Quelle Surprise

Well, well, well.  Turns out that the massive fire in Hawaii which caused all those deaths has absolutely nothing to do with Global Cooling Climate Warming Change©, but instead has the grimy fingerprints of incompetent officialdom all over the place:

The Maui fire is proving to be the worst wildfire in American history, having taken over 100 lives and likely many more by the time the count is complete. The fire itself was started by downed power lines, which was poorly fought (it was declared contained before it raged out of control), was made deadly by an incompetent Emergency Management official (Karen wrote about this in her VIP column earlier today), and to cap it all off was made difficult to fight by a government official who refused to approve the use of water to fight the fire.

That’s a trifecta of terrible, right there.  But it gets worse:

It turns out that nine years ago, a report by Hawaiian fire researchers sounded the alarm that the area was at extremely high risk of burning. Many key recommendations were ignored.

Where have we heard this before?  Oh yeah, in California.

And needless to say, one of the gummint lackeys is not only incompetent, but a woketard:

During the inferno that devastated part of the island of Maui, wiping entire towns off the map and possibly killing more than a thousand people (once a full assessment can be made), people on Maui begged state officials to allow West Maui stream water to be diverted to fill up reservoirs for firefighting. That request went to M. Kaleo Manuel, Deputy Director of Hawaii’s Commission on Water Resource Management, and he delayed approval of that water for five hours – five hours in which the once-contained fire exploded. By the time the approval was received, workers were unable to reach the siphon release so that the water could be diverted. Now we’re learning that Manuel, an Obama Foundation Leader for the Asia Pacific Region, is a climate change activist and DEI devotee who’s said, “Like, we can share [water], but it requires true conversations about equity.”

Yeah, having more than a hundred people die unnecessarily sounds pretty equitable to me.  And the highlighted part  of the above goes without saying because of course this stupid tit is an Obama lickspittle.


  1. That official death doll of ~150 is only the confirmed dead. There are still 800-1000 “missing” which after this much time (except for a small few) are also likely dead. At the end of things, if the death toll doesn’t break 1000, it will come very close.

  2. Wife and I lived in Chico, CA for 30 years, raised our kids there. We knew some folks whose remains were found in the ashes of the Camp Fire. Some days it’s hard to resist the urge to just step off the porch and go hunting.

  3. The other tragedy here is that none of the bureaucrats will be convicted of manslaughter for their horrid decisions.


    1. nope. no seppuku for this feckless imbecile. We should control his pain level for the rest of his life and we the people should determine the remaining length of his life


  4. Manuel has, of course, resigned, right?

    And the article implicates people, not nature, as the cause. Grrr…

  5. It gets worse, there are persistent and consistent eye witness reports that police actively prevented the evacuation of the burning areas, condemning many residents to burn to death.

    There are also rumours that residents in these areas had been receiving “offers” to buy their properties at below market prices by real estate development companies prior to the fires destroying everything (and of course greatly decreasing property values in the process).

    1. No. He was reassigned to a different position. That reassignment is now the subject of a federal lawsuit.

  6. It seems to me that had this Manuel character stepped into his office for five hours of “prayer and seeking God’s face” to figure out if diverting the water was a good idea, today he’d be among the ranks of the unemployed. Why then is his handwringing over his equally religious beliefs somehow more meritorious?

    This is why we lose folks. For us it is just politics and trying to hold a distant bureaucracy accountable. For them, it is their religion. We compromise because we want to seem reasonable. They don’t compromise because they want to seem to themselves to be stalwart defenders of their orthodoxy.

Comments are closed.