Bill Watson wrote:
Sorry Dudley, I just have a habit of reacting to terms like "these
people" and "extreme". They've been used so often to negatively
characterize people of good faith and purpose. I also tend to consider
the terms "left wing" and "extreme left" to be political, don't you? And
I consider their application to the remembrance of the recently
deceased to be "politicizing".

And yes, I still 'even' respect you despite your insistence on the
casual politicization of the passing of a hero.... or your unwillingness
to recognize the weight of you words.

I think Paul Tibbets was a man who bore his duty, and the great burden
that attended it, with honor and distinction. And I know you do too.

Perhaps we can agree with that if nothing else.

Bill Watson
Durham NC

Dudley Henriques wrote:
Bill Watson wrote:
Just for the record Mr Henriques, I consider myself pretty far out on
the left side political and social thinking. At the same time, I
totally honor Mr Tibbets. I even think a lot of you. Do we have to
politicize EVERYTHING?

Mr Oppenheimer arguably had more to do with dropping the big one -
check out what the far right did to him... and that actually happened.

Christ! Politics! Let's fly.

Dudley Henriques wrote:
Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote:
Bill Watson wrote:
He has been recorded more than once answering that question. He's
always answered it the same way. To his credit, I doubt whether
that's
true. Perhaps best reflected in his request for no funeral or grave
marker... though it can be interpreted in several ways.


I wondered about that too. He is eligible for a military burial at
Arlington National Cemetery... and there ain't so such thing as a
protest there. He'd be in excellent company and he'd be safe for
posterity.



Tibbets received many letters after the war and all through his life
from Japanese citizens thanking him for helping to save what would
have been millions of their lives as well the American lives saved
by forcing the surrender.
He never had trouble sleeping and always understood the role he
played in ending the war.
About his grave request; Tibbets always has understood and has had
to deal with the extreme left all through his life. He was well
aware of the ingenuity and inventiveness of some of these people. To
my knowledge he has always believed that no matter where he was
buried, the location would be a prime target for these people.
As for Arlington; interning him there would only have served to feed
the extreme left who would again have used the very location of the
internment as cannon fodder for keeping his name alive for use in
the anti-war movement.
The word I have gotten through my sources is that Tibbets simply
wanted to not be used after his death in any way the location of his
remains would have provided. He had quite enough of that in life,
and simply wanted not to be used in any ongoing controversy.

Personally, I think he did the right thing, although it's puzzling
to me why, considering his goals, he simply didn't choose cremation.
It's not too much a stretch however, to surmise that feeling the way
he did about all of it, that he chose to take even the "fire"
relationship out of the equation for the extreme left.

Not quite sure what you are addressing here, but I'm assuming you
believe I have politicized something that need not have been politicized?
Anyway, I'm happy that you "even like me" whatever the "even" might
represent :-))


Sorry. I can't agree with you on that. I do however respect your right
to an opinion and I won't push the issue.
Best to you
DH

--
Dudley Henriques