New Orleans police ordered to stop saving lives and start saving property

Crackdown on looting
New Orleans police ordered to stop saving lives and start saving property
By Patrick Martin
1 September 2005

New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin ordered nearly the entire active police force in the flood-ravaged city to abandon rescue operations Wednesday night and focus on efforts to halt looting. The decision came in response to mounting pressure from sensationalized media coverage which is increasingly placing emphasis on the property damage done by looters, suggesting that it has become nearly as significant a social problem as the virtual destruction of the city by Hurricane Katrina.

Nagin said that looters “are starting to get closer to heavily populated areas—hotels, hospitals, and we’re going to stop it right now.” He assigned 1,500 police to anti-looting duty. The Associated Press reported, “The number of officers called off the search-and-rescue mission amounts to virtually the entire police force in New Orleans.”

The order came only hours after Nagin warned that the death toll in New Orleans might rise to the “thousands” once the bodies of those trapped in their homes by the flood waters begin to be recovered. Thousands of people have been rescued from rooftops and attics over the past two days, but efforts to save other survivors will be drastically curtailed as a result of the new focus on saving property.

Louisiana Governor Kathleen Blanco said she would order National Guardsmen redeployed to stop looters as soon as federal emergency personnel were on scene to take over evacuations and rescues. “We will restore law and order,” the Democratic governor declared. “What angers me the most is that disasters like this often bring out the worst in people. I will not tolerate this kind of behavior.”

.............................................

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2005/sep2005/loot-s01.shtml

If that is true, I would be honored and privileged to blow them away myself.

Look, I'm not there, I don't know the truth. But I refuse to be baited into a socialist (it's WSWS) mythos that doesn't necessarily have any relation to reality but fits into preconceived concepts of politics above all. I'll wait, I'll read the information that does come out, and I'll cross my fingers and hope for the best.

But in spite of the quotes above, the totality of what I have heard is that looting is being treated as a threat to PEOPLE, innocent people, and the property be damned.

To otherwise try to protect property and merchandise is just misplaced manpower. People who are really worried about their valuables and stores who are worried about their merchandise are more than likely insured. F this "prosecute the looters to the fullest extent!" bandwagon, save the lives and then prosecute Bush for delivering our nation into tragedy over and over again.

You have already been baited into an all-commercial media landscape.

And we know how "preconceived concepts of politics" has little to do with corporate news, eh?
:sarcasm:

You live in a society that has only ONE allowed economic ideology.

As for WSWS, they are plain about their POV and I appreciate that pointing out capitalist abuses is one of their specialties. Frankly, I would rather live in a democracy with a significant socialist backbone (like the rest of the 'developed' world) than rely on liberals who obviously cannot defend social programs and public enterprise on their own. Very many of the sucessful political parties that Americans consider 'liberal' do in fact belong to organizations like the Socialist International.

It's time liberals (a.k.a. Failures) showed some respect for socialists instead of this pattern of insularity and abuse (and last century: persecution).

great on scene, downtown reporting from NO, lastnight....

http://news.globalfreepress.com/mp3/katrina/NO-8-31-05-2427-onscene_report-wdsu-katrina.mp3

peace

How are they going to transport it through chest-high water? Where are they going to plug it in? Why weren't the hosptials evacuated before the storm hit?

:mad:
rocknation

that is needed more for a heart/lung machine than for a wide screen TV.
Generators come in all sizes and some can be carried by the average person.
Most generators don't get plugged in, they have things plugged in to them. A better question might be where is the fuel going to come from to run the generator.
I hope that answers some of your questions, but the one I can't answer is, Why weren't the hosptials evacuated before the storm hit? I can guess their reasons: Maybe some of the patients were too sick to chance moving them? The hospitals thought their structures would withstand the hurricane, which they obviously did, but they weren't counting on floods and looters. Now they can't do anything about the floods, but they can ask for help against the looters.

What good is a hospital surrounded by water? The most critical patients should have been moved no later than last Saturday. And a comprehensive evacuation and relocation plan should have been put in place no later than 2003!

:headbang:
rocknation

(there was a shooting)

I'd say that establishing safe areas was a priority.

and armed thugs out to take what they will.

I'm glad some people get it.

People taking food, clothing and water from shops are not looting, but trying to survive.

People taking flat screen TV's are looters.

While some are making efforts to survive, others are out to profit from the misery of others and prey on those who are less fortunate.


I think I heard an evacuated hotel guest say that a prison had flooded and the prisoners were being released, so the guests had to leave immediately for their safety.

because there are not enough forces for everything that needs to be done. And because there has been unsatisfactory emergency response to feed and get water to the homeless and injured, they are taking it upon themselves to get what they need. As terrible a situation as this is, I find it unacceptable that there are so few emergency teams they are forced to choose between search and rescue and civil order- that it has to be one or the other is horrific to me.

My cousin is missing in NO, and I'm very concerned that by the time they are able to concentrate on the injured and stranded, it may be too late.

At the same time, I don't share the knee-jerk reaction of some posters who are appalled at the idea of the police being pulled off rescue detail.

They have hard, if not impossible choices to make.

as of late last week!!!!

:headbang:
rocknation

generally won't behave the way that structure wants. The structure values things over people and their needs. Gotta figure there will be some serious clashing.

Sounds like some insurance companies have come at the city government. Insurers are the only ones with anything at stake at this point. The owners of the 'Stuff" will already be filing claims, due to the flood. The insurers will be trying to duck and cover their asses and assets.

Values. It all comes down to real core values. Stuff vs people. Eat cake vs do one's presidential duty. Lead in times of national disaster vs go to that fund raiser in San Diego. Shoot some fools jacking a TV vs help a mother and child off the roof the've been on for 3 days.

Values. America, your values are showing.

industry, since they made such profits that we must save over
the human cost
humanity is only what is in the mind of the proletarian
and their thought has no economic relevance in our reality

Makes a lot of sense, doesn't it?

I hate to have my first post be naysaying, but the article is from the newsmax of the left, their feature story right now is that Bush is offering little support for this disaster on 9/1/05. Maybe that was true a few days ago but now that would be political suicide. I was alarmed when I saw this post, you should throw a bag of salt over your shoulder before you post this stuff. You wanna give freepers something to laugh about????? Keep quoting from that site buddy.

about Bush, I'm willing to support the Mayor in reassigning the police.

Everything I've heard is that the looting has become dangerous to the rescue effort, and to others.

It is no longer looting the Walmarts, but rather looting generators and food going to nursing homes and hospitals.

Unless the socialists are supporting a Lord of the Flies scerio for their own ends, we can't abandon the poor and helpless to provide a bunch of thugs leverage and wealth.

in Mississippi with a carload of supplies, hoping to pass some out when I see a need for it. My biggest concern right now is being robbed of the supplies I bring in by people who know there is no law to stop me.

So the mayor isn't only trying to protect property. He's trying to protect supplies, and to establish an order that will keep people from complete lawlessness. He's in a very tough spot right now.

Keep in mind that normally under these circumstances there are thousands of armed National Gaurd troops on the streets to stop looting and to help with rescues. Someone decided that wasn't necessary this time. That person should be fired, at least, whether it was Bush, Nagin or Blanco, or all three. The problem right now isn't the mayor's decision to divert some cops from search and rescue, it is the lack of necessary resources requiring the mayor to decide where to put the meager resources he has. People are looting hospitals and setting fires to buildings. That is endangering lives, too.

If the NG would have been on the streets right after the storm, as standard procedure dictates, the looting wouldn't have happened, the survivors would have been rescued more quickly, and maybe the mayor and other city personnel could have been concentrating on ways to plug up that leak yesterday, and on making sure that the feds actually did what they promised they'd do.

That is a rich perspective. It never should have reached this point. FEMA budget has been slashed and moreover, they've been systematically taken over by political hacks, NG in Iraq, Bush learning a G chord in Cali. I know who is to blame and I think he is done, not even another 911 will save his ass now. Thank god cause I sure as hell don't want to see them pull that out of their bag of tricks . . .

:hi:

If we had a dollar for every time Bush looked like he was done, we wouldn't have a deficit and the NO rescue would be well funded. But it's a sentiment I can agree with. (Though for the record I don't think Bush creates events like 9-11, I just think he's very ruthless at turning them to his advantage. He used 9-11 to start two wars against two nations that had not attacked us, and while he did pursue the actual probably culprit, he let him get away after a token pursuit. I suspect he'll try to turn this to his advantage to pursue some unrelated agenda. Hopefully people will finally see through him.)

People who are getting food, clothing, water etc are not looters. They are survivors. The ones who are essentially street gangs, taking whatever they want, car-jacking, threatening hospitals and the like...those people need to be stopped. But I would hope that there would be enough police/national guard/coast guard available to both continue rescue operations and patrol areas that truly need to be protected. Hospitals yes, the Wal-Mart notsomuch.

This picture was sad to see though...

My first thought was "My name is Toby." People who've seen Roots will understand...

They are if you are a helpless elderly person and they just took your food and water; and now you get to die because you weren't powerful enough to protect your food supply.

I don't think anyone is defending that type of action. They are saying that people breaking into a grocery store that is likely to be a tax write-off anyway to get food to distribute to your friends and family shouldn't be treated the same way as someone breaking into the local jewelry store and cleaning out the Longines case, and that's still different than a person who is stealing necessary goods from others who need them as bad or worse--hospitals, for instance.

I suspect that cops can tell the difference between the two. If there are any grocery stores that haven't been emptied yet.

<i>...that is likely to be a tax write-off anyway to get food.</i>

Yes. And when the little 98 pound retired grandma shows up at the store to buy some food with her "pin money," she can't; because the thugs stole all the food. She wasn't strong enough to steal food, so she dies.

Earth is a closed system. If you take something by force, someone else has to do without. And, it will never be big business doing without.

The stores are closed. The owners skipped town before the storm hit. Most of these stores are completely boarded up. Are you seriously suggesting that if you were in their shoes: starving, dying of thirst, sweating through 100 degree heat with no food or shelter and you saw a boarded up 7-11 you wouldn't break in to get some water? I would. I would take whatever I could back to my family and neighbors and hope it lasted until we got rescued.

I wouldn't be in their shoes. I keep a 15 day supply of food and water.
I don't depend on any mythical right to steal from others to base my survival on.

keep your 15 day supply of food and water in water proof air tight sealed containers with flotation devices attached to it?

ready to take out of the house in case of a flood. NONE. I never have, either.

Many of the ones who do are "survivalists," those looney tune right-wing mental cases.

Welcome to D.U., Caretha. :hi: :hi: :hi:

But I would have moved it to the second floor before the flooding.

all I really have to say is.....How nice :)

And not just out of necessity. See, these type always think they can handle these types of things. He'd hunker down in his little one story house (second story--please. did you see any second stories on these houses?) and say "I'm so damn superior. I'm prepared. I got my food, I got my guns, I don't need anyone. Then the waters would come so quickly he wouldn't even see them coming, and drive him into the attic barefoot. He'd flag down a helicopter to rescue him, or a boat. Maybe he'd try to swim somewhere. Only after his shivering, sobbing self was off the roof would he remember his food and water stash submerged under swirling, toxic water. So he'd go to a shelter, bitter and pissed at his bad fortune, and stand in line for meager food supplies that ran out before he got his superior ass to the front of the line. "Not fair!" he would scream. "If only I still had my guns! I prepared for this, and none of these other bozos did! I deserve the food!" So he'd strike out on his own, looking for food. He'd loot the nearest store he could find. By then, he'd be so pissed at the world and the government for ruining his beautiful survival plans that he'd figure they owed him a little more. Grab cash, grab a gun, grab something to make up for what THEY took away from him. Some young man would come into the store looking for food for his 86 year old great grandmother to keep her alive, and he'd drive the kid out with his new-stolen gun. "Go get your own, kid. It's survival of the fittest, and I'm superior. I deserve to survive."

All these damn survivalist chicken-shits are the same. I've never met one worth a damn. A man ready to deprive survivors of catastrophes food on a message board will be more likely to do so in real life.

I know he'll never read this. But this survivalist entitlement crap just pisses me off. They own guns, store up supplies, pretend they are so smart for being so prepared. As soon as a catastrophe greater than the overnight power outage caused by a squirrel chewing through a power line occurs, they are the first to go Lord of the Flies, and the loudest to blame others for their predicament.

Lucky jackass got tombstoned. Many of the people he's criticizing are worried about real tombstones, and may not even get those.

someone still has to do without. Many of these scavengers are getting food for little old ladies living on interstate highrises or on rooftop islands as it is. So if some little old lady actually finds someone to pay for her food, she's still keeping it from some other little old lady who will likely die without it.

The gangs roaming the streets taking whatever they want.

But if there's a convenience store with bread or bottled water, in this situation I feel it is completely acceptable for people to take what they need. There are several reasons for this: These are essentials for life; even if they wanted to pay there is no one to take the money; the food is going to spoil anyway if it isn't eaten; the store owner is (more than likely) going to be reimbursed for lost merchandise either by the insurance company or by the government. No one is really losing anything here, but maybe some lives are saved until they can be evacuated.

The police are needed to prevent exactly what you described. I understand that these people are in dire straits, but this is a time when they should all be banding together to survive until they can be rescued rather than preying on the weak.

and thought it was very disturbing. We're supposed to assume that the guy is a gang-banger out to collect jewelry or TV's or shoot people just for kicks, but we don't know anything about him and there is no story to put it in perspective.
Then again, the story is often slanted, too

I don't look at a photo and automatically say, "Oh, he's white! He's black," but I examined this because of your post.

I think she's hispanic or either biracial.

Although I'm not disagreeing the MSM is racist.

AP Sucks! Their is so much racist crap and people making excuses for * on AP, you really have to be careful what you believe from them. The other is from a Non-U.S. wire service, most of which are MUCH less racist in the way they write.

It's not blatant most of the time, but it's usually there, and they definitely don't try to sugar coat the stupid crap * does.

about their fellow officer who was shot in the head by looters. Sometimes those egalitarian souls can be a little violent.

Or maybe they're a little upset about some of the oppressed darlings shooting up their police station with a rifle.

...they're a little upset about some of the oppressed darlings shooting up their police station ...

Why do you think this language is appropriate for a non-racist message board?

Please point out my racist statement, so I can defend it or apologize for it.

Posters here were talking about how the looters had the right because they were oppressed.

Was the elderly black grandmother who now has to go without food, because the looters took it all, the one oppressing them? How dare she.

The DU posters forced you to reach beyond yourself to slap them down, as you felt the Democratic Underground posters were off base.

Good "thinking."

I saw DU posters who agree with me, that stealing is wrong.

I don't see it as a Democratic value that stealing is OK as long as you can overpower someone and take their food.

poor, oppressed? I've not been on enough to have seen that anywhere.

I'd appreciate seeing what you've seen here that leads you to claim Democratic Underground posters are "criminal" lovers.

What I HAVE seen is the sudden appearance of a lot of newcomers spewing racist drivel, imagining they are scoring one for their side.
That would be so childish.

"Those who are not invested in a social structure, or are passed over by it
generally won't behave the way that structure wants. The structure values things over people and their needs. Gotta figure there will be some serious clashing."

"And because there has been unsatisfactory emergency response to feed and get water to the homeless and injured, they are taking it upon themselves to get what they need."

who think it is wrong to shoot a cop in the head so you can steal some food.

Your assumption that the people who shot up the police station must be black is very telling. It was never reported such.

...Louisiana Governor Kathleen Blanco said she would order National Guardsmen redeployed to stop looters as soon as federal emergency personnel were on scene to take over evacuations and rescues...

Blanco isn't abandoning the rescue mission.

something about what happened after we invaded Iraq. maybe bad analogy, but, in many ways these are an oppressed population--the poor of LA (not all that is for sure).

wouldn't they have been patrolling the streets DAYS ago AND supplementing the search and rescue missions AND doing whatever else they could to bolster the infrastructure? Wasn't that their job in the pre-Bush era? This administration has managed to nuke the organizational AND the moral and ethical underpinnings of our country. We're all New Orleans now, and we have an ardous reclamation project ahead of us.

most of those folks wouldn't have been stuck there. The guard would have gotten them out. Way back in the day, that was what the guard was for.

Exactly. They are National Guard because they are supposed to guard/assist the nation. Not install an islamist government in Iraq.

should be in New Orleans.

HELLO! ANY OF YOU MSM ASSH*LES Remember the "...a Large number of the National Guardsmen and Army Reservists, who are currently over in IRAQ are also, to a high degree, Local Police Offices..." when they are not fighting a war for OIL!

AND Remember those TRILLIONS in TAX CUTS that you got some of, and all the Cuts the Federal Government made to the fund they had been sending to the States?

HELLO! Is This Thing ON!?!

That's right, quitting their jobs, turning in their badges. This thing has them overwhelmed.

If they can get in and out, why can't everyone elese? Remove them by force if need be. With no food, clean water, or electricity, how are they supposed to live, never mind survive? Is this emphasis on looting coverage a diversion from the lack of preparedness, or a prelude to responders pulling out altogether and leaving everyone else to die?

:scared:
rocknation