Haiti - 250,000 people dead is a lie!

Status
Not open for further replies.

Adrian Bye

Bronze
Jul 7, 2002
2,077
134
0
I found this comment today on the Wall Street Journal by a guy named David Ziegelheim.

"First, there is no credible report of fatalities in Haiti. If you actually read the reports, the numbers are all over the place. Except in other under developed countries competing for aid, the most exaggerated reports are the only ones reported; they created the best ratings for the media, contributions for the charities, and money for the Haitians. Reports from Haiti is that Haitians don't believe it.

There appears to be much more substantial damage to structures in Chile: bridges, roads, and even buildings. While there were a few concrete layer buildings that pancaked in Haiti, there were significant structurally should buildings that split in half, bridge that broke, roads that cracked. There is a picture of a road with several inch wide crack that appears to be 4" of asphalt on a foot or more of concrete.

The Haitian quake seems to have been pretty localized. The Chilean quake caused damage hundreds of miles away. We also don't have a real accounting for the population in the coastal towns yet in Chile. The actual fataility/missing count will probably be in the 10-20,000 range which is probably the same as Haiti."

Strength of Temblor Doesn't Dictate Damage - WSJ.com
 
May 29, 2006
10,265
200
0
This was in the comments section and shot down by the next poster.

The damage wasn't that bad in Haiti anyway. All they need is a little spackle to fix some cracks in the walls:

539w.jpg


Some people simply refuse to acknowledge reality. PaP had a population of over 3 million. 20,000 would be less than a 1% percent fatality rate. When you see devastation like this, a 10% mortality rate seems not only more likely, but conservative.
 

Lambada

Gold
Mar 4, 2004
9,478
378
0
78
www.ginniebedggood.com
Yes it was a reader's comment on the article by Gautam Naik. I thought there were grammatical errors which would not have got past an Editor. And David Ziegelheim doesn't use the word 'lie', so the title of this post is misleading.
 

Adrian Bye

Bronze
Jul 7, 2002
2,077
134
0
yes, it was a commenter on the WSJ, sorry i should have been more clear. but he's not just a random comment spammer, he's a paid customer of the WSJ.

i was pretty astounded to see the comment.
 

Tamborista

hasta la tambora
Apr 4, 2005
11,399
952
113
yes, it was a commenter on the WSJ, sorry i should have been more clear. but he's not just a random comment spammer, he's a paid customer of the WSJ.

i was pretty astounded to see the comment.

Anybody that registers on this WSJ site for FREE can post their opinions, fact or fiction in response to a WSJ article. The title that you gave this thread is indeed very misleading.

The Wall Street Journal Online - WSJ.com Log In
 

Adrian Bye

Bronze
Jul 7, 2002
2,077
134
0
oh i didn't know anyone could post for free, it must have changed.

anyways, the title of the thread is accurate, because that is exactly what the commenter wrote. The WSJ isn't a garden variety message board like 4chan or TMZ, the comments are usually pretty insightful.
 

Ken

Platinum
Jan 1, 2002
13,801
397
83
Why was this thread started? Some person we know absolutely nothing about makes a comment that is completely contrary to what reporters we do know about have been saying and suddenly we have a thread with a title not in quotes and thus is attributable to the DR1 poster who started the thread.

Suppose Chicken Little had written "The Sky is Falling" on the WSJ message board, how many of us would have immediately started a thread on dr1 with the news?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bronxboy

Lambada

Gold
Mar 4, 2004
9,478
378
0
78
www.ginniebedggood.com
Why was this thread started? Some person we know absolutely nothing about makes a comment that is completely contrary to what reporters we do know about have been saying and suddenly we have a thread with a title not in quotes and thus is attributable to the DR1 poster who started the thread.

And..............Adrian Bye couldn't have put it in quotes because the unknown person commenting on WSJ comments DIDN"T actually say it was a lie. He said 'the most exaggerated reports are the only ones reported' and 'Reports from Haiti is [sic] that Haitians don't believe it'. That is different from calling it a lie. 'Reports from Haiti' - unsourced I note.

Adrian Bye is normally better than this. Is it an Australian national celebration day or something? :cheeky:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bronxboy

Vacara

I love AZB!
May 5, 2009
710
84
0
Let's go easy on Adrian Bye, anybody can make a mistake and inflating death toll numbers is a common practice to get more help. Trujillo did it big time in 1930.
 

SantiagoDR

Forever a Clown
Jan 12, 2006
5,501
625
113
That person must really be blind, there were tons of video of the damage in Haiti.
Just in the following picture alone the damage is devastating .......

Perhaps the poster had been in Haiti and suffered head injuries! (Loco)
539w.jpg
 

Adrian Bye

Bronze
Jul 7, 2002
2,077
134
0
i think being aware of conspiracy theories in haiti is important, eg those swirling around the missionaries & orphans which have largely turned out to be empty.

to read this in the WSJ comments having been in port au prince 2 weeks ago was a bit stunning, thus the headline reflecting my shock.

i had no intentions to upset people and my apologies for those that are upset.

with that said, i would encourage you all to challenge people who post patently false info about haiti and/or are not using common sense. when in doubt, occam's razor is pretty useful.

Occam's razor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Nobody will never know

The number of people who lost their lives in the Haiti earthquake will never known , let's not speculate with opinions from all over the internet.
It was a catastrophe, lets pray the survivors can move on with their lives.


Closed
 
Status
Not open for further replies.