Quake3World

bush is getting so pwned...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/weather_katrina_reaction_dc

From Wikipedia, concerning martial law:

Hurricane Katrina

Contrary to many media reports, martial law has not been declared in New Orleans in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, because no such term exists in Louisiana state law[4]. Rather, a state of emergency has been declared, which does give some powers similar to that of martial law. On the evening of August 31, New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin did declare "martial law" (in name at least) in the city and said that "officers don't have to worry about civil rights and Miranda rights in stopping the looters." [5]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martial_la ... _countries

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/US/09/02/nagin.transcript/

Here listen to this; It's a radio conversation with the Mayor of New Orleans.

Denz wrote:http://edition.cnn.com/2005/US/09/02/nagin.transcript/

Here listen to this; It's a radio conversation with the Mayor of New Orleans.

Is that the one where he starts cussing like a sailor at the end?


Yeah it is. That is one of the most charismatic speeches I've ever heard.

R00k wrote:Do you think they should have allowed pets on the evacuation buses?

Of course they should, they're 'just' pets in terms of problems on the bus, but they're a huge part of a family.

Therefore, for morale, common decency and humanity, you would naturally allow the pets to go.

In a serious situation like this, you let it fly. It's real sad that some up-their-arse official decided that pieces of paper are more significant than the 'items' they all concern - real people.

That's not my concern. My concern would be, when you have a few hundred thousand people who need to get the hell out of the city, a dog or a cat or a birdcage might take up space a person could use.

If it's something small, and can be held in the owner's lap, I don't see why it would be a problem, but I'm not going to get up in arms if I hear that pets aren't being allowed to board when there are tens of thousands of people still trying to get out.

People still have their pets with them? They must not have been that hungry.

R00k wrote:That's not my concern. My concern would be, when you have a few hundred thousand people who need to get the hell out of the city, a dog or a cat or a birdcage might take up space a person could use.

If it's something small, and can be held in the owner's lap, I don't see why it would be a problem, but I'm not going to get up in arms if I hear that pets aren't being allowed to board when there are tens of thousands of people still trying to get out.

Seriously, how would a dog, cat or bird take up enough room for a person? You place them on your lap. Even the biggest dog will fit across a couple of laps.

Point aside, your overanalysis and 'oh but what if' worrying is precisely the mentality that breeds poor judgement such as this. Sorry to flame about it. True there's a small chance an animal would cause a big problem on one of the buses, but minor problems (overcrowding, someone getting pissed on, minor bites) really aren't a concern in a crisis like this and certainly not worth seperating a family from their pet

Foo wrote:Point aside, your overanalysis and 'oh but what if' worrying is precisely the mentality that breeds poor judgement such as this. Sorry to flame about it. True there's a small chance an animal would cause a big problem on one of the buses, but minor problems (overcrowding, someone getting pissed on, minor bites) really aren't a concern in a crisis like this and certainly not worth seperating a family from their pet

Are you fucking kidding or what? I didn't realize you were the resident expert on drastic humanitarian crises. How many have you been involved in?

You want to create a thread looking for criticisms of not planning ahead and thinking of every possibility, then you want to flame me for suggesting forethought, calling it overanalysis and 'oh but what if worrying'?

I'm sure you could run an entire crisis management center effectively from your basement there, mate. :icon14:

Foo wrote:You place them on your lap.

maybe you can't sit and there is not lap?

HAY GUYS EVERYTHING IS ALRIGHT, DUBYA HUGGED AND KISSED A BLACK WOMAN!

blood.angel wrote:HAY GUYS EVERYTHING IS ALRIGHT, DUBYA HUGGED AND KISSED A BLACK WOMAN!

Yeah, I saw that he must of thought she'd taste like chocolate.

DooMer wrote:People still have their pets with them? They must not have been that hungry.

er..

that's a tasteless thing to say- we have people who are in a dire situation, and who love their pets like they would family, and you suggest their suffering can't be that bad because they won't slaughter their pets?

wtf dude..

R00k wrote: Are you fucking kidding or what? I didn't realize you were the resident expert on drastic humanitarian crises. How many have you been involved in?

You want to create a thread looking for criticisms of not planning ahead and thinking of every possibility, then you want to flame me for suggesting forethought, calling it overanalysis and 'oh but what if worrying'?

I'm sure you could run an entire crisis management center effectively from your basement there, mate. :icon14:

I sure as hell wouldn't concern myself with taking people's pets away from them..

You really can't see the significance of letting the small matters drop when the big matters are in turmoil?

Seriously, you're a fucking fool.

Pext wrote:

Foo wrote:You place them on your lap.

maybe you can't sit and there is not lap?

HOW DO I SHOT WEB?

[xeno]Julios wrote:

DooMer wrote:People still have their pets with them? They must not have been that hungry.

er..

that's a tasteless thing to say- we have people who are in a dire situation, and who love their pets like they would family, and you suggest their suffering can't be that bad because they won't slaughter their pets?

wtf dude..

He was kidding honey

You never been in a crowded bus during rushour? Sometimes there's barely any room to move your ass around, when you're standing.

Foo wrote:

[xeno]Julios wrote:

DooMer wrote:People still have their pets with them? They must not have been that hungry.

er..

that's a tasteless thing to say- we have people who are in a dire situation, and who love their pets like they would family, and you suggest their suffering can't be that bad because they won't slaughter their pets?

wtf dude..

He was kidding honey

i don't care - it's a fucking tasteless joke. Imagine you had a pet rabbit that you cared for immensely, and you had to leave it behind due to dire circumstances, and some asshole makes a comment about how you can't be suffering that badly else you'd've eaten it.

You're well aware of humour as a way to releive negative emotions.

Foo wrote:You're well aware of humour as a way to releive negative emotions.

yes - but there is a line that must be drawn.

If I had a pet iguana who I made love to four nights a week, I'd be horrified if someone suggested I would consume it.

I dunno - maybe I'm overly sensitive...

Sweet, sweet reptilian loves.

you barely escaped this:

Do I get to say HAND?

talk to the iguana:

Love is over