Last night, while briefly listening to what I guess was the Armed Forces
Network, (In the 7 MHz range, USB), they were certainly espousing
cheerful topics. At first, they mentioned the importance of military
families concerning their need to relocate to new neighborhoods, and
saying that the current residents should heartily welcome the new family.
(I have no problems with this, but I do believe that welcomes should not
be limited to military families).

Shortly after, they went into the issue of being prepared. (OK, everybody
should be prepared.) But their idea of being prepared was making sure
that life insurance paperwork be kept at hand, that so called medical
directives were prepared, and God knows what else. Still a sound idea,
yet this is not the topic that most people wish to dwell on when their
sons and daughters, husbands and wives, are fighting on foreign soil.

Another time that I had caught a show on the AFN, they were discussing
the Terry Schiavo debacle. The problem is that the host explicitly stated
how Terry's fight was not a moral issue, simply one of the right of her
husband to carry out her desires against her life being artificially
extended. To my recollection, the case wasn't that simple, and for the
AFN host to paint it so is shameful. It seems to me that the AFN is
trying to steer the opinion of their listeners into life decisions that
benefit the military more than the individuals themselves. After all,
why keep a wounded soldier alive when it is much more economical to allow
him/her to die, honoring, in some cases, the misguided views of the
family.

I have no issue with the soldiers in the U.S. military, and the hardships
that they and their families have had foisted on them in this current
situation with Afghanistan and Iraq, but the AFN is not exactly the
cheeriest show that I have overheard. An at times buoyantly themed show
with frequent death themes is sure to cheer all. Way to go AFN.

In anticipation of some comments to my post, if any, I offer the
following:

1. Yes yes, the realities of war.
2. Yes yes, the realities of life.
3. Yes yes, the realities of death.

It still doesn't require frequent macabre themes on the AFN.

Dr. Artaud

"€ Dr. Artaud €" wrote:

Last night, while briefly listening to what I guess was the Armed Forces
Network, (In the 7 MHz range, USB), they were certainly espousing
cheerful topics. At first, they mentioned the importance of military
families concerning their need to relocate to new neighborhoods, and
saying that the current residents should heartily welcome the new family.
(I have no problems with this, but I do believe that welcomes should not
be limited to military families).

Shortly after, they went into the issue of being prepared. (OK, everybody
should be prepared.) But their idea of being prepared was making sure
that life insurance paperwork be kept at hand, that so called medical
directives were prepared, and God knows what else. Still a sound idea,
yet this is not the topic that most people wish to dwell on when their
sons and daughters, husbands and wives, are fighting on foreign soil.

Another time that I had caught a show on the AFN, they were discussing
the Terry Schiavo debacle. The problem is that the host explicitly stated
how Terry's fight was not a moral issue, simply one of the right of her
husband to carry out her desires against her life being artificially
extended. To my recollection, the case wasn't that simple, and for the
AFN host to paint it so is shameful. It seems to me that the AFN is
trying to steer the opinion of their listeners into life decisions that
benefit the military more than the individuals themselves. After all,
why keep a wounded soldier alive when it is much more economical to allow
him/her to die, honoring, in some cases, the misguided views of the
family.

I have no issue with the soldiers in the U.S. military, and the hardships
that they and their families have had foisted on them in this current
situation with Afghanistan and Iraq, but the AFN is not exactly the
cheeriest show that I have overheard. An at times buoyantly themed show
with frequent death themes is sure to cheer all. Way to go AFN.

In anticipation of some comments to my post, if any, I offer the
following:

1. Yes yes, the realities of war.
2. Yes yes, the realities of life.
3. Yes yes, the realities of death.

It still doesn't require frequent macabre themes on the AFN.

Kinda like the CBC trying to paint a cheery picture of life in CanaDuh.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

"€ Dr. Artaud €" wrote:

Last night, while briefly listening to what I guess was the Armed Forces
Network, (In the 7 MHz range, USB), they were certainly espousing
cheerful topics. At first, they mentioned the importance of military
families concerning their need to relocate to new neighborhoods, and
saying that the current residents should heartily welcome the new family.
(I have no problems with this, but I do believe that welcomes should not
be limited to military families).

Shortly after, they went into the issue of being prepared. (OK, everybody
should be prepared.) But their idea of being prepared was making sure
that life insurance paperwork be kept at hand, that so called medical
directives were prepared, and God knows what else. Still a sound idea,
yet this is not the topic that most people wish to dwell on when their
sons and daughters, husbands and wives, are fighting on foreign soil.

Another time that I had caught a show on the AFN, they were discussing
the Terry Schiavo debacle. The problem is that the host explicitly stated
how Terry's fight was not a moral issue, simply one of the right of her
husband to carry out her desires against her life being artificially
extended. To my recollection, the case wasn't that simple, and for the
AFN host to paint it so is shameful. It seems to me that the AFN is
trying to steer the opinion of their listeners into life decisions that
benefit the military more than the individuals themselves. After all,
why keep a wounded soldier alive when it is much more economical to allow
him/her to die, honoring, in some cases, the misguided views of the
family.

I have no issue with the soldiers in the U.S. military, and the hardships
that they and their families have had foisted on them in this current
situation with Afghanistan and Iraq, but the AFN is not exactly the
cheeriest show that I have overheard. An at times buoyantly themed show
with frequent death themes is sure to cheer all. Way to go AFN.

In anticipation of some comments to my post, if any, I offer the
following:

1. Yes yes, the realities of war.
2. Yes yes, the realities of life.
3. Yes yes, the realities of death.

It still doesn't require frequent macabre themes on the AFN.

Being in the military does often force one to face up to the realities of life.

You should try it!

dxAce
Michigan
USA

"€ Dr. Artaud €" wrote:

Last night, while briefly listening to what I guess was the Armed Forces
Network, (In the 7 MHz range, USB), they were certainly espousing
cheerful topics. At first, they mentioned the importance of military
families concerning their need to relocate to new neighborhoods, and
saying that the current residents should heartily welcome the new family.
(I have no problems with this, but I do believe that welcomes should not
be limited to military families).

Shortly after, they went into the issue of being prepared. (OK, everybody
should be prepared.) But their idea of being prepared was making sure
that life insurance paperwork be kept at hand, that so called medical
directives were prepared, and God knows what else. Still a sound idea,
yet this is not the topic that most people wish to dwell on when their
sons and daughters, husbands and wives, are fighting on foreign soil.

Another time that I had caught a show on the AFN, they were discussing
the Terry Schiavo debacle. The problem is that the host explicitly stated
how Terry's fight was not a moral issue, simply one of the right of her
husband to carry out her desires against her life being artificially
extended. To my recollection, the case wasn't that simple, and for the
AFN host to paint it so is shameful. It seems to me that the AFN is
trying to steer the opinion of their listeners into life decisions that
benefit the military more than the individuals themselves. After all,
why keep a wounded soldier alive when it is much more economical to allow
him/her to die, honoring, in some cases, the misguided views of the
family.

I have no issue with the soldiers in the U.S. military, and the hardships
that they and their families have had foisted on them in this current
situation with Afghanistan and Iraq, but the AFN is not exactly the
cheeriest show that I have overheard. An at times buoyantly themed show
with frequent death themes is sure to cheer all. Way to go AFN.

In anticipation of some comments to my post, if any, I offer the
following:

1. Yes yes, the realities of war.
2. Yes yes, the realities of life.
3. Yes yes, the realities of death.

It still doesn't require frequent macabre themes on the AFN.

Further whining can be directed he

http://myafn.net/contact_us.asp

dxAce
Michigan
USA

dxAce wrote in
:


Just as with whining cops (all cops aren't whiners), there are indeed
jobs in the private sector that represent substantial risk to the
individuals performing them. None, I believe, would represent the level
that many in the military are exposed to, but some are certainly far
beyond the risk that cops are. If you don't want the risks, don't join
the military or the police force. Of course the draft will alter this
principle.

Also, I don't believe that our soldiers should be:

1. In Iraq or any of the Mid East.
2. In Asia, Europe, Africa, etc. etc. etc.
3. Used as the police force of the world.
4. Commanded in any way by the U.N.

Too many people are dying for amorphous ideals. (hint: "Ideal" is a NWO
word for egregious profits for a limited number of entitled companies).

What other nations are willing to sacrifice the lives of their own
citizens for the benefit of other countries? How many Vietnams do we need
to suffer through?

Those of you willing to send our own people to die in a foreign nation,
allegedly to help those in need, are you willing to travel to a crime
plagued city near you and risk your life helping others, or do you
believe in keeping yourself aloof from these problems?

My deep respect for those honorable men and women (most of the Troops I'm
sure) in the U.S. military that have lived their lives and performed
their military tasks as ethically and as morally as possible. I have no
respect for rapists, murders, thieves, and some of the other reprobates
that exploit the people in conquered lands for their own (the reprobates)
gain, amusement, pleasures, etc.

Regards,

Dr. Artaud


Being in the military does often force one to face up to the realities
of life.

You should try it!

dxAce
Michigan
USA

"? Dr. Artaud ?" wrote in message
...
commentaries on AFN
Dr. Artaud

AFN doesn't (as far as I have heard) have their own commentators. They have
limited news offereings of their own.

Most of what they carry is contracted sources from stateside networks,
predominantly FOX news. They do carry news from the three major networks on
television, however, their primary source of news on television is Fox News.
Their news programming is definately skewed to the right (Rush, Dr. Laura,
Sean Hannity, Paul Harvey, et. al.) with some PBS (Jim McNiel, et. al.)
thrown in.

Most of the public service spots are also borrowed from commercial radio/TV,
with a few exceptions. One of the ones I least agree with is one where the
troops are advised how to decrease their chances of becoming victims of a
terrorist attack on public transportation (don't take this wrong, I think
force protection is very important). The spot encourages them to sit on the
inside seats on a bus or train, and the window and center seats on an
airplane. My problem with this approach is that it makes our troops look
like they are using civilians as shields..

"Brenda Ann" wrote in
:


Possibly then the comment about Terry Shiavo was in fact a news segment
from Fox or elsewhere. I realize that the case was emotional for many
people on both sides of the aisle, what I most disliked about the segment
was the characterization of the situation as being "simply an issue of".

Regards,

Dr. Artaud

AFN doesn't (as far as I have heard) have their own commentators. They
have limited news offereings of their own.

"€ Dr. Artaud €" wrote in
Also, I don't believe that our soldiers should be:

1. In Iraq or any of the Mid East.
2. In Asia, Europe, Africa, etc. etc. etc.
3. Used as the police force of the world.
4. Commanded in any way by the U.N.

Too many people are dying for amorphous ideals. (hint: "Ideal" is a NWO


The most unbelievable thing is that Bush will send men all the way to Iraq
to fight the terrorists and protect us from them. But, on our own soil, he
leaves the border wide open for ANYONE to enter into our country undetected.
They could be terrorists, illegals with bad intentions and unchecked
diseases, allowed to just walt in.

Not to mention the TONS of drugs that come into the country. These soldiers
should refuse to comply with orders for making fools out of them and the
U.S. citizens of this country. While these soldiers are fighting terrorists
in Iraq, their own wives, children and parents are not protected at all.
Anyone can cross the border and so whatever they please.

He is treating the Mexicans better then his own people. We gave a illegal
trespasser a chance and job, so in return he strangled the life out of a
N.Y. woman who hired the company. The family is now left with no mother, no
wife, all for nothing. He even taunted the family members that called her
house in concern after he killed her. This was a couple weeks ago.

Last week a trespasser shot two police officers and killed one. All for
being asked to leave a baptismal party where he was acting drunk. So, tell
me, when will Bush do anything? When people finally die from someone
crossing the border and blowing us up? He has sold out this country for the
Latin vote. That means all he cares about is being voted back in even if
means SELLING OUT THE COUNTRY AND US.

This administration needs to be booted out of office. We need the military
and police to help in this. They are making
fools out of the poor soldiers that die for him in Iraq, and the narcotics
officers that die trying to fight drugs dealers and gangs in this country.
Yeah, bush is sure concerned about protecting us.

This administration can't even protect themseves. A plane get within 3
miles of the White House and Bush is not even informed about it. Very good.
I feel real safe from terrorists and any POS that wants to wander into the
U.S., screw like an animal and have 3 babies,
then use our medical services, welfare system and add billions to our
deficit while their babies become automatic citizens of this countires that
must be supported.

So AFN being off tune is the least of our troubles. Hopefully they are
thinking for themselves now.

Lucky


word for egregious profits for a limited number of entitled companies).

What other nations are willing to sacrifice the lives of their own
citizens for the benefit of other countries? How many Vietnams do we need
to suffer through?

Those of you willing to send our own people to die in a foreign nation,
allegedly to help those in need, are you willing to travel to a crime
plagued city near you and risk your life helping others, or do you
believe in keeping yourself aloof from these problems?

My deep respect for those honorable men and women (most of the Troops I'm
sure) in the U.S. military that have lived their lives and performed
their military tasks as ethically and as morally as possible. I have no
respect for rapists, murders, thieves, and some of the other reprobates
that exploit the people in conquered lands for their own (the reprobates)
gain, amusement, pleasures, etc.

Regards,

Dr. Artaud


Being in the military does often force one to face up to the realities
of life.

You should try it!

dxAce
Michigan
USA

Lucky wrote:

"€ Dr. Artaud €" wrote in
Also, I don't believe that our soldiers should be:

1. In Iraq or any of the Mid East.
2. In Asia, Europe, Africa, etc. etc. etc.
3. Used as the police force of the world.
4. Commanded in any way by the U.N.

Too many people are dying for amorphous ideals. (hint: "Ideal" is a NWO

The most unbelievable thing is that Bush will send men all the way to Iraq
to fight the terrorists and protect us from them. But, on our own soil, he
leaves the border wide open for ANYONE to enter into our country undetected.
They could be terrorists, illegals with bad intentions and unchecked
diseases, allowed to just walt in.

Not to mention the TONS of drugs that come into the country. These soldiers
should refuse to comply with orders for making fools out of them and the
U.S. citizens of this country. While these soldiers are fighting terrorists
in Iraq, their own wives, children and parents are not protected at all.
Anyone can cross the border and so whatever they please.

He is treating the Mexicans better then his own people. We gave a illegal
trespasser a chance and job, so in return he strangled the life out of a
N.Y. woman who hired the company. The family is now left with no mother, no
wife, all for nothing. He even taunted the family members that called her
house in concern after he killed her. This was a couple weeks ago.

Last week a trespasser shot two police officers and killed one. All for
being asked to leave a baptismal party where he was acting drunk. So, tell
me, when will Bush do anything? When people finally die from someone
crossing the border and blowing us up? He has sold out this country for the
Latin vote. That means all he cares about is being voted back in even if
means SELLING OUT THE COUNTRY AND US.

This administration needs to be booted out of office. We need the military
and police to help in this. They are making
fools out of the poor soldiers that die for him in Iraq, and the narcotics
officers that die trying to fight drugs dealers and gangs in this country.
Yeah, bush is sure concerned about protecting us.

This administration can't even protect themseves. A plane get within 3
miles of the White House and Bush is not even informed about it. Very good.
I feel real safe from terrorists and any POS that wants to wander into the
U.S., screw like an animal and have 3 babies,
then use our medical services, welfare system and add billions to our
deficit while their babies become automatic citizens of this countires that
must be supported.

So AFN being off tune is the least of our troubles. Hopefully they are
thinking for themselves now.

Please try to pay attention... the Democrats sold us out for the Latino vote as
well.

Now please, try to find a radio, turn it on, and actually try to listen to what
is being said.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

On Sat, 21 May 2005 13:31:33 -0000, "€ Dr. Artaud €"
wrote:

Last night, while briefly listening to what I guess was the Armed Forces
Network, (In the 7 MHz range, USB), they were certainly espousing
cheerful topics. At first, they mentioned the importance of military
families concerning their need to relocate to new neighborhoods, and
saying that the current residents should heartily welcome the new family.
(I have no problems with this, but I do believe that welcomes should not
be limited to military families).

Shortly after, they went into the issue of being prepared. (OK, everybody
should be prepared.) But their idea of being prepared was making sure
that life insurance paperwork be kept at hand, that so called medical
directives were prepared, and God knows what else. Still a sound idea,
yet this is not the topic that most people wish to dwell on when their
sons and daughters, husbands and wives, are fighting on foreign soil.

Another time that I had caught a show on the AFN, they were discussing
the Terry Schiavo debacle. The problem is that the host explicitly stated
how Terry's fight was not a moral issue, simply one of the right of her
husband to carry out her desires against her life being artificially
extended. To my recollection, the case wasn't that simple, and for the
AFN host to paint it so is shameful. It seems to me that the AFN is
trying to steer the opinion of their listeners into life decisions that
benefit the military more than the individuals themselves. After all,
why keep a wounded soldier alive when it is much more economical to allow
him/her to die, honoring, in some cases, the misguided views of the
family.

I have no issue with the soldiers in the U.S. military, and the hardships
that they and their families have had foisted on them in this current
situation with Afghanistan and Iraq, but the AFN is not exactly the
cheeriest show that I have overheard. An at times buoyantly themed show
with frequent death themes is sure to cheer all. Way to go AFN.

In anticipation of some comments to my post, if any, I offer the
following:

1. Yes yes, the realities of war.
2. Yes yes, the realities of life.
3. Yes yes, the realities of death.

It still doesn't require frequent macabre themes on the AFN.

Dr. Artaud


Sir:

I think you miss the point of AFN. It is for and by military members.
It was not intended for the civilians to listen to, nor does it cater
to them with the exception of government civilians and dependents.
The PSAs that AFN runs are intended for the military under military
scenarios.

The welcome desired from current residents was for military
communities on bases in the US and OCONUS. Does not the CFBS or the
BFBS provide the same programming? From my service time with the
military, I have found that they do.

You need to realize that AFN is not out to entertain *you.*

Drive through please.

Al in CNMI
ASA Lives!

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----