No evidence backs up reports of rescue helicopters being fired upon

[struggle4progress]

By Miriam Hill and Nicholas Spangler

Knight Ridder Newspapers



NEW ORLEANS - Among the rumors that spread as quickly as floodwaters after Hurricane Katrina, reports that gunmen were taking potshots at rescue helicopters stood out for their senselessness.

On Sept. 1, as patients sweltered in hospitals without power and thousands of people remained stranded on rooftops and in attics, crucial rescue efforts were delayed as word of such attacks spread.

But more than a month later, representatives from the Air Force, Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security and Louisiana Air National Guard say they have yet to confirm a single incident of gunfire at helicopters.

Likewise, members of several rescue crews who were told to halt operations say there is no evidence they were under fire. <snip>

http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/12801034.htm

[MarsThe Cat]

1. I always wondered where they were getting the reports from-

were any of the copters ever hit? or did some shell-shocked pilots just back from the middle east just hear some random gun-fire and started having flashbacks to fallujah, and assuming that THEY were being fired upon?

the "reports" always sounded like total bullshit to me.

maybe the pay is better if you're in a "combat" zone...?

[jobycom]

4. The report came from the Feds on the day that Bush went to Biloxi

Bush held off aid to New Orleans so that it would be shown rolling into New Orleans at the same time he landed in Mobile and went to Biloxi, so it would look like Bush was bringing the aid. This was on the Thursday after the storm, I believe. Maybe Friday.

They announced that convoys were rolling in with food and that helicopters were arriving to evacuate people from the Convention Center and the Superdome. Then after Bush spoke, they announced that the helicopters had tried to land but had to abort because they were fired on.

It didn't happen. The Feds didn't have any helicopters, and no intention of using them to evacuate. They made the announcement to make Bush look good, then used the sniper lie to explain why they didn't actually do it. It was all a PR stunt, in other words.

[texpatriot2004]

6. Who announced it? n/t

[jobycom]

7. I've been trying to remember. I just remember when the story broke

not who actually told the reporters. The reporters just reported it as if it were undeniable fact.

I keep thinking it was FEMA, but that may be because they are easy to blame.

[Fescue4u]

2. How would they know they are under fire?

Unless they saw someone shooting at them, or the aircraft had bullet holes.

While handguns and rifles are loud, helicopters, are even louder.

Add in the cabin insulatation, the engine noise, rotor noise, headphones, I have serious doubts that a pilot could hear gun fire unless it was in the cabin.

Unless I see bullet holes, or an eyewitness account, I call BS on this claim.

[jobycom]

5. The report (which was a lie) claimed they saw muzzle flashes. But

as the news article says (and this is not new, it was reported soon afterwards), no pilot claimed they actually saw muzzle flashes. Only the feds claimed they claimed it.

I remember hearing the story as Bush was doing his first photo op, and saying it was a lie. It's the same method his spin crew uses every time.

[marions ghost]

3. so many people

absolutely believe that story...the damage is done unless a large effort is made to correct it.