Louisiana authorities DELIBERATELY MADE THINGS WORSE

Folks, I'm sorry for the semi-vanity post, but THIS NEEDS TO GET OUT THERE. Tell your friends. Tell your family. Tell perfect strangers. Tell everyone. Frankly, I'm absolutely stunned that this isn't the top article on every single news site. I'm stunned that the blogosphere isn't buzzing about nothing else. Why hasn't this gotten the attention it deserved?

In short: the Louisiana Department of Homeland Security BLOCKED THE RED CROSS from bringing desperately needed food, water, and supplies to the Superdome and the Convention Center. This was done to deliberately make conditions worse. Why? Because they wanted people to evacuate, and I guess they figured that if the people there had the luxury of, say, CLEAN WATER, they'd be less likely to leave. So they made a willful decision to starve and dehydrate the people in the Superdome so they'd be miserable enough to leave... or, if they were weak, miserable enough to die, as a few of them did.

Governor Blanco doesn't deserve electoral defeat. She doesn't deserve impeachment. She deserves to sit in prison for the rest of her life... or to hang by the neck until dead for inflicting on Americans what would be considered an atrocity if Americans inflicted it on anyone else.

And while this was going on, both the Mayor and the Governor were crying, "Where is the food? Where is the water?" The food and the water were sitting on trucks which were prevented from delivering them by the State of Louisiana.

""Only my hairdresser knows for sure. ;>"

Regarding the ineptitude of our elected officials, and in consideration of your comment, I propose that hairdressers are infinitely more capable of runnin our country than, at least those we now scrutinize as regards the current crisis.

I mean, the ability to react quickly and properly to curlers which have become overheated and are ruining a days work on someone else's head, seems to me to be just as important as whether we say "get out", or "we don't have a clue".....

You must be thinking of those hairdressers at a beauty school Shreveport, LA who went after a "would be burglar" with CURLING IRONS, chased him right outta the place. Not a bad idea. From henceforth, since "guns" are controversial, every resident of the USA will be issued Curling Irons.

And you can't blame FEMA if you hadn't preheated the iron when you were "disastered" or "set-upon".

But I do worry that NOLA officials might develop a "red hot disaster plan" costing untold billions in fed funds (with some state funds) that no one will follow anyway.

I dunno about the the curling iron proposal.

Yours on curlers has merit, tho.

Doing the right thing, the smart thing means that you take responsibility, these folks know that to accept responsibility means that you don't receive that means you PAY.

Hard to argue with that one.

Days before this tragedy I predicted what the "professional victims" would do and say and my posts were removed, the threads were removed and I was chastised by fellow freepers.

That is a painful reality in some cases. But we have to remember that although the Internet is a free speech zone, it is truly so only for those who have their own web site. And if you do have a web site, you have nothing if you cannot attract a readership - so your site has to be moderated (edited) for the reader the site hopes to attract. And that means fallible human judgement. Sigh . . .

DU did a number on me and I was chastised again.

I had an experience of attracting the attention of DU:
Just an FYI...DU is "archiving" this thread as proof that Freepers want to do away with the First Amendment. We may want to put some thoughts to "enlighten" those that don't read properly.DU thread here...shower after leaving
37 posted on 09/16/2001 2:08:55 PM EDT by Dakotabound
I got no flack from FR's mods, tho. And I just threw the text of the First Amendment back at DU - tho only within FR, I don't lurk DU and don't try to post there. But they should have been embarassed to claim that a discussion of the meaning of the First Amendment is anti-First Amendment. Especially a discussion which actually urges stricter enforcement of that restriction on the government.
But of course when a Democrat talks about "the First Amendment" in particular or the "Constitution" in general, the terms belong in scare quotes. Because when they say "Constitution" they don't mean the agreement ratified in 1788 but their idea of virtue. If they want a right to abortion on demand, they say it is "in the Constitution" - simply because it is what they believe in, with no sincere reference to the document itself.
It is a sociopathic argument, which rejects the idea that any disagreement with their POV is legitimate.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.