General Interest > Let's talk about the weather...
Explosive Residue Found on Failed Levee Debris
Anonymous:
--- Quote ---
On 2005-09-11 10:21:00, Deborah wrote:
"DJ, who are you speaking to:
This story is no more verifiable than "Martians did it." Can you PROVE they DIDN'T? No, of course you can't, but does that mean they DID?
NO, I didn't state or imply that 'they DID'.
--- Quote ---
Then we should not believe what you post, because
you don't identify it as bullshit, instead the reader is forced to make an assumption that you believe it!
--- Quote ---
It's information. Use it how you will, or not. There is plenty else to discuss around this issue.
--- Quote ---
Then you back down and deflect when called on it.
If you weren't called on dubious sources, then you
would carry on, as usual.
--- Quote ---
What I find curious is the rabid response to information (true or false) in this thread.
--- Quote ---
You attack the people questioning your posting of this information, just like the Republican Smashmouth manifesto.
--- Quote ---
And the unrelenting 'faith' that humans couldn't be capable of such an heinous act.
--- Quote ---
Put down to your detractors ...
--- Quote ---Again, your choice. If it is not of interest... what draws you back over and over to slam it?
--- Quote ---
Discreting the enemy!
--- Quote ---
While I despise the man's disgusting racism, there were articles there that were not found elsewhere...
--- Quote ---
Re-inventing your sources value ...
On and on you go, like a passive-aggressive amateur know it all ...
Do you understand any of this constructive criticism?
--- End quote ---
--- End quote ---
--- End quote ---
--- End quote ---
--- End quote ---
--- End quote ---
--- End quote ---
--- End quote ---
--- End quote ---
--- End quote ---
--- End quote ---
--- End quote ---
Troll Control:
--- Quote ---On 2005-09-11 10:21:00, Deborah wrote:
"
I suppose parents shouldn't listen to what ex students/staff and parents report about programs either; until or unless it has been filtered through a journalist and his/her publisher.
Come on. I know you're more intelligent than that comment suggests. This posting could very well be total BS. I for one would like to talk directly to people who lived close to the breaks. And yep, as gullible as it may sound, depending on their story, I may be more inclined to believe what they have to say over the press.
[ This Message was edited by: Deborah on 2005-09-11 10:55 ]"
--- End quote ---
I didn't see this at first glance, but what you're saying doesn't make sense here. News stories about program abuse ARE objectively verifiable, and sources are quoted.
Why would you need to take empirical evidence from a first-hand source and filter it through a publication? You wouldn't.
There's a huge difference between someone's unverified, sourceless story on the internet that is not coroborrated by any other source whatsoever and consistent stories of abuse and neglect, published and signed (often sworn), by staff and clients of BM warehouses. The difference, in this case, is the reporter of the "event" did not witness it nor did he cite a single source that did (aside from his severely diminished credibility).
There's a credibility gap there that doesn't exist with hundreds of abused clients and their credible, coroborrated reports.
Deborah:
Yeh, I was editing as you were posting.
It's all relative DJ.
While I totally concur with the 'credibility' issue, my mind allows for the possibility.
Who might be able to corroberate the diver's story? Suspending all judgement for a second... contemplate what you would do with the information if you were the diver.
Would you go to your grave with it? Would you give it to anyone who would listen?
Personally, it will remain a question for me until it is proven to be wrong. I'm a skeptic. Some independent party would have to dive down there and dispell the story. Until then, I won't loose any sleep over it. There is so many other red flags to explore. I expect there will be a list of question compiled, just like with the absurdities of 911, which will never be answered.
Ho hum.
Nonconformistlaw:
I'm not going to chime in on the credibility issue...and I have not read the links provided on this thread yet....but one thing hit me when I did read the 1st post about the explosives found.........NOT inside job.....but Terrorism...
Think about it....if the US Govt, hypothetically speaking of course, did this, then the aftermath--- lack of aid seems very inconsistent...the US now looks like a bunch of idiots in the eyes of many around the world...not just here...they have lost a lot of credibility in the eyes of the world becuase of their ridiculously inept response. Terrorism makes more sense because of the OBVIOUS lack of response...
I still believe the levees broke because lack of funding for proper upgrades that have been needed for years...which in itself it bad enough.....but I thought I'd contribute my first impression of the explosive article for the sake of argument.
Deborah:
I appreciated Richard Moore's commentary on this:
http://cyberjournal.org/
Several people responded, as you did, about the nature of Hal Turner's website. I had never heard of him - I got the article as a forward.
However, I don't see this residue story as being particularly related to Hal's propaganda line. If the story had a racist angle - "blacks blow up their own neighborhood" - that would be a different matter. I think he just got the story and figured it deserved air time, independent of his own perverse agenda.
I've seen various reports, from different sources, about residents hearing explosions just before the water started coming over the levee. And the levee did break a day after the
hurricane struck, in one of its strongest sections, and was well placed for the task of flooding the poorest part of the city. Perhaps the explosion story was intentionally leaked to
Hal, in particular, so that it could be quickly labelled as a 'right wing conspiracy theory'. In any case, I hope some independent evidence, one way or another, shows up.
In examining this kind of incident, i.e. Katrina as a whole, I find there are three phases of investigation. The first phase involves asking the question, "Are there enough suspicious
circumstances to warrant giving the incident any attention at all?" In the case of 9-11 that question was answered in the affirmative by the unprecedented lack of interceptor response. In the case of Katrina, the question is answered in the affirmative by a similarly unprecedented total lack of rescue support.
The second phase involves digging deeper, to see if the official story really is bogus. Are there enough anomalies, with enough substantiation behind them, to conclude that something else is going on, besides what we're being told. In the case of 9-11 the anomalies are staggering in their magnitude. In the case of Katrina, we've got the blocking of relief efforts, the bizarre treatment of the survivors, and a number of elements which don't make any sense, if things were on the up and up.
The third phase is to stick your neck out and investigate the incident as a covert operation: What is the purpose? Who stands to gain what? What precedents are being set? Who is being blamed? What remedies are being proposed? What cover story is being used and why? At this level little is hidden, and much can be learned.
Once you make the decision to examine the incident as a covert operation, then a given piece of evidence assumes a different
significance. If you are thinking in terms of a bungled rescue attempt, then rumors of an exploded dike are a bit far fetched. If you are considering a pre-arranged disaster scenario, then such sabotage makes perfect sense. If this scale of operation is to be carried out successfully, in its many dimensions, then nothing can be left to chance. If Katrina
turned out to be weaker than expected, then there must be a backup strategy to achieve the flooding objective. Standard procedure; Plan B.
Once you feel entering phase three is warranted, then debates about 'whether it's a conspiracy or not' become a bit tedious. Our next posting, soon to follow, will be entire in the space of phase 3.
cheers,
rkm
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page
Go to full version