This "expert" was on Meet the Press last Sunday--the second of two visits--and basically laid the whole thing at the feet of the Bush Administration for cutting funds to the Army Corps of Engineers. Two days ago he was quoted in an NBC Nightly News story where Lisa Meyers reported the contractor--while upgrading one of the levees ten years ago--had told the Army COE the ground was not strong enough to support one of the now broken levees. This professor never mentioned it on MTP. Now he's calling for an independent investigation regarding New Orleans sinking yet he never mentioned that either.
This story conveniently leaves out the fact the Prof. van Heerden is also an expert in levees and I've seen his actual title reported elsewhere as "deputy director of the Louisiana State University Hurricane and Levee Center".
So, he started out on Meet the Press blaming Bush, came back on MTP blaming Bush, then gets questioned regarding reports of irregularities dealing with the levee upgrades ten years ago and now is calling for an "independent investigation" for something he's supposed to be an expert on yet never bothered to mention.
I think he did know all this and was more interested in tieing an albatross around Bush's neck. Now, he's playing dumb when his job requires him to know--or at least study to find out--this information. Did he know any of this or is he just another incompetent Louisiana boob like the governor and the mayor of New Orleans?
Waht about the explosives? They forgot to mention the explosives used to blow up the levees.
It was Karl Rove's landsinker machine.
This is where I stopped reading!
I stopped reading right there, this is all I needed to see to know her agenda on this subject. Her adding the 1/4" raise in ocean levels over the last 100 years compared to the 2' of settlement tells me she is an environmentalist pushing a global warming hype to the problem.
Another theory to ponder......
He sounds about 3 sandwiches short of a picnic.IMHO
So, when the head of Homeland Security said the levee break was a surprise he was telling the truth.
OTOH: It's still Bush's fault.
There was an excellent thread on FR a few weeks ago analysing satellite data and pointing to areas where the levees were noticeably lower than they were supposed to be. It's possible FR was out ahead of this story by weeks.
We are experiencing historical difficulties; please stand by.
Review this FR thread for an early discussion of the condition and height of the levees using the satellite data I mentioned.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1484668/posts
Two prime Bush bashers, NBC and the LA Times, come out with levee failure stories within 24 hours of each other, both factually correct, both also sumarily incorrect. It's no accident.
Both sets of scum know the truth, they know it is going to come out one way or another, and this is yet another attempt to head utter disaster off by means of a pre-emptive strike.
Let them play their games. There was no need to draw Dan Rather in, his impatience and arrogance caused him to throw caution to the winds and plunge ahead, right into a trap, without thinking.
For the moment, these idiots are doing our work for us. They raise attention to Cat 3 levees that failed in Cat 2 conditions. Allow them to continue. So far, they are unable to make their point without explicitly stating it, and this issue is much too complex for the average man in the street to get what the media is trying to sell with only innuendo at their disposal.
Before too long though, NBC, the LA Times, and all the rest will come to a crossroads. They will have to decide between letting their point go unspoken and stating it explicitly.
Regardless of which avenue they choose, the truth is known. The truth is...archived.
If they choose to commit themselves, they leave themselves open to yet another Rathergate.
If they choose not to take the risk of explicitly stating a lie, then the ground is primed and ready for us to make the real point for them.
Once again, those who would save effort and work in achieving undeserved political benefit have outmaneuvered themselves.
No surprise.
Of course, if they were intelligent to begin with, they wouldn't be Liberal, would they?
Rename New Orleans as New Holland.. and use lowland techniques to rebuild the place.. with windmills and everything.. Course that will put a hurtin on the crawfish crop.. draining all them swamps.. or maybe even building the first underwater city.. Should be cheaper than inhabiting to Mars or the Moon..
Much of NO East was peaty boggy land before they filled it in. I moved out to one of the suburbs before most of the area was built up, and the air was frequently filled with the smell of smoke from bog fires. We moved to one neighborhood in 1968, but moved out in 1973 in part because the ground had sunk below the house slab, exposing places that rats and cats would come into the house from below. In 5 years, must have sunk around a foot. During the same time period, in Jefferson Parish, the area immediately west of New Orleans, houses blew up because of subsidence problems with the gas lines to the houses.
Experts had sounded alarms in recent years about subsidence, as the sinking is known ...
Subsidence (sub si dence), a condition where everything collapses after politicians suck all the money out of the environment.
"This "expert" was on Meet the Press last Sunday--the second of two visits--and basically laid the whole thing at the feet of the Bush Administration for cutting funds to the Army Corps of Engineers."
WRONG! I have it on good authority that George Bush ordered Navy divers to blow up the levees because he hates blacks and wants to steal their land.
>>As levees have sunk, melting glaciers have lifted ocean levels globally, she added.<<
I am not a scientist but I do have a call into one to verify what I am thinking. I think:
When water freezes it encompasses greater mass.
When an iceburg melts the amount of ice above the surface will only fill the space that the iceburg took below the waterline.
Therefore this will not cause the oceans to rise.
Am I correct?
OK, so NOW as (still) more evidence gathers than 'norlins' is sinking, can we quit trying to rebuild a city that is below sea level in a swamp?
All the workers have been evacuated, they will find new jobs where they are now. That is what workers do. The business owners will establish their businesses where they are now, its not like they have any assets to return to.
All the welfare receivers have been evacuated, tell them to pick up their checks where they are now.
Every ocean going ship that was going to dock there has been redirected to another port.
Farmers will have to have the rail cars that they load their grain into go to one of the other US ports.
The human debris of the Frog Quarter will have to go somewhere else for their annual 'parade'
... And where are the environmental impact studies that are required by law any time a wetlands is drained?
If a normal citizen fills in a puddle on their land, they go to jail. Why aren't the citizens of 'norlins' held to the same legal standard?
The fed should pay NOT ONE CENT to rebuild New Orleans.