GI Jessica says "Enough!"

Sparks

From breakingnews.ie:

Former prisoner of war Jessica Lynch has attacked the US military for manipulating the story of her dramatic rescue in Iraq and said they should not have filmed it in the first place.

The 20-year-old private told US TV’s Diane Sawyer in an interview that she was bothered by the military’s portrayal of her ordeal.

“They used me as a way to symbolise all this stuff,” she said.

“It hurt in a way that people would make up stories that they had no truth about,” she said.

She also said there was no reason for her rescue from an Iraqi hospital to be filmed. “It’s wrong,” she said.

Footage of the rescue was aired repeatedly on television networks reporting how a special forces team bravely fought into and out of the hospital.

“I don’t think it happened quite like that,” Lynch said.

star gazer

Fair dues to her, there must be a lot of money to be made if she plays ball. As much as some would glamorise it, war is not usually heroic.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Victor

How un-American of her, "she is either with us or against us". :rolleyes:

Hobbes

The fact they didn't "Liberate" her is old news. It is good she is pointing it out.

The Iraqis actually tried a couple of times to get her to the American soliders.

Whole story is here...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/correspondent/3028585.stm

Ping Chow Chi

lol - its quite a funny read.

I suppose it shows that you should not believe every thing you read / see in the news.

Biffa Bacon

Another story you may have missed, of how she was treated by her captors:

Fiends raped Jessica

This confirms in my mind why women should never be allowed serve in the military.

Sparks

So they say she was anally raped, but not in any other orifice, which is unbelievable enough as it stands, but then they mention that she doesn't remember a thing about it, but hey - it had to happen, because they say so?

Pah.

Sand

Another story you may have missed, of how she was treated by her captors:

She was treated quite well in the "hellish" hospital from what Ive read.....her treatment by the soldiers who actually captured her was probably of a different sort but Im wondering about the justification the author has for describing the hospital as hellish. He must have pretty high standards or the nurse must have been a bloody awful singer.

This confirms in my mind why women should never be allowed serve in the military.

Why? If women want to serve in the milatary so be it. Certainly they run serious risks if they are captured but so long as they are clear that they understand and accept those risks what can you do? Most volunteer milataries are not in a position to turn away potential recruits.

So they say she was anally raped, but not in any other orifice, which is unbelievable enough as it stands, but then they mention that she doesn't remember a thing about it, but hey - it had to happen, because they say so?

Pah.

Why? Lynch claims to have lost 3 hours from the time the convoy was attacked ... and given the injuries she sustained even without rape then its not so hard to credit - especially when Lynch seems to have no qualms about correcting claims of mistreatment in the hospital, of the need for an armed rescue and her heroic resitance at the convoy - where she says her m16 jammed so she didnt get to fire off a single shot.

So if you believe she is lying about the blackout, then logically shes lying about the rest and she killed over 50 iraqis with her bare hands before been taken down by a dirty iraqi trick, was beaten regularly in her hospital bed - something an Iraqi lawyer will back up too - and US soldiers had to fight a pitched battle room to room to get to her hospital bed!

The books cites medical records but Ive not been able to find any detailed records online apart from a usual listing of x and y bones broken. Certainly its very believable that Lynch may have been raped by Iraqi soldiers given their wonderful treatment of a US pilot from the last Gulf War. If it makes you feel better the Iraqi doctor who treated her when she was brought in from the convoy utterly rejects that she was raped saying he would have seen signs of it - though he accepts he wasnt looking for them either.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=7&u=/ap/20031107/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_jessica_lynch_7

Sparks

Originally posted by Sand
Why?

Because I find it hard to believe that she wouldn't have been injured more than she was if that's what had happened. I'd expect to see far more obvious evidence of rape, and not just sodomy either. In fact, I'd half expect that she'd have been raped repeatedly and then shot or her throat slit, according to the US accounts. Instead the proferred story was one of relative restraint.

Lynch claims to have lost 3 hours from the time the convoy was attacked

Only 3 hours now? A while ago, she couldn't remember anything from the initial attack right through to her waking up in a US hospital weeks later...

and given the injuries she sustained even without rape then its not so hard to credit

Except that her injuries are wholly consistent with a traffic accident and not any form of battle - no torture wounds, no bullet holes, no stab wounds, nothing you'd expect from a fight. Just someone that was in a traffic accident and was dropped off at a hospital.
It'd take one strange puppy to haul her out of a traffic accident, then sodomise her, then show the restraint to stop and take her to a hospital where she received near-preferential treatment with the doctors risking their lives to try to take her to the US forces. Frankly, I don't find it a credible story.

So if you believe she is lying about the blackout,

No, I don't - I'm saying I don't believe the offical US story of her capture and that the facts support the Iraqi's story more consistently.
And note that she hasn't said she was raped.

Certainly its very believable that Lynch may have been raped by Iraqi soldiers given their wonderful treatment of a US pilot from the last Gulf War.

See, I don't find that believable, because of her gender and their beliefs. Either they'd have gone nuts after a fight and raped her repeatedly in every orifice, and probably slit her throat afterwards, or they'd have captured her and taken her to hospital. I can't see anyone being so inconsistent as to do both, and I can't see the US withholding the rape story during the war when they were merrily playing the propaganda side of things by protraying her as a female version of Rambo...

If it makes you feel better the Iraqi doctor who treated her when she was brought in from the convoy utterly rejects that she was raped saying he would have seen signs of it - though he accepts he wasnt looking for them either.

Had she been anally raped, I think it would have shown given the resultant bleeding and bruising Sand.
Even consentual anal sex tends to have leave noticible physical damage on occasion - anal rape that is not detected on a patient that received more than one surgical procedure and who was in intensive care? I don't believe it.

Hobbes

They had some clips of the movie on Sky News. Absolutly comical.

It is not based on Jessicas but instead on the Iraqi lawyer that reported where she was.

Pure proproganda.

Speaking of which, I see the US no longer uses the term "Body bags". They are called "Transfer tubes".

Victor

Originally posted by Biffa Bacon
This confirms in my mind why women should never be allowed serve in the military.

But male soldiers can be anally raped as well! In fact it's the only practical option.

DadaKopf

The Iraqi has a book coming out.

GI Jessica can say anything she wants, she's still gonna make a bundle.

Redleslie

Originally posted by Sparks
See, I don't find that believable, because of her gender and their beliefs.

What do you mean by their beliefs? Men of any nationality or religion are capable of doing the most incredibly brutal things in war. Their beliefs don't come into it. During the Mai Lai massace one of the marines raped a girl then stuck his rifle in her vagina and fired. I'm pretty sure that behaviour wasn't consistent with his everyday beliefs. It's possible Pvt Lynch was raped (it's possible that US troops are doing quite a bit of raping in Iraq too) but overall the Iraqis seemed to have learned from the first gulf war and treated POWs well this time. Soldiers may have been under strict orders not to mistreat anyone they captured or something.

Hobbes

This is probably just a concidence.

http://www.sianews.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1348

Sparks

Originally posted by Redleslie
What do you mean by their beliefs? Men of any nationality or religion are capable of doing the most incredibly brutal things in war]

That is what I mean. I wouldn't expect to see "just" anal rape had this been a post-battle raping of an enemy soldier. I'd expect every orifice to be raped, and her throar slit or for her to be shot - or else for the diametric opposite, namely no assault. In other words, either a calm enemy or one still enraged, not somewhere in between.

Besides, the doctors who carried out surgery on her to fix her leg saw no evidence of anal rape - and anal sex, even when consentual, tends to cause physical damage that isn't exactly unnoticable by a trained medical doctor....

Redleslie

I see what you mean Sparks. I thought you were implying that the Iraqis wouldn't anally rape her because islam is down on sodomy and that sort of thing. Anyway, remember when Yvonne Ridley was captured by the Taliban. I seem to recall that when she was released she was asked if she was abused at all and she said no she hadn't, then the journalist said "so do you think they're gay?" Prejudice against muslims is such that if they don't rape and abuse their female captives then they must all be raving puffs.

As an aside, I heard that Ridley also said that the Taliban's ban on kites wasn't one of their nutty edicts, it was to stop kids flying them into powerlines, electrocuting themselves and knocking out power for days.

Oh and she reckons she was set up by the western intelligence agencies who hoped she would get executed or something and provide a nice propaganda boost in favour of the war. Source.

No better way to get everyone in a jingoistic mood than to put it about that evil foreigners are killing and raping our women in the arse and everything.

sovtek

That lawyer doesn't seem at all credible to me. How can he be quite happily showing up in the US to be interviewed and get a book deal without some helpful State Department "friends" doing something to make it happen.
His version is also wholly different than the doctors who treated her that state that there were no Iraqi soldiers there when she was "rescued" and in fact US soldiers handcuffed patients to their beds when they entered the hospital. As well that they tried the day before to take her to a checkpoint and were fired upon.
I beleive Lynch could have been raped but I heard the "evidence" is from medical records of the US military and not the intial records of the Iraqi hospital. As Sparks said I would think that it would be obvious.
Now just because they raped her wouldn't mean that they would kill her. I remember a story from the Gulf War where a female pilot was raped (by her own account), can't remember her name or anything. IIRC she had a broken leg at the time.

Sleipnir

God I couldn't read that book without puking

"The records do not tell whether her captors assaulted her almost lifeless, broken body after she was lifted from the wreckage, or if they assaulted her and then broke her bones into splinters until she was almost dead."

Which means

"She probably broke bones in the crash but that wouldn't be very interesting.
So instead, I'll plant the image of her being taken out of the vehicle intact and with a smile, then being savagely raped and beaten to the point where her bones broke by evil men with dirty mustaches. That's the image you'll remember and in time, believe."

Sand

Because I find it hard to believe that she wouldn't have been injured more than she was if that's what had happened. I'd expect to see far more obvious evidence of rape, and not just sodomy either. In fact, I'd half expect that she'd have been raped repeatedly and then shot or her throat slit, according to the US accounts. Instead the proferred story was one of relative restraint.

Heh, reminds me of a Judge who explained why he didnt send a man to jail for rape because he didnt beat the woman black and blue when he raped her. Regardless of the Judges viewpoint it does indicate that people ( even men ) can be raped without having their throat cut or shot.

Only 3 hours now? A while ago, she couldn't remember anything from the initial attack right through to her waking up in a US hospital weeks later...

The benefit of medical treatment or counselling perhaps? I dont claim to know but Id keep an open mind on the matter.

It'd take one strange puppy to haul her out of a traffic accident, then sodomise her, then show the restraint to stop and take her to a hospital where she received near-preferential treatment with the doctors risking their lives to try to take her to the US forces. Frankly, I don't find it a credible story.

Yeah it would. But seeing as the Iraqi army contains - or did contain - many different puppies, with differing ranks and outlooks it isnt beyond the bounds of reason that she was raped by one or more of the soldiers who captured her, before say - a higher ranking officer arrives and takes control of the situation. The credibility of the story seems a tad dependant on whether you believe the Iraqi army was a one man show, or all Iraqi soldiers are clones of each other. I dont find *that* credible.

No, I don't - I'm saying I don't believe the offical US story of her capture and that the facts support the Iraqi's story more consistently.

Neither does Lynch and shes been correcting that story with her own book which is what is being discussed isnt it? If shes not lying about the US milatary being wrong then why is she lying about being raped?

And note that she hasn't said she was raped.

The claim is in *her* book? She apparently went on some US chat show to talk about the rape claims?

Had she been anally raped, I think it would have shown given the resultant bleeding and bruising Sand.

Agreed - and this is what the medical records the book cites apparently indicate! I say apparently because Ive not seen the medical records and for all I know the rape claims could be the work of Daithis evil/good twin - taking a factual evidence and using it to spin a wild tirade against the evil Iraqis/US (delete as appropriate ).

Now just because they raped her wouldn't mean that they would kill her. I remember a story from the Gulf War where a female pilot was raped (by her own account), can't remember her name or anything. IIRC she had a broken leg at the time.

Agreed. That was the US pilot I was thinking about, some Helicopter pilot who got shot down/crashed during the Gulf War and was severely injured. Her Iraqi rescuers dragged her from the wreakage and raped her apparently. It was turned into a dire Meg Ryan vehicle, Courage Under Fire or some such ****e......In this version the pilot fought to the death etc etc. Guess they had to figure out someway to make it a suitable ending.

Sparks

Originally posted by Sand

Yeah it would. But seeing as the Iraqi army contains - or did contain - many different puppies, with differing ranks and outlooks it isnt beyond the bounds of reason that she was raped by one or more of the soldiers who captured her, before say - a higher ranking officer arrives and takes control of the situation.

Given that the bulk of the Iraqi army was made up of consripts who would much rather not have been there, that's a bit hard to believe. The officers were the ones you had to worry about.

Neither does Lynch and shes been correcting that story with her own book which is what is being discussed isnt it?

Actually, it's not quite "her" book...

The claim is in *her* book? She apparently went on some US chat show to talk about the rape claims?

The book was written, don't forget, by Rick Bragg.
That's not exactly a pedigree that inspires belief in it's honesty...

Sparks

And now, the latest twist...

(What was that about how the Iraqis were scurrilous dogs that treated her awfully?)

From breakingnews.ie:

Porn baron buys topless Private Jessica photos
11/11/2003 - 2:22:19 pm

Photographs showing rescued American soldier Private Jessica Lynch topless with two male soldiers have been bought by the owner of Hustler.

Larry Flynt insists he has only paid for the snaps to prevent them from becoming public.

The news comes on the day 20-year-old Private Lynch's book, I Am A Soldier Too, was published, detailing her capture and rescue during the Iraq war.

In a statement, Mr Flynt said: "I was offered photos of Jessica Lynch. I purchased them in order to keep them out of circulation, not to publish them."

Mr Flynt, an opponent of the Bush administration, added: "Jessica Lynch is being used as a pawn by the media and by the government to create a hero who can sell this war to the American people."

The photographs, showing Miss Lynch with two male soldiers at Fort Bliss, Texas, were taken shortly before she went to Iraq.

Larry Flynt reportedly paid a six-figure sum for the snaps.

Paul Bogaards of Alfred Knopf, publisher of Miss Lynch's book, said it would be "unspeakable" if Hustler decided to publish the pictures.

Redleslie

Originally posted by Sand
If it makes you feel better the Iraqi doctor who treated her when she was brought in from the convoy utterly rejects that she was raped saying he would have seen signs of it - though he accepts he wasnt looking for them either.

According to the link Sand posted and this article and this one the doctor "examined her extensively and would have detected signs of sexual assault. He said the examination turned up no trace of semen."

So that's that as far as I'm concerned. It seems as if some people would prefer if she had been raped, because it would give them a handy excuse to hate Iraqis even more or something, which is kind of perverse.

Sand

Given that the bulk of the Iraqi army was made up of consripts who would much rather not have been there, that's a bit hard to believe. The officers were the ones you had to worry about.

And because they were conscripts they were peace activists?:D Most soldiers do not enjoy being in a warzone - round about the 60s-70s Vietnam was not *THE* place to be for your average soldier... career soldiers maybe but not the average joe. Yet we hear plenty of stories of Americans abusing and murdering the civillian Vietnamese...what were they, the volunteers?

A POW would bring tremendous rewards to the officer who captured him/her. The Iraqis have always been keen to exploit the media/morale value of POWs. The point Im making is that whilst Iraqi officers werent angels, they werent stupid either - raping her doesnt get them their promotion or greater power/kudos within the Baathist regime.

I dont think the idea of an Iraqi officer arriving to take charge is that far out. Like I said I wouldnt dismiss the claims just because you have a black and white view of the situation.

The book was written, don't forget, by Rick Bragg.

Misdirection? Were not talking about Rick Bragg, were talking about the rape claims made in a book which tells Lynchs account of her capture and rescue. Now at the very least Lynch got to have a read of the final draft before approving it. Lynch has seemingly gone on US talkshows to discuss the rape claims in the book. Are you saying Bragg somehow slipped it by her?

Again we come back to the issue that youre selectively deciding to believe or dismiss out of hand Lynchs claims as it suits your own views. You believe her when she criticises the way the US milatary exploited the case, and corrects claims of abuse within the hospital and then totally dismiss her claims when she claims to have been raped and claims to have medical evidence to back it up. Seeing as youve read and evaluated the medical evidence do you mind throwing us a link so I can check it out for myself?

And now, the latest twist...

(What was that about how the Iraqis were scurrilous dogs that treated her awfully?)
..

Whats that got to do with anything? I think the "She was a slapper anyway" defence might be a few decades out of date - at least I certainly hope it is.

So that's that as far as I'm concerned. It seems as if some people would prefer if she had been raped, because it would give them a handy excuse to hate Iraqis even more or something, which is kind of perverse.

All you need is one side of the story eh?:) The very same doctors also say.......

Al-Saeidi said he found no signs of rape during an examination although he acknowledged he was not looking for signs of sexual assault.

I dont presume to be Mr Al-Saeidi so I dont know what sort of pressure he was under when he had two american POWs arrive requiring urgent medical attention - he claims they only had minutes to save them and one of them died 30 minutes after reaching the hospital - but it is conceivable that given the duress and the fact he admits he wasnt looking for evidence of sexual assault and the rather exstensive injuries he may have missed it? Certainly possible, I hope youll admit. I for one - the only one maybe - am curious to see whats in the medical records Lynch is citing in her book.

Redleslie

But according to the reports - "He said Lynch was fully clothed with her field jacket buttoned up. "Her clothes were not torn, buttons had not come off, her pants were zipped up," al-Saeidi said."

It's said that muslims are sticklers for politeness but being careful not to damage her uniform and taking the time and effort to put her pants back on after brutally raping her is probably stretching it a bit. The Iraqi soldiers most likely fecked off as quick as they could in case US support arrived. Yes it's a possibility that she was raped by poorly trained and ill-disciplined (yet extremely conscientious and considerate) Iraqi conscripts but it's also a possibility that she was raped by guys on her own side at some point prior to the attack.

swiss

I guess the more obvious question that arises for me is: who are you going to believe? Certainly I believe that the US were stretching the truth in regards to the rescue of GI Jessica, showing themselves in the best possible light (was there any need to film that rescue?). The Iraqis may or may not have mistreated her, but without proof, there can be no way to know.

So either the Iraqis are the evil monsters that the US administration makes them out to be - raping Jessica, brutally beating her etc, or they are in fact restrained and mindful of POW rights when treating her injuries. If Jessica is lying about that - what else could she be lying about? Whose agenda is she pushing?

Sleipnir

well to quote from today's Independant.

"She now denies she was raped and believes of her rescue should not be used to popularise the war. ( ©Daily Telegraph, London) "

Zombrex

I am confused (and to lazy to find out) ...

who actually said she was raped, the US Army, her "autobiography", her in an interview, ??????

Havelock

The US Army suggests she was mistreated, and they "saved"* her.

"Her"** Book says she was maybe raped.

She denies she was.

*American Army defines save as: Send in special Forces teams with Video Cameras, Blank rounds, flash bangs etc, to a peaceful hospital, to rescue a pateint the Iraqis had tried to return to the Americans, but couldn't because the Americans shot at them.
(Also not, the high death rate among the rescuers, car crashs, war wounds from two years ago, and a murder, *cough cover up cough*)

**The story written by some Rick "Not in the Pocket of the Pentagon" Bragg, with her name on it.

You know what scares me, the above is the closest I could get to unbiased.

sovtek

Originally posted by Sparks

The book was written, don't forget, by Rick Bragg.
That's not exactly a pedigree that inspires belief in it's honesty... [/B]

I wonder if he's any relation to Fort Bragg.

Redleslie

Let's see if I've got this right. Pvt Lynch's unit was attacked and she incurred injuries, then she was shagged up the arse by at least one Iraqi fiend who then zipped up her pants back up before breaking her bones into splinters. Is that right?

What a load of toss. But if the rape claim serves the "common good" (depicts Iraqis as evil barbarians) then I suppose we should all go along with it yes?

sceptre

Originally posted by Sparks
And now, the latest twist...

(What was that about how the Iraqis were scurrilous dogs that treated her awfully?)

That's rather unfair Sparks. It's tantamount to saying that women who wear short skirts and low-cut tops are asking for it and really shouldn't be surprised if they get raped.

Sparks

Originally posted by sceptre
That's rather unfair Sparks. It's tantamount to saying that women who wear short skirts and low-cut tops are asking for it and really shouldn't be surprised if they get raped.

I don't know where the hell you're getting that from, I was pointing out that while the stories were that she was treated badly by the Iraqis, the americans are the ones who are really treating her badly.

Victor

http://home.eircom.net/content/irelandcom/topstories/1941617?view=Eircomnet

Dr Shwail said he saw no signs of rape but neither was he looking for them. "The thought did not cross my mind. Her injuries were consistent with severe trauma, a car crash, nothing else . . . There is no way she could have been raped."

The rest of the article seems to suggest there is an element of sensationalism in the whole thing (perhaps to get books sold?). Not sure if it's a book I'd want for Christmas if it includes rape.

sceptre

Originally posted by Sparks
I don't know where the hell you're getting that from

Ah, my mistake. Apologies