Time Magazine April 21st Issue Insults Iwo Jima

The Marine Corps War Memorial stands as a symbol of this grateful nation's esteem for the honored dead of the U.S. Marine Corps. While the statue depicts one of the most famous incidents of World War II, the memorial is dedicated to all Marines who have given their lives in the defense of the United States since 1775.

Iwo Jima was the site of the most horrific amphibious assault of World War II and perhaps modern warfare.

Approximately 70,000 Marines from the 5th Amphibious Corps (made up of the 3rd, 4th, and 5th Marine Divisions) fought 21,000 Japanese in a brutal contest that left about 28,000 American casualties with nearly 6,821 Americans dead.The battle remains the most costly in Marine Corps history.

Time Magazine, evidently in their zest to sell magazines,has taken the initiative to minimize the importance of Iwo Jima.

How far has responsible journalism fallen?

Time magazine has hit a new low with their April 21st cover.

The new fad is "Green" in America and everyone, in their rush to act like they are a part of it, do anything they can to sensationalize "Going Green."

The issue of global warming is disputed among scholars, and it may or may not be real.

Global warming is not the subject of today's post. The subject is the outrageousness of Time Magazine's Photo Shop of a picture of a piece of history.


Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima is a historic photograph taken on February 23, 1945, by Joe Rosenthal. It depicts five United States Marines and a U.S. Navy corpsman raising the flag of the United States atop Mount Suribachi during the Battle of Iwo Jima in World War II.

The photograph was extremely popular, being reprinted in thousands of publications. Later, it became the only photograph to win the Pulitzer Prize for Photography in the same year as its publication, and ultimately came to be regarded as one of the most significant and recognizable images of the war, and possibly the most reproduced photograph of all time.

Perhaps the best argument for Rosenthal's photo is simply that it is powerful on a symbolic, not a literal, level. Americans responded to it because it was a stirring image of the victory they so badly craved. On that level, it is unassailable.

Marianne Fulton, chief curator of the International Center of Photography at George Eastman House in Rochester, N.Y., said the photo must be seen in the context of a perilous time.

"You're worried about your life, your family, the future of the nation, and this really incredible picture of strength and determination comes out. A picture like that is a real gift."

Of the six men pictured — Michael Strank, Rene Gagnon, Ira Hayes, Franklin Sousley, John Bradley, and Harlon Block — only three (Hayes, Gagnon, and Bradley) survived the battle. Strank was killed six days after the flag raising when a shell, likely fired from an offshore American destroyer, tore his heart out; Block was killed by a mortar a few hours after Strank; Sousley — the last of the flag-raisers to succumb — was shot and killed by a sniper on March 21, a few days before the island was declared secure.

Time magazine attempts to defend the picture.
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.

One of the things we do in the story is we say there needs to be an effort along the lines of preparing for World War II to combat global warming and climate change,” Stengel said. “It seems to me that this is an issue that is very popular with the voters, makes a lot of sense to them and a candidate who can actually bundle it up in some grand way and say, ‘Look, we need a national and international Manhattan Project to solve this problem and my candidacy involves that.’ I don't understand why they don’t do that.”

Weak, very weak, poor journalism at its best in my opinion.

A response from the American Veterans association:

Tim Holbert, speaking on behalf of the American Veterans Center, said the editorial decision by Time to use the photograph for the cover trivialized the cause the veterans fought for.

“Global warming may or may not be a significant threat to the United States,” Holbert said. “The Japanese Empire in February of 1945, however, certainly was, and this photo trivializes the most recognizable moment of one of the bloodiest battles in U.S. history. War analogies should be used sparingly by political advocates of all bents.”

I wonder what we can expect next from the Time magazine Rag? Maybe they will Photo Shop 9/11?















Time magazine has insulted all of the past and present armed forces personnel as well as every American citizen.

Time should issue an apology for their irresponsible journalism and make a substantial contribution to the Disabled American Veterans Association.