TheoHuxtable Posted April 23, 2004 Share Posted April 23, 2004 The U.S. government prevented these photos from being aired in the US; afraid that people would see how bad the war really is. http://www.50mmlosangeles.com/forums/us-military0750mm.jpg'> http://www.50mmlosangeles.com/forums/us-military0150mm.jpg'> http://www.50mmlosangeles.com/forums/coalition_kia_iraq_0000450mm.jpg'> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smart Posted April 23, 2004 Share Posted April 23, 2004 they look like regular old dead people... just wearing funny clothes... I think you've got ahold of a non-issue... And what, exactly, would be the point of showing those images? What does that prove? It's like showing pictures of the bodies at a car wreck, and if you can't understand why that's NOT news then... you probably don't get some of Andy Warhol's earlier works, and possibly never will... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheoHuxtable Posted April 23, 2004 Author Share Posted April 23, 2004 Originally posted by Smart they look like regular old dead people... just wearing funny clothes... I think you've got ahold of a non-issue... And what, exactly, would be the point of showing those images? What does that prove? The "point" is left up to the viewer. It also may provide a little shock value since it isn't everyday that you see images of US soldiers who just got shot to death in the streets of Fallujah, or blown up by a roadside bomb in Baghdad. But like I said, everyone will have mixed feelings. I'm not here to make an "issue" about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fethasmcgraw Posted April 23, 2004 Share Posted April 23, 2004 people die in wars Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smart Posted April 23, 2004 Share Posted April 23, 2004 ^yeah, maybe you're not aware of the implicit contract involved with becoming a soldier... Admittedly I've seen more 'dead soldiers' involved in the struggle on these streets here IN America but... fancy clothes and a foreign location doesn't make these deaths any more compelling or pointless... In America those pictures are NEARLY weightless from a political standpoint. Most Americans understand the commitment/sacrifice of the soldier and consider battle scene images of the dead to be both tasteless and offensive. Every one of those kids has a family here, in America. The display of those images serves as nothing but a detached disrespect for the Soldier's surviving family members. Those aren't 'compelling' images of war. Those are clinically sterile pictures of dead bodies... THIS is a 'compelling image of war"... notice the differences. http://www.epals.com/20thcentury/photos/1967vietnam1.jpg'> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poop Man Bob Posted April 23, 2004 Share Posted April 23, 2004 http://www.drudgereport.com/z1.jpg'> http://www.drudgereport.com/z4.jpg'> http://www.drudgereport.com/z5.jpg'> While I understand your point, Smart, I still believe these are compelling as well. Much of its weight is derived from the fact that these are images that our government has banned from being shown in the press. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metallix Posted April 23, 2004 Share Posted April 23, 2004 dd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poop Man Bob Posted April 23, 2004 Share Posted April 23, 2004 Russ Kick of The Memory Hole forced the release of about 350 photos via a Freedom of Information Act request, and as a result the photos are now available on the web here (or on a mirror site here). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metallix Posted April 23, 2004 Share Posted April 23, 2004 Originally posted by Poop Man Bob http://www.drudgereport.com/z1.jpg'> http://www.drudgereport.com/z4.jpg'> http://www.drudgereport.com/z5.jpg'> While I understand your point, Smart, I still believe these are compelling as well. Much of its weight is derived from the fact that these are images that our government has banned from being shown in the press. propaganda... How can "our government ban..." anything? Have you ever read the constitution? #1: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Furthermore Showing Pictures of Dead Soldiers is a very good way to show society what the real war looks like. People are not shown enough about the war. This is good way of getting people to see the real nature of war. Dead bodies..is the result of any war. War = Dead Bodies. I don't see a reason people shouldn't be shown the real nature of war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClueTwo Posted April 23, 2004 Share Posted April 23, 2004 That's the nicest hearst I've ever seen... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smart Posted April 23, 2004 Share Posted April 23, 2004 PMB... what I keep trying to say, and regarless of what that site (that I haven't visited) says... These images aren't banned for political reasons... Any adult understands that every soldier lost in Iraq comes home in a box, draped in a flag. There isn't any confusion about that... Now, essentially this is tasteless stuff... it's pictures of the transport of bodies... If you did the same thing with the bodies of people killed in car wrecks or kids that overdose, the result would be the same censorship. The word 'compelling' suggests an inherent NEED to be seen... this is not the case with these flicks... The numbers are reported nightly on the news, and as of a few days ago, more soldiers have died "after" the war than "during" the war... I don't need to see a casket to understand that sentence... Even if... Actually, Especially if these are anonymous images of a cargo hold full of caskets. Each of those caskets is/was a real person... I don't mean a 'real person' in the abstract sense. I mean, it's Jermaine from down the block. Even though you can't see him inside the box, it's not very cool to use his lifeless body, in transport to it's final resting place, as fodder for some political argument. What the 'opposition' is attempting to do with these pictures is dehumanize these people and turn their deaths into a vehicle for their political agenda. Who these people REALLY were doesn't matter... for all you know everyone of those soldiers could have been the most gung-ho kid in school before they shipped out to war... You don't know because they don't want you to know. They want these bodies to exist as numbers only, they don't want them to have a background or family... They are waiting until after the grave to rob these soldiers of their personalities ONLY for political gain. Worthless crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metallix Posted April 23, 2004 Share Posted April 23, 2004 yo mAN HOW DO You even know theres bodies inside those caskets? they could be empty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smart Posted April 23, 2004 Share Posted April 23, 2004 ^Yo! word. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smart Posted April 23, 2004 Share Posted April 23, 2004 Originally posted by metallix propaganda... How can "our government ban..." anything? Have you ever read the constitution? er.. uh... this argument is idiotic on it's face... There are all kinds of 'unprotected' speech... you can't yell "FIRE!" in a crowded theater (if there isn't one)... you can't slander or libel others, you can't incite a riot... Even though the release of these photos was obtained under the guise of the Freedom of Info Act, it's really an invasion of privacy to display these images... I understand why the Gov censored them, it was the wrong approach but it doesn't mean that these pictures "NEED to be seen"... Have some fucking respect... just because we can't see the dead bodies doesn't mean they died in a vacuum. It doesn't stop us from disputing the neccessity of their deaths. It doesn't stop us from knowing the numbers of the dead or arguing the merits of the war... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poop Man Bob Posted April 23, 2004 Share Posted April 23, 2004 Originally posted by Smart PMB... what I keep trying to say, and regarless of what that site (that I haven't visited) says... These images aren't banned for political reasons... Any adult understands that every soldier lost in Iraq comes home in a box, draped in a flag. There isn't any confusion about that... Understanding what occurs and having it placed on the frontpages of newspapers [which would otherwise occur] are two entirely different things. I fully believe these pictures are banned for political reasons. The powers were around [in some form] during Vietnam, and they understand that once public opinion shifts against a war, it's very difficult to keep at the war and win an upcoming election. It's the same reason that coffins are now called "transfer tubes." Now, essentially this is tasteless stuff... it's pictures of the transport of bodies... If you did the same thing with the bodies of people killed in car wrecks or kids that overdose, the result would be the same. These pictures are more than dead bodies, and I'm sure you understand that. There is a stronger than usual emotional response to the coffin of a soldier who died serving his country. While bodies of those that died in a car accident may be disturbing, soldiers' bodies/coffins are two different things. The word 'compelling' suggest an inherent NEED to be seen... this is not the case with these flicks... The numbers are reported nightly on the news. Images carry much strong connotations/emotions. As of a few days ago, more soldiers have died "after" the war than "during" the war... I don't need to see a casket to understand that sentence... Even if, actually, especially if these are anaymous images of a cargo hold full of caskets. Each of those caskets is a real person... I don't mean a 'real person' in the abstract sense. I mean, it's Jermaine, from down the block. Even though you can't see him inside the box, it's not very cool to use his lifeless body, in transport to it's final resting place, as fodder for some political argument. What the 'opposition' is attempting to do with these pictures is dehumanize these people and turn their deaths into a vehicle for their political agenda. Who these people REALLY were doesn't matter... for all you know everyone of those soldiers could have been the most gung-ho kid in school before they shipped out to war... You don't know because they don't want you to know. They want these bodies to exist as numbers only, they don't want them to have a background or family... They are waiting until after the grave to rob these soldiers of their personalities ONLY for political gain. Worthless crap. Okay .. you lost me here. I presume you're railing against those who believe the pictures should be released in order to, as you suggest, further their political careers, but I'm not sure. Assuming that's true, wouldn't it serve their purpose much more effectively if people viewed them as actual humans/neighbors/sons, rather than simply numbers? One can assume that the public support of the war would drop significantly if everyone viewed the bodies as someone they knew vs. a random person who exists only on paper. Or is my premise false, in that you are railing against those in power for not allowing the pictures to be seen [which wouldn't make sense given the tone of the rest of your post]? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poop Man Bob Posted April 23, 2004 Share Posted April 23, 2004 Let me clarify myself before there's any further confusion: I'm speaking about photographs of the coffins arriving at Dover - not about the dead bodies of the soldiers laying in the street. metallix - uhm, yes, I have read the Constitution. Thanks for asking. I've also read a great deal of Supreme Court cases interpreting the First Amendment, which can lead me to safely say that the government can "ban" something. I can provide you with a summary of the current status of First Amendment law if you'd like - just click the email button and shoot me a note. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smart Posted April 23, 2004 Share Posted April 23, 2004 Originally posted by Poop Man Bob Assuming that's true, wouldn't it serve their purpose much more effectively if people viewed them as actual humans/neighbors/sons, rather than simply numbers? Nope, that can ONLY be a second step... You don't want to just get any old picture of a dead kid and use that to support your goals... faceless kids do the legwork, begin the propaganda onslaught... Afterwards, 'you' would only pick those particular dead soldiers that died in the most seditious attack or were the most gung-ho... It would be a HUGE political blunder to use the image of a dead soldier (assuming you want to be re-elected) that turned out to oppose the war entirely and only joined up for the college benefits. Conversly (if you want to defeat the current regime) it would be foolish to use the image of a dyed in the wool patriot... First and foremost these images are best used when they have no faces, when they are merely numbers. Everyone has the best chance to advance their belief or refute that of their opponent. Once you actually give these bodies names and personalities is when they really become strong political tools... but as I said, you gotta pick the right kid. So, now let's consider the backlash of either party actually 'naming a body'... The proponents will do everything possible to exemplify this DEAD PERSON as a supporter of their cause; The oppponents will look for every chance to smear this DEAD PERSON to deny the political edge... Can you see where this is a Lose/Lose proposition? Propaganda LOVES anonymity! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poop Man Bob Posted April 23, 2004 Share Posted April 23, 2004 If, as you suggest, those in power know that those who opposed the war could use pictures of coffins/faceless masses as political tools, and this leads those in power to ban publishing the pictures ... doesn't that lead to the conclusion that the pictures aren't being shown for political reasons [albeit preemptive political reasons, which this administration seems to be so fond of]? Which directly refutes what you said earlier. I'm going to bed... but I'll respond more tomorrow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poop Man Bob Posted April 23, 2004 Share Posted April 23, 2004 And, yes, I do see how propoganda loves anonymity. Good points. ... but upon thinking further, I think that more effective propoganda would have personalities and names attached, assuming those names have been investigated fully to ensure they represent [or can be shown to represent] the views of those using the propoganda. You stated something similar, I suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pfffffffffft Posted April 23, 2004 Share Posted April 23, 2004 Originally posted by fethasmcgraw people die in wars sad but true, people dont realize the grimness of war until it is right before their eyes:o Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaBar2 Posted April 23, 2004 Share Posted April 23, 2004 The Armed Forces go to great lengths to treat soldiers' remains with dignity They often send an honor guard to accompany the casket made up of a couple of men who knew the deceased, who accompany it to the family, and can usually provide an eyewitness account of the action in which the soldier was killed. Not always, of course. In a really big war, there are too many dead casualties to permit this sort of luxury. In WWII, for instance, most wartime casualties were buried in military cemetaries near the battlefield. The transport of remains was too difficult, took too long, and the remains were often decomposing by the time Graves Registration arrived to identify bodies, etc. The family usually received the deceased soldier's "personal effects," his (unsoiled) dress uniforms, military I.D., dog tags, letters from home, any medals he was awarded and so forth. Transport of the dead is always accompanied by a lot of dignified ritual. Attention and care mirrors the deceased soldier's rank. Obviously every dead active-duty casualty receives the usual honors--a flag-draped coffin, an honor guard of soldiers, a graveside firing party to fire the 21-gun salute over the coffin, an officer to ceremoniously present the bereaved family member with the tri-folded American flag, a bugler to play "Taps." Officers receive a little more attention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smart Posted April 23, 2004 Share Posted April 23, 2004 Originally posted by Poop Man Bob And, yes, I do see how propoganda loves anonymity. Good points. Indeed, so you can perhaps see how both sides would rather that these remain nameless bodies because the carry more 'potential energy' that way... Also... Yes, I DO think this administration tried to squelch the opposition (unduly due to general ignorance of how this argument works, as eplained by me previously). Yes, I DO think this is one of the myriad of issues that will come back and sink Bush's re-election campaign. Yes, I ALWAYS thought Bush was an idiot. NO, I NEVER supported the war BUT... As I tried to say 16 months ago when everyone was suddenly rallying in the streets againts the war... This war IS going to happen, Bush WILL fuck it up on all fronts and will NOT serve a second term. I also said BACK THEN that what we needed to concentrate on was an exit strategy, not an aversion strategy... now it's a year later and we're mired in the war, the power change is iminent and neither Seeking nor Are2, or even Browner has even broached the subject of a successful exit at this point (or any time previously)... *Hey, I dunno if any of us actually argued these facts, well, I do know, we did, but I'm not calling you out, just using names to make a point. Maybe someone I forgot who is a better example though... OH... DUH... I meant Mapo! Anyway, a bunch of kids around here have tried to mischaracterize my support for the soldiers as support for the administration. Some have even used that as an excuse to decide that I'm something (politically) that I'm not... but... I said it then and I'll say it now, though it's only half as relevant... This war WILL happen, and Bush WILL fuck it up. Your job is to spot his mistakes and never let anyone forget them. ^Which is why this thread would have been much better without the pictures... the issue is more compelling than the flicks, and that's just ANOTHER reason this cheapens the memories of those soldiers. They are merely pawns in the game, in the global sense, nobody cares about pawns. Acting like we do is just patronizing the other pawns. In a famillial sense, we are all pawns, and those pawns are no better than yourself... and what power can you flex on Capitol Hill? Now imagine how much you could influence if you were dead. So, I agree, these pictures should NEVER have been censored... but I also belive they should NEVER have been displayed. From the political side, HELL YEAH, Bush IS AND WAS AND WILL ALWAYS BE SO SHOOK that he banned those flicks... That he joined a 'secret' Fraternity... That he is a fucking weasel assed self-centered dick nit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smart Posted April 23, 2004 Share Posted April 23, 2004 Originally posted by Poop Man Bob I think that more effective propoganda would have personalities and names attached, assuming those names have been investigated fully to ensure they represent [or can be shown to represent] the views of those using the propoganda. You stated something similar, I suppose. Exactly, but that takes time and money... and as much as it seems to flow like wine, money in Washington isn't THAT easy to come by... Both sides realize that it's just easier to leave the whole issue alone. This is where Bush, in his ignorant paranoia, fucked up with his censorship. He responded to an attack that historically doesn't exist, and dug himself a cozy little hole too... Also, the best propaganda is current propaganda... 'hot button issues' and so forth... It has always been easier/cheaper for opposing political sides to just forego the personalized agendas until they have proven by their own accord to be news worthy... Consider the Brady bill mandating a wait period for the purchase of handguns... Named for the White House Press Secretary who was shot by Hinkley... Although inspired by the Hinkley event and having already spent months making it's way through comittee to finally be introduced on the floor (still with some opponents mostly made up of Republicans in the pocket of the NRA)... The bill's passage had NOTHING to do with that assasination attempt though. The main fodder in that issue was a case that happened locally... A fellow felt like he got dissed at a bar, got drunk, went across the street to a pawn shop and bought a pistol... Came back and vented his rage on the patrons... This led to a police stand off where, in an almost superhuman feat, the gunman weathered quite a few (14?) shots from the police issued 9mm 's over several hours until fuinally being "brought to justice" (Bush quote, heh) by an off duty cop and his personal .45 This all occurred while the bill was on the floor of Congress... as soon as the story broke the bill was passed with no opposition. This is an example of a personal story (not the one you thought) that resulted in political change... BUT, the story told itself... no monies had to be expended to investigate, no commitees (secret or otherwise) had to be set up... It was just a magic event that they could glom onto... Dude just went all nuts and proved their point. Now we have to wait 5 days and get a background check... (Turned out the guy was some multiple felony convict as well) That's how they do it on the personal side, find a story that seems interesting, do a quick investigation (or in the Brady Bill case no investigation) and then bend the results of the outcome to most suit their agenda... To be honest I was a bit surprised that nobody tried to champion the DC Snipers but, that story is SO polarized against them so... tough sell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheoHuxtable Posted April 23, 2004 Author Share Posted April 23, 2004 Originally posted by Smart ^yeah, maybe you're not aware of the implicit contract involved with becoming a soldier... Admittedly I've seen more 'dead soldiers' involved in the struggle on these streets here IN America but... fancy clothes and a foreign location doesn't make these deaths any more compelling or pointless... Then if it isn't "compelling" and it's pointless and has no effect whatsoever like you claim, then why: 1. Would the US go to great lengths to make sure they're not aired in the living rooms of millions of Americans. They'd be a "non-issue" right? So why would they do this? 2. Why did images of dead American soldiers in Vietnam have a large effect to Americas opposition in the war? The US government is simply learning from the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vinyl junkie Posted April 23, 2004 Share Posted April 23, 2004 i only read the first couple of posts in this thread, so this has probably already been said, but... how often do you see a dead american soldier on the tv or in the newspaper? sure you see a couple of coffins every now and then, but that's it... not and not even talking about pictures, how often do you see these in the papers or on tv: a bunch of mother fuckers that you don;t know died... they're a bunch of foreigners... there's a ton of em... on to other news... but every time i watch the news, or read shit about it i see shit like this: our beloved hometown boy died in that other country... this kid was on the football team before he graduated highschool six minutes ago... he drank heavily and and slipped a couple of girls roofies... let's remember this one brave individual as someone who stood up for his country... i firmly believe that most americans are complete idiots... and they need to be sheltered from images that depict americans as "just another casualty in a stupid war", rather than claiming each one is a hero that we should all look up to... a week or two ago an undercover cop was shot and killed in a neighborhood near mine... within hours cops were going door to door with guns drawn trying to find someone who matched the killer's description... within 24 hours they found the guy (and not even in the neighborhood... in fact, the dude lived and was found in a whole other county...) this was in a neighborhood where people are killed on a nearly daily basis... and i don;t think any of those killings have had any kind of conclusion... and when i made a point to watch the news for a few nights after this, i saw ONE interview with someone who lived there saying that it was ridiculous that the police force put all this effort into finding a cop's killer, when they have put zero effort into finding the killers of school children who happened to be walking down the street at the wrong time... america loves a hero... and we will do anything to make sure that the general public knows that we are superior to everyone else... and that those who are defending us are even more important than the rest of us... shit is ridiculous... i say show more dead american soldiers... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheoHuxtable Posted April 23, 2004 Author Share Posted April 23, 2004 Originally posted by vinyl junkie i only read the first couple of posts in this thread, so this has probably already been said, but... how often do you see a dead american soldier on the tv or in the newspaper? sure you see a couple of coffins every now and then, but that's it... not and not even talking about pictures, how often do you see these in the papers or on tv: but every time i watch the news, or read shit about it i see shit like this: i firmly believe that most americans are complete idiots... and they need to be sheltered from images that depict americans as "just another casualty in a stupid war", rather than claiming each one is a hero that we should all look up to... a week or two ago an undercover cop was shot and killed in a neighborhood near mine... within hours cops were going door to door with guns drawn trying to find someone who matched the killer's description... within 24 hours they found the guy (and not even in the neighborhood... in fact, the dude lived and was found in a whole other county...) this was in a neighborhood where people are killed on a nearly daily basis... and i don;t think any of those killings have had any kind of conclusion... and when i made a point to watch the news for a few nights after this, i saw ONE interview with someone who lived there saying that it was ridiculous that the police force put all this effort into finding a cop's killer, when they have put zero effort into finding the killers of school children who happened to be walking down the street at the wrong time... america loves a hero... and we will do anything to make sure that the general public knows that we are superior to everyone else... and that those who are defending us are even more important than the rest of us... shit is ridiculous... i say show more dead american soldiers... I see what you're getting at, but at the same time, show some respect. No one said he was perfect in high school and he was fighting crime like superman or some shit. But he did something that you probably wouldn't want to do, and that's get killed in Iraq over some George W. Bush/Dick Cheney lie. He deserves the memorial that he gets and he deserves to get mentioned in the news. I feel bad about this shit because I truly feel these soldiers are dying for an unjust cause. This war was not necessary. And the ages of these people dying. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22... the majority of the people dying are the younger ones since they throw the more able-bodied and lower-ranked people on the front lines. There was this 20 year-old half-Cambodian half-Mexican girl from northern Cali who got killed when the helicopter she was in was shot down near Baghdad. I also can't stand to see young women die over this shit either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DR+DELUSION Posted April 23, 2004 Share Posted April 23, 2004 this is so very shocking. i had no idea that people were dying over there. :rolleyes: im gonna go take a shower now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheoHuxtable Posted April 23, 2004 Author Share Posted April 23, 2004 Originally posted by DR+DELUSION this is so very shocking. i had no idea that people were dying over there. :rolleyes: im gonna go take a shower now. http://members.optusnet.com.au/lanemeyer/forum/forumpics/prize.jpg'> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoink Posted April 23, 2004 Share Posted April 23, 2004 Im goin to go head and side with smart on this one...its a war people die, these people made the ultimate sacrifice, if that was my dad/brother/girlfriend etc...I wouldnt want to see her image plastered all over the media....why would that be neccesary. Its the same as every day on CNN " Well an american soldier has died in Iraq..." shits happening over there, and the media is allready all over the death thing just making people feel more and more shitty about it. ITs a fucking war for christsake. by the way this is the same argument as with what happend with those four contractors in fallujah (sp?) to what extent should the media show what happened to them, it was a choice the gov gave to them, have some sense when letting us know about it. Some papers ran the car on fire, some ambigious shots of cheering iraqi citizens...would it have been neccesary/tasteful for a full page spread of a human beings body charred/beaten/tortured hanging from a bridge.? no. I dont know Im sure this has been said before, and maybe im rehashing, but its my 2 cents on the matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoink Posted April 23, 2004 Share Posted April 23, 2004 "The U.S. government prevented these photos from being aired in the US; afraid that people would see how bad the war really is. " oh and I only responded because of this really, I think this is misleading, honestly do you think the government is trying to cover up that people are dying? I mean the soldiers arent over there on a vacation....people know how fucked up it is, they hear about it everyfucking day on the internet, the tv, the newspaper, the media waves are saturated with how awful it is. Sooooo...I think displaying these photos would just be tasteless to the familes of those invovled. I dont need to see someone elses dead body to feel/know about whats happening, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.