IAP Political Forum

War dead cremated at facility for pets

By Ann Scott Tyson

Saturday, May 10, 2008
The Washington Post

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2004404786_cremains10.html

WASHINGTON — The U.S. military has, since 2001, cremated some of the remains of U.S. service members killed in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere in a Delaware facility that also cremates pets, a practice that ended Friday when the Pentagon banned the arrangement.

The facility, in an industrial park near Dover Air Force Base, has cremated about 200 service members, manager David Bose said Friday night. It uses separate crematories a few feet apart to cremate humans and animals, he added.

Pentagon officials said they do not think any humans were cremated in the pet crematory. "We have absolutely no evidence whatsoever at this point that any human remains were at all ever mistreated," Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell said late Friday.

Despite Bose's estimate, officials said they do not know the number of service members cremated at the Kent County facility, identified on a billboard as Friends Forever Pet Cremation Service.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates found "the site and signage insensitive and entirely inappropriate for the dignified treatment of our fallen," Morrell said. "The families of the fallen have the secretary's deepest apology," he said.

The revelation came to light when an Army officer who works at the Pentagon traveled to Delaware on Thursday to attend the cremation of a military comrade.

Offended to discover that the facility was labeled as a pet crematory, the officer sent an e-mail late Thursday to superiors at the Pentagon that included a photograph of the signage.

It soon rocketed to the attention of Gates, who directed David Chu, undersecretary of defense for personnel and readiness, to conduct "a comprehensive review of existing DOD policies and practices governing the cremation and handling of remains of U.S. service members," Morrell said.

Bose said his company owns one pet crematory that is square and too small for most humans, who are cremated in two larger, rectangular crematories in the same room.

He was adamant that there had "not been any people gone through the pet crematory."

The Air Force has no crematory facility at Dover Air Force Base, where the Dover port mortuary handles the remains of all U.S. service members who die overseas.

As a result, in 2001 Air Force officials contracted with two local funeral homes to perform cremations, including with Torbert Funeral Chapels and Crematories, which oversees the facility managed by Bose, and another crematory that is located with a funeral home.

Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne directed Friday that the service "cease using the off-site crematory, use only crematory facilities that are co-located with licensed funeral homes, and have a military presence during the off-base process at the funeral-home facilities," Morrell said.

I'm bubbling with excitement at the idea of government run health care!! Yummy!

No reason the government should treat dead veterans any better than live ones.

Most people don't care about veterans, other than buying a yellow ribbon.

Want to show you care about veterans?

Write your congress-dolt about the new GI bill and have them support the troops in real ways.

There seem to be several GI Bill proposals. Any particular one you'd like to see pass?

... sorry to be the "Devil's Advocate" and all (and at the risk of infuriating just about every person on the forum)... but why does it matter?

I mean, cremation is simply the burning of a body, so why should it matter what furnace they do it in?

I'm not trying to offend ANYone, so please try to keep personal insults to a minimum, but I just don't understand the grave insult here.

Which ever one gives the most to veterans. S.22 in the senate is the current bill I favor.

http://www.armytimes.com/benefits/education/military_bigger_gibill_070808/

Looks like there could be a downside to the higher benefit package. I'll be watching the progress with great interest.

I'm with you Brax. Three dead a day ...well that just fine.... But burn a few up with fido and everybodys outraged???
  WTF??
 I'm outraged at the three dead a day.

Most people join the service for one tour.

I don't know people who join for the "great benefits" - because mostly there aren't any.

If people start to join, because they want the benefit, then that might make up for the few who were going to stay in but decided to get out and go to school.

Either way, I could care less about giving veterans what they deserve causing the military to have to work harder to recruit people.

Why not bolter the benefits to those who decide to stay in?

The benfits of folks in service as far as education and such are pretty decent.

I am all for bolstering their benefits too.

However, soldiers in war time leaving the service deserve better than they currently get.

I can't speak to what they get. I do know my brother went to college on the government dime after 6 years in the Navy. I support giving them as much as is feasible, certainly.

 I think it would be OK if these particular Iraq soldiers were cremated at the  Delaware pet crematorium;
 http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=87800936

Those dogs are patriots.

They deserve better too...

... though in the end, I'm not entirely sure what better is. A crematorium usually for humans? Again... what's the difference?

I'm lost. How are the democrats to blame?




( I know they must be, just trying to figure it out)
Ahk

Well, being from DE (though away over the weekend, I missed the daily paper), I looked into this online at the archives.

THIS (http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080510/NEWS/80510005/-1/archive) is a more detailed account of what's been happening:


There. That should settle everything.

The difference is whether the cremation is taking place at a licensed funeral home. We should show dignity and make sure things are handled properly, instead of allowing corners to be cut. What really strikes me about it is that it wasn't noticed until someone went to a cremation. This implies to me that many of these men were forgotten.

This is not important to the fallen, they are gone. It is important to the rest of us. It was not them, but us who were denied dignity when this happened.

They were.

"Gary Wallick, funeral director at Torbert Funeral Chapel, said he and other staffers took military officials on a tour of the facility, showing them their procedures and answering questions.

'They seemed very satisfied with the way that we do things,' Wallick said."


They did.

"Pet cremations are conducted in a separate area of the building, away from human remains.

'We’re very sensitive and respectful of the military,” Wallick said. “We’re honored to play a part in that, and I hope that continues.'

The Pentagon also ordered a review of its cremation policies and practices. There have been no complaints or accusations that the funeral chapel mixed up or commingled human and animal remains."


What strikes me is that the issue went so far up the chain of command before ANYone thought to ask around. The guy litorally saw a sign for pet cremations and complained.

The bodies were respectfully cremated AWAY from facilities used to cremate the remains of pets.

The issue was simply overblown.


No one was denied anything.

The site of the cremations in question was not at a licensed funeral home, it was different facility. TBH, I don't really see how directing them to use the funeral home instead of the facility labeled for pets is blowing anything out of proportion. I know that if I were responsible for the funeral of someone I cared about and respected, I would have it done at the funeral home and I would be present. IMO, these things should have been requirements from the beginning.

Though, I do agree with the logic that this is a small issue relative to treatment of our living servicemen and veterans.

Because they weren't ever using sites that are usually used to cremate pets to begin with. The 2 complexes are totally seperate.

They were using the pet crematory site. The bodies were cremated in different equipment, in a different part of the building, but it was the same facility. The two complexes (the funeral home and the offsite crematory) are separate, but they were using the offsite facility.




The fact that the Air Force ordered a halt to the use of the off-site facility suggest that they were not in fact satisfied with the way the company was doing things.