portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article

imperialism & war

You can post "your reaction to the war" on KATU's website

On KATU's website there is a link where you can email them "your reaction to the war" and view other's submissions. After reading some, I don't know whether to laugh or cry. Let's submit some good reactions....they actually are posting some anti-war reactions.

homepage: homepage: http://www.katu.com/home.asp

reactions 08.Apr.2003 17:07

Toby Esterhase

No way, they're the mainstream media, they wouldn't present any dissenting views. I don't believe this! Call Noam Chomsky!

dont be silly 08.Apr.2003 18:15


c'mon toby,
get over yourself.
sure they are the mainstream media, but who cares.
it's like saying... 'well, they are already 20 people doing something for the anti-war movement, why should i.

mabey if more people wrote into katu, they will show it off and other people might agree with your opinoins and write in there own about how they oppose the war. then there will be that much voice aginst the war.

dont be self-defeating.

Reaction I sent to KATU 08.Apr.2003 18:26

Sadder But Wiser

I sent this reaction on March 27.

You asked for a reaction to the war. I have a reaction to your reporting of the war, from which you can deduce my reaction to the war in general.

First of all, in your story "Local soldier doesn't like anti-war protests," the mother of a 21-year old Navy Seaman somewhere in the gulf says that the protesters are not helping her son by protesting. '"To know that they are there, you know, trying to protect the country and to know these people here are feeling this way - it's very upsetting," said Cora.'  http://www.katu.com/news/war_story.asp?ID=55827 . She just doesn't get the point. To begin with, the soldiers are not there to "protect the country;" they are illegally invading and occupying a sovreign nation. I don't know what country she is referring to when she says her son is there to protect the country, but they certainly aren't protecting this country--even the CIA has admitted that the chances of terrorist attacks in the United States are greater because of the invasion of Iraq. Each one of those children whose home is bombed, whose family is killed and who is injured by U.S. bombs is likely to grow up to hate the United States to the point of becoming a terrorist. Saddam isn't creating terrorists; George Bush is.

This mother goes on to state, "You might feel that what you are doing is going to help them, well I'm letting you know it's not. It makes them feel very upset and angered." I don't think that the point of the protesters is to make her son feel good about what he is doing; the point of the protesters is to end this unjust war of aggression and to get her son home alive as soon as possible. If it upsets him and makes him think about the loss of civilian life in the country that he has invaded in the process, then that's something that he is going to have to live with.

Next, let's look at your report on "Protests costing community on all fronts."  http://www.katu.com/news/war_story.asp?ID=55820 . You state that downtown businesses are losing money because of the protesters. While that is unfortunate, let's put it into perspective--yesterday, the United States military bombed Abu Taleb Street, a poor area of Baghdad, killing about twenty people.
 http://argument.independent.co.uk/commentators/story.jsp?story=391165 . Cafes were gutted, women and children were creamated in their vehicles, business owners were finding body parts in the wreckage of their businesses--I could go on, but I think that you get the idea.

Now compare that to nightclub owner Dan Lenzen complaining about the protesters, "...some of our employees were scared that night," or business owner Cynthia McBurney saying, "I'm down 33-percent this month." There's a war going on, folks, and sacrifices must be made.

In that same news story, you spoke of the need for police overtime due to protesters in downtown Portland, stating, "overtime soars and it could surpass the $335-thousand spent in the two weeks after 9-11." What was your reaction when George Bush asked for $75 billion? Or when the Los Angeles Times reported that the final bill could top $1 trillion? Everything is just a matter of perspective.

For what it's worth, that's my reaction to your reporting of the effects of the war. I realize that I am probably not representative of your viewing audience--in fact, I never even watch your news station--but you asked for my reaction and you got it.

wow 08.Apr.2003 23:43


thiz on3 tim i wuz po0p1ng a h0le l4wt 4nd h3d tew w1pe my azz wif th3 OREGONIAN. th3n I becum a rupeblican. it sukk3d.

KATU 09.Apr.2003 00:20


I also sent a letter that i will paste below but first i would like to mention that Katu DID NOT post mine. I kept going back to check but instead saw posting after posting of pro war comments...many days later i emailed them again claiming how disgusted i was that they quite obviously were not posting many anti war sentiments to give a faulty impression that this war is mostly supported.
My letter which was also sent on march 27th was this:

I'd like to give a thumbs up to all the protestors out there that have dedicated themselves to a movement that is so controversial. I'd also like state that had people not spoken out in our own American history, had people stayed home and shut up we still may be a country that oppresses women's rights and still supports the slave trade. Our country's ideals were built on those that chose to speak out and those of us out there on the streets daily are not only protecting the rights of anti war demonstrators but also the rights of those that one day may oppose a decision of our government in the future. I think people need to stop and think and look back on history and examine what brought us to this place. I think that the people in power need to be more careful in foreign relations and what dictators they may support now but in 10 years may wage war against. I think it's important to realize this is bigger then America, bigger then Iraq. Its about the whole world. I think its also important to be aware of how this will effect countries surrounding Iraq in the middle east. It is no suprise that alot of Arabs are angered at the double standard America has created. That America will support the state of Israel is looked on as hypocrisy. Do you people know that the US has "cast its veto a total of 38 times to shield Israel from Council draft resolutions that condemned, deplored, denounced, affirmed, endorsed, called upon and urged Israel to obey world body?". Would it not make more sense to end Israeli support of its occupation of Palestine and gain Arab support in overthrowing Iraq's brutal dictator? Sure, this may take awhile but it is apparent that this ghastly war will not be the "shock and awe" that Mr. Bush has claimed. Rather it will be a grueling and bloody fight with rising opposition in the Middle East. I have seen many reports on corporate media stations such as this one that suggest that the people are not quite informed. Being a former resident of New York City and having family and friends in the surrounding area of the World Trade Center, I am amazed that when I see reports of people supporting the "War on Terror" that they consistantly name Saddam and the 9/11 attacks in the same sentance as being related to one another. I believe that it is YOUR job to convey to the people that their assumptions are just that...assumptions. Even our own intelligence has reported that there is no evidence to suggest that Iraq had any involvement in 9/11. It was supposed to be YOUR job in conveying that to the general public who obviously use no other source other then the corporate media to gather information. It is no secret that a major goal in Al-Queda and that of Bin Laden was to unite Islam against the globalization of the West...in fact, many terrorist groups are a direct action and REACTION against the globalization and westernization of Islam. I would now like to sarcastically thank Mr. Bush for doing exactly what Bin Laden had been trying to do for the past 12 years, in the space of just a few short months....uniting Islam against America. The perfect breeding ground and recruiting ground for terrorist organizations.

they didn't print mine, either 09.Apr.2003 00:48

Sadder But Wiser

They didn't print my letter, either, but I just assumed that it was because I told them that I didn't fit into their demographics because I don't watch their station. (I don't have a TV.)

I don't go to their web site anymore, either because it just infuriates me and why do that to myself?

This One's Worth a Look 09.Apr.2003 02:28


Found here:  http://www.katu.com/news/story.asp?ID=55683

Messages sent 04/08/03
Below is a February 1992 Pentagon draft of Defense Planning Guidance leaked to the press which describes itself as definitive guidance from the Secretary of Defense for budgetary policy out to the year 2000. It was written by Dick Cheney. The pentagon was absolutely FURIOUS that this got leaked and did everything possible to hush it up. For those of you who think it's not about oil...here it is right from Cheney's mouth.

"The US must hold global power and a monopoly of force. It will then protect the new order while allowing others to pursue their legitimate interests, as Washington defines them. The US must account sufficiently for the interests of the advanced industrial nations to discourage them from challenging our leadership or seeking to overturn the established political and economic order, or even aspiring to a larger regional or global role........ We will retain the pre-eminent responsibility for addressing selectively those wrongs which threaten not only our interests, but also those of our allies or friends; the United States alone will determine what are wrongs and when they are to be selectively righted. As in the past, the Middle East is a particular concern. Here our overall objective is to remain the predominant outside power in the region and preserve U.S. and Western access to the region's oil while deterring aggression (selectively), maintaining strategic control and regional stability (in the technical sense), and protecting U.S. nationals and property. "

If it's about Iraqi freedom, why did the US put Saddam in power in 1963 and stay his close ally right through his worst atrocities in the 1980s when he was gassing people? We knew exactly what was going on and Rumsfeld (then US envoy) was shaking Saddam's hand in 1988.

Do your own research instead of regurgitating what they tell you.

Mine posted immediately 09.Apr.2003 08:30


Mine was the one concerning the "Pentagon draft of Defense Planning Guidance". It posted like it was automated and there was no censorship. In the subject line of the email I wrote "My reaction to the war". By the way, the info about the Pentagon document was taken out of Chomsky's book "Year 501, The Conquest Continues". I removed a few lines about NATO and Cuba. Noam didn't print the whole document but I would really love to get my hands on it.

Keep posting! 09.Apr.2003 10:25


Keep posting on KATU! i was wary at first, but they are putting our comments uncensored on, even the ones with criticism of the corporate media (including mine). Right now, in the past two days, there have been more anti-war than pro-war posts. We need to keep it up. let them know what the amerikan public really thinks. It also really pisses off all those annoying "support bush or get the fuck out" people. Plus all our replies have been much more intelligent than theirs... no surprise. Wake up the Amerikan people! shake them out of their comfort zone! Unite*Resist

maybe they do read 09.Apr.2003 11:59


maybe they read the 2nd letter i sent critisizing them for not posting more anti war sentiments as there obviously were more (mine not being posted and all).
ah, well. maybe i will try again.

just to let you know 09.Apr.2003 12:51


katu posted my letter. i wrote yesterday, and just checked it seconds ago.
keep sending more letters.

Just Checked Link 09.Apr.2003 13:28

Tracy Bari

Not Functioning.