There is a misconception that sites that mirrored the Bush photomosaic that
uses tiny face shots of U.S. soldiers killed in action as pixels that are arranged<br> to form a portrait of Bush, were somehow responsible for the
content.<br>
What other misconceptions do Bush supporters harbor and declare about him<br>and/or his administration?
What acts are actually disrespectful, hypocritical excuses to withhold photos of the human cost of the war in Iraq.... <br>while simultaneously defending the display of a 9/11 victim in a political ad, or protesting the war in Iraq, which <br>the Bush administration has taken elaborate and public efforts to hide the pictorial record of, from us, by turning the deceit back in the "face" of the
man who is the symbol of responsibility for this war, and by extension, the
past and future (so far mostly hidden) U.S. casualties that result from it.
Given the outrageous tactics evidenced below to hide pictures of the American casualties <br>while attempting to gain political advantage by displaying a domestic terror casualty, why is an outrageous, <br>visual protest, designed to attract support to end this war of choice in Iraq, not appropriate?
Quote:
Link to 3 part story pictured below: <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3652171.stm">http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3652171.stm</a>
He denied the suggestion that restricting access to the photographs was an attempt at damage limitation<br> by the Bush administration, which is under pressure over its policy of invading and occupying Iraq.
"I don't see that as our motivation. To be very frank with you, we don't want the remains of our service members<br> who have made the ultimate sacrifice to be the subject of any kind of attention that is unwarranted or undignified," said Mr Molino.
|
<center>
<img src="http://me.to/svr006.gif"><img src="http://me.to/svr007.gif">
<img src="http://me.to/svr008.gif"></center>
Quote:
<a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-03-04-bush-ads-criticism_x.htm">http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-03-04-bush-ads-criticism_x.htm</a>
Thursday afternoon, the Bush campaign said it would not cancel or alter the ads. Spokesmen said the ads are respectful <br>and designed to show the president's leadership skills in the aftermath of the tragedy.
|
<center><center><img src="http://me.to/svr009.gif">
Who is actually playing politics with the dead?
A U.S. executive branch that advances cynical and hypocritical reasons to
hide the pictorial record of the cost of a war of choice in Iraq; unidentified,
flag draped coffins of the U.S. troops killed, and press photos and interviews
with wounded U.S. troops, while at the same time, the same executive branch defends its display <br>the photographic image of a flag-draped body of a 9-11 victim in a presidential campaign ad.........or Joe Wezorek, an American
anti-war activist who has a much more noble and selfless goal....to bring
to the attention of misinformed Americans that there is a terrible and
intentionally hidden cost to Bush's war in Iraq.
Quote:
(from the page 3 of the BBC article displayed and linked above)
"Given this lack of financial or other crass motives, other recent instances of the politicisation <br>of the dead strike me as more morally questionable: the coffins of the victims of 9/11 showing up in a political advertisement,<br> the continued suppression of images of the funerals of those lost in Iraq from the mainstream American media, and images of the 9/11 disaster in a campaign ad," he says.
|