Re:

["Janet Valentine" <valent03@bellsouth.net>]

Actually, it's very unlikely that an official history would edit that out.
They might make some apology for it (maybe) but it would be in there -
because that's how it happened and that's what soldiers called the hill.
Regardless of the political atmosphere in Washington, the historians at CHM
are exactly that - historians.   The work they're currently doing on the
Korean War is first rate.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Davino" <mdavino@yahoo.com>
To: <KOREAN-WAR-L@raven.cc.ku.edu>
Sent: Saturday, August 03, 2002 9:42 PM
Subject: Re:


> I don't see anything wrong with it either, but today's
> military is incredibly politically correct and I am
> sure some bureaucrat would have edited that term out
> of the book.
>
> As an example of just how PC things are in 2002,
> someone in the HQ where I work sent out an email
> entitled "XMAS Party Fundraiser."  He inadvertently
> managed to offend the Christians who wanted to "keep
> the Christ in Christmas," as well as the
> non-Christians and non-believers who don't want to be
> left out.
>
> Mike Davino
>
>
> --- SDonell73@aol.com wrote:
> > In a message dated 8/3/02 3:51:34 PM Pacific
> > Daylight Time, mdavino@yahoo.com
> > writes:
> >
> >
> > > Incredibly (at least it is in today's day and age)
> > the Army's official
> > >
> >
> > I have that book and am reading it now. I see
> > nothing wrong with that as
> > that's what that hill was called, and in the name of
> > historical accuracy,
> > it's appropriate. Apparently the ROK's found nothing
> > wrong with it.
> >
> > Sandy
> >
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
> http://health.yahoo.com