Sam (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
l33tminion) wrote2005-09-03 12:48 am
l33tminion) wrote2005-09-03 12:48 am
Massive Destruction
You've probably heard a lot in the news lately about New Orleans.
Before the storm, I was happy about the news. A total evacuation. Sounded like good preparation to me. I knew that lots of people, tens of thousands, were still in the city, but I thought that they had decided to weather the storm.
I was horrified to learn that wasn't the case. Nothing was done to evacuate the city. People were told to get out, sure, but no aid was provided, no trucks, no buses, no trains carrying refugees out of the city. Those who didn't own cars were on their own. Government policy is clear, I guess: If you're poor, you're expendable.
Just after the storm, I was happy about the news. The city had been spared the worst of it.
But then the levee broke, the city was totaled, and it descended into chaos. The federal response has been incompetent. And "broke" might not be the right word for something that was never finished:
"It appears that the money has been moved in the president’s budget to handle homeland security and the war in Iraq, and I suppose that’s the price we pay. Nobody locally is happy that the levees can’t be finished, and we are doing everything we can to make the case that this is a security issue for us." [emphasis mine]
- Walter Maestri, emergency management chief for Jefferson Parish, Louisiana; New Orleans Times-Picayune, June 8, 2004.
I think this guy has it right. The Bush administration is responsible for the destruction of a major American city. "Not acceptable" just doesn't cover it.
Before the storm, I was happy about the news. A total evacuation. Sounded like good preparation to me. I knew that lots of people, tens of thousands, were still in the city, but I thought that they had decided to weather the storm.
I was horrified to learn that wasn't the case. Nothing was done to evacuate the city. People were told to get out, sure, but no aid was provided, no trucks, no buses, no trains carrying refugees out of the city. Those who didn't own cars were on their own. Government policy is clear, I guess: If you're poor, you're expendable.
Just after the storm, I was happy about the news. The city had been spared the worst of it.
But then the levee broke, the city was totaled, and it descended into chaos. The federal response has been incompetent. And "broke" might not be the right word for something that was never finished:
"It appears that the money has been moved in the president’s budget to handle homeland security and the war in Iraq, and I suppose that’s the price we pay. Nobody locally is happy that the levees can’t be finished, and we are doing everything we can to make the case that this is a security issue for us." [emphasis mine]
- Walter Maestri, emergency management chief for Jefferson Parish, Louisiana; New Orleans Times-Picayune, June 8, 2004.
I think this guy has it right. The Bush administration is responsible for the destruction of a major American city. "Not acceptable" just doesn't cover it.