Cheney-Bush 2004! Don't look here.

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

deep

Blue Crack Addict
Joined
Apr 11, 2002
Messages
28,598
Location
A far distance down.
Out of sight!

Out of mind!



and we like it that way!




z1.jpg



z4.jpg



z3.jpg



z2.jpg
 
Curtains Ordered for Media Coverage of Returning Coffins


By Dana Milbank

Tuesday, October 21, 2003; Page A23


Since the end of the Vietnam War, presidents have worried that their military actions would lose support once the public glimpsed the remains of U.S. soldiers arriving at air bases in flag-draped caskets.

To this problem, the Bush administration has found a simple solution: It has ended the public dissemination of such images by banning news coverage and photography of dead soldiers' homecomings on all military bases.

In March, on the eve of the Iraq war, a directive arrived from the Pentagon at U.S. military bases. "There will be no arrival ceremonies for, or media coverage of, deceased military personnel returning to or departing from Ramstein [Germany] airbase or Dover [Del.] base, to include interim stops," the Defense Department said, referring to the major ports for the returning remains.

A Pentagon spokeswoman said the military-wide policy actually dates from about November 2000 -- the last days of the Clinton administration -- but it apparently went unheeded and unenforced, as images of caskets returning from the Afghanistan war appeared on television broadcasts and in newspapers until early this year. Though Dover Air Force Base, which has the military's largest mortuary, has had restrictions for 12 years, others "may not have been familiar with the policy," the spokeswoman said. This year, "we've really tried to enforce it."

President Bush's opponents say he is trying to keep the spotlight off the fatalities in Iraq. "This administration manipulates information and takes great care to manage events, and sometimes that goes too far," said Joe Lockhart, who as White House press secretary joined President Bill Clinton at several ceremonies for returning remains. "For them to sit there and make a political decision because this hurts them politically -- I'm outraged."

Pentagon officials deny that. Speaking on condition of anonymity, they said the policy covering the entire military followed a victory over a civil liberties court challenge to the restrictions at Dover and relieves all bases of the difficult logistics of assembling family members and deciding which troops should get which types of ceremonies.

One official said only individual graveside services, open to cameras at the discretion of relatives, give "the full context" of a soldier's sacrifice. "To do it at several stops along the way doesn't tell the full story and isn't representative," the official said.

A White House spokesman said Bush has not attended any memorials or funerals for soldiers killed in action during his presidency as his predecessors had done, although he has met with families of fallen soldiers and has marked the loss of soldiers in Memorial Day and Sept. 11, 2001, remembrances.

The Pentagon has previously acknowledged the effect on public opinion of the grim tableau of caskets being carried from transport planes to hangars or hearses. In 1999, the then-chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Army Gen. Henry H. Shelton, said a decision to use military force is based in part on whether it will pass "the Dover test," as the public reacts to fatalities.

Ceremonies for arriving coffins, not routine during the Vietnam War, became increasingly common and elaborate later. After U.S. soldiers fell in Beirut, Grenada, Panama, the Balkans, Kenya, Afghanistan and elsewhere, the military often invited in cameras for elaborate ceremonies for the returning remains, at Andrews Air Force Base, Dover, Ramstein and elsewhere -- sometimes with the president attending.

President Jimmy Carter attended ceremonies for troops killed in Pakistan, Egypt and the failed hostage rescue mission in Iran. President Ronald Reagan participated in many memorable ceremonies, including a service at Camp Lejeune in 1983 for 241 Marines killed in Beirut. Among several events at military bases, he went to Andrews in 1985 to pin Purple Hearts to the caskets of marines killed in San Salvador, and, at Mayport Naval Station in Florida in 1987, he eulogized those killed aboard the USS Stark in the Persian Gulf.

During President George H.W. Bush's term, there were ceremonies at Dover and Andrews for Americans killed in Panama, Lebanon and aboard the USS Iowa.

But in early 1991, at the time of the Persian Gulf War, the Pentagon said there would be no more media coverage of coffins returning to Dover, the main arrival point; a year earlier, Bush was angered when television networks showed him giving a news briefing on a split screen with caskets arriving.

But the photos of coffins arriving at Andrews and elsewhere continued to appear through the Clinton administration. In 1996, Dover made an exception to allow filming of Clinton's visit to welcome the 33 caskets with remains from Commerce Secretary Ronald H. Brown's plane crash. In 1998, Clinton went to Andrews to see the coffins of Americans killed in the terrorist bombing in Nairobi. Dover also allowed public distribution of photos of the homecoming caskets after the terrorist attack on the USS Cole in 2000.

The photos of coffins continued for the first two years of the current Bush administration, from Ramstein and other bases. Then, on the eve of the Iraq invasion, word came from the Pentagon that other bases were to adopt Dover's policy of making the arrival ceremonies off limits.

"Whenever we go into a conflict, there's a certain amount of guidance that comes down the pike," said Lt. Olivia Nelson, a spokeswoman for Dover. "It's a consistent policy across the board. Where it used to apply only to Dover, they've now made it very clear it applies to everyone."
 
I can't believe he hasn't attended any funerals or services.

Is this really true? Anyone have any evidence to the contrary?
 
paxetaurora said:
I can't believe he hasn't attended any funerals or services.

Is this really true? Anyone have any evidence to the contrary?

I believe Dreadsox has posted before that presidents do not attend military funerals while in offfice.






I'm glad the images are getting politicized

[/sarcasm]
 
deep said:
President Jimmy Carter attended ceremonies for troops killed in Pakistan, Egypt and the failed hostage rescue mission in Iran. President Ronald Reagan participated in many memorable ceremonies, including a service at Camp Lejeune in 1983 for 241 Marines killed in Beirut. Among several events at military bases, he went to Andrews in 1985 to pin Purple Hearts to the caskets of marines killed in San Salvador, and, at Mayport Naval Station in Florida in 1987, he eulogized those killed aboard the USS Stark in the Persian Gulf.

During President George H.W. Bush's term, there were ceremonies at Dover and Andrews for Americans killed in Panama, Lebanon and aboard the USS Iowa.


:eyebrow:
 
nbcrusader said:


I believe Dreadsox has posted before that presidents do not attend military funerals while in offfice.

I'm glad the images are getting politicized

[/sarcasm]

I am too tired to debate the same issues. I posted a link in another thread that delt specifically with the topic. It seemed well researched. One fact that I do remember is that LBJ attended ONE funeral for a soldier returning home from Vietnam. It was a friend of his son. The site said that it was pretty much not uncommon for presidents to attend these services.

If you have EVER done work with the Secret Service the amount of time end effort and background checks put into securing a building for a visit is incredible. I am not making excuses, but I know one person that I do not want at my funeral because it would be a distraction for anyone trying to mourn.

The President has met with the loved ones who have lost soldiers in Iraq.

But, it is an election year so I am sure he is only doing that for the votes, because we know he is a heartless bastard.
 
nbcrusader said:
GWB and family have visited recovering wounded and awarded purple hearts. Somehow the article deep posts failed to mention this.


"A White House spokesman said Bush has not attended any memorials or funerals for soldiers killed in action during his presidency as his predecessors had done, although he has met with families of fallen soldiers and has marked the loss of soldiers in Memorial Day and Sept. 11, 2001, remembrances. "
:huh:
 
Scarletwine said:
"But, it is an election year so I am sure he is only doing that for the votes, because we know he is a heartless bastard."

How true :|

That was not a serious sttement. It was sarcasm...but I knew some would hold this sentiment.
 
You know there are dead people in those coffins. Why is the first thought always to jump on the party bandwagon and bash away?


Politics has no respect.
:sigh:
 
Dreadsox said:
Gee...where was Bush on November 26, 2003.

Hmmmm:huh:

And how will you respond when the next Hillary bashing thread pops up and someone brings this up?


These are our dead brothers and sisters under these flags and honestly bashing or supporting the president will not bring them back.

Back to the topic, the American people should have the right to see the realities of this war. It doesn't matter if you support this war or don't, it doesn't matter if you like the president or not. The White House shouldn't be upset about this photo, this is freedom of press and honestly the American people need to be reminded of this reality.
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:
Back to the topic, the American people should have the right to see the realities of this war. It doesn't matter if you support this war or don't, it doesn't matter if you like the president or not. The White House shouldn't be upset about this photo, this is freedom of press and honestly the American people need to be reminded of this reality.

I guess the issue is respect for the families of the fallen. You can find family members who want the pictures published. You can find family members who do not want the pictures published. To which side do we err in balancing these concerns?
 
I think publishing photos like these, of caskets, is a tasteful and moving way to show respect for both the soldiers and their families as well as to depict the realities of war, while showing photos of hanging charred bodies only incites hatred.
 
nbcrusader said:


I guess the issue is respect for the families of the fallen. You can find family members who want the pictures published. You can find family members who do not want the pictures published. To which side do we err in balancing these concerns?

I could see that if these caskets had names, but they don't.

We have always had media coverage of the deceased arriving before this, I remember watching coverage of those from the Gulf War. Why all of a sudden a change? We're just now becoming a respectful country?
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:


And how will you respond when the next Hillary bashing thread pops up and someone brings this up?


I have no cluse what this means. Please feel free to PM me.
 
nbcrusader said:


I guess the issue is respect for the families of the fallen. You can find family members who want the pictures published. You can find family members who do not want the pictures published. To which side do we err in balancing these concerns?

I don't think the White House is thinking about paying respect to the Families. That's not the issue. The W.H. is filtering out these photos because they're trying to keep up morale in the country. It's biased and it's also an election year. A disgusting way to sway opinion. Let's just hide the photos, and pretend they don't exist :huh:

That's why I like watching the BBC news. It's not biased towards any direction. They show all sides of the Iraq war, and when there's mention of the Israeli-Palestine conflict, they don't just mention the Israeli casualties, they list BOTH. Unlike the U.S. media.
 
paxetaurora said:
I can't believe he hasn't attended any funerals or services.

Is this really true? Anyone have any evidence to the contrary?
Why should he, and witch funeral he should he pick out whitout hurting the families of other killed soldiers. If he turned up on the funeral of my son, i would not be very happy.
I think it is a good move not to go to a funeral,.....
 
tackleberry said:
I don't think the White House is thinking about paying respect to the Families. That's not the issue. The W.H. is filtering out these photos because they're trying to keep up morale in the country. It's biased and it's also an election year. A disgusting way to sway opinion. Let's just hide the photos, and pretend they don't exist :huh:

The policy regarding the photos is over 10 years old - it is not just some election year ploy.
 
tackleberry said:


I don't think the White House is thinking about paying respect to the Families. That's not the issue. The W.H. is filtering out these photos because they're trying to keep up morale in the country. It's biased and it's also an election year. A disgusting way to sway opinion. Let's just hide the photos, and pretend they don't exist :huh:

The Pentagon has had a policy of banning the media from taking pictures of caskets being returned to the US since 1991. This is not something unique to this administration.


EDIT: Whoops, missed it by three minutes.
 
Last edited:
Dreadsox said:


That was not a serious sttement. It was sarcasm...but I knew some would hold this sentiment.

I knew you were being sarcastic, just wanted to get a dig in.

This morning on the Washington Journal, military families called in and not one waas against these photos being shown.
 
I think the planned effect will backfire. Most of the mainstream Media have hoped it would sway the American public by their speculative comments, trying to equate Iraq to Vietnam.

Contrary to their wishes most Americans do not view Iraq as Vietnam.

md.
 
Back
Top Bottom