FEMA
The Associated Press: Feds to Restrict Volunteers at Disasters — Yes, let’s let incompetence reign supreme. I always thought the Republicans were pro-self-help and pro-self-reliance. How does this fit into that mindset?
In an effort to provide better control and coordination, the federal government is launching an ambitious ID program for rescue workers to keep everyday people from swarming to a disaster scene [to help]…
The Federal Emergency Management Agency came up with the idea after the World Trade Center attack and Hurricane Katrina in 2005, when countless Americans rushed to help — unasked, undirected, and sometimes unwanted.
Many of those volunteers angrily dispute the notion they were a burden. They insist that in many instances they were able to deliver respirators, hard hats, and protective boots to workers when no one else seemed able.
Ground zero volunteer Rhonda Shearer and her daughter launched a fast-moving supply system that bypassed regular channels, often infuriating city officials.
Let Brownie do it. This somehow smells like a chickenshit way to blame the public for the Katrina mess that still goes on.
found by Aric Mackey
>>This is a really smart idea by someone in the
>>Bush administration
Oh yeah. Riiiiiight. Even if any “really smart idea” had EVER come out of the Bush administration, this would not be one of them.
Seeing what the “highly trained” Feds can do, I’d rather put my fate in the hands of untrained civilians.
I think Dumbya must be looking to secure a permanent place in the Guiness Book of World Records as the “biggest asshole that ever lived”.
Thousand Points of Light!
Only a bureaucrat would think that banning people from helping is a solution to a problem.
F is for FEMA
>>This is a really smart idea by someone in the
>>Bush administration
It depends on what your goals are. If your interested in controlling information it really is a smart idea.
If your goal is to prevent a community from taking care of it’s own and to divide said community then it is a brilliant idea.
If your goal is to make criminals of those who attempt to assist in an emergency it is truly a stroke of genius.
What are they thinking? That this is some kind of competition?
Idiots!
Face it, Republicans haven’t been republicans in years. This hair brain scheme further demonstrates that. So much for their ideal of “less big government”.
1. control of the site, to keep others from being hurt.
2. Watching how much is used and where it is going, no matter HOW slow it gets.
3. Even if you had heavy equipment they wanted to control the area.
Has anyone seen those rehearsals, where the gov has tried to group up and see if they can DEAL with a situation?? Such as Radiation and disease control in a city??
They have ALL fallen on there faces.
If we got rid of the insurance industry and lawyers, do you think it would be better? you went into this BAD area and got hurt…Whose fault is it? YOURS, so you arent covered.
“This somehow smells like a chickenshit way to blame the public for the Katrina mess that still goes on.”
And to prevent the public from knowing how incompetent they are after the next disaster.
#1 Mister Mustard “Seeing what the “highly trained” Feds can do, I’d rather put my fate in the hands of untrained civilians.”
So true. There was a guy in Tacoma who packed his pickup with water and food and drove to Mississippi to help out his family after Katrina. He arrived weeks before FEMA.
There are still people FEMA has not helped, 2 years later.
I’ll have to remember to check for proper ID next time I get rescued.
just when you think they can’t get any stupider….. sheesh.
The way the Katrina part is worded, you get the impression that someone in the US gov’t wanted a good many of the people of New Orleans to die (rather than be rescued and survive).
What better way to ensure more deaths than to deny unasked volunteers access to disaster areas?
#8 “If we got rid of the insurance industry and lawyers, do you think it would be better?”
Hell ya!
ECA, I usually agree with your comments but not this time. I think communities would be much stronger if people were forced to take responsibility for their actions. Lawyers and insurance allow people(and corporate entities) to abdicate responsibility.
Research the history of English common law and the initial role of lawyers. Lawyers were allowed to represent those who were illiterate mentally deficient or unable to speak the language. Now one requires representation to receive just due process. What does that say for our legal system and our culture.
Insurance if voluntary is ok. Mandated insurance is a protection racket. “Listen, you pay me $500 and I’ll make sure you don’t fall down and maybe break something”… Thats mandated insurance in a nutshell.
Communities provide the support that individual members need without insurance. Mennonites are an excellent example(no I’m not a Mennonite or even religious). If someones house burns down everyone gets together and builds a new one in a couple of weekends. Now thats solidarity.
13,
true…
But forcing you to HAVe insurance to AFFORD medical attention is INSANE.
Forcing you to have insurance on a car, is abit STUPID. make the person RESPONSIBLE for his actions, NOT dependent on insurance.
And I like the OLd idea…
Ignorance of the law is NO excuse..
Have you EVER seen the library in any state of the laws?
You probably couldnt read ALL those books in 1 life time.
ECA it seems were of a mind on insurance then.
On the lawyers perhaps even. You make my argument stronger.
“Have you EVER seen the library in any state of the laws?
You probably couldnt read ALL those books in 1 life time.”
When I was in school I worked in the law library so ya, I know the daunting volume of material.
When the law is to complicated for the people to follow who will follow the law?
When a citizen can’t represent herself before the law is there truly any justice?
heheh, I meant too complicated
I remember an incident about eight years ago when a canal up in the foothills broke. Water and mud came cascading down and destroyed dozens of homes and threatened a hundred more. For two days, 3000 volunteers donated time, food, and heavy equipment to help the community. On the second day, the Red Cross showed up and took control. Within hours, the Red Cross had managed to completely alienate those volunteers: they insisted that all donations go through them and they demanded that everyone be placed under their orders. On the third day, fewer than 200 diehards returned and the Red Cross had to rent their heavy equipment.
#18 Your anecdote reminds me of how the mob operates. I think the red cross is like the Gambino of disaster relief.
If people volunteer, then you can’t hire the people that your crony wants to supply at taxpayers expense!