[wtc911]

Un-named sources speculating with phrases like "may have been" in a news report that pre-dates the Army's official report are neither oersuasive nor credible. If you want to use unsubstantiated news reports you could just as easily use the BBC's reports that state that everything we heard about her capture and rescue was false and/or staged.

Again, it should not matter one bit to you how she received her injuries. Accuracy about something which you feel passionately should matter.

[sandlady]

Do you have a link to the Pentagon report or the Army report? You've sited both. I'm not being facitious-I would like to read them.

[sandlady]

By the way-the doctor quoted in the article gave a professional opinion-what's wrong with that. It doesn't fit within your scope, huh?

[#3Fan]

Un-named sources speculating with phrases like "may have been" in a news report that pre-dates the Army's official report are neither oersuasive nor credible. If you want to use unsubstantiated news reports you could just as easily use the BBC's reports that state that everything we heard about her capture and rescue was false and/or staged.

You cite a foreign news source that has less credibility than the New York Times to say that our military lied. Uh oh, you just showed your hand and it isn't pretty.