Newspaper Criticized For Publishing Photo

How are we supposed to ignore the carnage and death we have brought to Iraqi civilians when the damn newspapers show pictures of dead children? Shouldn’t they be covering last night’s American Idol?

WASHINGTON — Some readers resented The Washington Post for publishing an Associated Press photograph of a critically wounded Iraqi child being lifted from the rubble of his home in Baghdad’s Sadr City “after a U.S. airstrike.”

Two-year-old Ali Hussein later died in a hospital.

As the saying goes, the picture was worth a thousand words because it showed the true horrors of this war.

Neither side is immune from the killing of Iraqi civilians. But Americans should be aware of their own responsibility for inflicting death and pain on the innocent.

The Post’s ombudsman, Deborah Howell, said about 20 readers complained about the photo, while a few readers praised the Post for publishing the stark picture on page one.

Some mothers said they were offended that their children might see the picture, though one wonders whether their youngsters watch television and play with violent videos in a pretend world.

From the start of the unprovoked U.S. “shock and awe” invasion of Iraq on March 20, 2003, the government tried to bar the news media from photographing flag-draped coffins of American soldiers returning from Iraq. A Freedom of Information lawsuit forced the government to release pictures of returning coffins.

Howell said some readers felt the photo of the Iraqi boy was “an anti-war statement; some thought it was in poor taste.” Well, so is war.

(via IdleWorm, a great blog that desperately needs an RSS feed)

“Why should we hear about body bags and deaths? It’s not relevant. So why should I waste my beautiful mind on something like that?” – Barbara Bush

Daily Dose of Ingersoll

RobertGIngersoll.jpg

No unbeliever should allow his child to be tortured in the orthodox inquisitions. He should defend the mind from attack as he would the body. He should recognize the rights of the soul. In the orthodox Sunday schools, children are taught that it is a duty to believe — that evidence is not essential — that faith is independent of facts and that religion is superior to reason. They are taught not to use their natural sense — not to tell what they really think — not to entertain a doubt — not to ask wicked questions, but to accept and believe what their teachers say. In this way minds of the children are invaded, corrupted and conquered. Would an educated man send his child to a school in which Newton’s statement in regard to the attraction of gravitation was denied — in which the law of falling bodies, as given by Galileo, was ridiculed — Kepler’s three laws declared to be idiotic, and the rotary motion of the earth held to be utterly absurd?

Why then should an intelligent man allow his child to be taught the geology and astronomy of the Bible? Children should be taught to seek for the truth — to be honest kind, generous, merciful and just. They should be taught to love liberty and to live to the ideal.

Robert Green Ingersoll – “Should Infidels Send Their Children to Sunday School?”