Hero or Greedy American?

Originally posted by OnyxCougar
But you don't have to get on a personal level with a person that disagrees with you, Dave.

Read signature.

[Uryoces]

I've got a friend in the Gulf, and my niece is probably going to get redirected there. But dave, you didn't hear any of that. You heard me say Pvt. Lynch might be lying. Hell, I don't know; I've been trying to ignore it, but this story gets short-stroked all over. You are a really sensitive guy, and I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings.

"Molestor" is spelled "molester".

I agree with tw on this one.

Originally posted by Uryoces
I've got a friend in the Gulf, and my niece is probably going to get redirected there. But dave, you didn't hear any of that.

No, I simply didn't take issue with any of that. I made it extremely clear that it was my belief that you had no evidence to support an accusation of lying, and so therefore there was no reason for you to say she wasn't beyond lying except for your own suspicions.

You haven't offended me; I just think your comment is typical of a fucking retard. I don't think you to be a fucking retard, but you're providing me with more and more evidence - or maybe you folks are just incapable of reading. Regardless, when I finally do think you're a fucking retard, it will be because I have read and witnessed a number of pieces of evidence which have led me to the conclusion - not just because I suspect you might be one.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally posted by Griff
Not a hero, not greedy, just a victim trying to get something out of a very raw deal.

Bingo! Give that man a cigar. Victim and hero seem to be interchangable these days and they shouldn't be.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Quote Hot Pastrami

1) I wouldn't say that he ultimately saved her life... the article says "The Iraqi lawyer, whose information helped lead U.S. soldiers to rescue the captured Wirt County resident..." (emphasis mine). So, he told somebody that she was there, and that information helped lead US soldiers to her. Helpful? Yes. Ultimately

There is more to his actions than that. Walking 20 odd miles through the American lines at night to tell us where she was. Walking back to the hospital to draw diagrams of the layout, where she was and the guard setup. Getting that info back to us. Getting a Doctor friend to interceed when they scheduled her for surgery that would coinside with the rescue. Risking the lives of his whole family if he'd been found out. I think he was proactive enough to be called a legitimate hero. The Bath's had already taken his car and shot up his house for something minor.

[hot_pastrami]

Originally posted by xoxoxoBruce
There is more to his actions than that.

Well, I didn't know all of that stuff. I was basing my comments on the information contained in the pasted article. So I was underinformed on one point, but of course it wasn't the main point of my comment.

Damn cool of him to do all that, though. Hero, yes.

[breakingnews]

Originally posted by hot_pastrami

Well, I didn't know all of that stuff. I was basing my comments on the information contained in the pasted article. So I was underinformed on one point, but of course it wasn't the main point of my comment.

Damn cool of him to do all that, though. Hero, yes.

In Lynch's interview tonight, the Iraqi doctors said the troops could have just walked in the door and picked her up - the hostile forces had already evacuated the place days before. Of course U.S. military wouldn't have any idea about this; analysts/critics, however, insinuated that the rescue was staged for dramatic effect.

Sounds like the Iraqi informant was the key player here - his story (available on the newswires) is pretty cool.

[Uryoces]

Originally posted by dave


No, I simply didn't take issue with any of that. I made it extremely clear that it was my belief that you had no evidence to support an accusation of lying, and so therefore there was no reason for you to say she wasn't beyond lying except for your own suspicions.

You haven't offended me; I just think your comment is typical of a fucking retard. I don't think you to be a fucking retard, but you're providing me with more and more evidence - or maybe you folks are just incapable of reading. Regardless, when I finally do think you're a fucking retard, it will be because I have read and witnessed a number of pieces of evidence which have led me to the conclusion - not just because I suspect you might be one.

You're acting like a complete ass, dave. I'm puzzled by your reaction to my opinion. The Jessica Lynch thing is something I've been trying to avoid. Like I said before, I try and avoid any news, so my comments are pretty much my opinion, and they may or may not be wrong. This is really a hot button issue for you, one you can't handle in a rational manner. Hell, everyone is going nuts over this.

Because you say it does not make it so. What have I said which was irrational? My opinions have been based on evidence, where yours are based on suspicion - and I am the one called irrational. I have taken the time to explain my opinions, where you have stated them with no qualifications or backing whatsoever - and I am the one that is irrational. I have stated plainly that I do not believe she fits either of the extremes and I am the one that is called irrational. I take your hurtful and baseless statement (of her perhaps lying) and turn it into another hurtful and baseless statement (of you perhaps being a child molester), and it apparently doesn't occur to you that, "gee, he's doing the same thing I was doing to make a point to me that it's not cool" - and your word for me is "irrational". Yes, you sure do make a lot of sense.

Jessica Lynch is not a hot button issue; I react the same to many things, large and small. The "hot button" issue for me is fucking retards posting away without taking the time to <b>think</b> about what they are saying. That is why I react strongly. My words may sting, but I have at least <b>thought</b> about them. I can at least support them. That's more than a few of the people involved in this discussion can say.

And finally, I always act like a complete ass, Uryoces - when others are acting like fucking retards. I only fire with the ammunition I'm given. People like OnyxCougar and LUVBUGZ and now you, apparently, give me plenty of ammunition. If you don't want me to act like a complete ass, remove my reasons for doing so - post thought-out and reasoned comments.

[r9703410]

Just think of it this way OnyxCouger, not everyone is going to agree with you no matter waht you say. Don't get so worked up over one person(this part is to EVERYONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

[Beestie]

After watching the report last night, I have a question.

After the hummer crashed, at least two if not three of the occupants were taken to the hospital: Jessica, her friend (the native American female) and, maybe, one other.

Jessica's friend passed away some days before the rescue.

When the troops stormed the hospital to rescue Jessica, there was no word of also rescuing her friend. So, my question is: how did the troops know that Jessica was the only one left alive?

It has been established that the troops were tipped off as to her whereabouts. Fine, makes sense. It is also asserted by the military that the reason for the raid (as opposed to taking the elevator up) was a fear of the Fedeyeen that were based in the basement. Whoever tipped them about Jessica surely also tipped them about the fact the Fedeyeen had "left the building" and no longer posed a counterstrike threat.

So, given all that, why was there no discussion of rescuing the other two (or at least one) soldiers? Did the troops simply accept the word of the informant about Jessica being the only one left alive but disbelieve the informant about the Fedeyeen having evacuated? If they didn't believe the informant about the Fedeyeen having left, then why did they assume that the other soldiers in the hospital were dead and not being held and interrogated?

The story last night never even acknowledged that the rescue had any goal other than Jessica Lynch (..."the soldiers kept screaming: 'Where's Jessica? Where's Jessica'").

Something is fishy about all that. If I had to draw a conclusion I would guess that the rescue troops knew exactly what the hell was going on and staged the entire rescue knowing full well that Jessica was the only one left alive and that there was a ZERO chance of meeting resistance.

Just one idiot's opinion, tho.

Your assumption is based on the following flawed logic:

Originally posted by Beestie
Whoever tipped them about Jessica surely also tipped them about the fact the Fedeyeen had "left the building" and no longer posed a counterstrike threat.

There is no way to be sure that the informant knew this. We know who the informant was, and he's spoken to the media, and what he's basically said is "I knew where she was, and I decided that I would help get her out." He might not have had any clue that the Fedayeen had left the hospital. He might have. Who knows? But we can't say he "surely also tipped them" about that.

It was known that Lori Piestewa (the indian soldier) was dead. I don't remember exactly how, but they had that intelligence beforehand. If I recall correctly, they evacuated bodies that night as well, so one could probably safely assume that the rescue mission did indeed have other goals - the retrieval of all Americans, alive or dead. (Remember - U.S. military creed is "Leave no [wo]man behind.") So even if they didn't know she was dead, they found out pretty quickly.

Also remember that the Iraqi informant drew up maps of where the guards were stationed, so I would imagine it's quite likely that the forces conducting the raid did actually believe that they would meet resistance.

[Beestie]

Your assumption is based on the following flawed logic:

That's what I get for trying to understand something by watching Diane Sawyer talk about it.

Well, otherwise you were very reasonable, but I just don't think we can make that assumption based upon the data given. It may or may not be true, but we really can't know. You know?

[tw]

Wowww! So much hype and emotion over something so irrelevant. So much emotion that I am not even sure what the argument is about.

Who cares if Jessica lied. It does not matter what the military knew when a masssive assualt force was sent in. Does it really matter whether the lawyer really talked to Jessica (although he is a lawyer meaning lies come naturally)? Does it matter that Jessica never saw him? There is only one fact that is indeed important. The bottom line. What is clearly not in dispute. And that is become situation normal over these past few years.

Top government official lied about Jessica - repeatedly. And when they knew beyond a doubt that they had been lying, then they made no effort to correct their lies. It was not a mistake. They intentionally knew they had no facts to make those claims. They lied. And they lied again.

Jessica is a victim of our government that sees nothing wrong with lying about people - or nations. She is honest. She did not fire any weapon. She did nothing heroic as lying government officials even in the White House would have you believe. She just tried to survive. Period. Which means they lied.

That means the people we must trust most, instead, outrightly lied, boldfaced and repeatedly, to us. They could not even be honest about Jessica Lynch - becausing lying is that normal. We have not seen White House residents lie this much since Richard Nixon. That is the story about Jessica Lynch. Our government intentionally and repeatedly lies - which is why Jessica now has celebrity status.

Was there not another Jessica who became a celebrity because another persons of trust - Rev Jim Baker - also lied as prolifically?