Katrina Aftermath Raises Questions of Race

Remove all ads!

source

 

Yup.

IIRC New Orleans is about 2/3rds African-American, and a significant number of these are poor or working poor.

People say, "Why didn't they leave? They heard the warnings." But exactly how could they get out of the city? If you didn't have a car, and especially if you're responsible for a family, including children and the elderly. Airplane and bus services shut down completely. Should they have walked (I heard of one veteran bicyclist getting out of NO that way, but that's not really so helpful for a family, is it?)

Did anyone think of busing the poor out of NO, before the storm?

Actually, a number of tourists were also stranded in NO, for the same reasons: no way out.

Of course, while looting for food is completely understandable, violent theft, rape etc are not at all. But I'm concerned that incidents of violence, perpetrated by a very small percentage of storm victims, will be used to paint the majority of victims as somehow responsible for thier situation. This should not be allowed to happen, and there should be a full, open accounting of all the bad decisions that have been made, and are continuing to be made, which have worsened the situation.

 

Yes I read the area of land affected is the size of the UK but if you don't have a form of transport, you can hardly walk such a distance.

Being told to evacuate is all well and good, except when you are not told how or provided with a means to.

 

Looting of grocery stores is entirely understandable -- as is the raiding of clothing stores. Guns are a different matter -- although I would certainly try to procure one if I were in NO right now (maybe three or four with a few hundred round of ammo).

Race is always an underlying issue in America. I'm astounded that the press (who likes to tout itself as being fair and unbiased) has been so blatantly racist, but I'm not surprised.

 

Snopes has covered this story: Snopes

Part of it is what BTA said. The people who wrote the two captions explain it like this (paraphrase, see Snopes for detail):

"looting" - The person who took the picture witnessed the individual take part in the looting of a store. The store was broken into and entered for the purpose of procuring items.

"finding" - The person who took the picture witnessed the individuals recover items that were flowing on the water out of a store. They did not enter the store.

So, if these accounts are true (keep in mind they came from different agencies, so collusion is unlikely), it seems that the terms were applied properly.

Besides, does anyone really believe that ONLY blacks are looting? That is just silly.

 

No, but I do believe blacks are the only ones looting rims.


Edit...

I'm sorry...

I've cried like five times over this thing. Callous humor is not helping. I was thinking of driving down there and trying to help somehow, but I have school...

My grades are more important to me than all of their suffering and that makes me want to cry again.

[ September 03, 2005, 05:09: Message edited by: Late-Night Thinker ]

 

Race is mostly an invisible issue; i.e., not mentioned, although the faces of the refugees at the Superdome and in the streets are overwhelmingly black. The ones who lacked the means to escape. Aaron Brown devoted a large part of his news program on CNN tonight to this question, addressing it with great frankness. He is the first reporter I've seen do this.

 

If all that was taken was food that would have otherwise been wasted, and nobody was hurt in the process, why, then must the one accused of looting be made out to be a criminal. Technically, the food "found" didn't belong to the finder, so basically it's the same sin. Judge not, lest ye be judged. If they want to split hairs, then I'll accept this invitation to do likewise: The photographers and reporters in that case are guilty of having faulty priorities, as they were more concerned with taking pictures than helping those in need...