It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

ABC News to show pictures of soldiers killed in Iraq

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 28 2004 @ 03:33 PM
link   
On Friday, ABC news will hold a special edition of Nightline on which the names and pictures of soldiers who have died in Iraq will be shown. Here is a link to the article:

here

Many think this is politically motivated, an attempt to sway public opinion against Bush and the war in Iraq. ABC says it is a tribute to the solders. ABC is not showing similar information on soldiers killed in Afghanistan.

What do you think?

_




posted on Apr, 28 2004 @ 03:35 PM
link   
Ratings. They want them, dead soldiers get them.



posted on Apr, 28 2004 @ 03:37 PM
link   
I thought it was known fact that the media (especially ABC, NBC, FOX, etc) are all puppets of their respective political parties - most backed by anti-Bush Democrats?



posted on Apr, 28 2004 @ 03:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by xenophanes85
I thought it was known fact that the media (especially ABC, NBC, FOX, etc) are all puppets of their respective political parties - most backed by anti-Bush Democrats?


If by 'known fact' you mean 'partisan rambling'



posted on Apr, 28 2004 @ 03:45 PM
link   
Fox, owned by Anti Bush democrats? LMAO!!!!!!

I dont care what the motivation is. Im glad they are showing the pictures of the dead soldiers. I want Americans to feel guilty, uncomfortable, and offended, because thats what they need. They need to see war has a FACE....MANY faces. Everyone of those pictures was a soldier, a person, who meant something to someone, who now is forever confined to the grave. And when the American public sees them, assuming they even have souls left, will think, gee.......IS THIS STUPID #ING WAR WORTH IT???????????

ARE THE IRAQIS WHO PRETTY MUCH HAVE BEEN KILLING EACH OTHER FOR AGES, CAPABLE OF DEMOCRACY? CAPABLE OF A REPUBLIC? CAPABLE OF FEUDALISM?

Are these dead soldiers lives worth setting up democracy in a country that more than likely will revert to some sort of tryanny?

Is my SUV really necessary that I am willing to let someone elses kids die so my gas will be cheap and I can drive that abomination wherever I see fit?

Will we someday shake our heads and erect a big old black wall of marble in DC with these soldiers names to remind us the price we pay for agreeing with the govornments foreign policies?



posted on Apr, 28 2004 @ 04:54 PM
link   
FOX News (not FOX Entertainment, its parent company) boasts bipartisan opinions, when it is infact, just like the rest. Sad really. Hypocrites.

[Edited on 28-4-2004 by xenophanes85]



posted on Apr, 28 2004 @ 06:42 PM
link   
Its always nice to see the very same fraudulent repugnants scream,"I'm a patriot. I support the troops. Praise Jayzus in the name of God" then balk at showing the dead soldiers on TV.



posted on Apr, 29 2004 @ 05:35 PM
link   
Sinclair Broadcast Group has pre-empted the broadcast of Nightline this Friday evening. This link gives a very concise summary as to their reasons.

Link

I agree with their reasons for pulling the broadcast.






posted on Apr, 29 2004 @ 05:54 PM
link   
The Bush machine will have generated more than enough counter-propaganda by next week to push this off the radar of the typical "voter."

Sinclair Broadcasting is a lap dog of the Bush administration. Have you ever seen their fawning interviews with administration officials or those Mark Hyman editorials? It wasn't political until Sinclair made it political.

[Edited on 29-4-2004 by _alien]



posted on Apr, 30 2004 @ 12:09 AM
link   
From the Sinclair website:

Based on published reports, we are aware of the spouse of one soldier who died in Iraq who opposes the reading of her husband's name to oppose our military action. We suspect she is not alone in this viewpoint.

What about her feelings?



posted on Apr, 30 2004 @ 05:30 AM
link   
As a carer journalist, i can say for sure that we are in a "ratings period" and am not suprized that in my opinion a sensationalized piece like this would be put out.
They can say its a tribute, but it negates the service of the fallen in afganistan...i say reccognise ALL of our fallen warriors from this past year...or your story begs questions.

Skadi says;
"I want Americans to feel guilty, uncomfortable, and offended, because thats what they need. They need to see war has a FACE"

I know war has a face and consequences...I understand the gravity of this situation...
BUT, i will not dishonor our brave VOLUNTEER warriors by feeling the way Skadi suggests....

I will feel sorrow at their sacrifice, and for their families..
but i will not say they were thrown away...
weather they fully agreed with the "CAUSE" they were fighting for, they HONORED themselves by fufilling their sworn duty by carrying out their orders. They went and represented ALL of us other citizens who can not or would not be willing to do the same. (for whatever reason) They have shown that some people are indeed still willing to sacrifice up to and including their lives for the bennifit of their countries interests and the interests of other peoples. (weather you think the iraqi's/afgans deserve or "can handle" the opportunity were trying to help them achieve) I am humbled by and grateful for people like them.

Skadi asks;
IS THIS STUPID #ING WAR WORTH IT???????????
(legitimate question) Yes it is worth it for many reasons.

ARE THE IRAQIS WHO PRETTY MUCH HAVE BEEN KILLING EACH OTHER FOR AGES, CAPABLE OF DEMOCRACY? CAPABLE OF A REPUBLIC? CAPABLE OF FEUDALISM?
(reasonable but baiting) With help, certantly they are as capable to learn as any other humans.

Are these dead soldiers lives worth setting up democracy in a country that more than likely will revert to some sort of tryanny?
(speculative begging the answer she'd like you to get)
Yes, if they squander a gift or help, its not the givers fault, its theirs...the act of giving (especially ones life) to try and help is NOBLE

Is my SUV really necessary that I am willing to let someone elses kids die so my gas will be cheap and I can drive that abomination wherever I see fit?
(inflamitory, speculative, pre judgmental and attempting to link quasi related ideas to again beg an answer she would like you to draw...IE not an open question)
define nessisary... the only link to fuel prices ive seen is that ITS COSTING MORE!

I feel that the news should not be sugar coated and showing of the bodies is fine but potentially distasteful for several reason....(sensationalism, its dishonorable
and i feel journalistically unethical to use images of fallen soldiers to support or suggest any political adgenda, even one cloaked as a memorial....if this was the case, where are the fallen from afganistan? this is a multi front war, not iraq exclusive....IE ALL SOLDIERS COUNT!) Generally speaking, at legitimate news agencies bodies are NOT shown unless there is a compelling need, which is almost never present.

It appears that both skadi and colonel would support showing the bodies to support their political, anti-war stance....whos repugnant there?



posted on Apr, 30 2004 @ 05:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
Sinclair Broadcast Group has pre-empted the broadcast of Nightline this Friday evening. This link gives a very concise summary as to their reasons.

Link

I agree with their reasons for pulling the broadcast.




It's been revealed that each of Sinclairs heads has personally contributed the maximum of $2,000 to Bush/Cheney and none to Kerry.

The REAL reason revealed. The CONSERVATIVE media wants the anniversary of Bush in drag proclaiming MISSION ACCOMPLISHED to go without notice.

I, for one, will take notice considering more Americans died THIS MONTH than in all of the portion Bush considered "major military action".



posted on Apr, 30 2004 @ 05:58 AM
link   
what none of you have recalled here is that Sinclair is quite the notorious name that has a lot to do with global manipulation. oh wait, my mistake... Rant, thanks for dropping the hint about the Sinclairs. The name, Sinclair, goes back a long way, and is part of the collection of elite bloodlines responsible for the more heinous aspects of global manipulation.

plus, it's ABC. the disney-owned stations that competes with CBS's mind control programming. what'd you expect? that they would air something as non-PC as THIS? something that would surely piss off a few higher-ups in the Bush administration, to put it lightly?

in the words of wayne from waynes world,
"sh-yah! and pigs'll fly outta my butt!"

[Edited on 4/30/2004 by AlnilamOmega]



posted on Apr, 30 2004 @ 07:29 AM
link   
SBG may be part of the Conservative media, but they are less than 1/4 of the total media (CBS, NBC, FOX, WB, etc.). I'm not sure how this ties in with "part of the collection of elite bloodlines responsible for the more heinous aspects of global manipulation", if such a thing exists.

Their motives may be as simple as stated in their press release.

A more compelling reason not to air it may be the reason that I stated earlier: the spouse of one soldier who died in Iraq who opposes the reading of her husband's name to oppose our military action.

Maybe Mr. Koppel should have asked the families of all soldiers who have died in Iraq for their permission to use their loved one's name in his broadcast, right after he calls the families of those soldiers that have died in Afghanistan, or the families of those innocent civilians that died on 9/11, to explain why their loved ones are not important enough to commemorate.




posted on Apr, 30 2004 @ 09:19 AM
link   
It's fascist propaganda by exclusion. There's no whitewashing it. It's a complicit media manipualtion in favor of an administration that has crippled the FCC allowing Sinclair to garner market saturation.
You're either blind or willfully ignorant: Sinclair owns stations affiliated with ABC, CBS, Fox, NBC, WB and UPN in 39 markets.
How's that "1/4 of the total media?" That's 100% OF THE NETWORKS THAT EXIST!!!



posted on Apr, 30 2004 @ 09:55 AM
link   
Bout Time:

From the link I posted:

Sinclair's television group reaches approximately 24% of all US households and includes ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX, WB and UPN affiliates.

So ABC is part of the 24% of their television group. A rough guess would be 5% of this group. How do you equate that with 100% OF THE NETWORKS THAT EXIST. It seems that you are attempting to show that SBG controls 100% of the media, and you know that is not true.

ABC would like us to believe that they did not know this is sweeps week. Disingenous at the very least, IMO.

And why are you making this a personal attack on me, with comments such as You're either blind or willfully ignorant ? There is no need for that, and I resent it.

Final question, one which has been avoided by everyone so far: What about the families of those who object to having their loved one's name read on this show? What about their wishes?




posted on Apr, 30 2004 @ 10:07 AM
link   
That statement is no personal attack. I own a TV or two......ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX, WB and UPN are the only non-cable networks. No one implied that they own 100% of the media; they just own 100% of the networks that exist within their markets. So, if there is anything that they don't approve of, it blanked from those markets. Many still don't own cable or sattelite, they can't turn & see if CBS is carrying it.
One Fourth of America is small change?

I've already stated that they should do this sans commercials & include all of the dead in the Bush wars.

The families of those who object? An obituary is an obituary. Their information has been in the public domain since their family members death: branch/name/home town/rank/date of death......we can all surf that up now in less than a minute.



posted on Apr, 30 2004 @ 11:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
From the Sinclair website:

Based on published reports, we are aware of the spouse of one soldier who died in Iraq who opposes the reading of her husband's name to oppose our military action.


Look at that loaded phrasing. I'm dizzy from the spin, spin, spin!



posted on Apr, 30 2004 @ 01:17 PM
link   
Bout Time:

The families of those who object? An obituary is an obituary.

The comparison of an obituary that runs in a local newspaper with a nationally broadcast program is not even close. And more importantly, it does not answer the question.

If you were the head of ABC, and knew of such objection, what good reason could you give for ignoring the wishes of those families?

_alien:

Look at that loaded phrasing. I'm dizzy from the spin, spin, spin!

Why do they have to justify their objections to us? Is there a list of objections that are acceptable?





posted on Apr, 30 2004 @ 02:11 PM
link   
Simple - if I owned ABC, I would have heard of the objections sent to our offices and addressed each one with the family, or simply removed that iperson from the roll call. Granted, that would have to be the case since Republican operatives are surely Freep-ing the ABC complaint line.
I'm guessing your next attempted spin would be the equating of this memorial to the Bush campaign ads showing the coffins? They're both just as "memorializing"?



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join