizens.

Yes, it is expensive, but that is a choice they made when they chose
to develop and build in the area. They have failed themselves when
they, through creeping development, did not prohibit that development
in at least the low lying areas.

Should the burden of those poor choices be ------ across the US
population as a whole? Should those folks in Iowa and Nebraska pay to
develop the sea walls and Levees that only partially protect New
Orleans? That is not our form of government, but if it were, the
folks in Iowa and Nebraska would have a say in development strategies
if only to avoid exposure to unlimited damages.

It is obvious to one and all that if a man chose to build his home on
stilts in the Gulf of Mexico (or Key West Florida, for that matter)
because he liked the view and fishing from his balcony, would not be
protected from his folly at the expense of those who make more
reasonable accommodations with Mother Nature. New Orleans is that man
writ large, as is much of eastern and southern US costal areas,
especially Florida. Los Angeles and San Francisco also fall into this
category as they thumb their noses at earthquakes.

The Federal government has no say, and should have no say, in where
people decide to build and live. With freedom, however, comes
responsibility. Do we want the Feds to prohibit mountain climbing,
deep sea diving, parachute jumping and other high risk activities? I
think not. Instead, the risk is borne by those who choose to
participate in such activities.

What exactly is it that the Federal government should have done in
preparation for this hurricane? Should they have prepositioned troops
and supplies? Where? Nobody knew where the hurricane was going to hit
or what damage it would cause. It would be the height of folly to
send troops and supplies in early only to have them become additional
victims of the storm.

Additionally, had the Federal government prepositioned near New
Orleans, the major population center under threat, it is quite likely
that those men and supplies would not have available to the citizens
of Mississippi and Alabama where the worst of the hurricane actually
struck. Flooding, downed bridges, loss of power, water shortages and
the like would have greatly hampered any rescue attempt even if the
prepositioned troops and supplies avoided a direct hit themselves.

It is impossible to react to a disaster before it has happened. What
is needed, where is it needed and how can it be brought there all must
be known before anything can be done.

Aside from shutting the doors on New Orleans years ago, the orderly
evacuation prior to the hurricane was the only reasonable alternative.
President Bush was reduced to begging Governor Blanco to order a
mandatory evacuation on the eve of the hurricane, something the
governor should have done entirely on her own days earlier. The
evacuation, as we've seen was a failure because it was not ordered
soon enough and the city and state failed to provide transportation to
the large number of citizens who the local government knew had no
transportation.

Can the Federal government commandeer local resources and wrest
control away from local government? Of course not, doing so is against
the law. The Federal government can act only at the request of the
local government.

Should the Federal government surrender control of national resources
and troops to local government? Of course not, that is also against
the law. Imagine some loony governor given charge of the 82 Airborne
Division.

What usually happens is the governor of the state requests federal
assistance and then relinquishes control of local resources to the
Federal government. This is the only legal way to accomplish the
desired ends of both parties.

The above did not happen in Louisiana and New Orleans. Governor Blanco
was playing CYA with the lives of her citizens. This limited the
ability of the Federal government to act in this case, to the
detriment of all concerned.

What did the Federal government do despite these handicaps? They
shipped seven trailers of food and water to the Superdome on Monday,
the day the hurricane struck New Orleans. Another seven trailers
arrived on Tuesday. The Coast Guard reacted quickly, rescuing over
1200 people in the first two days. The Navy also supplied doctors and
medicine to the area to help the ill and injured.

The need for the evacuation wasn't known until the levee failure was
discovered later Monday. Prior to this time, the whole world was
breathing a sigh of relief that New Orleans had been spared the worst
of the storm. Rather than shipping 2.5 million pounds of food, water,
medicine and clothing each day to New Orleans, the relief effort now
had to be changed to the evacuation of the victims. A massive change
under dire circumstances. So much for the best laid plans of mice and
men...

Still, even at this late point, Governor Blanco had not declared a
state of emergency and had not yet authorized Federal assistance. The
Federal government, rather than acting without legal authority,
provided assistance through auspices of the Louisiana National Guard.

It wasn't until Wednesday that the Federal Government received the
authorization to act from Governor Blanco, though she stubbornly
continued to maintain control of the situation until as late as the
following Saturday, further hampering the Federal efforts.

By Thursday, the evacuation began in earnest, by Friday at least
60,000 people had been evacuated and by Saturday, the Superdome and
the convention center were emptied of the stragglers. Two and one half
days to gather the transportation, organize the destinations, supply
the food, drink and medicine for that number of people was a
remarkable achievement given the circumstances and lack of
preparedness and cooperation of the local authorities.

What seems to be taken as a given in this disaster is the authority of
the Federal government to fail to anticipate the path of the
hurricane, the location of its hit and the damage it would cause. We
could always say that the Feds should have anticipated the worst case
scenario and acted accordingly.

What was the worst case scenario? Had the hurricane veered west into
Galveston, Texas, what then? What if it had veered further east and
hit Mobile Alabama? What if it had continued straight into New
Orleans?

Planning and prepostioning for any of these alternatives would have
acted to the detriment of the others. As it was, supplying food and
water to a relatively intact New Orleans had to be switched to a full
eviction after the storm had passed and the levees had failed.

It was the massive failure, over the past decades, of Louisiana and
New Orleans to restrict the development and growth of their coastal
areas that is to blame for this tragedy.

Were mistakes made? Of course. Football, baseball, wars and
civilizations have always made mistakes, it is the human condition.
Was there any gross negligence or even just plain negligence in this
case? On the part of Louisiana and New Orleans, not just gross
negligence, but criminal negligence in my opinion.

How about the Federal government? They made mistakes, yes, but were
they negligent? No. They made a remarkable effort to clean up the mess
in short order.

What should we do now? We should remove the levees from Lake
Pontchartrain and restore the low lying areas to natural wetlands. We
should allow the Mississippi a natural way to flood deposit its silt
in the delta to keep it from sinking beneath the waters of the gulf.

Will this make New Orleans less populated? Of course, it should be
less populated. There is little we can do to protect New Orleans from
a direct hit of a category 5 hurricane. The levees won't help then.

Due to the extreme negligence of the local government, Louisiana ought
to be assessed the costs of the relief effort if only to discourage a
repetition of this disaster.


-- msosborn at msosborn dot com