Hero or Greedy American?

[Uryoces]

I understand that you were simply posting an opinion;

That's about all you understood. What the hell crawled up your ass? I simply stated that she could be lying. I don't know. I'm glad to see she wasn't another statistic.

[Undertoad]

Forget about the Brit media: the BBC alleged all kinds of things about the rescue, including a bunch of things that couldn't possibly be true and were later proven wrong, such as the notion that US Special Forces were shooting blanks in the operation.

Originally posted by Uryoces
That's about all you understood. What the hell crawled up your ass? I simply stated that she could be lying. I don't know. I'm glad to see she wasn't another statistic.

And I simply stated you could be a child molestor.

[OnyxCougar]

From MSN
Does Pfc. Jessica Lynch Own the Movie Rights to Her Life?
By Eugene Volokh
Posted Monday, April 14, 2003

NBC is planning to make a movie about Pfc. Jessica Lynch, the rescued American POW, even if it doesn't get her permission. Can the network do that? Doesn't NBC need to buy the movie rights to her life?

Yes, it can, and, no, it doesn't—so long as NBC sticks to the facts.

People don't own "movie rights" to their lives. Facts, even facts about particular people, are not exclusively owned by anyone. That's why newspapers may write about people without their permission, and why biographers may create "unauthorized" biographies. The term "movie rights" originally comes from copyright law, under which authors own the exclusive rights to authorize movies based on their works of fiction. But copyright law only protects creative expression, not facts.

The so-called "right of publicity" does give people a limited right to control commercial use of their names, likenesses, and identities. But the right doesn't extend to news reporting, biography, fiction, and most entertainment, or to the advertising of such works. Generally, the right of publicity applies only to commercial advertising of other products and to merchandising. So, NBC could make a movie about Lynch without her permission, but it probably couldn't sell Jessica Lynch action figures.

Likewise, the so-called "disclosure of private facts" tort (which is one of the several different legal theories that sometimes go by the label "right of privacy") lets people block publication of certain highly intimate facts about themselves. But this tort has been defined quite narrowly—largely for First Amendment reasons—and doesn't apply to any facts that courts conclude are "newsworthy." So even fairly private details of Lynch's captivity likely would be legal for NBC to report. That holds true even if Lynch is found to be a "private figure" rather than a "public figure." The law recognizes that newsworthy events can happen even to private figures, and that those events may legally be reported (or used as the basis for TV movies).

Why do we often hear of studios buying "movie rights" to people's lives? One reason is to get the subject's cooperation. Lynch doubtless knows lots of things about her captivity that others don't know (or aren't telling). So the NBC people might make a better movie if Lynch and her family were talking to them. NBC might also want to get Lynch to promise not to talk to any other networks so that it can hawk its movie as an "exclusive."

A second reason is that Lynch might be able to sue if NBC gets some facts wrong. If an error in the TV movie injures her reputation, she could sue for defamation; but even if the false claims reflect well on her, she might still be able to sue NBC for placing her in a "false light," so long as the error would be something that a reasonable person would find highly offensive. (For instance, if NBC exaggerates Lynch's heroism, she might be able to sue on the grounds that a reasonable person would find it highly offensive to get credit for heroic acts she didn't commit.) And it's quite possible that NBC will get some facts wrong. For instance, since the network doesn't know just how Lynch interacted with her captors, any dialogue or action they include in those scenes will necessarily be fictionalized, possibly to a substantial degree. By getting Lynch's cooperation, NBC could also get her to promise not to sue even if there are some inaccuracies. In this sense, "movie rights" really means "the right to make mistakes."

Finally, a third reason: Though the rules Explainer describes above are pretty well-established, their precise boundaries aren't always completely clear, which leaves room for (expensive) legal debate. Studios may therefore sometimes pay off the subject to prevent the risk of a lawsuit that—even if it ultimately loses—could possibly delay a multimillion dollar production.

[OnyxCougar]

Originally posted by dave

I don't know that she's a hero, but I do know one thing: it takes a hell of a lot more guts to even end up in Iraq than it does to sit in your armchair and speculate, to criticize from afar. Is she a hero? I don't know. But I doubt the word could be twisted in such a manner to make it apply to you folks.

And you don't know shit about me either, Dave. I could have saved peoples lives in a fire, or been in the Air Force, or done things that proclaimed me as a hero. I didn't say she wasn't brave, I didn't say she wasn't a hero.

I have more than a few relatives and friends over there RIGHT NOW. To even imply that I don't hold respect for every single one of the men and women that serve in our Armed Forces, whether they're in Iraq, Afghanistan, England, Saudi Arabia, Camp Pendleton, Camp Lejeune, Mississippi, Nevada or Kuwait or any where else is completely out of line. So because I bring up a point of discussion there's no way the word hero could be twisted to apply to me? Fuck You.

[r9703410]

To me I say "GREEDY AMERICAN" just trying to get on TV like the rest of them. No hero at all.

Originally posted by OnyxCougar
I could have saved peoples lives in a fire, or been in the Air Force, or done things that proclaimed me as a hero. I didn't say she wasn't brave, I didn't say she wasn't a hero.

But you didn't.

I have more than a few relatives and friends over there RIGHT NOW. To even imply that I don't hold respect for every single one of the men and women that serve in our Armed Forces, whether they're in Iraq, Afghanistan, England, Saudi Arabia, Camp Pendleton, Camp Lejeune, Mississippi, Nevada or Kuwait or any where else is completely out of line.

No it's not. You made that abundantly clear when you questioned whether or not she was a "Greedy American". Such a question does not show respect.

So because I bring up a point of discussion there's no way the word hero could be twisted to apply to me? Fuck You.

WOAH, YOU REALLY TOOK IT TO ME!

Heroes don't sit back and question whether or not someone who still can't walk due to injuries sustained in the service of their country is a "Greedy American".

I stand by my original analysis that the word couldn't be perverted enough to make it accurately describe those that would sit back and say such things.

Originally posted by r9703410
To me I say "GREEDY AMERICAN" just trying to get on TV like the rest of them. No hero at all.

<i>"We must recognise that we have a great inheritance in our possession, which represents the prolonged achievement of the centuries; that there is not one of our simple uncounted rights today for which better men than we are have not died on the scaffold or the battlefield. We have not only a great treasure; we have a great cause. Are we taking every measure within our power to defend that cause?"</i>

[FileNotFound]

Sigh...

Look if you want to bitch and moan and analyze "The Fake Hero's of Our Century" why don't you look at sports stars?

Come one, I'm seeing magazines with front covers like "Strugle of Kobe Bryant" and commentary from people "He was my hero, my role model. I don't believe he could've ever done these things!"


Hero or not, she deserves the fame and respect far more than most "heros" of today. Who cares if she was raped or not? I don't know about you but I'd be pretty upset if I were to find myself battered and broken boned in an Iraqi hospital in one of the hotspots. Hero? Maybe not, but certainly worthy of some respect.

[OnyxCougar]

Agreed, FnF. Certainly worthy of respect.

But to me, her service to our country does not instantly make her a hero.

If you consider a hero to be one that survived a horrific situation that nearly kills them, then yes, she is a hero. And using that definition, so am I. So are any of us that have had a brush with death and lived.

It comes down to your definition of hero. Is a hero someone that saves someones life? To me, yes. Firemen, Policemen, Joe Guy on the street that puts his life in danger to save another. That is a hero.

And while PFC Lynch deserves respect and gratitude for serving her country in time of war, and, I believe, qualifies for the purple heart (being wounded in wartime), that does not automatically define her as a hero. Courageous, brave, survivor, yes.

The only fact we know for sure is that she survived a terrible thing. Something no one should have to go through. But a hero, to me, means more than that.

So to some, like dave, she could be a hero. And that's fine. It seems his definition of hero is different than mine.

And by the way....respect does not mean above question.



Edit: tried to clarify my thoughts a little more.

I don't think she's a hero, per se. I just think she deserves more than having her name dragged through the mud.

(To clarify: your original question is "Hero or Greedy American?" It is not "Is she one of these two things?" - it is "She is either one or the other - which is it?" Your standpoint is that she is not a hero, and so the insinuation is that she is a greedy American.

I disagree with this viewpoint because she hasn't been hawking her story to the world. The "hero" figure is a creation of the military and the media. Her involvement in the whole ordeal was simply being the person upon whom the image was projected.

I don't look at her as a hero, but I surely don't look at her as a "Greedy American" either. The notion that the latter is an accurate description is baseless when facts are considered.

She's just starting her recovery process, one that will take a long time. The possibility of her being raped will put a question in her head that will poke and prod her for the rest of her life. She deserves a little more than namecalling.)

[OnyxCougar]

Agreed. But the media doesn't care what really happened, the author of the so called "biography" doesn't give a shit if people think she was raped. And the bitch of the whole thing is that ultimately, the only one it hurts in the end is PFC Lynch.

Because people, in general, being the stupid things they are, will believe what's fed to them, and now this 19 year old from small town West Virginia has to live the rest of her life being known as "rape victim" and "hero" and whatever else, even if she wasn't. She hasn't gone public, I think, in part because she doesn't remember much, and partly because she doesn't want all this BS to begin with. I remember an interview with her parents, when she called them from Germany, and they said, "She doesn't consider herself a hero." Well, she is whatever the media says she is.

Regardless of whether or not she has "gone public" with her story, people are going to wonder why she "sold out" because her "story" (that isn't her story) was sold to the networks. So tell me there aren't people out there, especially in other countries, who think she's nothing but another Greedy American cash cow.


I was writing this as you were writing yours, above. And to many, it comes down to one or the other. If you're paying attention, (and I know you are), you realize I don't put my viewpoint in on the first post, I just throw the question out there. And it has bitten me in the ass on occasion. You, more than most here, understand the value of "throw it out there and see what you get". I hope my posts have clarified my position on this one.

We care about their opinion?

[hot_pastrami]

Greedy American? Good Hell. A greedy person would be milking sympathy from this experience for all it was worth, and exaggerating her own bravery. She is doing the exact opposite... to the point that she is taking the US military to task for exaggerating her heroism. This shows incredible strength of character, much more than your average person. And despite this, you suggest that she may just be a "Greedy American." What has she done that is worthy of a "hero" label?

1) She joined the US military, knowingly placing her life and safety in potential danger for the sake of her country (and therefore, indirectly, for you).

2) She is telling the truth where it would be much easier and more self-serving to quietly allow the lies to be left undisturbed.

I suggest that she IS a hero, if only in her strength character. A hero isn't always someone who laughs at the face of danger, sometimes it's just someone brave enough to make the difficult chioices, like telling your country the truth when lies are more convenient.

In contrast, you haven't even admitted that you're an ass for questioning her character despite her incredible display of moral conviction.