Now, I don't have any hard evidence, but here's a what if: What if this shitstorm that Sinclair is stirring up is only a smokescreen, meant to bring attention to "Stolen Honor" without actually showing it?
I find it hard to believe that Sinclair thinks it could force its 62 stations to air this programming and not have attention called to their stance. In the week since this story was broken by the WPost, you've got the blogosphere calling their advertisers, their stock price dipping, an open letter from a former FCC chairman, a letter to the FCC from 18 Democratic senators. They will
NOT be able to show it. There's even this quote I saw from the Washington Post (story
here)
Hyman told The Washington Post over the weekend that the broadcast networks refused to air "Stolen Honor" unless someone from the Kerry campaign would come on to respond to it. "What they've effectively done is to give veto power over their editorial decisions to the Kerry campaign." The company's Web site yesterday urged viewers to call the Kerry camp and urge the senator to agree to an interview with Sinclair. Company executives did not return calls seeking comment yesterday.
What this tells me is that:
- Sinclair is not planning on actually showing this film, but drawing as much attention to it as possible
- getting free media for this movie and what its about, since reporters have to explain to their audience what this movie is
They believe that they can create the same controversial atmosphere around "Stolen Honor" that existed around F911 and drove audiences to see it.
That is why, in addition to making sure Sinclair will not be able to show this movie, we need to get out the word that the director of Stolen Honor is a Moonie shill who used to work for the Washington Times, which has floated some of the more ridiculous propaganda attempts by this administration. Plus the ties of this directly to the SB veterans need to be fully revealed as well.