|
YCMTSU (You Can't Make This Shit Up) Furor over media showing flagged draped caskets. Is it disrepectful? Is the Pentagon hiding information from us? Is this White House trying to cover up the numbers of, or the political impact of U.S. forces being killed in an increasingly unpopular war? Blah, Blah, Friggin' Blah!!! I found this link on Samizdata (and followed it to a NASA PR): The web page at memoryhole showing the photos of flagged-draped coffins is dated 22 April 04, and the photos themselves are from a CD of photos sent to memoryhole from Dover AFB: So, memoryhole is quite clear about the caskets. It was Fox news (and others) that screwed up. [> permalink <] |
 | | |
| Duke April 26, 2004 05:59 PM PDT  Wheter these are truly photos of our KIA troops or not, the way I understand this is that no, the Pentagon is not hiding info from us, the White House is not trying to cover up the numbers of US forces being killed...the reason there is a 'stink' about this is that ever since Vietnam it has been against the law to photograph the caskets of our soldiers arriving from any war or incursion. The reason being is that it gives rise to anti-war Vietnam-esk feelings and thus disrespect for our soldiers and lack of support at home for the effort they are making. As news of these feelings travel the globe, the enemy sees this and takes full advantage of it thus causing more casualties and demoralization of our troops. It's not a hide the evidence game, it's intended to keep people at home that are susceptible to media frenzies from causing trouble and bringing support down...we don't want this to turn into another Vietnam do we? This war in Iraq is definately winnable but we need to keep supporting the cause, our troops and our Commander in Chief. | ||
| ||
| | |
| JfZ April 27, 2004 04:17 AM PDT LMAO! What would Bush know about Vietnam? But anyway. That's why I said, "Blah!" ... because the only 'story' here is the media stepping on their collective dicks *again*. Story: memoryhole.com won on an FOIA appeal for the pix from Dover AFB. Good for them. Drudge then hyped the pix. Fox news then hyped the Drudge story. And it went down the media food chain like a mad-cow cheeseburger. | ||
| ||
| | |
| Duke April 27, 2004 09:31 PM PDT uhh...what does Bush's knowledge of Vietnam (or lack therof) have to do with this? | ||
| ||
| | |
| The Lib April 27, 2004 10:18 PM PDT Actually, the anti-media policy at Dover was put in place by (then) Secretary of Defense ---drum roll please---Dick Cheney in 1991 during the 1st failed Bush misadventure in the Persian Gulf. The bigger story would have been if the pictures were really from the shuttle. Then the administration would have to cover itself for deliberately turning over the wrong photos in violation of the FOIA, or explain yet another high profile bit of incompetence. Now, between Drudge and FOX there's enough disinformation out there that it became a non story. I know when I first posted the Pix from the Seattle Times, I got a record number of google hits, and Memoryhole damn near shut down that day. And BTW, Duke, if the Stonewaller and Theif could articulate the cause, let alone spell it, and had supported our troops and not tried to change the world on the cheap, I'd consider supporting him. He's a disaster. Nice Blog John, I'm Linking you if you don't mind. | ||
| ||
| | |
| The Lib April 27, 2004 10:20 PM PDT er Theif=Thief -- but I'm not trying to run the free world. | ||
| ||
| | |
| Duke April 27, 2004 10:38 PM PDT Well I've done a little (more) research of my own and I stand corrected on the time this ban was enacted. I do however have a question for you (The Lib)...you say that George W. is a disaster and you have every right to your opinion however...do you really think that Al "I invented the internet" Gore would do a better job? Do you really think any of the Liberals/Democrats would have taken the stance of protecting our Homeland that George W. has? I can't think of one who would. They are all spineless Socialists who would rather wait and wait until sanctions could take effect even though there have already been 12 years and 17 sanctions against Saddam's Iraq! (BTW, I mean no offense to you personally so please don't read this that way) | ||
| ||
| | |
| Duke April 27, 2004 10:43 PM PDT Oh and if I might add...I meant resolutions, not sanctions | ||
| ||
| | |
| JfZ April 28, 2004 01:46 PM PDT I'm honored Lib. Link away. Duke: Bush and Nam? I didn't bring it up or juxtapose those two words to start with -- you did. Bush, Cheney, or Kerry: they all served in the military (or not) in their own special way. | ||
| ||
| | |
| Duke April 28, 2004 08:17 PM PDT umm...I simply brought up Vietnam because I was missinformed regarding the ban on photos. You however said, "LMAO! What would Bush know about Vietnam?" So yea you did bring it up, it was on 04/27/2004 04:17 AM PDT to be exact. | ||
| ||
| Leave a Comment: |
