Nightline' to Honor 'The Fallen'

[cal04]

Ted Koppel to Read Names of Over 900 Servicemen and Women Killed in Iraq, Afghanistan in Memorial Day Broadcast

One year since honoring the American service men and women killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, Ted Koppel and ABC News "Nightline" will again pay tribute to the fallen by devoting an extended broadcast to reading the names and showing the photographs of more than 900 service members who have been killed in those countries over the last year.

Titled "The Fallen," the special "Nightline" broadcast will air Memorial Day, Monday, May 30, 2005, at 11:35 p.m. ET on the ABC Television Network. ABC News Radio will air excerpts of the program.

Last year on April 30, 2004, "Nightline" honored the 721 service men and women killed in action and in non-hostile situations in Iraq since the start of the war there. Less than a month later on May 26, 2004, the program paid tribute to the122 service members killed in the war on terror since the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan in October 2001. Monday's program will honor those killed in Iraq and Afghanistan and whose names have been released by the Defense Department since last year's broadcasts.

http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/story?id=786279&page=1

[Reverend_Smitty]

1. wonder if Sinclair broadcasting will show this

they looked like fools last time

[CatholicEdHead]

41. I bet they still will

it is about idology with them.

[warrens]

2. Oh, boy, can't wait til those assholes who boycotted it last year hear

They're gonna go ballistic and pump up Nightline's ratings AGAIN.

[Career Prole]

3. I wonder if the right-wing will go nuts again.

It was pretty disgusting the way they carried on about this last time.

Check it out...
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=koppel+nightline+honor+soldiers+killed&btnG=Google+Search

[cal04]

6. They are all disgusting starting with Drudge. They should all go

to Iraq

HERE WE GO AGAIN: ABCNEWS 'NIGHTLINE' PLANNING TO READ NAMES OF SERVICEMEN KILLED OVER LAST YEAR... DEVELOPING...

changed to
AGAIN: ABCNEWS 'NIGHTLINE' PLANNING TO READ NAMES OF SERVICEMEN KILLED OVER LAST YEAR... DEVELOPING...


:puke:

[ninkasi]

31. They stay nuts

The right-wingers in this country are the most pathetically delusion, moronic, downright vicious group of people ever to profane the earth with their presence.

The rest of the world must think we've all gone crazy at the same time, because the rest of us put up with their delusions and cruelty.

[Bozita]

4. My local ABC showed last year's tribute but skipped "Saving Private Ryan"

Wondering what they're gonna do this time.

BTW, I'm in a big blue city in a blue state.

[Lorien]

5. What criteria will they use

to choose the 900 names out of the over 1600 killed?

Ah, never mind-it's SINCE the last reading (one years ago). So more have died in the past year since the previous one year mark? Not exactly progress, BushCo. :grr:

[Enraged_Ape]

8. They're the 900 killed in the last year...

since Nightline had its original "Fallen" broadcast.

[MADem]

7. I just sent them a thank you email in advance of the event

[e-mail]

Remembering the fallen, the captured and the missing is a priority for me.

[yorkiemommie1]

29. thanks for posting the link

i just emailed them too.

[vkobaya]

40. Thanks for the idea and the link

I also emailed Koppel at Nightline to thank him for his
integrity, courage and honor.

Vicki

[Supersedeas]

9. will Sinclair cancel Niteline during a non-Presidential campaign

the decision not to cancel now suggest that the decision had less to do with 'privacy' and much more to do with protecting their choice for President, IMHO?

[saigon68]

51. Sinclair = Hateful Right Wing, Nut Job, Media Outlet

[orwell]

10. Great

Ted is going to read the names of the 100,000 Iraqis who have died.

Oh, that's right, they aren't human beings...they're

Collateral Damage
Insurgents
POW's
Saddam Sympathizers

Thanks Ted...

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[geomon666]

12. 100,000 Civilians Died Because of Iraq War, Hopkins Study Says

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=71000001&refer=us&sid=a5qWDoyceuDI

[Hobarticus]

14. This is suspect, too...

Readers who are accustomed to perusing statistical documents know what the set of numbers in the parentheses means. For the other 99.9 percent of you, I'll spell it out in plain EnglishÑwhich, disturbingly, the study never does. It means that the authors are 95 percent confident that the war-caused deaths totaled some number between 8,000 and 194,000. (The number cited in plain languageÑ98,000Ñis roughly at the halfway point in this absurdly vast range.)

<snip>

Here's how the Johns Hopkins teamÑwhich, for the record, was led by Dr. Les Roberts of the university's Bloomberg School of Public HealthÑwent about its work. They randomly selected 33 neighborhoods across IraqÑequal-sized population "clusters"Ñand, this past September, set out to interview 30 households in each. They asked how many people in each household died, of what causes, during the 14 months before the U.S. invasionÑand how many died, of what, in the 17 months since the war began. They then took the results of their random sample and extrapolated them to the entire country, assuming that their 33 clusters were perfectly representative of all Iraq.

http://slate.msn.com/id/2108887/

Truth be told, we'll probably never know how many Iraqi civilians have died...

[daleo]

19. You're right, it could well be closer to 200,000. n/t

[Hobarticus]

22. Seriously, no kidding, that could very well be possible...

It took almost a decade to correctly count civilian casualties in WW2.

Figure refugees, wounded, relocated peoples, etc...

[TexasLawyer]

24. The study was published in Oct 2004,

and based on data older than that. This was before Fallujah, the elections, and the latest rounds of extreme violence bordering on civil war.

[Frederik]

28. That is NOT correct

You completely misunderstand the concept of confidence intervals. If they had set the confidence interval at say 50%, the median would still be around 100,000, but the range around it would be much narrower. In other words, it's a bell curve. 95% confidence interval is the standard in population surveys like this one. There is nothing "absurd" in their estimation, they emphasized that 100,000 was a conservative estimate.

Since the data collection ended in mid-04, and the Falluja area was excluded due to its very high level of violence, the real number today is probably significantly larger than 100,000.

The survey is methodologically water-tight.

[Hobarticus]

32. Not debating the math...

According to math, we won in Vietnam, and Kerry won in '04.

The article states that the confidence interval is "95% CI 8000-194,000 during the post-war period". That's a confidence interval of 186k.

I'm not debating the math. I'm saying their methodology is rather suspect. Going house-to-house, in a war zone, and then extrapolating those figures? Is that reliable? Nope. That's why they give such a broad range, themselves.

Say the bottom end of that range is 30k, from iraqwardeaths.net, and the top end is 194k from their survey and further extrapolation. That's still a range of 164k. That's "watertight"? That's a margin-of-error over half-again GREATER than the figure, itself.

This figure was quoted way back last year, true, so this could have very well likely risen to the 100k point by now. I bet it's even higher. But I'm not going to trust a study with a margin-of-error like that, and quote it as reliable.

Look, the point is, which I concede in another post, is that there's no tried-and-true measure of how many are dead. You may disagree, but this is a bit loose for my tastes.

Peace.

[Frederik]

35. "That's a confidence interval of 186k."

"Going house-to-house, in a war zone, and then extrapolating those figures? Is that reliable? Nope. That's why they give such a broad range, themselves"

No, it isn't. It's a function of the 95% confidence level, which is the normal level in for instance medical research. They could have lowered it - which is sloppier - and achieved a narrower interval. The likeliest number, mathematically (assuming the data is correct), is still 98,000.

Nobody who actually know what they're talking abot has said this survey is "unreliable". The only people I've seen calling it "absurd" are people who don't understand what confidence level or confidence interval means, using the same arguments you used yourself.

Of course it's just an estimation, which is what you get short of counting every single death. But it's as reliable as it gets. The people who performed it are experts in the field of population studies.

[Hobarticus]

50. We don't have to agree, really...

And you can call me stupid or whatever, if it makes you feel better.

[Frederik]

37. I read that Fred Kaplan piece

He really makes an idiot of himself by misunderstanding the meaning of confidence level and confidence intervals. I can see that's where you got your fallacious ideas from.

[Hobarticus]

13. iraqbodycount.net is based on press reports...

They only count bodies they can verify through journalists. While 100k may be high, less than 30k is certainly conservative.

[Frederik]

36. Iraqbodycount

A representative for Iraqbodycount said he believed the Lancet number of 100,000 was "probable".

[Hobarticus]

49. OMG, it must be right, then!!!! n/t

[Frederik]

52. You pointed to Iraqbodycount as

being more reliable than the Lancet study. My point was that the Iraqbodycount people don't agree with you.

[Vincardog]

15. Uhhh excuse me

How many innocent people are you willing to maim and kill for Lille georges friends to make money?
How do you know how many are injured because of Iraq citizens fighting the illegal occupation of their country? How many children have died as a result of our leveling their town?

The occupation forces target and kill anyone who even tries to count.

[LynnTheDem]

17. IraqBodyCount is ONLY from Iraqis mentioned in news articles.

Guess how often THAT happens.

There were more than 30,000 Iraqis killed just in the first 3 weeks of invasion.

The 100,000 number is last year from John Hopkins University study done IN Iraq and published by the premiere medical journal on the globe, the British Lancet.

[LynnTheDem]

18. The majority of those deaths, "collateral damage" as you call it, are NOT

from insurgents; they're from US and UK bombings.

Read the study.

Learn.

[orwell]

20. Bloody Fingers

Where do you get this 100,000? iraqbodycount.net has the max numbers at less than 30,000.

Johns Hopkins study. See below.

I can see how 30,000 is so much better - so morally comforting.

And militarily speaking, they are considered collateral damage.

Well isn't that just special for all the family members left behind to grieve. "Hey Honey, stop crying, junior wasn't blown into a fine red mist, he was collateral damage. Thank God for George Bush Jr. and the culture of life."

That doesnt lessen the fact that they are still human lives.

Then why even use the term collateral damage? The reason: more Orwellian framing to ameliorate the real human costs of War. "Dead civilians" just doesn't have the same ring when rolling off the tongues of well-compensated Pentagon PR flacks.

And its also interesting to point out that the majority of those deaths are due to insurgent attacks versus bombings, raids, or collateral damage from US offensives.

So where is your source for this assertion? And even if true, why does that make it any different. A dead person doesn't get to sit here and "debate" the issue because...well...he or she is still dead.

"Honey, it wasn't the US troops that blew up our daughter, it was those nasty insurgents."

"Thanks dear, now I can go back to trying to replant those 60 year old olive trees that were torn out of the ground. Hey, do you have any idea when we'll have power or clean water again?"

"No. But at least we both have purple fingers. Let's raise them in a salute to all those who "saved" us from our life in hell!"

At least "freedom" is on the march...

[Bluzmann57]

23. Ah fer crissakes

Yes it is sad that a large number of Iraqi civilians have been killed, but we should at least be greatful that Nightline is honoring the slain U.S. soldiers. No other network is even doing that. Take small victories where you can.

[orwell]

26. I'm Not Grateful at All

I don't consider it a victory, even a small one. It only serves to divide us, which is how war is marketed in the first place.

When we no longer see a difference between "our" dead and "their" dead, we will be at the beginning of realizing how we have been manipulated throughout human history into these incredibly bad political decisions.

I suspect that the powers that be see no difference. We're all cannon fodder to them, despite the "patriotic" flag lapels.

But more power to you. Enjoy the show!

[Tikki]

16. What is the term that the rabid rightwingers

people use for this collateral damage?

In my way of thinking...collateral damage= people who once WERE.....and no longer ARE.

[UpInArms]

21. that's what they term "the culture of life" ........ eom

[Robworld]

25. These soldiers died for what? Oil? expansionism? Imperialism? why?

http://www.dumdumgoestothecircus.com

[Doctor_J]

27. Luckily I live in Chicago

where it will probably be shown. Sorry for those of you in LimpballsLand who will have some "patriotic" programming instead.

[ClintonTyree]

30. Thank you Nightline.....

for giving a damn about the men and women who made the ultimate sacrifice for their country. The bush administration sure as hell wouldn't do it.
Over 900 more dead in one year's time....all for a lie. This should haunt bush for the rest of his days, but it won't. The giggling murder monkey turned and ran when it was his turn to serve, but he's more than willing to send other Americans to their deaths for oil and to fatten his and his pals bank accounts.
Somehow, some way, I want bush to have these lives haunt him for the rest of his days. If there's a god in heaven, it'll happen.

[deutsey]

33. UFPJ March/Direct Action/Civil Disobedience Sept. 24-26

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=106x16074

[0007]

34. I think someone should read the names of the service members

who lost part of their body or mind in junior's mindless war. 15000 would take some time for sure or is it more.

[Piperay]

38. I suppose the RW

will have a hissy fit again. :puke:

[riverwalker]

39. maybe Laura should read the names

because as she said on her tour, "avery laafe is preshuus".

[leftchick]

42. 'Nightline' to Honor 'The Fallen'

Only 900? We are up to 1647 n Iraq alone....

http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/story?id=786279&page=1

May 24, 2005 — One year since honoring the American service men and women killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, Ted Koppel and ABC News "Nightline" will again pay tribute to the fallen by devoting an extended broadcast to reading the names and showing the photographs of more than 900 service members who have been killed in those countries over the last year.

Titled "The Fallen," the special "Nightline" broadcast will air Memorial Day, Monday, May 30, 2005, at 11:35 p.m. ET on the ABC Television Network. ABC News Radio will air excerpts of the program.

Last year on April 30, 2004, "Nightline" honored the 721 service men and women killed in action and in non-hostile situations in Iraq since the start of the war there. Less than a month later on May 26, 2004, the program paid tribute to the122 service members killed in the war on terror since the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan in October 2001. Monday's program will honor those killed in Iraq and Afghanistan and whose names have been released by the Defense Department since last year's broadcasts.

"Nightline" will show a photograph of each serviceman and woman in succession with his/her name, military branch, rank and age, while Koppel reads their names aloud. In order to include each name and face, "Nightline" will be extended from 30 to about 45 minutes. Many of the photographs featured in the program are being provided by The Military Times Media Group, publishers of Army Times, Navy Times, Air Force Times and Marine Corps Times.

[Clarkie1]

43. I was hoping for this! Kick!

[annabanana]

44. Maybe this time it'll get aired everywhere...

I want everyone to know it's coming and start clamoring for it to honor the fallen. THEY MUSTN'T BE IGNORED.

[theshadow]

45. That sound you hear outside...

...is the wingnuts gnashing their teeth. Here we go again!

[rodeodance]

46. good for them

[CatholicEdHead]

47. So, when does the right wing boycott begin?

That one ultra-right media group who did it last time.

[kskiska]

48. DUPE

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=1496495&mesg_id=1496495