May 15th, 2010
~Like it or not, “Katrina” has become
shorthand for a lot: the hurricane itself, the failed levees, the
neglect that followed. Maybe The Times should just call it a
“disaster,” without modifiers, and be as specific as possible when
Editilla Ho’tellas Oh yeah? Why, can’t the Times show us how far one has to bend over
before they can see the backside of the da’Truf? Like when they sold us on the
Iraq War for Bush, and especially in how they play the spit ball for
this BP Oil Disaster, the NY Times is the Run And Hide Paper of Broken
Yeah, they used our
Man-made Disaster of 8/29/05 to enrich their readership, yet they still
to this day will not admit to what actually factually caused the Flood
of New Orleans?
Are these horn-rimmed Yankees out of their fucking
~Joseph Treaster, now a
professor at the University of Miami, was a Times reporter who was in
New Orleans when Katrina hit. He said that mistakes by people made
things worse, but,
“No hurricane, no damage.”
Yeah well, I was there too you truth bender, and it was Yes Hurricane, No Damage! Compared to Yes Engineering Failure, Yes Catastrophic
Devastation. What “mistakes” by what “people” made what “things”
worse, Treaster? Well? Would you like to slide that innuendo and out the other?
What the hell did this liar just say? A Non Sequitur, a Memeish
I was living in New Orleans when Katrina missed the city.
Yes, it was a Rock’n‘Rolling Storm, but without the Corps’ Engineering
Failures we would have cleaned that up in a couple of weeks, a month
tops. But for the Exquisite Corps Failures, we would not be having this
conversation. But for the Corps of Engineers, the NY Times would not
have been able to capitalize on the disaster by spinning it wrong over
and over and over.
And now they would admit, nay swill in the
practice of Journalistic Shorthand? Not on my ground, Bras.
the face of my New Orleans.
IT’S THE LEVEES STUPID!
Editilla~New Orleans Ladder
Total Posts: 921 (show recent)