US: Ceremonies For Dead Soldiers Faked


Recommended Posts

eblkheart

Syndicated? Please. Let me know when he lands on a real station with a network that can be measured on a PPM in a top 25 market. Heck, top 50 or so. Public Broadcasting as far as I know isn't measured. Even Disney Radio isn't measured. pffft. Syndicated? HA.

Link to post
Share on other sites
zhangm

That's done for safety reasons and the pretence isn't to deceive.

Fine. Then a fake plane is safer than a real plane, and probably cheaper. And doesn't incur as high an opportunity cost. And what is deceitful about a fake plane that isn't deceitful about fake bullets in a gun salute? Is the point of the plane to have something there that looks like a plane, or do they expect the dead person to be disappointed that they can't hop in and take it for a joyride?

Link to post
Share on other sites
thomastmc

It's the thought that counts guys :)

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
theyarecomingforyou

So basically you are using the video parts that satisfy your agenda and cherry pick the parts out that don't. Got it. 

I posted a news story and offered my opinion on it.

 

Military ceremonies are measured in scale by the manpower involved. Moving a cargo plane takes 2 guys (Driver and guider) 10-15 minutes and costs nothing. If you've got a tonne of troops marching in a parade then it'll be deemed a big ceremony. Heck they wheel the Lancaster bomber outside in the open on nice days here purely so the plane spotters can gawk at it. They'll wheel fighter jets out to pose for office photos. 

 

After reading up, this entire ceremony is definitely purely for ceremon sake. Tradition, to honour the dead. The bodies having arrived previously and will be sat in forensics to be identified. They have since renamed the ceremony to address any confusion.

I just don't think it's an appropriate way to honour the dead. It strikes me as rather fake, designed to elicit patriotism rather than respect the individual. It's a pantomime. I can understand and respect colleagues and family members greeting a body as it returns into the country and a ceremony building up around that?given military tradition I would even expect it to be exaggerated to some degree?but not treating a body like a prop in a drama production by loading it on and off a plane for an audience.  :no:

Link to post
Share on other sites
metallithrax

Considering the history of censorship surrounding the return of dead soldiers in the US it is hard to consider it anything but propaganda. Typically ceremonies don't try to pass themselves off as something they're not, they are simply designed to respect the occasion.

 

 

It's vulgar patriotism used to portray the act of killing as a noble profession. No longer are western wars about defending the homeland but about securing economic interests abroad; no longer are people conscripted into service but rather volunteer to join. However, the reason we don't treat soldiers in the same way is because it is utterly tasteless and crass. And when you start with soldiers it's hard to know when to stop, which is why you now see similar displays in the US when it comes to police and firemen.

 

However, I utterly reject the implication that soldiers in the UK are treated with contempt and have to hide their profession in order to avoid getting beaten up. I regularly see soldiers in their uniforms and they are proud of it. The town of Royal Wootton Bassett has long held public gatherings to salute the repatriation of dead servicemen and I have seen nothing but respect for soldiers, though I am aware that some soldiers are occasionally subjected to verbal abuse from people critical of the war (especially Muslims because of the nature of modern conflicts). Whatever disagreements I have over the UK's foreign policy I put aside when it comes to respecting the brave men and women risking their lives for their country.

 

Your comment makes it sound like you don't understand British culture - being low key and reserved is our way of respected soldiers.

 

PS - You should never use the Daily Mail to support your argument if you want to be taken seriously.

 

Well, my nephew was last night when he and his non army mates weren't allowed into a night club because he is in the army.

Link to post
Share on other sites
theyarecomingforyou

Well, my nephew was last night when he and his non army mates weren't allowed into a night club because he is in the army.

One incident does not prove national contempt towards soldiers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
metallithrax

One incident does not prove national contempt towards soldiers.

Never said it did.  But there is contempt throughout the country from different types of people.

Link to post
Share on other sites
theyarecomingforyou

Never said it did.  But there is contempt throughout the country from different types of people.

There's contempt for people who wear the wrong football shirt or dress in an unconventional way too, so I don't see the point you're trying to make. Even in the US you have the Westboro Baptist Church picketing the funerals of dead soldiers. The point is the vast majority of people respect soldiers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
psionicinversion

oh come on.... i understand the ceremonies for the dead from war cus they are fighting for our freedom whilst most people are happy sitting on there arses eating mcdonalds but moaning over planes that cant fly is abit rediculous

 

its like having a memorial for the dead from world war 2.... if no allied force gained traction we'd all be speaking german and probably killed for bad mouthing the fuhrer, they should be remembered but moaning about a plane that cant fly is stupid

Link to post
Share on other sites
cork1958

oh come on.... i understand the ceremonies for the dead from war cus they are fighting for our freedom whilst most people are happy sitting on there arses eating mcdonalds but moaning over planes that cant fly is abit rediculous

 

its like having a memorial for the dead from world war 2.... if no allied force gained traction we'd all be speaking german and probably killed for bad mouthing the fuhrer, they should be remembered but moaning about a plane that cant fly is stupid

"they should be remembered but moaning about a plane that cant fly is stupid"

 

No doubt about that!

Link to post
Share on other sites
mudslag

I posted a news story and offered my opinion on it.

 

 

 

You posted an opinionated video piece, which you cherry picked out the parts that didn't go with your agenda, ironman posted the actual story. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
theyarecomingforyou

You posted an opinionated video piece

Both the video and the source article highlighted that the ceremonies were fake / phony and that the planes were not operational, with the video positing that it could be considered propaganda (something the corporate media would never publish for fear of a backlash from sponsors). If you don't agree with it then that's fine and I respect that but clearly it is a subject worthy of a debate. As I said, and the video supports, I consider it to be propaganda.

Link to post
Share on other sites
notchinese

That wasn't my point. I was simply explaining how I consider it to be propaganda and distasteful. Others are free to disagree and I have always been willing to respond to other people's perspectives, even if I disagree with them.

 
 

Had they been real working planes it wouldn't have been a news story.  :rolleyes:

 

How is it propaganda? Its just a tradition.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
mudslag

^

 

And the video also supports the other side, that it's ceremonial. It also doesn't look like the Pentagon was trying to hide this fact that they used a non working plane and they give a valid explanation. What you fail to understand is that using this as a propaganda tool is both a waste of time and money. Most of these are held for families and veterans and are rarely if ever publicized to the general public for public viewing. So who exactly are they trying to convince and what is the message? If it's propaganda it's to a very limited market, part can't server again and part lost loved ones to those putting on the ceremony. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By zikalify
      Startpage survey shows 72% in U.S. concerned about privacy
      by Paul Hill



      A new survey conducted by the search engine Startpage has found that 72% of Americans are concerned about their online privacy. While the findings are not surprising, it’s good that the number of privacy-concerned users has been quantified. While concern about privacy is high, the number of people actually taking action is quite a bit lower.

      The data shows that 17% of people had taken no action to protect their personal data online in the past year while 60% reported that they changed at least one password online. While changing a password will boost security, it does very little to limit online tracking with the use of cookies. Startpage called this phenomena ‘privacy inertia’ and put it down to the network effect where most people think it’s too hard to ditch services that don’t respect privacy.

      Discussing privacy inertia, Tim Pychyl, PhD, Associate Professor of Psychology at Carleton University said:

      According to Pychyl, a helpful way to overcome privacy inertia is by using a technique called if … then; for example, if you’re about to look up a term with a search engine, you will take five minutes and choose a private search engine. This helps you break down lots of tasks into more manageable, less daunting, jobs.

      Startpage also found that 62% of U.S. consumers have become more aware of how their information is used online. 57% noticed that ads were being targeted to them based on their browsing history, 47% read an article about how personal information is being used online, and 46% noticed an online ad targeting their location.

      If you’ve been suffering from privacy inertia because you’re not sure what other services and tools exist, be sure to check the recommendations over on PrivacyTools and ThinkPrivacy.

    • By Usama Jawad96
      Microsoft confirms it has halted PAC donations
      by Usama Jawad

      A Political Action Committee (PAC) is a private body that funds political campaigns via donations. Under U.S. laws, a PAC cannot give more than $5,000 to a candidate committee per election, and the amount is funded purely based on voluntary donations. Most Fortune 500 companies have a PAC which typically donates money to campaigns which support their interests.

      One such company is Microsoft, whose PAC came under the magnifying glass following the attack on the Capitol earlier this month. As a result, the firm has now publicly confirmed that it has suspended PAC donations until it completes its assessment of the situation. The matter was first internally discussed a few weeks ago, but has now been made public.



      In an employee meeting on January 21, Microsoft president Brad Smith highlighted that although 80% of the donations had gone to members of Congress who voted to uphold the Electoral College, 20% of its PAC donations in the last four years went to Congress members who voted against the certification of Electoral College votes.

      Consequently, there have been some internal discussions at Microsoft as to whether it should pause PAC donations to these Congress members and take stricter action against "members who led that effort or who fed disinformation, in our view, to the American public". Now, the firm has confirmed that it is suspending PAC donations until at least February 15, saying that:

      It remains to be seen what "consequences" Microsoft has in mind for Congress members who voted against the Electoral College, but we'll learn more in a few weeks. It is also important to note that other big tech organizations such as Google and Facebook have also paused PAC donations for now in light of the Capitol siege.

    • By indospot
      The U.S. government has revoked more Huawei licenses
      by João Carrasqueira



      Huawei seems to be getting in even more trouble with the United States government. According to a report by Reuters, citing sources familiar with the matter, the Department of Commerce has issued notices indicating that the administration intends to reject a number of applications for American companies to be allowed to deal with Huawei. On top of that, some existing licenses have been revoked, including Intel's.

      The United States government, particularly under the Trump administration, has been harsh on Chinese companies, and Huawei has been the most notable target of its restrictions. The smartphone manufacturer was added to the country's entity list back in 2019, restricting its ability to conduct business with American companies. That's why, since then, we've seen Huawei phones ship without Google services, while the company tries to push its own ecosystem of apps.

      American companies can still apply to obtain licenses to work with Huawei, which allowed some laptops to still run Windows or have Intel processors, for example. However, the latest restriction would put even more of a hamper on Huawei's business. Aside from Intel, memory chip manufacturer Kioxia (formerly Toshiba Memory Solutions) is also said to have had its license revoked. Some sources claim that up to eight licenses for four companies have been terminated.

      In a last-ditch effort to save at least part of its business, Huawei recently sold off its Honor sub-division to a Chinese consortium, which should save it from all the restrictions imposed by the government. Honor recently announced an Intel-based variant of its MagicBook Pro laptop at CES, which should still be happening since the company has been separated from Huawei.

      Around the world, some countries have followed the U.S. in their efforts to curb Huawei technology, removing its products from 5G networks. However, others, such as Brazil, are still welcoming the company to build out their infrastructure.

      More recently, the Trump administration appears to be doubling down on its efforts to restrict Chinese companies since the November 3 election. In December, a number of companies were added to its entity list, including SMIC and DJI, and more recently, transactions with eight Chinese apps were banned in the U.S. President-elect Joe Biden is expected to take office this week, and it remains to be seen whether the new administration will signal a new stance from the U.S. towards China.

    • By zikalify
      Brazilian government allows Huawei to take part in 5G auction
      by Paul Hill



      Reuters, citing the Brazilian newspaper O Estado de S. Paulo, has said that Brazil is likely to allow Huawei to participate in the 5G auction that’s set to take place in June. The Bolsonaro government of Brazil has been looking for ways to exclude the Chinese company from the country’s networks, following the lead of the United States, but between Trump’s upcoming departure from the White House and the cost of excluding Huawei, Jair Bolsonaro is being forced to backtrack on his plans.

      The Brazilian newspaper had cited government and industry sources to back up claims that Brazil will allow Huawei into the 5G network auctions later this year. It said that with China being Brazil’s biggest trade partner and Huawei being more cost-competitive, Bolsonaro has faced resistance to banning the Chinese firm from industry and members of his government including Vice President Hamilton Mourao.

      VP Mourao told the newspaper that any company that takes part in the auction will be subject to the country’s data protection laws and must respect Brazil’s sovereignty. One of the arguments put forth by the current U.S. administration is that Huawei has links to the Communist Party of China and therefore data won’t be safe if Huawei is allowed into 5G networks.

      While Trump’s departure may have saved Huawei’s prospects in Brazil, it has come too late for the company in other countries like Poland and the United Kingdom which have already moved to ban Huawei from their 5G networks and remove it where it has already been installed.

      Source: Estadao (Portuguese) via Reuters

    • By eRajesh
      U.S. government puts Xiaomi and eight other Chinese companies under investment ban
      by Rajesh Pandey



      The U.S. Department of Defense has put Xiaomi and eight other Chinese firms on an investment blacklist that prevents American investors from investing in these companies. All existing American investors will also have to divest their holdings in the backlisted firms by November 11, 2021. Huawei is already a part of this blacklist.

      Xiaomi is China's second-largest and the world's third-biggest smartphone maker. Notably, Qualcomm Ventures, the venture capital arm of Qualcomm, has invested in Xiaomi. If the decision is not overturned, the San Diego-based chipmaker might have to divest its holdings in Xiaomi by November.

      The U.S. government alleges that the nine banned Chinese companies have ties to or are controlled by the Chinese military. In addition to Xiaomi, the list also includes Comac, a plane maker that planned on setting up a factory in the U.S. to compete against Boeing and Airbus.

      Do note that this ban from the Trump administration is different from the 'Entity List' on which the U.S. Department of Commerce had put Huawei. That list prevents U.S. companies from providing their technology and services to Chinese companies.

      It is possible that once the Biden administration takes office from January 20 that the decision will be overturned but it remains to be seen what will manifest.

      Source: Reuters