« History Lesson IV | Main | In the Deepest Regions of His Id »
March 03, 2006
Better Said
The Washington Times says it better than I did:
This week's Associated Press reporting on the leaked Katrina briefing tapes contains a seemingly minor but actually quite significant factual error and subsequent hit job on President Bush. The reporting buried among sturdier assertions the claim that Mr. Bush was warned about possible breaches of the levees on Aug. 28-29, right before and during Hurricane Katrina's onslaught on the Gulf Coast. In reality, he was warned about many potential problems on these tapes -- but levee breaches weren't among them. The AP reported this as though it were fact, and then uncritically quoted Democratic partisans who were only too happy to parrot it.
As the tapes show, the president was warned extensively about storm surges, water topping over the levees, flooding in addition to storm surges and the possibility of significant losses of life across the Gulf Coast. Clearly, warning signs were in place for a major disaster. "I'm sure it will be in the top 10 or 15 when all is said and done after the post-analysis," said the half-prescient National Hurricane Center Director Max Mayfield.
But breaches? There was only one mention of breaches -- which Mr. Mayfield raised briefly in a confused-sounding sentence only to dismiss the possibility. "Louisiana can talk a little bit more about this than I can, but it looks like the Federal levees around the City of New Orleans will not have been [incomprehensible] any breaches to," he said on Aug. 29. This was the very day the levees were breached.
The previous day, Mr. Mayfield had actually dismissed the possibility of major flooding in New Orleans. "[T]he forecast we have now suggests that there will be minimal flooding in the city of New Orleans itself," he said. Storm surges were the overwhelming preoccupation. "The big question is going to be: will that top some of the levees?"
In other words, if the president heard any predictions that the levees would be breached, or even reports of breaches as they occured, the evidence is nowhere on these leaked tapes.
"We keep getting reports in some places that maybe water is coming over the levees. We heard a report unconfirmed, I think, we have not breached the levee." Governor Kathleen Blanco 08.29.05
The AP reports:
In fact, the National Weather Service received a report of a levee breach and issued a flash-flood warning as early as 9:12 a.m. that day, according to the White House's formal recounting of events the day Katrina struck.
Not until the day after Katrina roared ashore did the White House confirm that its surge had, in fact, breached the levees - a delay that critics charge held up repair efforts and allowed the deadly flooding to worsen.
Two points:
One, the AP's decision to drop the Bush tape (of which there were already released transcripts) before the "follow-up" with the Blanco tape (which they probably also sat on) doesn't sound like an agency trying to get to the bottom of anything.
Two, I didn't know that the White House needed to confirm breaches before it became true. I remember seeing it on television as it was happening (which was after reporters spoke of New Orleans "dodging a bullet").
Posted by Aaron at March 3, 2006 10:26 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.lifelikepundits.com/cgi-bin/mt3/mt-tb.cgi/2176
Comments
Gotta love the camera person giving the Gov a Rick's Caberet hat ...
Posted by: paul at March 5, 2006 02:03 AM
I didn't even notice that! Good catch, Paul!
Posted by: aaron at March 5, 2006 09:46 AM
The most important piece of the tape was watching Bush assure the folks that the government is "fully prepared." It's the absolute embodiment of his administration: say a thing is so, and forget about the rest. It's Bush at his most naked. And yet, you continue to love the guy.
In saying he was prepared, the only conclusions are 1) he's so out of it he actually believed it or 2) he couldn't have cared less whether it was true or not or 3) he somehow magically believes (he's in the White House at God's will, after all) that saying a thing makes it so. Given his general approach to all things during his tenure (ignore or supress the facts), I choose 3). Although, given his lack of attention in the first several days after the storm hit, you could certainly make a case for 2).
Posted by: Dr. Sid at March 5, 2006 05:23 PM