No, you've provide YOUR opinion, and an ignorant one at that. Why don't you tell us then, since you're such the expert, the precise causes for the failures. I don't mean your worthless "..maintenance wasn't done" rhetoric, but the actual cause of the failure in engineering terms. What's that? Oh, you don't know that. Just what I thought.. another bullshit artist with an oversized ego. It also proves you haven't read one damn thing on the subject. Hell, I did all the leg work for you and posted you links to all of the information. I've netted out the findings, just for you, because of your obviously limited reading comprehension skills. I do all this for you and still you continue to embarrass yourself.
Maybe you can get your friends at daily kos or truthout to draw you some crayon drawings.. maybe that will work. What a dolt. On Jan 23, 9:27 am, "liberal mike532 !" <[email protected]> wrote: > i have provided you with the truth not bush administration propaganda > and lies . > what you know about how and why the levees failed would fit in a > thimble . have you even looked at what the SELA project was ? i rather > doubt you have or you wouldn't keep making a fool of yourself ! > On Jan 23, 9:20 am, frankg <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > ACoE Documents, Engineering Studies, NOAA Documents.. all posted here > > that support my position. > > > And what have you contributed? Your opinion. > > > Which proves one thing... that you don't know shit about what you're > > talking about. > > > On Jan 23, 2:48 am, "liberal mike532 !" <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > you have yet to provide anything but excuses for bush ! pull your head > > > out of your butt and face the facts . the levee failure was because > > > the maintenance was not done ! > > > > On Jan 22, 4:49 pm, frankg <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > You never change. I continue to provide you PROOF, via quotes, web > > > > links and documents, that this is not the case. What we get from you > > > > is insults, followed by personal opinion. Why don't you post some > > > > evidence that the levees failed because of funding cuts. You haven't > > > > and you can't because there is none. No one from the ACoE is on record > > > > as having said the funding cuts had anything to do with it. Is General > > > > Strock full of shit too? I mean, he's only the head of the agency > > > > responsible for the levees. > > > > > At this point I can only conclude you don't know jack shit about the > > > > levees. > > > > > Being that I’m such a nice guy I’ll go so far as to provide you two > > > > more links. I’m going to pretend you actually care what caused the > > > > failures, and at these two links you’ll find lots of good information > > > > on this from people with lots of qualifications and who actually > > > > investigated the failures. I point this out just in case you want to > > > > suggest they too are full of shit. > > > > >http://www.ewrinstitute.org/files/pdf/katrinalevees.pdf > > > > >http://kerrn.org/pdf/IPETBEAreview.pdf > > > > > And in an honest effort to keep you from embarrassing yourself > > > > further, let me remind you the projects affected by the funding cuts > > > > were intended to bring the levees back to their original design > > > > specifications. This is important because, assuming you read the > > > > reports above, you will find that the original specifications were > > > > severely lacking. They were doomed to failure. In fact, several > > > > failure points were sections that had been recently repaired. > > > > > I’ve also discovered something else; you have no reading > > > > comprehension. I have never said the Mayor or Governor did any work on > > > > the levees. I have said a dozen times or more it's the ACoE that > > > > designed and maintained them. No wonder you get things so screwed up. > > > > > On Jan 22, 3:09 pm, "liberal mike532 !" <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > frank to put it bluntly you are full of shit ! > > > > > if you had done any research at all you would know that the levees > > > > > failed because the maintenance on them was not done. and the reason it > > > > > wasn't done was because bush cut the funding for SELA . and if you had > > > > > bothered to think or read anything at all about the levees system you > > > > > wold know that the corps of engineers does the work on the levees not > > > > > the mayor or the Governor . > > > > > On Jan 22, 11:52 am, frankg <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > I've done extensive research on this, but I seriously doubt you > > > > > > have. > > > > > > Unlike you, who thrives on blaming Bush, I’m indifferent. If he’s at > > > > > > fault, I’ve got no problem pointing that out. But unlike you, I look > > > > > > at the facts and make informed decisions without any preconceived > > > > > > ideas on who to blame and no incentive to falsely assign blame for > > > > > > political gain. > > > > > > > You ignore the role that Blanco played in the disaster. > > > > > > You ignore the role that Nagin played in the disaster. > > > > > > You ignore the history of the levee system and the role the levee > > > > > > commission played, via its corruption, negligence and mismanagement. > > > > > > You ignore what the ACoE and NOAA said concerning the design of the > > > > > > levees and its basic inability to resist a storm the size of > > > > > > Katrina. > > > > > > > The only thing you pay attention to are the Bush cuts - cuts I would > > > > > > consider shortsighted and ill-advised - but which, by all 'expert > > > > > > and > > > > > > official' accounts - played little to no role in the disaster. > > > > > > You've > > > > > > never posted anything that supports your argument other than your > > > > > > own > > > > > > opinion. The ACoE is responsible for the levees. Can you post > > > > > > anything > > > > > > from them saying the cuts caused the failure? Do you understand the > > > > > > history of the levee system and do you understand that if not for > > > > > > corruption and mismanagement, this would never have been an issue to > > > > > > debate? Have you read the details of the actual projects affected by > > > > > > the cuts and do you understand what they were designed to achieve? > > > > > > Do > > > > > > you understand the impact of the eradication of the wetlands that > > > > > > created a natural barrier for New Orleans, and what impact that had > > > > > > on > > > > > > the disaster? I doubt you understand any of this. You just want to > > > > > > blame Bush.. screw the details. > > > > > > > Quote: > > > > > > You might want to talk to General Strock, who is the commander of > > > > > > the > > > > > > Army Corps of Engineers, because I think he's talked to some > > > > > > reporters > > > > > > already and talked about some of these issues. I think some people > > > > > > maybe have tried to make a suggestion or imply that certain funding > > > > > > would have prevented the flooding from happening, and he has > > > > > > essentially said there's been nothing to suggest that whatsoever, > > > > > > and > > > > > > it's been more of a design issue with the levees. > > > > > > > Quote: > > > > > > The worst has happened in New Orleans and not everyone is surprised. > > > > > > For years, specialists have warned that the city, built partly below > > > > > > sea level and in an area of radically depleted wetlands, was a > > > > > > natural > > > > > > disaster waiting to happen. And when it did, they said, we would > > > > > > have > > > > > > no one to blame but ourselves. > > > > > > ... > > > > > > But, according to the US Geological Survey, Louisiana has lost 1,900 > > > > > > square miles of wetland in the past seven decades - an area larger > > > > > > than the state of Rhode Island. > > > > > > > The draining of the wetlands to make way for roads, malls, beach > > > > > > communities, marinas and condominiums has also meant shrinkage of > > > > > > the > > > > > > shoreline. Louisiana, in fact, loses 25 square miles of coast every > > > > > > year. > > > > > > > On Jan 22, 10:33 am, "liberal mike532 !" <[email protected]> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > like it or not the actions of G W Bush when he cut the funds for > > > > > > > SELA > > > > > > > caused the deaths of thousands of Americans ! > > > > > > > and i would suggest you do some research before you blindly > > > > > > > except a > > > > > > > report written by one of bush's administration . > > > > > > > On Jan 22, 10:22 am, frankg <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Mike, > > > > > > > > > No one ever said it was poor design; it simply was an inadequate > > > > > > > > design for something other than a fast moving cat 3 storm. The > > > > > > > > ACoE > > > > > > > > has said it wasn't designed for that type of storm, and would > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > failed regardless. There are storm simulations that were done > > > > > > > > by NOAA > > > > > > > > prior to Katrina that indicated that under exactly the > > > > > > > > conditions > > > > > > > > Katrina presented, New Orleans would flood. All these experts > > > > > > > > tell us > > > > > > > > New Orleans would flood, but Mike knows better. Your arrogance > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > impressive, if nothing else. > > > > > > > > > Yeah, the center of the storm was to the east of New Orleans. > > > > > > > > That > > > > > > > > spared it the worst of the winds, but had little bearing on the > > > > > > > > storm > > > > > > > > surge, which was over 28', yet you choose to ignore that fact. I > > > > > > > > provided you a link to give you a 20 year history of corruption > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > mismanagement regarding the levees - proof that long before > > > > > > > > Bush was > > > > > > > > president the seeds to disaster were being sewn, but you choose > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > ignore the facts. It's public record that the levee committee > > > > > > > > routinely channeled funds to casinos and other 'more important' > > > > > > > > projects, but you choose to ignore the facts. You're not > > > > > > > > interested in > > > > > > > > why the levees didn't hold the storm back, nor are you > > > > > > > > interested in > > > > > > > > what was done wrong that cost lives, because you have > > > > > > > > consistently > > > > > > > > ignored the facts. All you are interested in is your anti-Bush > > > > > > > > rhetoric, and anything that gets in the way of that is to be > > > > > > > > ignored. > > > > > > > > But not to worry; as is always the case, once the politically > > > > > > > > motivated stop their shouting and the facts are examined, the > > > > > > > > truth > > > > > > > > eventually comes out. There are very few remaining who don’t > > > > > > > > understand the history of the levee system, and that the Bush > > > > > > > > cuts had > > > > > > > > little to do with Katrina. So keep on blowing your BS if you > > > > > > > > like, but > > > > > > > > be advised you are only fooling yourself. > > > > > > > > > On Jan 22, 2:58 am, "liberal mike532 !" > > > > > > > > <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > what is certain is that the levees failed for lack of > > > > > > > > > maintenance . > > > > > > > > > not poor design ! > > > > > > > > > the storm did not even hit New Orleans it hit to the east of > > > > > > > > > the city > > > > > > > > > and the levees failed after the storm was long gone > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
