Americans come from all over the US to loot Okla. after tornadoes

Jun 09, 2013 27 Replies

Locally (north Alabama) storm debris get hauled to landfills. There's not even any attempt to salvage trees for lumber, firewood, or pulp. One of my co-workers home was hit in April 2011; he had a 4' diameter red oak tree blown down that was sawed into "small" pieces and dumped. As he is a woodworker, it bothered him to see it go to waste.

Gary

"American officials will not allow the 20,000 kilograms of food, blankets and diapers into the country until every item on board is itemized in alphabetical order and has the country of origin of every product noted.

"Because U.S. President Barack Obama hasn?t declared Moore, Okla., tornado a disaster area, the 52-foot trailer of goods is considered a commercial shipment rather than humanitarian aid."

So, apparently they did know how to handle it and were following the law. The above would also seem to imply that if Obama declared the tornado area a disaster area, then different rules, which would have allowed the shipment to proceed without the normal documentation, would have applied.

But Obama DID declare it a disaster area. Not sure on the timing or the outcome. Like many stories, the big sensational headline gets all the news and a day later, when it's fixed, you never hear about it.

Probably because if they did that, then every customs agent would be making up there own rules and excdeptions. Also, I don't buy the idea claimed in the article that all the stuff was going to go to waste. In any kind of relief effort like this, one of the first things is they don't want PERISHABLE food items, for all the associated problems. So, I'm having a hard time imagining a trailer filled with ground beef and lettuce.

 I'm sure the church group in Windsor that put that shipment

It's not the issue of who's truck it is or who's driving it. It's that there are customs rules that the border agents have to follow and it's not clear to me who can just overrule all that and say "go ahead". Except OBama of course, who apparently could have avoided it by declaring OK a disaster area sooner.

Apparently there is and that's by the president declaring it a disaster area.

I agree 100% with all that you say, except that "even the environmentalists agree that it's safer to ship oil via pipeline than by sea". I agree it is indeed safer. But I've yet to hear one environmentalist say it. To them virtually everything to do with energy is bad. Even say windmills. When it finally comes time to put them up somewhere, the environmentalists are blocking that too....

Assuming someone else pays for and flies the fighter aircraft that make safe passage for the cargo planes..... Do you think you could have landed a C-130 in Libya before all their air defenses were dismantled and their own fighter aircraft destroyed?

Seems those fighters were needed recently in places like Iraq and Libya. Stay tuned for Syria.......

The US military bought more drones than conventional aircraft for the first time just a year or two ago.

To keep guys like you out of here would be one good reason..... Why would you want a more open border with the USA? You hate everything about this country. You'd probably rather have that open border with North Korea, if it were geographically possible.

Syria is another mess.

But things in Syria aren't black and white. There is the Alouite (sp?) clan in Syria that genuinely support Bashir Allasad, and so it's not a black and white case of getting rid of a universally hated dictator so that the people can enjoy a better and truly democratic government. It's a case of picking sides between Syrians that want to see Bashir go and Syrians that want to see him stay.

As far as the Canadian oil goes, I think it's just a matter of time before the XL pipeline is built. America needs oil so badly that it was willing to put up with Hugo Chavez to get it, and Canada has enough to supply our own needs for another 400 years, so we're swimming in it. Obama can see for himself that both countries will benefit from building that pipeline, but he's playing his cards close to his chest because he knows it's a big deal, and he wants the best deal he can hammer out for the US. Our government is going to want the best deal it can hammer out for Canada. But, the pipeline is going to help both economies grow and so it's a good idea regardless of what side of the border you're looking at it from. So, it's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when we build that pipeline.

I don't see much difference in that respect with what went on in Libya. There were still Libyans that were strong supporters of Kadafi and like Assad, he had the military on his side. If anything, in the case of Libya, Kadafi in the last couple of decades, had pretty much behaved himself internationally. He wasn't sponsoring terrorism and he even gave up his nuke program under international supervision. And like Syria, there is no guarantee what will happen in Libya with Kaddafi gone. Best case it turns into some kind of stable democracy. Worst case, it spins into Islamic extremist hell. There was no real reason that I could see for Obama taking a different position with Syria, than with Libya. Except perhaps that in the case of Libya, there are European oil interests involved, so the Europeans were out front, pushing for intervention. That way, Obama could "lead from behind".

In the case of Syria, there is less downside. Assad is best buddies with Iran and a big supporter of terrorism. So, even if the rebels that replace him are worse, it's hard to imagine that they are going to be a lot worse for the region. And there is an upside that it could turn out better. That of course is if it's not too late to do something. Had there been a similar international operation in Syria, it could have been over by now. Now, it will take a massive air operation to turn it around.

The alternative view is that since you can't predict what will happen, just leave it alone and let what happens, happen. But if we're going to do that, then it was a big mistake for Obama to say that any use of chemical weapons would have serious consequences. In reality, this chem weapons thing is insignificant. By all accounts, only 150 or so peoplee were killed. That out of 95,000? Makes no sense to me. If Assad were killling thousands with chemical weapons, then I can see it. But it's OK to kill 95,000 with rockets, tanks, airplanes, bombs, etc but if you kill 150 with chemical weapons it's suddenly a big dea?

What best deal? AFAIK, there is no deal being negotiated. The sole issue is that environmentalists are blocking it and Obama is siding with them. And these environmentalists really don't want that oil in any way, shape or form. You can't just move the pipeline 10 miles or do another study that will appease them. They think any fossil fuel is just evil and the fact that we're just going to be buying it from Venezuela or Saudi Arabia doesn't register with them.

Also, as far as negotiating, Obama doesn't even understand the concept. Last year, before the election, he was caught on an open mike telling Medveydev that "After the election, I will have more flexibility (on arms control)." Medveydev told him, "I will tell Vladymer (Putin). Great job negotiating.

Or look what the dummy did when first came into office. He cancelled the radar station that was committed to go into Poland as part of a missle defense system. He cancelled it because the Russians didn't like it. Obama insulted the Poles. And what did he negotiate in return from the Russian? Nothing.... zippo. Anyone with a brain would have played hardball with the Russians. Like, if you want that radar cancelled, then get Iran to stop building nukes.

So, sorry, but I don't think the concept of negotiating is even in Obama's DNA.

I'd say it will take until the 2014 elections, at least. More likely until 2017 when we get a new president.

Crying shame.

In December 2011 the 100+mph winds blew down thousands of trees and tree parts, mostly street tree. The ironic thing is that the residents aren't permitted to trim the street trees and the City can't afford to do a proper trimming job more frequently than SUPPOSEDLY every five years. They spent all the money on pretty street lights and fancy paving in the downtown crosswalks.

It took months for the City to clear up the mess, and there are still tree stumps still partially in the ground, but they can clear Colorado Blvd. within hours after the Rose Parade.

Now instead of actually repairing the heaved sidewalks, they just put in some blacktop to make a smooth transition between blocks -- sometimes as much as an 8-inch difference in height.

It's not only the Feds that are incompetent or corrupt...

Join the Discussion

Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.

Didn't find your answer?

Ask the community — no account required