Posted on 05/03/2003 6:27:06 PM PDT by TXnMA
Fox News' Rita Cosby has just announced that the military says that Jessica Lynch cannot remember anything after the ambush. They say she was "traumatized" and is "blocking out the memories".
Psychiatrists are helping her recover her memories because she "is probably our best witness for war crimes prosecution".
Still developing...
The war was over in less than a month. Please don't insult our intelligence further. Come up with some accurate data before you post anything; it will do wonders for your credibility...
Lynch, a 19-year-old supply clerk, was in stable condition in the intensive care unit, where she was being treated for a head wound, an injury to her spine, and fractures to her right arm, both legs, her right foot and ankle.
The hospital also confirmed the possibility that gunshots may have caused fractures to the upper right arm and lower left leg. The hospital commander, Col. David Rubenstein, previously said no entry or exit wounds consistent with gunshot wounds had been found.
"The medical staff says, after more closely examining those wounds, there is a possibility they were caused by a low velocity, small caliber weapon," the a statement said, stressing treatment would have been the same no matter what the cause.
Don't sweat it buddy; I've been there myself. I never could figure out what Kennedy was doing at Ford's theatre. I'm still laughing!
I personally do not know what to think. But I don't want to be gullible and assume anything either way from the contradictory reports and unusual post-rescue treatment. I have not since encountered the fabrication theory in print anywhere. I think the reason it's not in print is because so many want to believe she is a hero, no matter what the facts are.
Fact: we don't know what the facts are.
Almost everything about this story is very tightly controlled.
But what about the lawyer who did the rescue?
Again, I have personally neither seen his picture or definitively know where he was or is, or even if he exists. If he was hired by a law firm, then where are his clients and co-workers? How could his privacy be shielded indefinitely? Gradually, we may learn more about him. Or we may not. It is convenient that he joined a law firm, which is bound by law to keep so much confidential?
Now... let's suppose for a moment that fabrication occurred. Would that be "wrong"? Under one imaginative scenario, the whole thing was staged to keep morale high, and actual casualties low. I have no problems believing that a major goal of the war was to keep US casualties low, at any cost. I believe I noticed several creative strategies employed during the war to that purpose, including imaginative use of an "adversary" (in the political sense, at least) domestic press.
Was this part of a scheme to neutralize the "adversary" domestic and international press?
If so, what then? It worked. One could argue that it may have saved coalition lives, and perhaps Iraqi lives, and may have further helped either demoralize the enemy or hastened their demise. Even if it did neither, it would have been an imaginative attempt in the direction of saving lives. Is the Bush administration and the military clever enough to have come up with such a scheme? (No doubt, Bush's political detractors and assorted anti-war activists would vocally decry such a contention.)
My take is that coming up with imaginative ways of saving lives is not a bad thing.
Either way, in fact, it seems as if Lynch and her comrades deserve credit for their service. And all the privacy they require, and prefer.
They don't call this kidnapping.
And the murders of her fellow soldiers, what were those an attempt to do?
Jeez-- "kidnapping"? If you got lost loking for an Elizabeth Smart thread, they're usually in the Back Room.
AND THEY'RE USUALLY OVER THERE BECAUSE OF PEOPLE LIKE YOU.
LOL! I was being sarcastic, but you really were thinking Elizabeth Smart.
Um, sleep in tomorrow or something.
As for all the conflicting stories, I would apply Occam's Razor. The simplest explanation is how information on sketchy or detailed stories makes its way to the public.
First, those truly in the know are being tight-lipped for a variety of reasons. Respect for Jessica's privacy, warnings from nervous lawyers AND PR people, special forces commanders that wish to keep operational details and methodology quiet, desire to protect informants or operations still ongoing in Iraq (still want to get the guy who "slapped" her), etc.
Those presumably in the know do have various agendas, emotions, bad info, etc. Some may lie b/c they are told something false, hold on to hope, etc. Some reporters twist words and statements so that the original intended meaning is actually reversed. Why a doctor who would truly know (as opposed to a hospital spokes/PR person?) sould say she wasn't shot while another says the opposite is somethign I can't answer, but I don't thinking conspiracy immediately.
There are many practical reasons not to publish a 1000 page book of facts that everybody who knows every detail will sign off on too.
So the press, in their zeal to report something, turns to those who are not in a position to convey "truth" because they don't know details. These people talk to reporters b/c it makes them feel important, or some may have an agenda. You have doctors, some military folks barely connected to events but that remain a "source" for a reporter, the 3rd cousin's uncle's best friend who heard through a family member that blah blah blah, etc. The press will take what they can get and the specific reporter will fill in the holes with his own bias or notion of events.
The next reporter writing an article or reading the news goes through the same process, and you end up with two wildly different stories.
This is the nature of things. Imperfect information combined with a publishing deadline makes its way to somebody thirsty for knowledge.
Another Freeper said it best: Wait. Don't draw conclusions and don't get caught up in conspiracy theories, which merely add to soup I've described above.
The IRS probably has an office & desk & title waiting for you.
Amen. I can't believe how some want to make "hero" a matter of being involved in a 1 in a million situation, only extreme acts of bravery that meet some finicky criteria: I think we have a few hundred thousand heroes, and we should acknowledge them as such.
It's miraculous that we still have a military left after Clinton's assault on our country. Those who faught in Afghanistan and Iraq are not just heroes in terms of putting their lives on the line to defeat the enemy, they have also helped exorcise the ghost of Clinton once and for all. In the sagging moral climate of America immediately post-Clinton, these men and women (with the leadership of GW and his team) brought back the soul of our country.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.