language analysis helperino
http://www.theage.com.au/comment/why-andrew-chan-and-myuran-sukumaran-never-stood-a-chance-20150430-1mwirr.html
I'm stuck on the contention and issue. I was thinking that the contention was either they never stood a chance or their deaths were part of a 'bigger plan'. help?
May 16, 2015
1 Comment • Newest first
Well from what i understand from the article, the contention is that they were just used as sacrificial lambs (absolute crap) so that the new Indonesian government could show its stance on drugs, and as the article likes to ensue that it was probably due to the state of terror in the world at the time (london bombings).
The main issue i can see is that it was a political thing, the Australian gov't didn't want to cause problems between the countries.
Sort of off topic but still relevant to the thread:
I hate how the Australian media handle this crap, they are trying to paint idiots as martyrs, these guys were trying to smuggle drugs, and if they had just paid a fine when they got caught there would have been no problem. I mean Indonesia is fairly corrupt in the sense that you can get out of almost any crime by paying on the spot. The only reason the media cares about these guys though is that they got caught, yet if they hadn't a load of drugs would have ended up in Australia and would have most likely caused problems anyway.