JohnH wrote:

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?

I do. In fact, I saw the body bags being loaded in Saigon. And showing
them on TV serves a purpose. It drives home the death and destruction
for which George W. Bush is responsible. These servicefolk are dying,
after all, because of his trumped-up war.




--
Email sent to will never reach me.

"JohnH" wrote in message
...

I sure don't recall seeing the body bags being
unloaded at Travis during the Vietnam war. What would be the purpose?

Hmm. I remember seeing plenty of pictures. My father says this is what woke
him up, after a period of believing whatever Washington was spewing. He
turned on a dime. One day, he was Mr Gung Ho, WWII former torpedo bomber
pilot, telling me a should follow in his footsteps. Next day, he was saying
that when he was fighting, there was a clear cause, but that someone was
beginning to stink with the Vietnam war.

JohnH wrote:

On Mon, 3 Nov 2003 21:44:57 -0800, "jps" wrote:

"Jim" wrote in message
...

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Con...=1038394944443


This is so disappointing considering we ask our men and women in the
military to risk their lives, their limbs and their mental health fighting
on behalf of our country.

To go to war under false pretenses is one thing, to treat the men and women
who were wounded or killed with anything less than the dignity and attention
due a person in such circumstances is a travesty. The American people have
a responsibility to support these people whether it be monitarily,
emotionally or spiritually. They and their loved ones have paid a huge
price.

To sweep their tragic circumstances under the carpet is inhumane and
sickening. Shame on us.

jps

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.

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


We certainly don't want Boobus Americanus to see those bodies coming
home en masse, eh? Might make ol' Boobus question Republican
authoritarianism.

--
Email sent to will never reach me.

On Tue, 04 Nov 2003 20:11:20 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

JohnH wrote:

On Mon, 3 Nov 2003 21:44:57 -0800, "jps" wrote:

"Jim" wrote in message
...

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Con...=1038394944443


This is so disappointing considering we ask our men and women in the
military to risk their lives, their limbs and their mental health fighting
on behalf of our country.

To go to war under false pretenses is one thing, to treat the men and women
who were wounded or killed with anything less than the dignity and attention
due a person in such circumstances is a travesty. The American people have
a responsibility to support these people whether it be monitarily,
emotionally or spiritually. They and their loved ones have paid a huge
price.

To sweep their tragic circumstances under the carpet is inhumane and
sickening. Shame on us.

jps

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.

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


We certainly don't want Boobus Americanus to see those bodies coming
home en masse, eh? Might make ol' Boobus question Republican
authoritarianism.

See previous response to this ridiculous tripe.

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

JohnH wrote:

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.

I don't recall a lot of outrage whenever the media showed bagged remains
carried past lines of workers in the WTC wreckage.

I don't recall a lot of outrage at photos of Reagan pinning medals on
the coffins of Marines at Dover.

I don't recall a lot of right wing protests at Carter, Reagan, Clinton,
or George 1st grabbing all the sad photo ops that Dover provided.

Spare us your outrage and your hypocrisy. It smells of Bush's failed
adventures and decaying jingoism.

Rick

On Wed, 05 Nov 2003 05:30:21 GMT, Rick wrote:

JohnH wrote:

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.

I don't recall a lot of outrage whenever the media showed bagged remains
carried past lines of workers in the WTC wreckage.

I don't recall a lot of outrage at photos of Reagan pinning medals on
the coffins of Marines at Dover.

I don't recall a lot of right wing protests at Carter, Reagan, Clinton,
or George 1st grabbing all the sad photo ops that Dover provided.

Spare us your outrage and your hypocrisy. It smells of Bush's failed
adventures and decaying jingoism.

Rick

Does my response indicate, to you, outrage? Geez, I hope I never get angry with
you guys.

What is outrageouos is your belief that only you (et a few al's) can appreciate
the death of a soldier without seeing his coffin come out the back of an
airplane.

What is wrong with my suggestion that the funerals be televised? Is it that most
families would not allow the media to do so? Could it be that privacy is
desired?

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

JohnH wrote:

What is wrong with my suggestion that the funerals be televised?

Nothing at all. What I see as wrong is your cynical use of the hiding of
those deaths for your own political purposes.

This is the first time in US history that the news media has been
prohibited from covering a poignant and powerful symbol of American
military "sacrifice." Bush Sr. used the image of those caskets to
bolster his image. Did you protest then?

Bush followed every hearse after 9/11, he reveled in the images of death
until the dead of Afghanistan began to haunt his polls. Bush now fears
the power of the images of those caskets.

Is it that most families would not allow the media to do so?
Could it be that privacy is desired?

Are you speaking for them now? Those aircraft discharging their sad
cargoes at Dover are national symbols. Each individual funeral is a
local tragedy. They are covered locally, as they should be.

You are being disingenuous at best and more than a little hypocritical.
You wrote nothing here to complain of the scenes at WTC, you wrote
nothing to to complain of the scenes of dead Iraqis, Africans, so why
the sudden moral conversion when it comes to supporting the chimp's
cynical prohibitions at Dover, prohibitions imposed solely to protect
his political poll standings and diminish the negative impact of his
failed policies abroad.

If you can't see the hypocrisy in your position then you are truly blind.

Rick

Jim wrote:

http://www1.iraqwar.ru/iraq-read_art...=25162&lang=en

We should all be very ashamed.

Rick

On Mon, 03 Nov 2003 19:56:19 -0500, Jim wrote:

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Con...=1038394944443

If the televising of caskets is so important, and if the families of the
deceased servicemen/women need public exposure for some type of 'closure', then
why are all the funerals not televised? Nothing is prohibiting the networks from
televising funerals, if the families so desire. And if the families don't desire
the public viewing of the caskets, then the media should not be entitled to air
the scenes.

Much ado about nothing.

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

JohnH wrote:


Much ado about nothing.

So JohnH, I assume (from something in one of your post a while back) that you were in the military. You think it's great to have a CinC who turns his back on
military casualties?

DSK