-
Website
http://sayanythingblog.com/ -
Original page
http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/associated_press_uses_leaked_katrina_records_to_bl -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
All Comments
Bush lied to the American people and no amount of parsing words that "overtopping" the levess or the levees being breeched means anything. It is clear there was grave concern expressed and Bush went on TV and told the world that "noone anticipated that the levees would be breeched." He told the state officials that the feds 'were fully prepared."
Yes, all sides share blame here but he is the commander in chief and he lied to all of us. period.
What did he lie about?
Paraphrasing, "no one could have anticipated that the levees would break", the video quite clearly contradicts that assertion. Bush repeated this assertion as recently as yesterday in his interview with ABC news.
The video shows Bush watching a presentation from his ranch of a meteorologist stating emphatically that breaching of the levees should be of great concern.
Assrocket ignores this blatant evidence. The administration is evidently now in damage-control mode, once again, as the facts they thought were safely hidden, come to light.
But, not to worry SA'ers - your man of principle was so concerned about the levees breaking that he flew directly to San Diego for a fundraiser.
Clintonesque parsing? The weatherman said the levees would be topped. The AP is claiming that he said they would break.
Those are two different things.
Rob, give me a break here. The weather man stated that this storm was bigger than Andrew. He wanted to "absolutely clear" and also added for emphasis that he had "grave grave concerns' with the levees.
Wow, you are the quintessential apologist for Bush, even when the language is clear. "Grave, Grave concerns". And you are standing on the word "topped". Unbelievable.
He had grave, grave concerns that the levees might be topped.
Topped is not breeched.
Imagine the Hoover damn. Imagine the water rising to the point where it spills over the top. That would be bad, right? But you know what would be a thousand times worse than that and a much, much different situation? The damn breaking open.
If you want to ignore this difference to rush ahead with your Bush bashing go right ahead, but know that your criticism isn't honest. I will wait to see if there is anything from all this worth directing honest criticism toward Bush over.
None of this matters. The Federal Government (under Bush) offered assistance to Louisiana and they were turned down. Trucks were ready to move in moments after the storms had passed and were told not to go in. Moronic, and astounding levels of incompetence can be found in the state and city leadership. The "Seriously flawed" response from FEMA didn't help, but neither did shooting at Rescue personnel. Even if Bush had anticipated properly that the levees would collapse, his offers of help were refused.
The money to repair the levees was given by the Federal Government, as well, some years back, but local leadership spent the money on other things.
The people who stayed were told to get out. They didn't. Busses and trains were ready and able to pull people out, but the city refused to act. Police turn to petty crime within hours of the storm. What we have here is a group of dependant people whining about who to blame for a catastrophe that we might not be capable of averting. There was FAR more damage than just N.O. Many other cities suffered massive damage too. But somehow we don't hear about any of them?
But somehow, the Federal Government is responsible for the ABSOULTE protection of each and every citizen and non citizen of this or any other country.
Why the endless assignment of blame for something that is still more powerful than human bureaucracy and rampant Government waste and excess?
Bush didn't lie. They didn't anticipate the levees being breached. "Overtopping" is quite different from "breached". Look it up in the dictionary if you need to. You'll see. No lie.
Yes, all sides share blame here but he is the commander in chief and he lied to all of us. period.
No he didn't. Period.
Rob, they clearly discussed that the levees could be breech. He heard it, was in on the meeting. Bush went on TV and told the world that no one anticipated that the levees would be breeched.
Get a new battery for your hearing aid. The guy said, "I don't think anyone can tell you with any confidence right now whether the levees will be topped or not..."
Do you understand the difference between "topped" and "breached"?
If you want to pull a Clintonesque parsing of words here, go right ahead.
There is nothing "Clintonesque" between noting the difference between the words "topped" and "breached". You're reaching ridiculousness with that criticism.
Wow, you are the quintessential apologist for Bush, even when the language is clear. "Grave, Grave concerns". And you are standing on the word "topped". Unbelievable.
I guess that standing up and correcting the record is being an "apologist". You're amazing.
mcair says, The video shows Bush watching a presentation from his ranch of a meteorologist stating emphatically that breaching of the levees should be of great concern.
Another one that needs a new hearing aid. Watch it again there chief.
Assrocket ignores this blatant evidence. The administration is evidently now in damage-control mode, once again, as the facts they thought were safely hidden, come to light.
You know what is funny here? You're insulting and yet you're so proveably wrong. Watch the video again after you get a new hearing aid.
But, not to worry SA'ers - your man of principle was so concerned about the levees breaking that he flew directly to San Diego for a fundraiser.
Blah blah blah blah. Get back to us after you get that new hearing aid and look up these words. Then maybe we can have a real discussion.
how do you have time to breathe when you're so busy being an apologist?
seriously.
Meterologist, Category 5 storm, bigger than Andrew, "grave grave concerns" about the levees. Even. Brownie sounded the alarm. talked about a catostrophe within a catostrophe. Bush told the local officials that that we are fully prepared".
You are all trying to make it sound like a trickle coming over the top is what was meant by the meterologist describing a category 5 hurricane bigger, bigger than Hurricane Andrew, that the levees could be topped and had grave, grave concerns. All this said at the same time.
What more could the meterologist have said to Bush to make his point? Once again, you all are trying to minimize the impact the seriousness of this tape because the meterologist didn't use the magic word "breach" as if that would have made Bush sit up and take notice, that "grave grave concerns" or "Category 5" " bigger bigger than Andrew" words used by the meterologist just weren't strong enough but if he would have just said breach then the cavlry would have been called.
Absolutely unbelievable. You take one word that wasn't said "breach" and then take that to mean the entire meeting was no big deal. Unbelievable. You guys can't be serious here.
Good point JS, and gosh, gee whiz, that weather man just didn't say the word "breach". How can anyone take a weatherman seriously anyway? Gees, it was just predicted to be a category 5 worse than Hurricane Andrew and that he was gravely, gravely concerned. But again, he's just the weatherman, and Bush had a birthday party to get to. He can't be bothered with a gravely concerned weatherman predicting a category 5 hurricane that could top the levees in NO or that there could be a catostrophe within a catostrophe because Bush was cocky and told everyone there that they were "fully prepared".
Everyone knows now that it is the weatherman's fault not Brownies. Gees what were we thinking?
Puzzlefoot shows his ignorance of the facts:
It was only a Category 3 by the time it reached New Orleans. None of the main levee breaches (17th St, Industrial Canal) were the result of overtopping, but rather the result of poor engineering design and construction errors. None of this was predicted up front for obvious reasons.
The St Bernard Parish flooding was the consequence of the underutilized (man made) MRGO channel, which allowed the storm surge from the gulf to reach the lower part of the New Orleans metropolis.
Ultimately these problems were thirty years in the making, and could not have been corrected in a mere four year span (it takes 10 years to build a properly constructed earthen levee for example). Bush has his share of the blame for inadequacies in the federal response, especially those associated with the turf wars between FEMA and HLS. Obviously you can't blame Bush for problems decades in the making or inadequacies in either the New Orleans or Louisiana governments.
I find it laughable that loud-mouthed critics of Bush can't even basic facts right, but expect everybody to take them seriously in spite of their inadequate grasp of the basic facts.
Carrick, 2hotel9 and ZsaZsa, the point of my posts was plain and simple and you are all making other point unrelated to what I said. I will say again, Bush was warned ahead of time of the "grave grave concerns, that this would be bigger than Andrew, much bigger, that the Dome could be a catostrophe within a catostrophe. That's the point. Yes, it was ACTUALLY a category 3 did not lessen the catostrophic damage of the hurricane or lessen the urgency that the meterologist nor even Brownie.
My point is this and I will say it clearly and succinctly: Bush was clearly warned of the "GRAVE GRAVE concerns with the approaching hurricane. But for you all to dismiss what Bush knew and was clearly told during this meeting and goes on TV four days later and say no one anticipated what would happen is sheer chutzpah. He told the officials that we "were fully prepared".
My point is he knew of the severity and grave concerns with the NO situation and the entire coast and then goes on TV and claims no one anticipated this would happen. That, my friends, is a bald faced lie. Lie, Lie, Lie.
Assuming arguendo, that I agree with what you all said in your posts, it does not negate one iota what the President was told during the meeting and what he said 4 days later.
Boy Rob, you and Rush Limbaugh must have spend all your waking hours, and even some of you sleep time, figuring out how to defend Bush on every issue he screws up on.
My calves are sore from playing Ultimate Frisbee last night and it's Bush's fault that it's not fixed. If we weren't spending so much on the war, tax dollars could have been spent on getting me a massage.
IMPEACH BUSH!!!!!!
There's NO WAY that I should have to pay for a massage! I play every Wednesday night and he KNOWS IT!!!! I should have had a masseuse waiting for me when I got home.
IMPEACH BUSH!!!!!
An election campaign promise from Gov Kathleen Blanco of Louisiana:
I wish the media would give as much attention to this video of Blanco making a campaign promise—which she obviously lied about—what she would do if a Category 5 Hurricane hit Louisiana:
<img />But that was campaign rhetoric.
That's what poiticians do in when they're campaiging. They say what the public expects them and wants them to say. Once they get elected then they do what the lobbyist expects and wants them to do.
Oh. Now you admitted that the word used was "topped". Welcome aboard. Who is trying to make it sound like this might be a "trickle coming over the top"? You're inventing that one up.
Once again, you all are trying to minimize the impact the seriousness of this tape because the meterologist didn't use the magic word "breach" as if that would have made Bush sit up and take notice, that "grave grave concerns" or "Category 5" " bigger bigger than Andrew" words used by the meterologist just weren't strong enough but if he would have just said breach then the cavlry would have been called.
No. We're just trying to correct the record.
Absolutely unbelievable. You take one word that wasn't said "breach" and then take that to mean the entire meeting was no big deal. Unbelievable. You guys can't be serious here.
You're being ridiculous and unserious. Your claim that "Bush lied" is false. That is why some of us made the point about the word "breach".
He told the officials that we "were fully prepared".
Given the knowledge that Bush had and the fact that they didn't anticipate the levees being breached (a point that you still don't grasp), the belief was that they were fully prepared. They were fully prepared (as far as the federal government is concerned) for the levees being topped. Understand now? Somehow, I doubt it.
My point is he knew of the severity and grave concerns with the NO situation and the entire coast and then goes on TV and claims no one anticipated this would happen. That, my friends, is a bald faced lie. Lie, Lie, Lie.
You're like a dumb parrot. "Lie squawk!" "Lie squawk!"
Tim spits, Boy Rob, you and Rush Limbaugh must have spend all your waking hours, and even some of you sleep time, figuring out how to defend Bush on every issue he screws up on.
Great argument Tim. You convinced,...well,..nobody. Don't address what the meeting was actually about. Just say some stupid insult and be done.
Puzzlefeet:
Except the "grave grave concerns" were based on a storm that never happened, and the meteorologist completely overstated the danger from the storm. As I pointed out, nobody predicted the events that occurred that caused the flooding of New Orleans. Had it not been for crapped-up engineering and construction, the city would have mostly stayed dry.
likwidshoe. you hook on the word breach but totally ignore the fact that the meteorologist, said the storm was Cat 5, bigger substantially bigger than Andrew and that he had very very grave concerns. It was also discussed that the dome could turn into a catostrophe within a catostrophe and they were worried about the morgue set up and other and recovery issues. I don't know what else the guy could have said to make his point.
I understand fully you all are hanging on the word breach but ignore every other serious, grave, catastrophic word that was used to give a sense of urgency to the situation.
Whatever. Just pay attention to what is actually said the next time.
I understand fully you all are hanging on the word breach but ignore every other serious, grave, catastrophic word that was used to give a sense of urgency to the situation.
Nobody here is ignoring anything.
You should really stop inventing up reality.
Puzzlefoot:
I doubled checked the numbers. I was wrong.
It was a category 1 when it hit NO. It was a category 3 when it first made landfall in southern MS. It had been downgraded from a Cat 5 for more than 24 hours before hitting landfall. Here's the complete blurb:
The only one ignoring anything here is you, and it's called "reality". The meteorologist's briefing, in retrospect, turned out to be entirely
You don't even know what was said. That's the problem here. You think you hear one thing and then run with it while parroting, "Bush lied", "Bush lied".
My point is that Bush knew that this was a distinct possibility and then went on TV and said no one anciticpated this. Hogwash!
They didn't anticipate the levees being breached. Keep on ignoring that point.
Parrot.
Denial of what exactly?
Get serious.
Puzzlefeet is in denial and needs her hate colored glasses to get through the day.
Speaking of videos:
AP Has Another Video: Gov. Blanco Told President Levees Weren’t Breached Posted by Noel Sheppard on March 3, 2006 - 00:43.<img />In the past couple of days, there has been a media frenzy over a video released by the Associated Press showing President Bush being informed that the levees in New Orleans could be “topped” as a result of Hurricane Katrina. Just hours ago, the AP reported that it has another video taken at roughly the same time wherein Louisiana Governor Kathleen Blanco is heard telling the president that the levees had not been breached.
The article began: “In the hectic, confused hours after Hurricane Katrina lashed the Gulf Coast, Louisiana's governor hesitantly but mistakenly assured the Bush administration that New Orleans' protective levees were intact, according to a new video obtained by The Associated Press showing briefings that day with federal officials.”
It then detailed what Blanco said:
It’s going to be interesting to see how much press coverage this new video gets as compared to the first one, especially as another AP article published a few hours prior to the Blanco revelations addressed new calls by Democratic lawmakers for an independent investigation into the federal response to the disaster as a result of the content of video one:
What a difference a day makes.for all those minimizing the grave concerns expressed at the meeting and saying the hurricane was much less than anticipated, makes it all the worse for Bush. He said they were fully prepared and even then with a cat 3 couldn't perform as he told them they were "fully prepared. So assuming arguendo that you assessment is correct, he still failed miserably at being "fully prepared" to deal with the aftermath.
I think Bush would have been better off saying that yes, this was indeed the big one, catostrophic and we did the best we could do. But you all hang on to the topped argument if it works for you.
Puzzlefeet, I'm beginning to think that you aren't reading any of the responses to your comments.
As I pointed out
<ul> <li>the "grave concerns" were overstated;</li> <li>the storm was not nearly the terror that people originally expected it to be, being a meek category one storm when it struck New Orleans;</li> <li>the levees did not fail in the manner anticipated, nor indeed were they ever overtopped.</li> <li>The real culprit was a combination of high water levels from the storm surge combined with excedingly heavy precipation, causing an unanticipated failure.</li> <li>The real culprit was not Katrina but man-made engineering failures, which include Mr Go, badly designedand constructed footers to the canal levees, intransigence on the part of the NO citizens regarding placement of safer earthen dams, as well as poor maintanence on the part of the city.</li> <li>The levees that failed were not even the one's anticipated for failure. The Pontchartrain shoreline levees did not even fail.</li> </ul>
I probably woudn't have even responded, if you hadn't been so far off on your facts. You have basically proven that you are really clueless about the Katrina disaster, its causes, the problems with the response, their origin, and so on.
In the end, you are clearly driven by a hatred of Bush rather than by any facts related to the federal response. As has been established in this thread, you are completely bereft of the latter, but have the former in great abundance.
Hey, I live in Aust., so I don't really care about your partisanship.
I have never read a debate over any political issue in your nation where it doesn't become personal. What debate?
Please; can you all check your spelling and punctuation?
Thankyou.
1. They're out there. 2. Politics is personal so it is hard not to get personal. This is not an excuse, just a possible explanation. 3. Politics is personal the world over. We're hardly alone or unique in that area.