you "Hate the bbc" (oh no I forgot "" marks are sneers)

They were right to say the rescue was a fake, and the story of her fighting to the last bullet was a fake.

Both of which made you so angry at the time, weird I missed your apology for them being true.

The whole story of Lynch has been a propaganda tool for so long the BBC are quite right to wait for evidence.

So unlike you, always jumping to the wrong conclusions (and never ever being man enough to admit you got it wrong)

I congratulated BBC for their "news" story. Quotation marks suggest an unshared opinion.
I will bet that the rescuers would have wished for the insight/hindsight of their critics who claim there were no possible dangers associated with going into an area whose status was not assured.

No, the BBC still eats shit. The details they proclaimed to be true at that time are still wrong. They said our guys used blanks remember? Lynch herself wouldn't comment for months and claimed to have no clear memories. So when a ghost writer "tells" her story I give her sympathey but not any grant of certainty. The rape is proveable from medical records and she seems to have a strange form of Geneva syndrome where the Iraqi's were all sweet and cuddly.

The short version, the rescue account was largely correct, Lynch has issues with the Army and is lashing out, money is at issue now so her crediblity is less pure, and the BBC continues to reign as the queen of distortion.

Have we all mentioned the BBC can go fuck itself, and that it's mindless drone true believers can have the video rights? No?

Well then allow me. The B B C can go FUCK itself.

My apologies for not being more clear on the issue.

Oops, read Stockholm syndrome, where hostages feel sympathy for their capturs. Kind of like the UK left under the BBC, forever bending over and kindly asking for another please.

Harmonia, you are such a moron.

The rescue wasn't a "fake", - especially the ridiculous story about the US troops firing blanks.

I don't recall ever saying, or agreeing with, the version of Jessica fighting until her barrel melted down.

I admit when I'm wrong all of the time. It just so happens that not sharing an opinion with you does not make me wrong.

I've always questioned the story about the "fake" rescue of Jessica Lynch. Why would they fake it? To bolster support for the war? Most Americans support the war in Iraq, and Bush had high approval ratings at the time. To bolster support from other countries? I would think the kidnapping and rape of one of our own would make us look bad to other governments. If we wanted to bolster support from other countries I'd think we'd try something on a much grander scale (here come the conspiracy theories...).

I think people want to believe the BBC report for a number of reasons. First, people want to believe that the news is always accurate. I worked in news radio for six years, and I can tell you from experience that you should never accept every story for face value. I've seen bias in the media first hand, and I've seen newscasters report on stories for which they had little or no evidence. I recall an instance where someone claimed to have found an anti-semetic book at a gun show. The newscaster reported it as fact, when all he had was the word of a talkshow host who hated gun shows in the first place. Not to mention that book could have come from anywhere. Even if it did come from the gun show, the newscaster should have verified it (which he didn't).

Second, people who hate the war and hate Bush want to believe it is true. It gives you a warm fuzzy feeling when you "know" the guy in office is "faking" rescue attempts. That shows what a fascist he is, right? To be fair, there were many hardcore right wingers who said the same thing about Clinton - the war in Bosnia was merely to booster ratings and divert attention away from the sex scandal, not to mention the sex scandals themselves. I guess the BBC story is just the latest conspiracy theory (for which there is no proof) from one side of the political fence who hates the guy on the otherside.

Er puggs, isn't it Helsinki syndrome?

Probably Dr., I'm going from memory from incidents that happened in the seventies. So any corrections from gentle people I respect are greatfully accepted.

Helsinki syndrome.

Thanks Dr.

Actually - the correct term is "Stockholm Syndrome". I guess the incorrect term "Helsinki Syndrome" is due to the film Die Hard (Bruce Willis), where an "expert" incorrectly refers to it as "Helsinki Syndrome".