Response to CBS News

Dear CBS:

I don't know who was responsible for yesterday's "Eye on America," but
if their collective brains were gasoline, they couldn't power a
****ant's motorcycle around the inside of a Cheerio.

In addition to several blatantly wrong "facts" in your story, which
I'm sure you've heard about by now, there are many reasons that light
planes are not good platforms for terrorist attacks.

For example, you can't carry nearly as much explosive in a small plane
as you can in an SUV, and planes are much less convenient to use for
explosive delivery. There are several reasons for this:

1. More people can drive a car than can fly a light plane. I would
guess this applies to suicidal maniacs too.

2. It's easier to buy, borrow, rent, or steal a car than it is a light
plane.

3. You can park a car and blow it up on a timer. With an airplane
loaded with explosives, timing is a major problem. Modern high
explosives won't explode just from a plane crash. You would have to
set them off a split second before the plane crashed, or have some
kind of detonator that senses a crash and then sets off the explosive.

4. There's not enough fuel in a light plane to work like the airliners
did at the World Trade Towers or the Pentagon.

5. Airplanes are visible on radar. Cars aren't.

I could keep going. The fact is, a car or truck bomb is a lot easier
and more effective for a terrorist than a light plane. Maybe that's
why terrorists use car and truck bombs and rarely, if ever, have used
a light plane successfully.

To summarize, you guys really suck.

Love,

Bob

I sent my letter (minutes after watching program), but like yours better
"Bob" wrote in message
om...
Dear CBS:

I don't know who was responsible for yesterday's "Eye on America," but
if their collective brains were gasoline, they couldn't power a
****ant's motorcycle around the inside of a Cheerio.

In addition to several blatantly wrong "facts" in your story, which
I'm sure you've heard about by now, there are many reasons that light
planes are not good platforms for terrorist attacks.

For example, you can't carry nearly as much explosive in a small plane
as you can in an SUV, and planes are much less convenient to use for
explosive delivery. There are several reasons for this:

1. More people can drive a car than can fly a light plane. I would
guess this applies to suicidal maniacs too.

2. It's easier to buy, borrow, rent, or steal a car than it is a light
plane.

3. You can park a car and blow it up on a timer. With an airplane
loaded with explosives, timing is a major problem. Modern high
explosives won't explode just from a plane crash. You would have to
set them off a split second before the plane crashed, or have some
kind of detonator that senses a crash and then sets off the explosive.

4. There's not enough fuel in a light plane to work like the airliners
did at the World Trade Towers or the Pentagon.

5. Airplanes are visible on radar. Cars aren't.

I could keep going. The fact is, a car or truck bomb is a lot easier
and more effective for a terrorist than a light plane. Maybe that's
why terrorists use car and truck bombs and rarely, if ever, have used
a light plane successfully.

To summarize, you guys really suck.

Love,

Bob

To summarize, you guys really suck.

Best summary I've seen to date! ROFL!

FYI -- Andrew Hayward is the president of CBS News, his email address is

Casey, I tried sending an e-mail to Mr. Hayward using the link you provided
and my e-mail came back as undeliverable - "The recipient name is not
recognized" was the message.

Harry

"Casey Wilson" wrote in message
news
FYI -- Andrew Hayward is the president of CBS News, his email address is

In article
,
"Harry Gordon" wrote:

Casey, I tried sending an e-mail to Mr. Hayward using the link you provided
and my e-mail came back as undeliverable - "The recipient name is not
recognized" was the message.

Harry

"Casey Wilson" wrote in message
news
FYI -- Andrew Hayward is the president of CBS News, his email address is






It sounds as if his mailbox "overfloweth." AWWWWW! What a bunch of
sleaze buckets CBS News in proving to ne!

I'm suspecting they changed his e-mail address :-).

Harry

"Orval Fairbairn" wrote in message
news ...
In article
,
"Harry Gordon" wrote:

Casey, I tried sending an e-mail to Mr. Hayward using the link you
provided
and my e-mail came back as undeliverable - "The recipient name is not
recognized" was the message.

Harry

"Casey Wilson" wrote in message
news
FYI -- Andrew Hayward is the president of CBS News, his email address
is






It sounds as if his mailbox "overfloweth." AWWWWW! What a bunch of
sleaze buckets CBS News in proving to ne!

I don't know who was responsible for yesterday's "Eye on America,"

If you wanted credibility you should have known who did it. He gave his name at
the beginning and end of the report and it was shown on the screen, too.

If you want OTHER people to get their facts right...

"StellaStar" wrote in message
...
I don't know who was responsible for yesterday's "Eye on America,"

If you wanted credibility you should have known who did it. He gave his
name at
the beginning and end of the report and it was shown on the screen, too.

If you want OTHER people to get their facts right...

Actually, his producer (in concert with the editor) have as much impact, if
not more so, on a story than the actual on-camera reporter.

FWIW...

Jay Beckman
Chandler, AZ
Freelance TV Production Technician
Lurker on r.a.p.

My facts are correct. I don't know who's responsible; I don't remember
who was on the credits, and I suspect they are not the ones
responsible anyway.

Love,

Bob


(StellaStar) wrote in message ...
I don't know who was responsible for yesterday's "Eye on America,"

If you wanted credibility you should have known who did it. He gave his name at
the beginning and end of the report and it was shown on the screen, too.

If you want OTHER people to get their facts right...