If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
Eliat, Israel
|
#62
|
|||
|
|||
Eliat, Israel
Go Fig wrote:
like this. Her vehicle ran into another truck after being struck with an RPG, and her injuries were apparently consistent with that. Moreover, the doctor said that they unzipped her pants and that buttons were in place, which would be inconsistent with a sexual assault. How much can an unconscious person resist to cause broken buttons, torn clothes and defensive wounds ? I guess that you are suggesting that someone who would be callous enough to rape and sodomize an unconscious women with serious injuries would take the time to carefully undo all her buttons, remove her clothing and then replace everything and do up her zipper and button, and that all this would be done at the scene of a recent battle with a chance of the enemy returning. It makes no sense at all. What you have shown in your excellent attributions is that no rape kit was taken, my only assumption. Of course no rape kit was used, and I gather that you have little or no understanding of what a rape kit is or the reason for it. Since you appear to prefer to play silly, I will try to explain it to you. First of all it is not some sort of test to see if someone has been raped. It is a set of medical instruments and equipment to collect DNA samples. Those would include semen samples, the victim's hair and pubic hair, finger nails , and all of the victim's clothing. They are used for the prosecution of rapists. If there had been any indication of a sexual assault, I am sure that the doctor would have checked it out. But as was pointed out to you, there was no reason for the doctor to have carried out any suck collections because there had not been any reason to suspect a rape. Even if he did, it was a war zone, and chances of a rape trial would in those conditions are slim. I have to wonder what sort of rape kit the US army used when they examine Lynch 9 days later. Maybe you can do some research and see what use a rape kit would be after that period of time and after she had been exposed to so many different people. I leave this subject with this; try and see the ABC interview, all parties speak in english except the singing nurse. These interviews were as a result of a specific paragraph in PFC Lynch's own book concerning rape. There is a unnatural hesitation in her voice when specifically asked about it; she, of course, has access to her official U.S. medical report. In an interview, she denied that she had been raped. So I guess we are facing a claim that there was a rape based on medical reports from examinations at least 9 days after the alleged assault. I have to wonder how the author got access to Lynch's army medical records. Maybe the huge sum paid for the book have something to do with the story being spiced up a bit. If she had done what they had originally done when the reports first came out she would be something of a hero. This report (s) is 1 report, and it was that article that was picked up world wide. It names only some "official." This aspect was covered on ABC TV this week, during the first ever interview with Lynch. There was never an official release from the U.S. Military that touted her heroic fighting. It's interesting how the army brass is backing off on the stuff that was fed to the media. Bear in mind that she was awarded a Bronze Star, and award that is supposed to be awarded "For heroic or meritorious achievement of service, not involving aerial flight in connection with operations against an opposing armed force." I am having trouble figuring out where being hurt in an attack, passing out and then waking up hours later in a hospital fits into that one. As it turned out, she did no such thing. She did not fire until she ran out of ammunition. She never fired a single shot, she stood her assigned station bravely as her sergeant indicated on ABC TV. Her sergeant? Where was he? The news reports indicated that everyone else in the unit had been killed. She never stood anywhere. She was out cold and carried off on a stretcher. up with abuse in the hospital. It turned out that she was well treated by the medical staff. Has there been ANY other reports to the contrary ? Yes. I cited them earlier, even cut and pasted the quote to make it exceptionally easy for you. You managed to miss it. The lawyer who made the claims about his witnessing her abuse made a lot of money on the deal. PFC Lynch's only reservation/resentment is that her rescue was filmed. That was indeed marketed, but it was quite a unique success. Well jeepers. Doesn't that tell you something right there. They go in on a special mission to "rescue" a POW (read "patient") and send a crew along to videotape the adventure. I am beginning to realize how right P T Barnum was. There is one born every minute. |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
Eliat, Israel
Go Fig wrote:
She is in a vehicle that gets hit. She is injured. She is taken to a local hospital where she is treated well. The army then overreacts and invades the hospital, who freely turn her over, and then she comes back home to the USA. The hospital is a military HQ and depot. The only reason it is absent of combatants was due to a strong diversion that was created exactly for that purpose. LOL, Given that the event was staged and that just about everything else that was reported about it has turned out to be false...... Yeah, I am sure that all the Iraqi soldiers left their posts to deal with a diversion. They had already pulled out of the area, and that's why the someone went ot the Americans to tell them where she was. Where's the legitimate drama here? What makes her more of a hero than anyone else who gets hospitalized and then released? Why a movie if not for domestic propaganda purposes? It has been more than 50 years since a POW was rescued by the U.S... And the first time ever that one has been staged, complete with videotaped coverage. Some people actually believed it. |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
Eliat, Israel
Go Fig wrote:
It has been more than 50 years since a POW was rescued by the U.S... What about that Scott O'Grady feller? miguel -- See the world from your web browser: http://travel.u.nu/ |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
Eliat, Israel
In article ,
Dave Smith wrote: Go Fig wrote: like this. Her vehicle ran into another truck after being struck with an RPG, and her injuries were apparently consistent with that. Moreover, the doctor said that they unzipped her pants and that buttons were in place, which would be inconsistent with a sexual assault. How much can an unconscious person resist to cause broken buttons, torn clothes and defensive wounds ? I guess that you are suggesting that someone who would be callous enough to rape and sodomize an unconscious women with serious injuries would take the time to carefully undo all her buttons, remove her clothing and then replace everything and do up her zipper and button, and that all this would be done at the scene of a recent battle with a chance of the enemy returning. It makes no sense at all. There would be very serious consequences if they were caught, thugs routinely cover their tracks. Why do you think that only her other possessions were found in an abandoned shack nearby the crash site and no possessions of her other group members ? What you have shown in your excellent attributions is that no rape kit was taken, my only assumption. Of course no rape kit was used, and I gather that you have little or no understanding of what a rape kit is or the reason for it. Since you appear to prefer to play silly, I will try to explain it to you. First of all it is not some sort of test to see if someone has been raped. It is a set of medical instruments and equipment to collect DNA samples. Those would include semen samples, the victim's hair and pubic hair, finger nails , and all of the victim's clothing. They are used for the prosecution of rapists. If there had been any indication of a sexual assault, I am sure that the doctor would have checked it out. But as was pointed out to you, there was no reason for the doctor to have carried out any suck collections because there had not been any reason to suspect a rape. So is your threshold of rape unzipped pants and missing buttons ? Perhaps you should look at the papers concerning date rape and one very rich heir who use to live in Santa Barbara.... women as much as a year later they were informed they had been filmed while being raped, they were unconscious. Even if he did, it was a war zone, and chances of a rape trial would in those conditions are slim. I have to wonder what sort of rape kit the US army used when they examine Lynch 9 days later. Maybe you can do some research and see what use a rape kit would be after that period of time and after she had been exposed to so many different people. In terms of positive ID that might be difficult due to contamination. That is if they don't have a semen sample. But a unique ID is not the point of this discussion. I leave this subject with this; try and see the ABC interview, all parties speak in english except the singing nurse. These interviews were as a result of a specific paragraph in PFC Lynch's own book concerning rape. There is a unnatural hesitation in her voice when specifically asked about it; she, of course, has access to her official U.S. medical report. In an interview, she denied that she had been raped. Not in the 2 that I have seen, and the only 2 she has given. She says she does not know what happened after the crash and before the hospital. She further said she doesn't want to know. So I guess we are facing a claim that there was a rape based on medical reports from examinations at least 9 days after the alleged assault. I have to wonder how the author got access to Lynch's army medical records. Maybe the huge sum paid for the book have something to do with the story being spiced up a bit. If she had done what they had originally done when the reports first came out she would be something of a hero. This report (s) is 1 report, and it was that article that was picked up world wide. It names only some "official." This aspect was covered on ABC TV this week, during the first ever interview with Lynch. There was never an official release from the U.S. Military that touted her heroic fighting. It's interesting how the army brass is backing off on the stuff that was fed to the media. Bear in mind that she was awarded a Bronze Star, and award that is supposed to be awarded "For heroic or meritorious achievement of service, not involving aerial flight in connection with operations against an opposing armed force." I am having trouble figuring out where being hurt in an attack, passing out and then waking up hours later in a hospital fits into that one. It was a very intense fight for over an hour from a logistics group. As it turned out, she did no such thing. She did not fire until she ran out of ammunition. She never fired a single shot, she stood her assigned station bravely as her sergeant indicated on ABC TV. Her sergeant? Where was he? The news reports indicated that everyone else in the unit had been killed. Everyone in her vehicle was killed; 5 were taken prisoner from her group, 11 bodies were recovered at the time of the Lynch rescue. I'm surprised you are not aware of this, they showed the POWs on TV endlessly being questioned by Iraqis. She never stood anywhere. She was assigned the jump seat over the transmission case in the rear. She was told to help the soldiers on both sides of her with ammo. That she did till the crash. She was out cold and carried off on a stretcher. up with abuse in the hospital. It turned out that she was well treated by the medical staff. Has there been ANY other reports to the contrary ? Yes. I cited them earlier, even cut and pasted the quote to make it exceptionally easy for you. You managed to miss it. The lawyer who made the claims about his witnessing her abuse made a lot of money on the deal. That is not from the U.S. military, and he is quite clear that it was not the medical staff, but a butcher's thug. PFC Lynch's only reservation/resentment is that her rescue was filmed. That was indeed marketed, but it was quite a unique success. Well jeepers. Doesn't that tell you something right there. They go in on a special mission to "rescue" a POW (read "patient") and send a crew along to videotape the adventure. You clearly do not understand that in Iraq, hospitals are Military HQs. As for the camera, it was not a crew... but as I understand it was a helmet mounted camera, common place for these type raid. In fact, the 4th division is entirely wired down to a man with GPS and some outfitted with cameras that transmit live feed. This was probably monitored live as well, although I'm not sure. jay Thu, Nov 13, 2003 I am beginning to realize how right P T Barnum was. There is one born every minute. -- Legend insists that as he finished his abject... Galileo muttered under his breath: "Nevertheless, it does move." |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
Eliat, Israel
|
#67
|
|||
|
|||
Eliat, Israel
Go Fig wrote:
(Miguel Cruz) wrote: Go Fig wrote: It has been more than 50 years since a POW was rescued by the U.S... What about that Scott O'Grady feller? He was never a POW, but one heck of a survivor. Good point. I spaced on the fact that he wasn't actually captured, just hoping to avoid it. miguel -- See the world from your web browser: http://travel.u.nu/ |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
Eliat, Israel
Go Fig wrote:
Dave Smith wrote: It is a set of medical instruments and equipment to collect DNA samples. Those would include semen samples, the victim's hair and pubic hair, finger nails , and all of the victim's clothing. They are used for the prosecution of rapists. If there had been any indication of a sexual assault, I am sure that the doctor would have checked it out. But as was pointed out to you, there was no reason for the doctor to have carried out any suck collections because there had not been any reason to suspect a rape. So is your threshold of rape unzipped pants and missing buttons ? Perhaps you should look at the papers concerning date rape Date rape??? I don't get it. You think some Iraqi got Jessica Lynch drunk and forced himself on her, then the army busted her out of a frat party? miguel -- See the world from your web browser: http://travel.u.nu/ |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
Eliat, Israel
|
#70
|
|||
|
|||
Eliat, Israel
Miguel Cruz wrote in message ... Go Fig wrote: She never fired a single shot, she stood her assigned station bravely as her sergeant indicated on ABC TV. So I really don't get this whole thing (didn't see the movie and haven't read that much about her story, so my bits'n'pieces understanding may be off): She is in a vehicle that gets hit. She is injured. She is taken to a local hospital where she is treated well. The army then overreacts and invades the hospital, who freely turn her over, and then she comes back home to the USA. Where's the legitimate drama here? What makes her more of a hero than anyone else who gets hospitalized and then released? Why a movie if not for domestic propaganda purposes? Absolutely. A minor scuffle with no particular credit to anyone, that most who have been on active service have probably experienced numerous times. Only the US would film the action, throw medals all over the place and turn it into an Audy Murphy unspectacular. I don't think the cinemas will sell (m)any seats outside of the US. Surreyman |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Airfare to Israel? | Mateo | Air travel | 0 | January 14th, 2004 03:28 AM |
Airfare to Israel? | Steve | Air travel | 0 | January 13th, 2004 06:05 PM |
Airfare to Israel? | Iceman | Air travel | 0 | January 13th, 2004 04:37 PM |