Don't be silly ... the mudslides weren't a natural disaster (Seattle: title, trees)

[Pugetsoundman]

Frank Mendizabal, a spokesperson for Weyerhouser, claims that the mudslides in the watershed that contributed to the disasterous flooding along the Chahalis River were a 'natural' disaster. No, my friends, this was a "Weyerhauser' disaster. Let the blame game begin.....

[zenfull]

here's the link & INCRIMINATING photo. really really sad.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...ogging16m.html

[allforcats]

Pugetsoundman, you wrote: Frank Mendizabal, a spokesperson for Weyerhouser [sic], claims that the mudslides in the watershed that contributed to the disasterous [sic] flooding along the Chahalis [sic] River were a 'natural' disaster.

Actually, the fact as quoted by the Seattle Times on December 16, 2007 are: "This storm was a catastrophic event, a natural disaster," said Frank Mendizabal, a Weyerhaeuser spokesman. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...ogging16m.html

There is a universe of difference -- called libel -- between what you stated and what the Times quoted. You might want to consider starting with facts, and then proceeding to state your position.

[Tesaje]

The OP quoted Mendizabal as claiming the storm and resulting problems were a natural disaster as did the paper. Then he begged to differ. Where's the libel? He is entitled to his opinion and represented the other person's opinion accurately.

[Fat Freddy]

The storm were a natural disaster.
The mudslides were a result of clear cutting.

[Pugetsoundman]

Originally Posted by allforcats

Pugetsoundman, you wrote: Frank Mendizabal, a spokesperson for Weyerhouser [sic], claims that the mudslides in the watershed that contributed to the disasterous [sic] flooding along the Chahalis [sic] River were a 'natural' disaster.

Actually, the fact as quoted by the Seattle Times on December 16, 2007 are: "This storm was a catastrophic event, a natural disaster," said Frank Mendizabal, a Weyerhaeuser spokesman. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...ogging16m.html

There is a universe of difference -- called libel -- between what you stated and what the Times quoted. You might want to consider starting with facts, and then proceeding to state your position.

I didn't libel anyone. I didn't slander anyone. Your tone is sort of personally intimidating to me. Why? What is your standing in this? Read the Seattle Times article, please.

I only meant to point out that the timber industry tends to blame their problems on others, including natural phenomena. The mudslides were clearly a result of clear cutting steep grades. This heavy rain, while very unusual, wasn't unique. What made this epidode so tragic was that for the first time, there weren't any trees to hold back the runoff. Now the soil is gone, gone, gone. Well, not really gone. It's gone off the slopes, forever; but now it is coating much of the downstream watershed floodplain and all the recent developments. So it is. Why do we get to re-learn the same old lessons over and over again.