Posted on 03/02/2006 12:01:35 PM PST by chemicalman
The Associated Press is running a piece of video on which they're claiming exclusivity, of some of the FEMA preparation meetings prior to the landfall of Hurrican Katrina. They've also got video of the President speaking to FEMA, and then, later, speaking to ABC in the aftermath. They've chosen to portray the President as oblivious to what happened in New Orleans.
President Bush (speaking to ABC news): I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees.
Voiceover: A seemingly direct contradiction to what is said at the briefing.
Max Mayfield (director, National Hurricane Center): I don't think anyone can tell you with any confidence right now whether the levees will be topped.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
Media is not confused at all, just trying to confuse.
Thanks for posting this; I thought they had finally driven me insane.
They're not the least bit confused, they're simply following the basic rules of modern American journalism. Define every word so that it casts America and/or any Republican President in the worst possible light.
"This was no boating accident!"
Obviously overtopping is a lot less bad than a breach, but does anyone have a link to materials discussing it in more technical terms? To me it's just obvious, like the difference between a bathtub overflowing (for a period of time) vs. a bathtub's ENTIRE WALL COLLAPSING.
Well, I've seen the breaches with my own eyes. And every engineer, soil scientist and geologist who's seen them says that at least two of the canals were not overtopped, but had the walls collapse for other reasons.
They fell down. Most likely because the pilings weren't deep enough and/or driven into peat rather than clay.
bttt
I do see the readership declining.
I do see the NYT stock declining.
So, maybe the people have given up on the media and just laugh at their inane attempts to destroy the country. And yet, it seems that this is taking place (for many people) on a subconscious level. When I talk to people and say "Hasn't the media become a joke?" I get:
1) Huh?
2) You mean Fox News? Yeah, they sure love the president, don't they?
3) You mean that guy on Channel X? Isn't he annoying? I hate his hair!
I don't really get the feeling that the media (the whole thing) has become a complete laughingstock. Yet.
I just don't get it.
I don't think this is the key distinction that the media is missing. As Bush himself clarified, this is about timing. Before landfall, everyone in the country - Bush included - knew there were concerns about the levees, regardless of whether the fears were of overtopping or an actual breach. But the day AFTER the hurricane passed through, everyone was saying that New Orleans had "dodged a bullet" and that the levees had done their job. THAT was what Bush was referring to, the relaxed vigilance after the original crisis passed. And he admitted there was a relaxation, but the MSM is trying to make the preposterous claim that Bush lied or mis-spoke about not knowing the levees were ever in danger.
where is the story?
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/09/20050912.html
Media continues to ignore Bush's clarification on levy breach comment (Whitehouse.gov Transcript from 9/12/05)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1588661/posts
Q Did they misinform you when you said that no one anticipated the breach of the levees?
THE PRESIDENT: No, what I was referring to is this. When that storm came by, a lot of people said we dodged a bullet. When that storm came through at first, people said, whew. There was a sense of relaxation, and that's what I was referring to. And I, myself, thought we had dodged a bullet. You know why? Because I was listening to people, probably over the airways, say, the bullet has been dodged. And that was what I was referring to.
Of course, there were plans in case the levee had been breached. There was a sense of relaxation in the moment, a critical moment. And thank you for giving me a chance to clarify that.
I could be wrong, but I could swear Shep Smith was the first one to say that. I'd love to go back through the Katrina threads and find it. I'm pretty sure someone actually posted it when Smith said it. If I recall, Smith almost said it like he was bored that not more had happened. He does the same thing if a car chase isn't fast enough. I'll bet President Bush was watching FOX coverage.
Then ya read the story ... and none of it backs up the headline!
Same analogy I was thinking of. And I agree that a breaching seems much more serious than a topping (if that's the word).
Mind you, topping of levees certainly can contribute, later, to the levees' collapse, through erosion of the lee-side support (soil, etc.). But the two concepts are distinct, and I can't tell whether the MSM folks blurred them on purpose or through sloppiness in their desire to Get Bush.
I'm not so sure they are trying to confuse
I believe they really think this way and interpret things to fit their way of thinking
Just look out how they read .. or shall I say twist the Constitution ..
They really don't have a clue they are doing this
I'm guessing it's a combination of actual ignorance and willful ignorance. Our side will have to push the issue of breach v topped in order for it to be registered in the discussion. I doubt the press will seek out the distinction on its own. It'll just go whistling by.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.