It depends so much on what she was mourning. Death of people? Death of an era? Death of illusions? Death of innocence? Did she even know what she was mourning? Some of those are newsworthy, and some aren't, but it's crucial to know the difference.

The Press comes from:

*A mostly wealthy, hereditary elite. One that has never struggled or had to fear want.
*Like most rich, self-contented elites it's prone to moralizing and looking down their noses at those who would ascend in status and compete with them.
*Thus the Press is disposed by background, nature, etc. to believe with religious fervor any half-baked Third World ideology and hate with a passion middle class aspirations. The Murder whether it's Tookie Williams or General Buck Naked generates heartfelt admiration (as does Osama and his gang of killers) while the policeman or soldier nothing but contempt and hatred.

For the Press (remember, they are mostly rich trustafarians seeking to justify their existence) NOT to actively side with Al Qaeda takes a massive effort of will which most simply don't have.

This is a far cry from the actual working-class and middle class background of the "old" i.e. Pro-American press that left with say, Ed Murrow. Who famously co-hosted with John Wayne a special on the evils of communism and despised Fidel.

What might be as good a question as 'what was she mourning' would be, "What did she think would happen next?" If "they know not what they do," what did she think that she knew?

What really happened, of course, was that American bombing raids on the north did a great deal to set the stage for the successful repulse of the NVA's 1972 invasion. It didn't lead to a wider war, or to war with China, or to global thermonuclear war. It was a wise policy, from a warfighting point of view, which achieved its stated goals. One can argue whether or not South Vietnam would still exist if Congress hadn't cut off the funding for similar operations later; but it certainly survived the 1972 invasion, which was larger and better organized than the one that finally destroyed it.

The truth is that she thought "they knew not," but she was likewise sure that she knew what they were doing. And "they" were wrong. And she was right. And that's the end of the story for her. These fools, if they could understand as well as she did -- she, who found herself praying to a "Father" she didn't even believe in, or know what she thought "Father" might be -- then everything would have been right. Now, it would all go wrong...

But it didn't, not because of the bombing of Hanoi. She was wrong all along, in spite of her faith -- and lack of faith.

Here's a good pic of a vicious Canadian Crusader, in the midst of perpetrating a horrible crime:
(no viruses)

link

Dirty infidel...
This pic shows why Muslims must fight the Canadians unto death, and why the MSM must help them.

[DR: Please don't publish bare URLs. And consider marking your post as sarcasm if that's what it is -- some readers have a hard time telling.

--Marshal Nortius "Big Tuna" Maximus]