Marines outraged over TIME's new cover picture

[Little-Acorn]

Our who-cares-about-war liberals managed to do it again. For those of you who thought it was impossible to insult the U.S. Marines with a nonexistent issue like "global warming", think again.

Maybe these people should stick to voting disapproving resolutions about recruiting centers. It will keep them busy while the adults fix what they break.

Why do I get the feeling the Marine looie didn't use the words "dadgum" and "rear"?

----------------------------------

http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2008/20080417171532.aspx

Iwo Jima Veterans Blast Time's 'Special Environmental Issue' Cover

by Jeff Poor
Business & Media Institute
4/17/2008 5:24:05 PM

For only the second time in 85 years, Time magazine abandoned the traditional red border it uses on its cover. The occasion – to push more global warming alarmism.

The cover of the April 21 issue of Time took the famous Iwo Jima photograph by Joe Rosenthal of the Marines raising the American flag and replaced the flag with a tree. The cover story by Bryan Walsh calls green “the new red, white and blue.”

Donald Mates, an Iwo Jima veteran, told the Business & Media Institute on April 17 that using that photograph for that cause was a “disgrace.”

“It’s an absolute disgrace,” Mates said. “Whoever did it is going to hell. That’s a mortal sin. God forbid he runs into a Marine that was an Iwo Jima survivor.”

Mates also said making the comparison of World War II to global warming was erroneous and disrespectful.

“The second world war we knew was there,” Mates said. “There’s a big discussion. Some say there is global warming, some say there isn’t. And to stick a tree in place of a flag on the Iwo Jima picture is just sacrilegious.”

According to the American Veterans Center (AVC), Mates served in the 3rd Marine Division and fought in the battle of Iwo Jima, landing on Feb. 24, 1945.

“A few days later, Mates’ eight-man patrol came under heavy assault from Japanese forces,” Tim Holbert, a spokesman for the AVC, said. “During fierce-hand-to-hand combat, Mates watched as his friend and fellow Marine, Jimmy Trimble, was killed in front of his eyes. Mates was severely wounded, and underwent repeated operations for shrapnel removal for over 30 years.”

Lt. John Keith Wells, the leader of the platoon that raised the flags on Mt. Suribachi and co-author of “Give Me Fifty Marines Not Afraid to Die: Iwo Jima” wasn’t impressed with Time’s efforts.

“That global warming is the biggest joke I’ve ever known,” Wells told the Business & Media Institute. “[W]e’ll stick a dadgum tree up somebody’s rear if they want that and think that’s going to cure something.”

Time managing editor Richard Stengel appeared on MSNBC April 17 and said the United States needed to make a major effort to fight climate change, and that the cover’s purpose was to liken global warming to World War II.

 

[evince]

Oh how redicules to be mad at that.

 

[Little-Acorn]

Oh how redicules to be mad at that.

It's somehow appropriate that that sentiment should come from someone who can't even spell "ridiculous".

 

[Good Luck]

I canceled my subscription - permanently.

I don't know who thinks of these asinine things, but to play politics on a great event in the history of WWII and the Marine Corps is beyond stupid.

I would try to explain why it angers people who understand the symbology of the original WWII picture, but modern liberals do not have an equivalent event that can be trashed to illustrate the point.

 

[ib1yysguy]

Oh please. Any marine who gets upset about this is a pussy or lying.

 

[ib1yysguy]

And GL, I highly doubt you had a subscription. You don't seem like the reading type.

 

[Socrtease]

Ok so let me get this straight. Marines are pissed cause they put a tree in where the flag was on a picture that was STAGED! The Marines that put that flag in for that picture did not do it in the heat of combat with bullets zooming all over the place. They did it with a photographer setting up the shot. Yeah damn them all straight to hell.

As an aside I wanted to be a marine but I couldn't pass the test.



















I couldn't get my head in the fucking jar,

 

[ib1yysguy]

this thread = biggest exhibition of false outrage in recent forum memory.

 

[evince]

That image does not belong to the marines.

That image is part of the American experience.

Discribe how this insulted the men who were in that picture?

Do you believe that our planet is less important than our country?

You do realize that if we trash the planet we trash our country right?

This image is just conveying how most Americans feel about the concerns for the health of our planet.

How in any way is that insulting the men in that picture?

Do you think they would have fought for their planet as hard as they would have fought for their country?

 

[Good Luck]

And GL, I highly doubt you had a subscription. You don't seem like the reading type.

You wouldn't know a reading type from a frog.

You faux intellectual types are all the same. All you can really do in debate is post little one line quips and completely inane rebuttals that only show your personal reading comprehension level places a point of shame on your kindergarten teacher for passing you. (assuming you did pass kindergarten.)

As for being upset with the way the flag raising has been politicized, like I said, the braindead modern liberals cannot possibly understand because they have no events of that import. While U.S. Marines (and Navy, Army and Air Force) go out and risk their lives - all too often losing them in the process - so you have the freedoms you so casually disdain with your diahrreal expution of mindless rhetoric.

The event you so casually defile with your personalized and idiotic agenda represents the deaths of 6,821 U.S. Servicemen, most of them Marines, along with over 19,000 wounded. But I know the deaths of servicemen only matters to liberals when it gains them political leverage. Otherwise we are just a bunch of baby killers.

 

[evince]

why dont you try answering my questions?

 

[Onceler]

Conservatives truly are the masters of false outrage. Liberals dabble in it; conservatives really wrote the book.

 

[Onceler]

I wonder - does Good Luck think that every soldier who ever died was a Goldwater Conservative?

 

[Antiaris Toxicaria]

I don't know, I see both sides. I can easily see how the marines are offended, and I don't think any of us can pass judgment on them. We weren't there, we didn't fight for that island, we have no idea what they experienced. On the other hand, that photo has been used so much that it has moved past meaning into iconic status.

I think care should be taken to respect the veterans, however.

 

[Little-Acorn]

this thread = biggest exhibition of false outrage in recent forum memory.

That's the kind of response I'd expect from someone who will never face a real Iwo Jima vet and tell him that his reaction is just a case of "false outrage".

I guess it's possible that you don't know just how disgusting real heros find people like you.

 

[Onceler]

That's the kind of response I'd expect from someone who will never face a real Iwo Jima vet and tell him that his reaction is just a case of "false outrage".

I guess it's possible that you don't know just how disgusting real heros find people like you.

What do you know about real heroes? (add an "e" for that, btw, since you're a member of the grammar police).

I doubt you know any. I've met with war veterans; they're not as stereotypical or monolithic as you would portray, and they are certainly not as homogenous in their political views.

 

[Good Luck]

Ok so let me get this straight. Marines are pissed cause they put a tree in where the flag was on a picture that was STAGED! The Marines that put that flag in for that picture did not do it in the heat of combat with bullets zooming all over the place. They did it with a photographer setting up the shot. Yeah damn them all straight to hell.

As an aside I wanted to be a marine but I couldn't pass the test.



















I couldn't get my head in the fucking jar,

There were three flag raising events on that hilltop. The first raised by the first platoon to climb to the summit. They did not at that time meet significant resistance because the majority of the Japanese forces had been cut off from that area, and the Japanese left behind were concealed in deep tunnels.

Then some political type (I forget his name) made them bring the flag back down as s souvenir.

The second flag was put up under orders using a taller pole that the first. It was also a larger flag. During the exercise a combat photographer noticed the activity, but missed the action shot. So he secured permission to have the Marines take it back down and put it up again for the photo shoot.

In short, to be accurate, the shot was a reenactment which admittedly never would have taken place had that political SOB not grabbed the first one.

None the less, the photograph does represent one of the most hard fought battles (on both sides) of the enter Second World War. To be fair, it also represents the 22,000 Japanese who fought to the bitter end defending (as they saw it) the last stepping stone to their homelands.

Being ecologically aware is important. But it is NOT the same as fighting a major battle, losing 80 of your buddies to death or injury. How many of you who think this is no big deal know someone who has given their lives for YOUR cause? That flag would not have been planted if thousands of Marines had not died to make it possible. Time magazine, and you asshole shitheads who support them, have spit on their graves for a political point that could have easily been better represented.

 

[Sean]

Our who-cares-about-war liberals managed to do it again. For those of you who thought it was impossible to insult the U.S. Marines with a nonexistent issue like "global warming", think again.

Maybe these people should stick to voting disapproving resolutions about recruiting centers. It will keep them busy while the adults fix what they break.

Why do I get the feeling the Marine looie didn't use the words "dadgum" and "rear"?

----------------------------------

http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2008/20080417171532.aspx

Iwo Jima Veterans Blast Time's 'Special Environmental Issue' Cover

by Jeff Poor
Business & Media Institute
4/17/2008 5:24:05 PM

For only the second time in 85 years, Time magazine abandoned the traditional red border it uses on its cover. The occasion – to push more global warming alarmism.

The cover of the April 21 issue of Time took the famous Iwo Jima photograph by Joe Rosenthal of the Marines raising the American flag and replaced the flag with a tree. The cover story by Bryan Walsh calls green “the new red, white and blue.”

Donald Mates, an Iwo Jima veteran, told the Business & Media Institute on April 17 that using that photograph for that cause was a “disgrace.”

“It’s an absolute disgrace,” Mates said. “Whoever did it is going to hell. That’s a mortal sin. God forbid he runs into a Marine that was an Iwo Jima survivor.”

Mates also said making the comparison of World War II to global warming was erroneous and disrespectful.

“The second world war we knew was there,” Mates said. “There’s a big discussion. Some say there is global warming, some say there isn’t. And to stick a tree in place of a flag on the Iwo Jima picture is just sacrilegious.”

According to the American Veterans Center (AVC), Mates served in the 3rd Marine Division and fought in the battle of Iwo Jima, landing on Feb. 24, 1945.

“A few days later, Mates’ eight-man patrol came under heavy assault from Japanese forces,” Tim Holbert, a spokesman for the AVC, said. “During fierce-hand-to-hand combat, Mates watched as his friend and fellow Marine, Jimmy Trimble, was killed in front of his eyes. Mates was severely wounded, and underwent repeated operations for shrapnel removal for over 30 years.”

Lt. John Keith Wells, the leader of the platoon that raised the flags on Mt. Suribachi and co-author of “Give Me Fifty Marines Not Afraid to Die: Iwo Jima” wasn’t impressed with Time’s efforts.

“That global warming is the biggest joke I’ve ever known,” Wells told the Business & Media Institute. “[W]e’ll stick a dadgum tree up somebody’s rear if they want that and think that’s going to cure something.”

Time managing editor Richard Stengel appeared on MSNBC April 17 and said the United States needed to make a major effort to fight climate change, and that the cover’s purpose was to liken global warming to World War II.

What a pretty picture. Who took that picture, I think it shows real creativity. I wonder how they got them to hold the tree. Why are the Marines upset? They look very nice.

 

[evince]

This does in no way trivialize the scarafice they people made on that day.

The fight to save the enviroment is about saving this country from a dark future.

For it to be seen as an insult you would have to think the the enviroment and global warming are silly issues.

They are not and the world sees them as great concerns.

THAT is why this is false outrage.

 

[ib1yysguy]

That's the kind of response I'd expect from someone who will never face a real Iwo Jima vet and tell him that his reaction is just a case of "false outrage".

I guess it's possible that you don't know just how disgusting real heros find people like you.

Oh please. My grandfather, who is still alive today, fought in Iwo Jima. He's told me many a story. And you know what? I'm sure he reads time and I'm sure he had 0 reaction to the cover other than probably thinking it was a clever illustration.