Skip to main content

We all know that the true cost of the Iraq war is downplayed by the American media, both in print and in photos.  Today, the LA Times reports their findings regarding photojournalism during the Iraq war.

The young soldier died like so many others, ambushed while on patrol in Baghdad. Medics rushed him to a field hospital, but couldn't get his heart beating again.

What set Army Spc. Travis Babbitt's last moments in Iraq apart was that he confronted them in front of a journalist's camera.

An Associated Press photograph of the mortally wounded Babbitt remains a rarity -- one of a handful of pictures of dead or dying American service members to be published in this country since the start of the Iraq war more than two years ago.

A review of six prominent U.S. newspapers and the nation's two most popular newsmagazines during a recent six-month period found almost no pictures from the war zone of Americans killed in action. During that time, 559 Americans and Western allies died. The same publications ran 44 photos from Iraq to represent the thousands of Westerners wounded during that same time.

Many photographers and editors believe they are delivering Americans an incomplete portrait of the violence that has killed 1,797 U.S. service members and their Western allies and wounded 12,516 Americans.

(Emphasis mine.)

Only 44 photos. Try to wrap your mind around that.  It's difficult, at least for me.

Here are some reasons for the low numbers, plus one editor's point of view:

Journalists attribute the relatively bloodless portrayal of the war to a variety of causes -- some in their control, others in the hands of the U.S. military, and the most important related to the far-flung nature of the conflict and the way American news outlets perceive their role.

"We in the news business are not doing a very good job of showing our readers what has really happened over there," said Pim Van Hemmen, assistant managing editor for photography at the Star-Ledger of Newark, N.J.

"Writing in a headline that 1,500 Americans have died doesn't give you nearly the impact of showing one serviceman who is dead," Van Hemmen said. "It's the power of visuals."

Obviously, the reasons are complex.  The article mentions that some imbedded photojournalists have been censored by the military units with whom they are associated;  they are often told to turn off their cameras.  Also, many of the pictures can't be published due to privacy reasons, namely if the soldier's identity can be recognized.  Also, some photos are deemed too graphic to publish.

Of course, the internet wingnut contingency had an opinion:

... a handful of conservative Internet commentators hammered the Pulitzer Prize awarded to the Associated Press in April. They said the wire service's 20 winning photos for breaking news (including the one of the 24-year-old Babbitt) bucked up the insurgents and failed to show U.S. troops looking heroic or helpful. The pictures, said a blog called Riding Sun, "portray the American invasion and occupation of Iraq as an unmitigated disaster."

I have some news for you, genius:  the war is an unmitigated disaster.  Click here to read Riding Sun's comments on the AP photos.  Apparently, he's a Michelle Malkin and LGF fan.  Big surprise.

Finally, please check out the flash presentation on the sidebar of the article.  It includes the AP photo of Travis Babbitt, as well as photos from previous wars.

Look below the fold for two tables that accompany the article.  Note that the Seattle Times is the only paper that has published a photo of one of the fallen soldiers.  Also note that the papers have posted photos of dead Iraqis.

I've also posted the AP photo of Babbit;  you can click it for a larger image, which is a screenshot I took of the flash presentation.


Originally posted to Daily Kos on Sun May 22, 2005 at 07:46 AM PDT.


Photos of dead U.S. soldiers

75%171 votes
19%45 votes
4%11 votes

| 228 votes | Vote | Results

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Oops (4.00)
    Only 44 photos out of 559 wounded.

    You mean 0 photos of 559 killed, and 44 photos of thousands wounded, right?

  •  They Make Me Feel Bad (none)
    And I wanna feel good all the time.

    Their greed will be their downfall -- Capt. John Aubrey

    by angry blue planet on Sun May 22, 2005 at 07:51:13 AM PDT

    •  Turn of Fox News! (4.00)
      That'll cheer ya up. It will also help develope a nice sense of anger towards those danged Dems. And they got wicked cool graphics to go along with the excellent fluff that they cover so well. Although it is getting progressively (can I use that word) harder to tell them from all of the other "news" outlets.

      They want the federal government controlling Social Security like it's some kind of federal program - George W. Bush

      by kitebro on Sun May 22, 2005 at 08:08:53 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Hmm (none)
    So apparantly Iraqis just die, they don't grieve.  Maybe the US soldiers are grieving for all the dead Iraqis.
  •  6 soldiers trying to save the life of one... (4.00)
    ... and the MSM wants to be complicit in hiding these photos of human compassion and caring.  

    Hiding the cost of this war deprives us of the true examples of our humaness.

    A vote for Bush is a vote for torture

    by Gator on Sun May 22, 2005 at 08:04:16 AM PDT

    •  Video (none)
      One of the problems with images that have been shown from Iraq is that they tend to come from sources that are pushing their own viewpoint.  There's nothing wrong with having an opinion, but people are less likely to encounter the pictures if they have to go to Al Jazerra's website,, or any of the military blogs.  I think people need more images and less of other people's opinions.

      Feeling that need, I've complied a video of photos from internet sites, military blogs, and just about everywhere I could find.  Many of the people on this site have been incredibly helpful.  Does anyone know how or where I can post this video so people can see it?

      •  Huh? (2.75)
        SPIN of grisly photos from an illegal and unecessary war is what you want?

        curious: what sort of SPIN on all of this death do you choose to use?

        never mind-- I've heard it already from BushCo; and from the head moll of the gang herself who flat out stated not long ago, "Why should I trouble my beautiful <puke> mind with these things?" or some such elitist statement.

        •  spin (none)
          Are you sure you responded to the right post?  

          We seem to share the same sentiment: wanting a spin-free look at the images of Iraq.  I'm just as angry as you are, but I think you should read what I wrote more carefully.

          •  You are abusing the rating system, Bob! (none)
            Maybe you need to practice what you preach and read my comment more carefully!  Just why did you think it was deserving of a 2?  Have you not seen numerous diaries on this site bemoaning the fact that the press won't report on the war while each day there is an excellent diary that very few bother to view or recommend?  Please line that up for me, Bob because your 2 rating makes me angry!  

            And, while you're at it, please tell me what Rub ever did to you to deserve a 2 rating.  Have you taken the time to visit his daily diary?  I seriously doubt you have.  OR, do you not understand the terms diary whore and diary pimp? Those are common terms that are used often on this site.

            The Christian Right is neither Witness Every Day

            by TXsharon on Sun May 22, 2005 at 01:27:54 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Somewhere a conservative is laughing at us (none)
              This morning I got up early and finished the video about Iraq that I was talking about.  I did it because I felt like it needed to be done, and because, like I said above, people have not seen enough of the images from the war.

              It was not easy to make this video.  I have always had trouble looking at gory stuff, and there's plenty coming from that part of the world.  Still, I did it, and cried more times than I can remember in the process.  

              At the end of all this, I wanted to show this to the dkos community.  It's a good video, and worth watching.  

              And then what happened?  Superpole accuses me of being an elitist and being like Bush.  Not to be outdone, you pile on about what ratings I gave to who.  It's hard for me to understand why this is such a big concern for you.  

              I didn't agree that Dkos members are hypocrites.  I think there's a gigantic number of incredibly number of compassionate people on this site.  They're here so that when the next election comes around we can win, and no one's paying them to be here.  This site really has a great sense of community.  

              Or maybe I'm wrong.  Maybe we are just a bunch of elitist liberals, who get angry about things that don't matter like "2" ratings and argue amongst ourselves only because we're too busy talking to realize that we actually agree for the most part with one another.  Tell me, am I wrong?  Or better yet, just prove me wrong.  You're halfway there already.

              Feel free to continue your campaign against me.  Enjoy yourself, say some insulting things while you're at it.  They'll be a conservative laughing while you do it...laughing and counting their votes.

              •  You didn't answer my question, Bob. (none)
                All I can deduce from your answer is that you didn't agree with my assessment that complaining about the press's lack of war coverage and then not taking the time to read the excellent daily diary series is being a hypocrite.  Please tell me how that is not being a hypocrite.  Disagreeing with someone is not a good reason to dish out a 2.

                The reason that I care is because you got up early this morning and made a movie that was difficult for you to make.  I truly appreciate that you took the time and effort to make the movie--it is important!   However, have you taken the time to read through RubDMC's dairy series?  We, Rub and the tiny handful who read and recommend his diaries, have been doing what you did this morning EVERY DAY for the past 153 days.  We have cried together and consoled each other for 153 days over 153 heartbreaking pictures and the poems that were carefully chosen to go with the pictures.  Then you come along and have the fucking, nerve to give Rub a 2 rating for whoring his diaries! Maybe you don't understand the rating system on this site, but giving out a 2 is pretty insulting and you don't do that just because you disagree with someone.

                I will still be very interesting in watching your video.  I will also recommend it and get others to watch.

                And, BTW, what do I care if a conservative laughs at me?  If I start caring about stuff like that, I won't be very effective.

                The Christian Right is neither Witness Every Day

                by TXsharon on Sun May 22, 2005 at 06:23:10 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

      •  I'll host it for you if you want. (none)
        if hosting is the problem, you're welcome to plop it onto one of my sites and link to it from there.

        alternately, if you need someone to build the appropriate html around it or turn it into flash video, can do that too. email me if interested: david at rabidnation dot com.

        The sound of no hands clapping

        by RabidNation on Sun May 22, 2005 at 12:18:17 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  "his mother had mixed feelings" (4.00)
    At least she got to see her son's comrades working like hell to save him, and he didn't die alone. Being a medic really sucks, I know 2 who were in VN and they still suffer.  

    "It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from its government." --Thomas Paine
    "And the world from this President"--BOHICA

    by BOHICA on Sun May 22, 2005 at 08:04:41 AM PDT

    •  I had the same thought (4.00)
      Imagine knowing your son or daughter died alone, from terrible injuries.
      •  known v unknown... (none)
        You want to know that your loved one died with his friends around him. You fear that's not going to happen. And you just don't know.

        The 'mixed feelings' piece is pretty accurate descriptor.

      •  I am trying hard not to be insensitive (4.00)
        to all that have not had any medical background here.  We in this field accept the blood and guts of things.  We simply forget that the others out there do not accept things as we do with our eyes and hearts.  Maybe I should just keep my mouth shut here, but it is needed to be shown to eveyone who is willing to see it.  At least it is not on your TV day and night like back in the 60's etc.  Even said, it still get to us too.  ONe can ot beging to understand being up close and personal to this kind of going on.  let alone being in a combat zone.  We must not forget those two things going on at the same time.  Being safe is always on ones mind....ALWAYS!!!!!  I am not going to make anay excuses for anyone, even myself, but all I want to get acrsoo to youall is it is simply not a good thing...we should not be there at all, period.  This is the topic we should be banging on the doors of every politicians door about.  Not all Iraqis are the enemy!  This is after all their land...I think we forget those little things.  Oh well, I will shut up now...and go...thanks for even thinking of those who are forever in our hearts and minds...Americans and Iraqis together.  May God have mercy on allour souls.
  •  The tide has turned against this war (4.00)
    I think it went back to the humvees and the armor.  When they dropped their hand, and let it be known how ill equipped the men were, and the nature of the war --when Rumsfeld said "You go to war with the army you have."  That was flippin outrageous!!

    I am astounded.  Sometimes I thought they'd been abandoned there.  The time a group of soldiers refused to transit some fuel, because they knew they wouldn't be safe... and they were put up on charges of insubordination.

    I'll be right back with a link to:


    Who controls the media, controls the fates.

    by Apian on Sun May 22, 2005 at 08:07:29 AM PDT

    •  The Stoty Of The Soldiers (4.00)
      who refused to transport the fuel was much worse than reported by the news.

      Not only was the route desperatly unsafe, the fuel itself was defective and would have endangered lives had it been used.  The fuel had already been refused once before at the same destination.

      Those brave guys were heroic not to do as they were commanded and happily they suffered no retribution.  But their commander was relived of duty I am pleased to report.

      You can't always tell the truth because you don't always know the truth - but you can ALWAYS be honest.

      by mattman on Sun May 22, 2005 at 08:31:14 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  51 Percent of Americans Now Think It's Not (none)
      worth what we've lost and what we're going thru-- just to get rid of one piss-ant dictator who wasn't a threat to American soil.

      cracks in the Neoclown empire building effort are widening with each passing day.

      endgame: The day (coming soon) that Ayatollah al Sistani punches the JIHAD against U.S. occupation button.

  •  Damn (4.00)
    when you think that actual coverage might translate ito actual disgust, this is unbelievable. Guess I'll call my home paper tomorrow.

    Anything by Loudon Wainwright III

    by Earl on Sun May 22, 2005 at 08:07:47 AM PDT

    •  My home paper (none)
      is one of the "yay war!" ones.  It endorsed Bush, too.

      There's a difference between supporting the troops, and endorsing Bush.

      One paper can't do both without exposing its stupidity or hypocrisy.

      It's the Albuquerque Journal, so I'll vote for stupidity.

      I like reading the stories about the ones who make it home, but for WEEKS after the war started, the paper had 20-foot-high "THE WAR!!!  GOES ON!!! WE BOMBED AND SHIT!!!" headlines.

      It was awful.

      •  Really , really awful (none)
        I believe the publisher and editor of the Albuquerque Journal are rich white guys who have not donated any of their children to the cause of Bush's regime change.  So what's not to love about an exciting war that we are sure to win?

        But plenty of under-class folks in NM have served, are serving, are will serve in Iraq, and plenty have come home in body bags.

        However, we shouldn't be weighing all this death and destruction our Christian president and his handlers have unleashed.  We should have focused more on the death of one severely incapacitated white Florida woman.  We should now focus on the unfairness of the filibuster in preventing two incompetent judicial nominees from being confirmed.  Also, the runaway bride from GA--now there's a serious matter.

        Seriously, Page, thanks for this diary.  

      •  I don't know if I expect much from mine (none)
        Small town paper. I suppose I was trying to finnd something, another crack to follow, maybe lead tto the bursting of the damn. It's harder because even these smal town papers are owned by some conglomerate that owns a hundred papers. I'll still call--no, I'll write, with links to photos, maybe the "Iraq War Grief" diarist. Thanks for your work

        Anything by Loudon Wainwright III

        by Earl on Sun May 22, 2005 at 10:14:36 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  As a photographer (none)
      I can tell you categorically that the idea that the war being "far flung" has anything to do with the lack of published photos is pure unadulterated BULLSHIT.

      I could take a digital photo in the Burmese jungle and have it in New York in about three minutes.  The technology is so easy to use and so pervasive as to make this argument laughable.

      The only thing "far flung" about this war is the outrageous pandering by the US press to the propaganda goals of the Bush administration.

      "You may experience episodes of explosive amnesia."

      by redcloud54 on Sun May 22, 2005 at 03:05:37 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I think your misreading the meaning of far-flung (none)
        It is wide ranging nonspecific battlefield. One where attacks erupt in disparate locations without warning (and mostly IED roadside bombings, etc.)

        Not that it is overseas or in a country that is unduly remote.


        Mitch Gore

        Nobody will change America for you, you have to work to make it happen

        by Lestatdelc on Sun May 22, 2005 at 11:10:17 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Ah, I get it (none)
          I see your point.  

          Even so, Vietnam was similarly disjunctive, yet acres of photos made it out of there.  The Bush suppression of photos of flag-draped coffins tells the story of the coverage for me.

          "You may experience episodes of explosive amnesia."

          by redcloud54 on Sun May 22, 2005 at 11:17:16 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Diary Whoring (4.00)
    I post a picture each day at Iraq War Grief Daily Witness (photo) Day xxx - some of which were among those taken by the AP pool and selected by the Pulitzer committee.

    Today's diary is Day 153

    Sorry for the whoring, but this diary was the perfect starightman for my punchline.

    "...psychopaths have little difficulty infiltrating the domains of...politics, law enforcement, (and) government." Dr. Robert Hare

    by RubDMC on Sun May 22, 2005 at 08:10:06 AM PDT

  •  Kultur of Life (4.00)
    Do check out this brilliant little post by Digby on a similar theme.

    "Never underestimate the power of very stupid people in large groups." -- John Kenneth Galbraith

    by GreenSooner on Sun May 22, 2005 at 08:10:55 AM PDT

  •  Heroic? (4.00)
    What the fuck does this moron think people are doing in Iraq? Making a war movie?

    Doe she think he's going to get some John Wayne pose in these shots?

    It's teenagers trying to save their friends. That's it. It's no movie. It's horrible, war is. This idiot needs to enlist and go to Iraq as an 11B and he'll learn quickly heroism isn't a pose.

    •  I would argue several photos show heroism (none)
      is its truest sense. These men were valiantly trying to save this young man's life. That isn't heroic?

      The photo of the men gathered around and praying I find very moving. And I think its heroic as well--in the sense that in the midst of all that horror they can find comfort in each other and in God. A victory for humankind, I call it. That isn't heroic?

      These critics probably love the WWII Memorial in D.C., I'm guessing. And hate the one to Vietnam.

  •  I wouldn't want my mom (none)
    to see me dead on the front page. I think you can convey the cost of war in other ways that are more sensitive to the families of those who die over here. Newspapers can publish portraits and pictures of soldiers during happier times to show what was sacrificed and honor their memory. I feel the same way about pictures of Iraqis who have been killed.

    I work in a combat support hospital in Iraq, so I have seen the realities up close. But I have to say, it seems to me like the media focuses too much on the attacks and not enough on the positive things that are being done.

    •  I saw a photo essay (4.00)
      in the New England Journal of Medicine.  It was put together by some military physicians who worked in a combat support hospital in Iraq.  

      Really horrifying stuff, as I'm sure you have seen.

      My question for you is this:

      What do you think the positive things being done are?  I don't want to comment, since I think someone who's been there is in a better position to do so.

      •  Thousands of little things that I pray will add up (2.50)
        Day-to-day life here goes on in spite of the shadow of violence. Iraq elected a government that is working on drafting a constitution. The majority parties have not moved to exclude the minorities but have worked to safeguard the voices of those disenfranchised by unfair circumstances. Moqtada al-Sadr has denounced the killing of civilians by anyone. People from around the world have shown up in spite of danger and are trying to help however they can.

        I know the media has a responsibility to report what is happening, and it would be wrong for them to try to hide the violence that's tearing this country apart. On the other hand, publicity feeds that violence. So I think that the least the press can do is to show that the majority of Iraqis are peacefully going about the business of building a country. I guess it's the same complaint you hear in the United States--why does the media have to be so focused on the sensationalistic? But while there is certainly more newsworthy tragendy in Iraq, the peaceful and mundane work that is occuring is remarkable too.

        •  Thanks (none)
          I hadn't thought of it as the "thousands of little things".

          I think it's going to take a very long time.  And I do know that there are so many good "little things" going on, too.

          I know that no one wanted the war to go on this long, that some predicted it would degenerate into the disaster that it has become, in many ways.

          If I prayed, I'd pray for things to go as well as they could, and to constantly improve.

          I'll just settle for thinking it :-)

      •  Ms, P Page, (none)
        The NJOM also did an article on ethics of the medical personnel as in prisons, IE AG, Gitmo etc.  What comes frist for them in their oath...the one to the military or the one to their medical profession....was very good.  I supscribe to them just for that very reason...they cover things that the normal journal does not want to touch.
    •  winter, I respect your views on this topic; (4.00)
      However, and appearently you do not understand the entirity of this complex topic.  I was in the VN war and I can honestly tellyou the public has a right to see what their military is doing in their name.  The public has a right to see the war dead--meaning maybe not close up and personal- but they do have a right to see this and they have a right to know [especially the families] that their lovedones were getting the best and most extreme care possible and that they did not die alone.  That is very important for us all to know.  

      As a nurse, I can tellyou that it is important in any setting for the closest of the families to be able to identify with closure and this might help with getting on with things.

      But to even have our government to hide things that is going on from us is not good.  It has always seemed to me that they are covering up something.  That is when we start to question what they are up to.

      The zone of which the combat is happening is important to our winning or loosing.  If we keep going on like this, we will never win, even here at if we should win here.  That is yet another topic to be covered.

      I respect your views.  Army medics and hosptial corpsmen are the best of all breeds of life savers....they are the first to be on scene and they are the ones who should be given the medals of honor.  They will carry around in their hearts all that they did or did not do at said time.  They question did they do the right thing or did they do enough or could they have saved a life or what injury that hey just could not do anything about.  It will go on forever in their minds and hearts...been there done that....

      NO need to rehash that but I just wanted to say my piece on this.  Anyhow, welcome home brother.  Glad youare here with us today.  Stay well and safe....

    •  That's the point (none)
      Maybe more moms and dads would be against the war if they fucking got it that those little photos on the front page ARE the war

      Anything by Loudon Wainwright III

      by Earl on Mon May 23, 2005 at 10:18:32 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Show the pictures (4.00)
    Let - no, make - Americans see combat in all its "glory" every morning with their cornflakes, and maybe, just maybe, they will begin to understand that it is not a goddamn video game. No second lives, no start over button.

    And then make posters of them, and put them in every high school in the country.

    When we were doing high school and college speaking gigs in the 80s (Reagan, "Be All You Can Be", Rambo, etc.) I used to show slides of the most realistic photos from Vietnam that I could find.  Some were pretty gruesome, and we had kids throw up right in the classrooms.

    Good.  Better an upset stomach than one scattered all over the pavement because they fell for the glory bullshit and went and got themselves blown up.

    •  People don't want to know (none)
      Try being a reporter or editor at any newspaper in this country and publishing a picture, or more than one, of someone dying or even bleeding. Then watch and listen as the outraged calls and letters stream into the newsroom:

      How dare you print such terrible things? I was so upset I couldn't eat breakfast! I don't want my children to see such disgusting pictures. This newspaper is for families. You are bad people. I am cancelling my subscription.

      And on. And on.

      I think it's going to take a collective courage implant for the MSM, in which a number of papers start printing these pictures all at once and TV "news" shows start showing them. Put the pictures into people's breakfast and dinner times. Make them uncomfortable. God knows, the soldiers are.

      There's a nice-ninny priest/at tea in everyone,/all cozy and chatty as auntie,/but a saint comes/and throws rocks through the window. -- John Ciardi

      by Mnemosyne on Sun May 22, 2005 at 09:17:49 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  how well I understand your point (none)
        just like the pictures of Abu Graube {sp?] was hard wasn't it...The truth is hard to deal with if given.  I suppose one would want lies to keep going on so we can eat our meals here and have our kids ignorant of the truth.  I gave my kids the truth and two of them served our homeland int he military...Now come again and tell me another one....It is up the the adults to tell the truth, let the kids know the truth...give them more credit than that are reselient...they will always see things as they are if given the way that they are..some already are seeing things theway they are...some are refusing to join the military for that very reason.  You common sense has a way of coming front and center... I think this only shows the ignorance of the adults....
        •  besides, some (none)
          men can not be int he deliver room when those kids are born...too weak kneed they are....shame on your for saying such a thing...or have I read your post wrong.
          •  besides some of those same adults (none)
            do not care about anything but themselves..check out the child abuse of our country and how they deal with you see anything in the papers about this and their you see the broken bones and minds of the children and the cigarette burns on you see failure to thrive from not being you see any of those adults coming forth and saying anything about this..It is sad to hear allt he excuses from all of those adults....My heart breaks every time I see one of these clsoe up and personal..let alone war pictures...It is a bad world out here...everywhere...we are very fortunate that we do not see thsi kind of thing on a daily basis....I could go on and on about the bad things of which goes on our streets..the killing and happenings...You just happened to oick on the wrong one on this case..  Have you see brain matter out of the nose and ears of a child who has been beaten?  Come on now..want to get serious...I see shit like this.  Have see this kind of thing since I was 18 years old in the medical field...hell no you do not see it on the fornt pages of any is toooooo dangerous for our kids to see..some might even bed doing it to those kids...who knows...Hey, this is a war zone..not some picnic....shit happens...and yes we should be seeing this and other things on the front pages of our newpapers ...All we see is dubya and is Lts. doing all their gastly deeds on a daily basis..frankly I am just so sick of seeing his face on the pages of our newspapers and the lies he tells on any given topic, that I could did...ths is why I do not watch the cable news or anything such as that anymore...They have lost my respect...if anything is needed to be learned, I come here to find out about it.  Besides I am usually way to busy saving lives to give a shit about dubya and how he is tearing our world apart....
      •  Show you have some journalistic cajones! (none)
        It is exactly those publications who will dare to show this disgusting war for exactly what it is that will prosper in the long term.  In the short term, there will be the "cancel my subscription" letters from those individuals who prefer to imitate ostriches.

        Help them take their collective heads out of the sand (or whatever human orifice they've chosen to bury them in) and see, yes really fucking see, that war is indeed hell on Earth.

        Local papers other publications NEED to take a stand!  And then let's start embarrassing the hell out of the MSM for not demonstrating any moral courage.

        Praise the Lord, Fire at Will, and Pass the Flippin' Corn Flakes...

  •  Publish almost all (4.00)
    Exceptions.. when a soldier is personally identifiable.  This is just too horrendously distressing for the family at home.  

    We need these pictures seen. The Iraq war is too distant and impersonal now, and in fact war is unreal to most Americans these days.  We've forgotten that there is no good war, and that in war there are no winners, only losers, usually tragic.

    •  agreed, but... (4.00)
      that would be my exception, as well. But, if the media outlet gets permission from the family to run the photo, they should - on the front page, above the fold.

      If you lived in a small town, where everyone knows pretty much everyone else, and you saw your neighbor's 18-year-old son on the front page of the newspaper or on the evening news, dead...

      Entire towns would start protesting this travesty.

      ...Freedom is on the march. Straight to the gas chamber. this is infidelica...

      by snookybeh on Sun May 22, 2005 at 08:58:15 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I disagree - publish all of them. (none)
      It wasn't until, as snooky says, small towns got ahold of pictures of the dead soldiers that everyone knew, that the tide turned against Vietnam. Yes, it's heartbreaking, yes, it angers and frustrates people, but most importantly, it gets the issue out into the open where it can be discussed. One of the largest issues with this war is that it's not on the table for discussion.
  •  During the Vietnam war (4.00)
    it was the press coverage, and the voices of the  returning vets that initiated the protests that eventually ended that war.  Americans have been immune to this disgusting war, because Bush has prevented them from seeing reality.  When Americans see their sons and daughters blown up on the front pages of their local paper, they get a new relate to the shock and awe of toppling dictators.  
    I am grateful my own son, took my advice not to join the Guard 3 years ago when Bush was preparing to invade Iraq.  My heart breaks for those lost and their grieving parents.

    If you tell the truth you don't have to remember anything-Mark Twain

    •  I was thinking the same thing (none)
      I can remember every night on CBS with Uncle Walter, they would show some fighting taking place, the body bags, and the body count. I remember the days when it was way more us than them. But just saying it and showing it can make a difference of how the war is perceived.  

      Think of the smiling German townspeople being taken to the local camps to see the horror of what their country had done to the Jewish people. And be reminded of how these same people were sick from seeing the truth and how it wiped the smiles from their faces as they left crying and very ashamed. They knew what was happening, but to see it made all the difference. It showed reality.

      We do not see reality over there. We do see the nice things but the nice things are the way it is suppose to be. It is the way we want it in our minds. But the reality of this war is that young soldiers have their life ended. And that is NOT the way it is suppose to be.

      At least the tide is turning on support of the war. But maybe it is because of the length of time we are over there and the adding up costs while domestic items at home are cut. But the pictures would sure tell the truth to the American public. Our children are dying because our government lied to us as to the reason we are over there. And if a country wants a democracy, they need to band together just like we did and fight the tyrants. And, later the British burned down our WH and we all became best friends.

      From what we were told, the tyrants were way outnumbered by the unhappy people. But that is another diary all together. Awww, the fear word. Rove's favorite..............

      Fix the Problems, Don't create new ones

      by BarnBabe on Sun May 22, 2005 at 09:07:27 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'm old enough to remember Vietnam, too (4.00)
        Coupled with "The Pentagon Papers" revelations of whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg and hard, investigative reporting by guys like Sy Hersch, those images turned the tide of public opinion and ended what we hoped then would be our last, illegal, immoral war.  

        Sadly, too many forgot too quickly.

        In war, truth is the first casualty.--Aeschylus, Greek tragic dramatist (525-456 BC)

    •  Exactly the reason it's blockaded (none)
      During the Vietnam war it was the press coverage, and the voices of the  returning vets that initiated the protests that eventually ended that war.  Americans have been immune to this disgusting war, because Bush has prevented them from seeing reality.

      Precisely why the orchestrate-everything Bushco has absolutely blocked any notion of these things getting published - up to and including non-specific pictures of flag-draped coffins.  Welcome to the land of an open and free press.  NOT!

  •  Let's not get carried away (none)
    Newspapers are also a business and the reaction to photos such as these can be strong -- e-mails letter-to-the-editor campaigns, protests, public denunciations and then the accounting guys get all nervous and pretty soon the publisher is firing editors left and right. But mostly left.

    Newspapers only publish what can be tolerated by the general public. Every time a controversial photo makes it to the point where editors have to make a judgement call, you can hear the sound of rectums puckering across the newsroom HOWEVER....

    There is no excuse now for papers to say in it's print product that THE REAL COST of war is on one of their Web pages, if they are brave enough to look.

    And then there is the very excellent Iraqi Daily Grief photo.

    Do you look every day?

    "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has." -- Margaret Mead

    by makemefree on Sun May 22, 2005 at 08:36:55 AM PDT

    •  "Do you look every day?" (4.00)
      Um, dude, what do you think?
      •  I don't (none)
        I get too caught up in the politics. I know it's there. I go once in a while. It's now a daily assignment. The post has raised my consciousness.

        "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has." -- Margaret Mead

        by makemefree on Sun May 22, 2005 at 09:01:28 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  need we say more! (none)
          This is the down fall for so many in America.  They should take a more active role in seeing what the land of our birth is doing in our name.  Why do you not do this?  Are y ou too busy to see what is happening in yoru name or what?  I find it very hard to understand this thought process...Really I do.....I suppose to each their own...but REALLY!!
          •  I am convinced.... (none)
            ....that what we are doing is wrong, and wrong-headed. I couldn't be against this war, or this administration anymore than if there were three of me. I couldn't be against this war more if I saw 1,000 of these photos.

            These photos need to be in front of those who still support this war for oil. How do we rub their noses in it? How do we make people face reality when denying reality is what got us into this mess in the first place? I don't know. I'm afraid in a culture of militarism, the first thing you do is ignore the damage ans suffering you have caused.

            "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has." -- Margaret Mead

            by makemefree on Sun May 22, 2005 at 09:44:32 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  Public reaction (none)
      Yes it can be strong--it should be strong. And an editor can inform readers to send their complaints where they belong; they're NEWSpapers, not policy makers.

      Freedom of the Press didn't come with an "unless the accountants object" clause. They have a business to run but also importantly a duty to uphold. How are they going to be held accountable to that if we give them the "bad for business" excuse? Many of our rights--assembly, privacy, speech, even the right to vote--could be at times be deemed "bad for business." Does your comment translate to those situations?

      Anything by Loudon Wainwright III

      by Earl on Sun May 22, 2005 at 10:35:32 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Photography is too powerful to be trusted (4.00)
    The military still remembers Vietnam, albeit incorrectly, and still wants to blame the press for losing the war. It is rubbish of course. But there is no question that photojournalism played a role in illuminating the war and turning decent people against it. Just think of the iconic images: a Buddhist monk burns himself to death in protest; a naked and terrified Kim Phuc fleeing the air strike on her village; one of our allies causualy assassinates an alleged VC; the bodies lined up at My Lai. Hersh was and is great; but there is no substitute for the power of those images.

    Indeed, the entire era was a time of powerful, iconic photographs that contributed to a sense that the world needed to be set right: the murdered students at Kent State; W. Eugene Smith's photoessay from Minamata, Japan, showing the devastating effects industrial pollution could have on the human body.

    There is no question that these images furthered the larger causes of social change and anti-militarism.  The people in charge now--of the government and the media--have their own notions of change, and I think we are all pretty clear that justice, the environment, equality and anti-militarism are not on the agenda. We are a different country.  Consider: a widely circulated, mainstream magazine (Life) ran the Minamata images. Who would do such a thing today, and risk the anger of the wingnuts and the administration?
    We have brave and dedicated photographers who would take the pictures, but who among them is likely to break through? Who are the photographers with household names today, like Eddie Adams or Nick Ut or W. Eugene Smith? Unfortunately for us, the golden age of photojournalism is over and we have one less weapon within reach.

    •  I applaude you !!! well said.... (none)
      Thank you....
      •  No, thank you! (4.00)
        I studied photojournalism for awhile, and I did so because of the people I mentioned above, but especially because of Smith. I believed that a decent, humane person with a commitment to the humanism that once characterized this country, could take up the camera and make the world better by showing us to ourselves, as we are and as we could be. Now that I have thrown out the word "humanism" I wonder if that is not the problem.  The best work from photojournalism's glory years was incredibly humanistic, and of course humanism is now veboten in America. Of course other trends are at play, changes in media, for example. But a fundamental change in ethos has taken place... and phojournalism as a force is just one of the victims.
        •  might I ask who made that change? (none)
          the public or the industry, it's self?
          •  which change? (none)
            Media change?  Probably a combination of things. Strong trends away from print media toward television; print media itself more ad-driven; concentration of ownership, especially among large conglomerates.

            Change in ethos away from humanism? That's one for the social historians. I don't know. Anti-humanism is always around, but how did it get the upper hand?  I suspect the rise of right-wing think-tanks willing to fund pro-corporate and anti-liberal discourse plays a huge role. They don't have any new ideas, but they are capable of steering the public discussion.  The new resurgence of Christian evangelicalism is militantly anti-humanist. But I don't know if these are causes or merely symptoms.  

  •  What I'd prefer (none)
    are more of the photos (which were on the web for a while) showing men being treated with their limbs blown off. These are the veterans who will come back to disasterous home situations, limited care options, a diminished Veteran's Affairs. I had a photo of a man with a bloody stump where his hand had been I kept on my screen for ages to remind me of what was happening.

    Dead should never ever be shown until the relatives are notified.


    •  35 years ago today (4.00)
      Life Magazine published a dual photo essay; one part dealt with the troops then in Cambodia, and the second half dealt with returned soldiers on the spinal injury ward at Bronx VA hospital.  

      Paralyzed veterans, thrown away like yesterday's newspaper.  Laying in beds ignored for days on end. Having to place mousetraps by their pillows every night to avoid getting bitten by rats during the night.  Sharing their hospital room with garbage cans.

      I first saw it while in an AF hospital in Cam Ranh Bay, Vietnam, recovering from gunshot wounds received in Cambodia and was outraged beyond description.  My anger has not lessened one iota in 35 years, and I keep a copy of that magazine just to remind myself if I feel the slightest degree of complacency.

      Publish the pictures.  If it shortens the war by one day, and/or saves a single life, it will be worth all the hate mail that could possibly be generated.

      •  I want to address thsi with you futher. (none)
        Many years ago, I took my parents to the orthopedic floor at Bethesda.....naval hospital this was in 1964 or 65, just can not remember the year father could do nothing but cry...I had to take him out to the lobby for him to gather his senses about himself.....When one who is not knowing of all the pain involved in all of this madness, then one should get educated in it... I am very sure he could tell you a thing or two about his will never know the courage and pain and the integerity of these men and women in all of this...I am only afraid that this administration will let those same kind go and not get much more than the basics....oh I am sure some will get the best...but for the most part..those others will go home and still struggle with their always we all do.....but we owe them way too much to give them the short end of the stick...Where is this administration putting allthe money for the VA to do thier good.not in the VA...they are putting it abck into the pentagon to make mroe wounded and sorry stats for us to cry over...if it is not Iraq, it would be someplace else...that is the way this administration thinks...It means mroe for the likes of Hillaburton....etc....
        •  The current neglect and apathy about veterans (none)
          is exactly what we faced when we came back...1972, Nixon vetoed a portion of the Readjustment Act because it was "fiscally irresponsible"; two weeks ago, supplemental funding to allow the VA to adequately deal with all of the injuries coming out of Iraq was cut from the budget...sigh...

          The recent presidential campaign vividly demonstrated that Vietnam is still very much an open wound on America's psyche, and I am convinced that we are inflicting another such wound today....40 years from now, our kids and grandkids will be arguing over the Iraq war, and the treatment of OIF vets...

          Where and when in VN?  I spent a bunch of time (all of it horizontal) at the 93rd Evac in 1970. One more time and they would have named a ward after me...heh

  •  Dear God How Horrorific (4.00)
    That photograph is making me cry, so I do think maybe these so called religious followers of Jesus who so believe in his ways need to see them each and EVERY day. Then maybe they will quit buying those funkybutt bumperstickers (who gets that money anyway?) that make them look good and perhaps do something real like vote and FIGHT TO END THIS WAR FOR OIL that is killing our children.

    I suppose the hawk view would only make them want to kill more Iraqi.

    How about this...Democratic religious folk go into churches and show them the truth with a lecture and slide show. Better yet a military man or woman that knows firsthand.

    Is it going to take us all being able to put a face on this (someone we know) before we take a stand and end this war and Impeach the man that started it?

    •  " believe in his ways..." (3.50)
      that's just it - they don't "believe in his ways." These fake Christians don't seem to have any use for Jesus's words and teachings, other than the "I am the way" bit. They're all Old Testament, specifically Leviticus and Deuteronomy - anything with lots of punishment and self-righteousness to it.

      They're a social club, with a club handshake and a set of club bylaws that have nothing to do with the club's namesake. They may as well be worshipping a golden calf.

      ...Freedom is on the march. Straight to the gas chamber. this is infidelica...

      by snookybeh on Sun May 22, 2005 at 09:09:38 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Want to end the war for oil? (none)
      1. Move to a place where you don't need to drive.
      2. Sell your car.

      You'll save money and lives.
  •  I call it the war on (4.00)

    The more uninformed or misinformed the public is, the easier it is for today's GOP to stay in power.

    Please link to & visit my blog: Penndit

    by Newsie8200 on Sun May 22, 2005 at 08:57:33 AM PDT

  •  And yet... (4.00)
    ...every person here has seen that cloying photo of the runaway bride in every friggin' paper and online news source.

    I used to make my living as a technology journalist, editor, and writer, and it makes me ache to think how far all journalism has sunk in the US.  Even worse is how willingly the public just goes along with it.  (And I shudder to think what the local press will do when Dub visits a high school about a mile from my house on Tuesday.  I'm sure that "fawning" will barely cover it.)

    As Mark Maron is fond of yelling on Air America, "Wake up, sheeple!"

    •  Bush came to Westfield, NJ, (none)
      a republican stronghold, and my eight five year old dad, walking to Trader Joe's, got involved in a protest and held a sign for 1/2 an hour.  I'm sure there will be a protest of some nature near you. Join it.
  •  We must NEVER, EVER let war be glossed over (4.00)
    War is a mad carnival of horrors, and attempting to gloss over what war is about is criminal to the point of being a felony as far as I am concerned.

    During the Vietnam war I was in the hospital briefly, at Wilford Hall Air Force Hospital, the noted burn center, for tests, and later at Fitzsimmons Army Hospital for a longer stay and got to see some guys that came home....early.

    It convinced me early on during my service years that the late General Smedley D. Butler was most correct in talking about war.  It's a racket that is not good for soldiers at all.

    Now they try to hide the price of war.  Don't,  it's too costly to hide the price, and the public deserves to know that price.  For unlike Vietnam which starteed over the plausible hysteria of Re  Communist expansionism, Iraq started over money and is ALL about money, period.

    So, I pose this question...."Why isn't Jonah Goldberg in uniform and serving in the war he so loudly supports?"  Is he scared he might end up in such a photograph?  I think he is.  I can understand that.  

    But, if you believe in the pack of lies that Bush has foisted off upon us, then you should serve and sacrifice for that pack of lies, no?

    "same old fears, same old crimes-we haven't changed since ancient times.." "Iron Hand" Dire Straits

    by boilerman10 on Sun May 22, 2005 at 09:12:19 AM PDT

  •  Why Does the Pullitzer Prize Committee (none)
    Hate Amurka?

    A democracy can die of too many lies. - Bill Moyers

    by easong on Sun May 22, 2005 at 09:20:10 AM PDT

  •  Bloody Images (none)
    Last year, the department of transportation announced the lowest highway fatality statistics since they began keeping track 29 years ago. Had our media printed graphic pictures of the 42,643 dead and 2,890,000 injured in 2003 source perhaps we would have raged at the pathetic efforts of our government to make automotive travel safe. Are we downplaying the true cost of driving?

    The fact is that we have to make rational decisions and analysis. Graphic bloody images can cause a strong emotional response but do not lead to clear thinking. This is the lesson Bin Laden learned from Blackhawk Down, that when confronted with bloody images we abandon our goals and commitments. If we do so at this point, who will take the pictures of the dead in the Civil war?

    •  So you are saying (none)
      democracy exercised by an informed public is risibly utopian.  Hmmm . . .

      One more county heard from, I guess.  Thanks for sharing!

      •  Informed public (none)
        Actually it was not informing the public I was commenting on, rather inflaming. The more powerful the image the more likely it can be used to bypass logic and cause emotional reaction.
        •  And how does one maintain that distinction? (none)
          I am at a loss to understand how the public can be informed 'logically' without some persons being inflamed 'emotionally'.

          I suspect that you are one who does not resent that the resident lied to you for the reason that he also lied to me.  Am I wrong?

          'Kick me again, sire, as long as you kick those two libs over there too! Thank you, sire!'

          Do I misread you?

          •  I am unhappy (none)
            about the fact that the US was so wrong about the conditions in Iraq. Whether Bush deliberately lied or was just convinced and started picking examples to justify his position (and who doesn't?), I can't be sure. I know that for decades military intelligence has always overestimated threats. It's normal play-it-safe reaction. We thought the Russion Migs were super planes until we got ahold of one via a defector and found it was a rusty piece of junk.

            My particular concern is that we rationally look at where we are and how to proceed with the minimal loss of life. The push for graphic pictures to be published is a desire to inflame the public rather than debate the situation.

            •  How can you say that??? (none)
              Have you not read the Downing Street Memo?

              Sorry, 'minimal loss of life' is an inadequate goal to me.  

              I hate to snark on you; I accept and believe that you are sincere in what you post, and if in parallel universes each of us became SoD I would not be overly surprised that you would bring this to a more satisfactory conclusion than I.  Still, the repercussions of trying to control 'inflamement' send shivers through me!

              If you are going to eat the ham, you should be willing to watch the hog being slaughtered

              by Clem Yeobright on Sun May 22, 2005 at 12:56:41 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Thanks for goading me into reading the memo (none)
                While I'd read excerpts I hadn't read the whole thing. While the 'fixed' phrase does seem ominous, it could be taken to mean the act of selection the examples to make the case, as I suggested. I would also like to point out that later in the memo concerns are raised as to what would be the results of Saddam using WMD on day one or against Isreal etc. If it was known to them that there were no WMD's that would be incomprehensable.

                It is clear that by the time of that memo, the US administration had moved from analysis to action and was preparing the case. Just as you or I might select examples to bolster an argument. It doesn't make us liars, but it may make us wrong. I do not rule out the possibility that there were flat-out lies. Politicians have always been fully capable of that. I just don't consider it proven.

                I'm not advocating censorship of ideas, but I think the goal of publication of photos is to bypass ideas and generate outrage.  I would not be happy with publishing the gory images (that were not published) of the bodies (and parts) from 9/11 for the same reason. Frankly, I really do hope we can stabilize the place and get the hell out of there without it falling apart when we left. I'm convinced we had to leave Viet Nam, but we left a lot of people behind to die who trusted us.

                •  Hah! You have caught me out! (none)
                  1. I had not recognized the implications of the para re WMD as you have: point well made! (BUT ultimately trivial, I believe. Maybe?)

                  2. If you did not, please review the chronology:

                  Why Care?

                  3. Coincidentally (to this conversation), I was there. The 'lot of people' were 'left behind to die' because the Embassy (and the Station) believed they had until HCM's birthday (5/19) and elected for the sake of orderliness to evacuate maids and guards from up-country first and to get around to agents and serious actors from Saigon and Regions III and IV only later . . .  It was 100% our 'oops' - we had the capacity to remove that 'lot of people' in real danger prior to 5/1.  The bargirls of Saigon (scarcely high-value targets) were all gone by 4/27; I had a friend who on 3 consecutive nights took 3 different bargirls to TSN and signed forms that they were his wives, hoping for a life-long menage-a-quatre (I heard in August that it didn't actually work out for him - surprise!)  On 4/27 I encountered the DCOB Saigon putting his maid and gardener on a flight oblivious to his responsibility to dozens of recruited agents.  I could go on . . .

                  There is more on heaven and earth, Horatio . . .  Iraq will fall apart and we will act the buffoons again, I am confident . . .

                  If you are going to eat the ham, you should be willing to watch the hog being slaughtered

                  by Clem Yeobright on Sun May 22, 2005 at 01:59:45 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Politics and Sausage (none)
                    #2 is about what I'd expect. I don't find it particularly surprising or ominous. I'm sure that someone in the Pentagon is planning a war with Mexico. If it were to happen, we need to have plans for it. I know there are plans for a war with Canada. The president can't go on the air, though, and say that we were planning for war with Mexico.

                    #3 as someone who was sitting safely at home with a student deferment, I respect your superior right to comment on the Viet Nam exit. I was, however, referring to more than the mass of humanity on the embassy, but also the boat people etc. A lot of people who were not high-value died none the less.

                    I sincerely fear you are right about Iraq falling apart, but I think it is still up in the air and want to give them a chance to do it if they can. It's not really the same dynamics as Nam. And, getting back to the pictures, I don't like to be manipulated.

                    •  On manipulation (none)
                      I sincerely doubt that you are very 'manipulable'; I would, for instance, be stunned if you were for an instant fooled by this

                      Snopes God Bless You!

                      So, assuming we are not talking photoshop journalism, I think I must go with Mao: let all the flowers bloom!

                      Someone here has mentioned the filmed scenes of the German citizens in May 1945 being forced - by our forces - to view the concentration camps in their neighborhoods and weeping - I saw a clip last month on PBS (I should have taped it, since it is sans doute 'Bill Moyer-ish' and will no doubt be burned (in a tragic accident? like the Reichstag? LOL) in the PBS vault in the next few weeks . . .)

                      Better we - every one of us - see the results of our actions now rather than later.  If we have weak stomachs, we had better galvanize them, because the plan - I truly believe - was that we would be most of the way to India, from the West and perhaps also from the East, by this date.

                      If we are going to be conquerors, ferxrissake let's not be pussies about it! (sez I)

                      If you are going to eat the ham, you should be willing to watch the hog being slaughtered

                      by Clem Yeobright on Sun May 22, 2005 at 02:48:06 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Iran (none)
                        Actually, I'm more concerned about the fact that we have base camps on both sides of Iran. And it has a nuclear program! (stop little pot stop!)

                        Anyway, I agree that knowing what is going on and what is being done in our name is a good idea, but I doubt that showing a dozen pictures of young U.S. servicemen dead or in agony is the way to get a comprehensive view.

                    •  Addendum re #3 (none)
                      We were man enough to laugh about it at the time. The Station started 'paring down' in early April and Case Officer X would bring his files to his 'good friend' CO Y and tell him 'This is xxExuberant and she has been a terrific source for x years and she will be standing on the corner of a and b when the evacuation is broadcast in a green ao-dai and you must get her out', and the next week CO Y would be 'trimmed' and would toss xxExuberant in the burn-bag and take his assets to CO Z with the same plea . . . etc etc etc.  

                      But read LeCarre or Greene and you will be able to guess the whole thing, I think.  The first pass, it is tragedy; we've done it all before so Iraq should be 100% comedy.

                      If you are going to eat the ham, you should be willing to watch the hog being slaughtered

                      by Clem Yeobright on Sun May 22, 2005 at 02:56:52 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

    •  I have to say this..... (none)
      I beg your pardon!  We all should be talking about Iraq not anything else...I know, ones experiences have a lot to do with their thoughts and actions....but Bush 1 left Clinton to deal with the situation leading to BH down...Yes those pictures of our men being drug in the dirt was hard to swollow.  Thsi is what it took to let us see the reality of things...The fraction that did that was from the A Amine {sp?] and he was the madman who put this together...not us.  A lot of mistakes were present from all in our military on that topic...I really do not think we want to go there.....
    •  Rationall? (none)
      Quote:  The fact is that we have to make rational decisions and analysis. Graphic bloody images can cause a strong emotional response but do not lead to clear thinking.

      Nah, baby, not seeing pictures doesn't help people make rational decisions. Helps them make fantasy decisions. Decisions made on un-reality, on phony, pretend versions of the "glory" of war.

      WHAT glory? If people want to see the reality of war and then vote to continue it, fine. Otherwise, they're being treated like babies too silly to know the truth.

      WITH full information we can make rational decisions. Until we have full information, we can't.

      As for people seeing their children's pics on the front page of the paper? Waaaay less hurt than losing the child.

      Reframing the news and people's views of our world:, free subscriptions.

      by AllisonInSeattle on Sun May 22, 2005 at 04:21:30 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  The golden age of journalism (4.00)
    When this happens for this war, I will know the press has turned the corner.
    Our forgotten wounded. Warning large graphics and depressing article. From my diaries, the May 22, 1970 issue of Life magazine.

    "It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from its government." --Thomas Paine
    "And the world from this President"--BOHICA

    by BOHICA on Sun May 22, 2005 at 09:50:28 AM PDT

  •  with exceptions (none)
    As stated above, I would not want family to see carnage of a relative on the front page.  However, there is an exception to this.  How long does the Pentagon hold off telling families?  Is there a deliberate hold on the killed, injured, lost file?

    I will admit bias on this subject.  I watched nightly news on television during the VietNam conflict which did televise the war.  Night after night of dead and wounded.  Finally enough was an enough. For the remaining years, I protested against the war.  It was not the legality nor was it the famous numbers nor the lying as much as it was the bodies and pain and blood I saw night after night.

    Of course, I was 16 and shell shocked at what I was experiencing. War is hell.

    Should they televise and print.  Yes.

  •  THE SILENT PRESS © (4.00)
    Only last evening I too read this article.  I also posted a diary here on Daily Kos and another on my own site, Be-Think.  I never expected to write a series of pieces on this subject, however, my recent writing is the third.  Under King George II, censorship is rampant!  Propaganda rules, and I feel a need to share the information that Bush and his Band hide.

    In my earlier essays, I offered some of the statistical data; in this newer narrative, I took a different approach.  I am thankful that you chose to include much of the facts and figures in your article.

    Here, I offer a glimpse of my own commentary.
    There was shrapnel all about, on my clothes, on the ground, and in my body.  Glass cut my throat, my hands, and my chest; the penetrations were deep.  I could no longer look; I could no longer breathe.  I fell into a deep, deep, sleep.

    No photographs were taken or none were published.  The press, and the President feared repercussions from my parents, friends, family, and from fellow citizens.  They all wanted to be proud of their son [or daughter], their soldiers.  Each wanted to remember me as I was.  They wished for no words or photographs of war, at least not those of the "good guys" wounded or killed.  They were only willing to see, hear, or read of death when it was that of their enemies.

    My hope is that we will all consider the cost of war, not only in dollars, but also the cost of lost lives, limbs, and loved ones.


    I thank you Plutonium Page for a great write-up!!
    Betsy L. Angert, Be-Think

  •  And the network news? (none)
    I would like to see similar statistics given for the nightly network news coverage of how often footage from Iraq/Afghanistan is shown and how often said footage is NEW.  Especially helpful would be if it is compared to the BBC World News statistics.

    Beyond the fact that the Network News (and cable news to a lesser extent) has been turned into "entertainment", it is next to impossible to get facts.  All you see are human interest stories.  As a result, I'm thankful to live in an area where I can easily see the BBC World News on my PBS station.  One shouldn't have to pay cable or internet bills to see what is really happening in the world (though I realize all news stories will be biased in some manner).

  •  World War II (none)

    In the middle of WWII the official policy of not showing combat dead was changed, because it was felt that the public was becoming too complacent. Strock's photo from New Guinea in the fall of 1943 was the first. This subject was treated in a 2003 piece in Time by Joe Klein.
    This discussion is from Texas Military Museum:

    The first is the most historically significant. During the first twenty-one months of America's involvement in World War II, the U.S. government prevented publication of photographs of dead American soldiers and sailors. The war had gone badly at first, yet morale had to be kept up at home and in the field. And so the Office of War Information and the censors of each branch of military service circumscribed the images of the war that appeared in the mass media.

    When the image of war is censored too carefully, there is a threat of war becoming unreal. An OWI memo of 1943 said Americans were in danger of perceiving the war as one in which "soldiers fight . . . some of them get hurt and ride smiling in aerial ambulances, but . . . none of them get badly shot or spill any blood."175 The memo urged that harsher pictures be approved for publication in order to prepare the public for an increase in death and destruction, and to help motivate the home front.

    In September 1943, the military released the first photographs of dead American soldiers. George Strock's images of corpses on Buna Beach, New Guinea, appeared in Life, the largest- circulation picture magazine. The powerful pictures shocked some readers, but a greater number approved of the policy. The Washington Post argued that the pictures "can help us to understand something of what has been sacrificed for the victories we have won."176 Images of dead soldiers appeared regularly after that. All were as anonymous as they could be made to be. Efforts were made to crop the photos or obscure the victims' faces, name tags and unit insignia. The caption to Strock's Buna Beach photo--"Three dead Americans lie on the beach at Buna"--told Life's readers that they did not need to know the names of the dead in order to appreciate what they had done.

  •  Re: Photos that are de-captioned (none)
    One of the items not discussed is the obscene treatment of the photos of the dead servicemen and women--without a caption. Like the blank marks over the eyes of the pall-bearers, the captions "de-foliate" the meaning of the casket by not assigning it a name.
      In an age where DNA evidence can provide the name of most everyone killed, this practice is doubly-obscene. The serviceman or woman is dead; yet the photos are released without even the effort to identify which person, airfield, etc., so that people would have an idea, if only for the historical record, as to the significance of each picture.
       In the public release of several hundred photos, some pall bearers had their faces/eyes blanked out; while others didn't. No explanation at all as to why. Yet shoulder patches are available, so you can at least see what units are involved. In some, there are both Air Force and Navy, others Marines and Navy, others Army and Marines. One of the photos even showed a Navy coffin being disposed of at sea.
       This is a form of stripping away the identity of the soldiers. It is doubtful that there are so many that are truly secret. This is a way of de-personalizing the war--worse, it strips the fallen dead of their place in history. In an age of GPS "precision-guided bombs," it is particlarly obscene that we would spend so much time, effort and money to deliver a bomb; and so little effort to deliver a fallen serviceperson to their final resting place in history. This practise of reverse-photo-op is positively ghoulish. It is as if the coffins mean nothing to the nation--and it totally undercuts all the otherwise visible drill and ceremony designed to impress the viewer with the solemnity of final respects. It has the same effect as the automatic pen "signature" of the Secretary of Defense to the families of the fallen. It is so utterly cold and impersonal that the gesture can be measured in degrees Kelvin.
  •  Brave photographers and their cowardly bosses (none)
    There are several reasons why these photos have not been coming in, and one would be the dangers faced by photographers.

    Most journalists can't travel outside of Baghdad, unless they're embedded with a unit, or traveling with armed escort.

    Many photographers have also been killed or detained by American forces. One of many examples would be Mazen Dana of Reuters, or the CBS photographer who was detained by the Americans because he was a "suspected insurgent."

    Photographers, especially Iraqis, are censored, threatened, detained or beaten all the time by the U.S. trained Iraqi Police.

    However, despite these dangers, photographers still do their jobs and cover the war the best they can. This effort, however, is not a guarantee that their work will ever be published.

    For some reason, newspaper editors and publishers claim that publishing gory photos will offend the sensibilities of their esteemed readers. But I seriously doubt that claim. There's bloodier stuff out on TV and in the movies. Furthermore, newspapers can afford to lose readers, because subscriptions and single newspaper sales account for little revenue. Hell, newspapers have even falsified subscription numbers so they can charge advertisers higher rates. Recently, many publications have been guilty of this deception. That is why I believe the real reason why newspapers won't publish these war photos is because editors and publishers are afraid of offending their advertisers.

    Throw out whatever illusions you had about journalism- it's all about the Benjamins baby.  

    •  will offend the sensibilities ? (none)
      I don't doubt it, but those sensitive viewers must come to realize that WAR offends their sensibilities, not pictures.

      Surely a few ruffled feathers is not too much to ask, for someone who accepts the need to send other people's kids to die or get maimed.

      We're back in the U.S.S.R.
      (You don't know how lucky you are boy
      Back in the U.S.S.R!)

      by lawnorder on Sun May 22, 2005 at 11:27:59 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Exceptions to publishing pics (none)
    All pics must be published only after consent from the next of kin.

    This ensures that:
    a) The next of kin knows about the death prior to seeing it plastered on MSM
    b) The next of kin feels ok about the publishing
    (Remember baby Bayley from OKC ? Her pictured being cradled tenderly by a firefighter brought us all to tears, but was a source of excruciating emotional pain for her mom for years...)

    We're back in the U.S.S.R.
    (You don't know how lucky you are boy
    Back in the U.S.S.R!)

    by lawnorder on Sun May 22, 2005 at 11:24:22 AM PDT

    •  Exception #3: Keep it away from daytime TV (none)
      I approve displaying the pics wholeheartedly, but I don't want my 5 year old to see any of it. If they are is displayed at any time he might see them while waiting for his cartoon show to start. Pics should be rated PG13 at least.

      We're back in the U.S.S.R.
      (You don't know how lucky you are boy
      Back in the U.S.S.R!)

      by lawnorder on Sun May 22, 2005 at 11:30:54 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Until the soldiers came home (none)
        from Vietnam, our television was that big grey glass box in the corner.

        Mom refused to turn it on at all.

        •  Weren't you a "celebrity" at school? (none)
          My parents also had "no TV" rule when I was growing up. It made me kind of a "celebrity" at school, imagine a pre-teen with no TV at home:

          •  !?!? Are you serious ? You don't have a TV ?
          • What do you DO all day ? Don't you miss it ?
          • How can you not watch ... (insert popular TV show)
          • This is so weird! I'm glad I'm not your sister.
          • Wanna come to my house to watch some TV ?

          We're back in the U.S.S.R.
          (You don't know how lucky you are boy
          Back in the U.S.S.R!)

          by lawnorder on Sun May 22, 2005 at 09:30:52 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Honestly... (none)
            Since I was 1-8 at the time, I don't remember it. My first official moment with the television was the lunar landing. Beyond that? Nothing much until Carter was running for president.

            It was just one of those things that came up in discussion when I hit HS history classes. It was really odd. I saw news footage and movies (Green Berets and Apocalypse Now). Was stunned. Went home and asked about it. That's when the "no war footage television" rule was discussed. I talked about it with some of my fellow classmates whose fathers had been in Vietnam. They apparently had the same rule.

    •  That's one point of view (none)
      OTOH: These people are our employees, doing our (dirty) work in our names . . .

      I approve of masking identifying features as possible; the 'universal soldier' is more apt than the personalization of any individual.  Still, I think the NOK's proprietary interest can not be absolute.

      The smirking chimp gave not the thought to the immense gravity of sending men and women to kill or be killed.

      The OKC baby is an entirely different matter, don't you agree?

      •  Entirely different circunstances on OKC (none)

        But a mother's suffering at seeing her son's dead body plastered in the news for several years may ammount to the same heartache, don't you agree ?

        We're back in the U.S.S.R.
        (You don't know how lucky you are boy
        Back in the U.S.S.R!)

        by lawnorder on Sun May 22, 2005 at 01:07:59 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  You are not wrong (none)
          but, sadly, neither are you right. . .  The mother deserves consideration, but so does the mother who perhaps saves her son after seeing the other mother's son's photo, don't you agree? And which more?

          My grandmother was a WWII 'gold-star mother' and was able to be proud of it despite the ache that never went away.  

          This sordid adventure permits no such consolation.

          The chimp belongs in the Hague, damn him!

          If you are going to eat the ham, you should be willing to watch the hog being slaughtered

          by Clem Yeobright on Sun May 22, 2005 at 01:23:31 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  The Free Market for Ideas (none)
    Those who support the war tend to be both free marketeers and avid believers in war censorship.  That paints them into a corner.  Either they don't believe that the free market works or they don't believe the war is justified.  I think it's more of the latter.
  •  I particularly like the word "harmed" (none)
    in connection with Iraqis -- the toddler is dead, -- d - e - a - d.  "harmed" can't even begin to explain it to his parents or to me for that matter.  An unnecessary war - An unnecessary war - An unnecessary war

    It sure the hell is heavy, father -- it's my grandchildren's share of the birth tax

    by xanthe on Sun May 22, 2005 at 11:41:52 AM PDT

  •  No Brainer (3.50)
    as a virus or infection gets stronger if one doesn't take the full regimen of antibiotics and totally kill it-- the Military-Industrial corporate masters which Eisenhower warned us of didn't go away after the bloody, contrived and useless Vietnam "war" (they actually called it a 'police action', not a war).

    they slank back to their holes in the ground, licked their considerable wounds and bided their time until:

    DUMB be dum-dum--- here comes Reagan & Georgie I & II! Yayyyyyy! (please note the war-mongering, racist and Treasury-fleecing thread which can easily be traced from the puppet masters, [cheney, dumsfeld, etc.,] right to the Reagan administration).

    the defense industries and the Pentagon only learned ONE STINKING thing from the Vietnam fiasco: CONTROL the media coverage in the U.S. of the conflict-- and DO NOT publish photos of either our fatalities and wounded or those of "the enemy".

    don't you remember rummy's outrage after abu Ghraib blew up in the world press? "take away their cameras and cell phone cameras!!"

  •  We're Near the Same Sentiment (none)
    "I think people need more images and less of other people's opinions."

    other people's opinions is, I'm sorry, rubbing me the wrong way.

    if you want to publish photos and video detaling the atrocities of war with no written material added, except when & where the atrocities occured, that's fine.

    but if you're implying you want to put your or BushCo's spin on the photos to replace other people's opinions, then I have a problem.

    I'm guessing you support the first approach.

    thank you.

  •  publish them all (none)
    along with 'before' photos as well. name, hometown, biography, photos from childhood birthday party, photos on holiday or with husband/wife/boyfriend/girlfriend/children/parents. list their hobbies, favorite bands, favorite foods. list what their dreams and ambitions were up until the moment that george bush got their guts blown out for no purpose.

    make them human again, rather than pieces of meat. force dipshit america to recognize that yeah, the ppl being ground up in the Bush death machine aren't only "just like them," they ARE them.

    if it's "painful for families," that's sad. but it's one of those things that should have been thought of before they sent johnny marching off to war. and if showing johnny dead helps some other family to talk their loved one out of signing on as a member of the world's biggest death cult, then it's well worth it.

    The sound of no hands clapping

    by RabidNation on Sun May 22, 2005 at 12:36:26 PM PDT

  •  Here is a real moral dilemma (none)
    Should the MSM print a photo of Jonah bleeding to death in the street after being hit by a truck as he in total panic flees an army recruiter passing out fliers at a subway entrance?

    Since the beginning of the incursion, I have been unable to see a report from the 'Sunni Triangle' or 'Triangle of Death' without recalling John O'Hara's Appointment in Samarra.


    Were I jonah goldberg, commander of the Fighting 101st Keyboardists, I would keep a sharp eye out in the market . . .  I suspect his god has a plan for him indeed . . .

    If you are going to eat the ham, you should be willing to watch the hog being slaughtered

    by Clem Yeobright on Sun May 22, 2005 at 12:49:08 PM PDT

  •  The Truth as an enemy of Bush (none)
    The blind support Bush is getting goes beyond misinformation. It is a willing suspension of doubt, and wilfull blocking of any information that would cause doubt in them AND ON OTHERS.. As Plutonium Page aptly blogged today on See no evil: photojournalism and the Iraq war Bush supporters are determined to avoid seeing pictures of the carnage in Iraq AND also determined to block the average American from viewing it. (Lest someone conclude Bush is wrong -- law). To see the pictures would force that conclusion, as even the right wingers agree The pictures, said a blog called Riding Sun, 'portray the American invasion and occupation of Iraq as an unmitigated disaster.. Well, I second PP's words: I have some news for you, genius:  the war is an unmitigated disaster..

    This and more on this willing denial of truth at

    Sartre, Baudelaire and Saddam in his underwear

    We're back in the U.S.S.R.
    (You don't know how lucky you are boy
    Back in the U.S.S.R!)

    by lawnorder on Sun May 22, 2005 at 01:02:30 PM PDT

    •  Excellent diary! (none)
      Thank you for that!

      (A myriad of witnesses appear to testify that you and I are unrelated and have never met and most probably have never even exchanged '4' ratings before at DailyKos . . .)

      Friends: This one is a winner.  If you have 5 minutes, use it to confront the fact and the cause of the 'suspension of disbelief' inflicted by shrub supporters on themselves.  Then come back and thank lawnorder and thank me!

      If you are going to eat the ham, you should be willing to watch the hog being slaughtered

      by Clem Yeobright on Sun May 22, 2005 at 01:17:01 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Jesus Christ Page... (none)
    Thank you for bringing that to my attention.

    I will disseminate this tragic information to all of the Catholic Churches in my area.

    They just love hearing from me...

  •  Publish most. (none)
     Avoid pictures the like of disembodied limbs, disemboweled corpses, et. al. But seeing the dead is a necessity if we are to correctly judge this war on it's merits.

    I tell you there is a fire. They have this day set a blazing torch to the temple of constitutional liberty and, please God, we shall have no more peace forever.

    by Anderson Republican on Sun May 22, 2005 at 01:07:56 PM PDT

  •  "Weapons of mass documentation", (none)
    if I may borrow from Jon Stewart.  In 1957(?) Emmitt Till's mother insisted on an open coffin funeral for her 14 year old son, sometimes (well, almost all the time) America needs her conscience pricked.  Vietnam was a horrendousely costly disgrace in every sense of the word, and yet Rummy, and Cheney are still around and able to bring about yet another moment of national pride.  You really can't blame Poppy's little prince, George, he's never been accountable for anything.  Entitlement to the entitled,please tell me where you find that in the bible.  In the mean time crack parachutist landed at Walter Reed to honor our boys, the young man missing his eye-his face shredded by shrapnel, his mouth blown away-couldn't wait to fly and jump.  We all just love Laura (W sends her when something takes unmitigated gall) but for some reason those ungrateful arabs were rude.  Poor prince george, once a schmuck, always a schmuck- but what the hell is our excuse?  He works for us dammit!!!!
  •  Photos of Americans Killed in Combat (none)
      Until the Gulf War, this was common.
      The WW II photos of two dead American soldiers, half buried in tidal sand, on the island of New Guinea, were the first to be released to the WW II civilian world of the United States.  What followed was a massive deluge of more and more such photos, which brought home to the American public, that this WAS War.
      I have viewed pictures of dead Iraqis by the hundreds.  I am preparing to be trained as a Draft Counselor here in Southern New Mexico, and have already been into local high schools.  Some of us (Vietnam veterans -- all wounded in combat), have spoken as warriors who ALL volunteered to go to Vietnam -- and all came to the conclusions that the Vietnam War was wrong and so, too, is THIS WAR.
       I was very seriously wounded on Nov 3, 1966.  My right arm was nearly shot off by a VC who was less than 15 feet from me .. completely hidden in thick jungle.  The first round went so close to my left ear lobe that I FELT the sound barrier as it passed by me.  I began to turn, flick the safety off my M-16, and was turning into a crouching, firing position when the second round knocked me two or three feet off my feet.
       I have thought about this a LOT.
       I would NOT have wanted anyone to photograph me while I was dying.  Take note: while I was dying.
       I was 19, and it suddenly  hit me, as the shock ebbed and the pain came on full bore (I never passed out), that I might be dying 14,000 from my Mom, Dad, and sisters and brother.
    It was incredibly difficult to think I was going to die.  I asked a lieutenant if I could hold his wrist, while I writhed in pain.
       Some who were there, came by, and called  me a "pussy" because I had made too much noise in the first five minutes, before the morphine began to take hold. It was the second pop of morphine that eventually quelled the most egregious pain.
       I think I cried.
       I was in the midst of men my age, some a few older ... the ones who were near me, suddenly, my Mom and Dad and brother and sisters.  This is what happens when men (and now, women) die in combat, thousands of miles from home.
    Other men and women, their buddies, become surrogate Mothers, Fathers, Friends, Siblings, as we go off into the next realm.
       That is TOO FUCKING PRIVATE to have someone nearby, snapping photos.  Waaaaaaaay too fucking private.
        That should not be allowed.
        But, once an American soldier has died, then photos should be taken, tastefully, of the dead man or woman. However, no photos of that man or woman should EVER be released until the family is fully aware of the circumstances of the death, and that the death has occured.
        One of the nastiest aspects of the Vietnam War was that soldiers did, I think, die on camera, or were shown shortly thereafter, and the photos were shown in the States, BEFORE the next of kin knew what had happened.  That's irresponsible, and one of the greatest affronts to military members doing their jobs.
        I do most assuredly favor showing the most graphic details of combat casualties.  UnderMars 54 - 58 show some incredibly horrific photos.  One shows an Iraqi man's head stuck to an Armored Personnel Carrier's treads.  And the caption is like: "Do I REALLY have to clean THAT off, Sarge?"
        The captions tell you all you need to know about how savage, and mean, 18, 19, 20 year olds become in combat.
        And dismemberments, traumatic amputations, traumatic
    disembowelments, etc., ARE the true face of combat in the modern world.
        Compared to the carnage of Vietnam, there is even more now.  The calibers and velocities of the ammunition does horrific shit to bodies.  I believe that we, who are standing in opposition to this piece of shit wear, have an obligation to inform young folks of the websites where they can find this carnage depicted.
        It is unbelieveable what happens when a human body takes ten or fifteen M-16 rounds.  Not like video games or movies or TV.  It is numbing to see the families of the recently slain, or dismembered, come out and pick up their relatives.  I saw that the first time I saw a Vienamese soldier killed.
        You don't get over that! Those things never leave you.
        And, the carnage in Iraq is unbelievable.
        And part of the insider "black humor" is about Arabs (all the ethnic names) getting waxed.  But those who are about to enlist should see those photos.
        So, no to showing an American or Iraqi dying.
        Yes, to photos of the dead and maimed ... after proper notification has occured.
        If the Press cannot wait for proper notification, then I question their true motives in asking these questions.  If they really don't care, then they will reap the consequences of the American people.  They must respect these boundaries, but if they remember that these photos show fellow Americans, or fellow world members -- Iraqis -- in their death postures ... then perhaps the true nature of war can be properly conveyed to billions who have never experienced war.
        Perhaps, then, the Human Family can say: screw this shit!
        Defeat George Bush! Dick Cheney! Donald Rumsfeld! Saddam Hussein. Kim Jong Il.  ANY politician who so blithely sends Americans, Iraqis, North Koreans ... to be blasted to bits ... for bullshit ideas.
  •  should be published ONLY as news (none)
    I definitely believe that the photos should be published as news of what is going on in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    However, I also strongly believe that after some arbitrary time (say six months, a year), photos of identifiable dead soldiers should not be allowed to be used without the consent of nearest relative. Until the photo is, say, 60 years old and then it goes back in the public domain again as a HISTORICAL photo.

    I've long thought about this issue because the mother of Jeffrey Miller, killed at Kent State in 1970 by the Ohio National Guard, is a very dear friend of mine. Jeff's death still haunts me. And that death was captured in the Pulitzer Prize winning photo of the young girl screaming over his body. Ever since that day, that photo has this way of showing up anytime, out of nowhere. Of course, whenever I watch something on 'the 60s' or Vietnam, I have to brace myself for the usually inevitable showing.  

    Having the death of someone you know and love immortalized in iconic imagery is a very heavy burden to have to bear. So I really believe there should be some time frame -- between when the story is news and when it is fully history -- that the family have a say in how the image is used.

    We need not stride resolutely towards catastrophe, merely because those are the marching orders. -- Noam Chomsky

    by kainah on Sun May 22, 2005 at 04:26:10 PM PDT

    •  the bleeding edge (none)
      To be there is an honor.

      Thank you for introducing me to your friend,
      Jeffrey Miller.  When I see that picture again I
      will know.

      But Jeffrey is a martyr to the cause now.
      His death has brought more change to
      America than Watergate.

      I wonder how many times Senator Kennedy has watched the Zapruder film.

      Or Martin Luther King's family has looked at the Loraine motel picture.

      All three of these above mentioned are Hero-Saints.  

      Publish every photo as fast as you can.
      Americans are sleep walking into blowback.

      'His worldly innocence is a kind of fundamentalism.' She goes on: 'Reading the novel again reinforced my fear of all the [Pyles around the world. They do not mean to hurt us, but they do.'

      End the invasion. Bring these facists down.  

  •  JHC (none)

    Check out Link TV's daily Middle East digest program, Mosaic.

    by shmooth on Sun May 22, 2005 at 09:21:03 PM PDT

  •  Iraq is Arabic for.. (none)

    We're back in the U.S.S.R.
    (You don't know how lucky you are boy
    Back in the U.S.S.R!)

    by lawnorder on Sun May 22, 2005 at 10:05:03 PM PDT

  •  For the record (none)
    THis article was carried in the Stars and Stripes, the daily newspaper for deployed troops.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site