A HERSTORY of VIOLENCE

[Murgatroyd]

Originally Posted by KoR-evo

Ahem:.."The Others are coming..you have 3 choices, RUN..HIDE..or DIE..Mwuahahahahaha!"

But that wasn't a lie - she was just wrong about their target and their destination. They did indeed 'come for the boy'. And if Rousseau didn't believe they were coming, she wouldn't have stolen Aaron and made for the place she expected them to be.

What makes her untrustworthy is the wealth of inconsistencies that may be lies, symptoms of delusion or (hopefully not) writing errors - her saying she went to the radio tower alone when the French message suggests there was someone outside the door; her saying that she never saw the Others <i>and</i> that the Others took Alex. They may not be conscious lies as such: we've yet to learn what's behind this sort of thing... but until we know, I'm certainly not going to trust her.

[D-Roc]

Originally Posted by Murgatroyd

But that wasn't a lie - she was just wrong about their target and their destination. They did indeed 'come for the boy'. And if Rousseau didn't believe they were coming, she wouldn't have stolen Aaron and made for the place she expected them to be.

But that was a lie, lol - she told them one thing so that she could manifest a favourable situation so she could snatch Aaron! Ask Charlie and Claire and tell them she didn't lie. She made them think that she was looking out for them, when she was actually working for her own devious ends..

And you yourself acknowledge that she "stole" Aaron..yet this crime gets overlooked so often.

This is also what I mean about peeps 'trusting' her - in that not only do alot of people trust her stories, but they also trust her nature

What makes her untrustworthy is the wealth of inconsistencies that may be lies, symptoms of delusion or (hopefully not) writing errors - her saying she went to the radio tower alone when the French message suggests there was someone outside the door; her saying that she never saw the Others <i>and</i> that the Others took Alex. They may not be conscious lies as such: we've yet to learn what's behind this sort of thing...

You have alot more 'trust' in her nature than I do Murg:P

I don't think she warrants any excuses..she's just a liar in my book.

[The Wizard]

Originally Posted by KoR-evo

But that was a lie, lol - she told them one thing so that she could manifest a favourable situation so she could snatch Aaron!

How do you know that?

[b-r-a-d]

i have no reason to not trust her at the moment! She hasnt done anything wrong yet!

[E Pluribus Unum]

She did say the others came and took her child, and now Ben has her child. The fact she could be wrong about a few technicalities (who actually stole her child) doesn't change her sincerity. She believed she was right, and the evidence does support this... (just because she was - or could be - wrong, doesn't make her a liar. Just misinformed)

Likewise, re: Run, Hide or Die. She told Jack etc about the pillar of smoke and them taking the boy before either happened. So she was telling, what she believed to be the truth (and it was mostly right). Now, of course, stealing a child was terribly wrong (I'm glad you can see that KoR I do worry sometimes :P) and that's that - is anyone going to argue that point? Not I.

I, for one, don't trust her - but that doesn't stop me liking her, or feeling terribly sorry for her. It killed them all? I shot them because they all contracted the sickness? - Which is it? Either it's poor writing or her reality is distorted, but I don't think she's lying here either.

[Murgatroyd]

Originally Posted by KoR-evo

But that was a lie, lol - she told them one thing so that she could manifest a favourable situation so she could snatch Aaron! Ask Charlie and Claire and tell them she didn't lie. She made them think that she was looking out for them, when she was actually working for her own devious ends..

And you yourself acknowledge that she "stole" Aaron..yet this crime gets overlooked so often.

This is also what I mean about peeps 'trusting' her - in that not only do alot of people trust her stories, but they also trust her nature

It was a trick that contained a single direct lie (she stated, I think, that Charlie had to go and see Sayid so she could be alone with Claire), and she certainly misguided the Losties as to her intentions, which is one of several reasons why she isn't to be trusted - but her initial claim was not a lie. She told them that she'd heard the whispers say that the Others were coming for the boy... and guess what? The Others came for the boy. Yes, she gave the impression that she wasn't going to steal a child from them, but her key statement - the Others are coming for the boy - was true. My point being that there's a precedent for her statements, in general, to be truthful (if not always correct): not that she can be trusted.

And I find it very hard to believe that anyone 'trusts her nature' when we know that she took Aaron (if people don't debate that very much it's because it isn't contested - we saw it happen) and killed her entire team. I certainly don't think anyone would entrust their safety to Rousseau.

You have alot more 'trust' in her nature than I do Murg:P

I don't think she warrants any excuses..she's just a liar in my book.

As I've said, I don't trust her word, because her story contains contradictions and because she seems a very unstable character (very similar to Mikhail - they ought to get together if the latter survived his kamikaze attack). I'm simply quite prepared for the potential revelation that she's confused and deluded rather than outright lying. That is, after all, the established pattern: Sayid didn't believe that there were other people on the island or that Rousseau had really heard whispers... but there are, and she had. Charlie didn't believe that the Others were coming for the boy... but they were. It's not impossible that Rousseau is generally telling the truth and that the contradictions in her stories are due to genuine confusion rather than wilful deception.

EDIT. EPU has the right word for it - sincerity. I think there's a distinct chance that Rousseau's utterances, however deranged they might be, could turn out to be wholly sincere. Equally there's a chance they may not and she may be a very cunning liar who just looks mad. I'm open to either possibility.

[D-Roc]

Originally Posted by The Wizard

How do you know that?

Because she was going to give Aaron to the Others in the hope of exchanging him for Alex..

[D-Roc]

[quote=Murgatroyd]

Originally Posted by KoR-evo

But that was a lie, lol - she told them one thing so that she could manifest a favourable situation so she could snatch Aaron! Ask Charlie and Claire and tell them she didn't lie. She made them think that she was looking out for them, when she was actually working for her own devious ends..

And you yourself acknowledge that she "stole" Aaron..yet this crime gets overlooked so often.

This is also what I mean about peeps 'trusting' her - in that not only do alot of people trust her stories, but they also trust her nature

Originally Posted by Murgatoryd

It was a trick that contained a single direct lie (she stated, I think, that Charlie had to go and see Sayid so she could be alone with Claire), and she certainly misguided the Losties as to her intentions, which is one of several reasons why she isn't to be trusted - but her initial claim was not a lie.

Sorry Murg, but she still lied..a lie is a lie. I mean there's no defence for what she did. She manipulated the situation (i.e lied) so that she could steal Aaron. If this happen in the real world, I doubt anyone would be so sympathetic..

She told them that she'd heard the whispers say that the Others were coming for the boy... and guess what? The Others came for the boy. Yes, she gave the impression that she wasn't going to steal a child from them, but her key statement - the Others are coming for the boy - was true. My point being that there's a precedent for her statements, in general, to be truthful (if not always correct): not that she can be trusted.

LOL, but it's still a lie! I'm not willing to gauge the depth of her lie when it involved a PRE-MEDITATED plan to steal a baby from his mother! That's the thing..it was 'pre-meditated'..there's no excuse for what she did, sorry

And I find it very hard to believe that anyone 'trusts her nature' when we know that she took Aaron (if people don't debate that very much it's because it isn't contested - we saw it happen) and killed her entire team. I certainly don't think anyone would entrust their safety to Rousseau.

Without wanting to go round in circles on this I think you'll find that many people trust her nature - even Brad has just stated that he trusts her, LOL! There are many more who believe what she says and therefore trust her nature You can't say that no-one believes her story about the sickness or how she came to be on the island, surely

[b-r-a-d]

roco how do you feel about Ben kidnapping Alex? Because i think his kidnap of her is alot worse that what Danielle did to kidnap Aaron! Ben set the whole thing off!

[D-Roc]

Originally Posted by b-r-a-d

roco how do you feel about Ben kidnapping Alex? Because i think his kidnap of her is alot worse that what Danielle did to kidnap Aaron! Ben set the whole thing off!

Well this is my point - alot of people (in general, not just on here) dislike Ben because of he 'supposed' kidnapping of Alex. However, for me we have evidence to suggest that the writers plan or planned to reveal that he actually 'rescued' Alex (see the deleted scene thread) or that he wasn't the one who kidnapped her, but she was placed in his care.

I think that alot of us overlook the idea that Ben is a reluctant leader and possibly he was a reluctant father. However, he has clearly raised Alex well (despite her betrayal) and he clearly loves her.

I would say the same to you - Danielle killed her team and her lover - now tell me, is that really a safe environment in which to raise a young child? I think people overlook this and forget that Danielle is an ill woman who didn't have the foundations to raise a child.

Alot of us also 'assume' that Ben is the bad guy because he took Alex - we don't even know that it was him - as I said above, there is evidence to suggest that it was someone else. For all we know, Dharma could've taken her from Danielle or Danielle may have begged someone to take her. We just can't trust anything Danielle says at the moment.

So, no, inmy opinion Ben's 'supposed' kidnapping of Alex is defientely not worse that Danielle's proven kidnapping of Aaron. For one thing we have proof that Danielle kidnapped Aaron, whislt we can only speculate that Ben took Alex, and for another thing Danielle took Aaron for her OWN ends...Ben, has raised Alex reluctantly, but lovingly..

We must be careful of believing everything that we see when we watch shows lie LOST, because this is not a conventional show..they use curveballs and foreshadowing in order to surprise us later.

[b-r-a-d]

I would say the same to you - Danielle killed her team and her lover - now tell me, is that really a safe environment in which to raise a young child? I think people overlook this and forget that Danielle is an ill woman who didn't have the foundations to raise a child.

well we dont know why she killed them yet, if they went all crazy because they got sick then i would say yes, Danielle could of just done it to protect her baby, which im sure alot of people (well i would) do!

I think until we see her flashbacks and what really has happened no one should really judge her that badly, her baby was kidnapped and this is sure to make any mother do what ever it takes to get there child back! Nothing she has done so far has made me not trust her or dislike her. I know that taking Claires baby to swap with the others was bad but i cant really blame her for it and i do believe it was just a last minute thing, because she rescued Claire earlier in the show when Alex had helped her escape the others, so if she knew all along she was going to kidnap Aaron to give the others wouldnt she of just kept Claire herself then?

[JB Sawyer]

Originally Posted by KoR-evo

LOL, but it's still a lie! I'm not willing to gauge the depth of her lie when it involved a PRE-MEDITATED plan to steal a baby from his mother! That's the thing..it was 'pre-meditated'..there's no excuse for what she did, sorry

Sorry Murg, but she still lied..a lie is a lie. I mean there's no defence for what she did. She manipulated the situation (i.e lied) so that she could steal Aaron. If this happen in the real world, I doubt anyone would be so sympathetic..

Ben lied about being Henry Gale. Ben lied about Jules being let off the island in 6 months. Ben lied concerning what he was doing with Jack. Ben lied about Sawyer's pace maker, a situation in which Sawyer believed his heart would explode. Ben lied about the Looking Glass being flooded. All of these were pre-meditated and manipulated so to get what was best for Ben...

[Murgatroyd]

Originally Posted by KoR-evo

LOL, but it's still a lie!

I'm not sure I understand you - what precisely is still a lie? Rousseau's telling Charlie that Sayid needed him was a lie, but if you're saying 'They're coming for the boy' was a lie, I have to very much disagree with you. Rousseau stole Aaron (the immorality of which is not in question) precisely because she believed what she was saying. Again, this doesn't make her trustworthy - it just means that there's a precedent for her telling the truth.

Originally Posted by KoR-evo

You can't say that no-one believes her story about the sickness or how she came to be on the island, surely

Which is not the same as trusting her. I personally think there's a 50/50 chance that Rousseau is sincere, but I don't trust her.

[D-Roc]

Originally Posted by b-r-a-d

well we dont know why she killed them yet, if they went all crazy because they got sick then i would say yes, Danielle could of just done it to protect her baby, which im sure alot of people (well i would) do!

Yes, well this is what I mean by people 'trusting' her stories. Evidently you trust her..so much so that you place faith in her despite not knowing whether your faith is misguided or not. I'm just saying that I find it difficult to see how you can defend her kidnapping of Aaron yet slaughter an 'assumed' Alex kidnapping by Ben.

Also, Danielle never said she killed her people to protect Alex..that's an assumption you've made(nothing wrong with that, but I feel we need to establish the facts)

I think until we see her flashbacks and what really has happened no one should really judge her that badly, her baby was kidnapped and this is sure to make any mother do what ever it takes to get there child back! Nothing she has done so far has made me not trust her or dislike her. I know that taking Claires baby to swap with the others was bad but i cant really blame her for it and i do believe it was just a last minute thing, because she rescued Claire earlier in the show when Alex had helped her escape the others, so if she knew all along she was going to kidnap Aaron to give the others wouldnt she of just kept Claire herself then?

Totally disagree - you and many other people were more than willing to "judge" Ben negatively BEFORE we had his f