Katrina: What Happened When (Good Timeline from FactCheck)

Fact Check ^ | 9/16/05

[MaxPlanck]

What Fact Check forgot (about the Red Cross)....



Red Cross: "It Was Not Safe To Be In The City" (Video).

In a Larry King interview on Sept 2nd, Red Cross CEO Marsha
Evans explained that the Red Cross were not in New Orleans
because it was unsafe.

“It was unsafe to be in the city.”

“…it was not safe to be in the city, and it's not been safe
to go back into the city.”

According to other reports, Red Cross workers could have been
shot or contracted disease if they entered New Orleans in the
first days after the storm.

In addition, Evans mentioned concerns that relocating in the
city would delay evacuation.

“They were also concerned that if we located, relocated back
into the city, people wouldn't leave, and they've got to
leave.”

However, many reporters and news sources have failed to
acknowledge the safety/security aspects of Marsha Evan’s
explanation (an exception being Bill O’Reilly at Fox News).

It is not yet clear whether or not the Red Cross would have
entered the city early on, given these serious safety risks,
even if they had not been asked to stay out by the National
Guard, the city and State emergency management.

A relevant video clip from the Larry King interview can be
found at this (liberal) site:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200509090002

MP



See also this comment from samizdata. (Trey saw my comment
first, before he wrote his). I don’t necessarily think Major
Garrett was ‘majorly’ wrong. He may be 100% right. But we
just don’t KNOW that yet…

MaxPlanck



Red Cross Story Update: Garrett’s Majorly Wrong Reason?

A possibly serious flaw in Major Garrett's reporting is that
he failed to emphasize the importance of SAFETY and SECURITY
in deciding whether the Red Cross would enter New Orleans in
the first days after the storm.

Both the Red Cross (in Larry King’s interview with Marsha
Evans, Sept 2nd) and Bill O'Reilly (in his interview with
Marsha Evans, Sept 6th) point out these important issues.
(See relevant clips here:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200509090002).

It seems that Major Garret was aware of the safety and
security issues that might well have stopped the Red Cross
from entering anyway.

“But the state told us A) it's not safe, because the water is
dangerous. And we're now learning how toxic the water is. B)
there's a security situation, because they didn't have a
handle on the violence on the ground. And C) and I think (my
emphasis) this is most importantly, they wanted to evacuate
out. They didn't want people to stay.”

But for some reason Major Garrett assumed that the desire to
evacuate was the most important reason the Red Cross were not
in New Orleans, which seems contrary to what we know from
Marsha Evan’s Interviews with Larry King and with Bill
O’Reilly. Subsequently, this is what he emphasized in this
reporting and now this is the story that is going around.

But isn’t it understandable that the Red Cross were blocked
if it was simply too dangerous for them to be there?

And is it accurate to say the Red Cross were 'blocked' from
entering New Orleans, if they would not have gone in anyway,
because it was too unsafe for them to go in?

We know that the Red Cross really wanted to provide
assistance. But would they have actually entered a highly
dangerous New Orleans in the first days after the storm,
risking the lives of their own members, if they had been
given the opportunity?

Trey Monke Posted by Trey Monke at September 14, 2005 09:49
PM

[meyer]

Good bush-Bashing first draft for creating a real timeline

Yep - after skimming it a bit, it seems that it has a bit of a leftist slant to it. It's a good start, but it's missing a great deal of important information, and seems to enjoy the art of mis-quoting and out-of-context quoting of the President's remarks.

[meyer]

Yep. I guess it is Most of the Fact Check. Almost all of the Fact Check. Leave out the Real Incriminating Fact Check.

It's a collection made up from articles from leftist MSM sources, not a timeline of facts.

[satchmodog9]

They seem to go out of the way to point out Bush at the ranch. Not very fair if your sources are biased and inaccurate media reports.

[chaosagent]

bookmark

[Presby Conservative]

Thanks for doing this work.

Have you found any information on the date and time the Louisiana National Guard was called up and deployed?

I heard on Fox that Col. Bill Cowan was going to dig into the NG deployment. Col. Cowan also said that the NG had been told to not tell anyone the details of their deployment.

[Cboldt]

This Ebbert guy doesn't appear in the time line at all. His statement, if given to the responders would explain why the break was played down early.

Yup. And here is another fun fact, NAGIN SAID THE LEVEES WOULD BREAK.

New Orleans Mayor, Louisiana Governor Hold Press Conference
Aired August 28, 2005 - 10:00 ET

MAYOR RAY NAGIN, NEW ORLEANS: ... storm is intensifying, and is still pointed toward New Orleans, and there's not a meteorologist or an expert that I have talked to that says that this storm will not impact New Orleans in a major way. ...

The storm is now a Cat 5, a Category 5, as I appreciate it, with sustained winds of 150 miles an hour, with wind gusts of 190 miles per hour.

The storm surge most likely will topple our levy system. So we are preparing to deal with that also. So that's why we're ordering a mandatory evacuation.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0508/28/bn.04.html

[Cboldt]

I stand corrected with all the facts Freepers have - this is NOT a good timeline!

It's misleading by omission. At a glance, I don't find false statements in it.

[FlashBack]

Thanks for a GOOD source on this Peach!!

[DocH]

In post 28, I said, in part, in fact, it was NOT FEMA coordinator Bill Lokey, but actually, Congressman Vitter from LA.

I meant to say SENATOR Vitter (R, LA).

[lifacs]

Ditto! Anyone that followed the live hurricane thread can easily see, at a glance, that fact check is incorrect on many accounts.