Subj : Re: Um...no comment?
To   : alt.tv.farscape
From : John Iwaniszek
Date : Fri Sep 02 2005 05:27:53

From Newsgroup: alt.tv.farscape

"RR" <lynchnutNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:a0QRe.210679$0f.188639@tornado.texas.rr.com: 

> John Iwaniszek wrote:
> 
>>> In 2001, FEMA warned that a hurricane striking New Orleans was one
>>> of the three most likely disasters in the U.S. But the Bush
>>> administration cut New Orleans flood control funding by 44 percent
>>> to pay for the Iraq war.
>>>
>>> A year ago the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers proposed to study how
>>> New Orleans could be protected from a catastrophic hurricane, but
>>> the Bush administration ordered that the research not be undertaken.
>>>
>>> After a flood killed six people in 1995, Congress created the
>>> Southeast Louisiana Urban Flood Control Project, in which the Corps
>>> of Engineers strengthened and renovated levees and pumping stations.
>>> In early 2001, the Federal Emergency Management Agency issued a
>>> report stating that a hurricane striking New Orleans was one of the
>>> three most likely disasters in the U.S., including a terrorist
>>> attack on New York City. But by 2003 the federal funding for the
>>> flood control project essentially dried up as it was drained into
>>> the Iraq war. In 2004, the Bush administration cut funding requested
>>> by the New Orleans district of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for
>>> holding back the waters of Lake Pontchartrain by more than 80
>>> percent. Additional cuts at the beginning of this year (for a total
>>> reduction in funding of
>>> 44.2 percent since 2001) forced the New Orleans district of the
>>> Corps to impose a hiring freeze. The Senate had debated adding funds
>>> for fixing New Orleans' levees, but it was too late.
>>>
>>> The New Orleans Times-Picayune, which before the hurricane published
>>> a series on the federal funding problem, and whose presses are now
>>> underwater, reported online: "No one can say they didn't see it
>>> coming ... Now in the wake of one of the worst storms ever, serious
>>> questions are being asked about the lack of preparation."
>>>
>>> By Sidney Blumenthal
>>> Salon.com Wednesday 31 August 2005
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Here's a timeline for the gutting of FEMA, starting, you guessed it,
>> in 2001.
>>
>> http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2005_
09/007023.ph
>> p 
> 
> Is is just me, or - based on the above info - does this smack of
> heaping amounts of bullshit insult to injury?:
> 
> http://www.cnn.com/2005/WEATHER/09/01/katrina.fema.brown/index.html
> 

It's all part of hte new Bush Admin talking points:  The people dying in 
NO deserve it because they failed to heed the evacuation order.  They 
are blaming the victim to cover for their own incompetence. And when 
they aren't blaming the victim, they are lying:

"    Robert Siegel: We are hearing from our reporter, heAs on another 
line right now, thousands of people at the convention center in New 
Orleans with no food, zero.

    Chertoff: As I said, IAm telling you we are getting food and water 
to areas where people are staging. The one about an episode like this is 
if you talk to someone or you get a rumor or an anecdotal version of 
something I think itAs dangerous to extrapolate it all over the place.

    [Snip]

    Robert Siegel: But Mr. Secretary when you say we shouldnAt listen to 
rumors. These are things coming from reporters who have not only covered 
many many other hurricanes, theyAve covered wars and refugee camps. 
These arenAt rumors, they are saying there are thousands of people 
there.

    Chertoff: I would beaI have not heard a report of thousands of 
people in the convention center who donAt have food and water."



Imagine what kind of mess this would be if Bush's first choice for 
Director of HS, Bernie Kerik, had been confirmed.

.