TV Ads Say S.U.V. Owners Support Terrorists

[Craig]

TV Ads Say S.U.V. Owners Support Terrorists
By KATHARINE Q. SEELYE

WASHINGTON, Jan. 7 — Ratcheting up the debate over sport utility vehicles, new television commercials suggest that people who buy the vehicles are supporting terrorists. The commercials are so provocative that some television stations are refusing to run them.

Patterned after the commercials that try to discourage drug use by suggesting that profits from illegal drugs go to terrorists, the new commercials say that money for gas needed for S.U.V.'s goes to terrorists.

"This is George," a girl's voice says of an oblivious man at a gas station. "This is the gas that George bought for his S.U.V." The screen then shows a map of the Middle East. "These are the countries where the executives bought the oil that made the gas that George bought for his S.U.V." The picture switches to a scene of armed terrorists in a desert. "And these are the terrorists who get money from those countries every time George fills up his S.U.V."

A second commercial depicts a series of ordinary Americans saying things like: "I helped hijack an airplane"; "I gave money to a terrorist training camp in a foreign country"; "What if I need to go off-road?"

At the close, the screen is filled with the words: "What is your S.U.V. doing to our national security?"

The two 30-second commercials are the brainchild of the author and columnist Arianna Huffington. Her target audience, she said, is Detroit and Congress, especially the Republicans and Democrats who last year voted against a bill, sponsored by Senators John McCain, Republican of Arizona, and John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts, that would have raised fuel-efficiency standards.

Spokesmen for the automakers dismissed the commercials.

Eron Shosteck, a spokesman for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, said of Ms. Huffington, "Her opinion is out-voted every year by Americans who buy S.U.V.'s for their safety, comfort and versatility." He said that S.U.V.'s now account for 21 percent of the market.

In an interview, Senator Kerry distanced himself from the commercials. He said that rather than oppose S.U.V.'s outright, he believed they should be more efficient.

"I haven't seen these commercials," he said, "but anybody can drive as large an S.U.V. as they want, though it can be more efficient than it is today."

Ms. Huffington's group, which calls itself the Detroit Project, has bought almost $200,000 of air time for the commercials, to run from Sunday to Thursday. While the group may lose some viewers if stations refuse to run the advertisements, the message is attracting attention through news coverage.

The advertisements are to be broadcast on "Meet The Press," "Face the Nation" and "This Week With George Stephanopoulos" in Detroit, Los Angeles, New York and Washington.

But some local affiliates say they will not run them. At the ABC affiliate in New York, Art Moore, director of programming, said, "There were a lot of statements being made that were not backed up, and they're talking about hot-button issues."

Ms. Huffington said she got the idea for the commercials while watching the antidrug commercials, sponsored by the Bush administration. In her syndicated column, she asked readers if they would be willing to pay for "a people's ad campaign to jolt our leaders into reality."

She said she received 5,000 e-mail messages and eventually raised $50,000 from the public. Bigger contributors included Steve Bing, the film producer; Larry David, the comedian and "Seinfeld" co-creator; and Norman Lear, the television producer.

New York Times Link (http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/08/business/media/08SUVS.html?ex=1042693200&en=4c65574ab6ffe612&ei=5006&partner=ALTAVISTA1)

[Jenny]

Ugh... why are they trying to make innocent people with SUV's [like my parents] feel guilty about this..? Everything is connected so of course everything we do is in a way, supporting terrorism. If they want to go as far as blame SUV owners, then they need to blame the companies that made them.

[rakovlam]

Okay, the gas we buy is not from Al-Qaeda or Hamas. I get my gas from Exxon-Mobil, Texaco, or BP-Amoco. Maybe the countries we get our oil have ties to terrorists (cough cough Saudi Arabia). These enviromentalists are running out of ideas to support their anti-productivity campaign. I should run these enviro-fascists (Enviromental Liberation Front for example) over with my Escalade.

As for the drug ads, if they're not profiting terrorists then they are most definitely criminals. Who wants to defend criminals (other than trial lawyers)?

[pfc beansprout]

ummm..not that i support it..but here's an example.....


http://www.boomspeed.com/minhnlee/move.jpg





-it's surprisingly got a following.....

[angel nympho]

That's so lame. There's other places we can get oil, by the way. So really, why is it the fault of the citizens? It's the fucking government who insists on drilling for oil in the Middle East. Didn't anybody ever tell them that there's tons of oil in Alaska?

[wylin]

Originally posted by rakovlam@Jan 8 2003, 02:17 PM
Okay, the gas we buy is not from Al-Qaeda or Hamas. I get my gas from Exxon-Mobil, Texaco, or BP-Amoco. Maybe the countries we get our oil have ties to terrorists (cough cough Saudi Arabia). These enviromentalists are running out of ideas to support their anti-productivity campaign. I should run these enviro-fascists (Enviromental Liberation Front for example) over with my Escalade.

As for the drug ads, if they're not profiting terrorists then they are most definitely criminals. Who wants to defend criminals (other than trial lawyers)?
exactly screw those eco-freak and their tree hugging crap. Let us polute all we want and drive watever car my salary buys me. Screw emissions controls special smog fo life! jk

seriously tho those adds should be a targeted at anyone who drives a truck, suv, sports car, sedan, luxo car because all those waste fuel. compared to the ecoboxs that these treehuggers want us to drive. Dude my 240sx gets gas mileage equivalent to those SUV on boost. i get 13-20mpg city and 16-25 highway. just like a ford exploror. :P

[MellowDrama]

Props to Ms. Huffington.

OK, terror econ 101, Afghanistan warlords sell opium (poppy) to drug syndicates and use the proceeds to fund Al Qaida.

Arab princes sell oil to Exxon and use the proceeds to send to Al Qaida.

That's pretty much it.

[pfc beansprout]

Originally posted by angel nympho@Jan 8 2003, 06:28 PM
That's so lame.  There's other places we can get oil, by the way.  So really, why is it the fault of the citizens?  It's the fucking government who insists on drilling for oil in the Middle East.  Didn't anybody ever tell them that there's tons of oil in Alaska?
:D I got another pic for ya....

<img src='http://www.boomspeed.com/minhnlee/pipeline-ap300.jpg[/img]



-now i'm not a tree hugger...but i don't necessarily agree w/the drilling of alaska....i think we need to develop better less oil/gas reliant cars-which i see they are starting (i think) to....

[TyroneK(prettypretty)]

No one's innocent. The state of the world is the fault of everyone who chooses to live in it. We all have some kind of influence over the way it works, even if it is a tiny one.

I agree with Subcommandante Beansprout. We need to make the move away from fossil fuels and start using the brainpower and science at our disposal. We'll have to do it anyways. Might as well do it now. Even if we don't, there are ways of increasing fuel efficiency without sacrificing performance. Let's impose some incentives, dammit.

[angel nympho]

Originally posted by pfc beansprout@Jan 9 2003, 02:19 AM
:D I got another pic for ya....

<img src='http://www.boomspeed.com/minhnlee/pipeline-ap300.jpg[/img]



-now i'm not a tree hugger...but i don't necessarily agree w/the drilling of alaska....i think we need to develop better less oil/gas reliant cars-which i see they are starting (i think) to....
Oh don't get me wrong. I definately don't agree with drilling in Alaska. I heard that if they drill too much, Alaska could like, literally detatch and cease to exist. But I'm just saying that there are other options, ya know? It's not the CONSUMER's decision where the oil is getting drilled from and who gets to profit off it. 'Cuz technically, we, as consumers, aren't really given much of an option. We HAVE to buy gas. And technically what those ads are saying is that we SHOULDN'T. And even if I'm just buying, like, 13 gallons to fill up my damn Honda, according to those ads, I'm supporting terrorists just as much as an SUV owner. So really, what's the point of these stupid attacks?

I think we should try to drill less entirely. Find another way. I was listening to something on the radio where they were discussing other combustables that could be used as alternatives. Given they may not be as efficient, but at least it'll be better for the USA to become more self-sufficient.

[BeTheReds]

What needs to be done to make the USA more self sufficient is for people to move back into the cities, living closer to the places where they work. None of this suburban beltway culture.

Next we need trains in all cities, and high speed train lines connecting the cities.

We need to create an environment where cars are unnecessary to get around.

I like driving as much as the next guy, but there are only 45 years left before we use all the oil up. The time has come to conserve, or to decrease the population somehow.

[LoneSwordsman]

Originally posted by pfc beansprout@Jan 9 2003, 01:19 PM
-now i'm not a tree hugger...but i don't necessarily agree w/the drilling of alaska....i think we need to develop better less oil/gas reliant cars-which i see they are starting (i think) to....
i heard a rumored that big oil companies did a buyout of the patents for less oil reliant cars.....

[pfc beansprout]

Originally posted by LoneSwordsman@Jan 9 2003, 04:57 AM
i heard a rumored that big oil companies did a buyout of the patents for less oil reliant cars.....
yeah..i've heard that too..also heard that big oil companies pressure/lobby the government in making the requirements for hybrid cars so difficult and unprofitable, many companies don't bother..... <_<

[Arex]

While I'm definitely no fan of SUVs, I think these commercials are retarded for the very same reason that the similar anti-drug commercials are retarded. I'm tired of people leveraging their positions by making tenuous pleas to people's paranoia regarding terrorism (Bush being the biggest offender).

The actual point to be made is that SUVs are notorious gas guzzlers and that we as a nation need to be more conscientious consumers of fossil fuels PERIOD. Forget the lame-ass terrorist connection; that's just post 9/11 propoganda that dimishes the credibility of both the speaker and the message IMHO.

Alex

[VV o n g B a]

Originally posted by angel nympho@Jan 8 2003, 05:28 PM
That's so lame. &nbsp;There's other places we can get oil, by the way. &nbsp;So really, why is it the fault of the citizens? &nbsp;It's the fucking government who insists on drilling for oil in the Middle East. &nbsp;Didn't anybody ever tell them that there's tons of oil in Alaska?
actually, not much of US oil actually comes from countries in the middle east. most US oil comes from venezuala. the problem is that oil is a world commodity. no matter where u get the oil from, its the largest producers of oil that have the most control over prices. since OPEC sets production quotas, it basically determines where oil is drilled. if saudi arabia wanted to keep the US from drilling somewhere (say texas or alaska), it would only have to ramp up its unused capacity. the saudi's alone have enough unused capacity to bring oil prices down in the world to a level where it doesn't make economic sense to drill anymore in those areas. THAT's why the US has to work with the middle eastern countries. its just too damn expensive to drill in cold as hell places or in the deep sea.

the only way to lessen dependence is to switch to another fuel source.

bush's reason for drilling in anwar is strictly politics. he's out to please his oil industry friends.

[wylin]

we need nuclear fusion and compact nuclear fusion powerplants in our cars and machines. immagine not having to refuel for 15 years and having planes the size of fighter jets never have to refuel for 5 yrs.

[VV o n g B a]

Originally posted by wylin@Jan 9 2003, 10:42 AM
we need nuclear fusion and compact nuclear fusion powerplants in our cars and machines. immagine not having to refuel for 15 years and having planes the size of fighter jets never have to refuel for 5 yrs.
that would be ideal. unless we had terrorists that is. :P

[wylin]

Originally posted by pfc beansprout@Jan 9 2003, 05:12 AM
yeah..i've heard that too..also heard that big oil companies pressure/lobby the government in making the requirements for hybrid cars so difficult and unprofitable, many companies don't bother..... <_<
no its the battery technology on hybrid/ electric cars that make them expensive....it costs more to make them then the automakers can sell them for, thus the automakers like honda/ bmw. mercedes (dailmer chrysler) said fuck it and are pursueing fuel cell technology instead. Toyota/ Nissan/ ford/ gm have fielded hybrid and fully electric vehicles in california...but really who wats a 3000lb civic that has 80hp, for 20 grand when they can have a 160hp accord or 227 hp WRX for the same price. america is still embroiled in the more is better and hot rod culture of more power is good, and they will not adopt any sweeping electric or hybrid car initiatives.

Again we should be researching fusion...we need a power source that is very long lasting and doesnt damage the environment....fusion waste is water and hydrogen.

[wylin]

Originally posted by VV o n g B a@Jan 9 2003, 08:46 AM
that would be ideal. unless we had terrorists that is. :P
a fusion engine technically would just cease to work once the reactions is stopped, least in the case of coldfusion (fusion w/o a primary fission explosion) technically a gas powered car is more unsafe because it can explode. if the fusionable elements are damaged or spilled they wouldnt be much more charged hydrogen ions and water the theoretical fuel and waste of the "cold" fusion process

[VV o n g B a]

well, since cold fusion is still unproven (isn't it?) the point is moot.

[wylin]

yeh but people are trying to develope it as a alternative fuel source, at the same time they havent been able to control the hot fusion reaction and harness it in a reactor type situation but hey we can dream!

for now i will be burning 91-92 octane premium petrol, and boosting my turbocharged car all day because we live in the good times and we gotta live it up. Right now gas is cheap i pay 1.65 a gallon for premium fuel....and man thats a deal to me!

[pfc beansprout]

wow...this stuff got over me...~scratchin head~ :P glad to hear it though..not much attn given to the issue! :P

[thaite]

So the gas that I buy to fill up my 4Runner is somehow different from the gas someone else buys to fill up their VW Golf?

Wow.

[nudel]

i bought the honda insight 2 years ago and it has been serving me well. i don't care what people drive. for me i don't care to pay a lot for gas and i love that i can get to denver on almost one and quarter tank of gas, i just like to drive and to travel. better to spend the extra gas money on things to do when i arrive to my destination. the insurance is a bit higher though. also its all aluminum, so its getting trashed on the street. i've heard the battery if needed to be replaced will cost 2 grand. the tech is already better than 2 years ago. they are now cheaper and smaller. i hear the new japanese insights now have a third seat because of the smaller battery. its not the fastest (0-60) in ten seconds but i've had it going about 95 mph, not to the floor and no shakes and shimmies, very smooth. i highly recommend picking one up. oh, and the chicks dig it.

[wylin]

for the price of an insight u can have honda's other engineering marvel the S2000 it revs to 9000rpm and consumes 16-24mpg depending how you drive most owners typically get bout 18mpg average and yes that bellow the 20-26 posted epa mileage cuz the epa drives like pansies. I'd rather have an S2000 over an insight or even an RSX-type S because to me speed matters more then gas mileage. :(

[TyroneK(prettypretty)]

I'd prefer a car that runs on dilithium crystals.

[Hito]

There was a conversation with reporter Keith Bradsher and the co-founder of the anti-S.U.V. ad campaign at www.democracynow.org
you can download the audio of the program here http://stream.paranode.com/democracynow/dn...dn2003-0109.mp3 (http://stream.paranode.com/democracynow/dn2003-0109.mp3)


The way i see it is this.
The Wright brothers took there first flight around 1903 and by 1969 we were walking on the moon & breaking the sound barrier that is just 66 years.

the internal combustion was invented around 1860 it is now a full 143 years later and we havent come up with a alternate means of powering vehicles.

[Hanuman]

Arrrghh. Again with the SUV bashing. All I can say is after the snow we've been getting here, I've never been happier with my SUV. Why don't they make ads against sports cars? I'm sure they aren't environmentally safe. :angry:

[wylin]

Originally posted by Tawee@Jan 10 2003, 07:55 PM
Arrrghh. Again with the SUV bashing. All I can say is after the snow we've been getting here, I've never been happier with my SUV. Why don't they make ads against sports cars? I'm sure they aren't environmentally safe. :angry:
exactly come and try to take away my petrol burning speed machine. u know why they dont because sports cars are the steeds of nobles and the real car enthusiasts! :!

[Fireblade]

We just need an alternative fuel to help us go around. Shit, if we can power rockets to go to space, I'm damn sure we can make a car that can run on water. It's just that the market for it isn't great enough, and no one likes drastic change. *Shrug* I say, develop water powered cars, jets, etc, etc.

Or we should build transporters like in Star Trek. Just teleport your ass to where you want, and there you go. So I could be like in H.K. in one second from S.F., instead of riding a 12 hour plane ride there.

[nudel]

does anyone know what this hydrogen technology is about. does it have to be in liquid form. if it does, its a load of crap. i have to liquify helium, its a bit colder than hydrogen, close enough though. the energy it takes to liquefy is tremendous. if your not polluting out of your tail pipe, you'll be polluting tons out of the electic plant. doesn't make sense. also my beef on ethanol gas. thats a waste too. it takes more oil to produce ethanol than it does just filling up with 100% gasoline. you have to use tracotors to grow it, use oil based fertilizers and pesticides, produce tones of runoff that pollute the water system, transport to grain elevator, transport to distiller, purify, transport to oil company. loads of crap.

[VV o n g B a]

they hydrogen (in cars anyways) will mostly come from current hydrocarbons like natural gas and propane. it takes some energy to reform the hydrocarbons into hydrogen (water gas shift) before it reaches the fuel cell (but the fuel for reforming is the hydrocarbon itself). a by-product of the conversion is CO and CO2, but only in small amounts so it is still "green."

talk of a pure hydrogen economy is waaay overblown. the necessary infrastructure may take a century to put in place.

[i know this b/c my current job involves using fuel cells]

[loserbutt]

money = power

by transferring wealth to among other places saudi arabia, iraq, and iran, we give them the power to push their sick agendas forward. so yes, by excessively consuming fuel people who drive SUV's make things worse

[loserbutt]

think about it, if the US weren't dependent on the mid east for oil, if we didn't need oil at all, we could say fuck saudi arabia and fuck egypt and fuck iraq and fuck iran. we could bomb em back to the stone age for spreading terrorism. however, as things are, we have to suck up to them.

[wylin]

Originally posted by loserbutt@Jan 14 2003, 11:44 AM
money = power

by transferring wealth to among other places saudi arabia, iraq, and iran, we give them the power to push their sick agendas forward. so yes, by excessively consuming fuel people who drive SUV's make things worse
good then it makes us money by creating funds for the Us defense industry. yay! go boeing go Lockheed-martin!

[Hito]

Hemp can be processed into fuel.
check out

http://www.hempcar.org/