I was discussing this whole mess with my husband yesterday, who worked for several years in the Entergy compound located just a couple miles from where the cops were stopping folks from coming across the bridge. That compound houses not only the dispatch center for repair work for a large area, but the IT operations center for the entire electric company for a four-state region. There’s also the only functioning telephone company switching station in the NOLA metro area just a couple blocks off the freeway right there in Gretna, and I forget what other similar places there are but I know he mentioned at least two more within a mile or two of that spot.
In other words, there was some important – and the only still functioning – infrastructure in the area that did need protecting. Whether it needed the level of protection the Gretna cops provided is another question, but it there certainly were valid reasons for limiting an influx of people into an area where the only places still up and running there were infrastructure sites vital to reestablishing services to a wider area.
I appreciate that stopping hungry, thirsty people from crossing the bridge was not a real smart move. But knowing as much as I do about that part of the Westbank (having just moved away from there a month ago – and I lived 3 blocks away from that mall that was partially burned), I can also see some valid reasons for preventing a huge influx of desperate people who were looking for services – food, water, shelter – that weren’t available on the Westbank, either.
I have a lot of issues as to how this disaster was handled, like why the mayor did not order an evac even after Bush asked him to, and why the mayor felt his citizens were so special and above the common man that they needed greyhound buses and were far better then the common man to use the school buses which were later destroyed in the storm.
But my biggest beef, which IMHO is totally unforgiviable, right next to the unpardonable sin, would be preventing people from leaving on their own. I really think the people who restricted the use of the bridge should be exiled from the US, if not they should be required to register like sex offenders so at least their neighbors will know who they should not depend on in times of emergencies.
Of course, your implication is that everyone trapped in New Orleans was looting and burning. Given that the refugees were pretty much carrying what they owned on their backs, (along with elderly, sick, children, etc.) an organized police force would not have much trouble keeping them in line. Of course, leaving one’s own jurisdiction to keep them on the wrong side of the Mississippi and destroying their makeshift shelters makes a lot more sense.
Note. Among all the people trapped in New Orleans, some unspecified number (but a small enough group to be driven off by a small contingent of policemen, despite having weapons of their own) resorted to looting and arson at a shopping mall that contained a police substation. When a larger, but unarmed, band of people trapped in the city attempted to walk out, they were stopped by policemen and obeyed the (probably illegal) orders of the policemen to remain in the city, then were sufficiently non-aggressive to be driven off public property by policemen operating outside of the policemen’s jursidiction. Your attempt to conflate that latter issue with the former is a pretty clear implication that everyone trapped in New Orleans was looting and burning. If you do not like the implications of your statements, then stop acting as though everyone in the city was behaving in the same fashion.
I watched the interview with Chief Lawson about an hour ago. He remains adamant that he made the right decision, even going so far as to suggest that it was for the safety not only of the people of Gretna, but the safety of the people on the bridge.
Interviewer: “But…in hindsight…you see that was the wrong decision, right?”
Lawson: “No, sir. I would do it again. It was the right decision. Things were just as bad here as they were in New Orleans. They were on high ground. It was safer for everyone involved.”
Interviewer (totally aghast): “But…you have to realize that it’s hard to believe, hearing this…”
Lawson: “Well, that’s because you’re here now, after it happened. It would’ve been a lot more believeable if you had been here when it was happening. I had to worry about my community. What would’ve happened if the levy here had broken? Then what? Those people were safe right where they were.”
I’m sure that it was difficult for the Gretna police to distinguish between a handful of young men with weapons and a few hundred refugees of all ages, (many in poor health) carrying bundles of clothing.
The people who were being blockaded from the bridge, being shot at, having their food confiscated and having their shelters destroyed were not the same people who were shooting at firefighters.
And do you “buy” the rational of the Sheriff who ordered his men to block the path of innocent people looking for relief from the storm? You seem quite confident what the penalty of arsonists and “murders” should be. What should the penalty be in your opinion, for the police that shot at, confiscated the food of and destroyed the shelters of those INNOCENT people, leaving them at the mercy of the storm?
Where’s the evidence that the cops shot at innocent people? Dio refers to the OP, who cites socialist worker.org. Do you have a real cite, or are you just talking out of your ass too?
I specifically said that the police whose substation in the mall was burned were not the police allegedly shooting over the heads of people on the bridge, knocking down their makeshift shelters, or confiscating food and water. (We only have that one report of it, and you’d think with all the thousands of people supposedly on the bridge, more than one report would have surfaced, so I tend to be a bit skeptical of that claim.)
The Jefferson Parish sheriff’s deputies did NOT block the bridge. Jefferson Parish sheriffs are not the Gretna police and have no authority over the Gretna police. It was Gretna and bridge police whio were stoppinjg people coming across the bridge. Completely different jurisdictions! So I made no claim that the fire at the mall and the blockade on the bridge were related, even though others have tried to; in fact, I specifically said it was different folks doing it and I didn’t believe it was justification for the Gretna police’s alleged brutality.
Also, keep in mind that the clothing styles in New Orleans tend to allow sufficient room to hide half an arsenal underneath, so it’s not possible to tell at first glance who’s “heavily armed” and who’s completely innocent.
I’m not defending the Gretna police or the bridge police. They were the ones up on the freeway blocking access to the Westbank. Harry Lee’s guys were on ground level maintaining order in their parish, and as far as I know played no part whatsoever in anything that went on on the bridge. That’s not Harry’s jurisdiction, and so he wouldn’t go there. Authorities in south Louisiana are highly territorial. Don’t confuse who was doing what, and don’t blame Harry’s guys for what Lawson’s guys did.
Oh, dear, he’s stuck. Its that socialist workers thing, got him all upset.
But it doesn’t matter much any more, does it, scooter? You got the interivew with the sheriff himself on the previous page, so its pretty safe to say that there is substantial truth in the aforementioned article. Whether or not the story was first broken in a socialist workers website is of precisely zero consequence so long as the story is true. If the SW website says its raining in Petaluma, and it is raining in Petaluma, it don’t stop raining when you come in here flailing your arms and raving about socialists being liars. Theres a fancy latin name for that form of dumfuk. You could look it up.