Yesh Gvul
Courage To Refuse
Free The Five
New Profile
Refuser Solidarity Network

Name: Antony Loewenstein
Home: Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
Comment Rules
About Me:
See my complete profile

Sweat-Shop Productions
Sweat-Shop Productions
Sweat-Shop Productions



Previous Posts

Powered by Blogger


Saturday, June 25, 2005

Get real

"It's easy to criticise from my ergonomic chair. Let's not forget: [Paul] McGeough is in Iraq and I am not", wrote Murdoch and pro-war lapdog, Andrew Bolt this week. How does anyone take this man seriously, other than propagandists and those suffering delusions? The war in Iraq is not going well, the American people are wavering and democracy is not taking root. Don't believe me?

Gen. John Abizaid, the top US commander in the Persian Gulf, gave testimony to the US Congress during the week, and contradicted the upbeat assessments offered by the Prince of Darkness, Dick Cheney. The insurgency is as strong as it was six months ago, he said, and shows no signs of weakening. Cheney continues to claim that the "terrorists" are in their "last throes."

Blind pro-war supporters have become the laughing stock in this debate. Face reality, people. The insurgency isn't simply about defeating America and its allies, it's about ending an occupation that continues to provide no security or basic services. How hard is it for ignorant war-lovers to understand that Iraqis don't want to be occupied?

Paul McGeough, meanwhile, the subject of numerous attacks this week over his reports from Iraq - and an Australian journalist on the ground contradicting Howard government spin - explains that our leaders have little or no understanding of the tribal nature of Iraq and refuse to see the lessons of the Douglas Wood saga. But how would they? They're too comfortable, like the Bolts of this world, in their ergonomic chairs.


Anonymous Phil said...

I've posted on this briefly as well Antony. I’ve been reading the column by Bolt over and over again the past few days and something just doesn’t appear right, not the content mind you, which is good for a Bolt column, but something else.

I must confess to reading and analysing Bolt regularly and have become accustomed to his blustering style, so I think I have some idea about how his syntax ‘reads’. What appeared odd to me are some phrasings, connections and word constructions that I believe were edited in and around his usual bombastic stylings. It’s interesting to note that the column was also run in the Thursday Media section of the Australian and bear some of the style of the Australian’s recent Media Watch files – in other words, I believe his column, was cleaned up and packaged for a future presentation in the broadsheet.

Anyway, it's good to see McGeough stay on the front foot.

Saturday, June 25, 2005 1:45:00 pm  
Blogger Antony Loewenstein said...

Bolt simply accepts govt denial as fact. As do most pro-war supporters. Have they forgotten the golden rule of journalism: "never believe anything until it is official denied?'

Saturday, June 25, 2005 5:52:00 pm  
Anonymous Shabadoo! said...

Hey Ant, just wondering, but why is a guy like Doug Wood, who is trying to help rebuild Iraq, a carpetbagging war-profiteer, but Paul McGeough, who makes a living spreading lies at worst and negative spin at best about the new Iraq, not? Presumably he gets paid too, right?

Sunday, June 26, 2005 9:23:00 am  
Blogger Antony Loewenstein said...

We're comparing Wood to McGeough?
Get real. One is reporting on the situation, not taking money from unaccountable companies and the other is making a quick buck in the most unethical of ways.
If you can't see the difference, perhaps you should go over to Iraq yourself and make a quick buck?
By the way, I read in today's Sunday Age that the Sheik, trashed by all and sundry, actually played a key role in Wood's release and his 'discovery' was no accident at all. McGeough is vindicated? God no, don't admit that, let's take the Aussie govt line at face value....
And you can yourselves thinking people?

Sunday, June 26, 2005 2:15:00 pm  
Anonymous shabadoo! said...

Jesus, Ant, who the hell made you judge and jury of what's an ethical way to make a living or not? Should everyone go and check their potential employers against the Ant Annual 500 list to make sure they're accountable? Maybe we can all let you know our salaries, and you can tell us if we're making a fair living or taking too much of the pie? What, precisely, was so unethical about what Woods was doing? It's a damn sight better than what your idol, David Hicks, was up to, namely, being a vile anti-Semite and taking up arms against Australians and Australia's allies. (Oh, wait, that's perfectly ethical in the Ant canon, to judge by your support for Israel's enemies...)

Sunday, June 26, 2005 4:42:00 pm  
Blogger Antony Loewenstein said...

I'm a supporter of David Hicks? Find anywhere I've written that. I'll tell you, nowhere.
To support a fair legal system isn't supporting his aims or ambitions.
A little too complex difference for you, but there you go...

Sunday, June 26, 2005 5:00:00 pm  
Anonymous Doylie said...

Shabadoo, over at Blair's site you'd be told to piss off and get your own blog. How about it?

Tuesday, June 28, 2005 1:47:00 pm  
Blogger Antony Loewenstein said...

Wouldn't that be great?
Rather than wasting our time...
Still, it's amusing to read people who can't see a world other than one ruled and abused by a man named Bush. Good for a laugh...

Tuesday, June 28, 2005 2:34:00 pm  

Post a Comment

<< Home