Yank justice by proxy

Post Reply New Topic

This is a thread I started, Fnord. I never stated it belonged to me, although a pedant could make an argument with reference to copyright law that both Alex and the contributors have a claim, in various ways, to the content. I was simply defending my position against accusations I was a "troll". Quite ironic, too, you should use that ill-defined word, considering how you've railed against those you believe have a poor command of the language, and use expletives, in another thread.

You also refer to the thread title, and yes that was to raise the question of whether your government was responsible for the treatment the shoe-thrower allegedly suffered. Afterall, it's common knowledge your government abducts people to torture them, or I should say more frequently abducts people and lets other governments torture them. So although not exactly the same thing, it still fits the general pattern.

Anyway, I was reading the Telegraph website, this morning, and knowing how you're so keen to read about the moral integrity of your government, I thought you'd like the following link:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/3869117/General-George-S.-Patton-was-assassinated-to-silence-his-criticism-of-allied-war-leaders-claims-new-book.html

Were we ever supposed to trust the US gov. Or think it was anything else than a poorly disguised, self-interested rebel pseudo-dictatorship?

Oh.. we were? Ah.. righty-ho. I'll just reconsider events....

Nope.. still not surprised that its dodgy.

The Patton link was interesting though. Low, but interesting.

the guy who threw his shoes at the president of the united states of america should have expected a hard time for doing so, if he threw his shoes at anyone else it would have been dismissed and seen as pathetic or at most minor assault.
if i disagree with someone the most i usually do is shout at them, maybe here and there a couple of swears to put a bit more emotion into what i'm saying but that's it.

i agree that the guy shouldn't have been beaten so badly but he did throw a 'weapon' at someone of high stature and the authorities punished him, they were wrong for how badly they beat him but he should have expected it considering what else happens over there.

Yes, he should have, despite the fact that it's his country (in so far as I assume he was born there, as were his parents), and Bush is the commander-in-chief of an occupying force that has created a situation where, even by conservative estimates, tens of thousands have been killed. But that's not the point. The point is that I'm wondering whether the US directed the guy's interrogation that would almost certainly have involved what most people would consider torture. I'm also reflecting on the fact that if the reports are accurate, then certain things haven't really changed much since Saddam was in power -- in other words if you challenge the political elite expect to be beaten, tortured and possibly killed.