[QatzelOk]

The Valencia region of Spain was recently hit with tragic floods, resulting in hundreds of deaths.

While this is a major tragedy, another tragedy is our media's inability to communicate possible causes of this flood, resorting to the very lazy "climate change" to explain what may have actually been caused by something much more sinister.

***

I actually visited Valencia four years ago (just before the COVID lockdowns) and did some research before arriving. Valencia drained its most important river in the late 20th Century in order to build a highway through the center of town. Protests occurred, and the highway project was transformed into an "urban park" project, which is quite a nice park.

The excuse it used for this "river re-routing" was a deadly flood of 1957. (This was the era when car companies were tearing down low-income neighborhoods and calling it Urban Renewal).


source: How Valencia turned a crisis into a transformative park

Notice that the re-routed floodway passes south of the city. This is where the disastrous flooding occurred, right next to the re-modeled floodway replacement for the natural river route.

In October 1957, a flood from the Turia river resulted in 81 casualties and extensive property damage.[54] The disaster led to the remodelling of the city and the creation of a new river bed for the Turia, with the old one becoming one of the city's "green lungs".

***

I realize that this is not the "definite" cause of the flooding, or the extensive damage it caused. But it may be a contributing factor.

**How is it that no mainstream media reporting on the flooding
has mentionned this obvious variable?**

How did every reporter miss the fact that Valencia changed the route of a major river 50 years ago?

1. Is it because the car companies pushed for the river-draining, and media is sponsored by car companies?

2. Is it because mankind is currently techno-worshipping, and any criticism of our technological interventions is considered blasphemous?

3. How many other important details does our "professional" media skip or neglect?


soundtrack

[QatzelOk]

Here's another piece of mainstream journalism that seems to be missing vital information for people to understand what really transpired. It's about the recent soccer hooliganism that transpired after an Israeli team lost a game in Holland to a local team:

Dutch PM 'ashamed' by Amsterdam attacks on Israeli soccer fans
Amsterdam Mayor Femke Halsema said Maccabi Tel Aviv supporters were "attacked, abused and pelted with fireworks" by what she described as "antisemitic hit-and-run squads," and that riot police had to intervene several times to protect them and escort them to hotels.

Israel was sending commercial planes to the Netherlands on Friday to bring home Israeli soccer fans after overnight attacks in Amsterdam that officials described as antisemitic, although there was evidence of provocative chanting from Israeli fans.

Videos circulating on social media showed riot police intervening in street clashes, with some attackers shouting anti-Israeli slurs...

Notice the brief mention of "although there was evidence of provocative chanting from Israeli fans?" This is missing from virtually all articles about this event, though most mainstream sources are careful to mention that the "attackers" were mostly "Muslims" living in Holland.

Here is the vitally important missing information:

In the Israeli media there’s been extensive coverage of the incident, but what’s been omitted is what led up to the confrontations – the anti-Arab chants, “Death to Arabs”, the provocations and so on.

These kinds of chants are mostly normalised in Israeli sports, you hear them at football games all the time.

So that part of the story – the fact that there was such a strong anti-Arab, anti-Palestinian expression by the Israeli fans in Amsterdam, on the field and in the streets – was omitted from the news coverage because it’s so normalised.

So shouting "death to Arabs" has become routine at Israeli soccer games. Is this an important detail, in your opinion?

[wat0n]

Does it mean we can lynch Arab immigrants who chant racist stuff, Qatz?

[Pewty]

Here's another piece of mainstream journalism that seems to be missing vital information for people to understand what really transpired. It's about the recent soccer hooliganism that transpired after an Israeli team lost a game in Holland to a local team:



Notice the brief mention of "although there was evidence of provocative chanting from Israeli fans?" This is missing from virtually all articles about this event, though most mainstream sources are careful to mention that the "attackers" were mostly "Muslims" living in Holland.

Here is the vitally important missing information:



So shouting "death to Arabs" has become routine at Israeli soccer games. Is this an important detail, in your opinion?

One team's fans attacking another team's fans is no big deal in Europe. If the attackers were anything other than the Ajax fans who were at the game then I would say it was a planned attack on Tel Aviv fans that hasn't happened with any other club, as far as I know.

If that is the case, then the reasons are obvious.

[QatzelOk]

One team's fans attacking another team's fans is no big deal in Europe. If the attackers were anything other than the Ajax fans who were at the game then I would say it was a planned attack on Tel Aviv fans that hasn't happened with any other club, as far as I know.

If that is the case, then the reasons are obvious.

But what about the Tel Aviv fans provoking Amsterdam? Is this an important detail?

Israeli Hooligans Storm Through Amsterdam Chanting "Fu** You Palestine"
"There are no schools in Gaza because there are no children left"

...Zionist hooligans stormed through the streets of Amsterdam on Thursday tearing down Palestinian flags and intimidating passers by. The scene resembled the incidents that occur regularly in the West Bank where fanatical settlers bully and brutalize the sheep herders and olive growers who live on the land. ...

According to non-mainstream media sources, the night before they were "attacked by locals," the Israeli team were harrassing Arab cab drivers, tearing down Palestinian flags, and generally disrespecting the locals in a violent way.

Didn't they get what they deserved from the locals? If they had done what they did in Amsterdam in your neighborhood, wouldn't you be demanding that Israeli teams be banned from international competitions since their Apartheid country is engaged in genocide?

Their cheerleading of "There are no schools in Gaza because there are no children" is an unacceptably racist and callous thing to be yelling at a sports venu in any context.

So our mainstream media... by describing what happened as "a pogrom," reveals that it is unable to tell the truth in any meaningful way. They just take money from sponsors and then provide lies to shield their atrocities.

Mainstream media is garbage, is the point I am making here.

[Pewty]

But what about the Tel Aviv fans provoking Amsterdam? Is this an important detail?

Sure, and like I said, if the attacks were the result of common or garden football hooliganism, then there would be nothing more to the issue.

If groups other than the Ajax fans at the game organized themselves to attack and beat Jews for reasons not related to the game, than that would be something else.

If random groups of people decided to chase and beat Jews on the spur of the moment after hearing offensive chanting, that would be something else again. To excuse that would be to excuse the same thing given anything anyone considers offensive, though. I can't see that.

I suspect it was the second option.

[QatzelOk]

Sure, and like I said, if the attacks were the result of common or garden football hooliganism, then there would be nothing more to the issue...

What if the attacks were a combination of "common football hooliganism" and the fact that this particular team represents a country that is proudly committing genocide?

Would that pretty well sum up the causes of this minor confrontation?

And if so, can you see that the media has spun this on its head to mean something completely false?

That is my point, that you can't really learn anything from commercial media, except "who owns it." When you understand who owns it, you understand why it misrepresents so many stories.

Because it is not teaching you anything except how to be a loyal dog to the establishment.

[JohnRawls]

The Valencia region of Spain was recently hit with tragic floods, resulting in hundreds of deaths.

While this is a major tragedy, another tragedy is our media's inability to communicate possible causes of this flood, resorting to the very lazy "climate change" to explain what may have actually been caused by something much more sinister.

***

I actually visited Valencia four years ago (just before the COVID lockdowns) and did some research before arriving. Valencia drained its most important river in the late 20th Century in order to build a highway through the center of town. Protests occurred, and the highway project was transformed into an "urban park" project, which is quite a nice park.

The excuse it used for this "river re-routing" was a deadly flood of 1957. (This was the era when car companies were tearing down low-income neighborhoods and calling it Urban Renewal).


source: How Valencia turned a crisis into a transformative park

Notice that the re-routed floodway passes south of the city. This is where the disastrous flooding occurred, right next to the re-modeled floodway replacement for the natural river route.



***

I realize that this is not the "definite" cause of the flooding, or the extensive damage it caused. But it may be a contributing factor.

**How is it that no mainstream media reporting on the flooding
has mentionned this obvious variable?**

How did every reporter miss the fact that Valencia changed the route of a major river 50 years ago?

1. Is it because the car companies pushed for the river-draining, and media is sponsored by car companies?

2. Is it because mankind is currently techno-worshipping, and any criticism of our technological interventions is considered blasphemous?

3. How many other important details does our "professional" media skip or neglect?


soundtrack

There has been a flood Qatz yes and its been reported here in Europe heavily along with the flooding in Central Europe a bit before.

Not sure how it should be a major topic outside of Spain and Europe though.

Do you think that we get massive hurricane reporting for US hurricanes here besides a bit of something like "Oh Shit here we go again a hurricane is heading for the US again for the 100th time"?

[Pewty]

What if the attacks were a combination of "common football hooliganism" and the fact that this particular team represents a country that is proudly committing genocide?

Would that pretty well sum up the causes of this minor confrontation?

And if so, can you see that the media has spun this on its head to mean something completely false?

That is my point, that you can't really learn anything from commercial media, except "who owns it." When you understand who owns it, you understand why it misrepresents so many stories.

Because it is not teaching you anything except how to be a loyal dog to the establishment.

The attacks could have been a combination of "common football hooliganism" and the fact that this particular team represents a country that some people think is proudly committing genocide. It could also have involved people who just hate Jews and saw this as a great opportunity to hurt some. I'm betting all three were there.

How are we to find out what is happening on other continents (or just down the road) without the media? It's incumbent on us to go deeper if we care enough. How do you find the truth?

[QatzelOk]

The attacks could have been a combination of "common football hooliganism" and the fact that this particular team represents a country that some people think is proudly committing genocide. It could also have involved people who just hate Jews...

So you are unable to tell what happened despite the availability of thousands of media sources.

Our media, therefore, doesn't help us to understand the world around us.

This means that we need a new type of media if we are to call ourselves "democratic" and claim to have "free speech."

That billions have been deceived by our liar media... is a major problem for human survival and justice.

There has been a flood Qatz yes and its been reported here in Europe heavily along with the flooding in Central Europe a bit before.

Not sure how it should be a major topic outside of Spain and Europe though.

My point is NOT that it hasn't received coverage. My point is that this commercial media "coverage" didn't even mention what could be the most important variable: that Valencia rerouted a major river 50 years ago... in order to build a highway (that never got built).

The major flooding south of Valencia is next to the floodway that replaced the natural river. And no media "professionals" discovered this during their research?

[Pewty]

So you are unable to tell what happened despite the availability of thousands of media sources.

Our media, therefore, doesn't help us to understand the world around us.

This means that we need a new type of media if we are to call ourselves "democratic" and claim to have "free speech."

That billions have been deceived by our liar media... is a major problem for human survival and justice.

Are they all lying? What about the outlets who tell you what you want to hear?

Why would the new media be any better than the old media? What if the reporter for one was at the opposite end of the street from the reporter for another?

[wat0n]

^ that's because Qatz considers that stating facts he doesn't like is propaganda.

My point is NOT that it hasn't received coverage. My point is that this commercial media "coverage" didn't even mention what could be the most important variable: that Valencia rerouted a major river 50 years ago... in order to build a highway (that never got built).

The major flooding south of Valencia is next to the floodway that replaced the natural river. And no media "professionals" discovered this during their research?

Spanish media has been all over that. What are you talking about?

https://www.rtve.es/noticias/20241104/r ... 4943.shtml
https://es.ara.cat/economia/inmobiliari ... 96740.html

And from a more niche media (tech), it seems around 30% of the affected dwellings were built in the flood zone. Note that it means some 70% of them were deemed to be safe.

https://www.xataka.com/magnet/valencia- ... -este-dato

[QatzelOk]

Spanish media has been all over that. What are you talking about?...

Neither of the Spanish articles you posted mentions that Valencia changed the course of its central river.

They mention "flood zones" without mentionning that these flood zones were created in 1970 when a major river was dried up and replaced by a canal.

My point is that mass media is just there to pretend to inform. It doesn't research very much, and is happy just to get eyeballs on advertisements.

Imagine if the World Trade Center collapsed and MSM had missed the fact that its owner had just insured the complex for a trillion dollars against "Terrorism."

If no mainstream media mention this, then it's the same as lying to the public, because the same MSM is offering lots of theories, but not the details that the public can use to contemplate and understand the story.

Likewise, NONE of the articles regarding the floods near Valencia mention that their major river was dried up and moved only 50 years ago. What kind of journalism "forgets" this kind of major detail?

And that they ALL missed this makes you wonder how many actual researchers and experts the MSM deploys. A half dozen for the entire world?

[wat0n]

@QatzelOk I think you're misunderstanding something.

The issue is not that Valencia changed the natural course of its river (the Túria). The Spaniards built the infrastructure you're referring to so the city of Valencia proper would not be likely to be affected by floods over the cold drop (gota fría) again, but this project wasn't designed to protect its suburbs.

And the project worked, the damage is concentrated in the suburbs that were never meant to be covered by the project, not in the city.

The real "news" is that those suburbs deliberately built in zones that were known to be flood zones. This is actually much more common than you'd think, in the US it reflects on home insurance rates (there's a crisis with this sector in some states) in other countries (like Chile) this is made explicit in master plan maps, and some places even have signs warning which parts of the city or the localities are flood zones (like in coastal cities and towns, so people know where to flee if there's a tsunami). The media is obviously asking why the Comunidad Valenciana allowed it but this has always been known.

Perhaps a more interesting question is why would anyone ever rent or buy property in a flood zone, particularly when those properties often aren't cheaper (if anything, they can often be more expensive). Those flood zones are usually mapped and known in advance, do people ever do their research before investing several hundred thousand dollars in property? Do local authorities have evacuation plans from those areas in case of an emergency and is the population as a whole aware of what to do if that happens?

[QatzelOk]

...The issue is not that Valencia changed the natural course of its river (the Túria).

How do you know that this is not the issue? Is it because the MSM didn't EVEN ONCE mention it that convinces you that this is unimportant?

Are you covering for MSM yet again?

And the project worked, the damage is concentrated in the suburbs that were never meant to be covered by the project, not in the city.

You don't know if it worked. IF the plan was to destroy the southern suburbs, then perhaps you could say it worked. I doubt this was the plan though.

The real "news" is that those suburbs deliberately built in zones that were known to be flood zones.

By "real," you mean that the MSM has occassionaly mentionned this, perhaps for reasons only known to its owners. The re-routing of a major river is a huge potential factor that hasn't been explored on MSM at all.

That you continue to parrot what MSM has (occasionally) mentionned, does nothing to defend MSM against my accusation of incompetence and bad faith.

1957: Flooding in Valencia. (Did oil companies and car companies enable this flooding? We will probably never know. We don't have a media that is capable of policing major corporations.)

1960s: Car companies and oil companies use their media influence to suggest that draining the river and re-routing it.... would stop flooding in the city. (And enable the construction of a highway project in the drained riverbed.)

1970s: Valencians protest the highway project, which is then converted into a greenspace project. (car and oil lobbyists probably thought this was a good way to drain the river and preserve it for a FUTURE highway project, once the dust cleared on the protests.)

2024: The area of the floodway experiences worst flooding than Valencia has in Modern times. (No MSM sources EVEN MENTION that the main river had been re-routed.)

Car companies (and oil companies) were among the biggest sponsors of MSM in the 20th Century

[wat0n]

@QatzelOk you have no evidence at all that the project didn't work as intended. The rerouting of the river within the city limits was never meant to protect the suburbs. The 1957 flooding's damage was concentrated in the city, so it's not that surprising the project was designed only to serve the city from the beginning.

I'd think you would criticize the Spaniards for building suburbs in flood zones

[QatzelOk]

@QatzelOk you have no evidence at all that the project didn't work as intended. The rerouting of the river within the city limits was never meant to protect the suburbs. The 1957 flooding's damage was concentrated in the city, so it's not that surprising the project was designed only to serve the city from the beginning.

I'd think you would criticize the Spaniards for building suburbs in flood zones

I have since edited the post in question. Rather than answering immediately, why not reflect a bit first next time? Complex discussions like this require time to digest information.

This isn't The View, wat0n. You can stop and think before posting. You aren't even responding to my concerns that MSM never mentionned the re-routing of the river.

[wat0n]

I have since edited the post in question. Rather than answering immediately, why not reflect a bit first next time? Complex discussions like this require time to digest information.

This isn't The View, wat0n. You can stop and think before posting. You aren't even responding to my concerns that MSM never mentionned the re-routing of the river.

None of the things you mention prior to 2024 has much to do with the actual issue at hand

The MSM has also been reporting on that, at least Spanish MSM has. I don't think the media from other countries cares all that much about a local issue.

[QatzelOk]

...The MSM has also been reporting on that, at least Spanish MSM has. ...

This is untrue.

Post a quote from MSM (Spanish or other language) that mentions in its report that the main river of central Valencia was "re-located" 55 years ago. .... I'm still waiting....

And if you don't, you have proven my point.

THAT MSM MISSED A CRUCIAL VARIABLE ONCE AGAIN...

***

Imagine reporting that "The World Trade Center is collapsing!" and forgetting to mention that a few planes hit it a few minutes beforehand. Would this be "good reporting" in your opinion?

"We're here live in New York City, LOL, where a couple of highrise buildings appear to be collapsing.... We have no idea why this is happenning, but we will be back at 11 after we've explored every hate-crime angle we can conjure up..."

[wat0n]

This is untrue.

Post a quote from MSM (Spanish or other language) that mentions in its report that the main river of central Valencia was "re-located" 55 years ago. .... I'm still waiting....

And if you don't, you have proven my point.

THAT MSM MISSED A CRUCIAL VARIABLE ONCE AGAIN...

***

Imagine reporting that "The World Trade Center is collapsing!" and forgetting to mention that a few planes hit it a few minutes beforehand. Would this be "good reporting" in your opinion?

"We're here live in New York City, LOL, where a couple of highrise buildings appear to be collapsing.... We have no idea why this is happenning, but we will be back at 11 after we've explored every hate-crime angle we can conjure up..."

That's because the disaster in Valencia's suburbs is not a rerouting built for the city 55 years ago. The river isn't even rerouted to the suburbs.