STAR.gif (4211 bytes)

 VETERANS IN DEFENSE OF TRUTH AND THE BILL OF RIGHTS

HOME BOYCOTT HOW TO HELP SINCLAIR WAR CRIMES CONSTITUTION CONTACT
 
STAR.gif (4211 bytes)
STAR.gif (4211 bytes)
STAR.gif (4211 bytes)
STAR.gif (4211 bytes)
STAR.gif (4211 bytes)
STAR.gif (4211 bytes)
STAR.gif (4211 bytes)
STAR.gif (4211 bytes)
STAR.gif (4211 bytes)
STAR.gif (4211 bytes)
STAR.gif (4211 bytes)
STAR.gif (4211 bytes)
STAR.gif (4211 bytes)
BOYCOTT SINCLAIR BROADCASTING - HELP STOP WAR CRIMES!

WHO IS SINCLAIR BROADCASTING COMPANY

Sinclair Broadcast Group, Inc. is one of the largest and most diversified television broadcasting companies in the country today. Sinclair owns and operates, programs, or provides sales services to 62 television stations in 39 markets.

Sinclair's television group includes 20 FOX, 19 WB, 6 UPN, 8 ABC, 3 CBS, 4 NBC affiliates and 2 independent stations and reaches approximately 24% of all U.S. television households.

Sinclair's news franchise
includes 37 of its stations which air local news in 31 markets.

Sinclair, either directly or through its Ventures subsidiary, makes equity investments in strategic companies.

Sinclair Broadcast Group, Inc. was founded in 1986, went public in 1995 and is traded on the Nasdaq Exchange under the ticker symbol SBGI.

FROM MSNBS
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6198935/#041012c

October 12, 2004| 9:42 p.m. ET Sinclair's sin (David Shuster) Imagine if the CBS television network pre-empted "60 Minutes" this Sunday and broadcast Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11." Many of you might be thrilled. But many of you would be disgusted and outraged, calling it a deliberate, misleading, and unfair ploy to impact the presidential election at the very end. The Sinclair Broadcast Group, Inc. isn't CBS. But Sinclair does own 62 television stations, including 35 affiliated with the major broadcast networks. (20 Fox stations, 8 ABC, 4 NBC, and 3 CBS.) And Sinclair is ordering all of its stations to pre-empt regular programming and run, as early as this weekend, a partisan documentary about John Kerry titled "Stolen Honor." The film attacks Kerry for his anti-war activism after he returned home from Vietnam more than 35 years ago. Mark Hyman, a spokesman for Sinclair, says "the documentary is just part of a special news event that we're putting together." Actually, it's not a news event. The film was released, (and picked apart) at a press conference five weeks ago. Some of my colleagues have made an issue out of Sinclair's partisan history. 97 percent of their political contributions have gone to Republicans, they sent a team to Iraq to find the "good news" the rest of the media wasn't reporting, and etc. But my issue with Sinclair is in regards to this film... and Sinclair's intention to run the film "as is." Without a major overhaul, this film should be rejected... and it has to do with journalism's requirement that you "get the facts right." "Stolen Honor" has several prominent factual errors: First, former America POWs are quoted on camera as saying "we stayed two more years because of the demonstrators like Fonda and Kerry... I figure they owe us two years." I have no doubt that some POW's feel that way. But the fact is, the war stopped in 1973 when the Nixon administration negotiated an end. History shows it was the lack of a settlement before then, not the protests, that kept the North Vietnamese fighting. Secondly, part of John Kerry's testimony as depicted in the film starts in mid-sentence. "They cut off ears, limbs, heads..." This editing makes it seem that John Kerry was making the allegations, when the sentence actually begins with Kerry saying, "They said they..." The difference is crucial. In reality, as opposed to this film, John Kerry always attributed those dramatic allegations to the testimony of other US soldiers. Thirdly, the film only features POWs who say John Kerry's name was invoked by north Vietnamese prison guards. But we've spoken to dozens of POWs who spent years in Vietnamese prison camps and say they never heard John Kerry's name mentioned once. Balance requires these opposing voices be included in a "journalistic film." But, alas, this isn't journalism that Sinclair is practicing. Some of you might be thinking, "Well, wait a second, Michael Moore splashed his anti-Bush film in movie theaters across the country." That's true. But there is a huge difference between forcing voters to buy a ticket to watch a partisan film... and showing something partisan over the free television airwaves. If Sinclair wants to sponsor "Stolen Honor" in movie theaters across the country, more power to them. But television stations are a different matter regardless of your political leanings. Because remember, if it is Sinclair and "Stolen Honor" this Sunday, would you be comfortable with CBS and "Fahrenheit 9/11" next Sunday?

Mr. David Smith
Chief Executive Officer
Sinclair Broadcast Group Inc
10706 Beaver Dam Road
Hunt Valley, MD 21030
Phone: (410) 568-1500
Fax: (410) 568-1533
Email: investor@sbgi.net
Web Site: http://www.sbgi.net/

Dear Mr. Smith,

Please be advised that I am joining with VERANS IN DEFENSE OF TRUTH AND THE BILL OF RIGHTS and  millions of other Americans to boycott all of your Television Stations and all of the advertisers who appear on your stations.

I take this action because of your assault on the fundamental principles implicit within the 1st Amendment of the Constitution concerning freedom of the press, and because you are implicitly and tacitly endorsing government policies that promote the commission of War Crimes in Vietnam and in Iraq.

As Chief Executive Officer of one of the largest owners of television stations in the country you are entrusted with a special responsibility on behalf of all Americans to fairly represent the news that effect our lives. Unfortunately, you have betrayed that responsibility and by your specific actions you are implicitly and tacitly endorsing the committing of war crimes by our nation while attacking those who had the courage to step forward and told the truth.

Your actions amount to defending the criminals and attacking the victims of war crimes that were the direct result of policies by our government. These are many of the same types of policies implemented by the Bush Administration that led to the War Crimes in Abu Ghraib.

The recent announcement that your network has ordered all 62 of its stations to air "Stolen Honor: Wounds That Never Heal" without commercials in prime-time next week, just before the Nov. 2 election. (as reported in the Washington Post) demonstrates that you have no regard for either the truth or the public interest with which you are entrusted as part of your licensing by the FCC.

Even worse, your promotion of this shameful and deceitful material and your failure to discredit both the movie and the swift boat ads which were created by closely related individuals, despite  overwhelming evidence that shows them to be false and misleading amounts to an endorsement of War Crimes by you personally and by your company.  This is shameful, intolerable, indefensible and un-American. The false misleading and slanderous show you are promoting and the related "Swift Boat" ads are an implicit defense of war crimes committed by our government and as a result are a direct attack on the millions of heroic soldiers who had the courage to serve honorably and bravely in Vietnam and to come forward with the truth in Vietnam and Iraq.

Your actions amount to a defense and endorsement of those who we know committed crimes and is an attack those who had the courage to step forward and try to stop them. You are a disgrace to the news profession and by your implicit and tacit endorsement of War Crimes you disgrace all American soldiers who served honorably and courageously in Vietnam, and those who likewise served honorably and courageously in Iraq and Afghanistan.

As a result of your unconscionable actions I am  boycotting all of your stations and all of the Advertisers who appear on your stations.

Furthermore, as you have engaged in a pattern of misusing the license granted to you by the FCC, for example in April you ordered seven of you ABC-affiliated stations not to air a "Nightline" segment that featured a reading of the names of U.S. soldiers killed in Iraq, I am joining with others in demanding that your license be revoked at all of the stations you own and will mount a public protest when your license comes up for renewal.


Sincerely,

_____________________________________

ENTER YOUR NAME HERE

BOYCOTT SINCLAIR BROADCASTING
WHAT YOU CAN DO NOW TO HELP THE BOYCOTT
LETTER TO PRESIDENT OF SINCLAIR BROADCASTING
WHO IS SINCLAIR BROADCASTING
FIND THE SINCLAIR BROADCASTING STATION IN YOUR AREA TO BOYCOTT
WHY SINCLAIR BROADCASTING,  AND CERTAIN SUPPORTERS OF GEORGE BUSH ARE IMPLICITLY AND TACITLY SUPPORTING WAR CRIMES.
WHY THE POLICIES OF GEORGE BUSH IN IRAQ ARE AN IMPLICIT ENDORSEMENT OF WAR CRIMES
THE CONSTITUTION AND THE BILL OF RIGHTS
 
 

"In February, 2002, the US president signed an executive order stating that although the Geneva Conventions did not apply to al-Qaeda or Taliban detainees, “our nation . . . will continue to be a strong supporter of Geneva and its principles . . . the United States Armed Forces shall continue to treat detainees humanely and, to the extent appropriate and consistent with military necessity in a manner consistent with the principles of Geneva.”5 This phrasing subordinates US compliance to the Geneva Convention to undefined “military necessity.” An August, 2002 Justice Department memorandum to the President and a March, 2003 Defense Department Working Group distinguished cruel, inhumane, or degrading treatment, which could be permitted in US military detention centres, from torture, which was ordinarily banned except when the President set aside the US commitment to the Convention in exercising his discretionary war-making powers.3,7 These memoranda semantically analysed the words “harm” or “profound disruption of the personality” in legal definitions of torture without grounding the terms on references to research showing the prevalence, severity, or duration of harm from abusing detainees.25–30 Also, the memoranda do not distinguish between coercive interrogation involving soldiers from those employing medical personnel or expertise. For example, both documents excuse the use of drugs during interrogation.3,7 Neither document mentions medical ethics codes or the history of medical or psychiatric complicity with torture or inhumane treatment.25,26,31,32 In late 2002, the Secretary of Defense approved “Counter Resistance Techniques” including nudity, isolation, and exploiting fear of dogs for interrogating al- Qaeda suspects at Guantanamo."