Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (41871)	5/2/2004 10:19:05 PM
From: Neeka	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793640

Oh come on Nadine. We are supposed to fall for the quagmire issue because the fat cats sitting at their desks tell us so. You and I and a whole bunch of other people understand the reason why anchors like Ted Koppel and others of like mind want us all to believe that we are in a quagmire in Iraq even if others don't want to admit it. If we try real hard we can dispel these silly notions. Notice the silence when real statistics emerge. M Quagmire-Free News: Reservist Contradicts Media's Iraq Coverage chronwatch.com Posted by Cinnamon Stillwell Saturday, May 01, 2004 This open letter from Ray Reynolds, a medic in the Iowa Army National Guard, serving in Iraq, was forwarded to me via e-mail. As I head off to Baghdad for the final weeks of my stay in Iraq, I wanted to say thanks to all of you who did not believe the media. They have done a very poor job of covering everything that has happened. I am sorry that I have not been able to visit all of you during my two-week leave back home. And just so you can rest at night knowing something is happening in Iraq that is noteworthy, I thought I would pass this on to you. This is the list of things that has happened in Iraq recently. Please share it with your friends and compare it to the version that your paper/TV is putting out: * Over 400,000 kids have up-to-date immunizations. * School attendance is up 80% from levels before the war. * Over 1,500 schools have been renovated and rid of the weapons stored there so education can occur. * The port of Um Qasar was renovated so grain can be off-loaded from ships faster. * The country had its first 2 billion barrel export of oil in August. * Over 4.5 million people have clean drinking water for the first time ever inIraq. * The country now receives two times the electrical power it did before the war. * 100% of the hospitals are open and fully staffed, compared to 35% before the war. * Elections are taking place in every major city, and city councils are in place. * Sewer and water lines are installed in every major city. * Over 60,000 police are patrolling the streets. * Over 100,000 Iraqi civil defense police are securing the country. * Over 80,000 Iraqi soldiers are patrolling the streets side by side with US soldiers. * Over 400,000 people have telephones for the first time ever * Students are taught field sanitation and hand-washing techniques to prevent the spread of germs. * An interim constitution has been signed. * Girls are allowed to attend school. * Textbooks that don't mention Saddam are in the schools for the first time in 30 years. Don't believe for one second that these people do not want us there. I have met many, many people from Iraq that want us there, and in a bad way. They say they will never see the freedoms we talk about, but they hope their children will. We are doing a good job in Iraq and I challenge anyone, anywhere to dispute me on these facts. So if you happen to run into John Kerry, be sure to give him my email address and send him to Denison, Iowa. This soldier will set him straight. If you are like me--very disgusted with how this period of rebuilding has been portrayed--e-mail this to a friend and let them know there are good things happening. Ray Reynolds, SFC Iowa Army National Guard 234th Signal Battalion

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (41871)	5/3/2004 6:43:04 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793640

What was the purpose of Ted Koppel's little stunt the other night? I don't know, Nadine. I haven't seen more than a few Koppel shows--way past my bedtime--so I don't have a good enough sense of the guy to assert a motive. I can say, though, that his explanation is plausible. That doesn't mean it's true, only that one cannot reasonably insist that he has nefarious motives. Why did he call this a war that should never have been fought I can do something that you can't, Nadine, which is to look at the event from the perspective of someone who thinks that this particular war shouldn't have been fought, as apparently does he. First of all, there are lists of the fallen all over the place. Making those available is, I think, considered in good taste and a form of respect. The Post has one. They used to have one for Afghanistan. They had one for the victims of the DC Sniper. SOP. If you're a TV show rather than a newspaper, you can only do it orally, which is what Koppel did. I posted to Suma a few weeks ago that I had steeled myself to the fact of heavy casualties way back when it became clear that we were really going to invade Iraq, not expecting it to be feasible let alone a cakewalk. Having anticipated the death toll, I was not as upset by the growing numbers as she was. But I can tell you this--this current casualty pace has started to intrude on my mind, too. This pace is brutal and I wonder about people who aren't affected by it. And when people are affected, it is natural and normal to want to express that in some way. If you have a TV show, reading off the names would be an understandable way of doing that, seems to me. If you think the war shouldn't have been fought, you have what I think is a different kind of sadness over the fallen--the sadness that comes from thinking that their sacrifice was unnecessary and, thus, even more tragic. And if you're a bleeding heart liberal, to boot, I imagine that your blood is flowing hard and fast over this. People who didn't approve the war feel the losses, too, Nadine. To encourage a pullout, in effect a total surrender, without acknowledging the costs of defeat or the potential benefits of victory, is that what you call "pro-American"? You're taking a lot of logical leaps there. First you assume the purpose of reading the names is to destroy morale to effect a pullout. Even it that's so, a pullout (which, to be perfectly clear, I don't support) is not necessarily a "total surrender." There are good Republicans who are now toying with the notion of declaring victory and getting out. It is a legitimate option that should be weighed along with any other options. We are, after all, between a rock and a hard place at the moment. As far as pro-American, if you legitimately think that a pullout, even a surrender, is in America's best interests, then you're pro-American. You keep confusing anti-war and anti-Bush with anti-American, and your POV of what's best for the country with pro-American, and that's not necessarily so. They may be misguided, but you cannot conclude that they have nefarious motives. If the media were working on purpose to destroy morale, what would they do differently? I take your point on that. If it quacks like a duck... But if someone believes that a pullout is the best option, what is he to do? He pushes his perspective just as you push yours. It seems more constructive to me to point out to him the consequences of his "well-intended" approach rather than to challenge his patriotism. That does this country no good.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (41871)	5/3/2004 9:40:59 AM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 793640

Nightline makes farce of the Dead Armstrong Williams May 3, 2004 Amidst the bloodiest month since the U.S.-led invasion began in March 2003, it has become clear that the loss of soldier's lives in Iraq is not just cause for anger, fear or mourning, it's also big business. For example, consider the April 30 broadcast of Nightline, in which anchorman Ted Koppel read aloud the names of U.S. servicemen killed in the Iraq war, while their pictures were shown on the screen. Pitched as a tribute, the Nightline episode is little more than a crass attempt to cash in during May sweeps, while stoking anti-war sentiment. "Sweeps week" is the period during which networks set their advertising rates for the year based on viewership shares. By coming up big during "sweeps," Nightline figured to honor hundreds of fallen soldiers and make lots of money. Happily, at least one major broadcaster has refused to air the show. Sinclair Broadcasting, which owns 62 TV stations, has ordered its eight ABC affiliates to drop the episode. In a released statement, Sinclair denounced the Nightline episode as part of a "political agenda designed to undermine the efforts of the United States in Iraq." "We understand that our decision in this matter may be questioned by some," continued the statement, "but before you judge our decision, we would ask that you first question Mr. Koppel as to why he chose to read the names of 523 troops killed in combat in Iraq, rather than the names of the thousands of private citizens killed in terrorist attacks since and including the events of September 11, 2001. In his answer, we believe you will find the real motivation behind his action." In the interest of full disclosure, I should note that I am a paid on-air analyst with Sinclair. That said, they make a good point. If the purpose of the broadcast was to honor the dead, then where are the pictures of those killed in Afghanistan? Furthermore, the timing of the Nightline episode is curious. Memorial Day is a more appropriate time to run a tribute to fallen soldiers. That Nightline chose the eve of the primaries to air this episode-as opposed to reporting on actual news items like ongoing developments in Fallujah-seems telling. A Nightline producer even admits that the episode was inspired by a 1969 issue of Life magazine that featured an 11-page photo layout, highlighting more than 200 servicemen killed in Vietnam during a one week period. A caption urged readers to "pause to look into the faces ... of one week's dead." The photo spread became a flashpoint in the anti war movement. In their defense, ABC officials said the "Nightline" broadcast "simply seeks to honor those who have laid down their lives for this country." Guess it's just a coincidence that they chose sweeps week to tote hate, fear and catharsis. Guess it's just an accident that they're emulating a photo layout that fueled the anti-Vietnam War movement. What a joke. What a sham. Some things should not be packaged and sold to the public. Some things should be beyond marketing, like the memory of our fallen soldiers. They think we're going to stare weepy eyed at the screen, completely unaware that we're being exploited; that dead soldiers are being exploited in order to bolster Nightline's advertising rates, and influence the primaries. Lower than this TV cannot get. I strongly urge viewers to follow the example of Sinclair Broadcasting and turn off. ©2004 Tribune Media Services townhall.com