Pondering war, politics and coverage

I find it high irony that Sinclair Broadcasting deems as a “political” act the honoring of soldiers killed in Iraq, as ABC’s “Nightline” planned to do Friday night by reading their names (“Soldier Tribute in Line of Fire,” by Elizabeth Jensen, April 30). The only political act here is Sinclair Broadcast Group’s refusal to air the show. This is yet another hypocritical and cynical attempt at censorship by a Bush campaign contributor helping Bush spin his war to the American people.

Robert Nusbaum

Redondo Beach

*

Sinclair’s position is one of partisan bias toward the Republicans, as they view any recognition of our losses as a statement against the war. In this day and age when too much time is devoted to celebrity and entertainment topics, we should encourage programs such as “Nightline” when they raise the quality of journalism by paying public tribute to the men and women of the armed forces. Honoring the dead isn’t partisan; it’s the right thing to do.

Carmen R. Gonzalez

Torrance

*

When I heard that Ted Koppel would read the names of all our service people who have been killed in Iraq, I felt strangely ambivalent. On its surface, honoring these valiant kids makes nothing but perfect sense. Why not read their names and show their pictures on network television? But when I began to consider the implications for doing such a thing and what the motivation might be, my ambivalence turned to anger.

This is a highly emotional time for our country, as well as a time of agonizing loss for the families of the dead. Why would Koppel feel the need to grind our nose in the brutality of this conflict? At once, I feel guilty for thinking this, and furious that a network is trying to manipulate my sentiments during such a critical time.

In reading the names of the dead on his program, Koppel is pouring salt on a widening wound that will erode what is left of this nation’s resolve and cohesiveness. While I honor and admire those who gave their lives in the service of this country, I feel that Sinclair Broadcast Group has made a painful but correct decision in forbidding the airing of “Nightline” on its stations. Koppel’s broadcast will only serve to polarize our country even more during a highly charged election year. It’s manipulative and, more important, it’s just not right.

John Johnson

Encino

*

I am grateful to “Nightline” and Ted Koppel for honoring our troops with Friday’s broadcast. It is important to remember those who have sacrificed their lives for us. These are real people -- with faces, names, histories and families -- not just statistics. The cost of war is high, far beyond the billions of dollars spent. The very least we can do is to thoughtfully reflect on the real loss.

Sylvia Bass

Tustin

*

Garry TRUDEAU’s subtle attempt to disrupt civilian morale in wartime through his “Doonesbury” strip (“Comics Drawn Into the Battle,” April 30) would have gotten him drawn and quartered during World War II. To say the least, it doesn’t belong on the comics pages. Editorializing and propaganda belong elsewhere.

Arthur Hansl

Santa Monica

*

It is not enough to show your anti-President Bush bias on your news and editorial pages. On April 27 you featured two slam stories in the Calendar section, taking up almost the entire front page. Your slant on the article about the weasel John Dean (“This Time His Target Is Bush,” by John M. Glionna) and the ultra-liberal TV personality Jon Stewart (“Politics on a Skewer,” by Patrick Goldstein), show you have not learned a thing about fairness, even after the public shaming you took in your handling of the Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger race.

Why not create a new section? Call it Bush-bashing and be done with it.

Karl Simon

Manhattan Beach

*

John DEAN’s assertion that alleged malfeasance by President Bush is worse because “no one died as a result of Nixon’s so-called abuses” illuminates the severity of Dean’s intellectual disconnect. Nixon’s resignation in disgrace murdered a vital part of the American Dream and the nation’s still in mourning. Perhaps it’s not “tough skin” that inures Dean to criticism, but the absence of conscience or heart beneath that skin.

Stuart Weiss

Beverly Hills

*

You mean someone actually considers Bush “the most openly religious president in generations” (“The Passion That’s Behind the President,” by Carina Chocano, April 28)? Hello! What about President Carter? He not only talked the talk, Carter actually walked the walk in all areas of his life -- and still does. This man of real character and humility has been admired the world over for his stand against prejudice and fraud, and for such great causes as Habitats for Humanity, plus faithfully teaching his Bible classes in a little church.

Bonnie Compton Hanson

Santa Ana

*

In response to the article by Lynn Smith about the young man who shared photos on the Internet of flag-draped coffins arriving home from the war in Iraq (“ ‘Coffins’ and Now Chaos,” April 26), I’m angry that the executive branch of our government is manipulating the horrible reality of war to suit political agendas. “To protect the privacy and sensitivity of families,” indeed!

As a young girl during World War II, I still remember many such photos in newspapers, magazines and newsreels. Were our leaders being insensitive to families then? No! They knew the real costs of war and so did I, and I was only 8 years old!

Judy Lehman

Orange