I Usually Like Front Page Mag, But...--Updated!This
is pretty weird. They have a symposium today on
an article written by a white racist about blacks in New Orleans, repeating all the horror stories about the Superdome, but none of the symposium participants seems to know about the articles in both the NO T-P and LA Times, saying that these stories were untrue:
Preparation for refugees was pitifully inadequate. By day, as many as 25,000 people sweltered in temperatures that rose into the 100s. Whatever order had been established soon melted away, and the stadium reverted to the jungle. Young men robbed and raped with impunity. Occasional gunshots panicked the crowd.You can get a sense of the racism there with "the jungle" comment. Apparently in the jungle rape and robbery and occasional gunshots are common.
And what of the reporting by
the LA and
New Orleans papers that indicates that none of the horror stories happened? That there were no rapes, no children with their throats slit?
The panelists completely forget to mention it! Indeed, the Leftist panelist Marc Cooper essentially endorses the worst stories (while decrying the racist presentation) here:
Indeed, I find NO original reporting in Mr. Taylor's rant whatsoever. A simple Nexis search reveals that all of the eyewitness quotes he offers were merely lifted from mainstream media sources i.e from stories that we had, in fact, already read or could have read. That would make Taylor more of a skilled copier than the messenger of any substantial observation. His only contribution, if you wish to call it that, was to re-assemble already existing reports in a way to most disfavorably portray blacks.
I, for one, certainly knew about similar outrages from other and much more reliable and mainstream journalists and commentators very early on. Indeed, on September 1, I wrote on my own blog that "gangs of looters" were roaming the city and noted that this said "something very ugly about our species." I learned of the looting and shooting from Reuters and AP among many other immediately available and far more legitimate news sources. Stories of rape and murder were also carried day after day by all of the major networks. What's new in Taylor's assemblage, other than unsourced superlatives?I don't get it. Maybe the LA Times and NO T-P aren't considered reputable sources? Given their history that may be valid, but their apparent debunking of much of Taylor's account deserves at least a mention. If we throw out the stories of rape and murder at the Superdome, and most of the reports of shooting at rescuers, then what are we left with? The looting stories, which are pretty minor by comparison. I hear a lot of that goes on in the jungle. (sarcasm)
Update: Marc Cooper
responds to my question on his blog:
Brainster... Good point. the reason is simple. The symposium took place by email and was concluded about a week before the Times-Picayune piece came out.So the blame is really with Horowitz for posting stale opinion.
