The Washington Times, which I only read to find content suitable for this website, has published an interesting story on ABC News anchor Bob Woodruff. I assume everyone knows that he and his cameraman were injured by a roadside bomb in Iraq. He and the cameraman are now in Germany and in serious-but-stable condition.
The Times story, which is via the AP and therefore lacking the crazed wingnuttery one would expect from the Moonie Times, has this interesting lil' nugget:
"A hospital official said body armor likely saved the journalist's life."
I remember reading something about body armor...something recently. Hmmmm.
Why, here it is! From Woodruff's own ABC News! Posted two days ago!
"Sen. Clinton Says Lack of Body Armor is 'Unforgivable'"
"Clinton pointed to President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney as the culprits. Some have said that supplying Marines and soldiers with armor that covers their sides is too expensive — costing about $260 for each person...
The lack of adequate armor has been a hot topic during the war in Iraq. In 2004, a soldier confronted Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld during a Q&A session in Iraq about the issue. The question turned out to be planted by a journalist. Recently, Howard Dean, former presidential candidate and president of the Democratic National Committee, called for Rumsfeld to resign.
The Defense Department and Army said that they needed more time to acquire the armor and that publicly discussing issues of body armor aided the enemy — claims that Clinton dismissed as out of hand."
It's good to know that, with this post, the Secretary of Defense accuses me of aiding "the enemy." Sweet.
Anyways: Body armor! Good enough for journalists! Too expensive for American troops!
I wonder what costs more, the $260-per-soldier cost of body armor or thousands of military funerals?