Anyway, I was about to launch into a screed about the BBC in general, but online there is
The breakdown of the relief operation in New Orleans was the result of multiple failures by city, state and federal authorities.That is fair, I think. The rest of the article is even better. Read it. Very balanced - a good summary.
There was no one cause. The failures began long before the hurricane with a gamble that a Category Four or Five hurricane would not strike New Orleans.
They continued with an inadequate evacuation plan and culminated in a relief effort hampered by lack of planning, supplies and manpower, and a breakdown in communications of the most basic sort.
The BBC WC though, was all Bush bashing, all the time. I don't know what stew of institutional bias, reporter Bush hate, or British ignorance of our Federal system of government - but it was like listening to MoveOn.org/democraticunderground.com radio.
Did I mention NPR? To give them credit, they were telling both sides. They had a professional (if there is such a thing) relief worker that has done work in Africa and SE Asia on (after some Bush bashing journalism professor from California). He basically said, "Americans are spoiled and have no clue. Nothing is perfect, but no other country in the world could have responded faster or better than we have. People's ignorance of logistics and desire to make political hay out of this are resulting in demands for the impossible. Americans should say "thank you" and wonder at the capabilities our nation can harness in such a few days."
They did finish with a snide comment that "....and he is a Colonel in the Army Reserve....", well, maybe not snide. But that is my anti-NPR bias slipping in, natch.