Woman loses her job over coffins photo

[True_Blue]

A military contractor has fired Tami Silicio, a Kuwait-based cargo worker whose photograph of flag-draped coffins of fallen U.S. soldiers was published in Sunday's edition of The Seattle Times.

Silicio was let go yesterday for violating U.S. government and company regulations, said William Silva, president of Maytag Aircraft, the contractor that employed Silicio at Kuwait International Airport.

"I feel like I was hit in the chest with a steel bar and got my wind knocked out. I have to admit I liked my job, and I liked what I did," Silicio said.

Her photograph, taken earlier this month, shows more than 20 flag-draped coffins in a cargo plane about to depart from Kuwait. Since 1991, the Pentagon has banned the media from taking pictures of caskets being returned to the United States.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2001909527_coffin22m.html

[LeftCoast]

1. Well, who didn't know THAT was coming?

[imax2268]

7. well hell...

I work for the DOD...so I should watch what I say...

my phone has some weird clicking noises as it is already...

hmmmmmmm...maybe I'm just paranoid...?

[IndianaGreen]

107. I think the American people need to see the real cost of this war

This is not some damned video game!

[Wonk]

2. Here it is avatar sized for anyone who wants to use it

DU donors only, sorry, unless Skinner adds it to the regular avatar list.

[TeeYiYi]

31. Thanks Wonk . . .

. . . I think I'll put it in my sig. :hi:

TYY

[Barkley]

125. This coffin picture is on the front page of today's LAT

I hope the L.A. Times is publishing this picture out of defiance and solidarity.

But I suspect it boils down to selling papers (money). Polls show the war in Iraq and are very unpopular here in California.

[whistle]

3. Well, if the military starts showing proof that war kills...

...that would spoil the whole illusion that war is heroic. Better to stifle the truth.:wtf:

[Blasphemer]

4. Idiots...

Like the "liberal media" was gonna touch that one with a ten foot pole anyway? Now it's more of a story than it was before (which is ridiculous in and of itself) but perhaps now it will get the attention it should have been getting in the first place.

[MercutioATC]

5. I'd bet that it's a general rule covering ALL cargo, and exists for a good

reason. Rules exist for a reason. In this case, it seems to me that the contract probably specifies some degree of confidentiality on the part of the contractor. This employee violated that rule.

I think most employees who put multi-million dollar contracts in jeopardy would be fired...

[poppabear36]

10. Damn you

with your logic and reason.
Of course your right, in the same way that calling 20 flag draped coffins "cargo" is technically correct. Or would flag draped coffins more accurately be called "transfer tubes?"
Pretzel logic.

[DenverDem]

28. "Rules exist for a reason." Exactly, TO CONCEAL THE HUMAN COST

of this criminal war.

Great rationalization for propagandizing.

[MercutioATC]

88. Actually, it's a common agreement, even in the private sector.

Contractors contractually agree to refrain from publicly disclosing the contents of shipments. In the case of military shipments, this seems even more important.

Granted, this shipment was human remains. The next might be UAVs or munitions that we'd rather not broadcast to the world. The contract most likely doesn't specify. Cargo is cargo and NONE of it is to be made public.

[worldgonekrazy]

102. Thats just an excuse to keep the human costs of war hidden

And I think you know that. Why you are parroting the Pentagon's line is beyond me. It is a completely transparent attempt to stop the American public from having to deal with the emotional reality of young men and women dying overseas for...for what?

[MercutioATC]

108. No, it's a regulation that makes sense. There are other avenues to

pursue if you want to make casualty records more available.

If you don't like the rule, change it. If you simply ignore it, there may be consequences. It sounds as if this employee found that out.

[northzax]

111. don't you understand?

because we may like the action this person took, she should be exempt from all rules and regulations.

frankly, she deserves to be fired. There was absolutly no secret information here to reveal, the Pentagon annouces each and every death, so she wasn't giving new information. so she's not covered by the Federal Whistleblower act.

[July]

131. Proof, please. n/t

[Changenow]

68. Except that the policy of not honoring the fallen soldiers on their return

is a new one. The article (as is typical) misrepresents the facts.


Curtains Ordered for Media Coverage of Returning Coffins
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A55816-2003Oct20¬Found=true

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.
*****
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 airbase or Dover 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."

*****

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.



******

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.

****

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.

*more*

[MercutioATC]

90. I don't disagree, but that's a separate issue.

The issue at hand is the contractual issues involved in an employee making public the contents of a cargo that the shipping contractor has agreed not to disclose. If you want to change the policy, work to change the policy, but the contractor did agree to the rules and its employee did break them.

That aside, I'd agree that we need to review this policy.

[July]

132. What rules, what policy, what agreement?

So far, you have asserted several times that a rule was broken. If you're just inferring this, don't talk about it as a fact.

[MercutioATC]

134. Well, the rule the military has about showing coffins, for one...

...and I'd be very surprised if confidentiality wasn't part of the shipping contract (yes, that's inferred).

However, the military rule is enough. She broke a rule. She's now paying the consequences. Seems like what we should be encouraging - people accepting the consequences of their actions.

[SemperEadem]

106. Well, next month Memorial Day rolls around...

it will be interesting to see if anyone honors the fallen in Iraq, or if * will act as if no one has died in Iraq, therefore his presence at a service honoring them is not necessary---fundraisers are far more important to the security of the US.

[July]

130. "probably" turns to "that rule"?

You assert that the employee violated "that rule" -- the one you also state is "probably" specified in the contract. In other words, you have no idea whether there was a rule that was violated.

[ThoughtCriminal]

6. A Pulitzer nomination perhaps?

nt

[Judi Lynn]

8. By prohibiting any visual evidence we have soldiers returning dead

the _Bush administration is exposing itself as dishonest to, and disrespectful of the American public.

To try to deny people are getting killed is to disrespect the horrible sacrifice they've been forced to make, and the value of their lives.

Here's the photo from the article:
TAMI SILICIO

Flag-draped coffins are shown inside a cargo plane April 7 at Kuwait International Airport, in a photograph published Sunday. The photographer said she hoped the image would help families understand the care with which fallen soldiers are returned home.

So someone at the top not only had Ms. Silicio fired, but also her husband. Is that not childish and spiteful?

[arcane1]

9. they fired her husband too??????

:wtf:

-snip-

Maytag also fired David Landry, a co-worker who recently wed Silicio.

[Coventina]

32. That should be grounds for a lawsuit!!!

IIRC, guilt by association is ILLEGAL in this country!

Who knows, the Patriot Act has probably taken away THAT protection as well....
:mad:

[arcane1]

73. I guess he "harbored a terrorist"

with us or against us.... if he really supported the troops he would've divorced this woman for daring to acknowledge their deaths

/sarcasm off

[DeepModem Mom]

11. This should be a big stinker of a story --

[deek]

79. #1 at Yahoo......keep it kicked!

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=519&e=1&u=/ap/iraq_coffin_photo

[ronnykmarshall]

128. check out the freepers on the message board.

Once again WE are the ones to blame.

[bleedingheart]

12. This may backfire on the Bush Admin

the question many will ask is..."Why shouldn't we see this?"

[Scairp]

13. It says MEDIA

cannot take pictures of returning coffins. She is not the media. How can they justify it that way?

[MaineDem]

15. That's a good point (nt)

[nolabels]

14. When the Bushco kills 10 or 20 Million then we can show them

Cus there won't be enongh fucking places for the stinking RATS to hide them.

I hope not, but I have some sense they are that evil

[smirkymonkey]

29. Wasn't it Stalin who said..

"One death is a tragedy, One Million Deaths are a statistic."

This administration has done its evil best to make certian that this war is only about statistics. Bringing the tragedies behind every story to life is a threat to the reich. :grr:

[Occulus]

38. You know that visceral reaction

people sometimes get, like when you meet someone who is just so bad, from the inside out, that you sometimes just know they're just evil, evil, evil?

Before he ever even opened his mouth in the first ad I saw of him, I felt he would be very bad news for us. I hate being right....

[gypsy11]

95. That's exactly how I felt n/t

[kentuck]

16. Thank you Tami Silicio......

It's sad we have to rely on foreign press or independent foreigners to give us the news and photos we should be getting from our media.

[Amaya]

17. Kick

:kick:

[NNN0LHI]

18. kick

[samsingh]

19. where's the outrage - where are the so-called repug

patriots defending the constitution?

[saigon68]

20. This disturbs the SHEEP

Who must be medicated with stories of Kobe, Scott Peterson and Michael Jackson.

[Pretty_in_CodePink]

21. I am touched by the sensitivity of Tami Silicio

She was a great gift to families who lost loved ones as she said she would "try to watch over their children as they head home". She also offered comfort to comrades of the fallen. No doubt she will be missed.

[Tinoire]

22. So will you on day n/t

[dweller]

118. So shall we all.....eom

dp

[Jack Rabbit]

23. Ms. Silico's name is to be added to the roll of honor

She joins Scott Ritter, Joseph Wilson, Valarie Plame, Karen Kwiatkowski, Paul O'Neill, Richard Clarke and others among those who have sacrificed to tell the truth in era of Bush.

I hope somebody has a good job waiting for her.

[Mari333]

24. Good for her. The Seattle Times called me last night

and asked me what I thought of her, as the parent of a soldier in Iraq. I told them she deserved praise and honour for doing it, and not only should they show the coffins, which I have been begging for them to do for a year in the media, but to show the dead Iraqi civilians, the dead soldiers, and the wounded on both sides..
the reporter asked me why?
I said
Because its the TRUTH. And its high time the US public saw the TRUTH.
I also told him that woman deserves not only her job back, but back pay and grievance pay and a MEDAL for what she did.
The TRUTH. Make the US public look at what they are doing, what they are paying for.

[cornfedyank]

25. i sent notes of this to my representative and senators.

i asked why even the woman's husband was fired. these are not state secrets. they should show the costs of war. what are they afraid of?? we know and our reps should know we know. or maybe shrub is saving it for his next "where are the WMDs" joke.

wage peace------it's cheaper

[DenverDem]

26. "the policy defers to the sensitivities of bereaved families." BULLSHIT

The concealment of the true human cost of this war is meant ONLY to prevent the humanity and compassion of the population from rising up to STOP THIS CRIMINAL WAR.

If the reality of the brutal impact of collateral damage and depleted uranium contamination on Iraqi civillians and the bloody maiming and killing of American soldiers was shown to the public, THE WAR WOULD END IN HOURS, and the traitorous prevaricators that led us there would be marched across the white house lawn in chains to their deserved capital punishmen

[Mari333]

30. Its just Bush politics, the military families WANT those pics

in every newspaper..I do, and I know plenty of people who do
www.mfso.org
show the pics, and show them all.
show the dead children and civilians and dead soldiers and horror.
Its long overdue.
The truth shall set you free.

[worldgonekrazy]

103. Not to mention recognition

I think the saddest part is that these bodies are shipped back to the states incognito in aluminum coffins. Its like the government doesn't want to acknowledge that troops die. I can see why that might be, but these people paid the ultimate sacrifice (even if it was for an unjust cause...thats not their fault) and them and their families really ought to be recognized for it. We should treat them like heroes, not a dirty secret to be pushed under the rug.

[Richardo]

27. I've changed my sig line. What an outrage.

:( :mad: :grr: :nuke:

[bobthedrummer]

33. What an insult to the people-this is an outrage, part of the dehumanizing

process of the masters of war, sanitize and control the media-that's not promoting what US military has historically fought for-the US Constitution and the promotion of democracy.

They take all the human connections to war and abstract them, use them for disinfo and fire mercenaries that visually record at the workplace.:puke:

This policy has only continued with Mr. Revolution in Military Affairs, Reichmarshall Rumsfeld heading the DoD for George W. Bush aka The War President. Our soldiers and their families and all Americans have never been so shamelessly abused by an administration like this one, they are fascist war criminals and profiteers following the neo-conservative traitors hidden agendas via PNAC imo.

[2Design]

34. spain had their dead laid out in a formal cermony

Did you see where spain had a very formal ceremony honoring their dead in full public view?

If the president is so ashamed of the dead, then he should stop killing them?

full honors in public view with state representatives is what every dead soldier deserves.

what did michael moore say about barbara bush not wanting to mess up her pretty head with body bag images.....something like that right??

[wabeewoman]

35. I posted in another thread

about this letter to the editor in yesterdays Tacoma paper in which a guy writes that it is basically unpatriotic and harmful to the war effort to even write about the number of dead and injured in Iraq. And he wanted the media to police themselves before the police did it. There are a surprising number of American fascists.

[Name removed]

36. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jackstraw45]

37. I guess the term "freedom of the press"

isn't in your vocabulary?

I know it's not in that of Bush, Rumsfelt and Cheney.

[Fort Worth Cowboy]

39. Freedom of the press?

Does that mean they should be allowed to show photos of someone getting shot in the head or photos of hardcore sex in the New York times?

[Bridget Burke]

44. So, you equate pictures of American dead with pornography.

I'll bet you're not really from Fort Worth. Probably Dallas--or one of those nasty little dry suburbs up there in the Metroplex.

[Fort Worth Cowboy]

46. I didn't say that

I'm saying that newspapers shouldn't be allowed to print whatever the fuck they want. There should be limits such as nudity, gruesome violence, and stuff on what the article is about.

[burrowowl]

122. In America we have drive-up

funeral parlors to view the 'dearly departed' in open caskets and the U$ cannot tolerate a very respectful photograph of flag-draped coffins!?
Give me a break!

[Changenow]

72. A perfect straw man argument.

Change the topic. If you want to debate porn start a new thread, this one is about respect for the fallen and freedom of the press.

[Danieljay]

97. obviously brains are one thing that aren't bigger in Texas..

Are you equating pornography and violence with flagged draped coffins? Just what is your idea of decency, or indecency for that matter.

edit: at least not generally, all due respect to those wonderful Texans that have one, including my Sister and her family, Hey Sis!

[prodigal_green]

100. You mean pictures like this?

(Uday Hussein)
or


(Iraq Mass Grave)

I guess it is only acceptable when it serves the appropriate propaganda purposes.

[Bridget Burke]

41. You have "no remorse for what she did" ?

Please, we're trying to dispel the myth of the illiterate Texan!

She's the one to have remorse. And I doubt she does.

Since she was not a member of the media, it's not media rules she violated. Perhaps there were corporate rules. But sometimes rules need to be broken.

This country must realize that people are actually dying over there.

[Fort Worth Cowboy]

43. People know soldiers are dying

We do not gruesome pictures to prove that, believe it or not the pentagon is not hiding any deaths. They are being open and upfront with how many soldiers are dying in Iraq each day.

[Mari333]

51. No, people dont care if soldiers are dying

they would prefer not to think about it.
I think its high time they had it shoved right in their face, along with photos of dead civilians and dead soldiers and wounded on both sides.
A picture speaks a thousand words. People should know the truth, and what this war is all about.
Its long overdue.

[Fort Worth Cowboy]

55. Scare tactics?

People know soldiers and citizens are dying, that fact isn't being hidden. Shoving pictures down people's throats is just going to drive them away.

[javadu]

81. Away from What? n/m

.

[July]

133. One picture of a few caskets after over a year

= "shoving pictures down people's throats"?

And what will the picture drive people away from? Support for the war, perhaps?

Showing the returning caskets, carefully draped in the flag these soldiers died under, is hardly gruesome or scary. It is a fitting tribute to those whose names and faces we do not know to at least honor them in death.

[jackstraw45]

54. You'd call this picture gruesome?!?!?!

[Fort Worth Cowboy]

56. What picture?

I don't see it.

[bobthedrummer]

57. If you believe that just go visit a VA hospital-and reassess the source

because the Pentagon of Mr. Revolution in Military Affairs- Donald Rumsfeld is full of neo-conservative liars and, imho, traitors abusing our military, hiring mercenaries, forming criminal enterprises, promoting PNAC under the administration of George W. Bush aka The War President.:grr:

[Fort Worth Cowboy]

59. Clinton wasn't a war President?

He unloaded more troops in different spots of the world more then any President in recent memory.

[bobthedrummer]

69. No, but he was impeached by Republicans for a character flaw

not war crimes and profiteering, something is suggesting to me that perhaps this isn't the place or thread to denigrate President Clinton who usually did a very good job for the people, and I'm an independent that voted for him, not a Democrat.
I'm also a lifelong anti-fascist.
Sheesh...

[Danieljay]

98. If my memory serves me right..those were mostly peace keeping operations

Which are a little bit different than a war based upon a lie and a total cluster(bleep) of a foriegn occupation.

[Rationality]

104. This is where you fucked up, Cowboy. Go back to school now...

And water the grass...

[lolly]

114. Damn . . .

Wanted to ask cowboy whether he thought we should publish all the flag-draped coffins that came home during Clinton's war . . .

oh, wait . . .

[Changenow]

74. There is nothing gruesome about the dignity of flag draped coffins.

But you might already know that.

[Sunny_Sunshine]

80. This was a "gruesome picture"?

Disturbing yes, but certainly not gruesome. Flag draped coffins. And no, the vast majority of people are not thinking about how many soldiers are dying and especially are clueless about civilian Iraqis dying. They are too busy worrying about gas prices and where they will spend summer vacation.

[ze_dscherman]

82. Sometimes pictures are necessary

Pictures play an important role in the formation of public opinion. They appeal to human empathy much, much more than just a small headline reporting just another number. That's why the Pentagon is doing it's very best to control which pictures are shown. They have learnt from Vietnam.

Hell would break loose, if pictures of maimed Iraqi children, guts and gore, crippled veterans and all the reality of war would be shown by the U.S. media. People would begin to feel again: That this war kills real people, wether they are Iraqis or U.S. soldiers.

But this has to be prevented by any means. Thousands of Iraqis have died, and hundreds of U.S. soldiers. They died and will die a cruel and unnecessary death for whatever reason that has been invented.

I feel it much more important to protect them, and not those with weak stomachs. I saw the shocked faces (on film) of Germans who were led through the horror of concentration camps. I'm sure, had they seen the reality of death and torture, instead of the Nazi propaganda by their media, they would have put an end to war.

So, you are right: There are very reason for the rule to only show the pictures accomplished missions. But these rules are only made to protect the wrongdoing of U.S. politics.

Better wake up from fairyland.

[July]

84. "Open and upfront"? I don't think so.

Is that why they're still giving "killed in hostile action" numbers instead of "killed in a combat zone" numbers? Is that why they refuse to even TRY to count Iraqi dead?

Believe it or not? I don't believe it.

[sophie996]

96. "i have no remorse for what she did"

Thanks, Bridget--I was starting to worry that Molly Ivins has the only dictionary in Texas.

And yes indeed, sometimes rules need to be broken.Ellsberg, Vanunu, Thoreau, for instance. Heck, women wouldn't even have the vote in this country if some brave ones hadn't broken the rules.

"Non-cooperation with evil is a sacred duty."--Gandhi

[Occulus]

42. Translation: you can't say that or you'll be punished

How very American.

[Fort Worth Cowboy]

45. So

Do you think newspapers have the right to post hardcore sex pictures or gruesome photos such as a man lying on the ground missing his head? We have people out there with uneasy stomachs.

[Bridget Burke]

49. You're repeating yourself.

The picture in question is not pornography. Neither is it gruesome. It's a respectful picture of American dead.

If it gives people pause to see this while they're eating their breakfast--perhaps they ought to put down their Pop Tarts & consider what our government is doing to our own people.

[Fort Worth Cowboy]

52. Did I say it was pornography

You seem to be missing my point. Pentagon has made it a violation against media rules to post pictures of flag drapped coffins returning to the US. What does that prove? People know people are dying, they don't need to see pictures to prove it. See this is what you all want, you want people with uneasy stomachs to be affected so you can swarm in and talk about how terrible and illegal this war is. That point can be made without pictures. She violated media rules therefore she should be punished, don't you agree?

[Bridget Burke]

58. No, I don't agree.

You're the one who was talking about hardcore sex in the pages of the New York Times. That's pornography. While porn has its place, I agree the Times is not it.

All wars are terrible. This one is illegal. People are dying and many in the US don't seem to care--even about the US soldiers.

And what kind of Texan wastes so much energy defending chickenshit "rules"?

[Fort Worth Cowboy]

63. I was talking about media rules and how they must be followed

Whether you should be allowed to post coffin drapped pictures of soldiers returning is a different story. My point is she violated media rules and therefore she should be punished which she was.

[fishwax]

75. Couple of Points

1. She's not in "the media." She was a cargo worker who took pictures of the coffins.

2. The Pentagon doesn't have "media rules" against "posting pictures" of coffins or the dead. The U.S. government restricts media access to locations at which dead American soldiers are shipped and arrive. If the media gets the pictures (as the Seattle Times apparently got this picture), than the media can print them.

With respect to pictures of coffins (and with respect to more gruesome pictures of the dead and wounded), the media rules attempt to restrict access. They can't restrict content.

[Lizz612]

85. Well said

and welcome to DU :hi: I think you might be around longer than others on this thread.

[RC]

123. Hey cowboy..

Rules are for the benefit of the people making the rules.

Just because someone makes a rule does not mean it must be followed sheeple like.
How about if I make it a rule that a picture of the the dead mangled body of every American killed in Iraq be printed in their home town paper? It's a rule. I made it. I think it is a good rule.

It would sure help to bring the war home to suburbia and shut the war mongers up. Might even help stop the next unnecessary 'WAR', ya think?

[prodigal_green]

101. Weak Stomachs?

Are you f'ing kidding me?

Yes, sometimes the truth is ugly. That doesn't mean we should be shielded from it or sweep it under the rug. Unless you understand the consequences of your actions, you cannot make a competent decision.

Watch Fox if you want news that won't make you think.

[Just Me]

50. Flag-covered coffins qualify as "gruesome"?

Hmmmmm,....

[Fort Worth Cowboy]

53. Wow did I say that?

:eyes:

[AtTheEndOfTheDay]

110. Yes, you did.

Pretty lame too.

[Mari333]

60. I could give a rats ass if their stomachs are uneasy

imagine how uneasy it is for me with a kid under mortar fire over there who could die any minute or be blown to bits?
Let the rah rah US public who supports this bloodbath BE uneasy..its high time they were uneasy and got out of their comfy chairs where they scream and holler about how wonderful the war is, and see whats really going on. If I have to suffer the horror of knowing my kid could be blown up any minute because of their goddamn war, they should suffer what I have to go thru every day for one frigging moment in their lives.
Let them see it all, the dead, the dying, the wounded on both sides.
Otherwise, they are hypocrites of the worst kind.
http://www.bringthemhomenow.com

[Occulus]

65. Pornography, in this context, is irrelevant,

unless you view flag-draped coffins as pornographic.

Ball's in your court. You just equated our dead soldiers with pornography. Way to go!

[icymist]

67. Why do you redirect the discussion?

Hey Tex, a picture of dead soldiers returning as cargo is not going to lead to pictures of pron! Why are you afraid of addressing the picture in question in stead of changing the subject? I believe that the truth is that you have no real answer except to root and hurah for this very ugly war.

[coda]

87. GHW Bush = Uneasy Stomach + Barabara Bush = Beautiful Mind

We must "protect the public" and pretend we're getting it done on the cheap.

They also "protected" this country from the monetary cost of this war when this malAdministration sold it as costing anywhere from 1.7 billion to 3 billion dollars. Then 25 billion to 50 billion.

Now we're being "protected" from the human cost.

You can't hide from the bill collector or the truth, forever.

[DrWeird]

89. C'mon people, don't feed the trolls.

The fact that these freepers show so much disrespect for our troops speaks for itself.

[susanna]

120. People with uneasy stomachs?!

That is insulting, at best. For example, I still have an uneasy stomach thinking of my dear friend who was killed a year ago in Iraq.

The fact is, I am MORE thankful than you can imagine that his lifeless body was treated with respect and honor by those cargo workers. They brought him home to his friends and family so we could both celebrate his life and grieve his death.

This woman's courage in taking this photo, combined with her recounting of how the fallen were treated in her care, give me great peace. I now believe that my friend was treated well on his final journey home, thank God.

I commend this woman's courage. If we, as a people, can't handle death (uneasy stomachs and all), maybe we should get out of the business of war. It's really that simple.

[coda]

48. " I have no remorse for what she did. "

I don't think anyone expects you to have remorse for something you didn't do.

[Lars39]

61. She wasn't a media member.

Pays to read the article.

[Fort Worth Cowboy]

64. Sigh

The pentagon banned taking pictures of caskets being returned to the United States. Whether she was a member of the media doesn't matter, she violated media rules and therefore she was rightly punished. I did read the article.

[mbperrin]

71. I've lived in Texas my whole life

and I never knew a Texan who gave a shit about arbitrary rules and regs, whether from dickheads covering their asses at the Pentagon or some chickenshit employer with an axe to grind.

I've been on rigs where the crew drained the oil out in order to get a shift off because the company man couldn't find another crew and you had to stay on 24 hours or more, for example. Now that's a real crime. But if they wanted us to come back tomorrow, swallow it. They did.

Now let me make myself very clear. People are dying. Anybody telling the truth and showing the truth about that cares about people. Any body who wants to conceal or limit that truth is one of the Bush butt-boys.

Choose.

[Nihil]

77. Sigh

Maybe you need to read it again rather than just the headlines.

She did not violate any media rules by taking the photograph.
Other people since may have violated the Pentagon's media rules by
"publishing" the picture but she did not.

The only rules by which she could be "justifiably" fired are those of
the shipping company for which she works. Many distribution companies
have "privacy" rules that forbid employees, contractors and visitors
from taking photographs. (I don't work for such a company but I've had
to visit some in the course of my work and have seen the signs saying
"No cameras beyond this point" and all the rest.)

In that sense - and that sense alone - she might have been fired with
appropriate cause. The defence is moral, not legal (i.e., yes she did
break the company rules but only for a 'higher cause' or however they
phrase it these days).

None of your previous ranting about "media laws", "gruesome" images of
wounder/dead soldiers or "pornography" have anything to do with the
subject of this thread and so only serve to sugggest that you prefer
to distract rather than enlighten.

Anyone would think that you don't want Americans to see how costly
the Iraq fiasco is in human terms ... the "beautiful mind" approach.

Nihil

[Changenow]

70. Are you aware that returning soldiers

aren't photographed for solely political reasons. Sometimes rules are so wrong that a statement had to be made by breaking them.

Check out this link. http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A55816-2003Oct20¬Found=true

We have given up too much already.

[javadu]

83. In One Way You Are Right

She did violate the rules. However, I have always admired Americans who broke stupid rules made by powerful people to protect powerful people. Good for her.

There is nothing that I detest more than "media rules" when it comes to political matters such as war. It as if the Pentagon can't "trust" the public. Jack Nicholsan screaming, "YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!" comes to mind. I think that we should always error on putting out too much instead of too little information to the public. You may not have much remorse for this person who publicized this picture, but I don't feel any angst about upsetting a few queasy stomachs.

Finally, her husband also lost his job. There is little doubt that this crossed a line and someone should be responsible for it.

[bobbyboucher]

86. Are you a real cowboy?

Or are you an "all hat,no cattle", punk-ass, jack-off cowboy like Bush?

Figures you would be for firing a woman over a real life photo that did no harm whatsoever except to the illusion that Chimpy and ya'll are trying to put over on the US.

Nice try, cowboy.

[proud patriot]

40. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

I'm so mad I could spit :mad:

[jmcgowanjm]

47. Wake Up Call, Tex

We're the Bad Guys. One of the Marines'
conditions in Fallujah is that AlJazeera leave
the City.

Fallujah is the Alamo to Iraqiis.

We invaded Iraq. We're killing its People.
We're stealing its oil.

With the public inattentive, there is no check on
the Christian-Zionist agitation to escalate the Middle
Eastern conflict. Prepare to sacrifice your sons to
Christian fundamentalist delusion and to a Greater
Israel.

http://www.antiwar.com/roberts/?articleid=2365

http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/coffin_photos/

[suegeo]

62. The reporter of this story seems like a non-whore

The guy who wrote this story for the Seattle Times (Hal Bernton) seems like a pretty good journalist, based on his stories that I've read (which I est. to be maybe a half dozen stories, so my sample size could be misleading...).

A non-whore reporter in the Imperial Empire is rare find these days.

[Mari333]

66. He is, I talked with him on the phone last night

I thanked him a week ago for printing the coffins picture. He called me last night and asked me why I appreciated it so much.
Hes a good person, I could tell.
We should all send him an email and thank him , seriously.

[Changenow]

76. Except that he reports that the policy has been in place since '91.

Which is just not the case, at least as far as enforcement is concerned.

[Guaranteed]

78. That has to be illegal. nt

[frankly_fedup2]

91. Thanks for the post with the photo

That picture should say more to the supporters of this war than any argument they have for continuing it.

Email it to your representatives and senators and even send one off to ole dubya.

We should inundate them with this picture.

[oasis]

92. But..but Bush praises the character of the American people. Surely their

resolve to wage this "war against terror" would not be shaken by the image of flag draped coffins.

[Pale_Rider]

93. Dover 'death' photos on the internet ...

... according to Drudge Report (now I'll go and take a shower).

http://www.drudgereport.com/dover.htm

[skip fox]

94. See here for more pictures. . .

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x1453879

[Domitan]

99. The Land of the Free!

Don't you just love having the freedom to get fired for revealing politically embarrassing photos? And damn the rights of the people to know what is really going on?

[Fovea]

105. Goodnight first amendment

will the last person willing to tell
Americans an unpleasant truth
about the Iraqi war turn
the teletype off on the way out?

[MercutioATC]

109. This is NOT a 1st Amendment issue.

There are, in fact, two issues involved here:

1) The prohibition the military has on showing pictures of caskets, and

2) the firing of an employee for breaking this rule (and, most probably, the terms of the contract between her firm and the U.S. Government).

I agree that #1 should be dealt with. The American public has the right to complete transparency where the deaths of U.S. servicepeople are involved. It's a rule that needs to be changed.

I don't have an issue with #2. Not only did the employee choose to disregard a military rule, she chose to place her firm in breach of contract (most likely). Her company has every right to fire her for this.

Just my .02

[icymist]

113. Maybe the military should reconsider out-sourcing?

If the military wants to make such rules then shouldn't the military be doing these jobs? Having so many contract workers in sensitive military work may not be such a great idea. Another 'well' thought out plan from the Bush-Co* administration.

[MercutioATC]

116. Actually, it's not just Bush. This goes on all of the time, for good

reason.

The military can 1) buy equipment and maintain personnel sufficient to meet all of its wartime needs or 2) maintain a base level of personnel and equipment and contract for more when the need arises.

Which makes more financial sense?

Of course, there ARE some things that the military has to do itself, but things like hauling cargo can more effeciently be done by contract sometimes.

[Guaranteed]

121. It is a 1st Amendment issue, because of your first reason

The government is restricting the freedom of the press. That's a clear violation of our rights.

As far as your second reason that you raised, you're correct. She can be fired for breaking her employer's rules.

[MercutioATC]

124. Actually, the military prohibits showing (or taking) pictures of a lot of

things...so do private businesses...so do I, as a private citizen, for that matter.

It's not a violation of the 1st Amendment.

[0007]

112. This is a fucking outrage

[NashVegas]

115. TOP Story on ABC News tonight

well well well

[Algorem]

119. NBC too,hardtobleev,and Rather mentioned it later.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3032619/

[sjgman9]

117. Hey Rummy!

Let the people see the coffins. What on earth do you have to hide?

[Snellius]

126. Why have they closed down thememoryhole.org but not Drudge?

Drudge reproduced the same pictures but they're still online.

[Maeve]

127. Is it closed or just overwhelmed?

I suspect the latter--the Washington Post had a direct link in their on-line story and the address has been all over the news today (radio and tv). That would tax any server.

[Barbara Ann]

129. What a crock of shit!

She won't have any problem getting a job in the US.

Bring it on!