Rita Damage to SW Louisiana worse than being reported

Lake Charles.com Photos ^ | September 25, 2005

[Comstock1]

The damage that has hit SW Louisiana and SE Texas is much worse than is being reported by the MSM. While there is very little in the way of a body count, houses and businesses by the hundreds have been destroyed. Entire communities in Cameron Parish have more than likely been erased from the map.

Here is link for some images from SW LA. You'll have to scroll down.

http://forum.lakecharles.com/ultimatebb.php?/ubb/get_topic/f/14/t/000023

[conservative in nyc]

I don't see how you can correlate the fact that there was less for Katrina to destroy in the areas she hit with her having been less destructive. To claim she was far less destructive implies she was far less powerful.

No it doesn't. By your logic, a category 5 hurricane with 220 mile-per-hour winds and a 50-foot storm surge in the middle of the Atlantic that never makes landfall would be more destructive than Katrina because it was more powerful than Katrina. That doesn't fit the dictionary definition of destructive:

de·struc·tive Pronunciation Key (d-strktv) adj.

1. Causing or wreaking destruction; ruinous: a destructive act; a policy that is destructive to the economy.

If a hurricane causes nothing to be destroyed, it's not destructive.

Had Rita made landfall south of Houston/Galveston, at the same intensity she did in Louisiana, she would have caused far more destruction.

Yup. It would have been more destructive.

[laz]

Katrina, on the other hand, destroyed the largest city in the state and a huge chunk of Louisiana's economy with it.

Really? Katrina didn't destroy NOLA. NOLA is still standing, while Cameron and Holly Beach are not. NOLA is the victim of a side effect of Katrina, not Katrina herself. If the levees had held, NOLA would be in as good a shape as Houston/Galveston. Before the flooding started, everyone was saying NOLA dodged a bullet, just as they're saying about Houston/Galveston. Seems you're falling into the media's trap, making NOLA the center of the universe. Katrina didn't destroy NOLA. She did, however, destroy the Mississippi coast. Remember that?

[Flux Capacitor]

----Coastal towns like Cameron and Holly Beach were ground zero.----

The loss of tiny places like Cameron and Holly Beach, bad as it is, will not ruin the economy of the state, as the loss of New Orleans will. Unlike Katrina, Rita did not completely REMOVE one of Louisiana's major population centers. And, most importantly, Rita will in the end have claimed far, far, FAR fewer lives than Katrina did. (So far there have been NO reported deaths in La.)

There simply is no comparison between Katrina and Rita. Katrina was a once-in-a-lifetime event; Rita was just a hurricane.

-Dan

[Flux Capacitor]

----Seems you're falling into the media's trap, making NOLA the center of the universe.----

Truth is harsh.... and the truth is that New Orleans was more important to La. than Holly Beach. And if the wreckage of one of America's major cities and the total displacement of its entire population aren't major news stories, I don't know what are.

----Katrina didn't destroy NOLA.----

Yes, it did. And your argument is akin to complaining about continuing media coverage of the destruction of New York City after a storm temporarily incapacitates Schenectady.

-Dan

[swmobuffalo]

"Unlike Katrina, Rita did not completely REMOVE one of Louisiana's major population centers"

No, Katrina did not remove a major population center. The FLOOD waters did the damage after the hurricane passed.

[Flux Capacitor]

----No, Katrina did not remove a major population center. The FLOOD waters did the damage after the hurricane passed.----

Yep. The flood waters caused by Katrina.

-Dan

[beckysueb]

Actually, they did show what happened in those states, before the flooding started in NOLA. All day Monday, August 29, the coverage was split between NOLA having dodged a bullet and Mississippi having been hit hard. In fact, the media seemed pleased that while NOLA had been spared, the Republican state of Mississippi had taken the full brunt of Katrina's wrath. As soon as the flooding started in NOLA on Tuesday, though, the media immediately switched to that, and their focus has been there ever since.

Yes, I think you are right which makes it even worse because they KNEW what happened in Mississippi and ignored it. Has anyone even heard from Alabama? I haven't heard a word. I know there was damage but they didn't say anything about it.

[calrighty]

Pretty damn dismal.

[beckysueb]

I am beginning to like Geraldo more and more. He doesn't care what color you are. He is getting angry at the media for blowing off Rita and saying they dodged the bullet. He said this is the worst natural disaster they have suffered in years. He said they didn't dodge the bullet. He kind of upbraided the media for taking things so lightly. He said whoever says they dodged the bullet aren't there to see the devastation.

[beckysueb]

And this is part of the misleading impression the media has created. No, Lake Charles wasn't dealt a death blow -- but other places were. Was Lake Charles ground zero? No. Coastal towns like Cameron and Holly Beach were ground zero. Cities like Lake Charles and Beaumont were just outside ground zero.

I guess the people in small towns aren't as important as big important cities. I feel for the people who are going to have to rebuild their lives and be told to suck it up. Who do you think you are, New Awlins?! These people are suffering just as bad as the poor in NO. There just aren't as many of them and they aren't as helpless and vocal.

[justa-hairyape]

What's the reasoning behind downplaying Rita???

Before the Cane hits, the government informs the MSM about the potential danger. The MSM then tends to hype potential Cane damage to make sure people hear the warning. While the Cane is hitting, the MSM hypes the damage occurring to hype their viewer ship ratings. Then after the Cane passes through, the MSM tends to downplay the damage to downplay the governments potential liabilities. Its kinda of a symbiotic relationship or theory. Rita was the norm, whereas Katrina was the exception to the theory. A different agenda was driving the MSM when they began to incite race war in Katrina's aftermath by hyping the 'treatment of blacks' in the Super dome.

[upchuck]

To get a new page you can also use target=new

[justa-hairyape]

The water comes ashore with velocity, and being heavy, it breaks things. One the structure's integrity is lost, the wind and surf together remove the debris.

There is a video on the MSM that was shot from someone inside a house that got Rita storm surge of up to at least 1/2 of their first story. Video shot inside large room with large open windows. Cameraman apparently standing on some furniture. The water looked downright dangerous. Lots of energy. Short powerful waves moving 500 to 1,000 gallons around in random directions.

[cherry]

its almost like the MSM whores are only concerned about NO's period, like all the white crackers living in Mississippi and Texas and Lousisana don't count, as well as the thousands and thousands of blacks outside of NO's.....

[seeker41]

I saw that video on KHOU 11 here in Houston, scared me to death. I can't imagine being caught up in that surge.

[geopyg]

Before Rita hit the weather guys were saying Cameron had been hit before and completely wiped out by a hurricane once before (I think it was after the 1900 Galvestone 'cane).

[Flux Capacitor]

Cameron isn't a major population center, though.

-Dan

[swmobuffalo]

Therein lies the point, the storm Katrina DID NOT cause the destruction. The flood waters did. Guess we can't split this hair any finer.

[Flux Capacitor]

A distinction without a difference. The floodwaters were a result of the hurricane.

-Dan

[geopyg]

Agreed - Cameron is a small town. Probably like most small towns it wouldn't be missed by too many. But also like so many small towns - won't give up either! Just thought it was interesting/sad/.... that it had been destroyed once before.