To the victor, the right to write the history.
Treason doth never prosper.
What's the reason?
Why, if it prosper,
None durst call it treason.
Anon
John
On Sat, 07 Apr 2007 17:33:33 +0100, P. J. Alling
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There were plenty of British Loyalists available, and a few atrocities
> from both sides, mostly in the Carolinas. The British perpetrated ones
> are better known, possibly because they were actually worse, possibly
> not.
>
> John Forbes wrote:
>> On Fri, 06 Apr 2007 15:51:52 +0100, graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> One side's patriot is the other side's traitor. One side's freedom
>>> fighter is the other side's terrorist*. However, old Ben was never a
>>> combatant. Much worse, he was a diplomat encouraging the King's more
>>> dangerous enemies, the French.
>>>
>>> *To the best of my knowledge the rebels (revolutionists, since we won)
>>> never committed atrocities against civilians. The Kings men didn't
>>> always draw that line however. But, that may depend upon whose history
>>> books you read.
>>>
>>> -graywolf
>>>
>>
>> Since the British civilians were 4,000 miles away, it would have been
>> hard
>> to have atrocified them.
>>
>> J
>>
>>
>>
>>> Christian wrote:
>>>
>>>> Bob W wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> It's Benjamin Franklin,
>>>>> terrorist,
>>>>>
>>>> We prefer "freedom fighter" or "patriot" :-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
