And fear of Internet gossip should not prohibit responsible journalism. The ABC News affiliate in Houston carried a video of investigative reporter Wayne Dolcefino confronting Texas governor Rick Perry about temporary “no-fly” zones for TV helicopters over parts of the Bolivar peninsula and west Galveston, the hardest hit areas. Later in the video, Dolcefino tells the ABC anchors:
After Katrina, we were able to go to Waveland, Mississippi, and Gulfport, and Biloxi, and places that were devastated, where there were, sadly, bodies on the road. Now that’s a horrible thing to see and a horrible thing to show, but people who live there, who have friends there, who have relatives there, have a fundamental right to know that stuff. They have a fundamental right to know, not just from the words of a politician or public official, but from the news media, which are independent of government and have also the responsibility of trying to help the public evaluate response
We couldn’t get crews back on Galveston last night and this morning until we complained on the air for about twenty hours. And it’s not because we want to sightsee, guys, it’s because we have the responsibility of telling people I made it as clear to [Gov. Perry] off camera as I did on camera that this is not going to be tolerated. You know, we hear about disasters in other countries—what was it, Burma, Myanmar—where they won’t let people in to see and you know, this is the state of Texas; this America. And we’re not trying to interfere with rescue and search operations, nor did anyone suggest we would be.
When asked why he thought the government was obstructing access, Dolcefino did not mince words:
I don’t think they want us to see images that may remind people of the images that we saw in New Orleans. I don’t think they want us to see the images that were seen in Waveland, Mississippi or Gulfport I think that’s the reality; they do not want us to see yet, until they can control what we see and how we see it. And that is simply, at least in my career, unacceptable. Maybe a lot of reporters won’t say it, but I will. I think they do not want us to see images of potential fatalities that may be on land or on water.
Other reporters didn’t think access was much of a problem. The Houston Chronicle’s Matthew Tresaugue said he wasn’t sure why TV choppers were prohibited from flying last Sunday, but that there were, in fact, reporters in the air. On SEJ’s list-serv he noted that:
The Chronicle had a photographer over Bolivar on Sunday about the same time as the televised confrontation. I flew with a photographer from High Island to Galveston’s west end to Surfside Beach in a Cessna yesterday, and one of our columnists and a photographer got a closer view of the same area from a helicopter. … I think the difference is the television guys wanted to take their helicopters, and we hitched rides. On my flight, I was able to see what I needed and even double back to take second looks. I can’t complain.
At any rate, its’ hard to imagine that information about the government’s response to Hurricane Ike would not get out sooner or later, and access seems to have improved since the weekend. But authorities should realize that obstructing the media’s ability to report in disaster zones only makes the public more suspicious about the adequacy of their response.
- 1
- 2





Not many know that a major hurricane - Hurricane Erin - was in the Atlantic Ocean in September of 2001. In fact, Erin was closest to NYC, and at its largest size, on 9/11 itself. Interestingly, the National Hurricane Center projected Erin to be stronger than it projected Katrina to be four years later. Shouldn’t they have prepared the upper-east coast for this major storm? Weather reports at JFK Airport indicated rain! The day after 9/11, Erin made a sharp right-hand turn (over 90°) away from NYC and back out to the Atlantic. An astronaut in the International Space Station commented on the WTC smoke plume, but made no mention of the monstrous hurricane next to it. How come? Those interested in learning the secret between hurricanes and Tesla Coils should see Dr Judy Wood’s new paper "9/11 Weather Anomalies and Field Effects". She presents evidence suggesting Erin was part of the mechanism used to turn the Twin Towers to dust. The paper is chock full of photos and analysis and is highly recommended.
http://drjudywood.com/articles/erin
How were they so sure Erin would make a sharp right hand turn away from New York and head back out to sea?
Posted by CB_Brooklyn on Thu 18 Sep 2008 at 10:50 PM
Dude, you're a nut bag.
I am a 9/11 Truther, and all your insane story does is make people think all of us are crazy, not just you. So please keep your stupid hurricane rants to yourself and watch the weather channel.
All 3 WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition. Period.
www.ae911truth.org
Posted by 911truthdotorg on Thu 18 Sep 2008 at 11:10 PM
No flyovers in order to dispose of bodies.
Posted by Doc Holiday on Fri 19 Sep 2008 at 12:24 AM
911truthdotorg - I wish to applaud your highly intellectual response to my comment. No doubt you represent the mainstream "truth movement".
All readers who wish to understand how the "truth movement" is controlled, and how 9/11 was really orchestrated, should read my article:
9/11: Distinguishing The Propaganda From The Smoking Guns
For instance, why did Alaskan magnetometers detect a shift in the earth's magnetic field with every 9/11 "event"?
Posted by CB_Brooklyn on Fri 19 Sep 2008 at 12:29 AM
to CB_Brooklyn:
You are crazy. What a jersey. You are as crazy as theese conspiracy theorists.
It is a proven fact, that the WTC buildings were brought down by controled demolition.
Posted by GI Joe on Fri 19 Sep 2008 at 09:04 AM
Controlled demolition and Tesla coils. What idiots. Get a more sensible hobby, like Sasquatch hunting.
Posted by Reason on Fri 19 Sep 2008 at 10:14 AM
the name calling (e.g. REASON, GI JOE, 911truthdotorg above) really makes us more suspicious of those slinging the names than the information being provided by the person being attacked....keep attacking the messenger and make yourself look more like "thou doust complain too much dear brutus."
Ideas arent dismissed by calling the person with the idea a name, they are dismissed through reason. You apparently have none or you would have spent your time debunking the idea instead of the person.
Posted by arctic bumblebee on Fri 19 Sep 2008 at 10:51 AM
I think it's because the federal government doesn't want us to see any oil spills since they have been pushing this "drill here drill now" meme.
Posted by Jeannie See on Fri 19 Sep 2008 at 11:10 AM
To:REASON
My dear fellow America,your one of the many obtuse fools enjoying the American dream--dead asleep.
First of all there were no planes that hit any WTC bldgs and the Pantygone. No high scrapers fall faster than gravity pull and 80% of solid concrete does NOT--turn to dust.It is reported that China diverted the whole WTC steel to india due to high levels of radioactivity.The black clouds and sparks and fireballs were just that--fireworks. WTC7 was brought down by normal tech demo from the bottom down. This was a fast job due to ENRON FBI files court pending had to be destoried. Now you know why BUsh wanted the case dismissed---Wall street scams up on us.
However, WTC1&2 was planned by Billy Goat Clinton thugs,he approved the development of low radiation bunker concrete busting bombs and fopr a new pearl harbour event.Wakie Wackie Americans you been duped by low interest rates--to cover up government kills it's own to acccomodate Israel and the oil companies and too stupid to know you were nuked on Sept 11/01. Let's see how dumb you are--why the Demoos are fearfull of impeaching--Bush/Cheny? If your answer is--DAAAH!,then here it is,Bush can Blackmail them as the terrorists that started it :^)
Posted by jojo on Fri 19 Sep 2008 at 12:46 PM
"JoJo" - please ask the doctors to update your medication level... clearly what you're taking now isn't effective
Posted by Kevin on Fri 19 Sep 2008 at 01:15 PM
Why a media blackout of this disaster. Several blogs out there have reported over 1000 bodies hanging in trees and many more washed out to sea. All governments lie.
Posted by Rocco on Fri 19 Sep 2008 at 02:27 PM
This is all about censorship. After all, censorship is becoming America's favorite past-time. The US gov't (and their corporate friends), already place protesters in fenced-in cages, ban books like America Deceived (book) from Wikipedia, Amazon and Facebook, and shut down Ron Paul. Free Speech forever.
Posted by Henry J on Fri 19 Sep 2008 at 02:38 PM
People, please stay on subject, which involves Galveston. Is there a secret govt. installation exposed by the storm? An oil well spill? Lots of bodies washed up and rotting in the sun? C'mon, think real hard.
Posted by mr.ed on Fri 19 Sep 2008 at 03:28 PM
Here's a recent news feed from CBS 13 in Texas on the media blackout.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ge0dxJfxsa8
Posted by Rocco on Fri 19 Sep 2008 at 04:02 PM
I doubt we'll ever be told the actual number of dead from Katrina. That and the National Guard shortage would cause a public outrage. The same goes for Galveston. After all, there's only one official mention of the Camp Falcon explosion. That's the new so-called reality.
Posted by Eric Vaughan on Fri 19 Sep 2008 at 04:23 PM
Could it be that images like this might make us rethink the idea of drill, drill, drill?
Posted by DrXyzzy on Fri 19 Sep 2008 at 05:21 PM
http://cache.boston.com/universal/site_graphics/blogs/bigpicture/ike_09_15/ike16.jpg
Posted by DrXyzzy on Fri 19 Sep 2008 at 05:23 PM
Thanks, Mr.Ed, for the reminder to stay on point. While I don't know about any *secret* gov't installations in Galveston, there is indeed a bio-defense lab on the island. The Dallas Morning News reported that Ike did not inflict any damage, but what the story doesn't mention is that this is actually a BSL (bio-safety level) 4 lab, the highest category. That should definitely raise questions about why it is located in such a high-risk location.
Posted by Curtis Brainard on Fri 19 Sep 2008 at 06:17 PM
I wrote to CNN, FOX, ABC and asked why they weren't throwing a fit over the media blackout...shouldn't they be screaming about Freedom of the Press. I wrote Salvation Army that their Southwest Territory link for missing persons did not work (as of yesterday)....have not gotten a reply back from anyone. I wrote the reporter asking if he had heard anymore on the blackout as to why or when they would be allowed in....nothing back from him either. Can anyone say Illuminati coverup?
Posted by Toni DeGain on Fri 19 Sep 2008 at 09:46 PM
Forgot to mention that I had also asked the news media why they weren't scrolling 800 numbers at the bottom of their screens for people to try to locate the missing...no answer.
Posted by Toni DeGain on Fri 19 Sep 2008 at 09:48 PM
What I thought was interesting about Dolcefino's questioning of Gov. Rick Perry was how Perry was trying hard not to say that he, as Texas governor, has had no authority in the stricken areas along the Texas coast, whether on the ground or in the air, since a state of emergency was declared over Hurricane Ike.
He first said local officials were in charge, which was false. Then he said the state government wasn't, that is, him being governor, which is true. Then he admitted that the federal government (DHS, FEMA, etc.) was in charge, but then mentioned something about "special issues" or circumstances.
So, does anyone remember the law that the Republican-controlled Congress passed two years ago that strips governors of their control over their state's security, their national guard units, their state's soil and air space, in case an emergency is declared, and defined, by whomever is in the White House?
Do you remember why the Bush administration wanted this law passed? (Something about Gov. Blanco of Louisiana repeatedly refusing demands that she turn over her state's security and national guard units to the Bush administration during Hurricane Katrina).
And do you remember that all fifty state governors vehemently protested this blatant intrusion into their authority as governors, with both Republican and Democratic governors being against this law?
I believe this is why Gov. Rick Perry stumbled the other day in answering Dolcefino. Perry really isn't governor of Texas, at least while Hurricane Ike's state of emergency is in effect along the Texas coast. Perry can't tell Texas National Guard units where to deploy and whom to help. He lost that authority. DHS (Chertoff), and to a lesser extent, FEMA now call all the shots. Perry is out of the command loop. For the time being, Perry is just a figurehead who has no say at all in what's happening along the Texas coast.
And if you think about it, this law passed two years ago, by it's usurping of the authority of state governors, means that George W. Bush is once again Governor of Texas, at least during the duration of this state of emergency, as declared and defined by him. (Hmmm, just think if a national state of emergency is declared by whomever is in the White House, let's say after another 9/11-like attack. This Republican-sponsored law would effectively make the President the governor of all fifty states, making it possible to shelve all of our state's governors, bypassing their authority and their state constitutions completely....which, no doubt, is what the Republicans had in mind who pushed for this law's passage).
Posted by The Oracle on Sun 21 Sep 2008 at 04:29 AM
I'm sure we will all see a much rosier world once reporters are embedded domestically with the police and national guard.
Does sort of blur the distinction between COPS and the local news though.
Posted by smchris on Sun 21 Sep 2008 at 12:37 PM
Umm 2 years ago Congress was in Democratic Control (as it is today).
And if you had any understanding over the Historical context for the passing of that law you would know that the reason it was passed was two fold.
1. The Dem Gov of La. refused to take responsibility for her inactions during and after Katrina and persisted on blaming the Feds (who by law should not have had anything to do with it). Thus with the MSM help creating this image that the Feds (Bush admin) refused to help and just let people die. It was a huge Dem political CYA to save face and office.
2. Because of what happened in #1 the administration said :Fine if you want the Fed Gov't to help in these situations, then you have to pass a law that says I can.". And the public outcry and Congressional outcry for this was huge (read pandering here) that no matter what constitutionalists like myself and others said, or those governors complained about this law was fast-tracked through.
So think of it in these terms:
Bush is like Pilot the Governor of Jerusalem asking the city what they want while even commenting what they are asking for is not right..but the crowd ignores him in their ignorance and well you know the rest.
Posted by response to The Oracle on Tue 23 Sep 2008 at 11:12 AM