quote:He allegedly shot and killed a man, a woman and a five-year-old girl and after raping another woman, he is alleged to have shot and killed her, the statement said.
According to an affidavit based on interviews with soldiers from his unit, Mr Green took the family into a bedroom, from where shots were heard.
"Green came to the bedroom door and told everyone, 'I just killed them. All are dead," the statement says.
We have talked about things like this before, but I was thinking about this guy today. We don't really have a lot of information on him yet, so I apologize for the speculative nature of this. Please bear with me.
Here's some thoughts:
1) He was given an honorable discharge based on personality disorders. I see a couple of issues here:
1-a) that he was mentally unstable when he enlisted and somehow made it through training and at least part of a deployment before anyone figured it out.
or
1-b) something happened to him "over there" that triggered his mental problems.
2) His comrades apparently willingly went along with him with the idea of raping this girl. The murder aspect seems to have come as no surprise either -- if not exactly premeditated, they at least didn't bug out after the apparent murder of the girl's family, but proceded with the rape. This behavior is also not "normal" for a group of men we recruit into our armed forces -- one takes this as given, but I think it can also be demonstrated as fact if anyone requires. So, another couple of options present themselves related to these other men:
2-a) The other guys are also suffering from some sort of mental instability. At the very least they were under the sway of this guy and followed him as if he had some sort of leadership position in the group (i.e., he took initiative and apparently took on the assignments of killing himself and nobody seems to have objected too strenuously). But other levels of mental illness could be reasonably ascribed to them if we assume a few things about their actions related to how willing they were to participate, how much prior thought they put into the whole thing, how they viewed the morality of their actions, and so forth. I won't speculate that far (or at all), but it is at least a possibility that there is some sort of mass breakdown among these guys.
or,
2-b) They operated under threat and coercion. This seems unlikely to me because...well, armed & trained men have ways to deal with their oppressors. I'd have a hard time believing that at least one of these guys wouldn't "do something" to stop soldier Green if he was threatening them. But...it's at least a possibility.
All of these draw some seriously disturbing pictures of what passes for daily life of soldiers in the US Army. Questions come up such as:
- How much freedom of movement in/around town do the soldiers have in this area? It appears that several of them went off armed, with a change of clothing, into a potentially dangerous area to commit this crime. I realize the base of operations is probably set up to keep unwanted people out, not the soldiers in ... but I at least wonder who is in charge of knowing who goes where if this is a war zone.
- People don't go from zero to rape/murder usually, do they? This took a little more planning than just a crime of opportunity. That means that something might've been noticeable as the malaise evolved within Mr. Green and his buddies (if indeed it was a progressive thing -- we really dont' know, but the alternative was that he was more than a little buggy when he first arrived in Iraq). So...what training (if any) do the various levels of people above these guys in their immediate command structure have in order to let them know when a soldier or a group of soldiers is more than usually disturbed?
- What are the events or attitudes that may have contributed to this behavior? For example, it takes a certain level of dehumanization and/or demonizing of the civilian population before a group of soldiers would think it's okay to murder a girl's family in order to have the opportunity to rape her. It takes a certain amount to commit rape in the first place. Is there anything in our military's general "tone" that encourages such things? Not officially, of course, but more subtly? And that's only one possibility for contribuitng factors. Were there triggering events (such as a particularly traumatic experience for this group of soldiers)?
...
In other threads here recently, we've talked about the racial hatred and demonization of enemies and/or ourselves. WE know that this is not the American way, that our soldiers are not generally like this. But do the Iraqi people have any reason to know that or give us (as a group) the benefit of the doubt in this respect?
Do we give that benefit of the doubt to the people who are relatives (or countrymen) of those who attack us?
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:People don't go from zero to rape/murder usually, do they? This took a little more planning than just a crime of opportunity. That means that something might've been noticeable as the malaise evolved within Mr. Green and his buddies (if indeed it was a progressive thing -- we really dont' know, but the alternative was that he was more than a little buggy when he first arrived in Iraq).
Possibly. But it's not clear that there's noticeable escalation in civilian rapists either.
As to the escalation from rape to murder, I can attest to anecdotal first-hand knowledge of people who go along with unexpected violence after agreeing to a lower level of violence. The survival instinct alone can account for that, as they'll all be liable for the murder (although not necessarily on the capital charge).
I would expect the opportunity for notice to be greater in the army because
1.) They are thrown together for greater periods of time 2.) in stressful situations 3.) with people who have a survival reason to notice progressing instability.
But at least two of those factors might tend to make people less likely to notice.
I hope we take the opportunity to look at these questions. When you arm people and train them to fight, you have a lot of responsibility even when you can't predict an outcome like this.
I noticed a couple of things in some articles. First, the soldiers hadn't aroused anyones suspicions at all except a few people who knew the soldiers at the checkpoint. Most Iraqis seemed to think it was insurgents.
Second, the paper used the term "cover-up." I couldn't tell from the article whether anyone knew about it outside the perpetrators. That's bad enough, but I think it would reflect much more poorly on the armed forces if others tried to cover up for them. Is there anything firm on whether such an external cover-up happened or not?
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I agree, BC, but it doesn't mean we shouldn't try to screen better if possible.
Edit: although I'd be surprised if this were the only rape committed by U.S. troops in Iraq since the invasion.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
When there are men and boys pimping wives and sisters and themselves for MRE's you hardly need to rape if you have a hankering for that sort of thing. I noticed several half black and several lilly white kids running around and nobody was screaming rape.
quote:When there are men and boys pimping wives and sisters and themselves for MRE's you hardly need to rape if you have a hankering for that sort of thing.
If rape were just about getting some this remark might apply.
quote:I noticed several half black and several lilly white kids running around and nobody was screaming rape.
Rape is often simply not acknowledged in Iraq, and certainly not "screamed" about.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
- Did you see my question in the first post about attitudes regarding the viewpoints of people in the military toward Iraqis and of Iraqis toward the US military? Basically, while I agree that this incident does not argue that all US citizens are rapists and murderers, the perception were I an Iraqi might be somewhat different. It doesn't mean they are right, but we also have to be sure of how we view the people whose country we occupy on their behalf. If we look down on them as inferior, for example, what does that do to interactions we may have with them?
Dagonee:
quote:I hope we take the opportunity to look at these questions. When you arm people and train them to fight, you have a lot of responsibility even when you can't predict an outcome like this.
This is exactly how I feel. I wish I'd said that instead of the 2-page post I made. Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
Actually I know a Canadian city where the last murder a police officer could remember was several years ago Canada 4TW!
IP: Logged |
posted
They are inferior in the most important way, they will not stand up and fight for themselves, they bow to anyone who sticks a gun in their face or shouts at them. The US soldiers are risking their lives for people who are willing to risk nothing. They have to be protected and herded and fostered into each baby step toward self determination. If the Iraqis had courage and integrity they would have no insurgency. Instead the only Iraqis capable of action are the ones that are so atavistic and hostile they border on insane, not the best pool for social responsibility to be drawn from.
posted
If you knew the number of false accusations that are thrown about in Iraq you would know how foolish it is to think Iraqi's would keep a rape by a US soldier quiet.
You simply do not know the way things are done, no operations takes place with fewer then 15 men. That always includes a Sergeant E-6 at the least usually an officer and always a medic. Fifteen men do not all agree to commit murder and rape or be complacent in it.
quote:They are inferior in the most important way, they will not stand up and fight for themselves, they bow to anyone who sticks a gun in their face or shouts at them. The US soldiers are risking their lives for people who are willing to risk nothing. They have to be protected and herded and fostered into each baby step toward self determination. If the Iraqis had courage and integrity they would have no insurgency. Instead the only Iraqis capable of action are the ones that are so atavistic and hostile they border on insane, not the best pool for social responsibility to be drawn from.
BC-- you need to edit that, pal.
I hope and pray that this attitude is not prevalent in our soldiers.
If it is, we really do need to pull out.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:You simply do not know the way things are done, no operations takes place with fewer then 15 men. That always includes a Sergeant E-6 at the least usually an officer and always a medic. Fifteen men do not all agree to commit murder and rape or be complacent in it.
No, but, as this incident demonstrates, it doesn't have to happen as part of an official operation.
posted
Is there anything you can't do, Bean Counter? You're a purveryor of simple, natural truths. You can judge the character of millions of people of differing religions and backgrounds and politics, by your personal experience with...maybe hundreds of them.
Behold the power of ignorance! Through it, all things are possible.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, hey, here's a nice proof of how ignorant and stupid your statement is, Bean Counter: what about all those Iraqis who have been murdered while in police uniform, or waiting in line to become policemen?
Whether or not it was just for a decent job is irrelevant. They were signing up to do something good for their community, to not just let someone wave a gun in their face and comply, and they died for it. And yet Iraqis continue to serve as policemen.
I eagerly await your chickens*@# backpedaling argument that this little fact does not in any way bear on your bigotry.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:They are inferior in the most important way, they will not stand up and fight for themselves
From a White House release last November:
quote:To Defeat The Enemy, Iraqis Need Strong Military And Police Forces. Bringing skills and knowledge to the fight that Coalition forces cannot, Iraqi troops know their people, language, and culture. They know who the terrorists are and are earning the trust of their countrymen. As Iraqi forces grow in size and capability, they are helping to keep a better hold on cities and are increasingly taking the lead. The goal is to train enough Iraqi forces to carry the fight against the terrorists.
* In The Past Year, Iraqi Security Forces Have Made Real Progress. This time last year, there were only a handful of combat-ready Iraqi battalions. Now, there are over 120 Iraqi Army and Police combat battalions in the fight - typically comprised of between 350 to 800 Iraqi forces. Of these, about 80 battalions are fighting alongside Coalition forces. About 40 other battalions are taking the lead, and most are controlling their own battle space and conducting their own operations with some Coalition support.
* Iraqi Forces Are Taking The Lead. This progress is especially clear when comparing last year's assault in Fallujah and recent anti-terrorist operations in Tal Afar. In Fallujah, the assault was led by nine Coalition battalions - with six Iraqi battalions supporting. The Iraqis fought and sustained casualties but were primarily limited to protecting the flanks of Coalition forces and securing ground already cleared. This year in Tal Afar, the assault was primarily led by 11 Iraqi battalions, backed by five Coalition battalions. Many Iraqi units conducted their own anti-terrorist operations and controlled their own battle space. Many Iraqi forces have stayed behind to ensure the city's safety and move ahead with reconstruction projects. In October, the citizens of Tal Afar were able to vote on the constitutional referendum.
* Iraqi Forces Are Taking Control Of More Territory. Today, over 30 Iraqi Army battalions have assumed primary control of their own areas of responsibility. In Baghdad, Iraqi battalions have taken over major sectors - including some of the city's toughest neighborhoods. Iraqi troops are securing the area around Baghdad's Haifa street, and roughly ninety square miles of Baghdad province. Across the country, Iraqi battalions are making similar strides, taking responsibility of areas in South-Central, Southeast, Western, and North-Central Iraq. As Iraqi forces take control of more territory, Coalition forces can concentrate on training Iraqis and hunting down high-value terrorist targets.
* Coalition Bases Are Being Transferred To Iraqi Control. As Iraqi forces take over more territory, the Coalition is transferring forward operating bases to Iraqi control. Over a dozen bases have been handed over to the Iraqi government - including Saddam Hussein's former palace in Tikrit. From many of these bases, the Iraqi Security Forces are planning and executing their own operations against the terrorists.
* By Any Reasonable Standard, The Iraqi Security Forces Are Making Progress. Some critics point to the fact that only one Iraqi battalion has achieved complete independence from the Coalition. To achieve complete independence, an Iraqi battalion must not only fight the enemy on its own but also provide its own support elements, including logistics, airlift, intelligence, and command and control through their ministries. There are some battalions from NATO militaries would not be able to meet this standard. But not every Iraqi unit has to meet this level of capability for the Iraqi Security Forces to take the lead in the fight against the terrorists.
quote:The US soldiers are risking their lives for people who are willing to risk nothing.
Last time I looked, it was mostly Iraqi's dying from all the suicide bombers-- not American soldiers. Your caricature of Iraqis cowering in fear is offensive.
They risk something just by existing. American soldiers expect that they will one day leave combat service; Iraqis are in it for the long haul.
quote:They have to be protected and herded and fostered into each baby step toward self determination. If the Iraqis had courage and integrity they would have no insurgency.
Of course they need to be helped toward democracy. You realize it's a completely new form of government in that part of the world? They don't even have a basis of understanding the terminology, much less the philosophical underpinning necessary for quick promulgation of the ideal. We've been at rebuilding Iraq for ONLY three years... don't loose patience just because things aren't turning out the way our poor planning envisioned.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
A White House press release isn't exactly the most balanced place to go for information on how the war's going.
Posts: 1784 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: Oh, hey, here's a nice proof of how ignorant and stupid your statement is, Bean Counter: what about all those Iraqis who have been murdered while in police uniform, or waiting in line to become policemen?
Lets look at that, twenty and thirty armed men marched out and slaughtered by a handful of armed gunmen instead of fighting back, IP's in uniform taking bribes, commitiing robbery, extortion and putting in roadside bombs. IA attacking soldiers training them while intimidating fellow recruits into keeping their affiliation silent with threats and harsh words. Recruiting for the enemy while we feed clothe and train them to protect their own country. Your life has never depending on you understanding how far Iraqi's can be trusted, mine did.
I never said they were not getting better, that still does not make them on par with what we consider normal or acceptable, therefore whether you like it or not the word inferior still applies. That is what it means, NOT AS GOOD.
posted
You said they were inferior based on what they were willing to do, not what they were capable of. You didn't say, "Their military and security forces aren't as capable in the field." You said, "They are inferior in the most important way, they will not stand up and fight for themselves, they bow to anyone who sticks a gun in their face or shouts at them."
Very different from what you're now claiming you said.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
You cannot say that, I said they are getting better, their capability in the field is a result of their lack of conviction and integrity not just their poor marksmanship. That is the only goodness that can save them.
posted
Since I wasn't there and don't know the specific long term circumstances surrounding this group of people, I can only make broad general sweeping statements.
First, you can't expect men thrust time and time again into insanity to not eventually become insane.
To some extent, I place a degree of the blame on the commissioned and non-commissioned officers commanding these troop. It is their duty to send these kids to war, but it is also their duty to maintain balance and perspective. When there has been a failure to establish and maintain a balanced perspective, to give soldiers a clear and concise knowledge of their purpose and the boundaries within which they are allowed to act, how can you expect anything other than unbalanced behavior? Further, any person can only endure insane circumstances for just so long before they start to lose their grip on reality. Because of this, soldiers need some time away from the insanity to keep their perspective.
Again, I wasn't there, I don't know specifically what these soldiers did, and I don't know the circumstances leading up to the event. I also don't know the specific actions of their leaders, nor to I have a clear idea of the leaders ability to lead competently. Further, nothing excuses what this soldier did, but excuse it or not, we can try to understand it in the hopes that we can avoid it in the future.
If you have read the book 'Lord of the Flies' then you know boys, and these soldiers weren't much more than boys, when left to their own devices without the civilizing influences of society can rapidly become lawless and wild.
That seems to be what happened here, these boys were left to their own devices in a lawless and dangerous world, and they rapidly began to reflect the world in which they lived.
Again, to some extent I blame the leaders of this group of soldiers for not continually re-enforcing the nature and limits of acceptable behavior.
posted
Information doesn't have to contradict the press release for the press release to be unbalanced. For instance, I've seen the odd report that some Iraqi military forces may have been involved in some insurgent attacks. Also as has been noted, Iraqi military and police forces are being targeted. Not mentioning at least some difficulties (and both of these are rather major) demonstrates a lack of balance by the press release.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Information doesn't have to contradict the press release for the press release to be unbalanced.
No, it doesn't. I'm not interested in how balanced the press release is. I'm interested in if the facts are accurate enough, because those facts are directly relevant to the point being made, which is that BC's opinion of the Iraqis lacks foundation.
Neither of the facts you proffer hurt the press release's usefulness in this regard.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
All Kasie was asserting was that it wasn't balanced, it was unclear to me why you expected her to know of any contradictory information.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I didn't expect her to. I asked if she did.
She said it wasn't balanced twice, once in response to the posting of the press release, once in response to a request for contradictory information.
Her second posting of the comment seemed to indicate that she thought Scott was contending that it was balanced. As best I can tell he wasn't. He reaffirmed my statement (based on numerous BC posts past) that a white house press release would be considered balanced by BC and asked if she knew of anything contrary.
I couldn't tell what the point of the second time was, so I asked again to clarify if she's refuting the points in the press release, indicating that it doesn't serve the purpose for which Scott posted it, or simply making a generic comment.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't need any proof to doubt anything BC says other than the fact that he is the one who said it.
Ignorance and bigotry taint everything he has to say.
Consider the source.
As far as how this happened, there are several psychological/sociological studies that examine mob behavior, and behavior similar to this in police officers. It is similar to the "thin blue line" effect that occasionally penetrate police forces here in the US.
I will try to find links to them, but I read them about 10-15 years ago so I don't know if I can find them.
From what I remember, often times in situations like these it is very difficult to stop something like this for a number of reasons, but one of the main reasons is the "group-think" mentality the armed forces foster. I remember feeling the effect of it, even though I was aware of the psychological techniques they were using to foster those feelings, when I was in the Army. There were several "men" in my unit who were horrible people, plain and simple, but I was unable to stop some of what they were doing because of threats made to me...both overt threats and implied ones.
They were not doing anything that directly affected me, and nothing like these events of course, but still...in any other environment I would have stopped what they were doing.
Also, even though we didn't care for each other, we saved each others butts on a regular basis. While it would never be friendship, there was a level of respect in other areas of competence that was had to ignore.
These men were critical to some of our everyday operations, and busting them would have made me the black sheep of the unit, as well as possible endangering our missions sucess.
Not to mention the fact that I was going to be on a live-fire target range with them every single day after that..so if I couldn't PROVE it, and motivate the leadership to do more than AR 15 them ( a slap on the wrist), then I would have to deal with them every day after that.
At SOME point they would have been in charge of getting me out of a dangerous situation, and I wouldn't be able to count on them at all. They might not ever raise a hand against me....they wouldn't have to. They might just leave me to die.
Fostering a group mentality is necessary to have a unit gel, and helps the unit in many, many ways, but taken too far it can lead to situations like this, where there is no clean way out.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
First this is clearly not a case of Mob mentality, this is a small group sneaking about doing naughty things.
quote: From what I remember, often times in situations like these it is very difficult to stop something like this for a number of reasons, but one of the main reasons is the "group-think" mentality the armed forces foster. I remember feeling the effect of it, even though I was aware of the psychological techniques they were using to foster those feelings, when I was in the Army. There were several "men" in my unit who were horrible people, plain and simple, but I was unable to stop some of what they were doing because of threats made to me...both overt threats and implied ones.
Second, it is good to see you admit what I have long suspected, you lack moral strength, the courage to do what is right in the face of peer pressure and not excuse yourself, what's the word for that? Oh yes... Coward.
quote:I never said they were not getting better, that still does not make them on par with what we consider normal or acceptable, therefore whether you like it or not the word inferior still applies. That is what it means, NOT AS GOOD.
Thank you for this chickens&@# backpedaling dodge, Bean Counter. And as for your 'moral strength', as far as I can tell from this forum is rests entirely on looking at circumstances which you have never experienced-such as living under a tyranny-and saying, "I would never let that happen to me. These people are cowards."
You lack the moral strength to examine your own beliefs with a critical eye, and to listen to anything which contradicts them with a reasonable ear. You lack the moral strength to admit when you are plainly wrong, as in this thread when you obviously contradicted yourself. You are an example of a kind of cowardice in your own right.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Careful with the insults, BC. You can't "bravely" delete this thread like you did recently to one of your threads. How we all applauded your courage!
Also, is your argument that these alleged rapists and murderer represent "a few bad apples" whereas any failings of Iraqis you witnessed is true of all Iraqis?
Posts: 6316 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
BC, what unit were you with in Iraq and what did you do with them? Doubtful it was so hard-core as to give you the ultimate moral authority on this subject.
I really do respect those that have deployed (you included), and am aware that it gives insight into a situation that can only be viewed straight-on when you've got your boots on the ground. It doesn't mean you have to be an ass, though.
quote:Originally posted by Bean Counter: First this is clearly not a case of Mob mentality, this is a small group sneaking about doing naughty things.
quote: From what I remember, often times in situations like these it is very difficult to stop something like this for a number of reasons, but one of the main reasons is the "group-think" mentality the armed forces foster. I remember feeling the effect of it, even though I was aware of the psychological techniques they were using to foster those feelings, when I was in the Army. There were several "men" in my unit who were horrible people, plain and simple, but I was unable to stop some of what they were doing because of threats made to me...both overt threats and implied ones.
Second, it is good to see you admit what I have long suspected, you lack moral strength, the courage to do what is right in the face of peer pressure and not excuse yourself, what's the word for that? Oh yes... Coward.
BC
I doesn't bother you having to be respectful of people that wouldn't be able to survive in the real world? I've gotten in trouble twice this month for "talking back" to a superior, and I understand how people would want to avoid the paperwork that can entail. It's not cowardice, it's planned career survivorability. The only reason I was able to avoid all that is that rank doesn't matter quite as much to us, and I have a REALLY good reputation.
The bottom line is that your thoughts on the subject wold be taken much more seriously if everything you said wasn't couched in a manner that leaves people to believe you are ignorant and judgemental.
Posts: 1156 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:They are inferior in the most important way, they will not stand up and fight for themselves, they bow to anyone who sticks a gun in their face or shouts at them. The US soldiers are risking their lives for people who are willing to risk nothing. They have to be protected and herded and fostered into each baby step toward self determination. If the Iraqis had courage and integrity they would have no insurgency. Instead the only Iraqis capable of action are the ones that are so atavistic and hostile they border on insane, not the best pool for social responsibility to be drawn from.
Impudent whelps! They were undeserving of our glorious liberation! How can we defend freedom on behalf of these cowards?
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
We might do well to learn a few lessons from our own past as colonists to a world power, and the 20th century lessons of the colonial powers about the failures of paternalism as a strategy for dealing with other cultures.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I was with B Co the 2nd of 130 INF in Abu Grahb and in TQ patrolling between Ramadi and Falluja. We patrolled the same ground the 101st and 10th Mountain.
I am judgmental! Why should I, with my experience, let others judge for me? I judge for myself and I am not afraid to do so. In fact the only people I remotely respect are those who make their own judgments, if you are waiting for all the facts to come in before you start making yours, oh well.
The only way you find out the strength of the opposition is to stake out some terrain and see what they bring to the fight.
quote: Careful with the insults, BC. You can't "bravely" delete this thread like you did recently to one of your threads. How we all applauded your courage!
I did not lock it up, if someone wants to show their power and authority and have it be the final word, they should not leave me with my own.
The White House released that press release in direct response to a story that the AP wrote (I believe...there were two incidents of this when Tony Snow first started, the first being I think a Washington Post or NYT article and the second being AP.)
*I believe* it's a point by point contradiction of a news story that another organization wrote. I have to dig through my email to find the press release and through the archives to find the original story; I'll go looking later this afternoon.
Posts: 1784 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:In fact the only people I remotely respect are those who make their own judgments, if you are waiting for all the facts to come in before you start making yours, oh well.
Your "remote respect" on this board consists of a continuous stream of insults.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
I'm not out to poke holes in the press release, necessarily, just to warn that it doesn't tell the whole story. In fact, press releases almost never lie. That's considered very bad form.
When I have access to the email I need I'll dig up the story that the press release was refuting.
Posts: 1784 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Er...it's kind of bad form to lie at all, press release or no. Which is why, incidentally, I'm torked with this administration.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
