by Yerusalyim 117 Replies latest social current
*HEAVY Sigh*
Yeru, don't let the left-wing wacko's get you down. Gosh, I hope that wasn't rude.
(Walks out, biting nails, wondering if she is sensitive enough for all the kind, sensitive types on the board lately)
I wonder if I put a smilie face....would people see the sarcasim....
(walks out again, wondering where her skunk is so she can breed with it)
"our embassy being attacked IS NOT the reason we are sending peacekeeping troops to liberia. it may be the reason the first batch is being sent over (to protect the embassy), but its far from the main reason we are being asked to send troops."
Actually the troops that were sent over are a security force, not peace-keepers, and no decision has been made about us sending troops there, for peacekeeping purpouses. The difference being that we are being asked, and the international community has signed on to this. Even the people of Liberia have asked for it.
oooh, lost it a bit on this one Yeru, lol
Are you sure you are not Rumsfeld in disguise ?!?
I hope you find your weapons of mass destruction evidence of weapons of mass destruction programmes soon !
Yeru,
As I said parenthetically in my first post in this thread, this smacks of an email hoax. When I was Webmaster for all the Web sites in the (international) corporation I work for, one of my tasks was to try to suppress the number of hoax emails that would get distributed and relayed. It actually becomes pretty easy to pick them out after a few examples. Propaganda email hoaxes like this one are very popular and often escape detection for quite a while because people who believe in the contents are often tempted to "make it their own," sometimes even personalizing them with a few extra details. You are hardly the first person to engage in this deception, I've seen many examples from my own co-workers who felt the need to make something more believable because it was important to them. (Same thing happens with examples of emails about so-called proofs of Bush's stupidity which are often just minor updates to old epistles about Quayle's stupidity.)
Either you or the "friend" who sent it to you has made a "Major" blunder in assessing its source or in an attempt at personalizing it. I'd merely drop the subject before you get any deeper into it. This will not likely be the only forum on which this exact scenario plays out.
Gamaliel
As i said on the first reply to this thread, sounds like your 'friend' is a reporter.
Well, MAJ Rydbom exists, and claims credit for the letter, here's the email I sent him after I looked up his name on the Army Email White page, and here's his response to the email I sent him.
MAJ Rydbom,
You've become somewhat of a celebrity. Your name has appeared on SNOOP.COM in connection with a letter you were supposed to have written to your Luthern Church back home. Here is the link: http://www.snopes.com/politics/war/rydbom.asp Is that your letter?
I came across this when a friend in Iraq sent it to me, at first I thougt it was his. I'm just curious as to the veracity of the letter and it's contents sir. Thanks for your time and your service.
SFC Cavalier
SFC Cavalier,
Can't check the site, but it most likely mine. someone added a line at the end of one version with something about WMD and Syria, but the ret of the letter is mine.
MAJ Eric Rydbom
Deputy Division Engineer
4th ID
Why this was passed off to me by my friend, I can't say. A more careful reading should have clued me as there are references to 4thID, but not the 101st which is the unit of the Major from whom I recieved this.
At any rate, it appears the letter is genuine, with the exception of the last paragraph. Apprently not all letters spread on the internet are hoaxes after all.
Yeru,
Has anyone disputed the actual content of the letter? Did the major make an accurate assessment of the coditions in Iraq?
Does it really matter if this letter is factual, that it was used for propaganda purposes?
I think not.
You should not have to bury your head in shame, or feel like your words carry less weight now. Every piece of written work is propaganda in some way or another.
It surprises me how quick some have jumped all over you, for doing exactly the same thing the detractor's do to support their view.
Danny
Danny,
Some here on the board have disputed the content of the letter, dismissing it as a hoax and me as a liar. While the first is possible, the second is an insult to my integrity.
The word "propoganda" has received bad connatations here in the US, but just because something IS propoganda doesn't make it untrue.
Every piece of written work is propaganda in some way or another.
TRUE DAT!
We Conservatives are targets for the left wing hate America first crowd. I'm kinda getting used to it. The more uproar, the more I must have touched a nerve in the lefties that they know the truth has smacked em in the face. Nuff said.
Yeru
You claim that you really got this letter from your friend, thus passing off any fault to him. The facts at this time, if you speak truth????, point to your friend as being, what we on the outside would call unreliable, a plagiarist, perhaps a liar, maybe part of a popaganda program. Yet, you have the nerve to make the following statement:
the lefties that they know the truth has smacked em in the face.
Truth??? Maybe those outside of the military have a different perception of what truth is.
Btw, at this point, putting iraq back together is something the US does owe the iraqi people. At this point, i'm not against that. I hope they do a good job of it.
SS
Oh give him a break!
How many of you scrutinze e-mail from friends and do a google search to see if they plagiarize the words from someone else?
I don't. He got an e-mail, took it at face value, posted it, as some people other have e-mail from friends and family, and immediately he is branded a liar and having no credibility. Should we do google searches on everyones e-mails and postings to see if they stand up to scrutiny?
That is just ridiculous. Talk about judging someone. Sheesh!!!
It surprises me how quick some have jumped all over you, for doing exactly the same thing the detractor's do to support their view.
