Remains of 274 Troops Reportedly Dumped in Virginia Landfill

tabby · Post by **tabby** » Thu Dec 08, 2011 9:20 am

Remains Of 274 Troops Reportedly Dumped In Virginia Landfill | Fox News

I found this article to be very distressing. If this has been in the news before, I must have missed it because this was the first I had read on the subject. Even sadder than the fact that the mortuary would do such a thing, it's heartbreaking that the families of these soldiers didn't take possession of the remains either before or after cremation and make their own arrangements. If it were a personal financial issue, isn't there some place for these soldiers in Arlington National Cemetery?

Post by **LarsMac** » Thu Dec 08, 2011 10:34 am

It is distressing.

A couple of notes, though:

These remains are primarily pieces and parts of soldiers, not bodies. and they are from those whose families agreed to allow the military to dispose of them.

We are talking a leg or an arm, finger, things of that nature. And they were cremated, before "disposal."

Of course, the phrasing of the form they signed specifies that the military will dispose of the remains in a respectful manner.

Somehow, I cannot see dumping them in a landfill fits that criteria.

K.Snyder · Post by **K.Snyder** » Thu Dec 08, 2011 12:59 pm

LarsMac;1378036 wrote: It is distressing.

A couple of notes, though:

These remains are primarily pieces and parts of soldiers, not bodies. and they are from those whose families agreed to allow the military to dispose of them.

We are talking a leg or an arm, finger, things of that nature. And they were cremated, before "disposal."

Of course, the phrasing of the form they signed specifies that the military will dispose of the remains in a respectful manner.

Somehow, I cannot see dumping them in a landfill fits that criteria.Perhaps the military should have flown the remains over the grand canyon and sprayed them throughout the valley...Or maybe thrown overboard on a military vessel...

This all, of course, would have meant mixing all of the remains together so I sincerely doubt that would have been viewed as very different...

How practical would it be to encourage the public to arrive at the designated department responsible for handing every individual urn out to then have a mass outpouring vigil?...Although the way soldiers are treated in this country after having fought in wars at the hands of the very same politicians those people voted into office I doubt would have a flawless outcome...

I'm left wondering what would actually be a respectful way of disposing of the remains...Anyone have suggestions?

fuzzywuzzy · Post by **fuzzywuzzy** » Thu Dec 08, 2011 2:36 pm

hang on ...Doesn't your government pay for the funerals? and don't you guys have sealed coffins ? (for the particular reasoning above) ......................OMG!!!! that is a disgrace!!!!!!!!! Why arent these families burying there children???????

Oh and is it 274 troops or 274 soldiers?

tabby · Post by **tabby** » Thu Dec 08, 2011 5:43 pm

fuzzywuzzy;1378051 wrote: hang on ...Doesn't your government pay for the funerals? and don't you guys have sealed coffins ? (for the particular reasoning above) ......................OMG!!!! that is a disgrace!!!!!!!!! Why arent these families burying there children???????

Oh and is it 274 troops or 274 soldiers?

I think it's 274 soldiers. I don't know the answer to your questions about the financial arrangements made for the burial of American soldiers, I've never really had to consider it before but maybe someone here will know!

tabby · Post by **tabby** » Thu Dec 08, 2011 5:53 pm

LarsMac & K.Snyder, your explanations made me feel a little better and you filled in some of the blanks that were left in the news article. I didn't realize it was "pieces" of remains but even so, a landfill seems unfitting.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Thu Dec 08, 2011 6:10 pm

fuzzywuzzy;1378051 wrote: hang on ...Doesn't your government pay for the funerals? and don't you guys have sealed coffins ? (for the particular reasoning above) ......................OMG!!!! that is a disgrace!!!!!!!!! Why arent these families burying there children???????

Oh and is it 274 troops or 274 soldiers?
You really felt it necessary to be that disrespectful? :yh_shame

fuzzywuzzy · Post by **fuzzywuzzy** » Fri Dec 09, 2011 2:02 am

disrespectful?????? Are you ****ing nuts??? how is what I wrote disrepectful .??? WELLL??? I'm not he one putting your soldiers in an effing landfill!!! since when do families not take responsiblity for the remains of their soldiers and when ...WHEN I ask you did your government decide not to take care of the remains of it's soldiers . Why doesn't the government pay for your soldiers funerals???? They do here .!!!!! And I believe they do in Britain it's part and parcel of the deal ...Don't tell me I'm the disrespectful one !!!

What is wrong with your country???

fuzzywuzzy · Post by **fuzzywuzzy** » Fri Dec 09, 2011 2:04 am

I can't even tell my boyfriend about this because he'd go off his nut knowing soldiers he fought with ended up in a bloody landfill..........Don't even go there accountable .

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Fri Dec 09, 2011 4:17 am

fuzzywuzzy;1378091 wrote: disrespectful?????? Are you ****ing nuts??? how is what I wrote disrepectful .??? WELLL??? I'm not he one putting your soldiers in an effing landfill!!! since when do families not take responsiblity for the remains of their soldiers and when ...WHEN I ask you did your government decide not to take care of the remains of it's soldiers . Why doesn't the government pay for your soldiers funerals???? They do here .!!!!! And I believe they do in Britain it's part and parcel of the deal ...Don't tell me I'm the disrespectful one !!!

What is wrong with your country???
Perhaps I mistook your overzealous use of punctuation as sarcasm. If that's the case, I apologize.

Snooz · Post by **Snooz** » Fri Dec 09, 2011 4:42 am

Fuzzy, I believe you missed the part of the story that said these were bits and pieces, not complete and identifiable bodies. They also received permission from the families to dispose of the parts. The outrage that should be felt is over the method of disposal. You might want to do a little research before screeching about the US not paying for the burial of its soldiers.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Fri Dec 09, 2011 4:49 am

As a disinterested observer, the only way to deal with such remains would be incineration

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Fri Dec 09, 2011 5:21 am

Bruv;1378103 wrote: As a disinterested observer, the only way to deal with such remains would be incineration

OP link wrote: According to the Post, incinerated partial remains were dumped at a King George County landfill in Virginia. They were cremated between 2004 and 2008.

Read more: Remains Of 274 Troops Reportedly Dumped In Virginia Landfill | Fox News

Snooz · Post by **Snooz** » Fri Dec 09, 2011 5:31 am

Yep, it's the LANDFILL part of the story we should be focusing on.

Post by **spot** » Fri Dec 09, 2011 5:37 am

Perhaps some over-zealous officer took an executive decision based on cost efficiency.

Since "parts", most of which weren't genetically identifiable, could come from people of any religious affiliation it would be difficult, I suggest, to provide any final resting place which satisfied every religious practice. What alternative are posters putting forward? Perhaps a single common marker at Arlington could have stood over the pooled cremated remnants.

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Fri Dec 09, 2011 9:04 am

My initial thought was that this just goes to show how disposable our kids have become to those in charge of calling us to war.

But then you have to ask yourself just how far down the food chain is the decision made on calls like this. The way I read this, once a relative inquired and anyone of rank became aware of the procedure that was being employed, it was stopped.

Does kinda make you wonder what else is being left to chance..

tabby · Post by **tabby** » Fri Dec 09, 2011 9:21 am

I like the idea of a single common marker at Arlington. It would be respectful to the soldiers and ease our minds that they weren’t being overlooked, forgotten or treated like “medical waste”. It’s an ultimate sacrifice that they’ve made and even if it’s simply the ashes of a soldier’s leg or hand, it’s the least we can do for them.

I did some checking online regarding the issue of whether burial expenses are paid for by the US government and it appears they do in fact cover all costs. The exception would be if the family requested "extras" in which case the family pays for that portion. Here’s some links that I found:

Who pays for the funerals of soldiers killed in action, the government or the families? - Yahoo! Answers

Military funeral - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Fri Dec 09, 2011 11:51 am

tabby;1378127 wrote: I like the idea of a single common marker at Arlington. It would be respectful to the soldiers and ease our minds that they weren’t being overlooked, forgotten or treated like “medical waste”. It’s an ultimate sacrifice that they’ve made and even if it’s simply the ashes of a soldier’s leg or hand, it’s the least we can do for them.

Absolutely not. We NEED the visual impact of a marker for every fallen soldier. One single monument might very well be respectful, but Americans should never be allowed to forget the cost of war.

eta: I later realized that you're not talking generally, but about these particular bodies. As long as the soldiers have one marker, I think that is enough. I believe they already have that, but I'm not sure.

tabby · Post by **tabby** » Fri Dec 09, 2011 12:16 pm

This photograph is so beautiful & poignant. It reminded me somewhat of the topic at hand.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Fri Dec 09, 2011 12:34 pm

Accountable;1378145 wrote: Absolutely not. We NEED the visual impact of a marker for every fallen soldier. One single monument might very well be respectful, but Americans should never be allowed to forget the cost of war.

eta: I later realized that you're not talking generally, but about these particular bodies. As long as the soldiers have one marker, I think that is enough. I believe they already have that, but I'm not sure.Yours is a good point if only it were realized the way you present it. The photo you offered more often than not is made to serve as a reminder of the necessary sacrifice to maintain that imaginary freedom we're sold these days. It's a Rite Of Passage - a Hero's Journey, morbidly glorified for no good reason.

tabby · Post by **tabby** » Fri Dec 09, 2011 12:41 pm

Accountable;1378145 wrote: eta: I later realized that you're not talking generally, but about these particular bodies. As long as the soldiers have one marker, I think that is enough. I believe they already have that, but I'm not sure.

I hope you're right, Accountable!

Post by **spot** » Fri Dec 09, 2011 12:51 pm

I'm sure "unknown warriors" have a marker, but we were talking originally about a final resting place for the accumulating unidentifiable cremated remains, not just a memorial for them.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Fri Dec 09, 2011 12:59 pm

tabby;1378150 wrote: This photograph is so beautiful & poignant. It reminded me somewhat of the topic at hand.

With this image representing where, in terms of conscious mourning, the human species has evolved to, and the empathy we're acquiring, why do we continue to kill (anything)?

Good photo, Tabby.

fuzzywuzzy · Post by **fuzzywuzzy** » Fri Dec 09, 2011 1:22 pm

SnoozeAgain;1378102 wrote: Fuzzy, I believe you missed the part of the story that said these were bits and pieces, not complete and identifiable bodies. They also received permission from the families to dispose of the parts. The outrage that should be felt is over the method of disposal. You might want to do a little research before screeching about the US not paying for the burial of its soldiers.

To begin with I don't screech . that's a very sexist thing to say ... My question would be why no one is screeching in your country about this. In Australia any soldier, sailor, airman killed in action gets a military funeral. The coffin is always sealed (again as I have stated previously the coffin is sealed never to be opened and it's quite possible that there is only one big toe in there) but the soldier is entitled and deserves a proper military funeral also a marker in his name.

According to the Post, incinerated partial remains were dumped at a King George County landfill in Virginia. They were cremated between 2004 and 2008.

If the remains are unidentifiable how could families give permission to cremate them? So during 2004 and 2008 you work out where these soldiers were when they died buy a piece of land and put a cross there for each and every one of them . Partitioned as per campaign.

Is this an effort by the US government to hide how many are actually being slaughtered for those oil magnates?

Australian military funeral .

Department of Defence Video Gallery

http://defence.viotv.com/?mediaId=00cd3 ... eAdded,All

Snooz · Post by **Snooz** » Fri Dec 09, 2011 1:38 pm

This is absolutely screeching:

disrespectful?????? Are you ****ing nuts??? how is what I wrote disrepectful .??? WELLL??? I'm not he one putting your soldiers in an effing landfill!!! since when do families not take responsiblity for the remains of their soldiers and when ...WHEN I ask you did your government decide not to take care of the remains of it's soldiers . Why doesn't the government pay for your soldiers funerals???? They do here .!!!!! And I believe they do in Britain it's part and parcel of the deal ...Don't tell me I'm the disrespectful one !!!

What is wrong with your country???

Unidentified remains would be amputated limbs, removed organs, etc. Do you suggest they be given back to the person they're removed from for disposal?

Edited to add since you apparently missed a few posts discussing this... the US DOES pay for military funerals. Jesus Christ, get a grip.

tabby · Post by **tabby** » Fri Dec 09, 2011 1:43 pm

spot;1378165 wrote: I'm sure "unknown warriors" have a marker, but we were talking originally about a final resting place for the accumulating unidentifiable cremated remains, not just a memorial for them.

In my mind, the two would go together. And to veer off the topic a little, I remember seeing something last year about a businessman in Massachusetts who provides wreathes for all of the graves at the cemetery at Christmastime. I might have the facts wrong but I'm going to see if I can find the info again.

fuzzywuzzy · Post by **fuzzywuzzy** » Fri Dec 09, 2011 2:00 pm

that's not screeching it's indignation...how dare you . And how dare a country leave it's soldiers remains in a landfill!!! if you don't see anything wrong with this then you are the sad one .

AND yes absolutely give them back. That's what coffins are for .

Yes spot all "unknown soldiers' have a marker in most countries around the world. but these soldiers aren't unknown ..If a family has been able to give permission to dispose of remains then they are not unknown. They have the bodies. Why is it that in a disaster geneticists can identify bits and pieces of bodies for the family but not in this situation?

could any of you imagine a family who's child dies in a car accident and is incinerated telling the morticians to dispose of the body??? it just doesn't happen you recieve the body back ...

urrggghhh I'm finding some of the attitudes in this situation completely ****ed up.

tabby · Post by **tabby** » Fri Dec 09, 2011 3:32 pm

100K wreaths headed to Arlington National Cemetery - WRIC Richmond News and Weather -

Wreaths Across America | Our Mission: Remember, Honor & Teach

Found it! The gentleman is in Maine not Massachusetts. Apparently what started as a one person's quiet patriotic gesture has taken off into a sort of grass roots effort. They will be busy tomorrow!

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 5:14 am

SnoozeAgain;1378172 wrote: This is absolutely screeching:
Stop being sexist.

Can a lady be sexist?

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 5:33 am

In war dead inquiry, a confounding question - Checkpoint Washington - The Washington Post

This article attempts to answer some of the 'why' questions. It gets a little bit into the weeds, but it's pretty educational.

Clearly there's a screwup. What's not really clear to me is whether all of the ashes are bits and pieces removed during surgery or found after the family had received the body, or whether some of the ashes are misdelivered bodies that grieving families are still waiting to receive. If the latter is the case, this is going to blow sky high, as it should.

Snooz · Post by **Snooz** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 5:51 am

Accountable;1378212 wrote: In war dead inquiry, a confounding question - Checkpoint Washington - The Washington Post

This article attempts to answer some of the 'why' questions. It gets a little bit into the weeds, but it's pretty educational.

Clearly there's a screwup. What's not really clear to me is whether all of the ashes are bits and pieces removed during surgery or found after the family had received the body, or whether some of the ashes are misdelivered bodies that grieving families are still waiting to receive. If the latter is the case, this is going to blow sky high, as it should.

There's no excuse for that. I can't imagine how an entire body would go unnoticed and unaccounted for. If it happened, it deserves to be blown sky high.

Edited to add: I didn't see anything that sounded as though entire bodies were processed. Can you quote the part you mean?

“It’s counterintuitive to take cremated remains and put them together with medical waste and burn them again,”said Jeffery Steers, director of the Division of Land Protection and Revitalization for the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality.

“Why would you?” Steers said. “It’s not required and, from a business standpoint, you’re paying twice.”

Ah, that explains so much.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 6:11 am

SnoozeAgain;1378213 wrote: There's no excuse for that. I can't imagine how an entire body would go unnoticed and unaccounted for. If it happened, it deserves to be blown sky high.

Edited to add: I didn't see anything that sounded as though entire bodies were processed. Can you quote the part you mean?It was in the article linked in the OP:

The report was based on database information at the Dover Air Base mortuary, where the remains of most war dead return. The revelations came after a four-year inquiry by the widow of Sgt. Scott Smith, who was killed in July 2006 as part of a bomb-disposal unit. She kept asking about where his remains were placed and eventually got the answer.

SnoozeAgain;1378213 wrote: Ah, that explains so much.
:yh_sick

Snooz · Post by **Snooz** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 7:56 am

Accountable;1378210 wrote: Stop being sexist.

Can a lady be sexist?

"Screeching" is not gender specific. Now if I had written "screeching harpy"...

K.Snyder · Post by **K.Snyder** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 8:55 am

spot;1378114 wrote: Perhaps a single common marker at Arlington could have stood over the pooled cremated remnants.That would have meant someone's pieces would lay next to another possibly gay soldier's piece and that wouldn't have gone over very well...

Post by **spot** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 9:27 am

K.Snyder;1378226 wrote: That would have meant someone's pieces would lay next to another possibly gay soldier's piece and that wouldn't have gone over very well...

Gays are welcome in the US armed services these days, and not before time either.

The mingling at Arlington would be more offensive than the landfill solution, you reckon?

fuzzywuzzy · Post by **fuzzywuzzy** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 7:12 pm

Accountable;1378210 wrote: Stop being sexist.

Can a lady be sexist?

yes actually those who mimic what a man would say in reflecting mens attitudes toward women . Women are womens worst enemies when it comes to this ...and putting another woman down because of personal beliefs what what that woman percieves another to be is also a reflection of herself. Does nobody any favours.

and deflects away from the topic because somone didn't like the fact that something in america is now known over the rest of the world .

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 8:16 pm

fuzzywuzzy;1378272 wrote: yes actually those who mimic what a man would say in reflecting mens attitudes toward women . Women are womens worst enemies when it comes to this ...and putting another woman down because of personal beliefs what what that woman percieves another to be is also a reflection of herself. Does nobody any favours.

and deflects away from the topic because somone didn't like the fact that something in america is now known over the rest of the world .I don't think it was because you knew about it, but because you screeched about it, going as far as blaming the families who were likely completely in the dark as to what was happening.

Snooz · Post by **Snooz** » Sun Dec 11, 2011 7:08 am

fuzzywuzzy;1378272 wrote: yes actually those who mimic what a man would say in reflecting mens attitudes toward women . Women are womens worst enemies when it comes to this ...and putting another woman down because of personal beliefs what what that woman percieves another to be is also a reflection of herself. Does nobody any favours.

and deflects away from the topic because somone didn't like the fact that something in america is now known over the rest of the world .

I've noticed that you frequently accuse people of being sexist. What I saw was you using a lot of exclamation marks, vulgar language that the filter had to asterisks out and words in all caps. That's the equivalent of screaming. Screeching = strident. There's no gender attached. But the point I was trying to make... repeatedly... is that you are incorrect in your posts claiming the US doesn't pay for military funerals. And your over-the-top way of saying it was offensive. Try reading your post again with the knowledge you hopefully now have that US military funerals are indeed paid for. "Screechy" is an accurate description. And trying to deflect your mistake by using 'sexist' is lazy.

K.Snyder · Post by **K.Snyder** » Tue Dec 13, 2011 9:02 am

spot;1378229 wrote: The mingling at Arlington would be more offensive than the landfill solution, you reckon?I'm assuming you're speaking of the incident in which hundreds of deceased individuals were misidentified when buried as opposed to Arlington National Cemetery as a whole

Having said that, I not only consider that more offensive but as offensive as anyone can imagine...It's not enough for leaders to lead this country in to incompetent wars out of greed for money but they can't even identify the ones that have died in them...

Then,..THEN,..we have NEWT FREAKING GINGRICH leading the republican party polls...

GOD!!!!...

Post by **spot** » Tue Dec 13, 2011 10:10 am

No Kevin, that wasn't my meaning. What I meant requires an understanding of the thread from start to finish. I wrote in context.

K.Snyder · Post by **K.Snyder** » Sat Dec 17, 2011 12:04 pm

spot;1378427 wrote: No Kevin, that wasn't my meaning. What I meant requires an understanding of the thread from start to finish. I wrote in context.I wouldn't assume any decision can be more offensive than another when full responsibility is unquestionably placed in the hands of another party related to the predicament which, again, was not in question.

Especially related to a situation in which has no other context but a religious one, as you've said yourself

the grumps · Post by **the grumps** » Tue Dec 20, 2011 12:41 pm

wouldnt one marker to the unknown fallen heros suffice ?

with a grave for the ashes of the 274

AA grumpy