Opinion: In Friday’s Letters to the editor
This article was originally on a blog post platform and may be missing photos, graphics or links. See About archive blog posts.
Friday’s Letters to the editor features responses to this column by Tim Rutten urging Barack Obama to authorize the release of photos of soldiers’ coffins arriving at Dover Air Force Base.
Most correspondents think it’s a bad idea. Ned Rice, of Marina Del Rey, cites politics:
As usual, Tim Rutten’s column is interesting, thoroughly researched, well written -- and totally wrong. The government’s ban on the release of photos or video of the remains of American soldiers was instituted in 1991 for one simple, compelling reason: The United States of America does not desecrate its war dead. If President Obama lifts this ban, we can expect to see these sacred images in shrill, partisan attack ads, from both Rutten’s side of the aisle and mine, that would exploit our fallen heroes -- their bodies, mind you -- for craven political purposes. As Rutten observes, the American people are not infants. We do not require visual aids to understand the costs of war, nor cynical media campaigns to comprehend what is meant by the last full measure of devotion. Here’s hoping that our new president, in his infinite wisdom, does not add the lifting of this ban to his already impressive list of blunders.
Gail Johnson-Roth, of Los Angeles, brings up more personal concerns:
My survey of families of the fallen indicates that more than 90% say no to taking pictures of flag-covered coffins before families can have a private moment to welcome their hero home. My son, Spc. Daniel P. Cagle, died in Iraq in May 2007. I want to remember how and why he lived, what he fought for and his bravery. Families deserve those first moments out of the public eye to say their final hellos and goodbyes. Yes, people should remember that these young men and women sacrifice everything for us here at home -- but let us remember why they lived. Do not reduce their service to a flag-draped box. My son believed in what he was doing, and I believe in him.
Reacting to this Op-Ed by former Bush speechwriter Marc A. Thiessen, Sherman Oaks’ William Seaton questions whether worrying much about Al Qaeda trying to bring down the U.S. financial system is the best target for American vigilance:
After the subprime fiasco, Wall Street greed and deregulation gone amok, [Osama] Bin Laden will need several dozen nuclear-tipped missiles to do more damage than we have already inflicted on ourselves. While we are trying to hunt down some robed fanatics in Afghanistan and Pakistan, we might want to spend a little more time keeping an eye on the financial terrorists at home who move from the boardroom to the trading floor to congressional chambers, wearing the clever disguise of a suit and a tie.
More on California’s budget, antibiotic-resistant bacteria, and plans to run ‘green’ transmission lines through the desert, too.