On Tue, 4 Nov 2003 15:21:47 -0800, "jps" wrote:

"JohnH" wrote in message
.. .

Preventing the public display for propaganda purposes of the liberals IS
treating the deceased with dignity and deserved attention. If the media
'papparazzi' (sp) need pictures of caskets, they should get permission
from the
next of kin to videotape the funeral.

Much ado about nothing.

That's why this is the first time in history this has happened, because it's
about nothing?

Should the American public be shielded from the real cost of war because
"we're fighting for a bigger purpose?"

I hope your parents weren't so calloused when you were in the military. If
my kid were shot and killed defending our country (which is why maybe the
Bush Admin. doesn't want them seen) I'd want the whole freakin' country to
see what my family had sacraficed and feel the weight of war.

Do you have children?

I have children, one of whom is married to a soldier in Baghdad. I just talked
to her. She thinks the idea of televising her husband's return, if killed or
wounded, is sick. I agree. I sure don't recall seeing the body bags being
unloaded at Travis during the Vietnam war. What would be the purpose?

You didn't address the media getting permission from the next of kin to
videotape the funeral. Wouldn't that accomplish the same purpose, only better? I
doubt if many parents or spouses would want the funeral displayed for the
liberals benefit. But if they didn't want that, then why should the media be
allowed to violate privacy as the wounded or deceased are unloaded at Dover?

Again, much ado about nothing. The important thing is that the wounded or
deceased are given the dignity and respect they deserve. Parents and spouses
could always put the funerals on public display if they desired.

John
On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD