Why no questions about Ron Brown's death?

Jack Cashill raises some very disturbing questions about Ron Brown's death.

Think about this. Three military pathologists and a forensic photographer had risked their careers to expose a likely bullet hole in Brown's head, the destruction of the head X-rays, the apparent "lead snowstorm" in a photograph of those X-rays, and a hasty burial without benefit of autopsy or forensic testing. And yet, none of this interested these reporters enough to even request the Air Force's report on the "inexplicable" crash of a plane carrying an embattled Commerce secretary in a war-torn region.

I've read about most of this before, but as I think about it now, I get really angry. I can think of only two possibilities here. Either the facts are as described by Cashill or they are not. If they are as he sets them out, every decent person in this country should be screaming his head off and demanding an accounting. If they are not, they should be properly debunked.

In either case, doesn't this situation demand resolution?