GWB warned before Katrina

[Your Paragon of Virtue 0]

Tape: Bush, Chertoff Warned Before Katrina

 

 

WASHINGTON (AP) -- In dramatic and sometimes agonizing terms, federal disaster officials warned President Bush and his homeland security chief before Hurricane Katrina struck that the storm could breach levees, risk lives in New Orleans' Superdome and overwhelm rescuers, according to confidential video footage of the briefings.

 

Bush didn't ask a single question during the final government-wide briefing the day before Katrina struck on Aug. 29 but assured soon-to-be-battered state officials: "We are fully prepared."

 

Six days of footage and transcripts obtained by The Associated Press show in excruciating detail that while federal officials anticipated the tragedy that unfolded in New Orleans and elsewhere along the Gulf Coast, they were fatally slow to realize they had not mustered enough resources to deal with the unprecedented disaster.

 

Linked by secure video, Bush's bravado on Aug. 29 starkly contrasts with the dire warnings his disaster chief and a cacophony of federal, state and local officials provided during the four days before the storm.

 

A top hurricane expert voiced "grave concerns" about the levees and then-Federal Emergency Management Agency chief Michael Brown told the president and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff that he feared there weren't enough disaster teams to help evacuees at the Superdome.

 

"I'm concerned about ... their ability to respond to a catastrophe within a catastrophe," Brown told his bosses the afternoon before Katrina made landfall.

 

Some of the footage conflicts with the defenses that federal, state and local officials have made in trying to deflect blame and minimize the political fallout from the failed Katrina response:

 

--Homeland Security officials have said the "fog of war" blinded them early on to the magnitude of the disaster. But the video and transcripts show federal and local officials discussed threats clearly, reviewed long-made plans and understood Katrina would wreak devastation of historic proportions. "I'm sure it will be the top 10 or 15 when all is said and done," National Hurricane Center's Max Mayfield warned the day Katrina lashed the Gulf Coast.

 

"I don't buy the `fog of war' defense," Brown told the AP in an interview Wednesday. "It was a fog of bureaucracy."

 

--Bush declared four days after the storm, "I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees" that gushed deadly flood waters into New Orleans. But the transcripts and video show there was plenty of talk about that possibility -- and Bush was worried too.

 

http://www.wtopnews.com/index.php?nid=116&sid=713599

[Dobbs 3K 0]

Is this really news though? I mean, pretty much everyone acknowledges that Bush knew Katrina was going to be bad, but that the government wasn't as prepared as they thought they were for the disaster. I mean, unless Congress is going to call for impeachment proceedings, can't we move on now?

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

Bush declared four days after the storm, "I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees" that gushed deadly flood waters into New Orleans. But the transcripts and video show there was plenty of talk about that possibility -- and Bush was worried too.

[Dobbs 3K 0]

Yes, but what does that prove? That either Bush is a liar or incredibly ill-advised, one way or the other. Is that shocking news to anyone at this point?

 

Again, what is the point of discussing this anymore? It's like the arguments about the border, Iraq, and the hunt for Bin Laden. Nothing ever changes, but Congress doesn't step in and do anything either. We're losing our freedom and our country and no one is doing a damn thing about it.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

Yes, but what does that prove? That either Bush is a liar or incredibly ill-advised, one way or the other. Is that shocking news to anyone at this point?

 

I don't see anyway that can be construed as *not* a lie. There is videotape of him receiving warning about the levees being breached.

 

And, yes, I guess brazen lies by the President of the United States are still shocking to me for some reason.

[CheesalaIsGood 0]

Well as long as it wasn't under oath over a blow job it should be alright.

 

 

But I'm a commie pinko cocksucker so I am biased. I guess pointing to the scoreboard just ain't what it used to be.

[SuperJerk 0]

Is this really news though?

Are we just now hearing about it? Then its news.

[Art Sandusky 0]

Yes, it's news since we're starting to get some real meat on how completely (and criminally, in the name-of-all-things-good sense) negligent the West Texas Rednecks were.

 

Yes, since that nickname came to me, I'll keep using it.

[Dobbs 3K 0]

OK, great...but again, what good does it do if Congress or no one else steps in to actually PUNISH the Bush administration for this?

 

I guess I'm just sick of this administration being able to get away with doing a lousy job, get caught contradicting itself time and again, not defending our border properly, and not being punished for it. Is this ever going to come to a head at some point, or do we just sit around twiddling our thumbs and waiting for 2009?

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

OK, great...but again, what good does it do if Congress or no one else steps in to actually PUNISH the Bush administration for this?

 

Couldn't agree more.

[Art Sandusky 0]

I guess I'm just sick of this administration being able to get away with doing a lousy job, get caught contradicting itself time and again, not defending our border properly, and not being punished for it. Is this ever going to come to a head at some point, or do we just sit around twiddling our thumbs and waiting for 2009?

We've still got a lot of time left for them to commit a fuckup of such proportions that a punishment would be foregone. Let's say the Abramoff thing expands even more, and the midterms put people with some cock and balls into Congress that'll be very change-minded and full'a common sense righteousness. That's just one nightmare scenario for them based off of existing lunacy going on.

 

I think the problem is that there's so goddamn much you can point to and say "these jokers shouldn't be in charge of the most powerful country in the world" about, nothing can really gain ground. People, as has been shown with this fucked up "post-9/11 mindset" idea taking over, are much easier to galvanize with one event than with a bunch of small ones. It becomes a simple pest then, not really worth doing anything about. The bright side is that each of the small fuckups they've committed so far do nothing but expand in scope and severity, so something's gotta make them finally stand up and be accountable and honest.

 

If we were to list miscues of this administration to see how many we could rattle off, it would probably surprise all of us.

[Special K 0]

And NOW they're saying the rest of the briefings are classified and trying to blow it off!

The two worst disasters to befall America in my lifetime happen on GWB's watch, and because they're just so goddamn close-lipped, no one cares, and we're not going to learn a fucking thing. It's infuriating.

[Your Paragon of Virtue 0]

I imagine a thread over at the Pit would be like the opposite of this one. It's weird though, because I would like to hear someone defend them on this, I'm sure people like that exist.

[EricMM 0]

How the fuck are tapes like these classified, because they make the administration look bad?

 

I think the problem in this country is that we've fixated on voting for the lesser of two evils. And it just seems that a majority of this country believes that Bush, or the Republicans, are the superior party. They can look at the multiple fuckups, and wonder how much worse the Dems would have handled it (see: every conservative commentary on what Gore would have done post 9/11)

[Special K 0]

Seriously, I probably fall on the liberal side of the spectrum (though the Dems now are pretty pathetic), I just want someone who's actually fucking STRONG in their beliefs. Take Buchanan for example. I think he's half-crazy, but he knows what he thinks and expresses why he does. Pretty much all the politicians in this country today are poll-humping brats with no idea how to make a budget, only how to bitch.

 

Where are the times of funding the military, corporate and social sectors? Political discussion is so fucking shameful now.

 

The ONE thing I cannot get is how Clinton was a bad president. He and GHWB were very good, moderate President's (in my mind) who understood economics and tried to explain them to the American people. They understood the standing of America as a superpower, who could quash rebellion quickly.

 

W is the most fiscally irresposible president in my lifetime (narrowly dodged Carter!), and he's fucking clueless or a fucking liar. I lived in NO for 5 years. Everyone knew that the levees could break. We had a tropical storm, and there was a mass exodus from the city. I pray for the day that GWB could have the fucking humility to say: we handled it badly. Fucking honesty.

 

Ii'm not a retard to say he could have predicted 9/11, or handled it any differently. But he blocked any inquiry into the subject. I will give him the benefit of the doubt and say that he couldn't have handled Katrina in a better fashion. However, he's a fucking arrogant liar, and the fact that he doesn't trust the American public to make their own views speaks so much volume. He is the Anti-American President. We'll survive.

 

Honestly, his approval ratings are the only thing that give me hope. That people are paying enough attention to see his bullshit.

 

If only the Democrats weren't so fucking Hyperbolous.

 

Give me McCain in 2008. There's a guy I know loves all of America.

[CheesalaIsGood 0]

But this is the medias fault. As if they made up the fact that a big hurricaine wiped out NO just to fuck over W.

[Dobbs 3K 0]

The problem with the Democrats is that they never outline any alternative solutions for our problems. I'm sorry, but most of the country is scared to death of terror right now. You can't have your candidate say that they'll take action in a foreign country if it passes "the international litmus test." We want a president who will tough on terror...you can't come off as limp wristed.

 

You have to explain your policies clearly in basic language, not say "it's all on my website." Of course I'm referring to John Kerry, but it goes beyond that. Howard Dean was a horrible choice to be DNC chairman...average Americans see him as an extremist, and when he does interviews he doesn't offer clear solutions to any problems America is facing.

[Skywarp! 0]

Yes, but what does that prove? That either Bush is a liar or incredibly ill-advised, one way or the other. Is that shocking news to anyone at this point?

 

I don't see anyway that can be construed as *not* a lie. There is videotape of him receiving warning about the levees being breached.

 

And, yes, I guess brazen lies by the President of the United States are still shocking to me for some reason.

 

The administration not being punished for this doesn't surprise me, because I'm still trying to wrap my mind around the fact that there is no outrage about the big, BIG lie that should have caused a major backlash with the citizens of this country--a war based on untrue premises that has killed scores of our people. And I mean this outrage should have crossed multiple lines and unified the citizens: whether you WERE for or against the war, whether you're an R or D, whether you make over $100k a year or minimum wage. That lie was monumentally huge, familes are destroyed becuase of it, and it's cause for massive reform in this country.

 

If there's no accountability for THAT, they can get away with anything. I guess people just expect their government to feed them shit sandwiches, so nothing bothers them anymore. That's a pretty fucked up state of affairs, when you think about it.

 

For instance, recently the Gulf of Tonkin attack has been basically accepted to be a complete lie. You'd think that all of these Vietnam Vets that have struggled with demons, the buddies they lost, the handicaps they gained, and the shit they saw would be screaming in the streets over this. But they just stay silent, and either return to their alcoholism, or worse, defend everything Bush does.

[The Czech Republic 0]

(Pinch it good!

You know, that confinement loaf is real good stuff

Hey, you oughta try some!)

 

They got lies so big

They don't make a noise

They tell 'em so well

Like a secret disease

That makes you go numb

 

With a big ol' lie

And a flag and a pie

And a mom and a bible

Most folks are just liable

To buy any line

Any place, any time

 

When the lie's so big

As in Robertson's case,

(That sinister face

Behind all the Jesus hurrah)

 

Could result in the end

To a worrisome trend

In which every American

Not "born again"

Could be punished in cruel and unusual ways

By this treacherous cretin

Who tells everyone

That he's Jesus' best friend

 

When the lies get so big

And the fog gets so thick

And the facts disappear

The Republican Trick

Can be played out again

People, please tell me when

We'll be rid of these men!

 

Just who do they really

Suppose that they are?

And how do they manage to travel as far

As they seem to have come?

Were we really that dumb?

 

People, wake up

Figure it out

Religious fanatics

Around and about

The Court House, The State House,

The Congress, The White House

 

Criminal saints

With a "Heavenly Mission" --

A nation enraptured

By pure superstition

 

Do you believe in the Invisible Army?

(Yes, indeed!)

 

When the lie's so big

And the fog so thick

And the facts kept forgotten

Then the Republican Trick

Can be played out again

People, please tell me when

We'll be rid of these men!

 

Broadway the Hard Way, 1988

[Kaertos 0]

Wait a second... you mean to tell me that a politician lied about something? That's just outrageous!

 

Now that the sarcasm is out of my system, I'll just say this: In the last election, both candidates were losers of epic proportions. Neither one showed me genuine leadership qualities, any sense of what was best for the country (as opposed to what was best for them and their rich donors) or any concept of how important a position President of the United States is.

 

Now we're stuck with this guy and hoping that the Congress can get its act together long enough to do something about it? Good luck. Congress is filled with, and after midterms will be replenished with, career politicians who care more about their next election and the number of tax dodges they can weasel their way into than any concept of improving the country or helping anyone.

[SuperJerk 0]

I imagine a thread over at the Pit would be like the opposite of this one. It's weird though, because I would like to hear someone defend them on this, I'm sure people like that exist.

Three ways to defend Bush on this:

1. deny the validity of the report

2. explain that Bush did everything he could and acted properly (because Bush's isn't ultimately responsible for the entire executive branch, or because FEMA's job isn't to actually respond to emergencies, as many have tried to argue)

3. blame Clinton

[SuperJerk 0]

The problem with the Democrats is that they never outline any alternative solutions for our problems. I'm sorry, but most of the country is scared to death of terror right now. You can't have your candidate say that they'll take action in a foreign country if it passes "the international litmus test." We want a president who will tough on terror...you can't come off as limp wristed.

 

You have to explain your policies clearly in basic language, not say "it's all on my website." Of course I'm referring to John Kerry, but it goes beyond that. Howard Dean was a horrible choice to be DNC chairman...average Americans see him as an extremist, and when he does interviews he doesn't offer clear solutions to any problems America is facing.

My only objection to this statement is that the "global test" (not "the international litmus test" as you put it) Kerry spoke of was actually a good idea. Kerry's global test was defined by him as: "your countrymen, your people, understand fully why you're doing what you're doing, and you can prove to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons."

WHY THAT FUCKING BASTARD!!!!!!!

 

Seriously, Kerry's idea was sound. The problem was that Bush took two words of that idea and constructed a straw man argument around it and dishonestly claiming Kerry was advocating an international poll.

 

I know...I know. Bush? Being dishonest about something? Shocking.

 

 

I did a google search on "global test kerry" and got a CNN article with the following priceless quote from Dr. C. Rice:

 

"I don't understand 'proving to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons,' " she said.

 

And this woman is the US's top appointed diplomat?

 

From Bush:

"I'm not exactly sure what you mean, 'passes the global test,' [that] you take preemptive action if you pass a global test," he said during the debate.

 

Again, Kerry's definition of global test: "your countrymen, your people, understand fully why you're doing what you're doing, and you can prove to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons."

 

So I guess Bush either just wasn't listening or didn't understand complex words/concepts like "legitimate" and "reasons". Even stranger considering Bush spent much of 2002 and early 2003 trying to sell his idea to invade by trying to prove to the world he was invading for legitimate reasons (both by going to the UN himself, and by going on TV to convince the American people). So because Bush failed at this, he later claims that he didn't need to do it (kind of like how backers of the administration claim after FEMA failed to do its job in New Orleans that it really wasn't FEMA's job to manage the emergency).

[EricMM 0]

This administration has never been too quick to try and prove anything.

 

They're about doing not explaining.

[NoCalMike 0]

This administration basically tells the american people not to look at the old man behind the curtain, on a daily basis. Don't believe your own eyes and ears folks.

[SuperJerk 0]

Ex-FEMA director admits errors, calls for Chertoff's resignation

Brown admits he should have gone public with concerns sooner

 

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The former federal emergency director who resigned after the heavily criticized response to Hurricane Katrina admitted Friday that he should have been more forthcoming about problems with the government's response to the storm but faulted the performance of his former boss, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, and called for his resignation.

 

Michael Brown, the former director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, was well aware that his agency was overwhelmed during the immediate aftermath of the storm, he told CNN, but blamed a "beltway" mentality that believes that "the American public can't handle the truth" for not making his concerns about the response public.

 

"I should have owned up to the public very early in this disaster -- probably on Monday and Tuesday -- that's how catastrophic it was, how serious it was, and that we were going to have problems," Brown said.

 

"I think we need to get beyond that and just start being honest with the public and telling them exactly what is going on," he added.

 

Brown resigned from FEMA in September amid intense criticism of his own performance after Katrina, the storm that left more than 1,300 dead in Louisiana and Mississippi.

 

"I have apologized to the people of America and I think it's time for everybody else to own up to their mistakes, too," Brown said.

 

Recently-released video and transcripts of FEMA video conferences from August 28, the eve of the storm's landfall, and August 29, the day the storm moved ashore, have fueled criticism that Bush was not fully actively involved in the response. (Full story)

 

Brown said Bush was fully involved but said the president should be faulted for putting too much faith in his troubled agency that, he contends, deteriorated after being moved into the Department of Homeland Security.

 

On Thursday, Brown said he spoke with Bush directly "on at least a couple of occasions" on August 29 and told him about the failure of New Orleans' levees -- "Because that, again, that was almost foremost in my mind and my concern."

 

"I think the mistake the president did make is that he was overconfident in FEMA, despite my entreaties [about] what was happening to FEMA," Brown said.

 

White House Deputy Press Secretary Trent Duffy disputed Brown's suggestion that the president was overconfident.

 

"The president was well aware it was a devastating storm and we pre-positioned more manpower and material before the storm," Duffy said."It turned out not to be enough."

Calls for Chertoff's resignation

 

Brown also reiterated that Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff should resign for his handling of Hurricane Katrina, accusing Chertoff of lacking disaster management knowledge.

 

Brown has blamed the poor federal response on the dysfunctional structure of the Department of Homeland Security, which became FEMA's parent agency when DHS was established in 2003.

 

"It appears to me that, you know, when Chertoff does things like tells me that I've got to go to Baton Rouge and plop my BUTT down on a seat in Baton Rouge and run a disaster from there, I think that shows naivete about how disasters are run," Brown told CNN on Thursday. "And you've either have to get with it, or move on."

 

Asked whether Chertoff should be dismissed, Brown said, "Well, I think so." He said FEMA had been "marginalized" by Chertoff and his predecessor, Tom Ridge, and that he had expected the agency's performance to suffer.

 

"I had been screaming internally that the budget cuts, the personnel cuts and what they were doing within Homeland Security was in effect marginalizing FEMA, and I predicted that at some point -- in a very specific memo to both Tom Ridge and to Chertoff -- that at some point, FEMA would fail," Brown said. "I just didn't expect to be in the middle of the failure."

 

The White House has stood behind Chertoff, who became Homeland Security secretary in February 2005. President Bush said Tuesday Chertoff was doing "a fine job."

 

But a House committee that investigated the response to Katrina criticized Chertoff for waiting two days after the storm hit to activate a national response plan -- and for naming Brown to lead the federal response, even though he was not trained to take on that role.

 

In testimony before a Senate committee in February, Brown said communicating with the White House through Chertoff was a waste of time and graded Chertoff's performance a C-minus.

 

Chertoff days later flatly rejected the accusation that either DHS or the White House were disengaged as the storm deluged New Orleans, Louisiana, and leveled much of coastal Mississippi.

 

In a briefing the day before Katrina made landfall, Bush was told by National Hurricane Center Director Max Mayfield that Katrina might send water rushing over the tops of the levees and leave New Orleans flooded.

 

In an interview September 1, three days after landfall, Bush said, "I don't think anyone anticipated the breach of the levees."

 

White House spokesman Trent Duffy said he could not discuss Bush's "private conversations" and would not confirm anything "either way" about whether Brown had discussed the levee breaches with the president.

 

But he said the government had helicopters in the air quickly to help rescue people trapped in the flooded city.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/03/03/kat...rown/index.html

 

Not only will this story not go away, it gets more and more amusing.