Does anyone know the link to those devastating photos of the Mississippi Gulf Coast that were popping up last week?
The ones I'm thinking of showed where the storm surge stopped - rubble before, intact buildings beyond. I think at least one of them showed a helicopter skid in the frame. They may have been of the Biloxi or Gulfport area.
I've spent quite a bit of time looking, and also searched the net, but can't find them. They were linked from somebody's blog last week.
Sorry to bother everyone, but I really need to find them. Thanks for any help anyone can give me.
(Eds, please delete if this is inappropriate.)
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
09/21/2005 18:18 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Wasn't there something about Google providing imagry service that people were using [and the intel people are pissed because now everyone can play their game].
#3
These weren't intel photos - just some photographer in a heli.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
09/21/2005 21:57 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Try www.capnhq.gov and follow the links. Civil Air Patrol (USAF Auxiliary) did a ton of photo recon for FEMA and the states effected. some psted on their site.
Fred, how about adding a Homefront: Media category since they are a major component in the WOT and a law unto themselves?
By Tim Ryan Editors' Note: LTC Tim Ryan is Commander, Task Force 2-12 Cavalry, First Cavalry Division in Iraq. He led troops into battle in Fallujah late last year and is now involved in security operations for the upcoming elections. He wrote the following during "down time" after the Fallujah operation. His views are his own.
All right, I've had enough. I am tired of reading distorted and grossly exaggerated stories from major news organizations about the "failures" in the war in Iraq. "The most trusted name in news" and a long list of others continue to misrepresent the scale of events in Iraq. Print and video journalists are covering only a fraction of the events in Iraq and, more often than not, the events they cover are only negative.
The inaccurate picture they paint has distorted the world view of the daily realities in Iraq. The result is a further erosion of international support for the United States' efforts there, and a strengthening of the insurgents' resolve and recruiting efforts while weakening our own. Through their incomplete, uninformed and unbalanced reporting, many members of the media covering the war in Iraq are aiding and abetting the enemy.
The fact is the Coalition is making steady progress in Iraq, but not without ups and downs. So why is it that no matter what events unfold, good or bad, the media highlights mostly the negative aspects of the event? The journalistic adage, "If it bleeds, it leads," still applies in Iraq, but why only when it's American blood?
As a recent example, the operation in Fallujah delivered an absolutely devastating blow to the insurgency. Though much smaller in scope, clearing Fallujah of insurgents arguably could equate to the Allies' breakout from the hedgerows in France during World War II. In both cases, our troops overcame a well-prepared and solidly entrenched enemy and began what could be the latter's last stand. In Fallujah, the enemy death toll has exceeded 1,500 and still is climbing. Put one in the win column for the good guys, right? Wrong. As soon as there was nothing negative to report about Fallujah, the media shifted its focus to other parts of the country.
More recently, a major news agency's website lead read: "Suicide Bomber Kills Six in Baghdad" and "Seven Marines Die in Iraq Clashes." True, yes. Comprehensive, no. Did the author of this article bother to mention that Coalition troops killed 50 or so terrorists while incurring those seven losses? Of course not. Nor was there any mention about the substantial progress these offensive operations continue to achieve in defeating the insurgents. Unfortunately, this sort of incomplete reporting has become the norm for the media, whose poor job of presenting a complete picture of what is going on in Iraq borders on being criminal.
Much of the problem is about perspective, putting things in scale and balance. What if domestic news outlets continually fed American readers headlines like: "Bloody Week on U.S. Highways: Some 700 Killed," or "More Than 900 Americans Die Weekly from Obesity-Related Diseases"? Both of these headlines might be true statistically, but do they really represent accurate pictures of the situations? What if you combined all of the negatives to be found in the state of Texas and used them as an indicator of the quality of life for all Texans? Imagine the headlines: "Anti-law Enforcement Elements Spread Robbery, Rape and Murder through Texas Cities." For all intents and purposes, this statement is true for any day of any year in any state. True - yes, accurate - yes, but in context with the greater good taking place - no! After a year or two of headlines like these, more than a few folks back in Texas and the rest of the U.S. probably would be ready to jump off of a building and end it all. So, imagine being an American in Iraq right now.
From where I sit in Iraq, things are not all bad right now. In fact, they are going quite well. We are not under attack by the enemy; on the contrary, we are taking the fight to him daily and have him on the ropes. In the distance, I can hear the repeated impacts of heavy artillery and five-hundred-pound bombs hitting their targets. The occasional tank main gun report and the staccato rhythm of a Marine Corps LAV or Army Bradley Fighting Vehicle's 25-millimeter cannon provide the bass line for a symphony of destruction. As elements from all four services complete the absolute annihilation of the insurgent forces remaining in Fallujah, the area around the former insurgent stronghold is more peaceful than it has been for more than a year. Rest at link.
Posted by: ed ||
09/21/2005 09:59 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Ed,
Fred already does, it is called Fifth Column.
Very apropos in my opinion.
Posted by: DanNY ||
09/21/2005 11:49 Comments ||
Top||
#2
The inaccurate picture they paint has distorted the world view of the daily realities in Iraq. The result is a further erosion of international support for the United States' efforts there, and a strengthening of the insurgents' resolve and recruiting efforts while weakening our own. Through their incomplete, uninformed and unbalanced reporting, many members of the media covering the war in Iraq are aiding and abetting the enemy.
The mass media loves it when a plan comes together...
#3
If MSM is unable or unwilling to cover the truth [the American colonial basis from the Royal Governor of New York vs. Peter Zenger case for 'a free press'] then why any First Admendment protection? Protect communication on the internet, screw the rest.
Hugh, The first individual you had on-air from Houston apparently does not know that Galveston has a SEVENTEEN foot seawall (not 8 feet) across much of the eastern side of the island that was constructed after the 1900 hurricane. He's an idiot! I lived through Hurricane Alicia in Houston in August 1983 ("only" a Category 3 though it had been a Category 4 when it crossed first over Galveston Island which buffered the mainland) and there were two problems. One was the high wind speed (clocked at 117 MPH, as I recall, in downtown Houston when the eye of the hurricane moved directly over the city) and the associated tornados. (The combined high winds of Alicia along with the tornados knocked down much of the above ground electric grid with some areas in the southeastern service area of Houston Lighting and Power directly in the path of the hurricane being without power for more than 3 weeks while the grid was rebuilt. BTW, at that time, the rebuilding of the HL&P grid was the largest utility reconstruction effort in history.) I saw large boats strewn along I-45 on the route to Galveston that were pushed there by the storm surge of Alicia (a distance of several MILES from the coast). The second problem with Alicia (or any hurricane or tropical storm impacting Houston) was the heavy rain combined with the storm surge that pushed water backwards up the Ship Channel as well as the East-West bayous which are used for drainage. (The Corps of Engineers proposed a North-South drainage system after massive storm flooding in the 1940's but the locals decided the plan was too expensive and opted to use the existing bayou system which is heavily influenced by storm surge coming in from Galveston Bay). The highest point in Houston is 30 feet above sea level and any kind of heavy rain combined with the storm surge causes immediate saturation of the drainage system and heavy flooding. It should be noted that during tropical storm Allison two years ago even the downtown area (among the higher points in the city) flooded which had never happened before in the twentieth century. The Houston Chronicle ran a series of articles after Alicia that pointed out how vulnerable Houston was to a hurricane whose path took it "up the chute" referring to a storm that moved directly up the Ship Channel. It was concluded from interviews with the Corps of Engineers and Harris County engineers that should a hurricane take such a path, the results would be catastrophic. Remember the largest concentration of oil refineries and associated process and chemical industries in the world sits on the Ship Channel. Major damage along that area (including flooding) would be devastating economically. Randy M.
Posted by: Steve White ||
09/21/2005 00:17 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
(2005-09-20) -- America's atheists finally have a voice in Washington D.C. to champion the cause of the "amoral minority," and the rights of those who believe in no intrinsic basis for rights.
"For too long, those of us who don't believe in God have been discriminated against because we have no objective standard of right and wrong," said Lori Lipman Brown, the executive director of the new Secular Coalition for America. "We need to let legislators know that the so-called 'morality' upon which our laws are based, is really just a product of uncontrollable electro-chemical reactions in the brain. Our laws shouldn't punish people who violate standards that we don't believe really exist."
Ms. Brown said public educators "pay lip service to 'survival of the fittest', but when it comes to the legal system, we put the best predators behind bars and play nursemaid to the weak, crippled and pathetic creatures who should be culled from the herd."
#1
"Amoral morality" is called "ethics". And while the dictionary does not distinguish between morality and ethics, in practice, they have a very precise division.
Morality is the body of laws created in "heaven", and subject to interpretation either through priests and other shamen, or directly in individuals. If you violate them, you are either punished by God, or by the priests acting in his behalf.
Ethics are the laws of men, created and enforced by men. If you violate them, you are not punished by the gods, you are punished by men. The United States is founded *not* on morality, but on ethics. Our constitition begins, "We the people...", *not* "God having ordained..."
Ethics can change with a change in the law. Morality can only change with either benign neglect of the law from priests; or if both somebody convinces a bunch of followers that God has changed the rules, and they are powerful enough to *force* the non-followers to accept the new rules.
Otherwise, you get "situational morality", the flip side to the much-despised "situational ethics". The trouble with situational morality is that eventually, priests will have to determine if you have broken the law or not. With situational ethics, it will be a jury of your peers.
And situational morality is far more subjective than situational ethics. If priests say "God forbids you from shaving your cat", but then say, "Ah, but what this means is that you are forbidden from eating tuna fish while wearing leotards"; it is far more convoluted that a judge pondering whether or not your actually shaving your cat is a constitutional act, protected free speech, animal abuse, or just tacky, if legal.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
