Blinders at Arlington Cemetery

Dana Milbank, whose Washington Sketch column often sparks debate among our Readers Who Comment, touched off a storm this morning. He said that the family of Lt. Col. Billy Hall, recently killed in Iraq and leaving two young children fatherless, granted permission for the media to cover Hall's burial in Arlington Cemetery. "But the military had other ideas," Milbank wrote, "and they arranged the Marine's burial yesterday so that no sound, and few images, would make it into the public domain."

Milbank writes that his column may be dismissed as "media whining," but says "the de facto ban on media at Arlington funerals fits neatly with an effort by the administration to sanitize the war in Iraq. That, in turn, has contributed to a public boredom with the war," which has claimed more than 4,000 American lives and countless thousands of Iraqi ones.

Many of our readers agree with Milbank and see no reason why the Arlington officials can override family wishes. Several others -- who have apparently experienced what they regard (sometimes correctly, I must say) as media transgressions in exploiting the emotional side of human suffering -- say they wouldn't let cameras or reporters anywhere near such a personal event.

Others want more facts. Several suggested Milbank's treatise lacks a significant element: reporting. They want to know the names of the Arlington officials who kept the cameras at bay and reporters so far away from the service that they could not hear the words of the chaplain. Many blame the media for permitting the Iraq War to happen in the first place; others recall the impact of media coverage on the Vietnam war and suggest that the military has learned to keep the cameras and reporters away. All this while Iraq has fallen far below the economy on the list of things that worry Americans.

We'll start with edlharris, who said, "So, I guess Lt. Col. Billy Hall gave his life so some bureaucrat has the "freedom" to override his family's wishes."

readerny asked, "...why won't the families invite journalists as family guests. Guests can take photos and record sound, even if surreptitiously... It's despicable to expect someone to sacrifice his life and then demand that the public cannot see the funeral or read a decently reported story about it."

But vatownsend, who can be depended upon to defend the administration in any Iraq story, wrote, "These soldiers gave their last breath of devotion to their comrades in arms, their families, and their country, not the press..."

normanspeight was the first to ask, "So, what is the name of the person(s) who obstructed/prevented the proper reporting of this funeral? Why does the press consistently not print the names of the offenders. Do you respect their right to anonymity in the light of such uncivilised, unthinking and downright rude obstructionist behaviors?..."

kingcranky said, "This policy of censoring funerals makes a complete mockery of the reasons-supposedly to "spread freedom"-why these soldiers died. Brave troops being sent to their deaths, maimings and mental traumas, by a cowardly President, at the behest of a just-as-cowardly Vice President. Just disgusting."

odonnell521 wrote, "After having gone to school with many of today's military leaders while in the one of the service academies during the early 1970s, I see that they've remembered the PR lessons of Vietnam and forgotten the political and historical ones."

And Casey1added, "This president has hidden his dead. An illegal war, based on lies and rationalized by an ever-changing definition of "victory" has cost hundreds of thousands of people their lives. It is no wonder that the decider-in-chief wants to hide the dead."

kglkgl06 said, "...wapo [Washington Post] you guys just don't get it... you've managed to twist everything military into something bad... so you are no longer welcome... people don't trust you anymore"

ghostmoves wrote, "The de facto government censorship extends far beyond caskets and funerals. Think about it. When was the last time you saw a media photo of a dead and dismembered American soldier in Iraq?... I am old enough to remember Vietnam, from where there were photos. Photos ended that war... Let the public see the reality, and our involvement in the Iraqi civil war will end fast."

rcvinson64 said, "What shame. Then again, if the press had done its job,none of this would be happening."

jquinlan29 agreed, saying, "...The true cost of this war in the lives of the service members and their families has been hidden. When it is finally known, the numbers will be appalling. I blame the media for not covering this aggressively and allowing the Bush administration to hide what they are doing. Where is our free press?"

timmyleecook asked, "And just what would be the "news" one would glean from observing the ceremony at close quarters? Perhaps an aggressive reporter could get one of the relatives to dis the President as the casket was lowered in the background? Maybe someone would make a Peace sign for the camera. You are a ghoul."

Awheck agreed, saying, "Death is a private affair. So this tirade was about reporters not the man or his family. I have had to remove reporters asking for pictures of the deceased before the wife was notified of her husbands death... Who will assure that the photographer looking to win the Pulitzer Price will not trample the other graves... Write to Honor our dead and departed brother for what he did not to satisfy you ghoulish newsworthyness."

But pundito wrote, "If the Iraq war had a visible cost, Americans might demand a visible benefit."

russell2 said, "Thank you Dana for reporting on this important subject... As long as there are American's dying in Iraq, you or the WP should publish a story a week about those who continue to sacrifice their lives not to mention the number who come home with severe injuries. [http://projects.washingtonpost.com/fallen/] All because Bush and team decided they wanted to invade Iraq."

Headline wrote, "...High military Brass can't be allowed to get away with this kind of censorship. This is a deomocracy, not communist China and family wishes and family wishes only should be obeyed at any funeral within reason of decorum."

But virginiathefrog said, "...I commend Hall and all the other COUNTLESS veterans in that cemetary. one family does NOT have the authority to determine the protocol of the entire cemetary... This is not a truly appropriate time for the press to be nagging the soldiers protecting the sanctity of the cemetary. It is a time for reverence, respect and no telephoto lenses..."

Last word to patty2 who said, "The press had the invitation of the immediate family. Period. They weren't crashing the ceremony. They were invited to attend, cover and report on the service. The government stopped them. One more reason to be concerned."

All comments on Milbank's sketch are here.

By Doug Feaver |  April 24, 2008; 9:30 AM ET Iraq
Previous: The Beat Goes On | Next: Immigration Migration

Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



The "media" takes pictures at Arlington all the time. The family has a right to have their loved one's funeral televised. It is the least we can do for them, honor their wishes.

Posted by: Cabdisbeenbad | April 28, 2008 2:12 PM

Being an Israeli citizen and far from internal US politics I wish to offer an observation.

As an Israeli I have, unfortunately, buried several friends in military service. Barring the wishes of the family (who are the sole decider in these matters ) cameras (normally 1-2 pool camera ) reporters and the public are invited to a service.
The soldier who died did so in a public way for the public, facing the public with the grave consequences of the act is an important issue. When a funeral is shown across the news and public sphere there had better be a good reason for the event.
Also this is the chance for his life to speak , a first amendment issue if ever there was one.
I DIED , MY LIFE IS OVER, WAS THIS RIGHT ?

The bereaved have a fundamental right to use this event to state this speech .

As a society with many such sad events , an army official trying to seal a funeral or control access over the wish of the family will be front paged and scorned !

As for respect , most media persons in such events act as any human would , a little unease , a little apologetic for the interference and mainly a healthy respect for the event.
I recommend you watch some coverage from Israeli funerals , in an emotional society the images are poi gent and need no extra embellishment and the coverage shows great restraint.

As a private person I only say this, hiding the results of these acts can only lead for the cheapening of the life wasted. No death is "good" merely a payment which can be justified as a prevention of a greater evil

J I Kirsch
Israel

Posted by: J kirsch | April 28, 2008 7:36 AM

Not sure to whose attention this ought to be directed, but if any WaPo staff read this, please click on OPINIONS at the top of this page, then click FEEDBACK to find Doug's column gets a shout-out, right below Deborah Howell's. Then note that the column abstracted for her is her latest, a nice plug, while the one abstracted for Doug is from months ago, making Doug's column sound lame and leaving the reader uninformed. If WaPo could fix it so his is likewise properly updated, it'd be appreciated.

Posted by: jhbyer | April 26, 2008 11:26 PM

I am sorry to object to Mr. Milbank but I really do not want him messing with families who are burying their family members in Arlington. After all, the Post describes him in these terms:

"Post columnist Dana Milbank, who serves as the capital's foremost critic of political theater in his Washington Sketch ..."

That is fine for cute remarks about Hillary or Obama. I guess I should get on the side of a free press. But he scares me.

Posted by: Gary E. Masters | April 25, 2008 11:51 AM

Without a doubt the officials that manage Arlington have a primary goal to respect the dignity of ALL of those interred there. Despite the the express wishes of the family they have an obligation to preserve the dignity of that sacred place (by the way, jogging is not allowed). I'm sure that the press would be respectful of this place and not make a media three ring circus at the first opportunity, or not.

Posted by: NY1SG(RET) | April 25, 2008 9:01 AM

My Army Wife Mother is buried at ANC, also my Marine Corps in Laws. My Dad's Brother, lost at St Lo in 1944, my Mother's Father, WWI and her Step Father, WWI. I come to Arlington regularly as an invited guest with a group that shields the family elsewhere. I have seen the Media doing it's job. I am not impressed and wish they would report the event, rather than capitalize on it. The "Military", not the President, offers a Solemn and Honored Final Farewell to its Soldiers, Sailors, Marines and Airmen, as well as their spouses, when eligible.

My Father, Major USA Retired, will be buried there, where Mom is waiting.

The Press will not be invited.

Posted by: Price | April 24, 2008 7:42 PM

My mention of Casey Sheehan is NOT for comparison purposes. It is simply to point out that HIS views & wishes were VERY DIFFERENT than that of his Mother.
HE was the one who served, NOT his Mother (i.e. the wishes of the PERSON WHO SERVED should be honored, not the family).

Sheesh.

Can't anyone connect the dots here??

Posted by: Jett | April 24, 2008 5:30 PM

>durham123
We don't know Lt Col Hall's request (WAPO does not make it known). My point is, HIS wishes may be different than that of the family. The grounds at Arlington are sacred, reserved for those who have so honorably served this country (it is unlike any other).

If the family wishes to include the Media they may do so within Arlington rules / regs. or they may invite the Media to services & memorials elsewhere. This has nothing to do with Bush, although you are quick to work that in (no doubt, MSM would do the same).

Just curious, why wasn't the Media knocking on the doors of Arlington pre-Iraq? Are service men/women who serve in an era of relative peace less important? Certainly not. Therefore, it appears the only thing you 'sheep' want, is to trample upon our most sacred cemetary for controversy and political spin.

I say...do it elsewhere.

The majority who serve, wish only to be buried alongside their brethern with the utmost respect and dignity (and that means NO MEDIA). Arlington Cemetary is not a venue for reporters or the wishes of others.

Posted by: Jett | April 24, 2008 4:32 PM

Jett, how do we know Col. Hall didn't discuss having media coverage with his family beforehand? Perhaps he did. We don't know; we know only what the family asked for. When there is such a request, why not allow a pool reporter and photographer in? That would eliminate the concerns of many about a horde of reports making a scene. I think there can be compromise and accommodation, but only if the Bush administration allows it, which they never will.

And BTW, Casey Sheehan's funeral was not a media circus. The circus came later with her protests.

Posted by: durham123 | April 24, 2008 3:54 PM

It is sad that the military has been conformed to the will of our political leaders. I can not imagine that anyone who has been awake for the last 5 years can see this as anything other than a political issue. Clearly the wishes of the family of the patriot who died in service should make the call. The Bush Administration has kept the war below the radar by silencing the media coverage, avoiding a draft at the cost of military readiness, and borrowing money from the Chinese to pay for the war. The bills will all come due after January 2009 but they will come due.

Posted by: VA Patriot | April 24, 2008 3:49 PM

re: Shame on you (and anyone else) for placing family and media wishes before the soldiers themselves.

Posted by: Jett

Funerals are for those left behind, not those who are deceased and whose soul hopefully returning to God.

Posted by: edlharris | April 24, 2008 3:49 PM

The press has underminded this War from the very start and now they think they should have the right to video and take pictures of our fallen soliders while being burried at Arlington. Their slanted reporting has resulted in American deaths. The Wash Post is usless and is agenda driven. There are rules in place for such conduct and unfortunately the wish's of one fallen marine do not trump those rules. I have three generations of family burried there and at Quantico. I do not want that sacred ground used for propoganda purposes.

Posted by: Cobra | April 24, 2008 3:47 PM

One family granting permission does not account for the other funerals that are taking place at the same time. If the press gains access for one what is to prevent them from disturbing other mourners that did not wish the 'limelight'

Posted by: Rod Pieper | April 24, 2008 3:43 PM

>POCO
Agreed.

>Marine Corps Spouse
Correction on my signature (to more closely match yours, of course):
Proud Daughter of USMC MSgt.

I will do anything to grant my Father's wishes (30 years retired) vs. my own or that of the Media. He too, will be buried at Arlington.

Posted by: Jett | April 24, 2008 3:09 PM

If you have ever been to a funeral at Arlington you would know that there can be more than one funeral being performed at the same time. Even though the media was invited by one family, the other families who are trying to cope with their lose may not want the attention of the media. USAF Retired

Posted by: John Becker | April 24, 2008 2:55 PM

> Marine Corps Spouse
I was replying to someone else in this thread, NOT YOU. Someone who thought Lt. Col. Hall himeself requested the media be present / therefore the soldier's wishes were being dishonored. You quite obviously missed the point - - which can happen when you so unwelcomingly jump second-hand into an exchange between others.

So, stop the holier-than-thou attitude. OK???????

And...take off the blinders if you think the Media would honorably respect any burial at Arlington without slanting the story with a political view.

Again, it should be the wishes of the deceased (not the family or the media). Family pride aside.

Posted by: Jett | April 24, 2008 2:53 PM

I think its interesting how easy it is to lose sight of what a funeral is and who it is for. If the press had a better reputation of behaving themselves in times like this, then they would have been allowed better access. What is the ultimate purpose of the press being there? To make a record of a very solemn event for the family, or a photop to propagandize the war some more? The cemetery staff were protecting the family and insuring that this very somber day of morning and remembrance would'nt be tainted by over zealous reporters wanting stills and video of grieving family members. Did they go to the funeral service too or only the graveside in Arlington? If they want the real story, schedule an interview. Get to know the family and how committed to serving his nation LTC Hall was. I have personally been to five military funerals. It is a very moving and special time for the family and also for the military that are there making it happen. The last thing I would want would be a totally irreverant "in your face" photo journalism crew indifferent to the family members only wanting that one good shot....and good grief people...you're blaming this on President Bush too?

Posted by: POCO | April 24, 2008 2:49 PM

Arlington Cemetery brass not only harrasses the media, they bully commercial photographers whom the families hire to film funerals. I hired a person to document my father's service. The management and military showed up with a handful of on-the-spot restrictions and limitations. We can't hear the minister because the military and someone at the cemetary's head office wouldn't let the photograher use a microphone. We sure weren't going to share with the media. Yes, I do have names. But they just said "it's our policy."

Posted by: Old Army Brat | April 24, 2008 2:47 PM

To Jett:

It is an absolute atrocity to compare the family of Lt. Col. Hall to Cindy Sheehan. To share with the media the Hall family's sacrifice through media coverage of his burial is quite different than camping on the road outside of the Crawford Ranch.

Did it ever occur to you that this family is proud of the service and sacrifice given by their son, father, or husband? Perhaps you didn't know that there was a memorial held at Camp Pendleton for Lt. Col Hall last week and that his wife personally thanked each mourner who came.

Lt. Col Hall was buried with dignity and full Marine Corps honors, and the world deserved to see. Instead of "shaming" this family, we should honor them, as they have also sacrificed a great amount for their country. Shame on YOU, Jett, for assuming you can place any type of judgment on a grieving family.

Proud Marine Corps Spouse-Camp Pendleton,CA

Posted by: Marine Corps Spouse | April 24, 2008 2:35 PM

Blue: The family's wishes, even against the desire of the President himself, should prevail at as funeral. we can assume media presence would be respectfully done.
Red: The press is the enemy, so keep them out. Obviously the President's wishes are most important. Anyone that wants the media must have a hidden agenda to shame the administration.
Me: I cry for my country, divided over a war that is largely meaningless to me.

Posted by: blueball | April 24, 2008 2:07 PM

bush and "so"cheney are bullies and cowards they usually are the same. they want to hide and i suspect one day bush will say this war never happened. everyone in the media is complicit with their lies and coverups.the family has a right to have any one they wish at their funeral ceromonies. one day i hope the whole world will know what a despicable misadministation this is.

Posted by: dee kuhlmann | April 24, 2008 1:56 PM

>Stephen Rhymer
"...the FAMILY of Lt. Col. Billy Hall, recently killed in Iraq...granted permission for the media to cover Hall's burial in Arlington Cemetery."

There is a big difference - - FAMILY granting media permission vs. deceased himself (or herself).
A good example would be Casey Sheehan - - I'm certain he would have preferred the quiet dignity of a military service while his Mother, would stop at nothing short of a media circus (simply to get her political point across, which by the way, was very different than her son's).

Shame on you (and anyone else) for placing family and media wishes before the soldiers themselves.

Posted by: Jett | April 24, 2008 1:37 PM

hey drindl, I think it's the cemetery folks, not the same thing as "the military". I'm guessing they have pretty strict regs in place to protect the families and mourners from the likes of the Westboro baptist freaks who routinely target military members' funerals to spew their hate.

Unfortunate that this protection of families and mourners and the dignity of the National cemetery comes across as restricted access, but, as is often the case, most of society is punished for the bad behavior of a few.

The reverence and honor to those who died in service of this country is remembered every day by the honor guard at Arlington and this duty is treated with the highest respect by the military. Some in society chose to disrespect this place, and though their free speech is protected in this country, unlimited access is not.

Posted by: proudtobeGOP | April 24, 2008 1:28 PM


********************************************************
********************************************************
********************************************************


Traitor-liar Bush hides everything. This White House is the most secretive in history. And, Traitor-liar Bush continues to try to hide anything that might show Americans that he is an incompetent A-S-S. In the case of this story, he hid the dead. He continues to hide White House emails (i.e. EVIDENCE) about the firings of US Atty Generals, and other illegal activities of his cronies. In other cases, he just has the evidence destroyed, as was the case with the TORTURE videos.

Meanwhile, the traitor-liar DICK cheney says "So?" when a reporter suggests that maybe American citizens have a say in how THEIR government is run.

Our country is slowly slipping away. I just hope the next President will be have the courage to set things right again.

Bush is a traitor and a liar, and he is destroying our country. Plain and simple.

Please wake me up on January 20.


********************************************************
********************************************************
********************************************************

Posted by: Frank | April 24, 2008 1:20 PM

Michael Geers (Gerson?)

"Conflict and confliction are the names of the game played buy the members of the press to post their slant without the respect owed to the families of the serviceman."

This argument is so dead in the water. The family's wishes were disrespected by the govt, not by the media.

The family wanted the media there. You have no way around that simple fact.

What you're really afraid of is that the media won't show adequate respect to your Dear Leader Bush.

Quit hiding behind the families, chicken. They don't want to be your political cover.

Posted by: OD | April 24, 2008 1:14 PM

Given the recurring actions of organizations such as the Westboro Baptist Church and Code Pink, who exercise their freedom of speech at the expense of the dignity and honor of those who serve our country, I am grateful that LtCol Hall, who made the ultimate sacrifice in faithfully performing his sworn duty, was laid to rest quietly.

Posted by: Grateful | April 24, 2008 1:09 PM

The military should have no control over the family's wishes. If the family wanted press coverage, they should have it. Where is the freedom that this soldier fought for?

Where is the First Amendment? Why the Soviet style censorship?

Posted by: drindl | April 24, 2008 12:28 PM

What a load of ACLU agenda! The military cemetary at Arlington is a shrine to the honored dead. The press/media has never in recent history demonstrated a respect for the same. Conflict and confliction are the names of the game played buy the members of the press to post their slant without the respect owed to the families of the serviceman.

Posted by: Michael Geers | April 24, 2008 12:20 PM

All the news we want you to see and
only the news we want you to see.
Freedom of the press?
Sounds more like ownership of the press.

Posted by: | April 24, 2008 12:19 PM

This horrid excuse of an administration has committed so many evils and has such facist controls inplace such to pervert truth. One cannot believe anything they do or say at all. To sanitize the war is criminal in that it perverts any sense of truth or reality to the American people about the cost of lives in this illegal war in Iraq. The Bush/Cheney cabal are ruthless and determined, they lack a soul, and old Cheney has not an ounce of empathy in his being. The MSM is also complicit with this regime and must share the blame and shame! God is not looking favorably on this country because of the perverse and profound evils of this administration.

Posted by: Janet1 | April 24, 2008 12:18 PM


Both of my parents are buried at Arlington.

In each case, the Marine Corps and the soldiers and staff who serve at Arlington did an outstanding job of working with us to make sure each of my parents' funeral wishes were carried out.

That includes having the Marine Corps band play "The Gary Owen", a favorite of my father's but very much an Army marching song.

My family and I could not have asked for better, kinder or more considerate, compassionate treatment by the Marine Corps or the Arlington staff.

Having said that, it's reprehensible for anyone at Arlington, or any other national cemetary, to block a soldier's wishes for his or her funeral.

If Lt. Col. Hall wanted the press to attend, take pictures and report on the funeral, that's his decision, not Arlington's.

Shame on them for carrying out a Marine's funeral wishes in such a dishonorable manner.

Posted by: stephen rhymer | April 24, 2008 11:52 AM

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




 
 

© 2007 The Washington Post Company