A journalist went undercover as a mortician during Operation Desert Storm

because he doubted the casualty numbers he was hearing from the gummint. They said "55." He ultimately found it was 299.

I just discovered this article in google, looking for work the author had done on another subject. I recalled reading in G.D. that some D.U.'ers have been wondering if we are getting the real skinny on the current war's casualties. You might find this interesting:

(snip) Using deceit to get the truth
When there's just no other way

When the military put the Desert Storm mortuary off limits, the most enterprising journalist since Nellie Bly went undercover — as a mortician!


by Jonathan Franklin

"Got your embalming license, Franklin? You can start this afternoon," the stocky mortician yelled to me while stitching an Army private's crumbling skull. I was next door, watching a crack mortician team stuff a second mutilated body into a starched uniform.

Posing as a moonlighting mortician, I had entered the mortuary at Dover Air Force Base, the sole Desert Storm casually-processing center, during the bloodiest part of the brief ground war. That, I believe, made me the only journalist to see the dead being returned from the Gulf.

As a professional journalist, deception is not a step I take lightly. But when the Pentagon cancelled all press access to Dover to prevent the American public from being demoralized by the sight of body bags and coffins, I found the ordinary rules of reporting unacceptable.

I was convinced that censors and press pools violated the honesty and openness implicit in a democratic relationship between citizens and their government. And the myth of the courageous correspondent was far from the embarrassing truth that, during Desert Storm, most American war correspondents got no closer to combat than the nearest fax machine. And no closer to the truth than swallowing the military's version of reality. (snip/...)

http://commfaculty.fullerton.edu/tclanin/Comm310/deception_case_studies.htm

it looks like it might still have a pulse, although it appears not to be running through the mainstream veins.

the cabal has been working hard to close off even these avenues for journalists. This war, we outright shot missules at them if they weren't on our side.

Never doubt--this gang is serious and they're willing to kill friendlies to keep their secrets.

First I'd seen of the story.

But I don't understand how the logistics of such a monstrous coverup would work. Presuming the Pentagon is expected to release the names of all US troops KIA, then surely some family members would notice that the names of their loved ones are missing. It's more than fudging the numbers, it's total erasure. How could they get away with it?

Speculating:

1. Unless someone is dead on the battlefield, they're not counted as dead. If they are wounded, which stats we're not getting at all, and die later (even, one would assume, minutes later -- just as long as they've been taken away from the point of confict), they're counted as wounded.

2. They're going to extraordinary lengths to narrow who gets called killed in combat. Someone else whose been paying better attention could probably say more about this. But they might exclude someone who was killed by their vehicle rolling over trying to avoid being fired at. That would be a "non-combat" death, or better yet, an "accident."

3. Outright lies. We've seen sources reporting higher numbers (say 64) when TV ("where Reality lives") is reporting 50. In fact, they might report 50 for days, even while discussing the newest battle resulting in death.

4. Take weeks to report some of the deaths, esp. "non-combat" deaths, and it keeps reporters and even more so, the public (or is it the public and even more so reporters??) confused.

5. Never bother to report the deaths that happened some time after wounding. After all, those weren't combat deaths at all.

Eloriel

ALL bodies of servicemembers who die overseas come to Dover? Whether they die in Iraq, Japan, or on a ship in the Atlantic Ocean,a servicemember's body goes through Dover. So not everyone there was necessarily an unreported casualty from the war...

That would mean almost 5 times as many US military personnel died outside of Iraq than died inside Iraq during Desert Storm One (299 - 55 = 244).

Does that seem reasonable to you? It doesn't to me.

htuttle said:
"That would mean almost 5 times as many US military personnel died outside of Iraq than died inside Iraq during Desert Storm One (299 - 55 = 244).

Does that seem reasonable to you? It doesn't to me."

Actually, that does sound reasonable...
Within a vague timeframe (more than a day, probably no more than 10 days), 244 service members died -world wide-. That's from natural causes, carcrashes, suicides, being mugged, falling off the ladder at home, etc. Non glamorous or embarassing deaths don't get much news coverage beyond local.

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

:kick:

got the access he did. I don't think you can just drive up to the base guards and get in without credentials. But even if you do, how could he get access to the morgue? I'd imagine that's a bit more difficult. He posed as a "rookie" embalmer and only spent one day?

I don't doubt the gov't lies about casualties, but there's something about this story that doesn't pass the smell test.

Did I miss something? Maybe I need to re-read the article.

Seems as if this is not the only time Duncan went undercover to discover military deaths. He did it in Panana and also Desert Storm. It appears that in each case the Military under reports deaths four to one.

He also mentions Iraqi civilian casualties to be around 80,000. If true, that is astounding.