Do you find it highly suspicious that the levees in New Orleans broke at 4:00 AM on August 30th?
The main storm surge from Hurricane Katrina would have been washed into Lake Pontchartrain at about 7:00 AM on August 29th when the counterclockwise motion of Katrina was pushing water from the Gulf of Mexico into the lake.
Why is there a 21 hour discrepancy between the storm surge and the collapse of the levees?
During the initial news coverage, some media outlets tried to explain away the time discrepancy as a "secondary storm surge" off of Lake Pontchartrain. Hurricanes DO NOT, never have and never will create "secondary storm surges". There's only one storm surge, the main surge while a hurricane makes landfall.
A secondary storm surge is about as believable as a magic bullet. But of course anybody who logically investigates the facts of this catastrophe will be accused of spending way too much time on the grassy knoll.
Now lets move on to the next two questions.
Why did pumping station #6, according to a statement made by New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin during an interview with Matt Lauer on the August 29th edition of the Today Show, fail in the lower 9th ward, which also happens to be the section of New Orleans which is the deepest part of the city? Why did the Industrial Canal levee break near the 9th ward a few hours later?
It's interesting that both the failure of pumping station #6 and the Industrial Canal levee occurred within hours of each other within the same geographic area.
The breakdown of pumping station #6 would have gradually allowed the flooding of the 9th ward and force it's residents to flee to the second floor and roofs of their houses.
The immediate flood of water from the breach of the Industrial Canal levee a few hours later would have easily drowned everyone who was unlucky enough to still be inside of their home in the lower 9th ward and waterlog every single one of those houses up to the roof. By the time the water is pumped out the city, all of those waterlogged houses will have to be condemned and torn down.
In light of the U.S. Supreme Court's recent eminent domain decision on private property, the City of New Orleans can easily condemn all of those destroyed properties and seize the land under eminent domain when the city is rebuilt. Of course with most of the residents of the 9th ward ending up dead, there's no one left to reclaim the properties or to fight back against city hall. Very convenient for anyone wishing to seize that property.
So lets continue by looking into the "construction projects" connected to the levees.
Why did the broken section of the 17th Street Canal levee undergo "construction" within the past year? http://www.ocnus.net/artman/publish/printer_20044.shtml
"The Senate was seeking to restore some of the SELA funding cuts for 2006. But now it's too late. One project that a contractor had been racing to finish this summer was a bridge and levee job right at the 17th Street Canal, site of the main breach on Monday."
Why did the broken section of the Industrial Canal levee undergo "construction" within the past two years? http://www.mvn.usace.army.mil/prj/ihnc/TEXTinteractive.asp
"West Bank Levee & Floodwall, Phase 1
Existing levee to be enlarged to 22.4 feet above sea level with 1,300 linear feet of earthen levee and 300 linear feet of combination earthen embankment and I-type floodwall. Pedestrian walkway and benches provided. On west bank of Industrial Canal from St. Claude Avenue to Mississippi River.
Estimated Start: June 2003. Construction Period: 10 months.
DESIGN BEING COMPLETED PILE DRIVING TRUCK USE"
Don't you find it very convenient that the levees broke in the exact same sections that were undergoing construction?
Predictably, skeptics and disinformation specialists, who will go out of their way to discredit serious inquiries into the levee collapses, will make up excuses and claim "shoddy construction" caused the collapse of both the 17th Street and Industrial Canals.
Of course the "shoddy construction" explanation was the same excuse used by skeptics and disinformation specialists to explain away the implosion of the World Trade Center towers and Building 7 on 9/11, which have been repeatedly proven to be controlled demolitions.
The cuts in federal funding for the levee system in New Orleans brings up even more interesting questions.
Why was the funding for the levee system cut by the Bush Administration?
According the New Orleans newspapers, several articles were published condemning the Bush Administrations slashing of funds for the maintenance of the levees in New Orleans; http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display
"In early 2004, as the cost of the conflict in Iraq soared, President Bush proposed spending less than 20 percent of what the Corps said was needed for Lake Pontchartrain, according to a Feb. 16, 2004, article, in New Orleans CityBusiness.
On June 8, 2004, Walter Maestri, emergency management chief for Jefferson Parish, Louisiana; told the Times-Picayune: "It appears that the money has been moved in the president's budget to handle homeland security and the war in Iraq, and I suppose that's the price we pay. Nobody locally is happy that the levees can't be finished, and we are doing everything we can to make the case that this is a security issue for us."
On the September 1st, 2005 edition of Good Morning America, President Bush claimed that "no one anticipated" that the levees would break in New Orleans; http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4204754.stm
even though Homeland Security had drilled for such a scenario in 2004 which was titled "Hurricane Pam"; http://www.fema.gov/news/newsrelease.fema?id=13051
"Hurricane Pam brought sustained winds of 120 mph, up to 20 inches of rain in parts of southeast Louisiana and storm surge that topped levees in the New Orleans area. More than one million residents evacuated and Hurricane Pam destroyed 500,000-600,000 buildings. Emergency officials from 50 parish, state, federal and volunteer organizations faced this scenario during a five-day exercise held this week at the State Emergency Operations Center in Baton Rouge."
This willful ignorance by Bush is very similar to a comment made just after 9/11 by then National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice who claimed "nobody had any idea that planes would be crashed into the World Trade Center" even though there were previous reports as well as NORAD and Pentagon drills(Operation Boijinka) which suggested planes would be used for terrorism.
Members of the Bush Administration knew full well this catastrophe was coming. Which begs the question: Were the collapse of the 17th Street Canal and the Industrial Canal levees deliberate events?
In light of all the evidence that's piling up, the conclusion would have to be "yes".
Were the levees destroyed with explosive charges?
Shaped charges would be the most convenient way to rupture those levees and the only way to explain why they ruptured so quickly instead of slowly crumbling apart in small pieces. With the city and and the surrounding areas evacuated, there would be very few witnesses to this type of deliberate sabotage, especially if it took place at 4 o'clock in the morning.
Were shaped explosive charges hidden inside of sealed, waterproof compartments during the "construction" on the 17th Street and Industrial Canal levees and conveniently detonated in the aftermath of Katrina?
In light of evidence of shaped charges being used in the destruction the Murrah Building in Oklahoma City on April 19th, 1995 and inside of the World Trade Center complex on September 11th, 2001, the probability is very high.
The circumstances surrounding the breaches of the levees becomes even stranger with the next piece of information.
Since a truck bomb was used to mask the presence of shaped charges in the Murrah Building in Oklahoma City and that the crashes of planes and resulting fires were used to mask the shaped charge demolition of the World Trade Center, we now have to turn to the mysterious barge that was conveniently parked near the area of the Industrial Canal levee breach; http://220.127.116.11/search?q=cache:I2iPvB6LGs0J:www.startribune.c
Barge in the breach?
A loose barge may have caused a large breach in the east side of the Industrial Canal floodwall that accelerated Hurricane Katrina's rising floodwaters in New Orleans, Army Corps of Engineers project manager Al Naomi said Monday.
Naomi said the barge was found on the land side of the floodwall, leading corps officials to believe that it could have crashed through the wall and sent a huge amount of water -- which was already pouring over the top -- into the neighborhoods immediately downriver.
Why was a barge parked next to the area of the Industrial Canal levee breach, especially when everyone knew a Category 5 hurricane was approaching the city? Was it planted there to make the collapse of the Industrial Canal levee look like an accident?
During the Oklahoma City Bombing, a truck with a fertilizer and fuel oil bomb was parked in front of the Murrah building by Timothy McVeigh and several Iraqi intelligence agents(who were brought into the U.S. by Bush Sr. during his term in office and were caught assisting McVeigh on video surveillance tapes confiscated under national security) in order to make it look like the truck bomb took down the building even though we know shaped charges caused the hole in the Murrah building.
It was the same way with the World Trade Center on 9/11. Planes were crashed into the buildings and the resulting fires were used in the governments whitewash of the events which claimed that the steel columns melted and caused the collapse. FDNY firefighter tapes prove the fires were nearly out before the shaped charge implosions of Towers
1 and 2 as well as Building 7, a demolition which was admitted several months later by Larry Silverstein on a PBS documentary called "America Rebuilds".
So the presence of this barge in the exact area where the Industrial Canal levee breached is highly suspicious.
On a side note, the original story linked above has been "scrubbed" from the main Minneapolis Star Tribune website and replaced with a totally different story. Luckily the original article was found in the Google cache. Looks like whoever destroyed those levees are putting massive pressure on newspapers and websites to censor the truth.
Now we have to ask, who benefits from this tragedy?
Halliburton, the company previously headed by Dick Cheney, has already been awarded contracts to clean up the damage from Katrina. http://www.halliburton.com/default/main/halliburton/eng/news/sourc
"Also, as part of the company's Construction Capabilities (CONCAP) contract with the U.S. Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC), Halliburton's subsidiary KBR is providing power distribution restoration, emergency roof repair and debris removal at three Mississippi Naval facilities that were damaged by Hurricane Katrina. Additionally, KBR will begin performing damage assessments on other Naval facilities in New Orleans as soon as it is deemed safe to do so."
Just like with the aftermath of the Iraq War, Dick Cheney and Halliburton will line their pockets by making billions of dollars off of the suffering of thousands of innocents.
Unfortunately for truth seekers, there will be influential individuals in the truth movement who will say that people who ask these types of questions "are shooting their mouths off" or will shut down inquiries into this event by saying "lets not get into this right now because of the scope of this tragedy". Unfortunately, they are unintentionally and unwittingly letting the perpetrators get away with this crime against humanity in New Orleans.
But those of us who ask these painful questions can always take solace in the following quote from Mark Twain:
"In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."
It's clear the destruction of New Orleans with the levee breaches was a deliberately manufactured event which was designed to bring about the chaos we saw in New Orleans and to bring us closer to the New World Order police state.