The Inquiry: White House Knew of Levee's Failure on Night of Storm

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by automated, Feb 10, 2006.

  1. automated

    automated Active Member

    The Bush administration was alerted to broken levees and flooding in New Orleans hours after their collapse, documents show.

    Link To Original Article
  2. wkmac

    wkmac Well-Known Member

    Last edited: Mar 2, 2006
  3. tieguy

    tieguy Banned

    yep you're right. They knew the levees would break. They knew how much damage would be done. They knew New Orleans had those buses sitting there. they knew exactly where this storm would hit. They knew exactly how much damage would be done down to the dollar. they knew there would be many people starving to death. After all we have one of these storms every week. And yet they chose to ignore all this exact information because they enjoy watching people drown and starve to death. Politics at work again.
  4. Are you getting paid by Bush as well as UPS for being an official apologist? Bush lied, people died.
  5. tieguy

    tieguy Banned

    only if you're being paid to be the official apologist for the governor and mayor that were involved and who had direct responsibiliity in this matter to either

    a) Handle the crisis

    b) assess what assets were needed and request them from the federal government.
  6. I guess you didn't see the tape. George Bush lied and lied again. People died. Watch the video here:
  7. tieguy

    tieguy Banned

    I guess you didn't see the real thing the first time. The governor lied, the mayor lied. The democratic appointed fema workers lied about the republicans . The republican appointed fema workers lied about the democrats. Keep stoking those ribs and try not to burn yourself.
  8. I think you are getting me mixed up with Dear Leader, who didn't see it until his aides gave him a DVD of it days after the fact. He didn't want to interrupt his vacation. The emperor has no clothes.
  9. tieguy

    tieguy Banned

    And perhaps the entire event was a test of leadership that resulted in a failure of leadership on all parts. The president , the head of fema, the governor and the mayor. Perhaps instead of looking for an opportunity to pick a political position and wail one of those 4 leaders for the entire escapade we should realize that that the scope of this natural disaster was too great for them too appreciate until it was too late to change the course of history. Some events that take place were never meant to be handled correctly. Some unfortunately end up being a lesson learned for future leadership. No one no matter what you take out of context could anticipate the scope of what was about to take place when Katrina hit. Be dissapointed but be dissapointed with all 4 leaders and stop trying to slice the pie for political opportunity.
  10. Agreed; all four failed the leadership test, all four should resign. None are fit for their positions.
  11. tieguy

    tieguy Banned

    lol. Theres a good democrat willing to sacrifice a mayor and governor to gain a president.

    if there was anyone that I think could have handled it better I might agree. Keep in mind Brown and Bush handled numerous major hurricanes the previous year with few issues. The scope of this storm was far above what anyone anticipated.
    Last edited: Mar 7, 2006
  12. Once again, I refer you to the tape. The destruction was anticipated, and the weather service was nearly biblical in their description of the scope of this storm. Bush and Chertoff dropped the ball. The burden to respond to a disaster of this magnitude lies on the Federal level. At the very least, Bush should take responsibility in the strongest possible of terms, and fire Chertoff immediately.

    PS--Nagin was a Republican before he switched sides to run for mayor of NOLA, because a Republican didn't stand a chance of being elected. You could say it was a marriage of convience, rather than conviction.
  13. tieguy

    tieguy Banned

    Thats where you and I differ . Fundamentally the burden lies with local officials including the mayor and the governor assessing and requesting the federal aid required. That means the governor should first call up and exhaust all national guard resources before requesting federal military help. That request was slow coming.

    Bush forcing military troops in to the area that have not been requested reeks of third world dictatorships.

    This point is very clear and often ignored by the democrats who were determined to pin this mess solely on Bush.
  14. The president clearly stated that any aid required would be forthcoming, then he resumed his vacation and [-]lied about[/-] ignored the situation.

    Are you suggesting that the governor of a state has the authority to withhold or recall personnel and equipment from the National Guard if they deem them necessary for the response to a natural disaster in their state?
  15. tieguy

    tieguy Banned

    Not sure why you are having such a hard time with this issue unless you are hell bent on trying to pin everything on Bush while absolving the governor and mayor.

    From all I've seen I believe

    1) the mayor requested aid but may not have had the experience and background to request what he needed and how to request it.

    2) The governor was woefully inadequate and may have had her own "hangups" about how and when to request aid. There were comments made where she showed she was strongly against having any federal troops deployed in the area. I personally believer the governor and her administration which would also comprise a key component of the fema relief effort were woefully inadequate to the point of suicidal incompetence.

    3) What stands out in my mind is the frustrated mayor saying someone has to get off their but and do something. What to me became clearly apparent was the deployment of troops and relief effort eventually appeared to completely bypass the governor and her administration as Bush and the feds developed a more effective working relationship directly with the mayor. As the federal relief effort became more effective it was clearly evident that the governor was being pushed to the background to the point where she almost disappeared. I still remember the influence of the cayenne general (Dupree?)who led the military relief effort. His name escapes me but what does stand out is this person for all intents and purposes becoming the governor of Louisiana when he basically coached the beleaguered governor on how to do her job. How to stand up and lead in a time of crisis , what to say and what to do.

    You really need to take a look at how the characters played out in this one. All 4 were standing there with their pants around their ankles on Katrina plus one. I believe what you then saw develop was a period where the 4 struggled to mesh. Followed by a period where The true leaders slowly pushed their way to the front. Bush and the mayor. While the mayor was woefully inexperienced he knew how to lead people.
    The governor disappeared. Her style of leadership was reminiscent of Hussein hiding in a hole in the ground.

    Brown I'm not sure about. Brown was the head of Fema the previous year when Florida got hit by one major hurricane after another and yet did a fairly decent job. Katrina hits and all of a sudden the guy is a schmuck who does not know what he is doing. What was the difference between Florida and Louisiana? Clearly strong leadership by the governor and the state response team who's job it is to assess the damage and request whatever federal aid was needed. Its also possible that Browns biggest shortcoming may have been that he did not know how to overcome an incompetent governorship in doing his job.

    A script that was very effective in Florida and Alabama was suddenly woefully ineffective in Louisiana.

    To try to make the point that Bush was negligent because he was more concerned about taking his vacation is a very naive assessment of what is in fact much more complex then you try to sell it. For someone who claims to do your homework you took a very shallow position here. Presidents don't take true vacations. He may be in Crawford Texas but he is still working as the president. The handling of a hurricane event has always been managed by Fema and the governorship of the state. The presidents public role has always been to pledge support, do the fly through 4 or 5 days later and request congressional spending and support. To try to make the case that Bush should have canceled his vacation and personally led the relief effort on day one is to willfully try to hold Bush to a standard that no other president has ever been held to.

    Sit back and do some hard thinking about the roles off all 4 as you slow cook those ribs. A federal relief effort will not be effective if you do not have the local infrastructure in place to allocate those resources where needed. The governor should have hopped into a helicopter on day one seen the flooding, seen the bodies floating in the water and the people on the roofs. At that point any simpleton should could have realized that they did not have the resources to meet this challenge. Any simpleton with staff could have figured out and requested federal miliatary support immediately. Why then did it take her and her staff so long to finally begrudingly request that help?