9/11 fmilies support Bush ads.

[Gaard]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: Wag
I would love to see Kerry ask Pres Bush directly during the debates why the funerals of soldiers are not allowed to be covered in the media if their families desire it?

The policies in effect at Dover go back to 1991 and have been consistent since then through three administrations now" - Gen. Myers on the "no camera" rule.

Bleat on...

CkG

You sure about this CAD? It may have been 'policy', and it may have been enforced at Dover, but other than that I believe it was about as often enforced as jaywalking. In fact, IIRC, Bush put his foot down at the beginning of the Iraq War because it wasn't anything that was being enforced anywhere (Dover being the exception). You do remember ceremonies surrounding the coffins coming back from previous wars, don't you?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Gaard

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: Wag
I would love to see Kerry ask Pres Bush directly during the debates why the funerals of soldiers are not allowed to be covered in the media if their families desire it?

The policies in effect at Dover go back to 1991 and have been consistent since then through three administrations now" - Gen. Myers on the "no camera" rule.

Bleat on...

CkG

You sure about this CAD? It may have been 'policy', and it may have been enforced at Dover, but other than that I believe it was about as often enforced as jaywalking. In fact, IIRC, Bush put his foot down at the beginning of the Iraq War because it wasn't anything that was being enforced anywhere (Dover being the exception). You do remember ceremonies surrounding the coffins coming back from previous wars, don't you?

I'm positive Gen. Myers said what I quoted him as saying - so yes, I'm "sure about this" Gaard

CkG

 

[Gaard]

Whadaya know? My first hit on Google.

 

[Gaard]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: Gaard

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: Wag
I would love to see Kerry ask Pres Bush directly during the debates why the funerals of soldiers are not allowed to be covered in the media if their families desire it?

The policies in effect at Dover go back to 1991 and have been consistent since then through three administrations now" - Gen. Myers on the "no camera" rule.

Bleat on...

CkG

You sure about this CAD? It may have been 'policy', and it may have been enforced at Dover, but other than that I believe it was about as often enforced as jaywalking. In fact, IIRC, Bush put his foot down at the beginning of the Iraq War because it wasn't anything that was being enforced anywhere (Dover being the exception). You do remember ceremonies surrounding the coffins coming back from previous wars, don't you?

I'm positive Gen. Myers said what I quoted him as saying - so yes, I'm "sure about this" Gaard

CkG

I guess Gen Myers was speaking specifically about Dover.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Gaard
Whadaya know? My first hit on Google.

Whadaya know? Contained inside that "first hit" -

A Pentagon spokeswoman said the military-wide policy actually dates from about November 2000 -- the last days of the Clinton administration -- but it apparently went unheeded and unenforced, as images of caskets returning from the Afghanistan war appeared on television broadcasts and in newspapers until early this year. Though Dover Air Force Base, which has the military's largest mortuary, has had restrictions for 12 years, others "may not have been familiar with the policy," the spokeswoman said. This year, "we've really tried to enforce it."

Meh...bleat on...

CkG

 

[Gaard]

During President George H.W. Bush's term, there were ceremonies at Dover and Andrews for Americans killed in Panama, Lebanon and aboard the USS Iowa.

Ceremonies for arriving coffins, not routine during the Vietnam War, became increasingly common and elaborate later. After U.S. soldiers fell in Beirut, Grenada, Panama, the Balkans, Kenya, Afghanistan and elsewhere, the military often invited in cameras for elaborate ceremonies for the returning remains, at Andrews Air Force Base, Dover, Ramstein and elsewhere -- sometimes with the president attending.

The photos of coffins continued for the first two years of the current Bush administration, from Ramstein and other bases. Then, on the eve of the Iraq invasion, word came from the Pentagon that other bases were to adopt Dover's policy of making the arrival ceremonies off limits.

Meh...bleat on yourself.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Gaard
Meh...bleat on yourself.

Seems that the "bleaters" are the ones who are trying to make an issue of this.

CkG

 

[Gaard]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: Gaard
Meh...bleat on yourself.

Seems that the "bleaters" are the ones who are trying to make an issue of this.

CkG

Actually I was just trying to make a point after you responded to Wag's question with a quote by gen Myers about a policy that only Dover enforced. It seemed to me that you were trying to tell Wag that this policy made his post a moot point.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Gaard

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: Gaard
Meh...bleat on yourself.

Seems that the "bleaters" are the ones who are trying to make an issue of this.

CkG

Actually I was just trying to make a point after you responded to Wag's question with a quote by gen Myers about a policy that only Dover enforced. It seemed to me that you were trying to tell Wag that this policy made his post a moot point.

Is it a "rule"?

CkG

 

[Wag]

Isn't this forum for discussion?

Why are you being disrespectful with your "bleat on" comments?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

MOMMY!!!!!

/me tugs on apron strings...

Would you rather me call it whining? It's the same thing.

CkG

 

[Wag]

No, I call it being disrespectful.

Why would you post something on a forum you wouldn't say to someone's face?
I don't think you'll get your point accross by insulting people.

I actually read what you had to say and learned something, until I got to the point where you insulted me and I lost interest.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Wag
No, I call it being disrespectful.

Why would you post something on a forum you wouldn't say to someone's face?
I don't think you'll get your point accross by insulting people.

I actually read what you had to say and learned something, until I got to the point where you insulted me and I lost interest.

Wow, I knew we had "sensitive" people here but for someone to take "bleat on..." personally almost takes the cake. I've seen your posts, I have read your slant, and this was nothing more than an attempt by you to bash Bush. "Bleat on..." is most appropriate for those comments that are spun into anti-Bush rhetoric. Now yes - the "mommy" part was towards you and well deserved for your whining about "discussion" and respect. This forum is for discussion but as "bleat on..." suggests - it has actually more of a "see who can slam Bush the most forum". Talk about "respect"... I see little respect shown for our President on this forum by those of differing ideologies. But whatever - people will do what they wish and continue to whine about Bush even though they know that he has done well. I guess it helps them sleep at night when they spin and rant about him.

*shrugs*

CkG

 

[leeboy]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: Wag
No, I call it being disrespectful.

Why would you post something on a forum you wouldn't say to someone's face?
I don't think you'll get your point accross by insulting people.

I actually read what you had to say and learned something, until I got to the point where you insulted me and I lost interest.

Wow, I knew we had "sensitive" people here but for someone to take "bleat on..." personally almost takes the cake. I've seen your posts, I have read your slant, and this was nothing more than an attempt by you to bash Bush. "Bleat on..." is most appropriate for those comments that are spun into anti-Bush rhetoric. Now yes - the "mommy" part was towards you and well deserved for your whining about "discussion" and respect. This forum is for discussion but as "bleat on..." suggests - it has actually more of a "see who can slam Bush the most forum". Talk about "respect"... I see little respect shown for our President on this forum by those of differing ideologies. But whatever - people will do what they wish and continue to whine about Bush even though they know that he has done well. I guess it helps them sleep at night when they spin and rant about him.

*shrugs*

CkG

^ ^ "bah on..." sheep.

 

[Wag]

CAD- I'd say you were the one who was oversensitive-

Show me in this thread where I was disrespectful? Even if I was, it is not to you, so how does that merit a personal attack or a sarcastic response?

Seriously, if you think you're going to get your point accross this way, why even bother posting? This board has become a pissing contest, and mostly useless.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Wag
CAD- I'd say you were the one who was oversensitive-

Show me in this thread where I was disrespectful? Even if I was, it is not to you, so how does that merit a personal attack or a sarcastic response?

Seriously, if you think you're going to get your point accross this way, why even bother posting? This board has become a pissing contest, and mostly useless.

Buahahaha - Now you try to say it was me who is "oversensitive"? Buahaha!!! You are the one who is whining about some "attack"

I replied to your "question" and then you whined about some "attack". Get over it - it's been policy - it's been discussed before - your "question" was typical of someone who thinks there was an angle against Bush.

CkG

 

[Wag]

So once again- How does an attack against Bush or any politician for that matter (as you see it), merit a personal attack on a forum member?

What does one thing have to do with another?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Wag
So once again- How does an attack against Bush or any politician for that matter (as you see it), merit a personal attack on a forum member?

What does one thing have to do with another?

So you still contend "Bleat on" is an offensive personal attack after making a statement that dealt with your "question"?

...and you try to say that I'm "oversensitive"

CkG

 

[Wag]

I'm just trying to make the point in this thread (because I don't participate that much in this forum), that those kind of responses are unproductive. You clearly don't see that
You see that any disagreement as a personal attack against yourself, and respond negatively.

I never post something here that I wouldn't say to someone in person. If you would say to someone in person "bleat on", then I think you would be someone I wouldn't want to deal with. I can see that appears to be the case.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Wag
I'm just trying to make the point in this thread (because I don't participate that much in this forum), that those kind of responses are unproductive. You clearly don't see that
You see that any disagreement as a personal attack against yourself, and respond negatively.

I never post something here that I wouldn't say to someone in person. If you would say to someone in person "bleat on", then I think you would be someone I wouldn't want to deal with. I can see that appears to be the case.

Where did I say that I thought you attacked me?
You can try to play the "high road" card all you want but it just doesn't work and I could care less. You took offense to "bleat on" IMO that is "oversensitive" - expecially in this forum. If you have something to say about my statement where I quoted your "question" then fine - but if not then take your "attack" whining elsewhere.

CkG

 

[Gaard]

Originally posted by: Wag
I would love to see Kerry ask Pres Bush directly during the debates why the funerals of soldiers are not allowed to be covered in the media if their families desire it?

I think the reason is clear...it might cause the support for whatever war we're involved in to wane. I'm not sure what the official White House reason is; I don't have a lot of time right now but I can look it up later if noone else has.

 

[Shad0hawK]

Originally posted by: leeboy
If even 1 family that lost a dad, mom, son, daughter, etc... is offended by the ads, then he should have the decency to change the imagry, not the message. Your point is lost dude. What a weak argument. Since so many have expressed their desire for it to be taken off, does it really matter what the 22 families that came out so far that support it think? No. Point is, his advisors should have had the common sense not to touch that subject in his re-election ads.

What you are basically saying is that as long as some people don't mind what others preceive is a bad thing, it makes it OK?

Who cares if there are two sides to this story? The important thing is one side finds it offensive, remove them. Simple.


Remember, we aren't talking about a Detergent ad here. We are talking about human lives. By NOT saying anything, it would have been like saying it was OK. Many families saw them, resented them, and spoke out. Remember again, we aren't talking about whether some people think it was OK for Janet's tit to pop out. Personally I find it OK, but as long as some in this country still find that kind of crap offensive, do I have the right to expect it on TV?

his argument is not weak, it is valid. no matter what you do, what you say, there will be someone "offended". so can you logically explain why the minority who are "offended" should overide the the majority of those who are not? the saddest part of your post is you actually came out and said what the 22 families think "does not matter"

well, it matters to them! and who are you to say it does not? are you the self appointed thought policeman of the nation? i find it more than a bit ironic you get up here and bitch about being sensitive and yet say other peoples feelings do not matter in the same paragraph.

on the other hand we have john kerry who constantly uses the vietnam war to promote himself with. the same hypocrites who whine about 911 have no problem using a war that killed tens of thousands to promote their candidate. yes some people are offended by it, the question is does your logic apply to this situation as well as to bush's?

personally, my view is both events were part of each's life. the commercial was done in a tastful and respectful manner. some liked, some do not...just as in everything else in life.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Gaard

Originally posted by: Wag
I would love to see Kerry ask Pres Bush directly during the debates why the funerals of soldiers are not allowed to be covered in the media if their families desire it?

I think the reason is clear...it might cause the support for whatever war we're involved in to wane. I'm not sure what the official White House reason is; I don't have a lot of time right now but I can look it up later if noone else has.

A Pentagon spokeswoman said the military-wide policy actually dates from about November 2000 -- the last days of the Clinton administration -- but it apparently went unheeded and unenforced, as images of caskets returning from the Afghanistan war appeared on television broadcasts and in newspapers until early this year. Though Dover Air Force Base, which has the military's largest mortuary, has had restrictions for 12 years, others "may not have been familiar with the policy," the spokeswoman said. This year, "we've really tried to enforce it."

So your intention of blaming Bush for policy is moot. Sure he could let policy slide but then what is the point of having policy? I think alot of the families have voiced support for this action, and I know that if it was someone from my family coming back that way I wouldn't want it all over the news. But I'm sure those on the left will believe it is only because Bush is "evil".

*shrugs*

CkG

 

[Gaard]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: Gaard

Originally posted by: Wag
I would love to see Kerry ask Pres Bush directly during the debates why the funerals of soldiers are not allowed to be covered in the media if their families desire it?

I think the reason is clear...it might cause the support for whatever war we're involved in to wane. I'm not sure what the official White House reason is; I don't have a lot of time right now but I can look it up later if noone else has.

A Pentagon spokeswoman said the military-wide policy actually dates from about November 2000 -- the last days of the Clinton administration -- but it apparently went unheeded and unenforced, as images of caskets returning from the Afghanistan war appeared on television broadcasts and in newspapers until early this year. Though Dover Air Force Base, which has the military's largest mortuary, has had restrictions for 12 years, others "may not have been familiar with the policy," the spokeswoman said. This year, "we've really tried to enforce it."

So your intention of blaming Bush for policy is moot. Sure he could let policy slide but then what is the point of having policy? I think alot of the families have voiced support for this action, and I know that if it was someone from my family coming back that way I wouldn't want it all over the news. But I'm sure those on the left will believe it is only because Bush is "evil".

*shrugs*

CkG

Blaming Bush for policy? I think you're trying too hard my friend. You think maybe your accusation that I'm blaming Bush for policy is like Wag's accusation that you personally attacked him?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Gaard

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: Gaard

Originally posted by: Wag
I would love to see Kerry ask Pres Bush directly during the debates why the funerals of soldiers are not allowed to be covered in the media if their families desire it?

I think the reason is clear...it might cause the support for whatever war we're involved in to wane. I'm not sure what the official White House reason is; I don't have a lot of time right now but I can look it up later if noone else has.

A Pentagon spokeswoman said the military-wide policy actually dates from about November 2000 -- the last days of the Clinton administration -- but it apparently went unheeded and unenforced, as images of caskets returning from the Afghanistan war appeared on television broadcasts and in newspapers until early this year. Though Dover Air Force Base, which has the military's largest mortuary, has had restrictions for 12 years, others "may not have been familiar with the policy," the spokeswoman said. This year, "we've really tried to enforce it."

So your intention of blaming Bush for policy is moot. Sure he could let policy slide but then what is the point of having policy? I think alot of the families have voiced support for this action, and I know that if it was someone from my family coming back that way I wouldn't want it all over the news. But I'm sure those on the left will believe it is only because Bush is "evil".

*shrugs*

CkG

Blaming Bush for policy? I think you're trying too hard my friend. You think maybe your accusation that I'm blaming Bush for policy is like Wag's accusation that you personally attacked him?

So your angle isn't to try to paint Bush in a bad light on this?

CkG