Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: STARWISE

On the CNN website

Judge supports CNN request to cover Katrina's toll

Saturday, September 10, 2005; Posted: 1:33 a.m. EDT (05:33 GMT)


HOUSTON, Texas (CNN) -- At the request of CNN, a federal judge in Texas Friday night blocked emergency officials in New Orleans from preventing the media from covering the recovery of bodies from Hurricane Katrina.

Attorneys for the network argued that the ban was an unconstitutional prior restraint on news gathering.


12 posted on 09/10/2005 7:46:04 AM PDT by Chuck54 (Confirm justice Roberts!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Chuck54

How ridiculous plus also those taling heads at CNN who want to have the photos are not the ones that will have to take them exposing themselves to possible disease and mental horrors. I suspect a lot of the photographers on the ground in NO are not keen on participating.


19 posted on 09/10/2005 7:52:09 AM PDT by snugs (An English Cheney Chick - BIG TIME)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: Chuck54; STARWISE; All
HOUSTON, Texas (CNN) -- At the request of CNN, a federal judge in Texas Friday night blocked emergency officials in New Orleans from preventing the media from covering the recovery of bodies from Hurricane Katrina.

A "state of emergency" is in effect. The situation is no longer under the jurisdiction of the judge.

I also wonder if this "judge" has anything to say about the unconstitutional confiscation of firearms from law-abing citizens defending their homes from looters and thugs.

20 posted on 09/10/2005 7:53:09 AM PDT by tarheelswamprat (This tagline space for rent - cheap!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: Chuck54

I suppose common decency is too much to expect.


29 posted on 09/10/2005 8:01:27 AM PDT by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: Chuck54
Attorneys for the network argued that the ban was an unconstitutional prior restraint on news gathering.

There is no right to gather the news, only to publish what you have gathered. The press has no more right to be somewhere than members of the general public. In fact they have no special rights that the rest of us do not have.

OTOH, there is a "right of the people" to keep and bear arms, which the Constitution says "shall not be infringed" (or in the case of the LA Constitution, a "right of each citizen" which "shall not be abridged"). Where is court order restraining the police and National Guard from confiscating the arms of the citizens?

32 posted on 09/10/2005 8:06:23 AM PDT by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: Chuck54
From Article: "At the request of CNN, a federal judge in Texas Friday night blocked emergency officials in New Orleans from preventing the media from covering the recovery of bodies from Hurricane Katrina."

I am so sick of the media. They DIDN'T want any pictures taken or shown of the 100's of people who jumped out of the World Trade Center, but they sure want pictures of all the dead and bloated drowning victims.

The difference is if they had shown the jumpers the people might have HATED THE TERRORISTS MORE, but if they show the bloated drowned people they will accomplish what they want and get a majority of the people to HATE THE GOVERNMENT MORE.

44 posted on 09/10/2005 8:22:37 AM PDT by Spunky ("Everyone has a freedom of choice, but not of consequences.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: Chuck54
Now, let's see if we can get a judge to require than CNN, et al, gain permission from the families of survivors before their loved one's body is shown on national television.

Get to it, CNN! Start identifying bodies so you can then go and ask permission. Come on, CNN, we're waiting! Certainly a crew of vultures and vampires like you have forensic patholigists on staff and on call for just such a situation! Get to identifying! Go! Go!

51 posted on 09/10/2005 8:26:23 AM PDT by Jokelahoma (Animal testing is a bad idea. They get all nervous and give wrong answers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: Chuck54

"Attorneys for the network argued that the ban was an unconstitutional prior restraint on news gathering."
...
translation: lawyers argued that it is unconstitutional to bar the media jackals from hell their feeding frenzy of the deceased.



86 posted on 09/10/2005 9:22:23 AM PDT by SunnySide (Ephes2:8 ByGraceYou'veBeenSavedThruFaithAGiftOfGodSoNoOneCanBoast)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson