Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

I believe the W.H. "sat" on the latest three dead soldiers.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
Career Prole Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 03:16 PM
Original message
I believe the W.H. "sat" on the latest three dead soldiers.
As any faithful follower of icasualties.org could tell you, more often than not (if not every time) the count there increments after a CENTCOM press release stating the date, place, and cause of death and in the period details they've always listed for the first few days afterwards the date and place and cause of the death with the name filled in as "Name withheld pending notification of next-of-kin".

Now this morning I find MSNBC apparently scooped CENTCOM on these latest three, with the damned Pentagon announcing the deaths (according to their story) rather than the standard CENTCOM press release.

And the period details for the first time I've ever seen have nothing filled in...

Just "DETAILS NOT RELEASED YET (Actual Date Not Known)"

Now that count sat on 2497 throughout *'s visit to iraq until the day after his little press conference back in DC, then suddenly it jumps to 2500 afterwards with none of the usual CENTCOM press releases ever showing up and none of the usual details...only the names were withheld in all the other deaths.

Not that I'd ever accuse the administration of hiding dead soldiers temporarily for the sake of convenience, but if these deaths had been announced before DimSon's presser, that would have cast a definite pall on the proceedings.

Maybe it's no big deal, but if that's the way it went down I'd be friggin' outraged. They've got no damned right to do that. :grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
elehhhhna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 03:18 PM
Response to Original message
1. Bush was there for a celebration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Career Prole Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 03:36 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Jeez, no kiddin'. If you click on the "No Details Given" link
on the period details page it links to a Yahoo news article instead of the usual "defenselink.mil" like the others all do.

And the news article explains why they may have indeed sat on these announcements as I suspect...

The Pentagon provided no details on the nature of the 2,500th death. Nevertheless, reaching the new marker underscored the continuing violence in Iraq just after an upbeat Bush returned from a surprise visit to Baghdad determined that the tide was beginning to turn.


Yet another low reached in the slime-suckingest lowest of all administrations ever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Breeze54 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 03:41 PM
Response to Original message
3. Thank you for posting this;
I have been checking http://icasualties.org/oif/ all day and it was still at 2497.
I was scratching my head at the 2500 KIA posts. I didn't see a link to it until now.

U.S. death toll in Iraq reaches 2,500
18,490 U.S. troops have been wounded since 2003 invasion, Pentagon says
BREAKING NEWS
Updated: 8:43 a.m. ET June 15, 2006
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Career Prole Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. I believe the W.H. pulled a fast one on these three.
The dogs kept it a secret so there wouldn't be any "2500" questions at the press conference where they were trying to claim things are now "looking up". Nothing's sacred to these jerks.
Absolutely nothing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gratuitous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 04:02 PM
Response to Original message
5. I'd bet a dollar to a hole in a doughnut that's just what they did
This administration doesn't miss details like this, and their whole story yesterday was about Bush's latest winning streak and fabulous week. Bush! He's back! Not that he ever went anywhere! And the American people love him! Yay!

2,500 dead troops doesn't feed into that scenario, so it had to be shunted aside for 24 hours while they clanged their little tocsins. The people dying in Iraq are dying now for less than nothing. They're not defending our country, they're not bringing democracy to Iraq, and if their deaths come at an inconvenient time for the corrupt Bush administration, they won't even be acknowledged for a while.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Breeze54 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. It didn't do him any good though! He's still at only 37% approval. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gratuitous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 04:19 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. I think they're less interested in poll numbers
After all, Stupidhead isn't going to run again. What they crave more than anything right now is favorable coverage, flashy headlines about a poll "bounce" that's less than the margin of error, and gabbling from the talking chuckleheads that supports their message o' the day.

Conservatives like to deride "politically correct" esteem building among youngsters, but they have this multi-billion dollar propanda machine spewing out all this nonsense solely to make Stupidhead feel better about himself and the miserable job he's doing. As long as Stupidhead is kept jollied along, nobody gets wished into the cornfield.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Breeze54 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 04:28 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. You may be right about that but
people do look at the polls. I think it does sway people.
People like to be on the 'winning side'...especially pigs!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kittenpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 04:07 PM
Response to Original message
7. Actual date not known?
That seems a little suspicious, doesn't it!?

I bet you're right... they didn't want to rain on their own parade.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Career Prole Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 04:53 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. First time I'd ever seen that, too.
Made the bells go off.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 04:56 PM
Response to Original message
11. It is just a number, right? No, it is a person? Here is a number for
you. I just gave you your fifth recommendation. Kick to the GP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Career Prole Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 05:06 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. Thanks.
:)

And now a moment of silence for that few, that band of "inconvenient" brothers.
Theirs was not to reason why. Theirs was but to do, and die after the damned presser.
:(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
morningglory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 07:16 PM
Response to Original message
13. Get a hold of yourself. It's only a number. (sad icon I don't know how to
do)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Career Prole Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-16-06 01:59 PM
Response to Original message
14. According to icasualties, it's back to 2499 again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kittenpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-16-06 02:18 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. hmmm? Does icasualties count defense workers?
I heard on CNN yesterday that a few of the 2500 were DOD, so could that be the disparity?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue May 14th 2024, 11:19 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC