Posted on 08/18/2005 2:06:23 PM PDT by Cool Chick
It's not every day that I side with a murderer over a man who gave his life helping our troops in Iraq.
But this is one of those rare instances.
The controversy concerns Arlington National Cemetery and who should be buried there.
Russell Wayne Wagner was buried in Arlington with standard military honors on July 27th. He served in the Army from 1969 to 1972 and was honorably discharged. He, therefore, qualified for burial in the prestigious military final resting place.
But Wagner was a convicted murderer. He murdered Daniel and Wilda Davis, both in their 80s, at their home. His death was almost as dishonorable. Wagner died in prison in February of a heroin overdose.
The Davis' son, Vernon, is mortified that Wagner is buried in Arlington. He wants Wagner's ashes removed from the time-honored military cemetery.
I have the deepest sympathy for Vernon Davis. I share his utter disgust. What Wagner did was outrageous, cold-blooded, and calculated. His burial at Arlington National Cemetery seems inappropriate. But Wagner met the standards of eligibility for burial at Arlington. He was eligible for parole at the time of his death, and only those veterans sentenced to death or life in prison without parole are barred from burial there.
Wagner's remains should stay where they are.
Then, there is Ali Abass.
A Captain in the new Iraqi Air Force, he died with members of the U.S. Air Force when their plane crashed near the Iranian border, according to USA Today. In an earlier incident, Abass convinced possible Iraqi terrorists that he worked for the Iraqi agricultural department, while American soldiers hid nearby. He saved our soldiers' lives.
Abass was buried at Arlington National Cemetery, last week. But Abass shouldn't be there.
(Excerpt) Read more at debbieschlussel.com ...
She missed the point..suprisingly for her.What is interred in Arlington are the remains of 6 Americans and the Iraqi that could NOT be identified, even by DNA analysis, because of the extreme heat of the crash. There is a reasonable supposition that some of the remains are of the Iraqi..it would therefor be cruel NOT to have his name on the headstone..IIRC each of the Americans, and the Iraqi, had individual services, and identified remains were interred at indivudal gravesites, including the Iraqi's in Iraq. Nope..Debbie is BIG TIME WRONG here..sorry..
Notice it didn't say that he was granted parole! He should not be buried there.
OOps...Sorry misread it.
Here is a link to the Arlington website that discusses some foreign nationals buried at Arlington: http://www.arlingtoncemetery.net/foreignn.htm
I was a bit surprised at first to see that EPW's were buried there. But then I recalled that there also EPWs buried in the Fort Devens, Fort Leavenworth and Schofield Barracks post cemeteries - and probably others. At least this Iraqi was fighting on our side.
"While it is true that some of Abass' remains may have been mixed with those of the U.S. airmen with whom he died... While also true that Abass' ashes will share a single coffin with those of the four Americans..."
I agree with you.
There was no way to separate his remains from those of the others. Therefor it is necessary that he be buried with the others, therefor her complaint is misdirected. Her complaint about the other 59 would also need to be judged on a case by case basis, and probably were.
Since she got this one wrong, I'd be hesitant to take her word for the others unless she did a little legwork to find out who the others were and why they are where they are.
You are right about the 21 gun salute. That is reserved for a head of state.
Others have said it, but so will I. She's wrong.
Goofy. This is the kind of stuff writers come up with when they are completely out of ideas.
21 guns and taps were standard when I lived there in the 80s.
Quality adverbs! Very good!
For funerals? Are you sure you're not confusing a 21 salute with 3 volleys?
I looked it up. She's right on this one. The USA Today article says he got a 21-gun salute.
That, and they can't be bothered to check the facts before they hyperventilate through the keyboard.
7 gunners x 3 volleys = 21 gun salute. Right?
A number are Allied personnel who died while stationed in Washington during the First and Second World Wars. These people deserved honorable burial, but it would not have been feasible to send the bodies back to their native lands in time of war.
The next largest group, into which the Iraqui in question also falls, is comprised of foreign service personnel who were killed in air crashes along with Americans and whose remains are indistinguishable from those of their American comrades. During WWII, we apparently had an agreement with the Brits that when remains were intermingled in this fashion, they would be turned over for burial to the nation having the most service members aboard the aircraft. It is for this reason that British General Ord Wingate, leader of the famous Chindits in the Burma campaign, is actually buried at Arlington. I suspect there are Americans interred for the same reason in England.
I know space at Arlington is limited and will one day run out. However, I think our nation can and should be gracious enough to accord this brave Iraqui a decent burial beside his American comrades. We don't owe it to him. We owe it to ourselves to be big enough to accord him this honor.
I'm not sure what I think on this one. It's a toughie, and that's why I didn't post a comment either way. But you'll at least probably agree with her other new one from today, "FBI Would Have Ignored Able Danger Warnings." I forgot to put her name in the title, so I doubt that many saw it.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1466136/posts
Dr. Jimmy was saying that the Iraqi *should* be buried in Arlington. The outstanding adverbs were applied to the article's author, who said that he should not be.
(Orde Wingate)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.