I have no explanation. But I am laying my money on interference by FEMA. I have nothing to support that suspicion, however, other than an overwhelming disgust with the other relief efforts that were delayed by direct interference from FEMA.
You can start by toning it down a notch, I’m not trying to nail you to the wall. I just pointed out the nature of statistics.
To answer your question, it is no more unsubstantiated than any other statistic. Statistics are generally used as a method of predicting an outcome. When used after-the-fact to justify an argument they are easily abused.
If you accept the premise that it was the people with both the means and good judgement who evacuated New Orleans then you are left with the poor and socially disaffected. I don’t have to substantiate that crime is tied to poverty and education. Therefore, the people most likely to commit a crime on any given day would be most be among those left behind.
I never mentioned race in anything I’ve said. That is an assumption you made and is irrelevant to my argument.
How is the media responsible for delaying the Guard? It is a fact that the National Guard delayed entering the Superdome until they could go in with overwhelming force: from the Washington Times Lt. Gen. Blum said the National Guard did not move sooner to secure the Superdome and convention center because commanders were waiting to amass “an overwhelming force.”
Clearly the National Guard expected to confront a violent crowd. The City of New Orleans did not have adequate communications equipment so it is logical to conclude that the distorted information of events (inside the Superdome) was derived from Media sources.
The fallout continues. From today’s Grey Lady:
FTR, I saw these stories although I never watch Fox News, so it wasn’t just them. I’ve been trying to track down the more virulent stories in the foreign press, and see if there’s been corrections. Nothing on the Beeb I’ve noticed so far.
The Times-Picayune quote in the OP, and the New York Times today, note that the New Orleans police chief was passing on rumors of some of these atrocities. That’s a pretty credible source.
What about that helicopter that turned away claiming to have been shot at ?
I thought some of the Katrina stories didn’t make sense… those bathrooms in the Superdome were probably being used all the time due to the overcrowding… not much privacy for raping people.
Now some of what the OP and responders are posting clearly looks like revisionism… white washing perhaps ? TV doesnt make up every story…
I don’t think that we can automatically discount all of the informatiion on acts of violence that we heard about. I heard one of the MSNBC program hosts comment that shots were fired in his presence.
From what I have read, there were a number of corpses in the Superdome, that were not murder victims. This might explain the “piles” of bodies that people referred to. Maybe I am misremembering, but I think I read that there were fourteen bodies found.
I haven’t read any report which denied that there was fighting inside the Dome.
I watched a lot of coverage on MSNBC and heard reports of shooting and non-specific violence. I personally did not hear any reports of murder or rape. I did see posts about it at SDMB.
Considering that the mayor of the city was on Oprah’s show talking about "“hundreds of armed gang members” killing and raping people inside the Dome, how could he expect the story to go unreported?
In my opinion, “the black community” believed the reports that “they” heard just as most of the rest of the country did. Since the city was in chaos, it was hard to sort out truth from fiction. Lines of communication were down within the city and state itself. All of us depended on the reports coming out of the city. I don’t think that we can learn anything in particular about “their” view of the world.
But just remember that you witnessed the media at its best – unwilling to take a story at face value. Meet the Press kept digging until they had the truth.
New Orleans presented the greatest threat to human life.
Another article from the Times today:
And now I see, thanks to Rashak Mani, that the foreign press may not believe the denials, thinking it’s a cover-up. Oh, great.
Cite? If I recall, they merely switched to a different set of slogans - freedom america democracy but never admitted being wrong about anything.
Now for others who question why we believed the news reports about Katrina. On the one hand, we are expected to believe certain news reports, but on the other had we are expected to not believe certain other reports. How does that work? The newspapers, the TV news, news magazines, were reporting bad stuff - massive death and destruction, rampant looting, terror in the Dome, government screwups, looting by police even. There were enough reports from enough different sources, that we believed it. How silly. We should wait until all the facts are in. - That means, since our “facts” come from news sources usually, the facts will never come in because all news is lies. We should not believe any news at all. However, when the news favors the administration and we call it spin, then we are wrong for not believing it. We are being partisan and have our fingers in our ears.
Believe the media when it toes the party line. Is that it?
Do they not have access to the TV? The BBC, CNN, Fox, ITV, SKY and C4 in the UK were broadcasting live from inside the centre for days. There were armed guards inside the hall (although they were acting like prison guards was a common observation). As was ’ where the fuck is the help?’. There clearly was no ‘hundreds of armed civilians’ waiting to attack those poor defenceless National Guard soldiers.
It’s bullshit or incompetence for anyone in authority at any time to claim there was any danger or that they didn’t know what was going on in the centre in detail.
Particularly to organised and armed National Guard units.
It’s just transparent ass-covering.
Really not the appropriate thread for this…and kind of silly as a 2 min. google search on ‘Bush admitted no WMD’ would give you tons of results. But here you go…enjoy. If you wish to go through this further or talk about the whole WMD issue, the ‘lies’, etc, I suggest you start yet another thread on it either here in GD or in the Pit.
-XT
I disagree. New Orleans did not take the brunt of the hurricane. It represented the greatest inconvenience to human life. The rescue effort was easily handled on a local/state level because of the assets needed (boats/buses) and the personnel required (National Guard). Except for hospital patient transfer there was no reason to use a $1,000/hr helicopter in place of a fleet of boats. Dollar for dollar helicopter’s represent a delay in rescue.
Mississippi represented a much larger demographic area for search and rescue of actual hurricane victims.
WHAT? Really? I wasn’t aware of this. Is there video anywhere of the guy not backing down?
How about this: believe that the media is making an attempt to produce news (with a tilt toward sensationalism because it sells), but note what they actually say when deciding what to believe.
Hypothetical news stories:
*Disaster, Day 2: There are reports of widespread murders.
Disaster clean-up, Day 20: Official Smith at this site notes that they found seven victims of heat stroke or dehydration, two diabetics who died for lack of insulin and bad diet, and one suicide.*
Note the difference? In the first story, they say that there are reports of violence, with no sources and no confirming evidence. It is accurate to say that there were, indeed, reports of that violence.
In the second story, an identified human in a position of authority has identified very specific events that have taken place–events that we will be able to confirm by consulting coroners’ reports once the furor has died down and the bureaucracy is functioning again.
In both cases the reporting is accurate. It is true that there were reports of violence in the first instance and it is true that there were specific victims identified by the types of trauma in the second.
The issue is to note, in the first case, that vague reports, identified as such, are not the same as statements of fact. We can believe the media (using some caution) when they say there have been reports without necessarily believing that their unsubstantiated reports are true.
Use of the media for information is the point of this thread. You saw 1 minute snippets of “news” involving interviews of people who recounted second hand information, including the police.
The security of the Superdome was handled by the city and they did not occupy the stadium area but kept to the entrance area (thus the prison guard observation). People were not properly screened for guns/knives. The city police represent the primary source of information so any breakdown in communication started there.
The National Guard is under the control of the Governor. They are not armed as soldiers unless designated to do so. They have to be specifically tasked as a police force before overstepping local authority. She delayed deployment by at least a day, presumably because of a reluctance to do this.
I agree. Security at the Superdome was the job of the city police chief, who has already resigned.
You do not understand the function of the National Guard. They consist of volunteers from all walks of life and their jobs are more reflective of military support/logistics then combat. When deployed in a natural disaster area their main function is rescue. Police work is generally handled by Guard units specifically trained as MP’s. In this case they used a Michigan Guard unit. Again, the Governor has to request such a unit and empower them with the authority to act in such a capacity. Without such structure you would end up with an untrained police force operating with military weapons. The last time that happened in my state they wrote songs about the dead.
The Superdome was not meant to be used as a mass shelter, it was one of 10 shelters and it’s original set up was for people with medical needs. The Mayor lost control of the situation as 20,000 people descended on the Superdome complex. It was exacerbated by a lack of communication. Presumably, the police did not move into the stadium area with weapons for the same reason prison guards don’t carry them among the prisoners. It is to prevent being overpowered and losing the weapons. The Police Chief was the person to make that call and he would be more qualified than anyone on this board to know what to expect.
Well, the New York Times seems to be trying to make up for media “sensationalism” in hurricane coverage.
Their story yesterday about New Orleans businesses trying to recover post-hurricane, had a headline that referred to losses sustained due to “scavengers”. :dubious:
*“looting” was mentioned in a less sensitive location, in the body of the story.
Yes, go to Meet the Press and look at the center of the screen for the section that says NBC VIDEO: MEET THE PRESS. Under the picture are buttons to scroll through 10 videos. it is the 2nd video.
This link will probably disappear this week because it summarizes the previous show.
Basically this guy reiterates his position that she died on Friday and not Monday as her son believes. He is in complete denial despite the fact that the nursing home was not contacted after Monday by the person who was suppose to have made all the dramatic phone calls.
Not only was he in denial but he attacked Russert by asking what kind of sick minded person would debate this and “get out of my face”.
Well, I’m black and I didn’t believe most of what was reported about the violence and chaos in NOLA. I posted this in one of those ridiculously long threads devoted to Katrina violence. It expresses my frustration at the media’s rabid sensationalism and the willingness of people to lap it up to the exclusion of everything else, including common sense.
If my friends and family are any indication, the “black community” was probably slower to believe the news than anyone else. I know that when Askia expressed doubts about the allegations, he was rebuked at least somewhat by more credulous Dopers. So really, when I think about people being quick to believe the worst, black folks do not readily come to mind in this case.
Thanks, you with the face. I too have heard various levels of belief from blacks and white equally, but unfortunately most of the faces on the news repeating the stories, like the Mayor and ex-Police Chief, were black. A shame.
The BBC finally runs a story, days late and buried in the Americas page.
Found this great site again, which was showing the sensational stories around the world, Watching America.
Why were people so quick to believe that New Orlenas had descended into anarchy, and orgies or rape and murder? Three big reasons:
-
Far too many people on the far right are already predisposed to believe that poor African-Americans are animals ready to go on a murderous rampage at the drop of a hat.
-
Far too many on the far left are eager to believe that everything that went on, in New Orleans is Bush’s fault, because of his supposed. And the worse things were (or appeared to be) in New Orleans, the more evil Bush must be for allowing it to happen.
-
People in positions of authority, especially Mayor Nagin, seemed to think they’d get more aid faster for their city if they exaggerated, or simply parroted every disaster story they’d heard third-hand.
So, a lot of people turned of their internal B.S. detectors, because horror stories fit their preconceived notions.
It’s still all bullshit. I was watching live 24 hour coverage of the aftermath with reporters broadcasting live inside the shelters and there clearly was no law and order problem and no swarms of frightening dark people ready to ‘overpower’ armed men.
There was simply nothing to stop proper help being sent in and distributed. And there was no communications lack for anyone with a TV. It was all laid out.