![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Scott Seidman wrote:
"Calif Bill" wrote in news ![]() When did the Governor and Nagin the incompetant mayor ask for Federal help? The Fed's could not go in without an invitation. Seems as if part of the Constitution and laws were followedInvestigation of State of Emergency declaration WIKPEDIA In a September 26, 2005 hearing, former FEMA chief Michael Brown testified before a U.S. House subcommittee about FEMA's response. During that hearing, Representative Stephen Buyer (R-IN) inquired as to why president Bush's declaration of state of emergency of August 27 had not included the coastal parishes of Orleans, Jefferson, and Plaquemines.[16] (In fact, the declaration did not include any of Louisiana's coastal parishes, whereas the coastal counties were included in the declarations for Mississippi[17] and Alabama.[18]) Brown testified that this was because Louisiana Governor Blanco had not included those parishes in her initial request for aid, a decision that he found "shocking." After the hearing, though, Blanco released a copy of her letter, which requested assistance for "all the southeastern parishes including the New Orleans Metropolitan area and the mid state Interstate I-49 corridor and northern parishes along the I-20 corridor that are accepting [evacuated citizens]."[19] What's the date on that letter from the gov? Bush declared a state of emerggency on 27 Aug. Hurricane didn't hit N.O. until 29 Aug. So how could Bush or anyone else know the extent of the devastation along the coast? So, with the possible exception of a few southern parishes (though that's up in the air), the Feds were CLEARLY allowed to move in after Aug 27. Nothing ambiguous about that. Move in for what? Why move in when you're gonna get pounded and flooded with the likely loss of whatever aid was brought in? You're just regurgitating more partisan arguments. There was no way to anticipate the N.O. disaster much less prepare for it. If it had been a Democrat pres, it would only classified as a natural disaster of unpredicted magnitude. One that nobody had foreseen. But since it was Bush, it was the worst failure in history. And Only because it was Bush. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Nov 23, 10:31*pm, Peaceful Bill
wrote: [snip] You're just regurgitating more partisan arguments. *There was no way to anticipate the N.O. disaster much less prepare for it. *If it had been a Democrat pres, it would only classified as a natural disaster of unpredicted magnitude. *One that nobody had foreseen. People had been predicting a disastrous hurricane for NO for a long time. But since it was Bush, it was the worst failure in history. *And Only because it was Bush. That is probably correct: no other administration since the time of Harding would have fouled up the gov't's response so badly. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Nov 24, 11:31*am, Peaceful Bill
wrote: Scott Seidman wrote: "Calif Bill" wrote in news ![]() When did the Governor and Nagin the incompetant mayor ask for Federal help? The Fed's could not go in without an invitation. *Seems as if part of the Constitution and laws were followedInvestigation of State of Emergency declaration WIKPEDIA In a September 26, 2005 hearing, former FEMA chief Michael Brown testified before a U.S. House subcommittee about FEMA's response. During that hearing, Representative Stephen Buyer (R-IN) inquired as to why president Bush's declaration of state of emergency of August 27 had not included the coastal parishes of Orleans, Jefferson, and Plaquemines.[16] (In fact, the declaration did not include any of Louisiana's coastal parishes, whereas the coastal counties were included in the declarations for Mississippi[17] and Alabama.[18]) Brown testified that this was because Louisiana Governor Blanco had not included those parishes in her initial request for aid, a decision that he found "shocking." After the hearing, though, Blanco released a copy of her letter, which requested assistance for "all the southeastern parishes including the New Orleans Metropolitan area and the mid state Interstate I-49 corridor and northern parishes along the I-20 corridor that are accepting [evacuated citizens]."[19] What's the date on that letter from the gov? Bush declared a state of emerggency on 27 Aug. *Hurricane didn't hit N.O. until 29 Aug. *So how could Bush or anyone else know the extent of the devastation along the coast? So, with the possible exception of a few southern parishes (though that's up in the air), the Feds were CLEARLY allowed to move in after Aug 27. Nothing ambiguous about that. Move in for what? *Why move in when you're gonna get pounded and flooded with the likely loss of whatever aid was brought in? You're just regurgitating more partisan arguments. *There was no way to anticipate the N.O. disaster much less prepare for it. *If it had been a Democrat pres, it would only classified as a natural disaster of unpredicted magnitude. *One that nobody had foreseen. But since it was Bush, it was the worst failure in history. *And Only because it was Bush.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - You gotta keep your story straight, Bill. First you insist that Bush was not asked to go in on time, so the fault lie with Nagin, et al, for delaying their request for help: Now you change your story and say there's no way he could have known the extent of the damage because the request came too early. Face it: Bush not only mismanaged a whole lot of things during his tenure, the people he hired (and as a result, he was indirectly responsible for their actions) also mismanaged a whole lot of things. And now, to compound things, you are taking on his mantle of crying "its not my fault!!" Last I saw, he even commissioned a full-length TV movie to show how the mismanagment of bad Intel was 'not his fault'. Well guess what; it WAS his fault. The response to Katrina happened under his watch. The misguided invasion was under his watch. The economic collapse was under his watch. The largest federal deficit in the history of mankind was under his watch. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. And its not a matter of being 'partisan'....incompetence is not the same as partisan politics. But of course, Bush (and Rove) were good at covering their mismanagements up by claiming that opposition folks were just being 'partisan'. Or "Liberals". Well guess what: try to write revisionist history all you want...Bush's legacy is written already. --riverman |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
riverman wrote:
On Nov 24, 11:31 am, Peaceful Bill wrote: Scott Seidman wrote: "Calif Bill" wrote in news ![]() help? The Fed's could not go in without an invitation. Seems as if part of the Constitution and laws were followedInvestigation of State of Emergency declaration WIKPEDIA In a September 26, 2005 hearing, former FEMA chief Michael Brown testified before a U.S. House subcommittee about FEMA's response. During that hearing, Representative Stephen Buyer (R-IN) inquired as to why president Bush's declaration of state of emergency of August 27 had not included the coastal parishes of Orleans, Jefferson, and Plaquemines.[16] (In fact, the declaration did not include any of Louisiana's coastal parishes, whereas the coastal counties were included in the declarations for Mississippi[17] and Alabama.[18]) Brown testified that this was because Louisiana Governor Blanco had not included those parishes in her initial request for aid, a decision that he found "shocking." After the hearing, though, Blanco released a copy of her letter, which requested assistance for "all the southeastern parishes including the New Orleans Metropolitan area and the mid state Interstate I-49 corridor and northern parishes along the I-20 corridor that are accepting [evacuated citizens]."[19] What's the date on that letter from the gov? Bush declared a state of emerggency on 27 Aug. Hurricane didn't hit N.O. until 29 Aug. So how could Bush or anyone else know the extent of the devastation along the coast? So, with the possible exception of a few southern parishes (though that's up in the air), the Feds were CLEARLY allowed to move in after Aug 27. Nothing ambiguous about that. Move in for what? Why move in when you're gonna get pounded and flooded with the likely loss of whatever aid was brought in? You're just regurgitating more partisan arguments. There was no way to anticipate the N.O. disaster much less prepare for it. If it had been a Democrat pres, it would only classified as a natural disaster of unpredicted magnitude. One that nobody had foreseen. But since it was Bush, it was the worst failure in history. And Only because it was Bush.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - You gotta keep your story straight, Bill. First you insist that Bush was not asked to go in on time, so the fault lie with Nagin, et al, for delaying their request for help: Now you change your story and say there's no way he could have known the extent of the damage because the request came too early. Face it: Bush not only mismanaged a whole lot of things during his tenure, the people he hired (and as a result, he was indirectly responsible for their actions) also mismanaged a whole lot of things. And now, to compound things, you are taking on his mantle of crying "its not my fault!!" Last I saw, he even commissioned a full-length TV movie to show how the mismanagment of bad Intel was 'not his fault'. Well guess what; it WAS his fault. The response to Katrina happened under his watch. The misguided invasion was under his watch. The economic collapse was under his watch. The largest federal deficit in the history of mankind was under his watch. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. And its not a matter of being 'partisan'....incompetence is not the same as partisan politics. But of course, Bush (and Rove) were good at covering their mismanagements up by claiming that opposition folks were just being 'partisan'. Or "Liberals". Well guess what: try to write revisionist history all you want...Bush's legacy is written already. --riverman You didn't answer the question. What dat6e did the La. gov ask the Feds to come in? (And your posts are extremely partisan.) |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Peaceful Bill wrote:
snip (And your posts are extremely partisan.) And so it starts. The right-wing nitwits launch their ridiculous brand of revisionism as a pre-emptive strike against historic ridicule. Shrub lied us into a disastrous war, tarnished American prestige with torture, sat idly by as New Orleans drowned, screwed the Justice Department with political shenanigans, censored science and let the financial market spiral so far out of control we have a worldwide crisis of unprecedented proportion. But other than that he was a pretty good president. LOL !! Mr. Jelly, you are one stupid moron, a laughably ignorant, hard core partisan from the far right wing. Enjoy your stay in the political wilderness, dumbass idiots like you are history. Buh bye. -- Ken Fortenberry |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Don Quixote, waving his sword at windmills and ****ting through his
fingers wrote: Peaceful Bill wrote: snip (And your posts are extremely partisan.) And so it starts. The right-wing nitwits launch their ridiculous brand of revisionism as a pre-emptive strike against historic ridicule. Shrub lied us into a disastrous war, Prove he lied. So far nobody can do that. tarnished American prestige with torture, In your opinion and the opinion of his opponents. But not in the opinion of all the courts. BTW, I don't agree that those prisoners should have been kept jailed. They should have been deported to Israel or Turkey. sat idly by as New Orleans drowned, Yeah, he seeded the clouds and personally blew up the levees. Used Chaney's black helicopters to aim the storm right at N.O. You're a complete imbecile. screwed the Justice Department with political shenanigans, But that kind of action was OK under the previous administrations of Clinton, Bush 1, and esapecially Carter who cleaned out the FBI every time any of their investigations started to implicate him or his family. censored science BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.... and let the financial market spiral so far out of control we have a worldwide crisis of unprecedented proportion. He certainly inherited a mortgage crisis in its infancy and didn't do anything about it. But the economic problems were already in place 10 months BEFORE he was sworn in. He just didn't do much about them. But other than that he was a pretty good president. LOL !! No, I didn't say that. As usual, you're putting your own descriptions in and attributing them to someone else. Mr. Jelly, you are one stupid moron, a laughably ignorant, hard core partisan from the far right wing. Enjoy your stay in the political wilderness, dumbass idiots like you are history. Buh bye. Clearly not as partisan as you (who can't make a truly objective assessment.) |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Peaceful Bill wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote: And so it starts. The right-wing nitwits launch their ridiculous brand of revisionism as a pre-emptive strike against historic ridicule. Shrub lied us into a disastrous war, Prove he lied. So far nobody can do that. Did Saddam Hussein have anything to with 9-11 ? No. Was Saddam Hussein's government conspiring with Al Qaeda ? No. Did Saddam Hussein posses WMD's which could be a threat to the US ? No. Did Saddam Hussein pose any threat at all to the US ? No. Bush lied and only a partisan nitwit could claim otherwise. tarnished American prestige with torture, In your opinion and the opinion of his opponents. But not in the opinion of all the courts. Gawd, you're an idiot. Courts don't issue opinions on American prestige, you ****ing moron. sat idly by as New Orleans drowned, Yeah, he seeded the clouds ... No nitwit, he sat idly by after the storm when his government should have been there to help. screwed the Justice Department with political shenanigans, But that kind of action was OK under the previous administrations of Clinton, ... BWAHAHAHAHA !! You right-wing nitwit dimbulbs are so predictable it's hilarious. censored science BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.... You think that's *funny* ? Man, you're dumber than you look and I wouldn't have thought that possible. and let the financial market spiral so far out of control we have a worldwide crisis of unprecedented proportion. He certainly inherited a mortgage crisis in its infancy and didn't do anything about it. But the economic problems were already in place 10 months BEFORE he was sworn in. He just didn't do much about them. There you go again, it's all Clinton's fault. Hilarious, well mostly it's pathetic but there's no sense looking backwards so let's just go with hilarious. -- Ken Fortenberry |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
Peaceful Bill wrote: Ken Fortenberry wrote: And so it starts. The right-wing nitwits launch their ridiculous brand of revisionism as a pre-emptive strike against historic ridicule. Shrub lied us into a disastrous war, Prove he lied. So far nobody can do that. Did Saddam Hussein have anything to with 9-11 ? No. Was Saddam Hussein's government conspiring with Al Qaeda ? No. Did Saddam Hussein posses WMD's which could be a threat to the US ? No. Did Saddam Hussein pose any threat at all to the US ? No. Bush lied and only a partisan nitwit could claim otherwise. But you supply no proof of ANY of your statements. How do you know Hussein was not part of any of that? tarnished American prestige with torture, In your opinion and the opinion of his opponents. But not in the opinion of all the courts. Gawd, you're an idiot. Courts don't issue opinions on American prestige, you ****ing moron. Gawd, you're an idiot. Courts do issue opinions on whether treatment of prisoners or interrogation techniques are torture. You're a ****ing moromn. sat idly by as New Orleans drowned, Yeah, he seeded the clouds ... No nitwit, he sat idly by after the storm when his government should have been there to help. What date did the governor of La. send the letter requesting aid? screwed the Justice Department with political shenanigans, But that kind of action was OK under the previous administrations of Clinton, ... BWAHAHAHAHA !! You right-wing nitwit dimbulbs are so predictable it's hilarious. You left-wingnuts are all alike. Just spin history whatever way you want. censored science BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.... You think that's *funny* ? Man, you're dumber than you look and I wouldn't have thought that possible. and let the financial market spiral so far out of control we have a worldwide crisis of unprecedented proportion. He certainly inherited a mortgage crisis in its infancy and didn't do anything about it. But the economic problems were already in place 10 months BEFORE he was sworn in. He just didn't do much about them. There you go again, it's all Clinton's fault. Hilarious, well mostly it's pathetic but there's no sense looking backwards so let's just go with hilarious. Did I say its all Clinton's fault or is that you having problems with comprehension again. But don't look backwards more than 8 years. That way you can deny that there were ANY problems under Clinton's watch. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Nov 24, 2:42*pm, Peaceful Bill
wrote: Prove he lied. *So far nobody can do that. This is likely to be my one and only post for you, so I'll type slowly. I am of the expectation that the President of the United States, if he is even moderately competent, has access to and takes seriously *all* of the available intelligence on any given topic of global importance. That is to say, if he makes the statement that the "intelligence indicates" something, that implies to me that he has seen all of the relevant intelligence or at least a comprehensive summary thereof, and he is willing to stake his veracity on the next words that come out of his mouth. Based on that perspective, I offer the following: "Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent." - State of the Union Address, 1/28/2003 "U.S. intelligence indicates that Saddam Hussein had upwards of 30,000 munitions capable of delivering chemical agents." - State of the Union Address, 1/28/2003 "We have also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas." - State of the Union Address, 1/28/2003 "Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications and statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of Al Qaida." - State of the Union Address, 1/28/2003 "Our intelligence sources tell us that he (Saddam) has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production." - State of the Union Address, 1/28/2003 "Satellite photographs reveal that Iraq is rebuilding facilities at [past nuclear] sites." - Bush speech to the nation, 10/7/2002 "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." - State of the Union Address, 1/28/2003 "We gave him a chance to allow the inspectors in, and he wouldn't let them in." - Bush Press Conference 7/14/2003 Now, in some cases above, one might weasel that Bush merely asserted what he believed the intelligence said; but we now know that Bush knew that there was substantial intelligence counter to his military aspirations; but he ignored, obfuscated, or outright lied about what the "intelligence indicated". A great deal of Bush's lies follow a similar scenario; it's not so much what he said as what he intended for us to believe. He lied. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Nov 24, 11:26*pm, Peaceful Bill
wrote: You didn't answer the question. *What dat6e did the La. gov ask the Feds to come in? Fair enough. According to cnn.com (http://tinyurl.com/5pd8rd) and factcheck.org (http://tinyurl.com/6peqf5) it was on Aug 27, two days before Katrina hit. My questions to you: 1) When was the White House and FEMA notified that a hurricane of this intensity could cause this level of destruction? (and as a supplement, what did FEMA do about it in advance to prepare the city for a hurricane of this intensity?) 2) When did FEMA learn of the people stranded in the Convention Center? 3) When did FEMA learn that the levees had been breached? 4) When did FEMA actually send assistance in? --riverman (Who wishes he could be generous enough to claim your posts are merely partisan.) |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Obama's grandmother died | Scott Seidman | Fly Fishing | 0 | November 3rd, 2008 10:08 PM |