>Tell me I've read this incorrectly. You don't mean thats it is SUBJECTIVE that over 6000 Americans have died at the hands of these mis-guided youths, I mean egg sucking dogs.

No, it happens to be a matter of fact what happened on Sept 11. However, defending America's reaction (bomibing in Afganastan) is subjective (I think we are doin the right thing, BTW).

Its simply good reporting to report the facts, not claim who is right and wrong in the world. If there was TV in Afganastan, do you think all the news anchors would be trashing the US and praising the Taliben? Would that be considered bad journalism, but if they were supportive of America, it would be fine?

I'm simply saying that because they are not showing sides, there is no reason to boycott the channel. They offer alot of good programming, and I'm pretty sure they're not banning flags because they support the terrorists. Thats just ridculous and un-American to assume so. I find it more and more alarming these days that people are making these sort of irrational requests that could make or break products and services when the economy is already about to get a swirlie. Everyone's got to do their part, and demanding that news programs include American Flags is not it. JMO.