Replies

moneyrunner posted:

"...But starting with New Orleans' heroic though not-infallible Times-Picayune, the correctives have come rolling in, from (in order) the Los Angeles Times, the Associated Press, Knight Ridder, the New York
Times, the Wall Street Journal, and the Washington Post..."

So....even though they lied the first time, this time they are telling the truth?

***Graphic Content***

http://cryptome.quintessenz.at/mirror/katdead-01/katrina-dead-01.htm

http://cryptome.quintessenz.at/mirror/katdead-02/katrina-dead-02.htm

http://carolinacomputingsolutions.com/nola/%23interdictor-scanner.freenode.log

http://carolinacomputingsolutions.com/nola/%23interdictor-scanner2.freenode.log

http://carolinacomputingsolutions.com/nola/%23interdictor-scanner3.freenode.log

http://carolinacomputingsolutions.com/nola/%23interdictor-scanner4.freenode.log

If you can't understand why the MSM would exaggerate the violence and chaos at first, and now try to whitewash it into never having happened now, check the links I've posted first, so you can see for yourself what happened and didn't happen, then come back here and ping me for an answer.

If you already have the answer you prefer from the MSM (not difficult as they've covered the entire spectrum so far) then disregard this post.

You can comment about this story here. (Note the nofollow tag). I tried posting the following comment, but it didn't make it through; that's happened before and Welch says it was a glitch. They aren't exactly tech geniuses there. Anyway, here's the comment:

-- As I've said before: Those who kinda believed all the horror stories before are now believing the attempt to whitewash this after. Not that Ed Bush himself is doing that, but I'm sure that many of those anecdotes will turn out to be true.

For the other side, start with this and this and this. The last the feds claimed happen; as for the first will we ever find out?

By the last count, nearly 1000 people died in and around New Orleans during and after the Katrina hurricane. Your pictures of the dead are graphic. But what do these pictures prove except to document – in photography – what this statistics already shows?

People who die in a catastrophe, whether a hurricane, in a tidal wave or in a highway pile-up make a gruesome sight. But these images create an emotional reaction, they don’t change the facts.

The facts appear to be at this point that no seven-year-old was raped and her throat cut at the Superdome; neither were there mass rapes or mass killings. It does not appear that rescue helicopters were shot at by snipers. The body count was one-tenth of the estimated broadcast by the MSM.

The MSM follow up, such as it is, goes along the line of “it now appears that the death toll was not as great as initially feared, and some of the rumors originally reported were apparently exaggerations.”

This is followed by no analysis of why this is the case; no soul searching about why this happened. Is this the way the MSM would treat an analogous situation if some other agency of organization spread the most hyperbolic stories that turned out to be false? I doubt it.

The real problem is that the MSM has lost so much credibility that your question is going to be a common one: “even though they lied the first time, this time they are telling the truth?”

For a free society to work it needs a free press; one that gets basic facts out. This function the MSM is in the process of destroying, It’s a shame.