# The possibility of New Orleans disaster as psyops success

1. Sep 8, 2005

### oldunion

I was trying to scrutinize the n.o. disaster to find weaknesses and flaws in the story. Media is not the best for giving this kind of info, so i looked online and got some information i found interesting and im sure you all will too.

we will begin here http://www.rense.com/general67/femwont.htm with a list of the aid that fema turned down. Fema also cut police lines in three counties which prompted the police to station armed guards all over new orleans to turn back fema anywhere they could. so fema is there, they are not really helping, and it is starting to sound like an experiment...so ill move to my thesis

the new orleans disaster was staged to see how a populous would react in an emergency situation to complete government control. now obviously the hurricane was not produced by the government but they have known since 2003 http://www.isthatlegal.org/archives/2005/09/the_department.html that the levee would break at a certain point and what the scenario would be like. yet for some reason the response was slow, help was turned down, and fema was controlling the situation to study and watch what happens when the government tells a frightened populous what to do.

there are now thousands in the astrodome (i think thats its name) that are NOT allowed to leave, and there are numerous reports of rape and other signs of disorder.

so as a scenario, what happens when a superweapon detonates on american soil, when their is civil war on american soil, or some other situation invoking general unrest? Notice the media is blocked out and receives no help from fema who does not promote media on the dead of n.o.; so basically you have fema telling a frightened bunch of people (fear is key) what to do, who have no media to rely on.

to me it seems as though they knew what was coming, what was going to happen when the levee broke and that it would indeed break, and they wanted to learn something from it

Last edited: Sep 8, 2005
2. Sep 8, 2005

### Staff: Mentor

Ridiculous is the only thing that comes to mind.

3. Sep 8, 2005

### Smurf

I'm doing my own analysis of the situation. I'll post it sometime this week end when I'm done my research. You've got some good information oldunion, but the government-wants-to-wipe-out-the-people conspiracy doesn't fit.

4. Sep 8, 2005

### TheStatutoryApe

Did you mean for that to be a wasn't?
If not maybe this belongs in S&D.

5. Sep 8, 2005

### oldunion

thanks edited:

Im not saying the government wanted to wipe out the people, im saying they felt it was an acceptable risk to take. the possibility of this being a psy op is something to keep in mind as a far-fetched but curiously interesting scenario.

As more information comes into this thread im looking forward to some interesting discussion as i dont know much on the possibility of this being a conspiracy besides what i posted.

6. Sep 8, 2005

### Staff: Mentor

I was going to say "creative", but ridiculous works too...

oldunion, the basic problem with your theory is that the level of control you are saying existed did not exist. The government is not confining people at the Superdome - its been empty for two days, and people never were confined to it. It was simply being used as a staging area for evacuations. The "mandatory evacuations" didn't become forced until two days ago, and even then, it was ordered by the Mayor, not FEMA.

Last edited: Sep 8, 2005
7. Sep 8, 2005

### Smurf

Oh. Well, duh. They've been neglecting those levees for decades. Ever Russ will agree with you on that one.

What exactly do you mean by 'psy op'?

8. Sep 8, 2005

### Staff: Mentor

I think people tend to forget how slow government always is in responding. I moved to Kansas in 1993 right after the devastating floods here. The flood waters had been receding for a few weeks when I got here and the realtor would point to something in the water and say, "see that? that's the roof of a building". This part of the country was destroyed by horrendous floods.

The Great USA Flood of 1993

The 1993 midwest flood was one of the most significant and damaging natural disasters ever to hit the United States. Damages totaled $15 billion, 50 people died, hundreds of levees failed, and thousands of people were evacuated, some for months. The flood was unusual in the magnitude of the crests, the number of record crests, the large area impacted, and the length of the time the flood was an issue. The magnitude and severity of this flood event was simply over-whelming, and it ranks as one of the greatest natural disasters ever to hit the United States. Approximately 600 river forecast points in the Midwestern United States were above flood stage at the same time. Nearly 150 major rivers and tributaries were affected. It was certainly the largest and most significant flood event ever to occur in the United States Tens of thousands of people were evacuated, some never to return to their homes. At least 10,000 homes were totally destroyed, hundreds of towns were impacted with at least 75 towns totally and completely under flood waters. At least 15 million acres of farmland were inundated, some of which may not be useable for years to come. That was 12 years ago. It was mostly to sparsely populated areas which kept the loss of life and$\$ damage down, but it was HUGE. How many of you remember this?

Most of you are too young to put Katrina into perspective.

http://www.nwrfc.noaa.gov/floods/papers/oh_2/great.htm

Last edited: Sep 9, 2005
9. Sep 9, 2005

### Smurf

10. Sep 9, 2005

### Art

Not least because it would assume an intelligence in gov't that is clearly lacking.

According to mumerous press reports and British tourists interviewed on TV following their return home they were not allowed to leave.
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2005/sep2005/norl-s02.shtml

Last edited: Sep 9, 2005
11. Sep 9, 2005

### Staff: Mentor

Fair enough - Not that I consider that to be a credible source, but it is worth at least a look elsewhere to clarify that. Details are pretty sketchy there: at the same time it talks about people who were not allowed in and as of two days ago, it was empty. I'm wondering when people were not allowed to leave - during the hurricane or after? And where were they trying to go - just out of the superdome or back into the city? It also makes a difference if whoever made them stay only did so until the transportation was available to help them leave. The situation did not allow for a lot of options, there, and the specifics matter. They bussed roughly 50,000 people from a shelter that held 10,000.

Perhaps oldunion can adjust his theory to be only about the few thousand people in the Superdome, but for the rest of the city, it is tough to see control in what was often described as anarchy.

Last edited: Sep 9, 2005
12. Sep 9, 2005

### El Hombre Invisible

I saw this on the news here (the UK) a few days ago. They had video footage of hundreds of people screaming to get out. People were overheating, having breathing difficulties, etc. On top of that, they shut the lights off at night, and people were being raped, robbed, attacked, the works. Children were abandoned. One British couple took care of a child they found on her own, but the authorities demanded they move to a different part of the stadium and refused to let them take the child. The child was asleep at the time. Having found someone to take care of her, she went to sleep, only to wake up alone again. When the non-US citizens were taken out of the stadium, the Americans started attacking them, throwing stuff, trying to stop them leaving. People had to be smuggled out disguised as Red Cross and the like. I don't know if you get any of this in the US.

I'd rather die in a hurricane or flood than be subject to that.

13. Sep 9, 2005

### BobG

There's been a lot of gaps in the stories, suggesting there was a big link missing that officials expected to be there.

The Superdome was only expected to protect people who couldn't evacuate for the duration of the hurricane. Obviously, they couldn't leave during the hurricane. Immediately after the hurricane, when the extent of the disaster was evident, they also weren't allowed to leave (they were allowed on the catwalks to get some fresh air). There seemed to be an expectation that evacuation was imminent (the Superdome was never expected to shelter folks for days, hence the lack of supplies).

Sending the folks that were rescued by helicopter and boat to the Convention Center where there were virtually no supplies also seemed to imply the plan was for immediate evacuation of everyone sent to the Convention Center.

There was a major gap somewhere - either expected supplies didn't come in or the vehicles for evacuation didn't come in.

Traditionally, FEMA hasn't been a very responsive organization. States have been left to fend for themselves in making a first response and FEMA then pushes money towards them after the fact (that's tended to make it a nice place to put friends who have aided the administration). It was in the 90's, under Lee Witt, that FEMA became an effective first response organization. The return to the 'old' FEMA just seems more horrible because it's peak was such a short time ago.

Louisiana was not very well equipped to respond to the disaster either. A major player in their first response efforts had a limited capability. A third of their National Guard personnel and most of the equipment was in Iraq. The folks they were relying on to fill the gap wound up responding to the hurricane disaster in their own state and weren't available to deliver the assistance they'd promised to Louisiana.

None of that points to a conspiracy. It suggests a major segment of the response operation didn't come through as expected because major players did not have the same capabilities they had just five years ago.

14. Sep 9, 2005

### Anttech

After Russ, for days after, it was all over the news on the BBC. All the British tourist (plus everyone else) were NOT allowed to leave. Eventually they "sneaked" the Brits out as to not start a riot... Not just one person said this, but all the tourists that were interviewed said this...

El Hombre Invisible is correct. Unless of course the BBC isnt a credible source

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4214746.stm

15. Sep 9, 2005

### Staff: Mentor

I saw on CNN a homemade video by a couple of Brits from New Orleans. They arrived the day before Katrina and got stuck. They mentioned that the day after the hurricane, when the flooding began and hotel lost power, they were evacuated to the Superdome, where they spent a few days (they were not allowed to leave).

They were quietly removed from the Superdome so as not to cause a situation.

16. Sep 9, 2005

### DM

Another strong reason for the Britons to be "sneaked" out of the superdome was because certain individuals and groups were racially discriminating them. A few scattered Britons were instructed to congregate with other British people in the superdome so racial attacks could be averted. Because the threat perpetuated to grow between the assailant groups, it was decided to evacuate the Britons.

17. Sep 9, 2005

### oldunion

check out this link http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=107946 there is a blurp on psyops at the bottom, and the links on the right of the screen are also interesting. Basically the whole article is about the possibility of radio jamming coming from an American source.

I thought that the government was unprepared as well for some time, but the more i read the more it didnt make sense.

Web definition:
Psychological Operations or PSYOP or PSYOPS are planned operations to convey selected information and indicators to specific audiences to influence their emotions, motives, objective reasoning, and ultimately the behavior of governments, organizations, groups, and individuals. The purpose of psychological operations is to induce or reinforce attitudes and behaviors favorable to the originator's objectives.

There was a lot of control in new orleans, but not in the traditional sense; however, they neither wanted nor needed to have absolute power in the situation.

what they learned: How us citizens would react if detained en masse. Anyone seen "the Siege"?, the muslim detainment camps seemed controlled compared to what was happening at the superdome.

how people reason in situations of dire need, and what they will do to get what they need for survival. this is irrespective of the status of the individual in society as police also engaged in punishable activities.

how well people would listen to government mandates

how well the media could be controlled in this situation, how well it could be engineered for maximum propoganda success, how well it could be directed to different regions.

what the resistance percentage would be, what profile of a citizen would be likely to resist

what local government would do in an emergency (which more or less was turn to the federal government immediately), what the resistance would be-if any- to federal presence.

the organizational skills of groups without the use of popular forms of communication supplied by corporations (cell phones, internet)

etc

ill keep looking for more information supporting the possibility of a psyop success, but the information the government learned from this event is more than what money could buy.

18. Sep 9, 2005

### Amp1

The site counterpunch.com has a few good articles about the NO deb.. oops er catastrophe.

19. Sep 9, 2005

### DM

Very interesting...

20. Sep 9, 2005

### Staff: Mentor

That still isn't all that clear - none of those accounts say that they were forced to stay, it says the military helped them leave. So what was keeping them there? There is a difference between "couldn't leave" and "forced to stay". If you have nowhere to go but into a flooded city of anarchy, its your circumstances that are forcing you to stay. But whatever - the semantic difference there isn't all that important to me. Either way, this conspiracy theory is still absurd.

Last edited: Sep 9, 2005