<< ROOFLESS IN QUEENSLAND ~ MAIN ~ SITE GETS WRIT >>
WITHDRAW THAT ASSERTION!
Margo Kingston, who’d promised to be “back in business” by yesterday, is still on a break. So, lest we forget her contributions to Australian journalism, here’s an edited transcript of Margo’s recent online argument with Webdiary reader Troy Cox:
Troy: Paul McGeough said that Iraq’s interim PM had been going around with a gun and shooting people. Until the evidence is produced, I’d take Paul’s comments with a grain of salt myself.
Margo: And your evidence for your belief that Paul got it wrong?
Troy: To the best of my (admittedly limited) understanding of the legal system, when somebody alleges murder, the burden of proof does not rest with the accused. Rather it rests with the person making the allegation. In this case, then, the burden of proof rests with McGeough; he is required to prove Allawi’s guilt.
Margo: Troy, you started this discussion by saying, categorically as I recall, that McGeough’s story was false. That puts the onus of proof on you, mate. Care to withdraw your assertion, since you won’t back it up? And by the way, on what basis did you make it in the first place? If you had none, please don’t do the same thing on Webdiary in future.
I, for one, welcome this new evidentiary standard. It’ll sure make journalism easier. By the way, Margo Kingston once kidnapped triplets and sold them to a dog food factory. Prove that she didn’t!
UPDATE. A press release arrives from the University of Western Australia:
Political commentator Margo Kingston will discuss her experience of participatory journalism and pose some questions about where we may go to from here in the current state of things in a lecture entitled: ‘The Citizen as journalist’ to be held at The University of Western Australia’s Social Science Lecture Theatre, on Thursday March 17, 2005, at 6.30pm.
“Where we may go to from here in the current state of things”?
Well, heck, with this standard, Dan Rather shouldn’t be giving his last news report tonight. The burden is on us to prove that what he said is false. Not just the faxes. But what the faxes said.
I thought Margo is an attorney? Is that what they teach in Australian law schools?
Posted by wronwright on 2005 03 09 at 12:22 PM • permalinkAnd here I thought the dingoes had ate my three bairns. ‘Twere Margo instead, eh?
Posted by spongeworthy on 2005 03 09 at 12:24 PM • permalinkI knew there was a reason that I never read Margo’s Webdiary.
BTW, I heard she was the Puppy Blender’s ace procurer.
Posted by scott crawford on 2005 03 09 at 12:38 PM • permalinkThe plot thickens…
The obsession with dead babies…
not many photos of babies with their guts hanging out
The dog food…
The dogs…
Posted by lewisinnyc on 2005 03 09 at 12:49 PM • permalinkI heard it was Margo, Adams and Habib but Habib didn’t want them to go to a dog food factory and, ultimately, fell out with his co-conspirators on the advice of his lawyer pending another 60 minutes doco and his latest welfare cheque (which was larger than Margo’s welfare cheque which pissed her off as ugly, lesbian, SMH employees should get more than terrorist cleaners).
Posted by Karl Fidel Adams-Kingston on 2005 03 09 at 02:42 PM • permalinkIf anyone is interested in McGeough’s reporting on the alleged looting of the Iraq National museum, check out my full article, Iraq Antiquities Revisited.
Yes, a pattern begins to emerge.
*
Posted by Jeffrey -- New York on 2005 03 09 at 02:45 PM • permalink*reads the thread in the link*
...wow, what universe are these people in?
Posted by Patrick Chester on 2005 03 09 at 03:25 PM • permalinkWell I suppose that’s the “golden thread” which runs through Fairfax journalism.
As a former lawyer, Margo should know better. And the reason she gave up law for Journalism?
An inveterate worrier, Kingston says her personality was completely unsuited to the law. She would lie awake at night worrying, finally jumping out of bed to look up cases for reassurance. With journalism, she says, at least you know the next day whether or not you’ve made a mistake.
Or perhaps not.
I am going to have fun at webdiary using the Kingston method of proof MATE. Licence to make wild accusations and then hide behind the prove me wrong arguement, sounds like fun to me.
I wonder if this will violate webdiaries code of ethics? I’m off to find out, that is of course if and when she makes it back.I heard Margo has sex with goats. Until she proves it’s false I guess we can all assume it’s true.
Posted by swassociates on 2005 03 09 at 05:38 PM • permalinkWhat does she think we are? French or someting?
Posted by Dog of War on 2005 03 09 at 07:40 PM • permalinkRe post #12:- a pity her parents hadn’t done likewise-
lie awake at night worrying, finally jumping out of bed…...at least you know the next day whether or not you’ve made a mistake.............they certainly did, but nothing a dose of RU486 couldn’t fix, or perhaps a camping trip in the company of a hungry dingo.I, for one, welcome this new evidentiary standard. It’ll sure make journalism easier. By the way, Margo Kingston once kidnapped triplets and sold them to a dog food factory. Prove that she didn’t!
1. Motive: The prosecution will assert that the triplets in question were genetically engineered “Boys From Bennelong” clones of John Howard. If Margo is “no thappy” about a single Howard, she would be positively genocidal about a race of super-Howards.
2. Opportunity: As she hardly ever turns up to work, she has ample opportunity to kidnap triplets. Further, her visage is not out of place in a dog food factory.
3. Ability: OK, this is the weak part of your case. Margo has demonstrated no ability in any of her chosen activities, whether they be: law; journalism; or activism. One would think this massive incompetence would not obscure supreme triplet-kidnapping abilities.
4. Intent: Admittedly it’s sometimes difficult to discern what Margo intends, as most things she says or does seem like they are the product of an unmedicated ouija board.
5. Preparation: Again, another weak point. Some gradual mastery of the possessive apostrophe would be a sign of preparation. Let me know if you detect any.
6. Plan: Yet another weak point. Margo’s plans generally resemble excreta spread erratically over retail premises.
7. Knowledge: The case is looking shaky by now. Even if Margo does have knowledge of the crime, she also “knows” lots of things which are palpably untrue, but then I only say that because ZIONISTS RULE MY MIND.
8. Identity: Well, Tim saw her leaving the smoking dog food factory with triplets all over her fingers. Good enough - even second-hand - for Paul McGeough.
‘Nuff said.
20 to life.
So somone is only subject to the burden of proof until I challenge them to prove something at which point I am subject to the burden of proof because they challenge me — I’m not drinking enough at work to make sense of Margo Kingston…
Posted by richard mcenroe on 2005 03 09 at 09:43 PM • permalinkNo, no, NO, people! McGeough accuses Allawi of murder, Troy accuses McGeough of making a baseless accusation, then Margo accuses Troy of making a baseless accusation when he said McGeough made a baseless accusation. Now it’s somebody else’s turn to accuse Margo of making a baseless accusation about Troy making a baseless accusation about McGeough making a baseless accusation. Unless she called “no tagbacks” or perhaps “no electricity”. I need a drink.
Or as Jim Treacher once wrote, “For the fourth time in as many days, CBS Evening News anchor Dan Rather interrupted his telecast tonight to reiterate his claim that he has been crowned Queen of the Space Unicorns.” It’s going to be much tougher to prove that he isn’t now that he will no longer be on television every night.
Posted by charles austin on 2005 03 09 at 11:31 PM • permalinkdorkafork:
Or maybe someone should TRIPLE dog dare Margo to prove her baseless accusation?
Posted by Patrick Chester on 2005 03 09 at 11:32 PM • permalinkIs this latest espisode going to unfold in the usual scenario of Margo being escorted away in a strait jacket and hockey mask after attempting to eat Troy’s face ?
Posted by Rachel Corrie's Flatmate on 2005 03 09 at 11:35 PM • permalinkTroy: Margo, I said in my earlier posting that we should take McGeough’s assertions with a grain of salt until proven true. His story about Allawi might be true and it might not be. That was my point - we just don’t know. I didn’t categorically say it was false. It was a very audacious claim.
I’m sorry if I gave the impression that I was calling Paul a liar - I certainly wasn’t. For all I know, he is a decent and honorable man.
Margo: Hi Troy. No worries.
Seems Margo is proof against irony too
Just read about the Iraq Museum as posted by Jeffrey—New York.
It really is true then. The first casualty of war is definately truth.
Posted by DropDeadUgly on 2005 03 10 at 04:29 AM • permalinkChas — Bring a small recorder, this begs for a podcast…
Posted by richard mcenroe on 2005 03 10 at 10:29 PM • permalinkBut wait, there’s more. The obviously inappropriately named Institute of Advance Studies is hosting a lunch with Margo on the 18th and, by the way, hosting the crazy cow in conjunction with the Perth Social Forum. Andrew Wilkie will be joining our Margo at the PSF. Jesus, Wilkie and Kingston together with a bunch of World Social Forum nuts. Now there’s a surprise.
Page 1 of 1 pages
Members:
Login | Register
| Member List
No, no, Tim, you’ve got it all wrong.
You were told the story by two unnamed sources, one of which claimed the parents of the triplets were in on it, while the other said that they weren’t sold, merely put on a long-term lease.
Oh, and the dates they provided were different, too.