snopes.com  

Go Back   snopes.com > SLC Central > Hurricane Katrina

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02 October 2008, 10:14 PM
JoeBentley's Avatar
JoeBentley JoeBentley is offline
 
Join Date: 23 June 2002
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 21,798
Default Cynthia McKinney Accuses Government of Mass Murder of Prisoners During Katrina

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10...odies-katrina/

Quote:
Green Party presidential candidate Cynthia McKinney, known for her provocative statements when she was a congresswoman from Georgia, accused the Department of Defense this week of using Hurricane Katrina to cover up the slaughter of 5,000 prisoners.

At a news conference in Oakland, Calif., on Sunday, McKinney claimed the Pentagon authorized the execution of the prisoners with one bullet to the head three years ago and then dumped their bodies in a Louisiana swamp.

McKinney said she heard the story from the mother of a National Guard soldier who said her son was assigned to help dispose of the bodies.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02 October 2008, 10:24 PM
lord_feldon's Avatar
lord_feldon lord_feldon is online now
 
Join Date: 08 August 2007
Location: Ohio
Posts: 12,294
Default

Surely 5,000 bodies in a swamp would attract some attention, as would 5,000 prisoners no longer existing.

But logic has no place in these kind of things. I suppose the same government agents who killed Kennedy, placed the explosives in the World Trade Center towers, and fired the missile at the Pentagon did this, too.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02 October 2008, 10:27 PM
BringTheNoise's Avatar
BringTheNoise BringTheNoise is offline
 
Join Date: 10 November 2003
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
Posts: 7,255
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lord_feldon View Post
Surely 5,000 bodies in a swamp would attract some attention, as would 5,000 prisoners no longer existing.

But logic has no place in these kind of things. I suppose the same government agents who killed Kennedy, placed the explosives in the World Trade Center towers, and fired the missile at the Pentagon did this, too.
Well, duh.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02 October 2008, 10:56 PM
Dropbear's Avatar
Dropbear Dropbear is offline
 
Join Date: 03 June 2005
Location: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Posts: 7,136
Australia

Quote:
Originally Posted by lord_feldon View Post
Surely 5,000 bodies in a swamp would attract some attention, as would 5,000 prisoners no longer existing.

But logic has no place in these kind of things. I suppose the same government agents who killed Kennedy, placed the explosives in the World Trade Center towers, and fired the missile at the Pentagon did this, too.
Rubbish - obviously the government agents who killed kennedy are now the senior operatives who orchestrated the planting of explosives and the missile. The prisoners were the labour for those operations and needed to be disposed of - Katrina provided the opportunity. Once the prisoners had covertly weakened the levees they were shot during the resultant confusion from the hurrican - which was guided to New Orleans using secret weather control machines.

Dropbear
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02 October 2008, 11:41 PM
mags's Avatar
mags mags is offline
 
Join Date: 23 February 2006
Location: Springboro, OH
Posts: 5,096
Default

Is the theory that Katrina was caused by the government, or just that it was a happy happenstance that allowed them to stop supporting 5000 people on the government's dime?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02 October 2008, 11:43 PM
Themis's Avatar
Themis Themis is offline
 
Join Date: 26 July 2000
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 2,035
Default

This lunatic is the reason why I left the Green Party when they chose her as their nominee. She's never BEEN a member of the Green Party, and she's just using them for notoriety. She also introduced a measure on the floor of the House to force the U.S. government to reopen the investigation into the shooting of Tupac Shakur.

I always knew that the Green Party was not going to make a lot of splash on the national level, but their 10 Core Values represent my personal beliefs completely, and I was content voting for them knowing that at most they'd win some small local elections. But after this hijacking of the Party by the lunatic fringe, I'm no longer a member.

Last edited by Themis; 02 October 2008 at 11:45 PM. Reason: typo
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03 October 2008, 01:43 PM
Dondi's Avatar
Dondi Dondi is offline
 
Join Date: 02 March 2005
Location: Lexington Park, MD
Posts: 1,622
Default

I knew I heard that name before. And, no, this latest accusation doesn't surprise me:

Quote:
Originally Posted by article
A member of the House for 12 years until 2007, McKinney is no stranger to controversy. Shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, she suggested that President Bush knew about the plot in advance but failed to warn Americans because of his father's business interests. Some political analysts say that statement contributed to her defeat in 2002.

After McKinney was re-elected in 2004, she tried to impeach Bush, Vice President Cheney and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on charges that they lied and manipulated intelligence to justify the war in Iraq.

McKinney hit a career low point in 2006 when she was accused of striking a Capitol Police officer who grabbed her after she passed a security checkpoint without wearing a congressional lapel pin. She later apologized for the incident. She was defeated in a Democratic primary later that year and left the Democratic Party in 2007. She was nominated in July to run for president on the Green Party ticket. There are 245 other Green Party candidates running for office this fall.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03 October 2008, 01:49 PM
gopher's Avatar
gopher gopher is offline
 
Join Date: 06 January 2005
Location: Sunderland, Northumbria, UK
Posts: 2,056
Default

Have any prisoners' groups noted that 5,000 have gone missing?
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 03 October 2008, 03:37 PM
KKHB
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gopher View Post
Have any prisoners' groups noted that 5,000 have gone missing?
I am a member of some prison related boards (forums for friends, family members, and support) which does not make this definitive, but during Katrina and the aftermath there was much speculation (and mistrust) about what was happening with the prisoners and how they were/would be treated. Of the cases that I read about (on a board that has 119296 registered members) none went missing and any death or injuries were well documented and explainable. As much as some of the family members wanted to believe the government would take the opportunity to abuse power and to hurt/humiliate/mistreat prisoners, there was no evidence that it had.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 03 October 2008, 05:26 PM
BamaRainbow BamaRainbow is offline
 
Join Date: 09 May 2006
Location: Montgomery, AL
Posts: 925
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Themis View Post
This lunatic is the reason why I left the Green Party when they chose her as their nominee. She's never BEEN a member of the Green Party, and she's just using them for notoriety. She also introduced a measure on the floor of the House to force the U.S. government to reopen the investigation into the shooting of Tupac Shakur.

I always knew that the Green Party was not going to make a lot of splash on the national level, but their 10 Core Values represent my personal beliefs completely, and I was content voting for them knowing that at most they'd win some small local elections. But after this hijacking of the Party by the lunatic fringe, I'm no longer a member.
Are you sure it's not because she's Black? (Just being a bit snarky there.)
You actually can type (presumably with a straight face) that you're willing to leave a Party because of its being "hijacked" yet there are many disaffected Democrats who feel EXACTLY the same way at the way Obama became the Party's nominee. Obama simply doesn't have the experience; the man faced LESS vetting by the very same media that pushed Bush's war in Iraq over the past year than Sarah Palin has received--as a mere VP nominee--in the last month, but any questioning of Obama's record is met with accusations of racism.
For the first time since I've been eligible to vote for a Presidential candidate, I'm not supporting the Democratic nominee. (If he could have put his overblown ego aside and been willing to go after the Party's VP nomination, I wouldn't have a problem. Let him be VP for 8 years, then run for President--he'd be better qualified.) Obama SUPPORTED Bush's FISA compromise and he hides behind "religion" to explain HIS opposition to same-sex marriage (sure, "civil union" is fine--separate, but equal) and he's even in favor of EXPANDING Bush's faith-based initiatives program.
I fully intend to support the Green Party candidate this year. Cynthia McKinney is certainly no worse than Obama. At least with McKinney, you ALWAYS know where she stands. Obama, to me, has shown that his plan for change means he'll "change" his views to accommodate the audience to which he's speaking. Remember, this is the candidate who mocked Hillary's foreign policy experience and claimed that his own foreign policy experience was superior. Then he goes and gets one of Washington's top foreign policy wonks--a man who's been in the Senate even longer than McCain.
And, just to show how "politics makes strange bedfellows", an attack against McKinney comes from Fox News, and it's given legitimacy. How much should I bet that a Fox News report on Obama would be met by various Snopesters with more than a touch of skepticism?
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 03 October 2008, 05:34 PM
Simply Madeline's Avatar
Simply Madeline Simply Madeline is offline
 
Join Date: 15 October 2005
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 9,382
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BamaRainbow View Post
Obama simply doesn't have the experience; the man faced LESS vetting by the very same media that pushed Bush's war in Iraq over the past year than Sarah Palin has received--as a mere VP nominee--in the last month, but any questioning of Obama's record is met with accusations of racism.
Really? Any questioning of Obama's record is met with accusations of racism? On this board? Or in general?
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 03 October 2008, 05:35 PM
Lainie's Avatar
Lainie Lainie is offline
 
Join Date: 29 August 2005
Location: Suburban Columbus, OH
Posts: 67,099
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BamaRainbow View Post
And, just to show how "politics makes strange bedfellows", an attack against McKinney comes from Fox News, and it's given legitimacy.
Feel free to debunk this video of McKinney making the accusation.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 03 October 2008, 05:45 PM
Richard W's Avatar
Richard W Richard W is offline
 
Join Date: 19 February 2000
Location: High Wycombe, UK
Posts: 23,080
Default

Quote:
McKinney hit a career low point in 2006 when she was accused of striking a Capitol Police officer who grabbed her after she passed a security checkpoint without wearing a congressional lapel pin. She later apologized for the incident.
I remember that. There was a very long thread about it at the time..
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 03 October 2008, 05:46 PM
Lainie's Avatar
Lainie Lainie is offline
 
Join Date: 29 August 2005
Location: Suburban Columbus, OH
Posts: 67,099
Default

Here's The Daily Kos on the topic, featuring the same video I posted from YouTube.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 03 October 2008, 05:58 PM
Themis's Avatar
Themis Themis is offline
 
Join Date: 26 July 2000
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 2,035
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BamaRainbow View Post
Are you sure it's not because she's Black? (Just being a bit snarky there.)
I'm sorry, are you accusing me of racism?

Quote:
Originally Posted by BamaRainbow View Post
You actually can type (presumably with a straight face) that you're willing to leave a Party because of its being "hijacked" yet there are many disaffected Democrats who feel EXACTLY the same way at the way Obama became the Party's nominee.
Could you explain to me how this bit is relevant to me?

Quote:
Originally Posted by BamaRainbow View Post
Cynthia McKinney is certainly no worse than Obama.
Yes. Yes, she is, if you define "worse" as "having a track record of being a complete lunatic." A physical altercation with the capitol police, wanting to use the resources of the federal government to investigate the murder of a pop celebrity who ran in dangerous circles, claiming that thousands of prisoners were murdered and dumped into swamps, claiming that she was unseated because of a Republican plot - the woman is a conspiracy theorist of the highest order.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 04 October 2008, 01:36 PM
surfcitydogdad's Avatar
surfcitydogdad surfcitydogdad is offline
 
Join Date: 21 August 2006
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 1,706
Jolly Roger

Quote:
Originally Posted by Themis View Post
This lunatic is the reason why I left the Green Party when they chose her as their nominee. She's never BEEN a member of the Green Party, and she's just using them for notoriety. She also introduced a measure on the floor of the House to force the U.S. government to reopen the investigation into the shooting of Tupac Shakur.

I always knew that the Green Party was not going to make a lot of splash on the national level, but their 10 Core Values represent my personal beliefs completely, and I was content voting for them knowing that at most they'd win some small local elections. But after this hijacking of the Party by the lunatic fringe, I'm no longer a member.
Interesting thread. I know nothing of McKinney, but Themis' problem with third parties' attempts to get attention with often unwise choices of nominees for major offices certainly rings a bell for me. I totally agree with you about picking the party that represents my beliefs, and for me, that's the LP, in almost every detail. I'm mostly happy with them, and have voted faithfully for their candidates since 1980, although I have my differences. But, one year, the New York LP had Howard Stern for their candidate for governor. He ended up dropping out. The guy is such a huge a-hole; did they really think he was going to be their free speech candidate, and not figure that he would flake out?

Also, back in 88, when Ron Paul became the LP candidate for prez, I had voted for Russell Means, and he ended up as the VP candidate. At this point, despite any sympathy I still have, Means seems a bit of a whacko, so I'm glad the LP wasn't able to get him to run for gov in NM a few years ago. Sometimes the major parties get embarrassed, like that KKK guy, Duke, in Louisiana, that got nominated for the the Demopublicans or the Republicrats - and it couldn't happen to a nicer party - but we, in smaller parties, are more vulnerable to getting strange candidates. Well, the GOP has Palin this year!

This year in the LP, we have former GOP Congressman Bob Barr as our presidential candidate. I was not a supporter, and was caught by surprise. If he can draw votes away from McCain, great (I won't vote for Obama, because he doesn't represent my beliefs - other than his claim of being against the war - but given that my party won't win, I hope Obama wins, and that Barr helps defeat McCain), but I worry that the LP is being hijacked by conservatives, just as you, Themis, feel the Greens were hijacked by the loony fringe. I haven't dropped out yet, and have no intention or reutrning to the Dems or any other party, but I may one day fail to identify as an upper case L libertarian.

If Barr is truly repentant of his drug-warrior past, and other unlibertarian beliefs and actions, I guess he's okay - I might vote for him - but if he's just using the LP, to hell with him and his supporters. If the party wanted an outsider to get attention, I'd have picked Democrat Mike Gravel. International Society for Individual Liberty leader Dr Mary Ruwart was my choice, but every party - major ones included, has to make these choices and compromises - activists vs intellectuals vs big names/ known pols who might get elected.

The Greens keep picking Nader - or has he been an indy sometimes? That seems a dead end to me, but I can see that he gets name recognition and draws votes from those who are not satisfied with the Dems. That is an advantage that third parties have - at least the Greeens and the LP - that the major parties worry about them "spoiling" their races, so perhaps have to make concessions to keep voters from jumping ship. Well, in theory. Never seems to happen, they just blame us when they lose, when they have no one but themselves to blame when the voters can't get excited about their platforms or candidates!

Weird as they may be, it does actually say something good about our freedoms - despite the power that the major parties have - when people like McKinney get elected to Congress. She's hardly the first whacko (maybe she's no loony at all, but like many politicans, and like Jackson and Sharpton, is simply pandering to her constituency). Seems to happen with the Dems more than the GOP, but the GOP has Ron Paul, who is really a libertarian, although imperfect, and no whacko, but a leader, now, of a movement that's making quite a stir, if not getting a candidate elected to the White House this time around.

All one has to do is get elected in one's own district, and to hell with the party leaders of the two-headed beast. Of course, they come after you in every primary, and, once elcted, it's hard to get much done, or get apponted to any important committees, but such will be the case for the first third party candidates (or, I should say, for the first ones elected in a long time, by the time it happens). Or not; indies - once elected, or having defected from their former parties - sometimes seems to get some attention from both major parties, but they wouldn't want to have to deal with more than one or two.

Of course, they go all out to prevent our candidates from being elected - or even getting on the ballot - when there is any chance they may get a significant percentage of the vote in any race. Scares the hell out of them. But, then, they have their own thorns in the side, from right in their own parties. Ha! Serves them right, except, of course, for taking up time asking for investigations into Tupac's case, etc. Well, the more time they waste, the less time they have to make more laws and government, and raise taxes. It also leaves less time to pass laws against polluting, or to fight against undeclared wars, but they aren't doing that anyway! They're too busy rubber-stamping Dubya's war, and voting to bail out their rich cronies on Wall Street.

Last edited by surfcitydogdad; 04 October 2008 at 01:46 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 05 October 2008, 06:01 AM
A Turtle Named Mack's Avatar
A Turtle Named Mack A Turtle Named Mack is offline
 
Join Date: 21 June 2007
Location: Marietta, GA
Posts: 17,965
Default

Perhaps McKinney's campaign slogan should be "She puts the 'Mental' in Environmental"
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 05 October 2008, 06:06 AM
surfcitydogdad's Avatar
surfcitydogdad surfcitydogdad is offline
 
Join Date: 21 August 2006
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 1,706
Wolf

Quote:
Originally Posted by A Turtle Named Mack View Post
Perhaps McKinney's campaign slogan should be "She puts the 'Mental' in Environmental"
No, Palin does that! I like what Pam Anderson called her in an interview, "the helicopter huntress from hell."
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 05 October 2008, 06:07 AM
A Turtle Named Mack's Avatar
A Turtle Named Mack A Turtle Named Mack is offline
 
Join Date: 21 June 2007
Location: Marietta, GA
Posts: 17,965
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by surfcitydogdad View Post
No, Palin does that! I like what Pam Anderson called her in an interview, "the helicopter huntress from hell."
Aw, C'mon. McKinney's the Green Party candidate. The joke works much better for her.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 14 July 2012, 09:09 PM
Graham2001's Avatar
Graham2001 Graham2001 is offline
 
Join Date: 21 January 2006
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 632
Default

Sorry for bumping an old thread, but as an Australian, I'm not surprised that rumors like this got started.

In the aftermath of Cyclone Tracy in 1974 (Wikipedia) rumors circulated that the police/armed forces had either:

1. Shot looters and dumped the bodies in the harbor.
2. Dumped victims into the harbour to reduce the official death toll.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:44 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.