[Cobnat]

All this about America torturing people of other nations: I suppose this can be expected, seeing as their record is against them.

Heck, back in the Revolution, they were breaking into tax collectors' homes, hauling them out into the street, tarring and feathering them en masse and then lighting them on fire! Hell, forget the Tea Party; a group of patriots in Rhode Island took the next step (a year earlier, I might add) and lit an entire fucking tax ship on fire!

The point of the story is: America has always been bat-fuck insane, and it probably always will be.

The British aren’t exactly saints either… especially during the war of independence.

[Bond]

Well, what did the Brits do that was so shocking?

[Cobnat]

Well, what did the Brits do that was so shocking?

There were a lot of executions of males suspecting to be a revolutionairy. There was also that famous massacre in that town… I forget which town it was but it became one of the causes for the war.

[Bond]

I think you were confused by The Patriot.

As for all the executing, there were a lot of spies in the British camps, and, of course, those executed were eventually glorified (Nathan Hale being one of them) and turned into martyrs by the patriots. Sound familiar?

This post has been edited by Bond: 04 August 2007 - 04:12 PM

[J m HofMarN]

The boston massacre was, I think, five people killed for throwing rocks at British soldiers. The execution of suspected spies was pretty standard. I'm just glad the British took the new world with the whole deal over the Armada. If Spain had run things it would have been far worse.

[Bond]

How so? Would it have been the Spanish Inquisition in the New World?

Ah, now I remember: the conquistadors. Yeeesh...

[Cobnat]

As for all the executing, there were a lot of spies in the British camps, and, of course, those executed were eventually glorified (Nathan Hale being one of them) and turned into martyrs by the patriots. Sound familiar?

Yes, I am sure the Americans and the British executed plenty of spies while the war raged. Keep in mind that almost anyone can be considered a spy.

[Bond]

Just like almost anyone killed in any war can be declared by their side as a martyr.

[J m HofMarN]

David Hicks has finally been released, and I just want to restate my position that anyone involved in his capture, torture, or forcing a confession from him should be hung from a fucking lamp post and left as an example. Cmon, there are Aussies on the forums too, somehow we can get a multi continental lynch mob going right?

The news story I read stated he was a convicted Al Qaida operative who had confessed after five years in Guantanamo. Of course it failed to say why he confessed except to mention "alleged abuse" And get this, if he says anything about what was done to him, or claims his innocence, he gets sent right back to Guantanamo as per his plea deal. This is some Orwellian bullshit people, and I hope I'm not the only one who feels that torturing someone until they confess to whatever you want AND agree not to say you tortured them, is a tactic even Machiavelli never dreamed of that aught to mean an instant death sentence to anyone involved in the matter.

Hicks has the benefit of having a large US allie to vouch for him, but I shudder to think how many others have been subjected to the same condition with no hope of escape, or, better yet, vengeance. (although some have tried to kill their captors at Guantanamo and I applaud the comraddes' efforts)

This post has been edited by J m HofMarN: 28 December 2007 - 10:23 PM

[Snake Logan]

The guy is a traitor who betrayed his country in order to fight for religious fascists. Forgive the Australian people if we don’t give a fuck what happened to him. He is being realised into the general population, that is more then he deserves.

[J m HofMarN]

Ah so some people over there are happy to allow the US to strip their countrymen of rights and kidnap them, then torture them into confessing to various and sundry crimes. I was under the impression that Australia has a law enforcement agency and a standing army, not to mention people who understand the basic tenets of human rights, but yeah, maybe its better that the US just decides which Australians are good people and which ones deserve to have light bulbs shoved up their arses til they admit to being terrorists.

[Otal Nimrodi]

The Boston Massacre wasn't really a massacre. It was an accident which, I suspect, the people who were shot quite literally brought upon themselves. After all, consider the facts.

1) People are throwing stones at soldiers
2) People are taunting soldiers
3) Soldiers are jumpy
4) Soldiers heard the word fire.

This would come off as the soldiers being pretty masscrous* except for the taunting. Which, most likely, included the word "Fire!"

For a better summary of what the situation was like, the best thing I can recommend is an episode of the new series of Battlestar Galactica. The one which introduces the Cylon who later gets deactivated. At the time, she's a reporter.

That's what the Boston Massacre was like, not the woodcut we've all seen.

*That's a word now

[Snake Logan]

Ah so some people over there are happy to allow the US to strip their countrymen of rights and kidnap them, then torture them into confessing to various and sundry crimes. I was under the impression that Australia has a law enforcement agency and a standing army, not to mention people who understand the basic tenets of human rights, but yeah, maybe its better that the US just decides which Australians are good people and which ones deserve to have light bulbs shoved up their arses til they admit to being terrorists.

He fought in a foreign army. This is not a tourist that gets detained by the Americans for no reason. Had he been a tourist then all Australians would be outraged and we would be singing for American blood in the streets but the simple fact is that he is a traitor who decided he wanted to support a bunch of religious fascists so they could destroy all known civilization in Afghanistan.

This post has been edited by Snake Logan: 29 December 2007 - 01:49 PM

[SimeSublime]

Regardless, it wasn't America's place to prosecute. He should have been held to trial in either Afghanistan or Australia. Not by American courts, and time in American prisons should have been minimal.

[J m HofMarN]

He fought in a foreign army.

He was detained without charge for five years and tortured before he admitted to fighting in a foreign army. Regardless of whether he was with the taliban or not he didnt deserve that. And the fact is that since the US seriously coerced his confession, there can never be any certainty as to whether he was guilty or not. Hell, some Jews might have actually been plottign against Spain during the inquisition too, but because they were tortured into confessing history regards them as the victims, and rightfully so. I think a sensible Australian court could have satisfactorily determined if he was guilty or innocent, and their ruling would have been more universally accepted.