Tuesday, May 03, 2005

runaway bride

since i didn't get a chance to make a comment yesterday, i am making 2 today. originally, i wasn't going to comment on the runaway bride but i heard three things related to the story yesterday that i believe will make sense out of what she did. first, i understand that her family more or less owns most of the town of duluth, georgia. which means they are wealthy.which means she is probably used to getting away with whatever she wants. i realize that sounds like a generalization but, given her age and the tremendous chutzpah that she had to have to attempt such a thing gives me the idea that she basically is a spoiled little daddy's girl, used to getting her own way and used to not having to take responsibilty for her actions. second, it has been reported that she has done this kind of thing before. third, she bought the bus ticket a week before she disappeared which would seem to indicate she had made plans and it wasn't just a spontaneous joyride to clear her mind. with that in mind, and given that the entire town was concerned and half expecting her abused, lifeless body to be found in a shallow grave somewhere indicates a selfishness on her part unparraelled. if she isn't made to pay some consequences, any consequences, justice will not have been served. that's all i have to say about that.

3 comments:

Murf said...

I must say that I disagree and that you are jumping to conclusions about her. First of all she did plan to run away. That is clear, but what crime is commited in that act? The only law that was broken in her entire trip was when she said she was kidnapped, after the police and media had made there run of things first. Make them pay. As to your previous statement I have no doubt that the PFC in question is somewhat of a scapegoat. However, what she did was wrong. I am a former soldier in the United States Reserves and she broke the Code of Military Justice without doubt. You say mere photos but you have no idea what that culture sees as torture. You should really look up the word Ethnocentrism in a dictionary, it could shed some light on how you look at things.

Mark said...

yes, i agree i may have jumped to conclusions regarding the runaway bride story, but it was an educated guess. as to pfc englands case, i don't care if she was right or wrong or if what the jailers did amounted to torture or not. it still doesn't compare with what would have been done to her had the shoe been on the other foot and they were the captors. repeat after me: they are the ENEMY! we are at war. i don't have sympathy for my enemies but i do have sympathy for our own people, especially when they are being villified by their own people and treated not as heros but as criminals.

Daedalus said...

The real shame is that the media devoted so much attention to the story BECAUSE she was from a wealthy family, when real abductions of poor people get nothing. Remember the biggest news in the media right before 9/11? Chandra Levy's abduction. Maybe we should get our priorities straight. (Regardless of what end of the political spectrum you fall, I think we can all agree that the media has become a little out of control.)

As for England, people should be outraged that the Army is calling her retarded to save face. The Army has a tradition of honor and integrity. They shouldn't shirk responsibility by using a "mentally challenged" escape. Besides, does it make you feel safe when you think that there are "mentally challenged" people charged with defending the country.

The Army is better than this.