Apparently what you see here is the front page of the Sunday, March 3, 2019 edition of the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.
Moments ago Elsie Hotpepper text messaged this to me via my phone.
Seconds later I saw myself flagged on Facebook via Mr. Wayneman. I went to Facebook to see this is also appearing on Facebook's "Panther Island Boondoggle" page.
I am not sure I remember if I knew there was such a Facebook page.
On that Panther Island Boondoggle Facebook page, regarding Sunday's Star-Telegram, Mr. Wayneman had this to say...
WOW did a journalist wake up from a coma to report some real news at the Star Telegram? It's been ages since I've bought an edition, but I might actually go out and get this one.
I was able to read the part of the article which is on the front page. At my current location I do not have access to the hard copy Star-Telegram.
From what I was able to read I am not sure if a journalist has actually woken from a coma to actually honestly, accurately report about this ridiculous absurdity which has been boondoggling along most of this century.
With no end in sight.
Does the article make mention of the Star-Telegram's complicity in this debacle? Starting with that long ago, early in this century, Sunday edition headline trumpeting "Trinity Uptown to turn Fort Worth Into Vancouver of the South?"
And all the following years of not accurately reporting on all the various aspects of this, which in the end may end up being some sort of criminal conspiracy of the RICO racketeering sort.
Will the Star-Telegram now report on all the dozens upon dozens of instances of eminent domain abuse which have left hundreds hurt by this project? With their property taken years ago, their land gone, some of which is now covered by those pitiful little bridges stuck in slow motion construction, over dry land?
Will the Stat-Telegram finally accurately report about those bridges? About what the construction problems are?
Will the Star-Telegram finally point out that it is a lie to claim those bridges are being built over dry land in order to save time and money.
When there was no option but to build them over dry land.
Because the funds to dig the ditch to go under the bridges do not exist. And if being built over dry land in order to save time, why has the construction now been going on for over four years? With the new completion dates being in the next decade?
Is the Star-Telegram answering those questions? If not, I think their reporter is still in a coma...
1 comment:
It's a fluff piece. They acknowledge the project has critics, but they're going to "help us" navigate the issues. I'm sure they're going to try to keep us paddling the kayak down that undug channel.
Post a Comment