Maybe I didn't make myself too clear. I have a bad habit of doing that.
In my post I was just alerting the subscribers to this list that the
program was scheduled. I have NOT seen it as yet. Neither have I
written anything to Discovery yet - because I haven't seen the show.
It appears, however,like you may have.
ROBERT
>The Discovery Channel is certainly responsible for their programming
>and its content, but in this case they are simply interviewing Capt.
>Scott O'Grady (and others). This interview consists of asking him
>about his experiences and HIS perception of those experiences. I don't
>think that TDC is endorsing such views.
CASEY
I would absolutely be the FIRST person to protect anyone's first
amendment rights, (unlike some of our xian friends), no matter how
much I personally disagreed with them. But I ALSO have first amendment
rights which allow me to express MY viewpoint if, upon viewing the
program, I disagree with the contents. I will have no problem with the
program if, when Mr. O'Grady makes claims about his omni-max spook-in-the-
sky, there are follow-up questions by Discovery that would indicate
responsible journalism. I am sick of watching atheletes, soldiers,
politicians, et al thanking god for everything from scoring touchdowns
to the economy and not one reporter that I have ever seen has the
guts to ask the tough questions when these ridiculus claims are being
made. That's all I ask. If they ask O'Grady WHY his god chose to save
him while at the same time allowed other pilots to die, etc., I will
have no problem whatsoever with the program.
Again, I apologize if I wasn't clear on this.
Chuck Casey
CASEY (5/31)
>This is just a quick off-topic notice that the Discovery Channel will
>be airing a program Sunday evening (6/1) at 09:00 pm edt called "Behind
>Enemy Lines: The Scott O'Grady Story". I've seen a couple of blurbs
>about the show and it looks as if we are going to be told once again,to
>the point of sickness, how god saved O'Grady, (but continues to let a lot
>of other soldiers in similar situations die - god's will I guess).
>
>For the most part I really enjoy the programing on Discovery but this
>appears to be a lot of "thanking god" on O'Grady's part. Obviously I
>haven't seen the show and must confess that I do not know to what
>degree O'Grady's b.s. will be pushed down our throats. But in
>expecting the worse, I already have Discovery's e-mail address
>bookmarked, (viewer_relations@discovery.com), so I can express my
>displeasure if the program turns out to be as bad as I fear.
>
>BTW, Farrell wrote an excellent piece on O'Grady called "God, Captain
>Scott O'Grady, and the Atlanta Braves" in the Jan/Feb 1996 issue of *TSR*.
SQUIRES (5/31)
>As you said it's "O'Grady's b.s.", so why take "The Discovery Channel" to
>task? I too find it unfortunate that Capt. O'Grady holds such ridiculous
>opinions, but he is certainly entitled to them. The Discovery Channel is
>certainly responsible for their programming and its content, but in this
>case they are simply interviewing Capt. Scott O'Grady (and others). This
>interview consists of asking him about his experiences and HIS perception
>of those experiences. I don't think that TDC is endorsing such views. To
>come out and tell TDC that they shouldn't have aired the program because it
>contains opinions that one doesn't agree with (or finds ridiculous) doesn't
>sound too open-minded or 1st Amendment loving to me. The way I see it,
>Scott O'Grady is the problem, not The Discovery Channel. As a former
>Marine, I never liked Air Force pukes anyway.
Rob Squires
r-squires@worldnet.att.net