I'm not sure that Bradshaw and Slonsky are socialists; I think their account was just posted at the sfsocialists site by someone who'd assembled it from a series of craigslist forum posts. Their account is also available at EMSNetwork.org without the socialist logo.

Posted September 7, 2005 8:20 PM by Josh

I'd hate for this story to be found to be falsified. I also hate the idea that it's true, because of what it says about my fellow humans.

Sadly, I know enough history to bet on my fellow humans as being capable of far worse than what was described in the post.

Anyhow, This would seem to be the original posting.

Posted September 7, 2005 8:26 PM by Josh Jasper

Aaah! Confluence of Josh!

Posted September 7, 2005 8:29 PM by Josh Jasper

I think the ur-source is socialistworker.org to which the two of them also contributed this Nov. 4 2004 article.

Posted September 7, 2005 8:31 PM by Tom Scudder

Heh. I knew I should have used my full name.

But, yeah. The possibility that it's true makes me ill, and I hate that conditions are such that I'm inclined to believe it. What the hell is going on?

Posted September 7, 2005 8:34 PM by Josh Larios

It's easy for me to believe that it's true, and you don't even have to believe that all of the authorities in New Orleans are engaged in a coordinated effort to increase the misery of people who are already miserable.

Believing that this is true "only" requires you to believe that the people who are supposed to be providing help and order are completely uncoordinated, that those nominally in charge don't care one way or the other what happens to the people in the city, and that each local cluster of officials is thinking of nothing more than its own local convenience.

I doubt if anyone set out to create the nightmare where each place the refugees went, they were told that they had to be somewhere else. It's the sort of pattern that emerges from selfishness and the absence of leadership.

Posted September 7, 2005 8:55 PM by Matt Austern

I actually saw the Hannity & Colmes bit with Shep and Geraldo. They were in fact very vocal about the people under the underpass.

Posted September 7, 2005 9:16 PM by Kim (basement variety!)

Thank you, Tom. I was a little worried when I read Josh Larios' first post. It hadn't occurred to me that they might not be socialists, because that's what they sounded like.

I regret to tell you that so far all the stories I've seen from the same time and place -- I've added a major one since I put the post up -- corroborate Bradshaw and Slonsky's account.

I had wondered if they were attending the paramedics' convention. Tom's additional link answered that question. What that tells us is that when Bradshaw and Slonsky say conditions were intolerable, they're not just being squeamish. Paramedics get the squeam knocked out of them during their first week or two on the job.

I think I'm going to keep the link to the socialist-flagged version of the story.

Posted September 7, 2005 9:22 PM by Teresa Nielsen Hayden

I can confirm part of it. Four EMS personnel from Hawai'i were also attending that conference, and they managed to report to their management people out here. We got TV news every night for four nights about the bus being commandeered and the cops being less than helpful (understatement? Don't know. When they get back here they may have more to say). Last I heard they were in Dallas.

Television news articles here.

Posted September 7, 2005 9:30 PM by Linkmeister

I'd misread part of the thread on the craiglist forums, leading me to believe that the version at sfsocialists was assembled from the craigslist posts--I see now that it wasn't. My mistake, sorry.

Either way, it's an astounding account. I'd seen the Geraldo Rivera/Shep Smith clip before, but the full import of what they said didn't really sink in until I read this piece. Every time I think I can't be any more disheartened by the massive ineptitude/malice on the part of the authorities down there, I'm proven wrong.

Posted September 7, 2005 9:38 PM by Josh Larios

Another dab of corroboration from the Health Care Blog.

Posted September 7, 2005 9:40 PM by Teresa Nielsen Hayden

This goes beyond appalling to "complete abrogation of the social contract between governors and governed".

What I find particularly disturbing is the implication that has been coming through these sorts of story that the crisis in New Orleans did not cause that abrogation, but merely stripped back layers which were hiding the constituent elements of that breakdown -- the contempt and selfish hostility which the police and other authority figures showed towards those whom they ought to have been protecting and serving.

The gross incompetence at the very top is in some ways less disturbing, because its very quality of deer-in-the-headlights paralysis suggests an incapacity which is a breakdown in the ability of part of the system to operate, rather than a complete abnegation and renunciation of the values of the system itself. Whether the administration has good or bad intentions now seems to be irrelevant, because it seems to be incapable of doing anything effective. The forces on the ground had power and were, simply and deliberately, misusing it.

Posted September 7, 2005 9:42 PM by James

Now, now, we must always be on guard against moral hazard. Feed, clothe, and house a man and he will want the same or better tomorrow; teach him that he's not going to get food, clothing, or shelter, and before long he won't complain at all.

Posted September 7, 2005 9:52 PM by John M. Ford

I used to love to read apocalyptic science fiction and daydream about what I would do if civilization ended. I have to say that most fictional accounts seem not to be as vicious as reality.

but going back to survivor stories from New Orleans, has everyone seen Charmaine Neville's account of her experience? She is sister to the Neville brothers in New Orleans and quite a performer in her own right. She is, in my mind, a bona fide hero after all she did to keep a group of folks alive. Here is her account. Make sure you bring kleenex.

http://www.wafb.com/Global/SearchResults.asp?qu=charmaine+neville&x=13&y=10

Posted September 7, 2005 10:11 PM by hrc

Looks like the entire Gretna PD will be in line for one of Bush's Medals of Freedom. Probably on the stage alongside Brownie and Chertoff.

I don't know wheter to be pleased or horrified that this story seems to be credible.

Posted September 7, 2005 10:16 PM by Larry Brennan

Another first-person account has appeared here, this one from a French-Canadian tourist. (It's already been translated into English.)

Posted September 7, 2005 10:24 PM by Julie L.

What truly boggles me is not that these things happened, but that a large fraction of the American public seems to think they're perfectly fine. According to Gallup 35% of the public thinks the Federal government response has been "good" or "very good", and another 20% think it's been OK ("neither good nor bad," not "no opinion"). (State and local governments get 37% "good" or "very good.") What would it take to make these people believe the Federal government screwed up? Mass public executions on prime time TV?

Posted September 7, 2005 10:34 PM by Jordin Kare

Fuck.

FUCK.

I knew something was wrong the moment I saw the first sat photos. Why didn't they just walk across the bridge to dry land? It was *right there*. The highway runs right by the Superdome, and the Convention Center, and across the Mississippi.

Answer: The police departments decided that they were better dead. And their mayors must have agreed with them. They could have easily stopped this. They didn't even try. Hell, they probably gave the orders.

Fuck you, Ray Naglin. You could have gotten your people out, and you didn't even try. Just one little lean, and that bridge would have been open. But you wouldn't do it. Why, I neither know, no care. The only consolation you should have is that you'll only rate the third or fourth circle, while those bastards on the bridge are heading to the ninth. Unless you knew of those orders, in which case, they'll be digging a hole next to Old Scratch Himself, to shove your ass in next to Bush and Brown.

You saw this image. It's not hard to find. It's been on the net for a fucking week -- and you had helicopters and such flying about. There's no rational world in where you didn't know that they could walk out, other than those fucking cops at the far end.

Posted September 7, 2005 10:40 PM by Erik V. Olson

TNH: Why should people be prohibited from leaving New Orleans...

For a week now, I've been wondering out loud if this business of herding poor people into a stadium to die was deliberately modeled on Justinian and the Nika riots.

From today's NY Times:

[Pelosi] related that she urged Bush at the White House on Tuesday to fire Brown.
''He said, 'Why would I do that?''' Pelosi said.
''I said because of all that went wrong, of all that didn't go right last week.'
And he said 'What didn't go right?' ''

Posted September 7, 2005 10:49 PM by Bob Oldendorf

Erik, I'm stunned. I've been assuming all along that anyone who hadn't walked out had a good reason for not doing so.

You know, New Yorkers, we've got it down to a routine. Last evacuation -- that was the blackout -- we had the Brooklyn Beep standing at the end of the Manhattan Bridge with a megaphone, yelling about how everything's okay now, you're in Brooklyn, greatest place in the world. He knew half the borough (okay, not half, but lots) would be walking past that point. It's fast, it's easy, it's remarkably effective.

What bloody right did the Gretna police force have to keep people from walking across that bridge? And why didn't other agencies tell them to knock it off?

Posted September 7, 2005 10:59 PM by Teresa Nielsen Hayden

I keep hearing people blaming these things - and the internment camp in Oklahoma - on "bureocracy", "centralized governament" and such.

I have a better explanation.

It's racism.

Not neccessarily skin-color racism, but it seems to me that the prime mover in a lot of these things is "we don't want Those People" around here. They loot, they rape, We Know What Their Kind Do.

That's why the good people in Baton Rouge at one point didn't want to accomodate their next-door neighbour.

That's why the grocery store owner in the city selected to host the New Orleans morgue said "Oh well better that than a refugee camp."

What struck me in the story about the Oklahoma camp was how much these people - people that were, until last week, free adult citizens with jobs and houses and lives of their own - have become to be considered too stupid or too emotional to be trusted with a kitchen fire.

It is "kinda scary", isn't it?

Posted September 7, 2005 11:09 PM by Anna Feruglio Dal Dan

I found that story earlier today. Larry Bradshaw and Lorrie Beth Slonsky are also union leaders for the SEIUC (probably sic, but) in SF. You can find older hits for them on the Web. This story has been propagated all over the place.

I believed the story because it filled in a bunch of dots for me, particularly the bit about people showing up at the convention center and on the highways. I also wondered why people just didn't walk over the bridges, the way that they did after 9/11 in NYC, and this story made it clear why.

Posted September 7, 2005 11:13 PM by Laurie Mann

Complete optimist that I am, I'm going to suggest once again writing to your Congressmen and Senators, requesting articles of impeachment against Bush.

Or, at least getting him declared an enemy combatant.

Posted September 7, 2005 11:40 PM by James D. Macdonald

JDM - Writing my congressman to demand articles of impeachment won't be terribly effective - he's on the short list of most liberal and therefore somewhat marginalized. BUT, I will write him about demanding an effective investigation into not only FEMA's immediate (lack of) reaction, but also into what seems to be happening right now.

For whatever good that might do.

Posted September 7, 2005 11:49 PM by Larry Brennan

Further proof that assuming everyone is True Evil alignment backfires mightly. All you do is piss off the majority that is Lawful Neutral and annoy the shit out of the True Goods.

Why, yes, I have developed an entire theory of human behavior based on the D&D alignment system.

Posted September 8, 2005 12:00 AM by Luthe

Now, now, we must always be on guard against moral hazard. Feed, clothe, and house a man and he will want the same or better tomorrow; teach him that he's not going to get food, clothing, or shelter, and before long he won't complain at all.

That was what the Chennault's Flying Tigers ran into in China when they ran out of fuel or something like that, the attitude of the local culture was that someone who rescued someone else, was forever after responsible for that person. Not coming to the rescue of strangers and letting them die, in that particular culture, was the culturally approved action to take.

Posted September 8, 2005 12:18 AM by Paula Lieberman

I read this story yesterday. Shocking but not surprising, like much of what's happened/happening. I haven't been sleeping too soundly the last few nights. I don't think we've had a serious discussion of original sin yet, though I have seen at least one elsewhere.

The Senate & House have announced that they will hold a "joint, bipartisan" investigation into the Federal response to Katrina.

Posted September 8, 2005 12:33 AM by Lizzy Lynn

This thread made me get out my ancient Methodist Hymnal and flip to the prayers of confession in the back (translated into more recent form):
"... We have followed too much the devices and desires of our own hearts. We have offended against Your holy laws. We have left undone those things which we ought to have done, and we have done those things which we ourght not to have done. But You, o Lord, have mercy upon us. Spare those, o God, who confess their faults. ..."

Right now, it looks to me like the only parts of government that are actually reasonbly unblameable are the Coast Guard and possibly the Army Corps of Engineers. Which is truly appalling. The worst part of it may be that the ones who caused the harm, by their actions or inactions, think they haven't done anything to be ashamed of; hence no confession of fault. (I suspect the NOLA police who suicided did know, and couldn't live with it.)

Posted September 8, 2005 12:36 AM by P J Evans

In case of irony, break glass

September is emergency preparedness month

You may now remove your fist from the monitor.

Posted September 8, 2005 12:47 AM by Josh Jasper

Anna: I have a better explanation.

It's racism.

Not necessarily skin-color racism, but it seems to me that the prime mover in a lot of these things is "we don't want Those People" around here. They loot, they rape, We Know What Their Kind Do.

Back in the old days when SF fans thought we were better than everybody else, fans called it "xenophobia," and we thought it was a sin.

Posted September 8, 2005 1:01 AM by Rich McAllister

This makes me sick.

Posted September 8, 2005 2:19 AM by Harry Connolly

You read this, and you begin to wonder about some of the claims made by the supposed leadership. You hear about these vile actions, and you wonder if a Mayor and a Sheriff would want FEMA to cut their phonelines so they could say they didn't know.

Yes, I know, not the same place, but what has happened in Jefferson Parish that we haven't heard of?

Is there anyone in a position of authority in New Orleans that we can trust?

Posted September 8, 2005 2:29 AM by Dave Bell

When I read this yesterday at Andrew Sullivan's, I've wondered why the SF Chronicle, that ran a story about these two coming home almost a week ago, with brief quotes, never really explored. After all, newspapers usually love anecdotical accounts of catastrophes. Obviously, this one was too much, even for the SF Chronicle.

Also, I remember reading a story by a New Orleans'writer that corroborates the part of the buses, down to the sums: 25.000$ for the buses, 45$ per ticket. Unfortunately, I don't remember his name, I just remember he hunkered down at home in the French Quarter with some friends until they thought it was too much (one of his neighbors had to have a dialysis and needed medical attention) and they joined the crowd for the buses in the hotel. These local people eventually got away very quickly in a bus driven by a resourceful guy (bus looter?). It was all very well written, in a light tone (the underlying message was, don't write off NO yet), probably in the NY Times.

Of course, this does not corroborate the rest of the story, but it is a good indication that it is true, I think.

Posted September 8, 2005 2:48 AM by Isabel

Anna, do you have a pointer to information on the Oklahoma camp? I hadn't heard about one and am not finding anything that looks relevant.

Posted September 8, 2005 3:05 AM by Todd Larason

Todd, I dunno if this is what Anna meant, but http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/fema.html is an interesting take on camps in Oklahoma....

Posted September 8, 2005 3:28 AM by Rich McAllister

Isabel, if you've remembered the timing right there's something that needs some checking. Count the days and see if they add up.

But I've noticed that I'm losing track of the days on this; is it really Thursday already? Again?

I think we'd all appreciate a link to any SF Chronicle report.

Posted September 8, 2005 3:53 AM by Dave Bell

Police and militia attacking citizens? Defended by the leaders of our national government and the leaders one of our major parties? This is fascism--the thing itself, not a tendency or a pale copy. May its reign be short.

Anyone care to argue that I'm being alarmist?

Posted September 8, 2005 3:57 AM by Randolph Fritz

Good thing you made me check, Dave Bell. Memory does play tricks on you. The Chronicle article refers some paramedics in a convention in New Orleans, but not the same ones:

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/09/04/BAG6TEIBDF1.DTL&hw=paramedics+orleans&sn=002&sc=846

And after my post I thought that, of course, the fact that some details were published a couple of days ago (like the prices of the buses) were not a proof (maybe au contraire). Anyway, I'll try to find that article, that was interesting, although it might be difficult.

I apologize for relying on my memory and relaying false information.

Posted September 8, 2005 4:13 AM by Isabel

And he [Bush] said 'What didn't go right?' ''

Sorry to nitpick, but that's a slight misquote. What he actually said was "We are quite safe here from your pitiful little band. Everything which has happened has done so according to my design."

Seriously: leave, now. I was being generous and saying things like "Well, it's just a disorganised response to what is after all a really big disaster. It's chaos, but would any other country do better?"
Then you start hearing about people cutting phone lines. And now this. If it's true - and I almost hope it isn't - this is very bad indeed.

(Incidentally: It hadn't occurred to me that they might not be socialists, because that's what they sounded like - they don't sound like socialists to me; just decent human beings. Two sets which overlap, but not completely.)

If I were living in the US, I would leave.
I I were a US citizen, I would still leave. I know there's the whole "No! Don't desert your country! Stay and make it better!" argument, but I think it's gone beyond that point. Life's better outside and you can get more done.

Think Huguenot.

Posted September 8, 2005 5:22 AM by ajay

Todd: I think the link floated in the comments somewhere, but yes, that's the story I meant. Link: http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread167902/pg1

Posted September 8, 2005 6:11 AM by Anna Feruglio Dal Dan

"If I were living in the US, I would leave."

And go where, Ajay?

Posted September 8, 2005 6:30 AM by Randolph Fritz

I can see why the red clenched fist logo might put people off. The funny thing is that it's some evidence that the story is true. The International Socialists come from a tradition that is very strong on not making shit up in matters of fact and reportage. The authors have responsible jobs and union positions. I doubt they would risk all that by making shit up.

Posted September 8, 2005 6:34 AM by Ken MacLeod

On the Today Show this morning, Haley Barbour, former chair of the Republican party, when asked about the early federa response to Katrina, said, "I don't know about New Orleans, but here in Mississippi..." and then went on to praise how well everything went in Mississippi. Given that Barbour is a Republican and that Mississippi doesn't have a large, denely populated area like New Orleans, that indicates a huge, unacknowledged problem.

Hurricane relief in Louisiana is still quite screwed up - this story was front page news on the Post Gazette today:

Frustration, Boredom for Pensylvania Troops on the Gulf

With all the work that needs to happen in the Gulf it's amazing that these folks don't seem to have a job yet...

Posted September 8, 2005 7:17 AM by Laurie Mann

Randolph Fritz said: And go where, Ajay?

Come to the Isle of Man! Our government is so small that corruption is of the pettiest kind. Plus we have no army so we won't feel let down if there's a disaster and the army doesn't turn up to help. And, even better, almost all the important stuff (power stations, hospitals, supermarkets, government offices, people) is on the coast so the whole country would effectively be destroyed if there was a flood. And, even better than that, being an island we don't even have the choice of evacuating on foot.

I've been thinking, ever since Katrina, how I'm kind of glad to have such limited options of survival over here. I'd rather face a storm, flood, tornado, hurricane, etc on my own than see my government and emergency services failing to do the human thing.

Posted September 8, 2005 7:29 AM by Madeline Kelly

And go where, Ajay?

I'd say Scotland (we need the people), but I'm biased. Ireland. Australia. England. Wales. New Zealand. Hong Kong. Canada. France. Germany. Spain. Czech Republic. Sweden. Denmark. South Africa.
And yes, I know, most people don't have the option of leaving - jobs that require you to be in one place or another, families, schools, or just lack of money - and that's bad for them. But if you can leave, do. This sort of thing is really getting worrying.

Posted September 8, 2005 7:35 AM by ajay

Or come to Holland. Most of my country may be below sea level, but after the flood disaster of 1953, we've implemented the Delta Works and now everything is (reportedly) up to speed for conditions that occur once every 10.000 years. As opposed to once every 50 years, as I heard knowledgeable guy from Rijkswaterstaat (our Army Corps of Engineers) say about New Orleans, where he'd been for talks with his USA colleagues. 'Well, they do things differently over there,' he said.

Now if we can only keep the neo-con agenda out of the country, all will be fine. I hope. I expect.

Posted September 8, 2005 7:41 AM by marrije

"Once in a while, situations do arise where the trad socialists are the ones who understand what’s going on."

Socialists! My God, why don't you just link to the NAMBLA site and get it over with!

Seriously, have we come so far in this country that you have warn readers that they might be encountering a political belief system to the left of Bill Clinton? But then, I'm a union member, so what do I know?... :)

Posted September 8, 2005 7:45 AM by Kevin M.

I'm not sure I believe that Oklahoma story. I'm not saying that it can't be true, but it's coming out of some flaky places. Also, whenever the administration screws up really, really badly, Rove's favorite technique is to float a false story that's similar to the true one, and let them be discredited together.

I keep thinking about the bridge thing. It's as though, during a crisis, the local police in Fort Lee, Weehawken, Jersey City, Bayonne, Elizabeth, and Perth Amboy, or in Brooklyn and Queens, had decided all on their own that they didn't want pedestrians from Manhattan crossing over into their area.

It's just wrong. They don't own the bridges. And even if they did try it, they couldn't make it stick for more than a few hours, because local police don't make those kinds of policy decisions.

So here's my question: All kinds of government and law enforcement agencies were operating in the New Orleans area. How come not a single one of them told the Gretna police to stop blocking the bridge?

Ken, I didn't know that socialists had that tradition -- and good on them if they do -- but I'd noticed as of a couple of elections ago that their news reporting can be very solid.

Luthe, you need to meet Greg London. He self-identifies as Lawful Good.

Posted September 8, 2005 8:07 AM by Teresa Nielsen Hayden

That the bridges were closed to people on foot was in the Montreal Gazette, not known as a socialist organ, nor a hysterical one, on Saturday.

Posted September 8, 2005 8:08 AM by Jo Walton

I'm afraid we're seeing corroboration all over the place. Looks like this story's true.

Posted September 8, 2005 8:37 AM by Teresa Nielsen Hayden

I've been assuming all along that anyone who hadn't walked out had a good reason for not doing so.

They did. It was called "Not being shot by police." This doubled when the order to concentrate on "looters" and the force authorizations went out. Now, all they needed to do was state that you were looting, and hell, you'd be just one more body on the ground, and the "looters" probably shot you anyway.

And the big blame game is "City, State or Feds?" Bullshit. They all fucked up badly, but I'm starting to feel while the fucked up federal response was merely mid-level "We don't want to spend money, besides, we've got cronies to seat", the city evil was "Do not let those people out."

Posted September 8, 2005 8:41 AM by Erik V. Olson

If you're talking information warfare, or black propaganda, faking incompetent enemy propaganda is part of the history.

But when it looks as if one part of the local government system is out of control, look carefully at what the people supposed to be in control are saying. It's a different suburb of New Orleans which had FEMA cutting phone lines, but there are also stories of deliberate radio jamming.

Just who is trying to hide what?

Posted September 8, 2005 8:58 AM by Dave Bell

It's sing along time, kids. Sing with me now!

"When in the course of human events..."

Sung to the tune of Greensleves.

Posted September 8, 2005 8:59 AM by Josh Jasper

Given that the story is true, and hypothesizing that situation underlying it--armed cops keeping displaced citizens from crossing the bridge--was known to him, consider Ray Nagin's dilemma.

A gun battle between my cops and the Gretna cops would be an absolutely perfect reason to federalize the situation, bring in the armed forces, and turn the place into a wasteland.

Oh, wait.

Okay, the place is already a wasteland, but there were still survivors of it, and witnesses to it.

Posted September 8, 2005 9:06 AM by adamsj

I remember seeing that the bridge had been closed to peds, although I seem to remember it being described as unsafe for peds. Unsafe is such a nice, neutral, all for the best sort of word. Its use suggested that the bridge had sustained structural damage or something, not that there was a police force that would be hard to distinguish from a KKK chapter occupying the far end of the bridge and shooting at refugees.

I'm not shocked that the 'burbs of NOLA contain raving racist scum willing to murder people to keep their fantasies of black people from entering their town (nor that those people are the police), but I'm a little surprised that no one in the major news outlets thought this was worth mentioning, particularly given how much time they were spending talking about the horrific conditions of the convention center. Perhaps it would have been worth mentioning, "And these people could just walk out of NO, if there weren't an army of racist cops blocking the only route out of this drowned city."

But I guess not.

Posted September 8, 2005 9:11 AM by Charles

I wouldn't put a stamp of reliability on socialist reporting in general, for reasons too notorious to mention, but the ISO is a US splinter (don't ask) of a group whose British newspaper, Socialist Worker, has been the training ground of such journalists of repute as Paul Foot, John Palmer, and Eamon McCann. (McCann started off his journalistic career by sending Socialist Worker reports scribbled in pencil from the front lines in Derry, 1969.)

Speaking of socialists, I would be interested to know what folks better placed than me to judge make of this analysis on the World Socialist Web Site.

Anyway ... we now have an answer to 'Why didn't people just walk out?'

Posted September 8, 2005 9:14 AM by Ken MacLeod

What would it take to make these people believe the Federal government screwed up? Mass public executions on prime time TV?

Depending on how the media spun this scene, you might end up with a 60-70% aproval rating.

I'd love to write my congresscritter demanding articles of Impeachment against Bush but alas, I live in Georgia. Every time I write my reps, I get a form letter back that is the verbal equivilent of the orgy scene from Caligula. Guess who plays Caligula.

Posted September 8, 2005 9:19 AM by Keith Kisser

"You forgot Holland!"

Sorry, Marrije. I have nothing against Holland as a destination (it's every bit as good as the others I suggested and better than some of them). I'm just thinking that it might make the Amis rather nervous to be behind dykes again; but, then, the Czech Republic and Germany have had massive floods as well; in '97 a third of the Czech Republic was under water.

Erik: no, the mayor will be in Caina, the first zone of the ninth circle of hell, which is reserved for traitors to city or state. Fittingly, while his victims were immersed in water, he will be immured in ice.

Posted September 8, 2005 9:21 AM by ajay

FYI, FEMA is still keeping volunteer first responders out of New Orleans --- and lest anyone think that's not policy, it's being justified right from the top, by our friend Michael Brown. The Huffington Post has the key quote from this LA Times article right at the top as I write:

"They can't just yet," Brown said during a briefing in Baton Rouge. "There is going to come this natural time when we will release this floodgate of cops and firefighters who want to help. It's the same for anyone who wants to volunteer — we have over 50,000 offers of donations from the private sector. It has to be coordinated in such a way that it helps."

As to the "Oklahoma story", if it's the same one I've seen here, it's worth noting some, shall we say, points of resonance between it and the coverage in local media here of where the Massachusetts state government was planning to put the 2500 evacuees that it was expecting (though the Globe headline yesterday said tht was on hold, as the evacuees are objecting to being warehoused in states where they don't know anybody).

Briefly, the plan was to put the people in the barracks of a National Guard base out on Cape Cod. They would have been four to a room, in two bunk beds; not a whole lot of privacy, nor many amenities. On the one hand, the local government here was arranging for shuttle buses to shopping in Falmouth and off-base schooling for the kids --- which is rather different from the Oklahoma story. But on the other hand, for all the talk about the base's swimming pool and nine-hole golf course, the sheer crowding would have made basic living conditions for the people stuck there, perforce, pretty bleak.

Put an operation like that in the hands of local cops whose attitude is what we saw in New Orleans itself, and what you get is, well... the Oklahoma story.

(Cites: here and here on the Cape Cod story, for those with an interest).

Posted September 8, 2005 9:41 AM by Charles Dodgson

BTW, another story we're hearing a lot about is of families that got split up because the helicopter pilots promised to come back for the rest, and didn't. Well, here's one reason that didn't happen: two of those helicopter pilots were acting on their own initiative, and got reprimanded for it. (via King of Zembla).

Posted September 8, 2005 9:44 AM by Charles Dodgson

adamsj,
as far as an armed battle between New Orleans and Gretna police drawing in the feds, it appears that part of the reason for the delay was that the Bush Administration was trying to force the state of Louisiana to give up total sovereignty as a condition for assistance. A friend sent me the following on it:

"It now seems to be coming out that at least part of the delay in getting out-of-state national guard and regular army in to New Orleans was caused by some as yet unreported on legal wrangling between the White House and Louisiana Democratic governor. One poster on DailyKos says

>And maybe someone will ask what the "two options" were that Bush offered Blanco the day he flew in and before he gave the go ahead to let rescuers in. "Two options" that were evidently so "loaded" that she responded she had to have time to think them over.

What were the options? Let the Fed's use the "Insurrection Act" to bring in the military, instead of FEMA operating under the local authorities in conjunction with the NG?

There was a stall while political arm twisting went on.. I betcha, I betcha . . . It [the Insurrection Act] also allows the president to use federal troops to enforce federal laws when rebellion against the authority of the U.S. makes it impracticable to enforce the laws of the U.S. There is reason to believe that President Bush, running out of patience with Blanco by Saturday morning, used the only option that remained to him. It is being reported that Bush went around Blanco and utilized the Insurrection Act to federalize the National Guard and send in active military troops to take over the rescue and put down the lawlessness that had taken over New Orleans. The forces that Bush had poised to move into the city, swung into action.

Posted September 8, 2005 10:22 AM by hrc

the rest of my friend's information:

"...Is it really possible that the President of the United States has become the first modern president declare a "rebellion against federal authority" and no one knows about it? Or could it be that the Governor of Louisiana has been the first governor ever forced to declare an "insurrection" and we don't know about that? Both seem very unlikely to me and so I assume that the out-of-state national guard and federal active duty troops that are finally helping in New Orleans are doing so on the basis of the very same authority that they have in Mississippi: a disaster has been declared and FEMA has asked them to help.

In other words Bush used some sort of bogus legal opinion to try to bluff Blanco into declaring "insurrection" and she called his bluff believing that he would not have the balls to declare a "rebellion". Bush blinked and discovered in the end that neither of these were necessary. We need a full investigation to get to the bottom of this. If even a few hours, let alone days were wasted over such arguments clearly national security requires that the congress find out about the problem and solve it with clear new laws."

I hope we get a full, fair and impartial investigation of this by someone other than Bush and his cronies.

Posted September 8, 2005 10:25 AM by hrc

Ok, while we're on the subject of methods of contacting our senators and reps, who has any insight into what will actually be read/listened to/acted on?

Each time I send something in postal mail, I get a bulk reply (if I'm lucky). If I call, they tell me they'll just tally my name, if they answer the phones after putting you on hold. If I email, it generally never gets a reply.

Considering the resources of this group, someone must have a better insight into the best method to get your message across to your congress members?

I don't create the most publishable letters to the editor, but the Chron will definitely be getting mine.

The march in SF on the 24th is a definite for me now. I hate crowds, but my comfort isn't what the day should be about.

Posted September 8, 2005 10:59 AM by Dru

Tying together the folk song and Katrina threads, a bit of salient pardody:

http://www.livejournal.com/users/katallen/110898.html?#cutid1

Posted September 8, 2005 11:00 AM by elizabeth bear

Patrick points out to me that the Oklahoma story comes from a very iffy site of UFO conspiracists.

I don't know. I have a hard time disbelieving the Oklahoma story for a couple of reasons:

First, even a UFO nut can be in good faith.

Second, the whole setup is a whole lot like the typical refugee housing setup. And I use the word refugee advisedly. My friend in Dublin tells me for example that asylum seekers in Dublin are housed in apartments where they are forbidden to cook; they are issued some money, they can't of course work, and they have to eat out in Dublin.

When I went to Ellis Island what struck me was how immensely better the conditions were compared to what illegal immigrants who have the ill luck to be rounded up in Italy are subjected to.

All in all, although the Oklahoma story is not as well substatiated as the other, I had a much harder time believing that the police would shoot on evacuees than in beliving they would house them as described by the Oklahoma story. It still might turn out not to be true, of course. So far, everything I've heard from evacuees is good words for how they've been treated, especially in Texas.

Posted September 8, 2005 11:00 AM by Anna Feruglio Dal Dan

Charles not-Dodgson: that bridge being blocked off was reported by none other than FOX News, in the now-famous "Shepard Smith and Geraldo shout down Sean Hannity" segment.

Also, the Oklahoma camp seems to have been closed down, for now.

Posted September 8, 2005 11:06 AM by Tom Scudder

A journalist for the St Louis Post-Dispatch has interviewed another guest of the Monteleone hotel whose story corroborates Bradshaw and Slonsky. The report can be found here.

Posted September 8, 2005 11:06 AM by Charlie Whitaker

Good post. Except for this:

FEMA’s contemptible excuse for not letting the Red Cross into New Orleans was that if they alleviated the suffering there, people might be disinclined to leave.

It wasn't FEMA. That's the federal agency. It was the STATE homeland security department that requested that the Red Cross stay out. That's what the Red Cross's website says, anyway.

Posted September 8, 2005 11:08 AM by Jack V.

Then you start hearing about people cutting phone lines. And now this. If it's true - and I almost hope it isn't - this is very bad indeed.

This thread collided during the night with a couple of thoughts that have been in the back of my mind for a while:

(1) that there are people in government who really, truly believe that liberals and ACLU members are unAmerican and traitors; and

(2) that there are people (not necessarily the same ones) in government who are willing (and probably capable) of making people disappear (I have this picture in my mind of guys who show up, probably in the evening, and tell you that you've just 'won' a trip to Iraq/Afghanistan; you're leaving now and the movers will pack your stuff the next day).

The result of the collision was the really awful thought that the incompetence involved may lie in the stories getting out. There may actually be malice involved, but it isn't what we were thinking it was: these people really don't care about poor and minorities (they don't exist on any significant level of thought for "those who"); it's really a practice run for clearing out the liberals.

A wonderful thought to start my day with. Back up the links and stories, before they disappear.

Posted September 8, 2005 11:13 AM by P J Evans

Charles--thanks for posting that quote. I watched the briefing yesterday, but failed to take notes. His answer of "there has to be TEH PLAN" falls pretty damn short. People *died* waiting for TEH PLAN.

I do recall that Brown was also asked, "Are you worried about getting fired?" and "Will you be tendering your resignation?" His answer was "I serve at the pleasure of the President".

He was also asked, "Can you comment on why the Red Cross are being kept out of the city?" He sort of "um er well"d for a second, and then another official stepped between him and the microphones saying that "Mr. Brown won't be taking that question; we'll be getting you a better answer" from someone else, presumably from Homeland Security.

The briefing ended without that "better answer" ever materializing.

Posted September 8, 2005 11:20 AM by Nicole J. LeBoeuf-Little

Jordin Kare September 07, 2005, 10:34 PM:

Clipped.

"According to Gallup 35% of the public thinks the Federal government response has been "good" or "very good", and another 20% think it's been OK"

Clipped.

"What would it take to make these people believe the Federal government screwed up? Mass public executions on prime time TV?"

I would like to note that most of what this story condemns is the local response, not the federal response. It does little good to conflate the two where blame is concerned. They have different responsibilities and different capabilities.

Posted September 8, 2005 11:21 AM by Trevin Matlock

It's too bad there's no warranty on governments - this one's in need of an RMA.

Posted September 8, 2005 11:22 AM by Gluon

The airlift to the Cape Cod National Guard base is also on hold; that may well be the case more generally.

Posted September 8, 2005 12:16 PM by "Charles Dodgson"

Sigh. I'm always amazed at how people are so eager to gobble up all of the awful stories. Somehow the amazing stories of courage and endurance and sacrifice get lost. Not all police officers are fascist pigs out to kill and destroy all of the lower-class citizens. Some of us down here are busting our asses to help our fellow man--even after suffering losses of our own.

I know, that's not as fun to rant about.

Posted September 8, 2005 12:18 PM by Diana Rowland

The Senate & House have announced that they will hold a "joint, bipartisan" investigation into the Federal response to Katrina.

Yeah, the Republicans put out an announcement of a "bipartisan" investigation without even letting the Democrats read it first.

Posted September 8, 2005 12:18 PM by Redshift

This story definitely makes me wish I believed in Hell. (Alas, I still don't in any theological sense. We just make our own hells for our fellow earthlings, right here.) Despite being something of a pacifist, I've also been harboring some "Bring on the guillotines!" emotions for years now. But I very much doubt we'll even get impeachment, or criminal condemnations on any level.

I also have some friends in Australia. But it's not just financial or family considerations that will lead me to stay here in the wretched US of A. Just as nature goes through cycles of disaster and recovery, society does too. And if the "good folks" all leave for the sake of their own souls, what's left? Much as I hate what's going on here, the country as a whole isn't a drowned city (or sinking Titanic) fit only to be abandoned now. As a cowardly, introverted wimp, I may not be able to do much for it (even protest marching scares me), but some day my anger and my votes may still do some good.

Foolish optimism? Well, I do have a back-up belief: If we human parasites become too much for Earth to take, it will "shrug us off" and life in some form will go on. Gaia or no Gaia, that's a likely result.

Getting off my high horse, one more evacuation note. Some refugees recently arrived in Phoenix (as shown on TV). It makes me wonder about the effects of a long-term diaspora on the people of New Orleans, scattered all over the place.

Posted September 8, 2005 12:25 PM by Faren Miller

Anna said: My friend in Dublin tells me for example that asylum seekers in Dublin are housed in apartments where they are forbidden to cook; they are issued some money, they can't of course work, and they have to eat out in Dublin.

Just a slight correction: I am indeed in Dublin, but I was talking about asylum seekers in other parts of Ireland (I don't think there are any major accommodation centres in Dublin); and I think they get some kind of food delivered to them, so they don't have to eat out -- but they also can't choose what they eat (and I could make comments about standard Irish cuisine here, but I won't, and I'll mention standard Irish institutional cuisine instead).

(This of course changes nothing in the point that Anna was making -- if anything, the parallels are even closer: I just wanted to be precise.)

Posted September 8, 2005 12:37 PM by Anna Mazzoldi

May they be ashamed of themselves forever.

World without end, amen.

But I think Ajay's wrong, and I choose to stay and fight. I just got here, and if a big chunk of America seems to have abandoned the America I came here to join, well, that's no reason for me to do so as well. Not just yet.

(And Ajay, don't include Australia in your list of destinations. That's where I came from. You think the US is a racist society, go live in Aus for a while. It's also homophobic, wilfully ignorant and generally bass-ackward as far as culture goes, and moving rapidly to the right politically. There are some wonderful people living there, and I'd have stayed there and fought if I hadn't had extra reasons to come here (married a 'merican), but Aus is no improvement on the US in any way. And the US has the advantage that what happens here matters, no one really gives a rat's what Australia does or says.)

Posted September 8, 2005 12:39 PM by sennoma

When I first saw this story on Anna's blog before you guys ran it, I was very doubtful about its authenticity. Alas, it looks confirmed beyond doubt at this point. I still find it hard to believe that it was that easy to get a large group of unrelated individuals to behave in a unified fashion though. But I'm used to large crowds of sf fans ratther than 'normal' people. I'm going to go check on the OK internment story now and see if I think I still know anyone in OK who might confirm or disavow.

MKK

Posted September 8, 2005 1:03 PM by Mary Kay

Ajay,

It's all very well to talk about leaving, but aside from the ideological objections to it (and the fact that anywhere you go will have its own problems, e.g. NPD (neo-Nazi) election gains in some German states), you have to be able to get a visa, which is often a difficult thing to do. I recently did a student stint in Scotland (graduated too early for the Fresh Talent thing to apply) and would have had to find a job specialized enough that I wouldn't have been outcompeted by local jobseekers (since they will and I believe have to prefer locals where possible), or chosen to go on for a PhD, which would have involved getting a scholarship that's quite hard to obtain, and wasn't what I wanted anyway. Or married someone, but that wasn't really in the cards.

All things considered, I prefer to stay here and keep trying.

Posted September 8, 2005 1:13 PM by Alexis

It seems clear that this is going to be the federal (and in some places, state) response to climate disaster...and we are going to have more climate disasters.

Bad weather as an excuse for totalitarianism?

Posted September 8, 2005 1:16 PM by Randolph Fritz

Louisiana wants 40,000 troops
FEMA defends response; Congress considers $10.5 billion bill

Thursday, September 1, 2005; Posted: 11:26 p.m. EDT (03:26 GMT)

Terri Jones, right, and others try to cool down fellow flood victim Dorothy Divic, 89, in New Orleans Thursday.
WATCH Browse/Search

How a 94-year-old survivor is not 'ill enough'

An update on the military response to the disaster (9:54)
RELATED
• Gallery: Storm damage

• FEMA
• American Red Cross
• E-mail us: Send us storm stories
• Your e-mails
QUICKVOTE
How would you describe the response to Katrina's destruction?
As good as could be expected
Patchy
Too little, too slow
or View Results
SPECIAL REPORT

• Interactive: Safety Tips
• Gallery: Top 10 worst hurricanes
• Flash: How hurricanes form
• Gallery: Saffir-Simpson scale
• Special ReportYOUR E-MAIL ALERTS

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
Disaster Relief
or Create Your Own
Manage Alerts | What Is This? BATON ROUGE, Louisiana (CNN) -- Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Babineaux Blanco said Thursday she has requested the mobilization of 40,000 National Guard troops to restore order and assist in relief efforts in hurricane-ravaged New Orleans

Posted September 8, 2005 1:20 PM by Bob

I'm not sure I believe that Oklahoma story. I'm not saying that it can't be true, but it's coming out of some flaky places. Also, whenever the administration screws up really, really badly, Rove's favorite technique is to float a false story that's similar to the true one, and let them be discredited together.

If you look at the original site, it's pretty believable; the pictures are a coherent set, the author isn't a driveby but a member of the site who sticks around for discussion afterwards, she's not assuming that they are there to be gassed or anything -- there's a later part in the thread where they debate if the movement restrictions are meant to be just temporary for quarantine purposes, whether maybe these are actually displaced prisoners and thus the extra security and paranoia, etc.

There is at least one poster in the thread that's kind of paranoid UFOish, but the majority are carrying out a perfectly logical discussion based on direct evidence, so I see no reason to disbelieve.

Posted September 8, 2005 1:20 PM by tavella

Okay. That Oklahoma report may have been on an iffy site, but I can confirm that the Baptists do have a camp called Falls Creek. I've never been there, but I knew people who did go. (We belonged to a Baptist church until I was about 15.) The pictures included with the article look genuine -- that's certainly how that part of the state looks. I did my undergraduate and graduate degrees both as OU which is south of OKC and I'm pretty familiar with the area. So there certainly was a very strong Highway Patrol presence at the camp.

As for the weird regulations. What it sounds like to me is bureaucracy in action. They've made one set of regulations about what will and won't be allowed based on the worst possible places, i.e., the Astrodome, and are applying them to ALL situations. And they're gawdawful fearful about liability.

The newspaper report which talked about the operation being put on hold is from the Pryor paper -- Pryor is a small town in northeastern Oklahoma probably about 4 hours drive from the camp area. Which seems odd. What seemed doubly odd is that the announcement of the hold was made by a major in the OK Highway Patrol. Why would they be using the HP for coordination rather than H&HS or somesuch? I'll do some more checking of other papers later, but I haven't eaten anything yet today and I should go do that soon.

MKK

Posted September 8, 2005 1:27 PM by Mary Kay

A friend who used to live in Jefferson Parish heard the "armed cops blocking the bridge" story days ago and told me that she wasn't surprised and had a good idea who might have ordered it. She's looking forward to hearing what Broussard, who she otherwise describes as very admirable, will have to say about it.

Posted September 8, 2005 1:33 PM by OG

So, why doesn't this weaken anybody's faith in the whole concept of having this big, powerful state which does all these things for us?

Seriously, the story of the survivors in New Orleans could easily be a chapter from a novel by L. Neil Smith. One might conclude that we need better government, or one might conclude that we need a lot less. If nothing else, he'd love the bit about how government officials interfered with a market transaction by commandeering buses which had been hired by private parties for evacuation. Under other circumstances, socialists like that sort of state intervention.

I'm not trying to make a cheap shot here. Rather, it does seem that government officials at all levels -- local, state, and federal -- seem hostile to the whole notion of private relief efforts, spontanous self-organization, and even using the resources at one's disposal to make one's life better. In effect, they infantalize people, encouring them to stand in line, do what they're told, wait to be ground through the machinery. It's not a conspiracy; it's a mindset, a philosophy of governance. Mike Brown's comments about how everything has to be organized and coordinated is a part of this mindset.

One of my concerns about the long-term effect of this is that exactly the wrong conclusions will be drawn. Many will say we need more of the same, only better this time. So we'll end up with more rules, more regulations, more controls.

When, in fact, one lesson ought to be "first, do no harm." If anything, we need to harness the power of spontaneous mutual aid and citizen volunteers. How many more people could have been evacuated quickly if they'd asked for volunteers to drive to certain locations to pick up people, a sort of vehicular Dunkirk?

Two other smaller comments while I'm at it.

First, I think it's a mistake to go overboard with the whole Bushiltler thing. Bush screwed up, and he deserves to be criticized, condemned, even excoriated for it. It's inexcusable that the top three guys at FEMA are all political operatives or cronies. But if Bush fell on his sword tomorrow, the mindset I talked about above would still be presesnt. Recall that a lot of the screwups happened at the local and state level. And no, I don't think that the local cops were getting secret orders from FEMA to keep the blacks bottled up at the Superdome. FEMA's not that competent or organized.

Second, it sometimes is the case that decisions which seem stupid or unreasonable at some remove actually do make some sense. Not to give people an unreasonable benefit of the doubt, but the bit about not letting people walk out might be one of them. I think that I detect a certain amount of Eastocentric perspective in Teresa's comments. Of course it makes sense for people to walk across the bridge out of Manhattan -- Brooklyn is on the other side. It makes much less sense to have people wandering around on the roads in Louisiana, which is far more rural and less hospitable.

This is not to say that it was right for the cops to lie in order to get people to move from an inconvient location, or that everything they did made sense. But "just walk out" makes a lot more sense in Manhattan than New Orleans.

Posted September 8, 2005 1:41 PM by Pete

Diana Rowland said:

I'm always amazed at how people are so eager to gobble up all of the awful stories. Somehow the amazing stories of courage and endurance and sacrifice get lost. Not all police officers are fascist pigs out to kill and destroy all of the lower-class citizens. Some of us down here are busting our asses to help our fellow man--even after suffering losses of our own. I know, that's not as fun to rant about.

I can't speak for other people on this blog, and maybe I shouldn't even try.

Having said that, I suspect that focussing on the things that went wrong is part of the grieving process. We wish that everybody involved - from Bush on down - had been courageous, self-sacrificing and eager to do the right thing. We wish that all of you who had to live through this had gotten more help, sooner. We wish very much that this would never happen again. Hurricanes are unavoidable - the real disaster here was caused by humans.

Posted September 8, 2005 2:01 PM by Laura Roberts

I have just two words to say about the various government agencies harrassing survivors on foot, shooting over their heads, taking their food and water, and focusing more on what something "looks" like on TV than whether or not they actually served and protected the people they should be serving and protecting, just two words:

abso-fucking-lutely mother-fucking-criminal

These assholes should be publicly flogged, and if anyone has started a petition for said flogging, please direct me to it.

We now return to our regularly scheduled program.

Posted September 8, 2005 2:14 PM by Greg London

Diana: This is a mixed bag. It's about people who were making things better being prevented from doing so.

Would I like to be writing about the good things (such as they are, let us rather say the commendable actions) to come out of this.

Yes, and "Better to praise the good than rail against the ill" as Tennyson said, but when Cain asked God, "Am I my brother's keeper?" the answer was, "Yes."

Things like this need to be said, they need to be shouted from the rooftops, because to be quiet about them is to be complicit, and that is an evil thing; when good men do nothing.

So this, is something I can do (since I have not been called up to wait; or better yet help; though it might not go well for me if I saw something like this bridge scene). I don't know what I could do if I flew in, by myself, nor yet can I afford to drive. The imcompetence (and what seems to be worse, venal fear) of this thing is more important than those people who are doing good.

Those people, doing good, are saving people. Noble, laudable, to be praised. The others, they may be killing people, people they ought (one might say people they are paid, and perhaps swore an oath)to be protecting and to serving.

That seems more worth writing about than the warm fuzzies of a good human interest story.

Posted September 8, 2005 2:22 PM by Terry Karney

Pete asks:

So, why doesn't this weaken anybody's faith in the whole concept of having this big, powerful state which does all these things for us?

Because what we're seeing now is the direct consequence of an administration that decided not to do those things. As I've said before, libertarianism is 21st-century Luddism.

I refer you, as always, to John Barnes' wonderful essay Two Cheers for Ned Ludd, in the event that you think that's nothing but a put-down, because it's not.

Posted September 8, 2005 2:22 PM by adamsj

This is not to say that it was right for the cops to lie in order to get people to move from an inconvient location, or that everything they did made sense. But "just walk out" makes a lot more sense in Manhattan than New Orleans.

the impression I got was that it was a Mississippi river bridge and they wanted to walk over to get to a non-flooded area, from which they could get out more easily, not that they were proposing a long-distance march.

And if anyone in the parish does know who ordered it, pass the word so said @#$%^ can be punished appropriately.

Posted September 8, 2005 2:24 PM by P J Evans

Adamsj, I don't see any evidence that the administration ever "decided" not to do these things. Bush isn't a libertarian, and never pretended to be. It would be one thing if the administration had succeeded in devolving this function to the private sector -- then at least Wal-Mart could deliver trucks with water in them unimpeeded. Rather, the administration said it was going to do this job and proceeded to do it poorly.

As for the bit about libertarianism being the Luddism of the 20th century, it's not worth my time trying to convince you otherwise. Nor would I bother arguing with somebody who wants to give even one cheer for old Ned Ludd.

Posted September 8, 2005 2:35 PM by Pete

It would be difficult to point a finger at Aaron Broussard after seeing this.

Posted September 8, 2005 2:44 PM by Nate

Pete,

The guy who wrote the essay to which I refer is enough of a libertarian to be represented in the Free Space anthology--make of that what you will.

Posted September 8, 2005 2:44 PM by adamsj

sennoma: I sincerely hope that you find the USA better suited to be your permanent home than Australia. I can't disagree with your description of my country, perhaps because I lack the insight required to assess an entire nation in so few words.

I heartily agree that nobody cares what Australia thinks or does. Except for Australians, that is, but I feel certain, from your remarks, that you would feel aggrieved if you were to be called one. I hasten to assure you that I would never so insult you.

Posted September 8, 2005 2:54 PM by Dave Luckett

I'd say Scotland (we need the people), but I'm biased. Ireland.

If there could be a real possibility of moving to Scotland or Ireland, I'd like to know about it. But my career is in the arts (I work for a museum), and my husband, while handy with computers, isn't a programmer or a tech worker, and as far as I know, there's little chance of getting a job. If this isn't the case, please let me know.

I tend to be a milder personality, but the stories I'm hearing out of New Orleans are actually pushing me to the point of considering leaving. I never thought I'd be at that point.

Posted September 8, 2005 2:56 PM by genibee

The lawyer's description is just priceless.

A group of about 200 Monteleone guests decided to try to walk out of the city to the east, and got to the on-ramp at the Crescent Connection bridge, where they were met by Gretna, La., police with shotguns. "They told us the bridge was closed to foot traffic," Scheer said. "Some locals had joined us and became extremely unruly, threatening to rush the officers. They fired their shotguns into the air."

Ah, those unruly locals. They obviously forced the police to act that way.

Posted September 8, 2005 2:56 PM by shinypenny

Pete,

I was, perhaps, a bit short with you. Let me explain:

Like Luddism, libertarianism in its historical context was a reasonable, understandable response to encroachments of power and authority on the lives of ordinary citizens, for which responses we should be grateful. However, both Luddism and libertarianism are at heart reactionary (in a non-political, if perjorative, sense), and are not suitable guides for a well-functioning society.

That's my take--better writers than I are not be held accountable for my mangling of their views.

Posted September 8, 2005 3:34 PM by adamsj

By the way, is anyone taking notes on this? I don't mean "notes", like blogging about it on the web so that people can just read about it and get pissed. I mean take NOTES about it to see to it that certain mother fuckers actually do get flogged at some point? Goddamnit. I just wish that some news reporter had sense enough to embed himself with the group and follow them around and record all this shit. Police firing over their heads? A flogging, I tell you, an honest-to-god flogging. There are so many people that need to get fired right now, there isn't a list big enough to hold all the names.

Posted September 8, 2005 3:56 PM by Greg London

More info on the Oklahoma story. There is an article in the Norman Transcript which says Falls Creek has indeed been put on standby. It also says that 1400 people have been taken to Camp Gruber which is an Army National Guard base in northeastern OK. I'll see what I can find out about that.

A bit of expansion on what I said earlier about the whole liability thing. Even competent responsible adults have accidents and things like grease fires happen to the best of us. Imagine, if you will, a grease fire in the kitchen of one of the cabins getting out of control. The potential liability regards both property and human life is enormous. And you know how people in this country are about liability. That's what I think is driving a lot of the rather draconian regulations. The comments about riots and "the kind of people we'll be getting here" I put down to pure old-fashioned racism on the part of the guy speaking. I still have relatives living in OK who used the N word without shame or fear. It really is a different world than the one most of us live in.

MKK

Posted September 8, 2005 4:05 PM by Mary Kay

I pretty much go along with Matt A's comments up at the top.

As for shinypenny's quote about the unruly locals: It seems to me that there's some room for middle ground here.

Maybe those particular police guarding that bridge had a racist belief that letting black people into their neighborhood would be bad and/or unsafe. Maybe some of the people in the crowd were also behaving in an unruly manner. Maybe the bridge was also potentially unsafe for pedestrians to cross. Maybe those particular police were scared and exhausted and had inadequate communications and had heard about rioting looters and felt they needed to be hard-line to protect themselves and their city. I don't think those various stories are mutually incompatible.

I wasn't there; I don't have good enough data to know what happened. But I suspect that "what happened" was not one solid monolithic story in which all members of each group behaved identically for identical reasons, and everyone agreed about what everyone did and why. I suspect that if you asked everyone who was there for their version of events, you'd get three to five major versions of What Happened, each with a dozen minor variations, depending on who you talked with, and I suspect that most of those versions would be more or less factually accurate. Think _Rashomon_.

Relatedly: maybe the cop at the station lied to the crowd (about the buses) to get them to leave; or maybe he had received false information; or maybe he had received rumors of buses and he exaggerated their reliability to get the crowd to leave; or maybe there was something else going on. My understanding is that there were very few conduits of information into or out of the city; in those circumstances, it all turns into one big game of Telephone. Rumors get distorted and exaggerated and turned into Facts. And of course the behavior of one police officer, or even all the officers at a particular station, doesn't imply that The Police all felt or behaved the same way.

Just to be clear: I am not doubting any of this very sad and distressing account. (And thank you, Teresa, for posting it.) I'm quite willing to believe that everything happened pretty much as Bradshaw and Slonsky said it did. But I'm also willing to believe that others who were there might have seen slightly different things, perceived the same things through different filters, put different interpretations on events, remembered things differently afterward.

I've been in plenty of situations where I compared notes afterward with others who were there and found that their perceptions of what had happened and why were very different from mine.

Of course, it's also possible that Scheer is just lying. I'm just saying that his version of events and Bradshaw & Slonsky's version are not entirely mutually exclusive.

Side note: Mary Kay wrote: "I still find it hard to believe that it was that easy to get a large group of unrelated individuals to behave in a unified fashion." Note that the group size changed a lot during the course of events. They started with 500 people; when they left the police station for the bridge they were down to about 200; that crowd grew as they went to the bridge, but then the crowd dispersed at the bridge, leaving a "small group" to settle on the freeway; that small group eventually grew to 80 or 90 people. So it sounds like the most cooperative behavior (on the freeway) happened in a group of a few dozen people, not the 500 they originally started out with. (But I don't mean to downplay that cooperative behavior; I'm very pleased and impressed that it happened regardless of group size.)

Posted September 8, 2005 4:07 PM by Jed Hartman

My understanding (based on reporter interviews with their management) is that the Red Cross is at this point asserting that it was the Louisiana DHS who were stopping relief convoys from entering New Orleans, not FEMA.

That being said, the rest of this rings true, and is utterly unsuprising.

Posted September 8, 2005 4:35 PM by Charlie

Jordin Kare wrote:
>What would it take to make these people believe the Federal government screwed up? Mass public executions on prime time TV?

It would depend on who was being executed; if it was the Gretna Sheriff's Department, it might restore a bit of my faith in the Feds....

BTW, I think my parents met you on a plane a couple of years ago; your name rings a bell, and when I googled it I was reminded of their account of talking with an astrophysicist and filker who happened to be acquainted with my favorite filk duo, Echo's Children. I also see that you were on the concom for ConJosé, which I attended, so your name could be familiar from that context as well.

Posted September 8, 2005 4:35 PM by J. Alexander Harman

Thanks, Rich & Anna. I've passed it along to some people who might be able to improve things a bit, if they choose to and if the feds are giving the state any real control at all.

Posted September 8, 2005 4:37 PM by Todd Larason

Okay, there are a couple of articles in the Muskogee (nearest large town to Gruber) paper about the Camp Gruber evacuees. The kids are being enrolled in schools around the area and some people even have their pets with them there.

The Tulsa World (larger city further away) doesn't tell me anything about Gruber, but did inform me that on this day in 1974 Ford pardoned Nixon for any crimes he may have committed while in office.

MKK

Posted September 8, 2005 4:43 PM by Mary Kay

Dave: you seem to have misread me somewhat (and on re-reading, mea culpa). You won't like me any better for it, but I'll try to explain myself anyway. I wasn't saying "Australia is horrible, rah rah the US". My point was that Australia is, in fact, a very similar environment to the US in many ways. Racism is a deep seated problem, homophobia is common (though there are notable exceptions -- parts of Sydney for instance), the education system is