Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Anti-Kerry Film To Air on 1/4 Of America's TV's Nights Before Election

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 10 2004 @ 04:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by everyone (insert back-and-forth liberal v. conservative crap here)
Nice work everyone... you're playing along with the "divide and conquer" strategy of the current system. Create two distinct groups, make them somewhat equal in numbers, and manage the divisive rhetoric to maintain the proper level of consistent hate and rancor. Has anyone ever stopped to think that both of these idiots are complicit in a long-standing process to keep the public divided and focused away from real issues? We lose with either one.




posted on Oct, 10 2004 @ 05:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by everyone
(insert back-and-forth liberal v. conservative crap here)



Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
Nice work everyone... you're playing along with the "divide and conquer" strategy of the current system. Create two distinct groups, make them somewhat equal in numbers, and manage the divisive rhetoric to maintain the proper level of consistent hate and rancor.

Has anyone ever stopped to think that both of these idiots are complicit in a long-standing process to keep the public divided and focused away from real issues? We lose with either one.


I recall distinctly inviting RANT and two Independents to watch the program in question with me (previous page), I hardly think that that is complicit or divisive... Unwise possibly, but that's a chance I'll take.


Inclusive Monkeys, not just for Caribbean vacations anymore...



posted on Oct, 10 2004 @ 05:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mirthful Me
I recall distinctly inviting RANT and two Independents to watch the program in question with me (previous page), I hardly think that that is complicit or divisive... Unwise possibly, but that's a chance I'll take.


Inclusive Monkeys, not just for Caribbean vacations anymore...


Mirth, I do recall you inviting me to screen a film back at the evil lair, but I don't recall the subject matter being particularly political.


Though it did also happen to be titled Stolen Honor I do believe.



posted on Oct, 10 2004 @ 06:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by RANT

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Basically you are complaining because the anti-kerry film is getting
to more homes than F911. I'd betchya' any amount of $$ (if it were
legal to do so) that Michael Moore would have put F911 on CBS, NBC,
ABC, and FOX if he could have. He didn't put it on Pay For View because
of any kind of personal morality.


He tried, and was told it's illegal.
Just like this. The RNC alerted the FEC they would contest it, but it didn't matter anyway since Moore doesn't own the movie. Hs distributors do which said...no, no, no Mr. Moore we're selling this thing, not giving it away.

Check your hypocrisy please. Sure Moore's a propagandist but he was stopped. Why isn't this? Hmmm?


Just a question, and I'm being serious here not just trying to prove a point. I know that F/911 was in theatres...it's an actual movie. Is the anti-Kerry movie that's being shown and actualy movie? Was it ever released anywhere else other than when they're going to show it? Also, as I recall last year before the election there was an anti-Bush documentary that came out.



posted on Oct, 10 2004 @ 06:58 PM
link   
interesting discussion.

I have to agree though, if they can show a republican biased documentary on national tv before the election then they should allow a democrat biased one as well.

It's that darn liberal media I swear!



posted on Oct, 10 2004 @ 07:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by KrazyIvan


so michale moore can make propaganda film and the conservatives cant then? wtf dude?



Its a difference between michael more and the bush film on national tv.

here in the south the michael moore film was banned so as today I has not seen it yet.



posted on Oct, 10 2004 @ 08:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

Has anyone ever stopped to think that both of these idiots are complicit in a long-standing process to keep the public divided and focused away from real issues? We lose with either one.



Thats why I am gonna vote Libertarian


This is just a game people to keep yall riled up at each other so no one sees which shell the pea is under. Our ONLY hope is to open this up to more parties.



posted on Oct, 11 2004 @ 10:05 AM
link   
Carlton Sherwood, the producer of Stolen Honor, was hired by Tom Ridge back in March to produce a new Fed website -- www.firstresponder.gov -- a key Bush Administration public outreach program directed to the more than 8 million police, fire, EMS and emergency management personnel nationwide." (Firstresponder.gov is not yet operational. According to the American Public Works Association, it was supposed to be live by March 2004, but it has apparently been delayed.)


Sherwood is president of Red, White and Blue Productions, which produced Stolen Honor; he is also executive vice president of the wvc3 group, a firm focusing on homeland security and counterterrorism.


mediamatters.org...

This just gets dirtier and dirtier. Of course SBGI itself (airing the "news" movie) is closely linked to the Bush administration in contributions and some would argue FCC rulings favoring the expansion of their media monopoly, but the MAN THAT FOUND TIME TO PRODUCE "Stolen Honor" CAN'T GET AROUND TO THE HOMELAND SECURITY WEBSITE?

Feeling safer yet? :shk:

Dirty. Corrupt. Indefensible.

Make my day. Try and defend this. I beg you.

This won't spin well for Bush.



posted on Oct, 11 2004 @ 11:39 AM
link   
The ties that bind....always a money trail with Republicans. That it took a regular detour through perversity ( busted John heading the network) is also not unusual.
The "Deeevide & Conquer" theme - what about folks like me, who belonged to no party, yet understood a change was necessary and ONLY possible by playing the cards dealt? I've been after this cabal since 2000, so there's no "partisan" spin coming to pass. Did I then and now want more party representation? Hell YES. I was sorely disallusioned when John Mccain didn't go Independent in 2000, and even more so when he decided to NOT start the road to the White House trek in 2000, taking Jim Jeffords along with him as VP. I was heartened a bit with the talk of a Kerry/McCain ticket too, but that was a fizzle.

As for this tactic by defacto Team Bush members to bradcast this? It will backfire, as have the lion's share of dirt lobs in this campaign. Why?

1. Team Kerry is nothing if not studious - they studied 2000 up down & side ways.

2. Team kerry has actual product that withstands comparison shopping; Team Bush does not...hence, this very, VERY unusual campaign being conducted by an Incumbent US President.....all hat - no cattle.

3. Won't get Fooled Again - folks are smart enough to remeber what they were sold in 2000, what it was like when they got it home & tried using it for the last 4 years, and now,..........the Used Car Lemon King is back being sold as a solution!

[edit on 11-10-2004 by Bout Time]



posted on Oct, 11 2004 @ 12:13 PM
link   
Stolen Honour(I presume the film that favors Bush through negative ulterior motives) being shown on standard broadcast, versus F911 being pay-per-view since the TV syndicates could not show it due to ownership issues and potiential lawsuits.. Almost simular to the Takedown versus Downtime debacle over Keven Mitnick. Downtime didn't get any airwave support at all. Takedown was so vehemently protested it got sent to only 1 or 2 countries under a different name. The point... if you oppose Stolen Honour being shown on standard broadcast and want it on an *even-footing*(we are above censorship!) then contact the stations and let them know! Contact Information is in the beginning of the thread. As my previous analogy has shown, it can be done, this is no different(other than subject).



posted on Oct, 11 2004 @ 01:14 PM
link   
There is a very large difference, between network t.v. an ppv. Not everyone has ppv, pretty much everyone has network t.v, To play this film without playing the counterpoint,is aganist FCC rules, whats good for the goose is good for the gander. My biggest problems with this type of film and both sides are guilty of it, is the picking of info that only serves your political agenda. I for one have been reading everything on both sides I've watched the debates an will watch the last one, but that's it. I've made my decision awhile ago, there is more going on then Iraq, and we need to start paying attention to it.



posted on Oct, 11 2004 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
Has anyone ever stopped to think that both of these idiots are complicit in a long-standing process to keep the public divided and focused away from real issues? We lose with either one.


What I find funny, is that the only two people to respond to you SO are Libertarians.

I hate the Big Two, and everything they stand for. I have absolutely no doubt that the federal government IS complicit in detracting from public awareness on many fronts.

Although I am unsure if it is a collabrative effort or not, the problem still remains that the BIGGEST PROBLEM IN AMERICA TODAY IS THE US FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

But why talk about that and ways to fix it. We'd all like to know if the president is a damn rockem sockem robot.

Deny what?



posted on Oct, 11 2004 @ 02:52 PM
link   
I hear one of the networks is offering to play F9/11 on the 4th!



posted on Oct, 12 2004 @ 02:48 PM
link   
Since this is from DRUDGE, who knows how true it is, but:




FCC COMMISSIONER STATEMENT ON SINCLAIR AIRING OF ANTI-KERRY SHOW
Tue Oct 12 2004 13:39:02 ET

FCC COMMISSIONER COPPS CRITICIZES SINCLAIR CORPORATE DECISION TO PREEMPT LOCAL STATIONS FOR POLITICAL BROADCAST

Commissioner Michael J. Copps reacted to reports that Sinclair Broadcast Group will preempt more than 60 local stations across the country to air an overtly political program in the days prior to the Presidential election.

Copps stated: This is an abuse of the public trust. And it is proof positive of media consolidation run amok when one owner can use the public airwaves to blanket the country with its political ideology -- whether liberal or conservative. Some will undoubtedly question if this is appropriate stewardship of the public airwaves. This is the same corporation that refused to air Nightlines reading of our war dead in Iraq. It is the same corporation that short-shrifts local communities and local jobs by distance-casting news and weather from hundreds of miles away. It is a sad fact that the explicit public interest protections we once had to ensure balance continue to be weakened by the Federal Communications Commission while it allows media conglomerates to get even bigger. Sinclair, and the FCC, are taking us down a dangerous road.

END



EDIT: There is a good interview with Mark Hyman, the vice president for corporate relations for the Sinclair Broadcasting Group at CNN.


HEMMER: Democrats say this is illegal. Clearly, you do not. Why not?

HYMAN: Well, a couple of issues. First of all, we haven't even looked at a 90-minute program. But if John Kerry wants to spend 45 minutes or an hour with us, maybe we have a 90-minute program. Again, no formal format has been decided upon.

However, the accusations coming from Terry McAuliffe and others, is it because they are some elements of this that may reflect poorly on John Kerry? That it's somehow an in-kind contribution of George Bush?

If you use that logic and reasoning, that means every car bomb in Iraq would be an in-kind contribution to John Kerry. Weak job performance ratings that came out last month would have been an in- kind contribution to John Kerry. And that's just nonsense.

This is news. I can't change the fact that these people decided to come forward today. The networks had this opportunity over a month ago to speak with these people. They chose to suppress them. They chose to ignore them. They are acting like Holocaust deniers, pretending these men don't exist.




[edit on 12-10-2004 by curme]



posted on Oct, 12 2004 @ 03:38 PM
link   
My brother once said that democratic elections are the biggest lie ever sold to people. Back in the days when I wasn't enightened, I thought that was crap. Of course we have real democracy, tv says so, president says so.
How wrong was I??! Damn...

He also said that elections are decided in the last few days before the vote, usualy because of some minor detail that is blown out of proportion. That is exactly what we see here. issues don't matter, jobs, healthcare, education, enviroment, reality, #-ups of Bush administration, none of that matters. What matters is what Kerry did 30 years ago. He threw away three purple hearts. Completely ignore the fact that Bush ditched the army all together, got high, drunk, wasted money, got to power by changing laws of texas so he can steal, fixed elections 4 years ago (watch the documentary how he got to power, it is very enlightening). None of that matters. Kerry did this and that in Vietnam, thats all you need to know.

The vote is decided by undecided voters. Politicians have counted all the "traditionals", those who always vote for republicans because their family vote for republicans or because they love guns, decided democrats are known too. Those are not the ones who have to be convinced. It is the undecided that matter. For that, you only need to pull a big thing right before the elections. That is the purpose of this Anti-Kerry film. The film most centainly won't change the minds of those who have already decided what to do.

The whole election thing is one big show anyway. You have "debates" where questions and answers are already predetermined, so they only recite their policies, there is no real debate there. Two candidates are over-exposed in public, and people actually vote for the character created by "sponsors" of elections, big corporations. In reality it doesnt matter who the president is, he is just a puppet anyway. The real leaders are behind the scenes, in case of Bush administration those were Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and of course, the big money, corporations. If you vote for Kerry, you'll get the same # just differently wrapped. What might change is what issues they present as important to people. They all do everything almost the same anyway, the difference is only what they SAY they do a lot.

Republicans love to present themselves as bad-ass gunloving traditional people, with Jesus on their side, democrats are a bit mellowed down, more into reforms. But that is just what they present on the outside. Inside it is all rotten. Bush attacked Iraq for some seriously messed up reasons, Clinton let Rwanda genocide happen and destroyed Sudan's pharmaceutical facility, cousing deaths of thousands. They both supported modern forms of slavery in third world, big corporations employing children to do hard work (think of Nike for example). They both support exploatation of third world resources without people profiting on that, they support outrageous policies of IMF, UN, and all other international organisations, Kerry won't change that either. They all sell weapons to various dictators all over the world. I could go on for hours on just how bad they all are.

They are good in one thing though. Creating this perfect illusion that WE, the people, actually decide what will happen. Hah, what a joke. WE are all brainwashed consumers given just enough to keep us alive and shut us up. The kings and emperors of the 21st century still hold the power and keep everything in the family.

We seriously need some kind of revolution.

Bah. Rant over.



posted on Oct, 12 2004 @ 03:43 PM
link   
Paperclip, you have no idea. What I love is when Bushies cry "Kerry did this 30 years ago!" But then a Kerrynite tells you what Bush was doing 30 years ago(coke, AWOL, so forth) and the same Bushies cry "Past doesn't matter!" So, the past is only important if a dem, but a republican's past? It seems not to be important to Bushies.



posted on Oct, 12 2004 @ 04:15 PM
link   
That Hyman quote about the "other" news organiations acting like "Holocaust deniers" is strikingly familiar to the arguments of "Stolen Honor" producer Sherwood's defense of Reverend Sun Myung Moon.

I've been digging in Moon's closet all week. Moon is deep in the Bush family, and the more extreme right wing Senators, the Washington Times, Falwell's Liberty University and some pretty scary "New Messiah" stuff to get into our public schools with Bush "Faith Based Initiatives" for preaching abstinece federally.

It's hard to compile all this information or even process it, though I'm trying. It's mind boggling what's going on. But the Moonies are taking over bit by bit, one right wing front group after another all over the world. And they are deep in Washington. Not to mention Kim Jong-iL.

Obviously these "true beliviers" at Sinclair what with the sex crimes President and 50% stock loss since getting political over Nightline, and complete disregard for local communites (opting instead for their national feeds of editorials and even WEATHER!) care nothing for capitalism anymore or making a good honest buck. Moon's right wing goal is to destroy individualism (I've learned) and has Bush Sr. trotting the globe (at six figs a pop) on his behalf as he scoops up more right wing newspapers to control the global voice to that end.

Sinclair it seems now is willing to destroy themselves to influence one election. Why? To the same ends as Bush friend Moon? Why would they do that? They've been told by the FCC they will suffer. They've been told by countless financial analysts and advertisers to buck off. So why?

It's got to be the Moonies. I'd dead serious. If right wing Christians had a clue what was going on they'd literally puke blood. It's neither Christian or American. There's so little difference in Moon and PNAC goals it's virtually indistinguishable now. I just don't know if Republican leaders know they've lost control. Surely they like the money, but they have to know better on some level that Moon is insane.

But the "code talk" stuff is really hitting me now. Moon's "holocost like persecution" and his adamant war on homosexuality and against birth control and abortion and fight for control of media.... It's like he's almost in charge now. That can't be though. Can it?

I'm really kind of freaking out over what I've learned.



posted on Oct, 12 2004 @ 04:35 PM
link   
Anti-Defamation League Ad in Washington Post

www.adl.org...


Letters to the Editor
The Washington Post October 11, 2004


To the Editor:



The statement by Mark Hyman, vice president of the Sinclair Broadcast Group, that the television networks were "acting like Holocaust deniers" with regard to coverage of anti-Kerry veterans groups is grossly inappropriate ("Sinclair Stations to Air Anti-Kerry Documentary," Oct. 11).



Regardless of Mr. Hyman's opinion of the quality of news coverage relating to Presidential campaign issues, his analogy to those who deny the Nazi murder of 6 million Jews and millions of others is insensitive and painful. Usage of Holocaust imagery to score a political point is unacceptable. He should repudiate the comment.


Sincerely,

Abraham H. Foxman
National Director



posted on Oct, 12 2004 @ 04:51 PM
link   
I have a very simple question. What are you afraid of if this airs? Have any of you seen it?

I have a problem with F9/11 being aired because it is filled with deciets. If the movie you are upset about is also filled with deciets, though I am NOT a Kerry fan by ANY stretch of the imagination, I will support your cause and will begin a letter writing campaign to protest this movie being aired.

If the movie is NOT similar to F9/11 and is a factual documentary than why the uproar?


Jemison



posted on Oct, 12 2004 @ 05:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jemison
I have a very simple question. What are you afraid of if this airs? Have any of you seen it?

I have a problem with F9/11 being aired because it is filled with deciets. If the movie you are upset about is also filled with deciets, though I am NOT a Kerry fan by ANY stretch of the imagination, I will support your cause and will begin a letter writing campaign to protest this movie being aired.

If the movie is NOT similar to F9/11 and is a factual documentary than why the uproar?


Jemison



How are some guys opinions a factual documentary? It actually is the same as 9/11 but AGAIN, not the point. That's a movie. You pay, go see. You rent, take home. You order pay per view, it play.

I really don't even care about the Kerry angle anyway. He's wiping Bush's nose and this is actually helping. It's the PUBLIC AIRWAVES we must defend.

I really don't see how to make you understand this. It's been done to death. You can't do what Sinclair does to it's markets. Period. This is just the latest example. It's not like a cable network you subscribe to and invite and KNOW who's behind it.

It's your local everyday, UPN or FOX, or CBS or whatever YOU THINK is local, but it's like a direct feed from the White House. And this attempt to give free air time for an election infomercial IS criminal. Make them form a 527 and PAY. Buy air time Pennsylvania Vets and Homeland Security Contractor Moonies For Bush! It's not "news" it's an AD.

Anyway, just think about someone turning on their local ABC station thinking it's local, it's news, it's whatever...and getting that movie right before an election or any of Sinclairs antics:

SINCLAIR REFUSES TO LET LOCAL MARKETS SEE NIGHTLINE
Tonight, ABC's "Nightline" will pay tribute to U.S. troops killed in Iraq by airing a 40 minute special the names of the fallen will be read by anchor Ted Koppel as their photographs appear on screen. But Sinclair Broadcast Group the country's largest owner of TV stations will not allow its ABC affiliates to air the show. In a statement, Sinclair claims the special "appears to be motivated by a political agenda designed to undermine the efforts of the United States in Iraq." While Sinclair claims it is pre-empting Nightline because it is an attempt to "influence public opinion," the record shows that Sinclair media has repeatedly leveraged its control over the airwaves to manipulate public opinion in favor of President Bush's right-wing agenda.

SINCLAIR REQUIRES JOURNALISTS TO READ PRO-BUSH STATEMENTS: In September 2001, Sinclair Broadcasting required its affiliates to air messages "conveying full support" for the Bush administration. At a Baltimore affiliate, WBFF "officials required news and sports anchors, even a weather forecaster, to read the messages, "which included statements such as "[the station] wants you to know that we stand 100% behind our President." Several WBFF staffers objected on the grounds that reading the statements would "erode their reputations as objective journalists" because it made them appear to be "endorsing specific government actions."

SINCLAIR REFUSES TO AIR AD HIGHLIGHTING 2003 BUSH ERROR: In July 2003, Sinclair Broadcasting refused to allow WMSN TV its FOX affiliate in Madison, WI to air a DNC advertisement that featured a clip of President Bush making the false claim "Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa" in his 2003 State of the Union Address. Three other Madison stations, including ABC, NBC and CBS, readily agreed to air the ad. The Madison CBS affiliate, WISC, said the advertisement was "no worse than any other political ad."

SINCLAIR PRODUCES CENTRALIZED RIGHT-WING CONTENT FOR 'LOCAL STATIONS': In a controversial business practice, Sinclair Broadcasting has fired much of the staff for the local affiliates it owns, instead producing content for its local stations from a central facility outside Baltimore which it then airs on "local" news broadcasts. The centralized content features nightly commentary by Sinclair corporate communications chief Mark Hyman. Hyman regularly refers to the French as "cheese-eating surrender monkeys," the so-called liberal media as the "hate-America crowd," and progressives as "the lonely left" On one recent commentary, Hyman called members of Congress who voted against a recent resolution affirming the righteousness of the Iraq war "unpatriotic politicians who hate our military." You can see all of Hyman's commentaries this month HERE. (Read more from American Progress about the problems of media consolidation.)

SINCLAIR AIRS FAKE NEWS BROADCASTS PRODUCED BY BUSH ADMINISTRATION: In March, it was discovered that the Bush Administration was producing "television news stories, written and paid for by the government, which have the appearance of legitimate news segments delivered by independent reporters," and distributing them to local newscasts as a way of promoting administration policies including its ill-conceived Medicare prescription drug law. On the broadcasts, a public relations professional named Karen Ryan pretended to be a reporter. Among the stations which aired the administration propaganda as news: WPGH in Pittsburgh "the Sinclair Broadcasting station that fired much of its news staff in favor of feeds from a centralized newsroom in Baltimore."

Nobody is this deceptive or one sided. NOBODY! FoxNews is liberal compared to this. At least you know what you're inviting into your home with Fox Cable. These are PUBLIC AIRWAVES though disguised as local independent voices of the community. What don't you still get?

I'm frankly shocked our Liberty lovin' board members aren't collectively disgusted regardless of politcal affiliation. And even if you're only in it for Bush, it is hurting him. The backlash and outrage is linking directly to him. How can it not?


[edit on 12-10-2004 by RANT]






top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join