Hard Light Productions Forums

General FreeSpace => FreeSpace Discussion => Topic started by: admiral_wolf on September 05, 2008, 02:43:25 pm

Title: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: admiral_wolf on September 05, 2008, 02:43:25 pm
Watching the cutscene Command Brief, where Polpolion details MY plan of capturing The Taranis, there is a shot of 3 terran pilots gasping in awe when he says "THE CAPTURE OF THE TARANIS".  Is it me, or does the one on the far right look like the rotating head used in the Command Briefing before the McCarthey mission?
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: Aardwolf on September 05, 2008, 03:00:04 pm
That's just :v: being lazy and not making enough character models.
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: Colonol Dekker on September 05, 2008, 03:10:14 pm
Blatant GTI prisoner re-programming. It would never happen under your watch sir.
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: admiral_wolf on September 05, 2008, 03:27:59 pm
Blatant GTI prisoner re-programming. It would never happen under your watch sir.

But it did, it happened on my SHIP!
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: Jeff Vader on September 05, 2008, 03:30:28 pm
You have failed, sir. You are hereby demoted to senior janitor-in-training.

**** that. This is a mutiny! I am commandeering that vessel. Dekker, you're my first officer.

Srsly, though. If we already have a person called "Polpolion" giving a serious briefing, there is nothing amazing in having McCarthy attending that briefing. :v: obviously had a tight schedule
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: Colonol Dekker on September 05, 2008, 03:38:30 pm
Woot! Promotion. Commodore Dekker :D
 
 
Sorry Wolf :nervous:
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: neo_hermes on September 05, 2008, 04:00:26 pm
maybe there was a twin..or a clone...or maybe it's a trap..
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: Snail on September 05, 2008, 04:28:24 pm
If you look hard Head-CM1 also looks a bit like McCarthy...
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: Cobra on September 05, 2008, 05:12:50 pm
Nah, he doesn't. McCarthy's got that rebellious look about him while Cm1's got that "srs bsnss" look about him.

None at all.
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: neo_hermes on September 05, 2008, 09:20:31 pm
a GTI trap...
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: FUBAR-BDHR on September 05, 2008, 09:54:57 pm
Twin brother perhaps?
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: eliex on September 05, 2008, 10:15:12 pm
A mirror of fate?  :nervous:
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: Mongoose on September 06, 2008, 12:30:58 am
Couldn't be.  All true mirror universe people have beards.
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: MarkN on September 06, 2008, 07:43:21 am
Quote
Couldn't be.  All true mirror universe people have beards.

Even the Women???
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: Androgeos Exeunt on September 06, 2008, 07:48:31 am
Quote
Couldn't be.  All true mirror universe people have beards.

Even the Women???

:wtf:

Transsexuals, maybe.
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: Al Tarket on September 06, 2008, 08:09:34 am
the person who puts it best, quark from deep space 9 "all humans look alike".
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: Frosty on September 06, 2008, 10:09:58 am
I remember in FS2 they make a reference to the McCarthey trials, so if it is him then the GTA screwed him over after.
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: Eishtmo on September 06, 2008, 10:21:08 am
Quote
Couldn't be.  All true mirror universe people have beards.

Even the Women???

Silly, the women are all sexy and scantly clad.

ALL THE TIME!
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: neo_hermes on September 06, 2008, 10:24:00 am
they got two pieces of cloth on the entire time....maybe a fan as well..
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: Androgeos Exeunt on September 06, 2008, 10:20:54 pm
Or good airbags? :drevil:
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: karajorma on September 08, 2008, 03:12:16 am
I remember in FS2 they make a reference to the McCarthey trials, so if it is him then the GTA screwed him over after.

They never actually say what happened to him though.

Quote
The GTA formed the Suicide Kings in the Great War, when the old Valkyrie fighter went into service after the Shivan attack on Ross 128. The 242nd was stationed on the Galatea back then, and our first mission was the capture of Lieutenant Alexander McCarthy. We all studied the McCarthy trials in school, pilot. We're a part of history here, though the Galatea is long gone and the Valkyrie has since been retired.

It's obvious that the McCarthy Trials were something big. I suspect the fact that McCarthy obviously knew of the Shivan threat long before the GTA were willing to mention their existence coupled with the fact that he was arming the Vasudans so that they could fight the Shivans would have made for an interesting trial.

For all we know he got off. :)

Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: Colonol Dekker on September 08, 2008, 03:25:15 am
I assume the fact they're referring to him in the context of being caught and put on trial (generally criminal overtones), as a pretty good indication that he was convicted and possibly executed.
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: WMCoolmon on September 08, 2008, 05:26:50 am
Thank goodness you're a Brit. If you were an American, I'd have to hit you over the head for never having heard of the real McCarthy trials (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mccarthy_trials). :p

For all we know, they could have been a post-Great War occurrence that took place as a political shenanigan to try and oust people on questionable legal grounds for having acted as possible traitors during T-V era, when the obvious real wrongs had been committed by the GTA in an attempt to cover up the invasion of the Shivans and the destruction of Riviera station (With the description that Volition gives in the tech room, there's just no way that a station could just disappear and nobody from the GTA would notice).

It'd actually be an interesting moral dilemma, though. You'd have people who were technically traitors being tried by people who had actually betrayed humanity by not telling them about the Shivans - possibly out of fear that they would be hung for it because they had some involvement with shield development at Riviera outpost, or were under orders or had issued orders to keep clear of the area lest the Vasudans had captured the station and learned about the shield technology.

Other things could include people getting tried after closer contact with the Vasudans revealed that the Vasudans had information that they shouldn't have. The most likely people to have leaked the information being tried and executed, or simply the most believable people being tried and executed and being framed by those people who actually had leaked the information. When in reality, the crime they were being tried for had been heavily invalidated by the way that the evidence had been brought against them. It seems a little ridiculous to have someone tried for treason for leaking information or technology to your allies, the fact that they were your enemies at the time being mitigated by a greater threat against both of you.

In short, it's hard to fault McCarthy for leaking weapons technology to the Vasudans when Terran High Command had serious indications that something was wrong and that a third force had entered the area. Remember that line about diplomatic efforts with the Shivans? I wouldn't be surprised if McCarthy was acting on orders by GTA High Command to come up with a diplomatic solution with the Shivans when he realized that the Alliance would either mean decimation of the Vasudan population and military, or became convinced that the Shivan's wouldn't ally with the GTA and would instead attack no matter what.

There's a mission in one of BR's campaigns, IIRC, where you defend a Vasudan destroyer as a Terran pilot, even though the cease-fire as yet has not been established. Even though you're doing a 'good deed' and defending the helpless, it's still giving aid and comfort to the enemy and is just as deserving of charges on that basis as leaking weapons technology to the enemy for use against a mutual foe. The difference being in that one situation, it's an Admiral giving the orders - in the other situation, it's a Lieutenant taking action because he believes that the Admirals have been derelict in their duty - and in the end, the events of FS1 transpire to say that
(1) Yes, there are Phantom ships
(2) Yes, the GTA is going to ally with the Vasudans
(3) Yes, the Shivans are an incredible threat to humanity above any other
(4) Yes, the GTA and the PVN are going to share weapons technology

In every instance, history bore McCarthy's beliefs out. If he was tried for being a traitor, he was probably tried at the point when it was obvious that he was being tried as an example to traitors in general, and not at all because what he had done had been unquestionably wrong.

Now look at Bosch in Freespace 2, who engineered a popular uprising, who spurred on speciesism and bigotry on an interstellar scale, who put the entire GTVA at risk, and ended up getting captured and possibly killed. And Allied Command was helping him every step of the way. Meanwhile, Command doesn't even bother with obvious safeguards like "How do we turn this Knossos thing off?" or "What if Shivans take a couple of shots at this poor, undefended freighter carrying this massive bomb thing?" or "What if the Knossos doesn't shut down the portal when it gets blown up?"

Or "Gee, maybe we should station a Meson-equipped destroyer at the Gamma Draconis-Capella jump node, in case the Shivans come through there."
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: karajorma on September 08, 2008, 08:13:00 am
You've basically summed up a lot of my feelings about the trials there WMC (And yes I've noticed the name before).

The McCarthy Trials are such a big event in GTA history that they can be referred to by name. You only really get that when either a celebrity is on trial (OJ Simpson for instance) or when the trial is actually about a much bigger issue (e.g the Scopes trial). This wasn't a simple trial and execution of a traitor. The trials must have caused a big stink either at the time or a few years later if they make schoolchildren learn about them.

On one hand you have a man who passed on military secrets to the Vasudans. But on the other hand by the time the trial actually occurred McCarthy had been proved right about the dangers posed by the Shivans. Whatever the outcome of the trial was there would have been a lot of people who felt he was right. Furthermore efforts to present the Vasudans as the enemy would have been hampered by the fact that the Vasudans were now allies of the Terrans. Efforts to cast them in a bad light would probably have been stepped on quite hard in case they provoked ill-feeling that could set off a second war.

My personal feeling is that either McCarthy got off or was punished but is now regarded by the GTVA as a hero for his actions. If the population of the GTVA thought he was a traitor I doubt they'd be teaching that story to kids.
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: Colonol Dekker on September 08, 2008, 08:18:48 am
They still teach kids about oliver cromwell and hitler (no particular slant to those two names by bringing them up) :nervous:
Just saying. ;)
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: karajorma on September 08, 2008, 08:45:08 am
Because they were noteworthy historical figures. Which is kinda my point. McCarthy was noteworthy. That means that the trials were big news either at the time or because they became a big scandal afterwards.

I'm sure the more learned amongst us can name a famous spy or two perhaps but how many of us can say we learned about them in school?
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: Colonol Dekker on September 08, 2008, 09:51:25 am
Yeah i should have said :

If the population of the GTVA thought he was a traitor I doubt they'd be teaching that story to kids.

They still teach kids about oliver cromwell and hitler (no particular slant to those two names by bringing them up) :nervous:
Just saying. ;)

Also i learned about no spies,a few commando raids in ww2 but agree a few of us could name any actual covert operatives like Sir Francis Walsingham ;7
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: Eishtmo on September 08, 2008, 06:49:40 pm
I find the whole thing interesting because they are called the McCarthy Trials, implying that there were more than one. 
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: karajorma on September 09, 2008, 01:25:01 am
Well McCarthy didn't act alone. He had to have co-conspirators.

But yes. I do find that interesting too. :)
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: Colonol Dekker on September 09, 2008, 01:29:03 am
At least two wings of co conspiritors. :)
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: FUBAR-BDHR on September 09, 2008, 01:51:56 am
Little rusty on my FS2 history but wouldn't McCarthey Trials indicate that he had something to do with setting up the trials and not the one that was tried?  Or more likely the trials took place on a ship called the McCarthey. 

Of course the s on trials could have been a typo. 
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: karajorma on September 09, 2008, 02:12:28 am
Little rusty on my FS2 history but wouldn't McCarthey Trials indicate that he had something to do with setting up the trials and not the one that was tried?  Or more likely the trials took place on a ship called the McCarthey. 

If it was McCarthy and his co-conspirators then the trials would be named after the most famous defendant even if they were several separate trials.

At least two wings of co conspiritors. :)

Yeah but even the GTA aren't stupid enough to sweep up the debris and put the box they put them in on trial. ;)
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: WMCoolmon on September 09, 2008, 02:16:23 am
I always figured that there was more than one person on board the Omega. No real reason, it just seemed natural in the situation.
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: FUBAR-BDHR on September 09, 2008, 02:17:12 am
At least two wings of co conspiritors. :)

Yeah but even the GTA aren't stupid enough to sweep up the debris and put the box they put them in on trial. ;)

Never underestimate the stupidity of the GTA. 
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: eliex on September 09, 2008, 03:05:15 am
I always figured that there was more than one person on board the Omega. No real reason, it just seemed natural in the situation.

FS1 Terran and Vasudan transports strike me as really strange. A box nearly as big as an Apollo that is supposed to carry enough people for a boarding attack? Not to mention engines and petrol etc.

Has anyone wondered about the role of the Vasudans captured from the PVT Rasputin? They surely must have been in the McCarthy trials too.
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: Androgeos Exeunt on September 09, 2008, 03:37:56 am
Perhaps the GTA returned them to the PVE, who released them.
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: WMCoolmon on September 09, 2008, 05:08:47 am
Well, there's two likely scenarios:
(1) The Vasudans were acting under orders from Vasudan High Command, in which case they would probably quietly be shuttled back to the PVN to lead the rest of their lives in early retirement, in exchange for not making any disunifying comments against the PVN.

(1) Definitely gives the possibility for a lot of controversy, as Terrans would see the Vasudans going home to their families while one of their own was held up as having participated in a shameful act. Furthermore, the lack of testimony by anybody other than GTA personnel would give an unsatisfactory verdict. With the PVN likely backing the GTA on keeping the mysteries of when the Shivan's appearance became clear, you can bet there would be a lot of discontent.

(2) The Vasudans, too, were renegades and were most likely elements of the HOL. However it does seem a bit of a misnomer to call them part of the "McCarthy Trials" if this were the case. There would be far more HOL-related court martials than McCarthy court martials. While they might be put on trial to offer testimony, their testimony would likely be regarded with great skepticism given their anarchial leanings. The PVN would almost certainly insist on a court martial, and based on the impression of the Vasudans in Freespace 1, I'd guess it would have been swift, decisive, and not very public.

If it were (2) though, it would be an open and shut case.

(3) The status of the Vasudans on board the Rasputin wasn't known because they became MIA/KIA during the remainder of the armed conflict in that era. Despite this, prosecutors made the case that the Vasudans were HOL operatives, despite the lack of solid evidence, and McCarthy was still convicted.

Lack of concrete evidence, potentially unfair tactics by the prosecutors, and a strong possibility of Vasudans feeling slighted and lots of discussion and possibly some kind of protests or interspecies violence-a very good candidate. Plus there'd be the many people convinced that the GTA had killed the Vasudans themselves, secreted them away, or otherwise prevented them from being capable of offering any testimony during the trial.

Just based on how Lt.Samsa states it, I'd guess that it's something like #1. The Vasudans were released back to the PVN and possibly provided some testimony at the "McCarthy trials", which consisted of individual trials of McCarthy and his crew. During this time, insinuations that the trials were being used by either or both the PVN and GTA to weed out people from the ranks that they thought were objectionable in some fashion came up. During the trial, evidence that the GTA did indeed know about the Shivan attack on Ross 128, long before it alerted anyone else, came to light and began circulating in the media. Many people began to sympathize with McCarthy and his crew. However, the court martial found McCarthy guilty of high treason during a time of war and had him executed. The majority of the other individuals were convicted and sentenced to long prison terms. However, in the intervening years and with the chaos following the GTI rebellion, additional information came to light that proved that many of the people sentenced had been innocent.

For many civilians, this became a question of whether a Lt. had the right to take action where the GTA High Command failed to take the appropriate action. It became widely discussed in ethics circles. However, among military personnel, and served as a hallmark case representing the lesson needed to be learned about understanding one's place in a military hierarchy. There's a similar theme in Starship Troopers. Hence, to Lt. Samsa, the trial serves as an important part of recent military history and is a good thing - it keeps idiot recruits from thinking they can thumb their nose at their CO. To pretty much everyone else in the GTA, the trial was a source of temporary indignation and frustration at their government, and representative of the failures therein (eg the economic collapse by the Terrans alluded to in FS2).

So when Lt.Samsa says they were a part of history, he's not kidding. :p The McCarthy trials were probably one of the last big events before the GTA went bottoms-up.

'Course there could be something even more malicious at stake here. It could be that the GTA tried to pin some or all of the blame for instigating the Shivan attack on McCarthy, and turned him in to a pincushion for people whose anger was directed at the GTA for the death of loved one(s). Thus Lt.Samsa would be justified in having a "justice served" attitude, but he'd have no clue what he was talking about. Kind of fits with the cloak-and-dagger theme of FS2. :p
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: Grizzly on September 09, 2008, 06:08:46 am
Except that Samsa is the squadron leader of the 107TH Ravens and not the 242nd suicide kings. That is Lieutenant-Commander Cordovo... Cordovo does not seem to be like the guy who doesn't know where he is talking about, so I am just going to agree with WMCoolmon here, who put waaay to much thought into this :P.
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: karajorma on September 09, 2008, 07:35:27 am
So when Lt.Samsa says they were a part of history, he's not kidding. :p The McCarthy trials were probably one of the last big events before the GTA went bottoms-up.

They could even BE the reason the GTA went bottoms-up. :)

The revelations you mention could easily have fractured the GTA. It would also be another reason why kids learned about the trials in school. Same as kids today learn about Archduke Ferdinand.


At this point we're mostly into speculation but I tend to think that's what happened too.
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: Jeff Vader on September 09, 2008, 07:59:40 am
Cordovo... Cordovo
It's Cordova. Cordova.

A jolly bloke. I think he's the funniest person you get to serve under during the game. Always seems to take the whole military thing and leadership positions too seriously.
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: TrashMan on September 09, 2008, 10:10:32 am
The revelations you mention could easily have fractured the GTA. It would also be another reason why kids learned about the trials in school. Same as kids today learn about Archduke Ferdinand.

They could even have triggered the GTI rebellion. Regardless of the trial outcome, there were bound to be unhappy terrans.
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: karajorma on September 09, 2008, 10:39:17 am
The Rebellion being in part a desperate attempt to take over the GTA before the trial brought their misdeeds to light has a certain ring to it.

I tend to feel that the trials were after the Rebellion itself but that doesn't mean they couldn't have been a cause for them.
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: admiral_wolf on September 09, 2008, 02:51:06 pm
I wouldn't have thought that the GTA would have collected all the evidence and had enough time to analyse it, with most if not all of GTI involved in investigating the Shivan threat, and of course the rogue element designing and building Hades.  After all, there would have presumably been many hours of interogation of not only Alex, but others allied with him, I would even wager that the Interpid's Admiral would have been questioned.  So I'm inclined to agree with karajorma.

And Mr. Lobo, mutiny is a traitorous crime, punishable by death.  Be very wary where you next make port...
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: Titan on September 09, 2008, 03:30:43 pm
well, the GTI supposedly had made contact with the shivans years before the GW... and McCarthy knew about the shivans... and he answered to a higher athourity... hmmm....
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: Androgeos Exeunt on September 10, 2008, 05:08:38 am
I think McCarthy meant the Vasudans when he said, "I answer to a higher authority!"
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: WMCoolmon on September 10, 2008, 06:18:02 am
At this point we're mostly into speculation but I tend to think that's what happened too.

Speculation is half the fun. :p

I think McCarthy meant the Vasudans when he said, "I answer to a higher authority!"

Even if McCarthy were defecting to the Vasudans for defecting's sake, I don't think he would refer to the Vasudans as being a 'higher authority'. As far as we know, the Terrans and Vasudans were just as sovereign as each other and neither one of them was part of a bigger interstellar group. Morality or religion, yeah, those could be a higher authority but there's no evidence in FS1 presented that the Vasudans play any kind of religious or moral role in Terran civilization so he'd most likely be referring to something that he considered to be above either if that were the case. ("God told me to steal experimental weapons and take them to naked yellow space aliens" - well, weirder things have happened before, I suppose.)

Or were you thinking of something different?
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: Stormkeeper on September 10, 2008, 06:29:35 am
a GTI trap...
It's a TRAP!
(http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a354/sohmingjian/ackbar.jpg)
The **** I miss when I don't bother to do anything other than click unread replies.

I think McCarthy meant the Vasudans when he said, "I answer to a higher authority!"
I doubt. I think he thought that the Vasudans would be better able to understand the threat the Shivans represented to both their races.
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: LuaPineapple on September 10, 2008, 08:28:03 am
Blatant GTI prisoner re-programming. It would never happen under your watch sir.
I knew it...
Maybe it's McCarthey's son?
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: karajorma on September 10, 2008, 09:06:57 am
I think McCarthy meant the Vasudans when he said, "I answer to a higher authority!"

I always took that to mean that he was working for the good of humanity and therefore the orders of any particular government working against that good had no authority over him.
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: admiral_wolf on September 10, 2008, 04:43:37 pm
I took it to mean he would not justify himself to a lowly fighter pilot.  After all, after reaching the rank of Commander and possibly Captain, I wouldn't expect those ranks to be on the front line.  That's the sort of level I'd expect to be in command of cruisers.
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: Stormkeeper on September 10, 2008, 10:24:04 pm
Weeeell, if you achieved the rank of Captain thru being a flyboy, I'd think you'd be stuck as a flyboy. You just get more people under you.
Title: Re: LT. A. McCarthey, traitor, or new pilot?
Post by: Androgeos Exeunt on September 11, 2008, 12:00:47 am
Weeeell, if you achieved the rank of Captain thru being a flyboy, I'd think you'd be stuck as a flyboy. You just get more people under you.

You'd be reading a book once you reach Admiral rank. :p