Who's Running The Correction
The AP issued a "clarification" to the video releases of teleconferences before hurricane Katrina hit. In the original release, they said the president was warned of the possibilities of the levees being breached. Now they come out with this:
WASHINGTON (AP) _ In a March 1 story, The Associated Press reported that federal disaster officials warned President George W. Bush and his homeland security chief before Hurricane Katrina struck that the storm could breach levees in New Orleans, citing confidential video footage of an Aug. 28 briefing among U.S. officials.
The Army Corps of Engineers considers a breach a hole developing in a levee rather than an overrun. (Didn't I post that here). The story should have made clear that Bush was warned about floodwaters overrunning the levees, rather than the levees breaking. The day before the storm hit, Bush was told there were grave concerns that the levees could be overrun.
It wasn't until the next morning, as the storm was hitting, that Michael Brown, then head of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, said Bush had inquired about reports of breaches. Bush did not participate in that briefing.
I found this on Charlie Syke's site, not in the Washington Post, which is instead running editorials today telling us how the President knew the levees would be breached. Maybe the editorial board and writers should read the wire feed corrections.
To help out the folks at Command T.O.C, who have an issue with the difference, it's quite simple. Fill an 8 ounce glass of water to the top, call that the 9th St. shipping canal. Now add another 3 ounces of water to it. How much water ended up on the table? 3 ounces, only that which wouldn't fit, that's overtopping a levee.
Now, fill the glass, break it, and then add 3 ounces of water. Now you have all 11 ounces on the table. That's a breach, and a significantly different event than an overtopping. Hope this clears a few things up. (legal disclaimer: The author bears no responsibility for injuries incurred while trying this experiment, thanks for the reminder Jeff)
Technorati Tags: New Orleans, Hurricane Katrina, breach,Blanco FEMA,Washington Post,Howard Kurtz,Bush
WASHINGTON (AP) _ In a March 1 story, The Associated Press reported that federal disaster officials warned President George W. Bush and his homeland security chief before Hurricane Katrina struck that the storm could breach levees in New Orleans, citing confidential video footage of an Aug. 28 briefing among U.S. officials.
The Army Corps of Engineers considers a breach a hole developing in a levee rather than an overrun. (Didn't I post that here). The story should have made clear that Bush was warned about floodwaters overrunning the levees, rather than the levees breaking. The day before the storm hit, Bush was told there were grave concerns that the levees could be overrun.
It wasn't until the next morning, as the storm was hitting, that Michael Brown, then head of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, said Bush had inquired about reports of breaches. Bush did not participate in that briefing.
I found this on Charlie Syke's site, not in the Washington Post, which is instead running editorials today telling us how the President knew the levees would be breached. Maybe the editorial board and writers should read the wire feed corrections.
To help out the folks at Command T.O.C, who have an issue with the difference, it's quite simple. Fill an 8 ounce glass of water to the top, call that the 9th St. shipping canal. Now add another 3 ounces of water to it. How much water ended up on the table? 3 ounces, only that which wouldn't fit, that's overtopping a levee.
Now, fill the glass, break it, and then add 3 ounces of water. Now you have all 11 ounces on the table. That's a breach, and a significantly different event than an overtopping. Hope this clears a few things up. (legal disclaimer: The author bears no responsibility for injuries incurred while trying this experiment, thanks for the reminder Jeff)
Technorati Tags: New Orleans, Hurricane Katrina, breach,Blanco FEMA,Washington Post,Howard Kurtz,Bush
posted by Crazy Politico at 6:30 AM
10Comments:
*LMAO* = laughing my arse off
Well said. But I still don't think they will get the message.
Steven and Sarge, no correction in the Washington Post, I know that much.
Great. Now there's broken glass all over the kitchen floors of every liberal moron who reads your blog. Hope they don't all cut their feet...
I guess i should go back and put a disclaimer in the post :)
Speaking of such, read the haloscan comments if you get a chance.
I have to say, as a person who's been through a hurricane or two: Nobody watches what the feds are doing! They're in Washington, we're down here, what do they know? That's the mindset. Local officials handle nearly all of the initial response, and the State does most of the rest. That's just the way it is.
New Orleanians had to be depending on their local officials, and they failed them.
BTW, On Fox's politics page, it has a link to a video of Blanco- of course- acting like a dud.
Rebekah, I understand what you are saying. In 1989 when Hugo hit, for about 3 days they weren't sure if it would track through the gulf or up florida's east coast. And no one seemed to really care a whole lot if it was going to come through.
A flood is still a flood. The splitting of hairs between breached and topped is asinine. This hurricane had been covered for 6 days before landfall in every podunk and big city newspaper and television station from sea to shining sea and almost all of them covered the possibility that New Orleans would flood and what those repercussions would be if it did flood. Retrospectives were done on TV about the levee structures, how they were built, how old etc. We even got to know Walter Maestri, the head of disaster management for Jefferson Parish who was being interviewed nightly about this possibility. The governments both local and federal should have been better prepared. They should have prepared for the worst case scenario, but they didn't. Why can't anyone in this administration admit they were wrong? I'm sick of no one taking responsibility for their actions. We teach our children to be accountable for themselves and their actions, but when it comes to this administration, they get a free pass.
Kenny and DJ, again, using the analogy of the glass of water. If the Governor thought the levee's were overtopped yes, the lower 9th ward would have had water in it. Just not ALL the water from the shipping canal, and part of the lake. Estimates are about 2 feet of flood water vs. 6-8 and over 12 in some areas.
The pumps in the ward could have handled that load, which they couldn't with a breech.
After you learn some basic hydrodynamics and flood control, come on back.
You miss the point Crazy. They should have prepared for a WORST CASE SCENARIO AS I STATED ABOVE. You prepare for the worst, in this case N.O. floods, and hope for the best. That is the probably the #1 rule of disaster management. They even did a hypothetical excercise that proved that N.O.would be almost completely under water. When you learn some common sense, then maybe I'll take your blog seriously.
DJ, go to the top of the page, and do a search on the blog about Katrina, read all the articles, then get back to me.
You'll see I've been very tough about the lack of preparedness.
Again, this article was simply about getting a correction to the AP story, which put words in lots of folks mouths that their own video shows didn't come out of them.
Post a Comment
<< Home