FLAG DRAPED COFFINS

[Dave_Schuldt]

Checkit before it gets shut down.

http://media.newsfrombabylon.com/war/coffin_photos/dover/page7.htm

>

[2morehours]

Bush affirmed the policy of no casket pictures for this or that reasons. Do we need to see these kind of pictures to hammer in the reality of warfare, or is it too much disrespect to bear on the families??

[JoshK]

I've been kind of torn on this one. On one hand I believe in freedom of information, and the reason this fucked up administration wants to hide this is the same reason it wants to hide all the other bad news about this war.

 

On the other hand, I definitely see that families could be hurt by this sort of thing.

[max]

Thanks dave. Powerful.

 

I think the pictures reminded me of what these people and their families have lost. Outside of the pro/anit wart debate, I think it's good to step back and reflect on loosing human life, and say a prayer for these people.

[Greg_W]

and the reason this fucked up administration wants to hide this is the same reason it wants to hide all the other bad news about this war.

 

From my understanding, this has been standing policy for quite some time. You know, junior, the world of policy, politics, and goverment didn't start the day after your testicles dropped.

[Ratboy]

Soldiers coming home dead is news. Show it. We must learn there are real consequences for our actions.

[Jim]

and the reason this fucked up administration wants to hide this is the same reason it wants to hide all the other bad news about this war.

 

 

 

From my understanding, this has been standing policy for quite some time. You know, junior, the world of policy, politics, and goverment didn't start the day after your testicles dropped.

 

Wrong again dude. This new policy was instituted by the Bushies in 2002. Never before have the press been bared from Andrews and photos. It is nothing more than the contiued policy of the Bushies to hide thing from the public.

[Greg_W]

<threat of violence against Jim deleted by user, 'cause he ain't worth the sweat off the user's nuts>

Edited April 26, 2004 by Greg_W

[b-rock]

But Jim is right - this is Bush policy since 2002, not other administrations before.

[Rodchester]

But Jim is right - this is Bush policy since 2002, not other administrations before.

 

Is is my understanding that this policy was put in place, by the Pentagon, about the time of Gulf War I. This was done primarliy as a reaction to the media's focus on it during Vietnam. The brass running the show at the time remembered it all to well and was not a fan of the media. I do seem to recall that Clinton used this policy (by failing to lift it) to his benefit during the Somalia fighting.

 

You may be correct, but I don't think so, if this is a Bush II policy could someone please cite the Presidential order number, and or a link?

 

I'm curious about this one.

 

Edited April 26, 2004 by Rodchester

[Ratboy]

I remember reading last week that this policy has stood for 10+ years, spanning several Presidents (and wars). I was surprised, because I thought it was a Bush II thing. I don't remember the source, unfortunately.

[Jim]

But Jim is right - this is Bush policy since 2002, not other administrations before.

 

Is is my understanding that this policy was put in place, by the Pentagon, about the time of Gulf War I. This was done primarliy as a reaction to the media's focus on it during Vietnam. The brass running the show at the time remembered it all to well and was not a fan of the media. I do seem to recall that Clinton used this policy (by failing to lift it) to his benefit during the Somalia fighting.

 

You may be correct, but I don't think so, if this is a Bush II policy could someone please cite the Presidential order number, and or a link?

 

I'm curious about this one.

 

 

Rodchester -

 

Technically you are correct. The policy was first put into place in 1991 during the first Gulf War, but was not consistently followed as Bush I and Clinton saw fit to visit Andrews as remains of soldiers arrived, and to provide opportunites for press photos. So it would be more fair to say that Bushie II has taken the policy to the extreme and barred all ceromonies and press coverage.

[JoshK]

and the reason this fucked up administration wants to hide this is the same reason it wants to hide all the other bad news about this war.

 

From my understanding, this has been standing policy for quite some time. You know, junior, the world of policy, politics, and goverment didn't start the day after your testicles dropped.

 

 

Looks like Jim beat me to it with the explanation of where this policy came from. Not surprising, the moron's dad instituted it. Another fine leader! My point remains, photos like this are damaging to the moron in chief and it's in his best interest to hide them, just like every other bad story coming out of that shithole he created.

Edited April 26, 2004 by JoshK

[Dave_Schuldt]

Bush has never been to a funral of anyone killed in Iraq. What a lame asshole.

[Mal_Con]

The coffin pix were to be reserved for future BUSH04 adds just like the 9-11 Flag Draped Coffin in his first ad.

[Squid]

Bush has never been to a funral of anyone killed in Iraq. What a lame asshole.

 

Is that true? I'm no fan of Bush, but that is unbelievable. Anyone confirm/deny this assertion?

[marylou]

Here is an online petition you can fill out if you are mad at GWB for not attending any funerals of fallen soldiers.

 

If he went to one due to public pressure, it wouldn't exactly be sincere, would it?

[cracked]

Well, if there's an online petition about it, then it MUST be true.

[Mal_Con]

Google search shows none with many articles complaining about his lack of attendance. More importantly right wing sources Newsmax, Fox try to shift the subject and SURPRISE blame Clinton. History news network summarizes all prexys http://hnn.us/articles/1784.html

[mothboy88]

I am one of the last people to defend Bush, but I can see some reasons why he might not attend a funeral. If it were a family member of mine, the last thing I would want at his or her funeral would be a secret service and media circus all because a guy who doesn't really know my loved one wants to show up to score some public relation points.

 

I would be totally OK with someone printing photos of the coffin being respectfully transported. But to have W show up to the funeral? I would consider that a massive invasion of privacy. I would much rather prefer getting condolences in another setting from the President.

 

Who knows if that is his reasoning or not? I suppose since he is every US soldier's ultimate commanding officer it would be appropriate for him to show. But if I were the President, I would definately feel like I was intruding on one of the most intimate of human rituals unless I was invited by the family.

[Squid]

Thanks for the link, MC.

 

I'm disgusted in our commander-in-chief.

[EWolfe]

Hiding both the bodies and ceremony

combined with non-attendance of funerals

says a lot about the shallowness of a man.

[Rodchester]

There is a huge difference between attending a memorial service (like the OK City bombing service or the Reagan Beirut bombing service) and attending an individual’s funeral.

 

So the link to me makes it clear that few presidents attended funerals of fallen soldiers.

 

I think there is some legitimacy in criticizing Bush on this, but I can see why he wouldn't do it. It is for most families, a very personal event.

 

Edited April 27, 2004 by Rodchester

[Jim]

It is ironic, however, that the Bushies chose the flag-waving images of the rubble of 911 in their campaign ads. Hmmm.

[Greg_W]

There is a huge difference between attending a memorial service (like the OK City bombing service or the Reagan Beirut bombing service) and attending an individual’s funeral.

 

So the link to me makes it clear that few presidents attended funerals of fallen soldiers.

 

I think there is some legitimacy in criticizing Bush on this, but I can see why he wouldn't do it. It is for most families, a very personal event.

 

The media frenzy and throngs that would follow Bush (or any president) to a funeral would create mayhem. In my own opinion, this would be a greater disrespect than not attending. Like Rodchester says, a funeral is a private, personal, family affair - not a media event or photo op. The "funeral" of Paul Wellstone, which turned into a huge campaign stop sickened me.

 

Let the families grieve and say goodbye in privacy -the President was neither family nor friend, he has no place there.

 

Greg_W