<< LATEST COLUMN IS POSSIBLY LAST COLUMN ON FLANNERY ~ MAIN ~ FOLDING TRADITION CONTINUES >>
DUAL STANDARD OVER FREEDOM OF SPEECH
A letter in the Melbourne Age:
The hysteria being whipped up over the The Chaser’s satirical song is highly amusing for the light it sheds on Australian values. When Muslims reacted indignantly to Danish cartoons that mocked Muhammad, they were ridiculed and chastised. They were told that freedom of speech was a core value in Western democracies and their failure to appreciate this showed that they were not adapted to Western society.
The Chaser, however, has mocked sacred Australian symbols: a racing car driver, cricket player, talkback radio host and rich newspaper proprietor. Such a reaction shows how flimsy is the commitment of some Australians to freedom of speech.
Colin Sheppard, Essendon
None of The Chaser guys are under police protection. None have been charged or thrown in prison. And, while we’re talking about the flimsy commitment of some Australians to free speech, it might be worth noting that the ABC broadcast The Chaser’s little song - but banned itself from running those Mohammmed cartoons.
(Via Dan Lewis)
I think ‘reacting indignantly’ is a little disingenuous. People died and property was destroyed. And they were not even the people who drew the cartoons.
Posted by Toiling Mass on 2007 10 19 at 09:39 PM • permalinkGood Lord. How can someone find an equivalence in a comparison like that where there is obviously none to be had?
Criticising The Chasers for being tasteless in lampooning the dead who cannot defend themselves - this is simply the tried and true societal behavior-check mechanism called stigmatization - and threatening real, living people with death over some line drawings of a historical personage when nobody even knows what he looked like is… well… completely, totally, 100% not comparable or equavalent in any way, shape, or form.
a bit of mock outrage & general tut-tutting from that pompous windbag neil mitchell doesn’t equate to burning churches, attacking embassies & killing nuns. bindi irwin isn’t going to urge croc hunter fans to kill the chaser guys. neither john howard nor kevin rudd are going to propose a law to outlaw satire about the dead. colin sheppard is a moron
the fact that the chasers are tasteless bastards is a major part of their charm
As Pauline Hanson was told during her time in the sun - freedom of speech also means people are free to call you an asshole.
This attempt at moral equivalence is laughably pathetic. It has nothing to do with free speech. Criticism of someone isn’t denying free speeech. When people are threatened with violence, intimidation or legal sanction for what they say - that is a free speech issue.
This asshole Colin from Essendon is apparently trying to deny people’s right to their freedom to criticise the Chaser. If Muslim’s had stuck to objecting to the publication of the cartoons they would have been exercising their right as well.
I’d like to think that it is only The Melbourne Age that would be capable of highlighting that letter with the headline DUAL STANDARD OVER FREEDOM OF SPEECH. when something like TYPICAL MORALLY INVERTED ASSWIPE MORON DRIBBLE HERE would have been more appropriate.
People able to publish, indeed, embroider that letter have given up logic and reason as standard human values. They are not worth feeding.
8: Precisely so, Francis. Freedom of speech does NOT mean freedom from criticism. But at least Sheppard can print out a hard-copy of his letter, frame it, and hang it on the wall, right between his first grade perfect attendance record and the blue ribbon for winning the pie-eating contest at the union picnic. Another ornament for the Sheppard “Gallery of Achievement”.
Great, now everyone is denying the Age letter witer’s right to free speech. Where will it end?
Of course, he has free speech - and it is overpriced even at that.
Posted by Toiling Mass on 2007 10 19 at 10:36 PM • permalinkThanks for the post, Tim.
Claiming that “Muslims reacted indignantly to Danish cartoons” has to be about the biggest whitewash of history, in history. Yet it was at the very top of The Age’s letters page.
I don’t doubt The Chaser’s willingness to have a go at anyone (viz War on Everything) as demonstrated by their go at Hilali. However I do wonder, if they’d sung about Mohammed, whether the ABC would have aired it.
Colin Sheppard’s comparison between the Australian reaction to The Chaser’s eulogy song and the Muslim reaction to the Mohammed cartoons is utterly ridiculous.
Yes many people were upset with The Chaser, just as some were upset with “Piss Christ”, the Virgin Mary in a Burkha or the ‘Nuns’ who appear in the Gay Mardi Gras each year.
Of course these people were entitled to get upset. However, quite unlike the Mohammed cartoons, the Chaser haven’t been forced into hiding by rewards for their death, there have not been Australian or Christian leaders calling for the beheading of The Chaser team, nor have any Australians tried to hurt them. There has been no rioting, no murder and no destruction of property, all of which seems to happen every time Muslims get upset about someone saying (or drawing) something they don’t like. The “Jihad du Jour”.
Some groups just seem to react a little less ‘indignantly’ (ahem) to mockery than others. This is of course, why the Mohammed float will probably never appear at the gay Mardi Gras alongside Fred Nile’s effigy, even though it is Muslims, not Christians who are executing or murdering homosexuals these days and deserve mockery.
Indignant indeed!
Actually Toiling Mass’s overpriced speech crack reminds me of the wonderfully wilful misrepresentation of the concept of free speech by former Democrats leader Janine Haines when she was campaigning to stop political advertising. Her line was that political adverising wasn’t exercising free speech it was “expensive speech”.
I’m not offended by what The Chaser mob did at all. I must share the same peurile type of humour gene. I was having dinner with some friends the other night and one told a story about a kid acting very inappropriately. Everyone else tut-tutted whilst I burst out laughing.
We used to have this drinking song that had a verse along the lines of “I can do the Niki Lauder”, which involved singing that line over and over again whilst running around acting like you were trying to put your head out. I am sure it was cruel and insensitive back then, but the worst that would happen is that someone might tip some beer over your head.
If people are offended, I see no reason why they be repressed from punching any member of the Chaser team in the face if they ever happen to meet them on the street.
I for one am going to stop singing “Hitler has only got one ball” out of respect for Adolf, who is dead.
Posted by mr creosote on 2007 10 19 at 11:25 PM • permalinkThe Chaser was once funny, but now it’s just a juvenile show going for either the soft targets, or complete shock value, most of the time, both.
I must admit, I would have laughed my arse off if Chas had been shot at APEC though. Or had the crap beaten out of him when he was selling weapons in team colours outside the Canterbury game.
Religious satire has a long tradition in undergraduate reviews (which is basically what the Chaser is).
I want to see the Chaser satirise some of the more extreme Islamic leaders out there. You know, the ones calling women who show their legs “uncovered meat”, or calling for death to the West, etc.
That would be a riot.
I know you can do it, Chaser boys. After all, this is a war on everything, right?Posted by daddy dave on 2007 10 19 at 11:29 PM • permalinkI exercise the Free Will that living in this country affords me and change the channel.
Sorry, Pogria, but that is crushing the Chase’s dissent. Remember the Dixie
ChicksTwits? You’re supposed to be mindlessly entertained by stupid stunts being pulled by halfwits, doncha know? Thinking is not allowed, and refusing to pay them some ‘tenshun is Unpatriotic./whining leftie
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2007 10 19 at 11:54 PM • permalinkOT: This thread at Bolta’s has the potential to be absolutely hilarious.
#22
Can’t see ‘em emulating D-Generation/Working Dog Productions’* (commercial) success and in a ratings quest can see Auntie dumping ‘em for a slicker revue team should one surface.
Enjoyed the Hilali airport scene, however.*Their early Thunderbirds sketch was a hoot.
Jesus, don’t you know that free speech = never criticising the left?
Posted by Harry Buttle on 2007 10 20 at 12:22 AM • permalinkTut-tut. Tut-tut.
Sorry, but I laughed at that song, ‘cos it’s both funny and truthy. Tools do turn into top blokes after death.
I suspect that JoHo’s pissed off both about the Don (Corleone) and his own probable treatment. Honest John: Dead thank Christ!
Posted by Hero Schema on 2007 10 20 at 12:27 AM • permalink#27 I reckon you’re right there Egg. Working Dog are a great team, with the success of The Dish and The Castle (filmed in 9 days, I think it was).
I’m yet to figure out why the Chaser haven’t been stolen by another network if they’re so sure they’re a great ratings success. It could have something to do with there being little choice on TV on Wednesday nights.
Actually egg, it’s two oxymorons, seperated by a colon.
I’m free to say it. You’re free to react however you see fit.
The social contract obligates us to be (somewhat) restrained in the matters of beheading, arson, & phoney umbrage.
Posted by Hero Schema on 2007 10 20 at 12:39 AM • permalinkOh yeah, just in case… the Chaser can be very dull and unfunny. I tune into the ABC on Wednesdays for the much funnier and more reliable Spicks & Specks.
Posted by Hero Schema on 2007 10 20 at 12:41 AM • permalink#23 - religious satire goes right back to Erasmus, who was writing back in the time of King Henry VIII.
Posted by mr creosote on 2007 10 20 at 01:16 AM • permalinkHonest John: Dead thank Christ!
Ah Hero, aren’t you the clever one?
I personally don’t watch The Chaser, not because of the content, but because one of the ‘boys’ shits me so much I’d like to stamp on his face. I dislike smirkers immensely.
So are you yet another of the people disenfranchised by HoWARd? Picked up in the middle of the night and thrown in jail for dissent? Banned from speaking in public forum?
Thought not. So please tell us all, clever fellow that you are, how Krudd is going to fix everything and make it shiny and new?
Perhaps he can help you move out of your parent’s garage eventually?
As part of his ‘Here to help Working Families because I’m a Financial Conservative’ policy?Agree with Chaser re Rudd stealing Latham’s policies, esp. edumacation in his tax launch.
Pogria, Mum’s dead, but you go right ahead with your insults. I’ll probably cry soon.
185600, sure, I’ve been arrested & jailed in various attempts to stifle my political expression. It’s never bothered me too much because rights like free speech are defended through their exercise - not by the grace of governments.
As far as KRudd is concerned - I have him marked down as one of yours. A gutless, prissy little coWARd who curries favour with anyone rich and/or powerful who condescends to notice him.
Posted by Hero Schema on 2007 10 20 at 02:05 AM • permalink#48 Ash_
Got it in one!
Yes please, some of the future legal defence studying hard?#49 Heroboy
Oooh, you’ve been arrested whilst ‘speaking truth to power’? Bet that turned the girls at Uni on heaps. Well, the hairy ones anyway.
So did any of these political expressions change a single thing? You weren’t one of the Erskinville 12 were you? I hope the naughty police officer didn’t actually have to force you into the van?As for Krudd being a gutless prissy coWARd, yep, right on the mark. So why do you hate John HoWARd so much? I take it you have a job? And on your arrests you weren’t tortured, threatened with the deaths of your family, etc? So what has he done that would warrant you wanting him dead, exactly?
Oh, and as for your ‘deceased’ mother, sorry ‘bout that, it happens to just about everyone sooner or later.
Ash, you don’t have to break a law to be arrested and locked up, or even convicted.
All you need is an over-zealous Police officer trying to please their boss, or some VIP to end up on charges. Acquittals come when you have the knowledge and resources to properly contest the matter in Court.
On free speech issues I’ve won more often than lost in Court. The only compensation is a certain moral smugness.
Posted by Hero Schema on 2007 10 20 at 02:24 AM • permalinkSuch a reaction shows how flimsy is the commitment of some Australians to freedom of speech.
That’s right put up and shut up. My freedom of speech is more important then yours. This Colin would be a blast to have a debate with.
O/T
On the subject of stupid letters to the Editor.There’s on the Saturday’s courier mail, saying that they did a google search on failed Aussie business’ and got 6 million hits, and some how blames John Howard for this.
Posted by Old school on 2007 10 20 at 02:26 AM • permalink#54 Heroboy
Yep, those cops can be really overzealous, can’t they? Officious Pigs, man.
‘you don’t have to break a law to be arrested and locked up, or even convicted.’
So you were unlawfully arrested and detained? Why haven’t we heard about these obvious travesties in the mainstream media!
Oh, it was for Offensive Use of Interpretive Dance? Lucky they didn’t beat you black and blue.185600, I don’t HATE JoHo, I just want him away from the levers of power.
Here’s an extract from the election leaflet I’m distributing now which gives my key reason.
“In 2003 John Howard told the Australian Parliament that his government “knew” Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction. He lied.
In 2003 John Howard told the Australian people that he went to war with Iraq solely because of those WMDs. He lied.
In 2004 John Howard said the war in Iraq was over. Australia had won, and was leaving. He lied.
In 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007 hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have died and been maimed in a war which is illegal, immoral, and unwinnable. John Howard’s a bastard.
In 2007 John Howard tells us we’re still winning, and our troops will come home soon. No, honestly. He’s lying.
John Howard lies about a lot of things.
On 24 November 2007 your vote can help John Howard stop lying….”
KRudd’s season is coming.
Posted by Hero Schema on 2007 10 20 at 02:36 AM • permalinkOfficious Pigs, man.
Hee hee hee. That’s funny. 185600, say that at home. As loud as you can. Let me know what happens afterwards… unless I really don’t want to know. Exercise discretion.
...you don’t have to break a law to be arrested and locked up, or even convicted.
I hear your pain man. I was arrested just the other day for changing the channel on my TV from the ABC. When will HoWARd stop this oppression?
Officious Pigs.
Your words, not mine. I have great respect for Police and the job they do. When JoHo slams Keelty for speaking truth - that’s disrespect.
Posted by Hero Schema on 2007 10 20 at 02:43 AM • permalink#58 Heroboy
Where to begin?
Number one, the WMD? You would have been hard pressed to find any western intelligence agency that wasn’t saying in their assessments that there were substantial WMD in Iraq. Not that you would have had access to them, but I got to see quite a few in ‘98 and ‘03. Everyone believed them. Your precious Kruddy as well.Hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqi civilians? Utter bullshit. The Lancet ‘study’ was nothing more than a survey, and has since been discredited.
A lot of people have died, and continue to, I agree.
But what do you do about it? How many Iraqi Kurds have been sponsored by you to live in your country? How many times have you been to the middle east exactly? Just curious, but if you want to make statements and call them facts, at least have some backround.Let me guess, you ‘want the troops’ home?
But you don’t know a single person who has been there, do you?
I am impressed with the depth of your feeling, misdirected as it appears to be to me.
So keep ‘speaking truth to power’ son.
Go back to trying to impress hairy uni chicks who are impressed with you wanting to change the world, until they wake up, shave their legs, get jobs and marry someone like me.#64, I said hundreds of thousands have died and been maimed, and I never cited Lancet.
Ali Allawi (hardly anti-war) estimates between 200,000 and 250,000 dead, and I think he qualifies as having been there.estimates
Posted by Hero Schema on 2007 10 20 at 02:59 AM • permalinkAs evidenced by Hero, the Howard haters are coming out of the woodwork, and suddenly, this election is starting to feel like the last four.
Love your work, hero.
Posted by Margos Maid on 2007 10 20 at 03:04 AM • permalink#67 Heroboy
An ABC interview? I note that wasn’t exactly scientific, now was it? You really have no idea how many casualties there have been, or how many displaced.
I didn’t ask about Ali Allawi, I asked about you. Have you ever set foot in the Middle East (Bondi doesn’t count son)? Do you know anyone who has served overseas? Don’t make claims that someone’s farted unless you’ve at least sniffed the air.
It’s always annoying when someone who has never even seen something tries to tell me it’s something else. Kinda like a blind man in a brothel.
On free speech issues I’ve won more often than lost in Court. The only compensation is a certain moral smugness.
Hero Schema is revealed as being on the same level as Bryan Law, not counting their respective wins/losses in court. He’s here to lecture from the high moral ground of a Howard Hating Pamphleteer. I have already pointed out that he is becoming abusive, referring to commenters here as “losers”. His latest efforts just confirm that he is waste of time and space.
#74 Ash_
Yep, and washing the cars and boat, taking the dog for a run, and of course, playing ‘bad constable’.
Don’t ask. :)#75 blogstrop
Exactly my point, Heroboy is one of those credulous people who truly believe in his cause, however misguided, and yet bases it all not on experience, but on the fact that he has to protest something.It’s a shame that some people have this sick urge to find an obsession that takes them away from the truth of their daily lives instead of facing the mirror.
#58 Heroboy
The War is your issue. Why am I not surprised?
In 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007 hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have died and been maimed in a war which is illegal, immoral, and unwinnable. John Howard’s a bastard.Illegal:
How? Certainly not under Australian law. Maybe international law but that’s a crock anyway.Immoral:
No more so than any other government program.Unwinnable:
This is crap.
Simultaneously making Iraq a democracy and avoiding theocracy might be impossible, holding the country together might be undesirable but the war is not unwinnable.There are many legitimate criticisms of Howard so why is it always this?
As for the lying thing politicians lie welcome to the world.
Hero boy listen up. For starters John Howard never said Australia had won the war in Iraq. Thats just left wing myth told often enough it becomes fact. The closest to it would be President Bush when he said “mission accomplished” which when you consider the miltary side of it was correct. Maybe your not old enough to remember but the real main reason we went to war in Iraq and Afganistan (which you have never mentioned) was because at the time arseholes were flying planes into tall buildings. Then there was that bombing thing in Bali and so on.The biggest scare for the western world then as now was that these arseholes would go nuclear.As for the hundreds of thousands killed in Iraq ask yourself who’s doing the killings? If you come up with the Yanks then you truly do have your head up your arse. Another thing name one ‘legal’ war PLEASE. lastly I dont know 185600 but I’m guessing it’s his regimental number and an old one at that.So if your going to blew with him on miltary serving overseas do your reseach.
185600, you got me. I haven’t been to the ME. I’ve had no reason and wouldn’t feel at all safe.
How many war-related deaths would you estimate?
Blogstrop, stop complaining. If you think being called a loser is too, too awful - why don’t you get organised and win. “Living well is the best revenge”.
Andy, “Immoral? No more so than any other government program”. My my.
Posted by Hero Schema on 2007 10 20 at 03:51 AM • permalink#85 “If the Kruddster gets in I may have to start protesting just to get a little action. :)” 185600 Would that be a hirsute pursuit?
Posted by Hero Schema on 2007 10 20 at 04:01 AM • permalink#83 Heroboy
I wouldn’t care to estimate. I already said a lot. Could be a hundred thousand, could be more. How many did that lovely ‘Uncle to the People’ Saddam Hussein kill, maim, torture?Perspective is a wonderful thing son. Think about widening your view about the ME. You wouldn’t feel safe? You wouldn’t be safe in just about any country in the region, with the exception (ironically) of Israel.
Go and see the world before you comment on it or protest about our role in it’s affairs, it might do you some good.#82 jon crow
Yes, it is an old one, thanks for making me feel positively geriatric at the age of 35! :)The coalition isn’t the cause of the killing in Iraq, not anymore. If anyone thinks that the Sectarian and criminal violence would stop as soon as the Allies pull out, they’re eating magic mushrooms.
The old regime kept a lid on this stuff by being totally ruthless and brutal. Should we be the same? No.
We should be proud of the fact that at least we are trying to do this the right way. Were mistakes made? Yes. But a mistake doesn’t require blame, it requires a compensating action.Sorry to ramble, but hey, it’s free.
#83
Overthrowing socialist dictators is one of the few things the government does that I can bring myself to stomach. They may not be very good at it but that doesn’t make it immoral.
What is immoral is forcing people like your good peacenik self to pay for it and I don’t endorse that. Given that you likely support forcing me to pay for all forms of welfare corporate, middle class, regular and otherwise I find it hard to summon sympathy for taxing you a little to free people from Baathist oppression.
Feel free to disagree that’s the great thing about this country.
“In 2003 John Howard told the Australian Parliament that his government “knew” Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction. He lied.
He did? I mean he only knew of the information he was given. Man I must of lied
when a friend told me that he that a test was going to be on the next week, I told that to my other friends, damn it. I’m a lying bastard.In 2003 John Howard told the Australian people that he went to war with Iraq solely because of those WMDs. He lied.
Same as the last reply he didn’t lie the problem is he relied on faulty evidence.
In 2004 John Howard said the war in Iraq was over. Australia had won, and was leaving. He lied.
Come again? your statements are just filled with lack of evidence.
Posted by Old school on 2007 10 20 at 04:28 AM • permalink#58
In 2003 John Howard told the Australian Parliament that his government “knew” Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction. He lied.Wot, juz cos the dopey UN weapons inspectors Hans Blix and (Oz f*cktard diplomat in the vein of KRuddy) Richard Butler* couldn’t find their way out of a wet paperbag? Pffft!
*Booted out of Tassie cos of his supercilious demands.
#105 kae
Whatever could you be insinuating?
I care about his right to speak truth to power.
Or the hairy legged lesbian communist collective in Erskinville.
You have to feel for the lad, Interpretive Dance is such a difficult medium to protest in.You keep getting arrested on suspicion of being drug affected. :)
Is it warm in here?
#103 Nope, still here. Just don’t want to take up too much space.
I remember 2002/3 and WMD. I remember that an early tactic to avoid the war, using the UN, was to insist on a return of weapons inspectors.
I remember that those weapons inspectors began to follow up all the so-called “intelligence” reports from the CIA, MI5, and the Iraqi exiles (remember Challabi?) and kept finding the intelligence wrong.
I remember the Iraqi government complying with US demands.
I remember that the US once more forced the weapons inspectors OUT and attacking Iraq before its intelligence credibility was completely eroded.
John Howard told the Australian Parliament in February 2003 that the government “knew” Iraq had WMD. Not “had reason to believe”, or reasonably suspected”, or believed its intelligence assessments. He said “knew” - and he lied.
Posted by Hero Schema on 2007 10 20 at 05:12 AM • permalink#58
Richard Butler:While at UNSCOM Butler frequently argued that Saddam had undisclosed weapons of mass destruction. In a 1999 speech he said:
‘following Iraq’s expulsion from Kuwait, it became clear that the Saddam Hussein government had created a range and quality of weapons of mass destruction that was truly alarming. Iraq had also acquired a very considerable long-range missile force to deliver those weapons. There was also concern about Iraq’s nuclear weapons program, which through the International Atomic Energy Agency, we now know was advanced. It was for these reasons that the Security Council imposed very heavy, very strict requirements upon Iraq for the destruction, removal or rendering harmless of those weapons, and all of that to be done under international supervision.’He also accused Iraq of actively concealing its weapons and obstructing UNSCOM’s work:
‘Iraq never kept its side of the bargain by: not making honest disclosure statements of its prohibited weapons and weapons capability; unilaterally destroying weapons in order to ensure that the Commission would never know the full nature and scope of what it had held and this, under circumstances where the law required that all destruction be conducted under international supervision; and, through the pursuit of an active policy and practice of concealing weapons and proscribed components from the Commission.’Yes egg, that’s why the weapons inspectors were sent in. Unfinished business.
Why weren’t they allowed to finish the job?
Posted by Hero Schema on 2007 10 20 at 05:23 AM • permalink#110 Heroboy
You are really talking to the wrong person when you start talking about the UN inspectors son.
I was there in ‘98 when the Iraqi regime did everything it could to obstruct the inspections, and I remember some of the ‘inspectors’. You claim that they followed up the intel? Most of them were spooks son.
The inspectors weren’t forced out by the US, they were forced out by the situation - Iraqi anti-air firing in the no-fly-zone, Saddam making threats to fire on Israel, etc.The French and German governments of the time were shitting bricks about the fact that they built most of the infrastructure, and supplied a lot of the raw material for an NBCD capability to the Iraqis in the first place.
Oh, and if you say ‘Scott Ritter’ I will say ‘Paedophile who was lucky to leave the ME with his head’.
Come on, son. You can’t be such a one trick pony?
Oh, and if we all knew in ‘03 about there being no WMD, WTF were we doing taking so many precautions? Why did we have all of those Anthrax injections, etc?
We believed, and so did most of the world. Even Saddam’s side believed that they had them.
I don’t stoop to personal attacks on people often, but check YOUR facts. I was there, you weren’t. And I doubt you were in the room when the PM was briefed?
Mr Hero,what the fuck is an illegal war.
What the fuck is an immoral war.
Is there such a thing as a good one,a moral one…..You idiot.
Your right,it should be U.N sanctioned,we can sit around while some Coffee Anan type tosser raves on about how “concerned” he is in endless press statements while 2 million people die like Rwanda.
My family has been serving in the Australian Armed forces since the first Australian Army was formed to go to Sudan in 1885, There is nothing legal and moral about any war.
I read this letter this morning. What a disgrace. Sheppard is an idiot for describing these Muslims as reacting “indignantly” since it is a complete misnomer and whitewashes the whole thing.
So the next time I burn flags, kill a few people and chant ‘death to the infidels!’, will I be described as reacting “indignantly”?
The Age is pathetic.
Posted by The Best Infidel on 2007 10 20 at 05:43 AM • permalink#114, I’m talking about 2003. No, I wasn’t there when JoHo was briefed, but I knew enough from independent research to know the WMD issue was propaganda.
I accept your experience, but perhaps you’ll tell me now since everything was so rational, good and true - how come there weren’t any WMDs, or programmes, and why Colin Powell has since been moved to apologise for the innaccurate tripe he presented to the UN on 5 Feb 2003.
#116 an immoral war is one based on a cynical lie, for profiteering purposes, waged against civilians, that makes everything it touches turn to shit - and in which troops are lied to, abused and then neglected by a government of would-be tyrants and tossers.
Posted by Hero Schema on 2007 10 20 at 05:48 AM • permalink#116 sparrow
Exactly. The only people who think that you can have such a thing as a ‘Just War’ are those who have never fought.
War isn’t nice, it isn’t clean, it doesn’t always make a lot of sense. It’s warfare.And when we no longer need soldiers and are all singing folk songs around the fire, I’ll be turning in my long cold grave. Human nature determines conflict.
My family have fought as Australians, since the Boer war.
Do I love war? No, but I love my country, and I want to do something that has an impact on the world, for my country.Obviously, the paper mache heads and walking down the main drag carrying a banner has some safe appeal, but really. I have testes.
#118 You’re absolutely full of it Hero.
You know about 2003. Ok, that’s cool. But you know enough from information, given years later, that it was crap. Well done buddy. Hindsight is always perfect.
As for “how come there weren’t any WMDs, or programmes, and why Colin Powell has since been moved to apologise for the innaccurate tripe he presented to the UN on 5 Feb 2003.”
Hindsight is always perfect. You know that.
Ash, I knew about the WMD scam in 2003, before the invasion.
I did what I could to spread the knowledge then, but the government spin (with support from Murdoch et al) counts for much more, and Crean, like Krudd, is a gutless spiv.
Hindsight may well be perfect, but I’d value a higher attachment to honesty in our political culture - and I’m naive enough to believe we can achieve it.
Posted by Hero Schema on 2007 10 20 at 05:59 AM • permalink#118 Heroboy
What independent research? Hindsight is a marvelous thing. ‘03? I was probably not clear, I was there for both ‘98 and ‘03.The Iraqis themselves thought that the programs were still running (Saddam had their General Staff all thinking that someone else was responsible for them - good move in a country where informers are rife).
Things weren’t all good and true. There was so much counter work going on from certain countries, along the lines of ‘Ziss is not Cherman’ etc. No-one knew, and everyone took the worst case scenario. Consider the fact that the threats to attack every country with a border to Saddam, and you can kind of understand that.
Please don’t hand me that tripe of ‘in which troops are lied to, abused and then neglected by a government of would-be tyrants and tossers.’
I have had the pleasure of meeting the PM, and he isn’t a tyrant, or a tosser. He at least seems concerned every time he sends a soldier overseas. I doubt Kruddy or yourself would give two fucks if I died on a mountainside in Afghanistan, or a road in Iraq.
So what is your solution? Would you prefer that we all just pull out of everywhere, including Timor (which, by the way, was not UN sanctioned until we went in)?
185600, you said “I doubt Kruddy or yourself would give two fucks if I died on a mountainside in Afghanistan, or a road in Iraq”.
You’d be wrong. You scoffed earlier when I said I respected Police officers and their work. And I guess you’ll be equally sceptical when I profess respect and admiration for soldiers and armed service-folk. Nevertheless.
Every soldier I know talks about the ugly realities of war, and also about the higher values (democracy, nation, family) they believe it serves.
While the situation was confused, and yes, the worst-case scenario had to be acknowledged, my informed belief is that the war in Iraq could have been avoided (justice, not appeasement) and that JoHo and his cronies just didn’t do the job they signed up for.
We can disagree about that, but I’m confident you’ll support my right to act honestly on my beliefs as long as I’m prepared to pay the consequences. I support your right to do the same.
Posted by Hero Schema on 2007 10 20 at 06:18 AM • permalink#128 Bomb Boy,
now that you’ve established that you believe in “Truth, Justice and The Australian Way”, why the hell don’t you relax and join in the genuinely jolly fun that most of the commenters have on this site.
I’m sure if you dig REAL deep, you can amuse us in ways that don’t require us to place you over our knee and deliver the required spanking.
You know that it hurts us more than it hurts you when we have to administer the punishment plank.
Quick quiz for hero. Who said this?
There is no debate or dispute as to whether Saddam Hussein possesses weapons of mass destruction.
He does.
There’s no dispute as whether he’s in violation of UN Security Council resolutions.
He is.
Is it too late to add another name to your brochure?
Posted by Margos Maid on 2007 10 20 at 06:30 AM • permalink128 Heroboy
Of course I respect your right to do whatever you wish (if it’s legal and constitutional), but please, don’t tell me that on an international scale, our politicians didn’t do what we paid them for? They’re politicians, for crying out loud!We had a choice to make, either sit idly by and let our alliance with the US and UK go to pot, or join up with the Coalition.
Consider something. The Pre-war ME had not one single democracy. Not one, bar Israel.
If you were a person thinking on the strategic level, wouldn’t you think that a resurgent Shia nation (Iran) and a Wahabist fuedal regime (Saudi Arabia) are going to butt heads sooner or later?
What possible buffer could you get to preserve trade (the most important thing to our national interest) in the region?A democratic country slap bang between the two. That’s just a guess, but it’s not so far off if you take the long view.
Otherwise, it’s the New Caliphate.
One way or another, it will be decided in that region whether our requirements for resources are traded for, or we are blackmailed.I thought regimental numbers had 7 digits, not 6.
Posted by mr creosote on 2007 10 20 at 07:43 AM • permalinkWell that explains it.
Dad had a letter or two in his. The letter denoted your state. Don’t know when they got rid of that.
I’m told the blood type thing is no longer that necessary. True or not?
Posted by mr creosote on 2007 10 20 at 08:36 AM • permalinkA Queensland number? Shouldn’t it be shorter? I didn’t think people could count much higher than 10 up north.
Ha ha.
I knew a few people that had the blood type tat, usually on both arms for the reason you pointed out.
Posted by mr creosote on 2007 10 20 at 08:52 AM • permalinkF256570
32 years since I joined up and I still remember it.
Blood crossmatching is very quick these days and they often use blood which matches type with a universal one, like I think O positive will go with any positive and O neg will go with any negative, but you’d have to ask someone here with nursing experience. And I was told that in an emergency situation blood will always be crossmatched, they won’t go by tattoos, ‘cos they’ve been known to be wrong! Though I’m not sure of the drill in a battle situation.
And it’s amusing that, if they need your bloodgroup you’re probably missing bits anyway.
#143 Ash_
No one ever said that black humour isn’t a soldier’s game. :)
#145 mr creosote
Yep, we count real high, since we got edumacated an all.
The blood type tattoo is popular with some people, I was just young and hung out with a bad crown (and seventeen years later, am stil hanging around with the same bad crowd, just younger). :)#147 kae
You were a WRAAC? Ladies every one, I only got to meet a few of them after the changeover. We did have a ‘sister platoon’ at Kapooka, and I will admit, it was fun for the instructors and us trying to stop the fraternising.I still remember the WRAAC girls as being much more ‘ladielike’.
That said, some of them were bad, bad girls. :)All I got was seven lousy digits and no letters. Some people have all the fun.
Posted by mr creosote on 2007 10 20 at 09:05 AM • permalinkI was in the ARES in the 70s.
I just had a look for an amusing photo, but I have taken it out of the album and can’t find it. This one will have to do.
I never got a photo in the dress uniform which was tailor made in those days. And it was before the goofy green striped hat came out. We only had the beret, the fur-felt bottle green hat as dress.Ah, jungle greens. Funny how you never see the fashionistas wearing them these days. Or ever.
If you can look sexy in them, you can look sexy in anything.
And don’t knock the groundsheets. I thought the term was “mattress cover”.
Posted by mr creosote on 2007 10 20 at 09:36 AM • permalink#154 kae
Our hat is the same colour, hence we cop a bit of flak about it.Sometimes some girls do join up and for whatever reason, groundsheet time.
That said, I have worked with some girls who would kick just about anyone’s arse.
Although I do still remember my platoon staff, as we ran in three files, making the right file punch our rifles out to the side, on the command of ‘indicators on’ as we passed a female platoon. That and the fact that as we ran past, their instructors (all female) gave them the ‘eyes right’ whilst ours gave us the ‘eyes left’.
I fell in totally platonic love with one of those girls.
Page 1 of 1 pages
Members:
Login | Register
| Member List
The Chaser song didn’t go far enough. Why didn’t it mention Kerry Packer? Some cows are too sacred I guess.