Bush Admin Bans Media Coverage of Dead Soldiers Returning..Why?
by Valis 71 Replies latest social current
-
-
expatbrit
Six:
I think that all wealthy nations, not just America, have an obligation to stop people hurting one another, wherever it happens. Indeed this is the only legitimate purpose of government, imo.
You may reply that using force to do that is also a case of people hurting one another and thus defeats the object, but I consider this reality over ideology. People who will murder thousands will not respond to reason and negotiation and enlightened self-interest, and therefore must be removed for the safety of those who will.
So the brief answer to your question is yes.
Expatbrit
-
Seven
Dover mortuary preparing for casualties Troops killed in the Iraq war are expected soon By BETH MILLER Staff reporter 03/23/2003
The flags at Dover Air Force Base flew at half-staff Saturday and workers at the base mortuary prepared to receive the remains of the first fallen troops from the Iraq war, expected to begin arriving at any time.
It is a most somber time at the Charles C. Carson Center for Mortuary Affairs, the largest military mortuary in the world and the U.S. Central Command's designee to receive U.S. casualties from the war on Iraq. In the Persian Gulf War in the early 1990s, the Dover mortuary received the remains of 310 troops.
"There is nothing more sensitive on earth than the return of someone's loved one," said William Zwicharowski, director of the mortuary.
No formal ceremonies and no public events are held at the base when the remains arrive. The mortuary is considered a stopover spot, and formal ceremonies are held at the final destination, usually the hometown of the service member.
When the remains arrive at Dover, they are taken to the mortuary for processing. There, they first are scanned to be sure no unexploded ordnance is present. A number is assigned until positive identification is made, when a name replaces the number. Personal effects such as watches and family photographs are collected and inventoried.
The remains are weighed, photographed and X-rayed. They are identified scientifically, using digital X-rays, dental records, DNA analysis and fingerprints.
It is "zero-defect" work, Zwicharowski said, which means everything must be verified and accurate. An autopsy is performed on each body to determine the cause of death. And then the embalming process is done.
"The primary purpose of embalming is to kill bacteria and render the remains safe to be exposed to the public," Zwicharowski said. "It also preserves the body for the return home."
Just as in civilian mortuaries, there is a cosmetology area. The remains also are clothed in the dress uniform of their service branch, along with every medal, ribbon and other decoration they have earned.
From there, they are placed in a hardwood or 18-gauge steel casket - the family's choice - for transport to hometowns. If cremation is preferred by the family, that is done at a Dover crematory, and an engraved urn is hand-carried to the hometown.
The work can be difficult and emotionally taxing. Each day starts and ends with a chaplain's prayer, and counselors are available to workers, Zwicharowski said.
"You've got to lean forward and focus," he said. "If you stand still, it could very well knock you down. I'm a former Marine. We've got to get them home. But you try to stay detached."
Staff Sgt. Demetrius Perusquia of Dover is among the Air Force Reservists from the 512th Airlift Wing's Mortuary Services Squadron. When the remains of soldiers killed in a Fort Drum, N.Y., helicopter crash came through recently, she worked in the X-ray area and helped with embalming and dressing the remains.
"It feels like I'm helping bring closure to the families," she said. But she cannot bear to know much about the troops who have died or the families who grieve over them. She prefers not to deal with the troops' personal effects or watch the news about casualties.
Instead, she concentrates on doing her job precisely.
"We take our time and make sure we don't make any mistakes," Perusquia said.
The Dover mortuary staff has handled enormous assignments since it opened in 1956, and it can handle 30 to 50 bodies a day, Zwicharowski said.
The largest single incident handled by the mortuary was the 1978 mass suicide of the cult led by Jim Jones in Guyana. The mortuary processed the remains of all 913 people who died there.
The tempo at the center has been especially intense since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, Zwicharowski said. The mortuary received the remains of 188 people killed at the Pentagon.
Last month, mortuary workers identified and prepared the remains of the Columbia shuttle crew. Soon, remains will start to arrive from the war in Iraq.
Zwicharowski and his staff plan to handle them just as the sign posted over a mortuary door says: "Always With Honor."
Reach Beth Miller at 324-2784 or
[email protected]. mailto:[email protected]
Considering the morturary director's words which I highlighted: no media coverage. The ban was long overdue. As the sign says, "Always With Honor."
-
SixofNine
So the brief answer to your question is yes.
Good. Me too.
I was all for Iraq too, but I was very wrong.
The United States army is being treated about the way you'd expect a man (and I use the word loosely) like Bush to treat them.
-
Perry
I joined to pay back student loans, not to get shot at in Haiti or Saudi.
I'm sure you don't mean this in the strictest meaning..... I hope.
-
Beans
It's not good moral for the country. When I was in Germany in April the coverage of the war was totally different than the coverage I watched on CNN. Only what is deemed to be pro America is shown on CNN but the negative reality was not. I saw many interviews with American soldiers that I would not have seen on CNN and video coverage.
I think if you look bace to the past war coverage in any country the general public is only shown certain things and the reality coverage is documented and saved for documentaries later to be seen.
Beaner
-
frenchbabyface
Nothing to say about the topic
but need to say that : for -
SanFranciscoJim
Expatbrit,
If tomorrow Georgey Bush and Tony Blair got up on the podium and made a speech which basically said "ha ha suckers, we fooled you into thinking that Saddam had WOMD's, when all we really wanted was the oil" I would still hold the position that the war was the right action to take, simply because it resulted in the downfall of Saddam Hussein.
I'm not naive enough to think that politicians conduct themselves based mainly on enlightened principle. But nor am I naive enough to think that the ends never justify the means. Sometimes they very much do. And if (and that's an if) it turns out that there was indeed prevarication, deceit and exaggeration, then the end result justifies those means, in my opinion.
Your opinion differs from mine. If Bush and Blair freely admitted they used "scare tactics" to draw us into war with Iraq (which they won't, especially with a reelection bid on the horizon), the ramifications of admitting their deceit would have far-reaching effects in the world community. The U.S. has always prided itself on being an honest superpower, a hero always standing by to slay the dragons of evil around the world. Wherther or not Hussein was slaughtering his own countrymen by the thousands becomes a moot point, because we chose to enter his country, not to stop the executions, but to destroy the "weapons of mass deception" which, according to Bush's rhetoric, was threatening populations outside Iraq.
I am very much against how Hussein treated his countrymen and realize that a need was there to remove him from power. I am glad he's gone. Having said that, I believe that the U.S. would have been looked upon much more kindly, as the "avenging hero", if only Bush had invaded Iraq because of the atrocities going on within the border against Saddam's own people, not because of a "wag the dog" imaginary threat against the rest of the world. It is a public relations disaster for this country. We will now be looked upon with suspicion rather than respect.
Indeed, we should be asking ourselves why it took such means to convince us of the necessity of war. Why was not the suffering of fellow humans enough? Are we that self-centred now in the wealthy West?
In my opinion, yes. Considering that vice president Cheney's Halliburton Corporation expects to earn billions in a secret deal for the clean up of Iraq, I would say that greed played an important role in the timing of the invasion.
Other equally impressive threats exist around the world. Fidel Castro's Cuba, for example. Or Kim Jong Il's North Korea. Why haven't we taken a more agressive posture against those countries? The short answer: There is no profit in it.
As for there being a plan in place, I have no idea what you are referring to. UN sanctions? The UN sanctions that killed half a million kids? Perhaps another 17 resolutions would have done the trick? Sorry for the sarcasm, but there was no effective plan in place to remove Saddam. Just endless chitchat and bluster.
I agree that the U.N. could have been more agressive in their stance against the atrocities in Iraq. This, however, did not give the Bush regime free license to bypass a process which was already in place and in effect negate whatever actions the U.N. had already taken. The United Nations has existed as a buffer against the start of a third world war. Since the end of World War II, it has succeeded in that mission. Bush's actions disrespectfully and belligerently bypassed the authority of the U.N., thus pulling out the stops and removing the safety buffer. This country thumbed their noses at the U.N. and told the rest of the world that we do not recognize any U.N. authority. If the U.S. does this, who will be next?
-
DakotaRed
Instead of demanding focus on the dead in Iraq, why not start focusing on the murders from Los Angelos, Chicago, New York, Detroit, Houston and every other major city each day? Wonder whch will have coffins piled higher?
Ask yourself why the media only wishes to cover deaths and not also include what good our people have and are accomplishing there? A recent bi-partisan delegation visited Iraq and even the Democrats stated the media was only focusing on what they could to paint a dismal picture of it all. Yesterdays local news here opened with the words, "It was a particuarly bloody day in Iraq. 3 soldiers were killed!" I wonder what the body count just from Los Angelos was?
It's sad enough that families have lost loved ones, but to have it plastered all over the news before they even receive the bodies makes it all that much worse. Did it ever occur to any that maybe families don't want their loved ones used in such a manner, possibly against their values and what their deceased loved one stood for?
-
JT
Ask yourself why the media only wishes to cover deaths and not also include what good our people have and are accomplishing there?
just wondering-
do you believe that if the table were turned it would be done any differently
the democrats in power instead of the rep
thanks