Media Witness Return Of War Casualty For First Time In 18 Years

DOVER, Del. — For the first time since an 18-year ban on news coverage of returning war dead was lifted, the media witnessed the arrival Sunday night of a soldier killed overseas.

After receiving permission from family members, the military opened Dover Air Force Base in Delaware to the press. An eight-member team wearing white gloves and camouflage battle fatigues carried the body of 30-year-old Air Force Staff Sgt. Phillip Myers of Hopewell, Va., off a military jet in a solemn ceremony on a cool, clear night.

Myers was killed April 4 near Helmand province, Afghanistan, when he was hit with an improvised explosive device, the Department of Defense said.

The ceremony under the yellowish haze of airport floodlights took about 20 minutes with Myers' wife and other family members in attendance.

Myers was a member of the 48th Civil Engineer Squadron with the Royal Air Force in Lakenheath, England, one of the bases the U.S. Air Force uses in the country. He was awarded a Bronze Star for bravery last year in recognition of his efforts in support of Operation Enduring Freedom, the Department of Defense said.

The new Pentagon policy gives families a choice of whether to admit the press to ceremonies at Dover, home to the nation's largest military mortuary and the entry point to the U.S. for service personnel killed overseas.

Critics of the previous policy had said the government was trying to hide the human cost of war.

President Barack Obama had asked for a review of the ban, and Defense Secretary Robert Gates has said that the blanket restriction made him uncomfortable. The administration will let families decide whether to allow photographs.

For example, if several caskets arrive on the same flight, news coverage will be allowed only for those whose families have given permission.

The ban was put in place by President George H.W. Bush in 1991, at the time of the Persian Gulf War. From the start, it was cast as a way to shield grieving families.

There have been several exceptions since then, most notably in 1996 when President Bill Clinton attended the arrival of the remains of Commerce Secretary Ron Brown and 32 others killed in a plane crash in Croatia. In 2000, the Pentagon distributed photographs of the arrival of remains of those killed in the bombing of the USS Cole and in 2001, the Air Force distributed a photograph of the remains of a victim of the Sept. 11 attack on the Pentagon.

One objection to lifting the ban had been that if the media were present, some families might feel obligated to come to Dover for the brief, solemn ritual in which honor guards carry the caskets off a plane. Few families now choose to attend, in part because doing so means leaving home and the support system of friends at a difficult time. The sudden trip can also be expensive and logistically difficult to arrange.

Comments

[Lionsden]

That the witnesses pile up is because Obama asks them to.

[westreal]

About freakin time.

[hope]

Unless it is YOUR family member returning, it is absolutely none of your business what decision the family makes regarding media coverage.

[A Meat Beetle]

Exactly. It is up to the families whether they want their loved ones' repatriation ceremonies covered by the media or not. Bush 1 robbed them of that choice. President Obama has given the choice back to them. Unlike his predecessor, he trusts the families to make the right decision for themselves (Republican governance is based on an inherent mistrust of people and the need to have a strict, authoritarian father figure telling us what we can and can't do in our personal lives).

The only sensible and compassionate view one can take on this is to respect all military families, regardless of what they choose.

[JonShank]

See, I don't understand, if we cannot see WHO is in the casket, why would the family care?

[MarciaJ720]

Thanks and respect go to both the President and Secretary Gates for lifting this ban.

I think they made a good compromise - let the families decide and not the military or government. It is their family member who sacrificed their life. Some families prefer to grieve in private and some want to scream to the world "look what your wars have done." I respect both positions.

BTW, the only reason the military recruitment is up is because of the Economy. Enrollment ALWAYS goes up during hard economic times. Only trouble is, then the country needs to find a war to use all these men and new equipment for.

[kshawNCvoter]

this is good that we are not hiding the sacrifices of our dead war heroes anymore. i am glad we have a president that is not afraid to show the ultimate sacrifice our boys and girls are making to keep us safe from the taliban.

we should never have been in iraq but the afghan conflict is a necessity, unfortunate but needed.

i still sometimes can't believe what a huge mess ex pres george bush as left behind.

[popart]

what we are actually being treated like adults....our government is letting us see caskets.....i feel so "grown up".

[JonShank]

I have never understood why anyone would have qualms about showing closed caskets. We don't know who exactly is in there. And by showing the closed caskets, the brave dead have their anonymity and the U.S. citizens get to see the ugly wages of war. I could understand families being upset if the caskets were open, but they are not.

[EmmanuelTheTalkingHorse]

Haven't the families already lost and sacrificed enough, without also losing the right to a private funeral at a time and place of their choosing?

Just because you don't understand it, doesn't make them weird or wrong. It just means you don't understand it.

[ADinSC]

They still have the right to their private funerals. What JonShank and the article were talking about was showing caskets being unloaded from airplanes just back from overseas. Reading comprehension is not one of your better skills, is it.

[ADinSC]

Out of sight, out of mind. Didn't you get the message that war is just flags and yellow ribbon magnets and "Mission Accomplished" stunts? Can't see all those caskets coming back. It would ruin that image.

[chili111]

Do YOU have loved ones in the military? I didn't think so.

Next!!!

[OneAngryDwarf]

Yeah nobody but you has ever served in the military or known anyone that has...

Oh btw Frank Schaefer has a great article about how uber-Republican Laura Ingram feels about who should serve in the military. You should read it some time.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/frank-schaeffer/money-the-republican-god_b_176284.html

[dengal]

I would want the nation to know of my families loss...its the families choice so MYOB

[Savetheworld]

Kudos to the Obama administration for this decision. I'm sure that if GWB had the same policy he would have been more reluctant to use American soldiers as dispensible chess pieces. Now if we only had a way to view the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians--including children--who have also died in this unjust war... I'm sure there a plenty of people who can't wait until G. Dummy loses his secret service protection in 10 years.

[Witchitalineman]

I am grateful to the families who give their permission for the media coverage.

[indy girl]

for some interesting reading about wars, TV coverage and public opinion, as well as the current casket debate (views reflect several differing angles, both pro and con):

http://xroads.virginia.edu/~CLASS/am485_98/lane/media/viet.htm

http://www.warbirdforum.com/media.htm

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB152/

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/1102-08.htm

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2009/02/military_caskets_photos_banlifted_022609w/

http://www.museum.tv/archives/etv/W/htmlW/warontelevi/warontelevi.htm

http://www.ajr.org/article_printable.asp?id=2989

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6078.htm

[hope]

Frankly, this is one bit of transparency I wish we need never make use of again.

[SJeffH]

I think choice is the most important aspect of this rule. Some families absolutely want this to be covered by the media as sons and daughters who have given EVERYTHING deserve to be known about by the population at large. Other families are just as strongly opposed and feel this must be a PRIVATE matter. The families deserve the choice.

A possible negative side effect here may be the driving of a wedge between family members who disagree on the issue. I'm surprised not to have seen this brought up as it seems cause for discussion.

[VOTER]

"I'm surprised not to have seen this brought up as it seems cause for discussion."

It hasn't been brought up because the families are given a choice.

[IntelligentDesign]

Banning media coverage of our fallen soldiers will rank fairly high on the list of egregious acts of the tyrannical Bush years - and that's no short list.

[Independent voter]

Come on, don't be so dense.

The ban covered an 18 year period and includes the Clinton years as well.

[NowWhatFolks]

And 12 Bush years, right? Just sayin'...

[VOTER]

Well said.

[ToL1]

Obama's change has a $6.5 Trillion price tag. I'll take more of the same, please.

[IntelligentDesign]

OT and BS - oh for two

[mouselion]

A case of:

Trillion wise, quadrillion foolish?

[1differentdrummer]

More like a case of foot in mouth.

[TimeToPunt]

Don't forget the $4 trillion that is included in that figure because the Bush administration has been covering up the true cost of the wars with accounting tricks for 6 years.

[24kgold]

What does that have to do with the media coverage of fallen soldiers. You have nothing do you? Hee Hee

[WilliamL]

Giving military families the choice is key and it is up to the media and certain segments of the population to remain respectful.

I hope those clowns from Kansas do not show up and if they do, a ride in an ambulance will be in order.

The civilian population at large needs to see the parade of coffins in between the super bowl, world series, britney, hannah montana, and the rest of the garbage filling the eyes and ears of the public.

We can not advance while being in a state of perpetual war.