Posted on 02/02/2006 1:39:59 PM PST by FerdieMurphy
In an unprecedented move, the nation's top military officers blasted the editors of the Washington Post and editorial cartoonist Tom Toles for an editorial cartoon published in the newspaper on Monday and on its website.
The letter to the Post editors charges that the six military leaders "believe you and Mr. Toles have done a disservice to your readers and your paper's reputation by using such a callous depiction of those who have volunteered to defend this nation, and as a result, have suffered traumatic and life-altering wounds. ... As the Joint Chiefs, it is rare that we all put our hand to one letter, but we cannot let this reprehensible cartoon go unanswered."
The Toles cartoon shows a soldier, a quadriplegic, in a hospital, being visited by a Dr. Rumsfeld who is scribbling on a form. Rumsfeld says, "I am listing your condition as battle hardened." At the bottom a smaller figure of the doctor adds, "I'm prescribing that you be stretched thin. We don't define that as torture."
According to Editor & Publisher, a spokeswoman from the office of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said a letter from all six joint chiefs to anyone, let alone a newspaper, is rare, but the cartoon so offended them, they wanted to let their feelings be known.
"It was expressing their disappointment with the paper and outrage at using that image to make a political point," said Lt. Col. Diane Battaglia. "That is a rare occurrence, but the level of inappropriateness prompted a response of unanimous support."
Battaglia said Post editors told her office that the letter would be published in Thursday's paper. Editorial Page Editor Fred Hiatt declined to comment on the letter. "My policy is I can't talk about letters until we publish them," he told E&P. "If and when a letter runs, I'd be happy to talk about it."
The letter is signed by Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Admiral Edmund P. Giambastini, Jr., the vice-chairman, and the four other military branch leaders and it's addressed to the Post's managing editor, Philip Bennett.
The generals said they were "extremely disappointed" in the Toles cartoon. "Using the likeness of a service member who has lost his arms and legs in war as the central theme of a cartoon is beyond tasteless," they wrote.
They observed that the paper is "obviously free to address any topic," even use exaggeration. But they added: "While you or some of your readers may not agree with the war or its conduct, we believe you owe the men and women and their families who so selflessly serve our country the decency to not make light of their tremendous physical sacrifices."
"This is where the news media has sunk to -- in their hatred for Bush and for the military, they publish a horrid cartoon and don't believe they crossed the line," said a former Marine intelligence officer and NYPD detective.
"Anyone who thinks they're getting the truth reading the Washington Post is sadly mistaken -- I expect to see cartoons like [the Toles cartoon] on terrorists' pamphlets!"
Great rejoinder...
Talk about arrogant and ignorant.
As a Staff Sergeant in the United States Marine Corps, I was not authorized to speak on behalf of the organization as a whole. However, the Commandant of the Marine Corps was and is. That's his job. The same goes for the other service chiefs. It is not only legal, it is their duty and solemn obligation to protect their soldiers, sailors, airmen, Coasties and Marines against vicious attacks.
They don't take actions such as this one lightly. And they have a ton of attorneys at their disposal.
Perhaps you missed that day in 6th grade. Freedom of speech is guaranteed to the Post, and also to the Generals. If the US Gummint sent the FBI to close down the Post, then the First Amendment would be violated. It is not violated by the Generals writing their opinion to the paper. Is that clear now?
Lying through your teeth again.
It isn't illegal. Although I am sure you would like to make it so.
I will fight for their right to vote and otherwise exercise First Amendment rights after they retire from military service.
So now you also actually believe that they should not be allowed to vote while they are in the military?
Come to think of it so did algore.
Ok...Shouldn't the civilian side of the DOD be handling this trifling matter...
ROTFLMAO!!! Oh geez, I completely missed that gem in her pile of vomit. Thanks for catching and highlighting.
AFTER they retire?
That's big of you, albeit totally inaccurate as always.
Since you're either still on or recently retired from active duty, whom do you think the majority of your colleagues would prefer to see defending them from attack? The Secretaries or their Service Chiefs? (Hint: Your view wouldn't be a popular one.)
"Memo to the generals -- remember these 2 words:
FIRST AMENDMENT"
Memo back - First amendment
My view?
And considering how many members of our military are minorities and/or women MurryMom has just come out in favor of disenfranchising minorities and women.
I think she should be required to turn in her liberal card.
This line in the article assumes that this is the heart of the generals' protest. I'll wait to see their letter before deciding that.
However, the generals did say that the paper is free to publish what it wants. They obviously recognized the first amendment. Some posters on Free Republic might need a refresher course in reading....or maybe a comprehension course.
In any case, is the depiction callous. I would say that it is. The cartoon does depict the quadriplegic soldier as a bit of blob with bandages on chubby limbs.
It is a callous portrayal of those who sacrifice for our nation. Had they portrayed the soldier in some way that was respectful of the sacrifice that individual had made, then perhaps they could still have made their point that they disagree with Rumsfeld.
Actually, I don't think the SecDef takes soldier suffering lightly at all.
So, besides being a callous portrayal of the suffering soldier, it is clear that the intended message is propaganda.
Typical liberal bilge. Saying that a particular example of speech is inappropriate or despicable is not even remotely the same as violating the First Amendment. Are you one of those geniuses who shows up at protests with duct tape on thetre mouths, saying they risk arrest just by "dissenting," i.e., standing there smelling up the place?
Since they were defending troops and not a party, to believe the generals have entered the political arena, one must believe that the troops are political props rahter than people to be honored and left out of cheap political shots. Thanks for letting us know where you stand on cheap political shots that screw with our fighting men and women.
You aren't actually posting from American soil, are you?
Mr. Bush, he deserves a special place of honor now that he has bravely endured not only our enemies assaults but also an assault by the leftist media.
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.