Levee breaches

Posted by: Sister Toldjah on September 10, 2005 at 9:07 am

Another example of a blogger doing the hard research that reporters should be doing but aren’t. Pat at Brainster’s Blog argues that the President was right for statements he made in the immediate aftermath of Hurricane Katrina when he said no one anticipated the levee breaks.

The President was ridiculed by any number of people who say that the levee breaches had been anticipated for years. Pat’s convincing argument (with many links) notes that it was an overtopping of the levees, not actual breaches ,which had been anticipated. Read his argument here and see what you think. Also note his link to an article that mentions the possibility that a barge broke the Canal Street levee, not the flood waters.

Hat tip: Michelle Malkin

RSS feed for comments on this post.

4 Responses to “Levee breaches”

Comments

  1. Rob says:

    Overtopping of the levees leads to their destruction.

    Levees are designed to hold back water. If water runs over them, they are very likely to fail. I’ve known that since I was a kid — and we don’t even have levees around here.

    Ok, so my Dad was an engineer. Still…

  2. “Overtopping of the levees leads to their destruction.”

    Not always.

  3. wayne says:

    Nice try, Sam, attempting to post here as “Wayne.” I’ve figured you out. Buh bye. –ST

  4. LCVRWC says:

    While reading the article I noticed it said there were two breaks in the levee. I doubt the barge caused both, but I’m certain the barge caused at least one of them. Just playing devils advocate, I wonder if the barge caused the second break. In other words, there was the first levee break, which caused a current as water poured into NO through the break. The barge was swept away in the current, and caused the second break as it hit the levee. I’d like to know how far apart the two breaks are from each other.

    I doubt we’ll ever really know for sure what caused the breaks.