Jessica Lynch rescue: fabricated lie?

can you post the article? we can't get to it without registering with that site. I'm registered on enough sites as it is.
 
Robert Scheer
Saving Private Lynch: Take 2
The rescue was pure Hollywood, reportedly a bit of Pentagon fiction.

Published May 20, 2003


In the 1998 film "Wag the Dog," political operatives employ special editing techniques to create phony footage that will engender public sympathy for a manufactured war. Now we find that in 2003 the real-life Pentagon's ability and willingness to manipulate the facts make Hollywood's story lines look tame.

After a thorough investigation, the British Broadcasting Corp. has presented a shocking dissection of the "heroic" rescue of Pvt. Jessica Lynch, as reported by the U.S. military and a breathless American press.

"Her story is one of the most stunning pieces of news management ever conceived," the BBC concluded — the polite British way of saying "liar, liar, pants on fire."

Though the Bush administration's shamelessly trumped-up claims about Iraq's alleged ties to Al Qaeda and 9/11 and its weapons of mass destruction take the cake for deceitful propaganda — grand strategic lies that allow the United States' seizure of Iraq's oil to appear to be an act of liberation — the sad case of Lynch's exploitation at the hands of military spinners illustrates that the truth once again was a casualty of war.

Lynch, who says she has no memory of the events in question, has suffered enough in the line of duty without being reduced to a propaganda pawn.

Sadly, almost nothing fed to reporters about either Lynch's original capture by Iraqi forces or her "rescue" by U.S. forces turns out to be true. Consider the April 3 Washington Post story on her capture headlined "She Was Fighting to the Death," which reported, based on unnamed military sources, that Lynch "continued firing at the Iraqis even after she sustained multiple gunshot wounds," adding that she was also stabbed when Iraqi forces closed in.

It has since emerged that Lynch was neither shot nor stabbed, but rather suffered accident injuries when her vehicle overturned. A medical checkup by U.S. doctors confirmed the account of the Iraqi doctors, who said they had carefully tended her injuries, a broken arm and thigh and a dislocated ankle, in contrast to U.S. media reports that doctors had ignored Lynch.

Another report spread by news organizations nationwide claimed Lynch was slapped by an Iraqi security guard, and the U.S. military later insisted that an Iraqi lawyer witnessed this incident and informed them of Lynch's whereabouts. His credibility as a source, however, is difficult to verify because he and his family were whisked to the U.S., where he was immediately granted political asylum and has refused all interview requests. His future was assured with a job with a lobbying firm run by former Republican Rep. Bob Livingstone that represents the defense industry and a $500,000 book contract with HarperCollins, a company owned by Rupert Murdoch, whose Fox network did much to hype Lynch's story, as it did the rest of the war.

But where the manipulation of this saga really gets ugly is in the premeditated manufacture of the rescue itself, which stains those who have performed real acts of bravery, whether in war or peacetime.

Eight days after her capture, American media trumpeted the military's story that Lynch was saved by Special Forces that stormed the hospital and, in the face of heavy hostile fire, managed to scoop her up and helicopter her out.

However, according to the BBC, which interviewed the hospital's staff, the truth appears to be that not only had Iraqi forces abandoned the area before the rescue effort but that the hospital's staff had informed the U.S. of this and made arrangements two days before the raid to turn Lynch over to the Americans. "But as the ambulance, with Pvt. Lynch inside, approached the checkpoint, American troops opened fire, forcing it to flee back to the hospital. The Americans had almost killed their prize catch," the BBC reported.

"We were surprised," Dr. Anmar Uday told the BBC about the supposed rescue. "There was no military, there were no soldiers in the hospital. It was like a Hollywood film. [The U.S. forces] cried 'Go, go, go,' with guns and blanks without bullets, blanks and the sound of explosions," Uday said. "They made a show for the American attack on the hospital — [like] action movies [starring] Sylvester Stallone or Jackie Chan."

The footage from the raid, shot not by journalists but by soldiers with night-vision cameras, was fed in real time to the central command in Qatar. The video was artfully edited by the Pentagon and released as proof that a battle to free Lynch had occurred when it had not.

This fabrication has already been celebrated by an A&E special and will soon be an NBC movie. The Lynch rescue story — a made-for-TV bit of official propaganda — will probably survive as the war's most heroic moment, despite proving as fictitious as the stated rationales for the invasion itself.

If the movies, books and other renditions of "saving Private Lynch" were to be honestly presented, it would expose this caper as merely one in a series of egregious lies marketed to us by the Bush administration
 

What happened to the time when everyone could believe the news was truth. Whether it is the Peterson case or US Military, it has gotten where I don;t know who to believe. The news says one thing only to turn around a few days later to say something else. URGHHHH
 
I have no doubt that there WASN"T a battle to get her out of the hospital. It was real apparent from what little film footage there was of the incident. I'm not so sure that a story had been spun that there was a battle to save her, was there? It was weird in itself that there was film footage of the rescue, but the film footage of what occured in Iraq was so tainted and slanted by all sources, that it was hard to believe anything you saw!

But -- I do believe that man's story about trying to save her. I do believe he tried to rescue her. I believe he risked his life to try to save her. Even if the hospital had arranged for her release two days before the "raid", that man would never have known that. I believe in him and his efforts.

Is it true that she has no gun or stab wounds? Has that been substantiatied? I still feel for her, no matter how her injuries occured. I can't imagine what she's gone through as a soldier in a forgein land who saw some of her friends die during whatever happened out there. I just wonder why anyone would spin a story about her injuries?
 
Sorry, it will take more than the BBC saying they did extensive research for me to believe this. They will actually have to provide documentation of their facts and more than a quote from one hospital staffer.
 
Not meaning to have my American blinders on, but who's to say that the Iraqis they are interviewing aren't telling the truth?

There's a large chunk of the Iraqi population that doesn't like the US, even though we got rid of Saddam. I can't imagine any of them would want to lie to a foreign news service that could also have their own agendas.

Anyway, I would like to believe the story, but take it with a grain of salt. will I see any movie about it or read a book? No, but I can imagine there will be tens of thousands that will...
 
Not meaning to have my American blinders on, but who's to say that the Iraqis they are interviewing aren't telling the truth?

There's a large chunk of the Iraqi population that doesn't like the US, even though we got rid of Saddam. I can't imagine any of them would want to lie to a foreign news service that could also have their own agendas.

Is this meant to be sarcastic? Because why WOULDN'T the Iraquis want to lie about the US?

I totally do not believe the BBC version. I sincerely doubt the Iraqui lawyer would lie about what he did even before he was out of Iraq knowing he could be killed because of his story. So, I don't believe he would make up something that could get him killed.
 
Just suppose this is true ( which for one I dont believe) the one thing that stands out at me is the

But where the manipulation of this saga really gets ugly is in the premeditated manufacture of the rescue itself, which stains those who have performed real acts of bravery, whether in war or peacetime.



This fried me beyond belief!!!


I dont care if a guy was changing oil in jeeps in Iraq and was no where near the fighting... they are ALL HEROES who ALL acted in bravery!

Do NOT taint the fact that they are heroes.


I agree Ill wait for some actual proof.

Thanks though for bringing it to our attention Dr P :)
 
I first heard this story about six weeks ago from a co-worker but she couldn't remember where she had heard it. I think the truth lies somewhere in-between.

1) There may have been no Iraqi military presence at the hospital but to go in acting that way would be to court disaster. Remember that the 507th Maintanance Company (Lynch's unit) thought they were in a secured area when they were ambushed, leading to her caputure. Although the Hospital staff had said there were no Iraqi military in the hospital it could have been a ruse. By this time we had already seen soldiers and Marines killed by Iraqis holding white flags. Complaceny can be a killer in wartime.

2) If our military had gone in firing blanks I think that would have come out as well. First, gas operated weapons have to be adapted to fire blanks. This would leave them looking different in the case of an external adapter, which is easily noticed, or non-fireable with live ammo in the case of an internal blank adapter, and would take a couple of minutes to convert back to live fire mode. Not something you want to have happen if it turns out there are bad guys in the area. Also, spent blank cartidges look different than live spent cartridges. If blanks were used I think some Iraqi would have been holding up a handful of spent blanks on Al-Jazeera within hours of the event taking place.

3) As for the cries of "Go, Go, Go!" and the way the hospital was assaulted, that is SOP for storming any building, whether it be a hospital, a school, or an office building. The command to commence the assault is..."Go"...it is repeated three times to insure that everyone has heard it. Once again, SOP...not theatrics as the article seems to imply.

4) The BBC was pretty much against the war from the beggining so I have to wonder if they had another motive with this story.

5) We probably won't know the whole story of this or the whole Lynch saga until she regains her memory, which may be never. I have to agree with TRAPPED-PARENT. She is safe, and that is the main thing.
 
It's looking more and more like the charges of a "fabricated lie" are in actuality "fabricated lies". The internet blogosphere is all over this story, as is talk radio.

From Power Line (one of my favorite blogs!):

This is a story about how new media--bloggers and talk radio--acting in real time, drawing on the knowledge and expertise of thousands of amateurs and a few dedicated professionals, can leave major media in the dust.

The story began last Thursday, when the BBC published a a sensational story purporting to debunk the "myth" of Jessica Lynch's rescue. The BBC's story--based entirely on interviews with a couple of Iraqi doctors who worked at the hospital where Lynch was held--claimed that the entire rescue was a fraud. The BBC alleged that Iraqi forces had left the hospital days before the raid, that Lynch was not mistreated by the Iraqis, and that the raid was a hoax, staged like an American movie, with special forces "firing blanks" to the amazement of the Iraqis who observed the show.

The BBC's report attracted the attention of the blogosphere, which promptly swung into action, chiefly at InstaPundit. There are many blog readers and writers who are knowledgeable about firearms (unlike virtually all reporters). They pointed out, among other things, that the claim that U.S. soldiers were "firing blanks" was absurd. American military weapons cannot fire blanks without the addition of a bulky attachment to the firearm. No such attachments are visible in the video footage of the rescue. (For that matter, there is no firing in the video, so the claim that the Pentagon used "blanks" to fake firing on Iraqis makes no sense in any event.) Also, a firearm that has been modified to fire blanks cannot readily be prepared to fire live ammunition, and the idea that American special forces would carry out an operation in a war zone with disabled weapons is ridiculous.

For this and other reasons, the BBC is already beginning to back off its story.

Unfortunately, Robert Scheer, a Communist writer for the Los Angeles Times, didn't get the word in time, and wrote an inflammatory, hateful column based entirely on the BBC allegations, to which he added his own hysterical surmises. (I am not linking to the column because the LA Times' web site requires an intrusive, cumbersome registration process in which I refuse to participate.) He should have checked the blogosphere to get his facts straight; instead, he is hung out to dry.

This morning, Hugh Hewitt posted on the Scheer column. And tonight, I heard Hugh interview Glenn Reynolds on Hugh's radio show. Between the two of them, they left the BBC and Robert Scheer for dead. Reynolds actually knows something about firearms--a useful skill that no "mainstream" reporter I know of has bothered to obtain.

This isn't to say, of course, that "new media" will be entirely successful in correcting the errors of "mainstream" media. The fantasy that the U.S. Army faked Pfc. Lynch's rescue, filming a "fictitious" movie of blank-firing special forces for propaganda purposes, will find its way into the lore of the hate-America left. It does show, however, that anyone who wants to be well informed had better include blogs and talk radio among his sources of information.

AND ONE MORE: Bill O'Reilly was all over this story on Fox News tonight.
 
And some people have "proof" that the World Trade Center attack was also a fabrication and that Hitler didn't kill any Jews. The BBC has it's own agenda that colors what they report, too.
 
I don't believe everything our government puts out nor everything the media puts out. I think the truth is probably somewhere in between. I have seen reports about the fabrication of the rescue from mainstream American media as well. I agree that the most important thing is that she is safe and I don't know the true circumstances of how it all played out. Don't think we will ever truly know exactly how much is reality and how much is just propoganda.
 
Originally posted by 6_Time_Momma
Is this meant to be sarcastic? Because why WOULDN'T the Iraquis want to lie about the US?

I totally do not believe the BBC version. I sincerely doubt the Iraqui lawyer would lie about what he did even before he was out of Iraq knowing he could be killed because of his story. So, I don't believe he would make up something that could get him killed.

Yes, it was meant to be sarcastic. I should have put the ;) next to it.

:D
 
One question: Who did the fabricating, who's doing the reporting of the fabricated lies?

With 24 hour news reporting, things need to be made bigger then they are. Add a little here, add a little there and you have a sensational story to report.

Yes, she was rescued by brave soldiers, there were many in the Iraq War. Some we will read about, some we will hear about on the news. Most we will never know.
 


Disney Vacation Planning. Free. Done for You.
Our Authorized Disney Vacation Planners are here to provide personalized, expert advice, answer every question, and uncover the best discounts. Let Dreams Unlimited Travel take care of all the details, so you can sit back, relax, and enjoy a stress-free vacation.
Start Your Disney Vacation
Disney EarMarked Producer






DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest DIS Tiktok DIS Twitter

Add as a preferred source on Google

Back
Top Bottom