Aussies are not always politically correct :-)

[El Presidente]

"One thing about blokes from Oz is that their hearts and humour are always in the right place.

T.B Bechtel, a City Councilor from Newcastle, Australia, was asked on a local live radio talk show, just what he thought about the allegations of torture of suspected terrorists. His reply prompted his ejection from the studio, but to thunderous applause from the audience.

HIS STATEMENT: "If hooking up one ******* terrorist prisoner's testicles to a car battery to get the truth out of the lying little camelshagger will save just one Australian life, then I have only three things to say, 'Red is positive, black is negative, and make sure his nuts are wet.'

[Warren]

T.B. Bechtel for Prime Minister . I bet He doesn't speak Chinese and have private meetings with communists.

[lfg2nrg]

I'll Drink to that!

[Guest rob]

He'd be an interesting guy to have a beer with.

[anacostiakat]

He has got balls don't he.

[Colt45]

just don't shoot him!

[FlyFishingDude]

My kind of politician......Personally I would go for the "nuts in a vise" method.

[sliver54]

My kind of politician......Personally I would go for the "nuts in a vise" method.

"nuts in a vise", always a crowd pleaser. I'm with you FFD!

[sandholm]

I usally dont say this, but as a former sergeant in a special force unit who have served in several international conflicts and this scares the living crap out of me, not for the "prisoner", personal i don't give a ##### ( we did always follow our code of honour and the rules of engagement). Instead i fear for my brothers in arms. So no, he is not cool, or got balls, he is a moron that actually put Australian and other soldiers in danger who try to carry out there job, to create a better world.

How the hell do he think that this kind of statement will help Australian soldiers? He make them more of a target, to say that its ok to torture there prisoners of war. Do he actually think that terrorist, that are so desperate that they strap bombs to themselves, will think "No, i wont do this, because they will fry my nuts?"

This kind of statement create more extremist/terrorists then actually solve the conflict, it dont make it easier for soldiers to carry out peace keeping and making a country more safe. If someone believe that, they haven't learned anything from first world war, Afghanistan (before the us entered), former Yugoslavia, Vietnam... and many more

Ask anybody who actually have served in a real conflict, and not just been sitting in a peaceful country and cheering for more military action and more brutal methods. People who have been in this kind of conflicts dont want this kind of statement, I personal dont like this kind of methods, but sometimes, just sometimes, they might be legit. But saying this in public is just stupid and put many soldiers, who put there life on there line, in more danger.

What this moron needs to learn/read is three things

1; The geneva convetion

2; United Nations Convention Against Torture

2; What happens when you pour gasoline on a fire

And a question.

How can we, who want to see us as a civilized world, think its correct to connects a persons ball to a car battery or put them in a vise or in any other way torture a person and then complain when they do it to our soldiers and call it a crime of war? So you who think that he is right, where it correct to do this in the 2WW, in Vietnam or any other war? How do you justify this kind of methods?

[sinnyc]

I usally dont say this, but as a former sergeant in a special force unit who have served in several international conflicts and this scares the living crap out of me, not for the "prisoner", personal i don't give a ##### ( we did always follow our code of honour and the rules of engagement). Instead i fear for my brothers in arms. So no, he is not cool, or got balls, he is a moron that actually put Australian and other soldiers in danger who try to carry out there job, to create a better world.

How the hell do he think that this kind of statement will help Australian soldiers? He make them

more of a target, to say that its ok to torture there prisoners of war. Do he actually think that terrorist, that are so desperate that they

strap bombs to themselves, will think "No, i wont do this, because they will fry my nuts?"

This kind of statement create more extremist/terrorists then actually solve the conflict, it dont make it easier for soldiers to carry out peace keeping and making a country more safe. If someone believe that, they haven't learned anything from first world war, Afghanistan (before us entered), former Yugoslavia, Vietnam... and many more

Ask anybody who actually have served in a real conflict, and not just been sitting in a peaceful country and cheering for more military action and more brutal methods. People who have been in this kind of conflicts dont want this kind of statement, I personal dont like that kind of methods, but sometimes, just sometimes they might be legit. But saying this in public is just stupid and put many soldiers, who put there life on there line, in a more dangerous.

What this moron needs to learn/read three things

1; The geneva convetion

2; United Nations Convention Against Torture

2; What happens when you pour gasoline on a fire

And a question.

If we, who want to see us as a civilized world, think its correct to connects a persons ball to a car battery or us any other form of torture,

Why do we complain when they do it to our soldiers? So you who think that he is right, where it correct to do this in the 2WW, in Vietnam or any other war? How do you justify this kind of methods?

Thank you, Sandholm - eloquently stated. My own additional comment won't be nearly as diplomatic.

Armchair badasses like that City Councilor in Oz and any number of politicians and pundits here in the U.S. should all take a long tall drink of shut the f*ck up.

- Tim

[Warren]

Thank you, Sandholm - eloquently stated. My own additional comment won't be nearly as diplomatic.

Armchair badasses like that City Councilor in Oz and any number of politicians and pundits here in the U.S. should all take a long tall drink of shut the f*ck up.

- Tim

Yes I do see your point, and this guy would probably be the first to piss his pants at the sight of a set of approaching jumper leads.

It is however a little refreshing to see a complete absence of political correctness.

Over here now , the police are not allowed to talk about Gangs.

For instance if you were murdered by a Biker gang , the police can't use the word gang in a statement.

They are a group of like minded people.

So perhaps it is this in part that we are applauding.

But I do see your point about the act it's self.

[shrink]

Over here now , the police are not allowed to talk about Gangs. For instance if you were murdered by a Biker gang , the police can't use the word gang in a statement.

They are a group of like minded people.

So the news would report, "A Man was Murdered by a group of like-minded people". We don't want to give any offense to gangs.

Although of course I agree with Sandholm, I dearly love the direct and earthy way that the Aussies address things, and each other. Where else would a man be known by his mates as "Shagga". Roughly translated, in the States it would be "****'r".

[shrink]

Oh, and BTW, I wouldn't consider that to be torture.

IMO, that would be an effective treatment program for compulsive camel shagging.

[PigFish]

I refrain from political discussions here because political opinions not matter what, no matter from whom will likely offend someone. I am here to meet people and have fun not alienate them. One thing we can all agree on here is what a good cigar is. That is my point of being here.

I'll chime in briefly to make a point. I can't speak for Rob but can say that he is a man of cognizant thought (when sober) and clear speaking. I think he was indicating that he is tired of the double speak and hypocrisy often parroted by most politicians for a certain poll or focus group. Rob is a man with a goal, one of accomplishments and presumably a plan; people like that like action. They want to see progress not excuses.

I don’t think this thread is about the torture of prisoners but that of pragmatics of clear speaking. Perhaps even the Aussie politician would recant his position when it came to attaching the leads. One thing that I gleaned from his elegant prose was that he was not for taking anymore **** from terrorists. I believe he was saying that if you are going kill my countrymen then you are going to risk your own in the attempt. I believe the “message” was a clear one.

[Freefallguy]

It is however a little refreshing to see a complete absence of political correctness.

I'd do more than piss my pants!

With two batteries do you get 24v from parallel or series connections?

I'd vote for anyone who foments revolution.

[sandholm]

I'll chime in briefly to make a point. I can't speak for Rob but can say that he is a man of cognizant thought (when sober) and clear speaking. I think he was indicating that he is tired of the double speak and hypocrisy often parroted by most politicians for a certain poll or focus group. Rob is a man with a goal, one of accomplishments and presumably a plan; people like that like action. They want to see progress not excuses.

I don’t think this thread is about the torture of prisoners but that of pragmatics of clear speaking. Perhaps even the Aussie politician would recant his position when it came to attaching the leads. One thing that I gleaned from his elegant prose was that he was not for taking anymore **** from terrorists. I believe he was saying that if you are going kill my countrymen then you are going to risk your own in the attempt. I believe the “message” was a clear one.

I have the highest regards for Rob, my post where not to attack him in any way. Instead I wanted to give my view on people like T.B Bechtel and the problem we have with this kind of people in the world, on any side they are.

I usually dont comment on political issues, because as you say, there are so many views and in most cases a person is not rational when it comes to politics, instead it come down to believes.

now i will light a Siglo VI

cheers

[El Presidente]

I didn't think this would create such a storm.

Now the Honourable T.B Bechtel may be no moderator for peace. However he has the right to express his opinion. Apparently he has a lesser right to do so than radical Mulla's in Sydney and Melbourne. Thank goodness he is not a cartoonist or he would now likely be denied access to travel to most of Europe....pray he offend someone.

Now T. B. Bechtel may indeed be a redneck ignoramus so tear his arguments apart and call him such. However the current "global" trend of sanitizing commentary, not offending anybody for any reason, homogenization of language and ideas........sickens me to tears.

In my humble opinion the world will be at peace when we see a Muslim produced version of "The Life of Brian"

[Warren]

I didn't think this would create such a storm.

Now the Honourable T.B Bechtel may be no moderator for peace. However he has the right to express his opinion. Apparently he has a lesser right to do so than radical Mulla's in Sydney and Melbourne. Thank goodness he is not a cartoonist or he would now likely be denied access to travel to most of Europe....pray he offend someone.

Now T. B. Bechtel may indeed be a redneck ignoramus so tear his arguments apart and call him such. However the current "global" trend of sanitizing commentary, not offending anybody for any reason, homogenizarion of language and ideas........sickens me to tears.

In my humble opinion the world will be at peace when we see a Muslim produced version of "The Life of Brian"

Amen

[Ken Gargett]

I didn't think this would create such a storm.

Now the Honourable T.B Bechtel may be no moderator for peace. However he has the right to express his opinion. Apparently he has a lesser right to do so than radical Mulla's in Sydney and Melbourne. Thank goodness he is not a cartoonist or he would now likely be denied access to travel to most of Europe....pray he offend someone.

Now T. B. Bechtel may indeed be a redneck ignoramus so tear his arguments apart and call him such. However the current "global" trend of sanitizing commentary, not offending anybody for any reason, homogenization of language and ideas........sickens me to tears.

In my humble opinion the world will be at peace when we see a Muslim produced version of "The Life of Brian"

the problem is that we will never see it because it just won't rate here. i am sure that a great many muslims have perfectly working senses of humour (sense of humours?) and no doubt there is plenty of comment/satire/humour in their own way. i suspect they can get away with it in the sense that you might bash your brother but no one else can bash your brother (aussies can dump on kiwis but no one else can - actually that one is not true, anyone can dump on kiwis).

one of the most interesting nights i ever had in cuba was when a friend (this was on one of the trips that was not with the czars mob) took a few of us to a massive hall not far from the city, out towards playa. among the acts was three guys and they kept 400 of us in stitches for about three hours - and some of us spoke no spanish. they were comedians who took the piss out of everything - mostly a visual act, hence why we could all enjoy it and their timing was brilliant - but to see these young guys dressed as castro and his cronies up on stage and mocking them in quite a cruel manner (though no tears shed there), was something i never thought i would see in cuba. they had him pretending to bonk animals and so on. made him out a total fool and i thought at the time, far more effective than placards and embargos. took just as much piss out of the russians and americans and so on. it was a surprise and the sort of thing we don't hear about. i know it is na little different but i'd be very surprised if similar things did not happen in muslim countries.

and sandholm, have just come across this thread and you got in first. could not agree more. your comments spot on.

as for rights to express opinions, i'm all for that but if those opinions lead to things like the cronulla riots, then they have overstepped the mark and need to suffer the consequences and if that is prosecution, good thing. whether they are muslim, redneck, christian, bantu, pies fans or whatever.

how free is free speech if it brings harm to innocents?

[El Presidente]

how free is free speech if it brings harm to innocents?

But who determines what speech is "Free" Politicians? Religious groups? I know you would trust neither Ken for the only good they seek is good unto themselves, their beliefs, their benefit.

Which is the worse of two evils?

To me it is the second because I can combat others ideas and ideals through my own passion and argument...as can you as can Sand..as can Piggy.

Legislate "Free Speech" and that is taken away.

[Habanos2000]

Legislate "Free Speech" and that is taken away.

I totally agree. Free speech is a sacred right for all of us. Like or hate what people say, I will defend their right to voice it. We have enough laws to address any actual criminal acts that arise because of or inspite of a person's opinion.

[Ken Gargett]

how free is free speech if it brings harm to innocents?

But who determines what speech is "Free" Politicians? Religious groups? I know you would trust neither Ken for the only good they seek is good unto themselves, their beliefs, their benefit.

Which is the worse of two evils?

To me it is the second because I can combat others ideas and ideals through my own passion and argument...as can you as can Sand..as can Piggy.

Legislate "Free Speech" and that is taken away.

indeed, i would not give tuppence for anything either group contrives. perhaps though, when it heads towards inciting racism, violence etc, then something must be done. a big example - hitler? a small example - i was doing a lot of work in asia when the pauline hanson/one nation nonsense started - in fact, i had no idea what they were talking about to begin with - and i know how much damage it did to our reputation there (people voted for someone so stupid that she actually said, 'i am not a racist, i had lunch in a chinese rstaurant'!!!). i know, slightly different but it all comes back to a common thread.

the problem is not someone like yourself (never quote that) or others mentioned but the vast majority of braindead moronic sheep that populate the planet and who have not had an original idea beyond changing the tv channel, and even that is dictated by the voice within the box. sadly, they compose the majority of humanity, or at least far too much of it to ensure a dodgy future. i think, for example, that the majority of members of the forum can handle whatever it is they hear/read/encounter etc (though the response to this thread was interesting) but there are a lot of people, often well meaning, who are taken in.

normally i would assume darwinism in action, not give a toss, and on we go but it is when they are dragged in and duped and induced into actions that affects others (again, think hitler if you want an extreme example but sadly a real one) then there must be something that protects them for their own good, and moe importantly, the general good. i know, who decides that...

i think most decent, thinking people have a general idea of the line. but we do need those laws that habanos2000 mentions - so i agree free speech at almost all costs, but with limits, as per legislation.

[Colt45]

i think most decent, thinking people have a general idea of the line. but we do need those laws that habanos2000 mentions - so i agree free speech at almost all costs, but with limits, as per legislation.

I think I understand your view, but I'm not sure hitler is the best example. He, like many other dictators, used the military to enforce his

beliefs, though granted he had his followers.

But there is no doubt that free speech comes with responsibilities. When we speak our minds we best be ready to expect, accept, and tolerate

viewpoints other than our own. Otherwise, I believe one should keep their opinions to themselves.

But as to RA's original post, it is a breath of fresh air to hear someone unwilling to coddle criminals / terrorists - we need more of it.

Harden the f@#k up.

[El Presidente]

the problem is not someone like yourself (never quote that) or others mentioned but the vast majority of braindead moronic sheep that populate the planet and who have not had an original idea beyond changing the tv channel, and even that is dictated by the voice within the box. sadly, they compose the majority of humanity.

Touche.

In my opinion (and I am not claiming to be right), dumbing down the populace through the surrendering of Freedoms is pure folly.

We can't say "gangs". We cannot identify racial crime in media. Proposals for Govt filtering over "internet" for ..the protection of children?

Hitler thrived through a period of appeasement. Pauline Hanson as well. How much better would we have been for forthright discussion of racism and lunacy as opposed to taking a guarded middle line of discussion.

Incitement of racial violence is a crime (that is where it started). It should be. However it has morphed into

Incitement of Racial Hatred

then:

Discussion of Race/religion.

The arbiters of "grey" areas are political parties and religious groups.

Take the internet Filtering laws here in OZ (proposed). Initially it was Child Pornography....but now it is R rated pornography. The Israeli's have put forward that anti Hollocaust sites should be axed...Muslims put forward Anti Muslim sites... Anti Gambling lobby... online Gambling sites. Aboriginal Lobby are challenging some online History.

My point is Ken, open the door and there is no end which is good. How much better off we would be to raise a generation of children who question everything, who seek the truth, who are taught to challenge their own beliefs and thoughts.

[zuma]

interesting thread...

Free speech is perhaps the most powerful of all freedoms in a free democratic society... while it is the foundation of nation building, it has the power to plant the seeds of discord and hatred, undermine the foundations of society, fan the fire of anarchy, and completely destroy a country.

IMHO, there should be moderating limits... look at this forum, we are a microsociety but there are rules that we members must obey... by the same token, and also paradoxically, a free society is only free because its members are educated to choose to be ruled by the law... how do we decide on moderating limits for free speech? well, just note how did not vote for the rules of the forum... maybe we need a monarchy?