Hurricane Katrina; Is the U.S. responding fast enough?
- Thread starter s0nny80y
- 266 comments
- 8,236 views
- 3,425
I already made it known how I feel about the FEDERAL response to the crisis. After three days of hell some one woke up and started kicking butt and since then no one could do a better job . This race crap is a big friggin joke . All the idiots roaming around in gangs shooting up relief convoys and carjacking people fleeing NO just happen to be black...so what are you supposed to do dress up some white guys and fake a robbery ? The looters carrying plasma tv 's and other crap just happened to be black..in fact because the neighborhoods are close to 100 % black I would be surprised to se some white looters going out of there way to hang out . They finaly got around to declaring martial law so thet the army and national guard can try to maintain order...what do I see and hear from the idiot scumbag apologist ? " They ( Bush ) gave the OK to shoot blacks " ....ummm ok...
The liberal idiots and the others from outside of the US that are quick to blame the Bush admininistration from everything to the Hurricane itself to the levy breaking ...to plagues of locust..etc,. All I can say is get a grip nutsack ...The levys have been screwed up since Carter was president and EVERY administration since then has bandaded it ..JUST LIKE THE REST OF THE INFASTRUCTURE IN THE US . You just wake up from a friggin coma or something ? ..You gave facts and figures ..blah blah blah ..did you back PAST this administration ? Bunch of dogooder nutsack munchin idiot savants . Politicions of all flavors do not spend money on stuff until it breaks or falls down or floods like Noahs pond ! So this is somehow news ??? Friggin idiots . The state and local governments have 90% or more of the responsibility for planning and initial response to a disaster ....National Geographic in 2004 wrote of the disaster waiting in New Orleans along with a slew of others... State and Local government SCREWD UP . But thats hindsight . So who has the plan for delivering aid while being shot at ? The initial non government response stalled because the rescue people were being shot and robbed . They wisely sat back and waited for reinforcements ...and a large amount of people DIED and SUFFERED because of it . Now I hear the liberals on one hand complaining that its ok to shoot looters and on the other hand screaming for security...YOU MAKE ME SICK you idiots . Look at the response in the rest of the affected area and you will see a big difference ....
Guess what it is ?
A bunch of people brought out their guns and gathered together to protect property and the rescue personel and aid workers ... the people were white black and whatever and all in the same economic class as those in New Orleans ..although it was seldom needed to use force the idiots got the message. Order was maintained by volunteers for the most part and regular home owners . In New Orleans the gangs of thugs ..most who deliberately stayed behind for lootin action available after the storm..took over the city . Normal people do not make up a friggin war plan as part of the relief effort ..NEW ORLEANS died at its own hand . The conditions there were evident by the second day ..the Governor should have declared martial law and called in the Guard to restore order. It must be hard to declare war on the people of your city . But I see no other way to get aid to the suffering.....aid workers sign on to help ..not be shot at ..raped ...or robbed .
The liberal idiots and the others from outside of the US that are quick to blame the Bush admininistration from everything to the Hurricane itself to the levy breaking ...to plagues of locust..etc,. All I can say is get a grip nutsack ...The levys have been screwed up since Carter was president and EVERY administration since then has bandaded it ..JUST LIKE THE REST OF THE INFASTRUCTURE IN THE US . You just wake up from a friggin coma or something ? ..You gave facts and figures ..blah blah blah ..did you back PAST this administration ? Bunch of dogooder nutsack munchin idiot savants . Politicions of all flavors do not spend money on stuff until it breaks or falls down or floods like Noahs pond ! So this is somehow news ??? Friggin idiots . The state and local governments have 90% or more of the responsibility for planning and initial response to a disaster ....National Geographic in 2004 wrote of the disaster waiting in New Orleans along with a slew of others... State and Local government SCREWD UP . But thats hindsight . So who has the plan for delivering aid while being shot at ? The initial non government response stalled because the rescue people were being shot and robbed . They wisely sat back and waited for reinforcements ...and a large amount of people DIED and SUFFERED because of it . Now I hear the liberals on one hand complaining that its ok to shoot looters and on the other hand screaming for security...YOU MAKE ME SICK you idiots . Look at the response in the rest of the affected area and you will see a big difference ....
Guess what it is ?
A bunch of people brought out their guns and gathered together to protect property and the rescue personel and aid workers ... the people were white black and whatever and all in the same economic class as those in New Orleans ..although it was seldom needed to use force the idiots got the message. Order was maintained by volunteers for the most part and regular home owners . In New Orleans the gangs of thugs ..most who deliberately stayed behind for lootin action available after the storm..took over the city . Normal people do not make up a friggin war plan as part of the relief effort ..NEW ORLEANS died at its own hand . The conditions there were evident by the second day ..the Governor should have declared martial law and called in the Guard to restore order. It must be hard to declare war on the people of your city . But I see no other way to get aid to the suffering.....aid workers sign on to help ..not be shot at ..raped ...or robbed .
///M-Spec
Staff Emeritus
- 4,928
On a somewhat side note:
The 5 stages of grief.
Denial
Anger
Bargining
Depression
Acceptance
Be aware that almost everyone who has something strong to say about these events will be speaking from some point in this grief cycle.
Early last week, the world was "stunned" and "amazed" that something like this could happen in the US. As the week progressed, you heard a lot of pissed off people on the news, saying really dumb things they probably would not have said if they weren't solidly in the second stage of the grieving process.
Been there myself. About four years ago... right around this time.
The more I think about it, the more I am convinced just blaming the feds for the slow response is very limited in scope and ultimately, pointless. It seems clear to me that the forces that responded were simply under strength and overwhelmed.
Speaking with the benefit of hindsight, there should have been a plan in the begining that focused on evacuation, rather than rescue and disaster management. Evacation is largely a state and local government function and it is clear this was not handed well either. Prevention of course, would have ultimately been the most effective way to head something like this off. But it's easy to say that now....
M
The 5 stages of grief.
Denial
Anger
Bargining
Depression
Acceptance
Be aware that almost everyone who has something strong to say about these events will be speaking from some point in this grief cycle.
Early last week, the world was "stunned" and "amazed" that something like this could happen in the US. As the week progressed, you heard a lot of pissed off people on the news, saying really dumb things they probably would not have said if they weren't solidly in the second stage of the grieving process.
Been there myself. About four years ago... right around this time.
The more I think about it, the more I am convinced just blaming the feds for the slow response is very limited in scope and ultimately, pointless. It seems clear to me that the forces that responded were simply under strength and overwhelmed.
Speaking with the benefit of hindsight, there should have been a plan in the begining that focused on evacuation, rather than rescue and disaster management. Evacation is largely a state and local government function and it is clear this was not handed well either. Prevention of course, would have ultimately been the most effective way to head something like this off. But it's easy to say that now....
M
- 2,208
THE GAME
The news videos taken from helicopters showing SEVERAL parking lots full of flooded school buses was a true shock. What, getting those buses into the residential neighborhoods a day or two before Katrina hit was just too tough to accomplish? That's nonsense! The will to do it just wasn't there.
A few FEMA people were in the city quickly, but the awful truth is that they didn't have a full command and control center going until Thursday. Everybody was bitterly complaining about nobody actually being in charge.
I think you're wrong about the Guard. I'm pretty certain there was no significant National Guard presence in New Orleans until Thursday.
Young_Warrior
(Banned)
- 2,285
ledhed
Your views are extremly right winged. But thats what all us non americans clock onto straight away to a person who say has the american flag in his avatar.
I'm not about to say that race was a reason, but it made me think after reading these Yahoo! captions:
To say racism doesn't exist is just plain ignorant.
The response wasn't race motivated, yes, but it took a hurricane to show America that there are those so impoverish that they couldn't escape their own city even if their lives depended on it. It just so happened that most of those impoverished in the New Orleans area were Black. Maybe now funds could re-located from wars fought abroad to realities back at home.
To say racism doesn't exist is just plain ignorant.
The response wasn't race motivated, yes, but it took a hurricane to show America that there are those so impoverish that they couldn't escape their own city even if their lives depended on it. It just so happened that most of those impoverished in the New Orleans area were Black. Maybe now funds could re-located from wars fought abroad to realities back at home.
- 2,208
My head is spinning. It appears that the Secretary of Homeland Security, which FEMA was folded into, does not fully understand how things work. See below, in bold:
From The Los Angeles Times, September 5, 2005 -
Why FEMA Was Missing in Action
Most of the agency's preparedness budget and focus are related to terrorism, not disasters.
By Peter G. Gosselin and Alan C. Miller
Times Staff Writers
WASHINGTON While the federal government has spent much of the last quarter-century trimming the safety nets it provides Americans, it has dramatically expanded its promise of protection in one area disaster.
Since the 1970s, Washington has emerged as the insurer of last resort against floods, fires, earthquakes and after 2001 terrorist attacks.
But the government's stumbling response to the storm that devastated the nation's Gulf Coast reveals that the federal agency singularly most responsible for making good on Washington's expanded promise has been hobbled by cutbacks and a bureaucratic downgrading.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency once speedily delivered food, water, shelter and medical care to disaster areas, and paid to quickly rebuild damaged roads and schools and get businesses and people back on their feet. Like a commercial insurance firm setting safety standards to prevent future problems, it also underwrote efforts to get cities and states to reduce risks ahead of time and plan for what they would do if calamity struck.
But in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks, FEMA lost its Cabinet-level status as it was folded into the giant new Department of Homeland Security. And in recent years it has suffered budget cuts, the elimination or reduction of key programs and an exodus of experienced staffers.
The agency's core budget, which includes disaster preparedness and mitigation, has been cut each year since it was absorbed by the Homeland Security Department in 2003. Depending on what the final numbers end up being for next fiscal year, the cuts will have been between about 2% and 18%.
The agency's staff has been reduced by 500 positions to 4,735. Among the results, FEMA has had to cut one of its three emergency management teams, which are charged with overseeing relief efforts in a disaster. Where it once had "red," "white" and "blue" teams, it now has only red and white.
Three out of every four dollars the agency provides in local preparedness and first-responder grants go to terrorism-related activities, even though a recent Government Accountability Office report quotes local officials as saying what they really need is money to prepare for natural disasters and accidents.
"They've taken emergency management away from the emergency managers," complained Morrie Goodman, who was FEMA's chief spokesman during the Clinton administration. "These operations are being run by people who are amateurs at what they are doing."
Richard W. Krimm, a former senior FEMA official for several administrations, agreed. "It was a terrible mistake to take disaster response and recovery and disaster preparedness and mitigation, and put them in Homeland Security," he said.
Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff acknowledged in interviews Sunday that Washington was insufficiently prepared for the hurricane that laid waste to New Orleans and surrounding areas. But he defended its performance by arguing that the size of the storm was beyond anything his department could have anticipated and that primary responsibility for handling emergencies rested with state and local, not federal, officials.
"Before this happened, I said we need to build a preparedness capacity going forward," Chertoff told NBC's "Meet the Press." He added that that was something "we have not yet succeeded in doing."
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.
"What's awe-inspiring here is how many federal officials didn't issue any orders," said Paul C. Light, an authority on government operations at New York University.
Evidence of confusion extended beyond FEMA and the Homeland Security Department on Sunday.
Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt said that conditions in New Orleans and elsewhere could quickly escalate into a major public health crisis. But asked whether his agency had dispatched teams in advance of the storm and flooding, Leavitt answered, "No."
"None of these teams were pre-positioned," he told CNN's "Late Edition." "We're having to organize them as we go."
Such an ad hoc approach might not have surprised Americans until recent decades because the federal government was thought to have few responsibilities for disaster relief, and what duties it did have were mostly delegated to the American Red Cross.
"A century ago, no one would have expected a massive federal response. Most people viewed natural disasters mainly as things to be endured on their own or with the help of their neighbors and communities," said Harvard University economic historian David A. Moss, whose recent book, "When All Else Fails: Government as the Ultimate Risk Manager," traces Washington's expanding duties in protecting Americans from all sorts of risks.
In 1927, President Coolidge described the federal role in aiding victims of a devastating flood of the lower Mississippi River this way: "To direct the sympathy of our people to the sad plight of thousands of their fellow citizens, and to urge that generous contributions be promptly forthcoming."
But starting with the New Deal of the 1930s and with increasing vigor in recent decades, Washington sought to prevent disasters, both natural and man-made, and to partially compensate state and local governments, companies and even individuals when calamities did strike.
The government reacted to Tropical Storm Agnes in 1972 by providing victims with grants and low-cost loans. It responded to a flood of the upper Mississippi in 1993 by approving $6.3 billion in aid. Comparing the federal government's response in 1927 to its efforts in 1993, Moss concluded that Washington made up less than 4% of the estimated losses in the earlier flood, but more than 50% in the later one.
Within 10 days of the Sept. 11 attacks, Congress and Bush had OKd $40 billion in aid, including $15 billion in grants and loans for the staggering airline industry and $4.3 billion to compensate the families of victims.
"The federal government has dramatically increased its role in absorbing disaster losses after the fact," Moss said. "Until recently, many may have assumed we'd made similar strides in disaster prevention."
FEMA was created in 1979 in response to criticism about Washington's fragmented reaction to a series of disasters, including Hurricane Camille, which devastated the Mississippi coast 10 years earlier. The agency was rocked by scandal in the 1980s and turned in such a poor performance after Hurricane Andrew struck South Florida in 1992 that President George H.W. Bush is thought to have lost votes as a result.
But according to a variety of former officials and outside experts, the agency experienced a renaissance under President Clinton's director, James Lee Witt, speedily responding to the 1993 Mississippi flood, the 1994 Northridge earthquake and other disasters.
Witt's biggest change was to get FEMA to focus on reducing risks ahead of disasters and funding local prevention programs.
After the 1993 flood, for instance, Witt's agency bought homes and businesses nearest the water and moved their occupants to safer locations. The result in one Illinois town was that although more than 400 people applied for disaster aid after the flood, only 11 needed to apply two years later when the river again jumped its banks.
"He got communities to take practical steps like encouraging homeowners to bolt buildings to foundations in earthquake-prone areas and elevate living space in flood-prone ones," said Howard Kunreuther, co-director of the Wharton Risk Center at the University of Pennsylvania.
But with the change of administration in 2001, many of Witt's prevention programs were reduced or cut entirely. After Sept. 11, former FEMA officials and outside authorities said, Washington's attention turned to terrorism to the exclusion of almost anything else.
Times staff writer Judy Pasternak contributed to this report.
From The Los Angeles Times, September 5, 2005 -
Why FEMA Was Missing in Action
Most of the agency's preparedness budget and focus are related to terrorism, not disasters.
By Peter G. Gosselin and Alan C. Miller
Times Staff Writers
WASHINGTON While the federal government has spent much of the last quarter-century trimming the safety nets it provides Americans, it has dramatically expanded its promise of protection in one area disaster.
Since the 1970s, Washington has emerged as the insurer of last resort against floods, fires, earthquakes and after 2001 terrorist attacks.
But the government's stumbling response to the storm that devastated the nation's Gulf Coast reveals that the federal agency singularly most responsible for making good on Washington's expanded promise has been hobbled by cutbacks and a bureaucratic downgrading.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency once speedily delivered food, water, shelter and medical care to disaster areas, and paid to quickly rebuild damaged roads and schools and get businesses and people back on their feet. Like a commercial insurance firm setting safety standards to prevent future problems, it also underwrote efforts to get cities and states to reduce risks ahead of time and plan for what they would do if calamity struck.
But in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks, FEMA lost its Cabinet-level status as it was folded into the giant new Department of Homeland Security. And in recent years it has suffered budget cuts, the elimination or reduction of key programs and an exodus of experienced staffers.
The agency's core budget, which includes disaster preparedness and mitigation, has been cut each year since it was absorbed by the Homeland Security Department in 2003. Depending on what the final numbers end up being for next fiscal year, the cuts will have been between about 2% and 18%.
The agency's staff has been reduced by 500 positions to 4,735. Among the results, FEMA has had to cut one of its three emergency management teams, which are charged with overseeing relief efforts in a disaster. Where it once had "red," "white" and "blue" teams, it now has only red and white.
Three out of every four dollars the agency provides in local preparedness and first-responder grants go to terrorism-related activities, even though a recent Government Accountability Office report quotes local officials as saying what they really need is money to prepare for natural disasters and accidents.
"They've taken emergency management away from the emergency managers," complained Morrie Goodman, who was FEMA's chief spokesman during the Clinton administration. "These operations are being run by people who are amateurs at what they are doing."
Richard W. Krimm, a former senior FEMA official for several administrations, agreed. "It was a terrible mistake to take disaster response and recovery and disaster preparedness and mitigation, and put them in Homeland Security," he said.
Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff acknowledged in interviews Sunday that Washington was insufficiently prepared for the hurricane that laid waste to New Orleans and surrounding areas. But he defended its performance by arguing that the size of the storm was beyond anything his department could have anticipated and that primary responsibility for handling emergencies rested with state and local, not federal, officials.
"Before this happened, I said we need to build a preparedness capacity going forward," Chertoff told NBC's "Meet the Press." He added that that was something "we have not yet succeeded in doing."
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.
"What's awe-inspiring here is how many federal officials didn't issue any orders," said Paul C. Light, an authority on government operations at New York University.
Evidence of confusion extended beyond FEMA and the Homeland Security Department on Sunday.
Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt said that conditions in New Orleans and elsewhere could quickly escalate into a major public health crisis. But asked whether his agency had dispatched teams in advance of the storm and flooding, Leavitt answered, "No."
"None of these teams were pre-positioned," he told CNN's "Late Edition." "We're having to organize them as we go."
Such an ad hoc approach might not have surprised Americans until recent decades because the federal government was thought to have few responsibilities for disaster relief, and what duties it did have were mostly delegated to the American Red Cross.
"A century ago, no one would have expected a massive federal response. Most people viewed natural disasters mainly as things to be endured on their own or with the help of their neighbors and communities," said Harvard University economic historian David A. Moss, whose recent book, "When All Else Fails: Government as the Ultimate Risk Manager," traces Washington's expanding duties in protecting Americans from all sorts of risks.
In 1927, President Coolidge described the federal role in aiding victims of a devastating flood of the lower Mississippi River this way: "To direct the sympathy of our people to the sad plight of thousands of their fellow citizens, and to urge that generous contributions be promptly forthcoming."
But starting with the New Deal of the 1930s and with increasing vigor in recent decades, Washington sought to prevent disasters, both natural and man-made, and to partially compensate state and local governments, companies and even individuals when calamities did strike.
The government reacted to Tropical Storm Agnes in 1972 by providing victims with grants and low-cost loans. It responded to a flood of the upper Mississippi in 1993 by approving $6.3 billion in aid. Comparing the federal government's response in 1927 to its efforts in 1993, Moss concluded that Washington made up less than 4% of the estimated losses in the earlier flood, but more than 50% in the later one.
Within 10 days of the Sept. 11 attacks, Congress and Bush had OKd $40 billion in aid, including $15 billion in grants and loans for the staggering airline industry and $4.3 billion to compensate the families of victims.
"The federal government has dramatically increased its role in absorbing disaster losses after the fact," Moss said. "Until recently, many may have assumed we'd made similar strides in disaster prevention."
FEMA was created in 1979 in response to criticism about Washington's fragmented reaction to a series of disasters, including Hurricane Camille, which devastated the Mississippi coast 10 years earlier. The agency was rocked by scandal in the 1980s and turned in such a poor performance after Hurricane Andrew struck South Florida in 1992 that President George H.W. Bush is thought to have lost votes as a result.
But according to a variety of former officials and outside experts, the agency experienced a renaissance under President Clinton's director, James Lee Witt, speedily responding to the 1993 Mississippi flood, the 1994 Northridge earthquake and other disasters.
Witt's biggest change was to get FEMA to focus on reducing risks ahead of disasters and funding local prevention programs.
After the 1993 flood, for instance, Witt's agency bought homes and businesses nearest the water and moved their occupants to safer locations. The result in one Illinois town was that although more than 400 people applied for disaster aid after the flood, only 11 needed to apply two years later when the river again jumped its banks.
"He got communities to take practical steps like encouraging homeowners to bolt buildings to foundations in earthquake-prone areas and elevate living space in flood-prone ones," said Howard Kunreuther, co-director of the Wharton Risk Center at the University of Pennsylvania.
But with the change of administration in 2001, many of Witt's prevention programs were reduced or cut entirely. After Sept. 11, former FEMA officials and outside authorities said, Washington's attention turned to terrorism to the exclusion of almost anything else.
Times staff writer Judy Pasternak contributed to this report.
- 3,425
Young_Warrior
Please explain how my views are " right " winged or any winged for that matter .
I tell it like it is ...without the friggin filter . You want to look at every thing that happens with a pre concieved notion of what it is ...you just go ahead and live that way . Reality is out there just the same . My flag is not right or left or center .
Unlike in europe its just a flag and dosnt carry with it a " wing " America or the United States consist of all races all religions and all philosophys united as one country ..thats what MY flag represents . Or do you normally look at a book and decide what it says before reading ?
- 2,208
s0nny80yI'm not about to say that race was a reason, but it made me think after reading these Yahoo! captions:
To say racism doesn't exist is just plain ignorant...
This is, unfortunately, precisely what Kanye West was talking about:
West: I hate the way they portray us in the media. You see a black family, it says, "They're looting." You see a white family, it says, "They're looking for food."
- 19,698
- Alabamamania
I heard about this on NPR about 5-6 days ago, it shows what difference it makes by using one word instead of another. It just shows that the must-have-it-now style of webdesign for news agencies needs a little more oversight.s0nny80yI'm not about to say that race was a reason, but it made me think after reading these Yahoo! captions:
Nobody's saying racism doesn't exist, it just seems to have nothing to do with the fact that people were trapped in their own flooded city.
- 3,425
s0nny80yI'm not about to say that race was a reason, but it made me think after reading these Yahoo! captions:
To say racism doesn't exist is just plain ignorant.
The response wasn't race motivated, yes, but it took a hurricane to show America that there are those so impoverish that they couldn't escape their own city even if their lives depended on it. It just so happened that most of those impoverished in the New Orleans area were Black. Maybe now funds could re-located from wars fought abroad to realities back at home.
I guess you will just continue to ignore the people who stayed TO PROTECT WHAT LITTLE THEY HAD from looters and those that stayed just because it would leave a city ripe for looting.....along with those that stayed because they ALWAYS did before during the last 22 storms etc. etc. and those that stayed to party ..becauase thats what they ALWAYS do during hurricane season ...
Do you live in a vacuume ? Do you think this is the first hurricane to ever hit the gulf coast ? DONT YOU THINK FOR A MINUTE that people could be just a little lazy about getteng the hell out ...because they just dont believe the friggin hype ?
Friggin idiots...race has nothing to do with being stupid or cynical . Again those without a friggin clue looking for bull**** and creating it when its just not there .
That women is black in the second picture and the kid in the first story is black...so its racist because of the white guy ? Or is it two different friggin people seeing things in a certain way and writing the same story with different words ?
Then again maybe it has something to do with a few trashbags full of stuff along with a case of beer and in the other picture a lady with friggin BREAD AND EGGS ! DUHHHHHHHHHH ! Yep thats RACIST...friggin morons ...
Young_Warrior
(Banned)
- 2,285
So your saying that the black people from new orleans stayed because they wanted to loot even though their lives are at risk.
- 3,425
Young_Warrior
No knucklhead I am saying that PEOPLE stayed to loot because it was a great oppurtunity for it and thats what they do ...EVERY TIME THERE IS A HURRICANE ..Its nothing new ! Looters are out in EVERY emergency ...WTF you just come out of a coma or something ? If they happen to be 90 % black looters its BECAUSE THATS THE FRIGGIN MAKEUP OF THE POPULATATION . You want to bus some white looters in to make it a fair representation ?
- 19,698
- Alabamamania
ledhed
It looks like Diet Pepsi to me, not beer. But then again, people always create these crappy things in MS Paint anyhow, so it's hard to tell if the images have been manipulated. Checking it in an image-editing program is rather unconclusive, since the image is very lossy. If anyhting the pepsi is a loot more useful than wet bread and eggs in which you'd likely have to eat raw.
Looking again, it's probably two different photographers, since the pictures are availble through two different agencies. Secondly, the screen-captures are taken at least 8 hours apart (bottom before top) or possibly 16 hours from one another, and therefore, the attitude of the writer had changed.
I'd say that accounts for something. If someone stole from my shop just after I closed up, then I'd consider it looting. If it's 2 days after a flood has shut down the city and nobody's done a thing for people, I'd probably consider it finding food as well. I'd still be pissed off that someone took my stuff, but I'd at least understand the reason for stealing food.
So there's two different writers involved, but working independently. You don't know who said what, or even what race the person who typed that out was.
- 3,425
I decided to jump to conclusions because everyone else is and I didnt want to be lonely .
It was a case it might as well be beer as soda...I guess you missed the point of the CONTEXT of the photo's . One has trash bags full of stuff and a case of whatever the other has a loaf of slice bread and what looks like eggs or something...its suprising now how one could be considered LOOTING ...just for the amount of stuff and the fact its not visable ..ANYTHING could be in the trash bags .. BUT of course you dont see HOW anyone could not call carryng off a loaf of slice bread and some donuts or something looting . Sure ITS GOTTA BE RASISM...it couldnt be just PURE COMMON SENSE....that just cant happen .
It was a case it might as well be beer as soda...I guess you missed the point of the CONTEXT of the photo's . One has trash bags full of stuff and a case of whatever the other has a loaf of slice bread and what looks like eggs or something...its suprising now how one could be considered LOOTING ...just for the amount of stuff and the fact its not visable ..ANYTHING could be in the trash bags .. BUT of course you dont see HOW anyone could not call carryng off a loaf of slice bread and some donuts or something looting . Sure ITS GOTTA BE RASISM...it couldnt be just PURE COMMON SENSE....that just cant happen .
ledhed
What little they had? If they a mode of transportation, they could've gotten out because with most of the city in exile, THERE WOULD BE NO BUSINESS. Hell, if you were in the same situation of having no food, water, or gov't aid, I bet you'd go looting too. Also, thats alot of partying black people...
ledhed
So you're saying that the majority that stayed, who are black, are lazy huh? Or maybe they could never leave the city even if their lives depended on it or they still have no modes of transportation even after 22+ storms hit.
Sorry if you haven't had a reality check yet but racism does exist. There is a correlation between race and poverty. Considering that you live in lala land, you wouldn't understand.
ledhed
How do YOU figure shes black, huh? How do you figure thats a case of beer? Can you clearly see any trademark names on it or do you just see a black guy with a box under his arms that could very well be beer in your eyes?
- 3,425
s0nny80y
So he's carrying a case of pepsi...whats that change ? No one ever said racism doesnt exist . I see racism and deal with friggin racist morons every day at work ...since I work with the poorest people in the country and have done so for the last three years maybe I just wish I was in la la land. You couldnt find your butt with both hands and your going to lecture me about reality ? Maybe you could first learn to read . Then maybe work on your comprehension a bit .
I wrote that people stayed for more reasons than - " they are poor " thats bull**** . A small minority could most likely not leave without help. Everyone else CHOSE to stay for what ever reason . being poor dosnt effect your brain as far as decision making is concerned. Being poor limits your options it dosnt remove them . The hurricane was not racist it drowned everyone with equal vigor . Neither was the rescue effort . Everyone was treated the same either good or bad . If you knew what a demographic was I'd tell you to look it up..the majority of poor in the US are white . There's enough racism for real without idiots looking for it when it dosnt exist .
- 1,620
I don't think any one department or group is completely at fault. It seems like everyone is equally at fault in some way.Swift
I wasn't really referring to any particular department, just any person that had an oppurtunity to drive those buses to save lives. Does the fact that they didn't act make them responsible in any way for any deaths? Probably not you will say, but they would sure feel pretty bad knowing that they could've directly saved hundreds or thousands of people...
- 3,425
I do not htink anyone thought that this hurricane was going to destroy New Orleans . If you cant get your mind around the fact that the city is going to be destroyed is it any wonder that they let some things slip ? Look at the disaster drill that they practice and have been practicing for YEARS...no buses . They have evacuation drills but never evacuation drills using buses . Not to mention buses are useless without bus drivers . I would think you would not wait until a week before the storm to find out if you have drivers that will stay around to drive evacuation routes . Even the police evacuated. The New Orleans PD was not at full stregnth . In hindsite that wasn'rt such a good Idea .
I do not think reading dire warnings and hearing about how bad things are going to be sunk in .Maybe because when it rains or snows the news makes it seem like the world is ending . People just get used to hearing its going to be bad ..but this time it actually was .
150 years from now when it happens again do you think the lesson will be learned ?
I do not think reading dire warnings and hearing about how bad things are going to be sunk in .Maybe because when it rains or snows the news makes it seem like the world is ending . People just get used to hearing its going to be bad ..but this time it actually was .
150 years from now when it happens again do you think the lesson will be learned ?
- 2,093
ledhed
Ledhed, I'm glad to see you're calming down a bit, but many people knew that the city was going to be flooded. Maybe not everyone who lived there, but the ones who read a paper should have pretty good idea. Maybe even then they wouldn't believe it, but everyone who read the official reports must have been pretty sure.
And yes, there was a lesson learned last time also, as quoted before:
This time, when New Orleans will be rebuilt (not if, when) they will implement all the things that the FEMA was doing prior to 2001 and some extras.
Listen, ledhed, there were many screwups, but the one for preventing the flooding of NO falls squarely under the Bush administration.
Danoff
Premium
- 34,040
- Mile High City
Regarding the lack of FEDERAL funding for the NEW ORLEANS levee.
1) I don't want my federal government funding New Orleans' levee. That's pork.
2) The proposed project that Bush cut WOULD NOT have stopped the levee from breaking (as per one of the engineers invovled with the project).
3) Any opportunity to blame Bush
The relief effort is first and foremost the obligation of the city officials - who immediately gave up and pointed the finger at everyone else for not helping. The next obligation is to the state government, who also very quickly gave up.
Stop there for a second. The city AND state were completely and totally unprepared for this natural disaster which EVERYONE (seriously, everyone) knew was a potential thread and has been since the city was il-created. Why were they unprepared? Because to be prepared would have meant funding the preparation. It would have meant actually taxing the people of Louisiana and (even more so) new orleans to actually (GASP) take care of themeslves.
Does the north east scream for federal funding every time a blizzard strikes or are they prepared? Is the west coast prepared for earthquakes - you bet.
Now, since the Louisiana government was SO pathetic and SO negligent in their duties. The federal government should have stepped in with aid faster, and to a certain extent they tried. The tried to get aid in and were shot at by the MORONS on the ground. So they pulled the aid back and sent in troops. That they sent in troops as quickly as they did is actually impressive in my eyes, because I would never have expected that we'd actually need to INVADE one of our own cities due to flooding.
In this process though, the federal government was negligent in one regard - they could have air dropped food and water to the people at the superdome from aircraft and not have risked being shot at. They did not.
Is that Bush's fault? Only if you blame him for appointing the wrong guy to head up the branches of government who are actually directly responsible for this. The majority of the blame lies with FEMA and other government branches that should have stepped in faster and with a more organized response.
There is plenty of blame to go around.
Bottom line: Government is inherently slow and expensive.
1) I don't want my federal government funding New Orleans' levee. That's pork.
2) The proposed project that Bush cut WOULD NOT have stopped the levee from breaking (as per one of the engineers invovled with the project).
3) Any opportunity to blame Bush
The relief effort is first and foremost the obligation of the city officials - who immediately gave up and pointed the finger at everyone else for not helping. The next obligation is to the state government, who also very quickly gave up.
Stop there for a second. The city AND state were completely and totally unprepared for this natural disaster which EVERYONE (seriously, everyone) knew was a potential thread and has been since the city was il-created. Why were they unprepared? Because to be prepared would have meant funding the preparation. It would have meant actually taxing the people of Louisiana and (even more so) new orleans to actually (GASP) take care of themeslves.
Does the north east scream for federal funding every time a blizzard strikes or are they prepared? Is the west coast prepared for earthquakes - you bet.
Now, since the Louisiana government was SO pathetic and SO negligent in their duties. The federal government should have stepped in with aid faster, and to a certain extent they tried. The tried to get aid in and were shot at by the MORONS on the ground. So they pulled the aid back and sent in troops. That they sent in troops as quickly as they did is actually impressive in my eyes, because I would never have expected that we'd actually need to INVADE one of our own cities due to flooding.
In this process though, the federal government was negligent in one regard - they could have air dropped food and water to the people at the superdome from aircraft and not have risked being shot at. They did not.
Is that Bush's fault? Only if you blame him for appointing the wrong guy to head up the branches of government who are actually directly responsible for this. The majority of the blame lies with FEMA and other government branches that should have stepped in faster and with a more organized response.
There is plenty of blame to go around.
Bottom line: Government is inherently slow and expensive.
Similar threads
