quote: Why is it that we never see footage of the World Trade Center collapsing? All kinds of other videos are run over and over again, but not that one.
Am I wrong or did the media stop airing the WTC attacks because it was traumatizing children and the White House asked them to stop. From what I remember, there was some hub-ub when CBS aired their documentary the next March because it had been nearly 6 months since the footage had been shown (and as I recall it was at the request of the White House.) But I also recall some of them talking about how the children weren't understanding that it was repeats of the original bombing and they were thinking that the bombing was happening over and over again.
Does anyone remember and thing specific. I can't seen to find the right words to put into a search engine to figure out what they said when they talked about why they were going to stop airing the impacts.
posted
Well, I don't know about OSC, but I've definitely seen that shot many many times since it happened - so many times that it is almost losing effect.
Posts: 2432 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: . . . in the district bureaucracy, bloat is inevitable and obvious. When someone is hired to do a certain job, he immediately starts thinking up new programs, so that he can justify his continuing employment. Nobody ever says, "My job is done" or "My program turned out not to work."
And all these cool new programs cause more work -- and more distraction -- for the poor beleaguered teachers.
posted
It's horrifying to watch OSC descend further and further towards Republican hackery. It really doesn't become him. I mean, this election has pushed me in the "hack" direction too, but I don't have a reputation to spoil...
Accusing Republicans of black voter intimidation and suppression is not a Democratic tactic, it's the defense against a very real, nationwide Republican tactic, that has already started.
and there's more, believe me. Remember 2000? Republicans are trying all sorts of tactics to lower voter turnout. Those "stupid voters" who might vote at the wrong precinct? Some of them were sent official letters telling them to vote at the wrong precinct.
Posts: 535 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
The world is coming to an end! A popular author is taking a political stance opposite yours! Oh no, run for the hills!
Posts: 3446 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
No need for snarky sarcasm.. But if the Republicans truly are trying to interfere with democracy this is something to worry about.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
To answer the initial question, no. The White House made no such request. Like the essay says, it's just a mutual withdrawl of the footage from the airwaves by the networks.
Sort of like that list of songs that was being "censored" in violation of the first amendment, back when the towers first came down. That list was made by the owner of the stations, not by the FCC.
Posts: 1894 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
By the way, Kayla, I am pretty sure that the cessation of the WTC collapse footage was sort of a mutual decision -- enough already.
I don't specifically recall the administration asking networks to stop airing it.
But there was an "air" of official request or something like that at the time. I had that same impression as you did, but then when I thought about it, I couldn't actually recall ever hearing that the White House had put out a formal request.
posted
There was one documentary on the towers themselves on PBS where they showed why the towers fell. Lots of footage of the planes running into the buildings.
Also, I believe PBS has run a documentary on 9/11 itself. I think.
Conversely, has FOX or CBN run any footage of the towers at all? I haven't seen either of those networks run anything from either the towers or much footage from the Russian massacre this election season, though I seem to recall the aftermath of the WTC ruins figuring prominently in recent Bush jr ads.
Personally, I think people are a little burnt out on the seeing the planes fly into the towers and would consider it kind of ghoulish to use the footage of people dying for any kind of political gain.
On the other hand, I don't necessarily disagree with what Orson is saying. The conservative media doesn't show very many dead or wounded soldiers. The liberal media does. The conservative media shows more after effects of the wot on terror than the liberal media does. Just the way the ball bounces.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hey, Honore, the Franklin county thing is because they have more registered voters than eligible voters in their county.
Here's more on it that points out just how bad the Ohio election laws are regarding double registration of voters.
Whether this is Republican intimidation or not (I'm still withholding judgement on that), there is a serious problem with voter registration - specifically with duplicate registrations and invalid registrations.
Just in my little microcosm of a life, I have had three sample ballots sent to my address for people who have long since moved out. We just bought this house in June, and not only did we get the previous owner's sample ballot, but sample ballots from owners prior to him.
My best friend is registered in New Jersey and Massachusettes, even after he *told* New Jersey specifically that he moved and to remove him from the voter rolls. It still hasn't happened, and he got sample ballots in both places. And he's *honest* - and will only vote in one place.
How many people aren't so honest?
This is a problem in the country. It should have been handled long before now, though.
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Yeah? Imagine he'd just written an essay saying Bush hated black people.
We don't need to imagine it, since people regularly insinuate that's what he's doing or endorsing.
I'm trying to picture black voter intimidation going on anywhere in the country without being plastered all over the major news organizations, continuously. If such a thing were even nearly as unequivocal as you say, Honore, major news outlets would be all over it like white on rice.
Which is why I think something else is going on, as FlyingCow described. But go ahead, label Bush a racist intimidator-it suits your self-claimed hackery Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Erm, I didn't label Bush a racist intimidator, I labeled some agents and supporters of his racial intimidators.
quote:Franklin county thing is because they have more registered voters than eligible voters in their county.
Meaningless. People move away, or die, and don't get removed from the rolls. That doesn't mean there are people taking advantage of that to cast fake votes--there's zero evidence of that I've seen. There have been occasional fake registrations by corrupt officials who get paid by the registree, but no organization designed to fake votes--something that normal precautions are generally sufficient to prevent.
Back to Rakeesh--I just don't share your assumptions about the "major news organizations." In 2000, they only reported shenanigans like this well after the election.
I, for one, don't think republicans would engage in supressing the black vote because it would be political suicide for ANYONE running to do that, at this point in time.
Frankly, I think it is mostly scare tactics.
I'm a registered Democrat in Utah. I do not recall getting absentee ballots from my party as a registered Republican. I'm very irrtated with how the democrats are reacting to certain local doings on. I understand they feel legitimately outgunned here, but some of their behavior has been less than honorable in my eyes, and pretty whiny.
I talked about this to my husband, and he said "Of course. Democrats are whiny, and republicans are stingy."
I'm going to reregister back to independant. I know I won't be able to participate in primaries, but I just can't stand anyone right now. The republicans locally are way too conservative for me.
Posts: 438 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
We all hate pre-emptive strikes, don't we? After all, just because Republicans have shown a history of deceit, doesn't mean we shouldn't just trust them and let the inspections work.
If I be a hack, sir, I'll make the most of it.
Posts: 535 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Okay, well, just because you haven't seen any evidence, doesn't mean it's not there. Let's find some things that you can say you've seen... whether you deem them significant enough to be of consequence is different (I do, but that's my own opinion). But, now you won't be saying you haven't seen any evidence at all.
Example 1 is from Florida during the 2000 election. It details hundreds of illegal votes that have turned up, some of them from dead people.
Example 2 is for this year's election, and is from Ohio. Dead people registering to vote again.
Example 3 has fraudulent voter registration cards being requested in New Mexico - some for dead people, and others for variant names of living people with different social security numbers and birthdates.
And that's just the tip of the iceberg. Punch in Dead People Vote or some combination of similar words, and you'll get lots of links.
But back to my own life, it would be entirely possible for those duplicate registrees to request absentee ballots and vote twice. It would also be possible for members of either party to vote for these now absent people by sending in a proxy to pretend, and sign the form.
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Two of those examples are actually what I was talking about--false voter registration but not false votes. More likely evidence of people getting paid by the registree than evidence of preparation for fraud.
Example 1, though, is definitely evidence, although not proof, of an organization in Florida dedicated to voter fraud. (Note, incidentally, that it could have been Republican vote fraud, with the fake votes placed in heavily Democratic precincts as a disguise.) So I definitely can't make the claim that all Republican attempts to foil voter fraud are baseless, and really aiming at intimidation/suppression of votes. I apologize if I seemed to suggest that before.
But my point still holds: OSC is doing the equivalent. He's implying that all attempts to foil vote suppression are baseless, and really just laying the groundwork for stealing the election. And my examples (and more, like those described on This American Life), show that's not true.
Posts: 535 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:They firmly believe that if they can just keep up the pressure, the American Left will deliver them a victory just as forty years ago the American Left delivered the North Vietnamese a victory that they could not win on the battlefield.
Every time I start thinking about listening to OSC on Iraq, I remember that his other example of a just American war is Vietnam.
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Excuse me, but it was the Republican RichardNixon who sold out SouthVietnam, and Republican GeraldFord who let the NorthVietamese break the peace treaty and overrun the South.
Just as it is GeorgeWBush who is personally responsible for allowing Iraqi armories to be looted for the weapons which are currently being used to kill UStroops.
Posts: 8501 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I just simply don't read OSC's columns anymore. Except the ones regarding literature. They're still generally good and valid; his political columns are dead to me.
Posts: 92 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Honore, I don't know which side is doing it, and I'm sure both are equally guilty, actually. You don't think one set of liars is going to stand by while another set of liars finds a better way to cheat, do you?
The last bit is proof of voter fraud, but the numerous fraudulent voter registration cards is a problem. Anyone can take that card and vote with it, signing that name. We have no system to weed out these dupliate or fraudulent votes, which is unfortunate.
Close states this year will again come down to law suits, on both sides, to verify that the votes were actually legitimate. If a small group of challenged votes yields invalid voters, then a larger inquiry will likely be allowed.
It's going to to get ugly before the end, I'm sure, but only because both sides are playing dirty pool.
Edit: And while I understand that you're saying fraudulent registration does not equal fraudulent voting, that seems somewhat naive to me.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
