HATEFUL RHETORIC OF UNITY

Two or three reasonably informed people discussing an issue might get somewhere. Ideas will develop; theories be refined. But dump ten or more people in a television studio and you’ll only rarely get beyond talking points and half-formed positional statements, which is why I declined SBS’s invitation to attend taping of Monday’s Insight program. Judging from the transcript, I may have made a mistake; the thing was a festival of correctional opportunities. Here’s guest David Marr addressing the show’s topic, What It Means To Be Australian:

I think there are things that mark us. And these days, and perhaps for a long time, kind of passivity, kind of putting up with what we’re given, a sort of bedrock understanding that somebody’s going to look after us, there’s somebody somewhere looking after us. And we just take what comes. We moan about authority but we don’t do much about it. We whinge but when was the last time an angry public stopped the Federal Government in this country doing anything? We just cop it.

The last time an angry public rose up was at Cronulla. Can’t imagine Dave was too pleased by the rioters’ rejection of passivity, and their evident refusal to “cop it.” You know, sometimes it seems as though Marr isn’t a great fan of Australia:

We do believe in mateship and we do believe in a fair go but not passionately. We’re not going to go out into the streets, we’re not going to passionately defend those virtues. I mean, a country that has just junked a century of understanding about labour law and how we deal with working men and women in this country, just junked it effortlessly, it’s not a country that believes deeply in fairness and mateship.

Partisan hack Dave then veered into a wild Anzac Day theory:

Lately there’s been a lot of marching up and down and a lot of drums being thudded around by the Government and, to some extent, also by the Opposition. I think Australians find this a bit embarrassing. But Gallipoli is now so far in the past, it’s an iconic Australian event, it puzzles us. And I think a great deal of the fascination of Gallipoli is it’s a riddle, it’s a hard riddle for this country to solve.

Embarrassing? Puzzling? A riddle? Record crowds, Dave. Marr next inspected treasurer Peter Costello’s views on the likelihood of Sharia law in Australia:

It’s dog-whistling politics. You know, this rhetoric from the Government at the moment about Aussie values – it’s talking white values and Christian values. It’s dog whistling and it’s disgusting and it is one of the most embarrassing things that’s happened in public life in the country for a very long time. This is wholly unnecessary. Costello’s rant the other night about the, you know, the dangers of sharia law in this country was a confected rant against Islam. And this is a country, Australia is a country terrified of Islam at the moment. Why? Well, it’s very good politics for the Government and that is a very sad thing.

More from confected David shortly. Now to an exchange between host Jenny Brockie and Hizb Ut-Tahrir representative Wassim Doureihi:

BROCKIE: Now, democracy, secularism, do you believe in those things?

DOUREIHI: Muslims do hold a unique set of values which will definitely, and I’ll say very unequivocally, which will go against notions of secularism and democracy because Islam puts the role of the creator as the pillar for both the personal and the political. But that is a belief. No-one is suggesting that the Muslims in this country are engaged in subversive activity to alter the political reality in this country. We exist, we’re under one set of laws and no-one is suggesting we are trying to implement sharia on this country. It’s the exact opposite that is occurring.

The exact opposite? That point could have been explored a little further. We now return to Dave, debating matters with One Nation’s Bob Vinnicombe, comedian Mikey Robins, and the Muslim Reference Group’s Mustapha Kara-Ali:

MARR: Let’s not romanticise Australia’s past. Australia is a paradise of a kind and it’s because people like you who spout this hateful rhetoric … hateful rhetoric of unity. Why do you say like me? Have you studied no history? The calls for unity …

BROCKIE: Hang on a second.

MARR: And I’m old enough to remember when this country was so bitterly divided between Catholics and Protestants, they couldn’t marry each other, they didn’t know each other.

VINNICOMBE: They didn’t blow each other up.

MARR: They didn’t speak to each other.

VINNICOMBE: They didn’t blow each other up.

ROBINS: Who’s blown who up, sorry?

VINNICOMBE: The Muslims murdered 88 Australians in Bali. They blew up 50 people in London. They killed 3,000 people on September 11.

BROCKIE: OK, Bob, you’ve made your point.

KARA-ALI: This gets to the heart of extremism. This is a form of extremism Australia can do without.

VINNICOMBE: I’m not an extremist, I’m the most moderate person here.

KARA-ALI: Muslims did not kill 88 people. Listen – no, no, this is very important. This is exactly, unfortunately, exactly the language that breeds extremists for Muslim youth. They listen to you and they go out very angry and frustrated.

Got that? Muslims did not kill 88 Australians in Bali, and Islamic extremism is caused by a One Nation bloke nobody has heard of. Let’s close with another line from Dave:

A tipping point would come if there were large numbers of people who were disobeying the law, or even a small group disobeying the law in a way which caused immense difficulties for the country. But thank God a terrorist hasn’t so much as exploded a firecracker in this country, yet we have laws now which are all set up as though this country were being rent by communal violence. It’s a strange thing going on and I think in some ways the law has tipped over a bit here.

Posted by Tim B. on 04/27/2006 at 09:21 AM
    1. Marr must have had his microphone buried in the sand along with his head.  To borrow the headline from your last post:  unbelievable.

      Posted by cosmo on 2006 04 27 at 09:59 AM • permalink

 

    1. Sometimes there’s a lot to be said for just letting these people talk where folks can hear them.  Does half our job for us.

      Posted by richard mcenroe on 2006 04 27 at 09:59 AM • permalink

 

    1. The best answer to the stupid question, “What makes us special?” should be “You’re not so goddamn special.” Unless you’re Barassi.

      Posted by chinesearithmetic on 2006 04 27 at 10:00 AM • permalink

 

    1. Ok, you can put the Marr-bot away for a full service. Spouting that much wank in a single session must have nearly overloaded its bullshit circuts.

      “Hatefull rhetoric of unity”. A village somewhere is missing its idiot.

      Posted by thefrollickingmole on 2006 04 27 at 10:03 AM • permalink

 

    1. David Marr has tipped over a bit here..

      Posted by crash on 2006 04 27 at 10:05 AM • permalink

 

    1. Although on second thought, Tim, you might look to your conservative credentials.  Given the quality of people the American network talk shows like post up as what THEY decide is the REAL face of conservatism (circus folk like Bill O’Reilly and tar-encrusted revenants like Pat Buchanan) it could be a bad sign that they thought you fit to invite…

      Posted by richard mcenroe on 2006 04 27 at 10:06 AM • permalink

 

    1. Can anyone who watched it tell me if Libby Gorr is still the worlds most annoying attempt at a witty comedian?
      Her Mcfeast wast shite but Id like to think she has finaly found her own personal hell of irrelivance.

      Posted by thefrollickingmole on 2006 04 27 at 10:10 AM • permalink

 

    1. I remember channel surfing and seeing parts of that show.

      The thing that got me where his craven comments about “the only people being able to cook lamb being the lebs”. A pointed attempt to curry favour with some members of the audience. Unfortunately for him they appeared to view it as deeply creepy. Perhaps the tone of voice (kindergarten teacher sermonising about inconsequentialities) and pregnant atmosphere at the time made it more so.

      I switched channels then, but it was hard to forget.

      Posted by lemmy on 2006 04 27 at 10:14 AM • permalink

 

    1. Re #3 what is so special about Barassi? I saw him play against Collingwood at Victoria Park in 1960 and he hardly got a kick. Same thing in the 1964 Grand Final.

      Posted by Rafe on 2006 04 27 at 10:19 AM • permalink

 

    1. But Gallipoli is now so far in the past, it’s an iconic Australian event, it puzzles us. And I think a great deal of the fascination of Gallipoli is it’s a riddle, it’s a hard riddle for this country to solve.

      I’m probably not as bright as David Marr, but Gallipoli doesn’t puzzle me at all and I don’t see anyone in Aust viewing it as a riddle they have to solve. Other than effete dilettantes of course. At a personal level, Gallipoli and Anzac day give me the opportunity to remember my father (Mosquito pilot who survived WW2), two great-uncles (killed in WW1, one in 3rd Light Horse at Jericho and the other at Bellecourt in France) and a school friend killed in Vietnam. And after them I remember those others that I don’t know who fought to ensure our freedom.

      It’s as simple, sombre and as easy as that David. Don’t try to make out it’s anything more. It’s not a puzzle, riddle or conundrum.  Give your brain a rest.

      Posted by Whale Spinor on 2006 04 27 at 10:19 AM • permalink

 

    1. Yeah, I don’t blame you for declining.

      It’s much easier to take pot-shots at people using your website.  Then instead of having to debate them, you can just ban them.

      Posted by gustov_deleft on 2006 04 27 at 10:24 AM • permalink

 

    1. And how do you view Gallipoli gustov old mate? Are you with David? Were you riddled, puzzled and perplexed like all the other people who were with you at the record turnout on Anzac day. Or did you just stay at home and scratch your balls.

      Posted by Whale Spinor on 2006 04 27 at 10:37 AM • permalink

 

    1. Eh, lets not pretend that these TV/radio debate shows achieve anything more than tossing a conservative to an angry mob of liberal lions. Then take that conversational meat and run it through an editorial grinder to fit the current leftist meme. That meme happens to be, white hetro men and anything they have done in 250 years = bad.

      Posted by 13times on 2006 04 27 at 10:41 AM • permalink

 

    1. #11 fuxakes, anyone who goes near this program is wasting their time. they are never going to make anyheadway against zealots & dhimmis. add to that having to be in a studio with marr, who looks like he’s got a dead rat under his nose & who sounds like his mouth is permanently in cat’s arse purseitude, & it’s a very unattractive proposition.  and his curious phrasing, stressing so many words to try to sound like a person of gravitas, is just ridiculous.  but his bizarre thoughts are the real worry.  as for his mate kara-ali, derangement isn’t in it

      Posted by KK on 2006 04 27 at 10:42 AM • permalink

 

    1. nice to see a troll back, but

      Posted by KK on 2006 04 27 at 10:44 AM • permalink

 

    1. Gustov,

      I’ve appeared with Marr on at least a couple of radio panels, one of them in front of an audience of ABC luvvies. The problem with larger-scale forums like Insight is the LACK of opportunity to debate; there are simply too many voices.

      Posted by Tim B. on 2006 04 27 at 10:46 AM • permalink

 

    1. Lisbeth hasn’t become any funnier than when she deliberately (wanting to shock her audience) let loose the Frankenstein, a drunken Chopper Read on her show.
      Gawsh it was interesting watching her face as he described feeding a live person into a cement mixer.As he pawed and kissed her and lurched about the set..even being ABC’s Elle McFeast and putting it about with ABC boss David Hill couldn’t save her or her show. It was canned due to public outcry.

      Posted by crash on 2006 04 27 at 10:50 AM • permalink

 

    1. and how we deal with working men and women in this country

      The tin ear.

      “The working man’’ as a figure of solid middle class straight-out honesty depends rather strongly on not falling into political correctness.  But he can’t resist.  He knows this other figure, “men and women,’’ that has to replace “men’’ everywhere.

      Posted by rhhardin on 2006 04 27 at 11:09 AM • permalink

 

    1. Marr is apparently one of those multiculti leftards who knows jack shi’ite about matehood.

      Real Australians are the best of mates – both as a nation and as a nation of individuals. It’s a country which has stood squarely alongside the cause of liberty at every instance and often against all odds with nary a single Frenchified triangulation…And no, fighting for other people’s freedom to preserve one’s own is not a french habit.

      Anyway, when the day is done, free people remember the many fine mates who slogged it out in the shitholes of Gallipoli, and Tubruk, Vietnam and Timor with nothing to gain but victory for the principles that bind free peoples together. Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of infidel Happiness.

      Those men and women are the strong fair-minded Aussies I’ve come to respect as friends, and I have no doubt that my country will do so in as like a manner as to be worthy of being your mates.

      I take solace in the fact that history will most certainly NOT remember as mates the likes of Marr and the whole screeching cathouse of self-referential media whores who have built their parasitic careers out of trumping up some fantasy police state on public-funded television.

      Posted by monkeyfan on 2006 04 27 at 11:18 AM • permalink

 

    1. Australia is a country terrified of Islam at the moment. Why? Well, it’s very good politics for the Government and that is a very sad thing.

      Howard has created Islam!

      Posted by Patricia on 2006 04 27 at 11:26 AM • permalink

 

    1. 9. I had 1970 in mind.

      Posted by chinesearithmetic on 2006 04 27 at 12:02 PM • permalink

 

    1. On a somewhat related topic, I purchased a book called “The Fatal Shore” some years ago off the sales rack of the local library, but never got around to reading it (it’s about Australia’s turbulent early days, from what I gather). I was thinking of doing so, now, but before I dive into this weighty tome, I was wondering if any of you have any thoughts on the book or the author, Robert Hughes. The dust jacket describes him as having been an art critic for, I believe, Time magazine – a not particularly encouraging portent. And the photo reveals a rather beefy fellow with unkempt hair and what would probably be described as rugged good looks, save for the ferocious expression in the eyes which suggests an axe murderer. For all that, he may be a first-rate scholar, but I would appreciate any instant judgments from my fellow commenters.

      Posted by paco on 2006 04 27 at 12:08 PM • permalink

 

    1. Muslims did not kill 88 people.

      Well, of course! It was the bombs that did that.

      Never mind that the bombs were placed by Muslims, cheerfully encouraged by an imam.

      Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 04 27 at 12:30 PM • permalink

 

    1. The book is worth reading paco. It’s been many years since I read it but it is what you have gathered. A detailed and well written account of the early convict era. The book is very well known and made something of a splash at the time it was published. As far as I know it was Hughes first venture outside of the art world.

      Hughes is also very well known. An Australian who has resided in the US (I think NYC) for many years, perhaps decades. Has made several TV programs as well. The brother of a former conservative Australian Cabinet Minister. Hughes had an ugly run in with the WA Crown Prosecutor (DA) and police a few years ago following a road accident on a remote road in which he was nearly killed. The accident was fatal for others.

      Posted by geoff on 2006 04 27 at 12:57 PM • permalink

 

    1. #24: Thanks, Geoff. It looked interesting; I just wanted to make sure it wasn’t put together by a writer of, say, Robert Fisk’s caliber, and my knowledge of good historical writers is not that broad outside of U.S. and Middle East specialists.

      Posted by paco on 2006 04 27 at 01:10 PM • permalink

 

    1. A very good book, paco. I am not Australian, so I cannot say how they look at it, but it is beautifully written, deeply researched and full of challenges to conventional thinking—things in there to make people of every political hue upset.

      I happen to have it on my computer desk right now. Don’t miss the endnotes, very entertaining.

      Hughes is one of the ornaments of Australian literature. His history of Barcelona is also a ripping good read, whether you think you know, or care, anything about Barcelona or not.

      Posted by Harry Eagar on 2006 04 27 at 01:16 PM • permalink

 

    1. Hey! Its Gustav the Latte Lovin Lefty! Welcome back you lying sack of shit poser.

      Posted by Texas Bob on 2006 04 27 at 01:25 PM • permalink

 

    1. #26: Well, now I can’t wait to start the thing! And thanks, Harry, for the reference on the Barcelona book, too.

      Posted by paco on 2006 04 27 at 01:26 PM • permalink

 

    1. Australia is a country terrified of Islam at the moment. Why?

      Um, well, murderous plane hijackers, suicide bombers, head-lopping kidnappers, cartoon rioters, just to name a few reasons.  I don’t think governmental politics have a whole lot to do with it.

      Posted by RebeccaH on 2006 04 27 at 02:15 PM • permalink

 

    1. I don’t blame gustov for declining to post anything substantive, either. It’s much easier to take potshots at people using somebody else’s website. Instead of having to debate them, you can just show yourself to be a colossal moron and heir-apparent to Miranda Divide.

      BTW, that Kara-Ali guy didn’t exactly say that Muslims didn’t kill 88 people in Bali, he said they didn’t kill 88 people. Presumably his objection is that it has been a heck of a lot more.

      Posted by PW on 2006 04 27 at 03:01 PM • permalink

 

    1. I think David Marr used up his quota of fair go’s a long time ago

      Posted by rog2 on 2006 04 27 at 04:50 PM • permalink

 

    1. PW, your analysis reminds me of the joke about the Jesuit, who when accused of killing five men and a dog, triumphantly produces in his defense – the dog.

      There might be some lefties with courage and integrity, but David Marr is not one of them.  He’s done the calculus and concluded that there is no personal risk in deciding that he’d rather be murdered by Islamic terrorists than defended by Howard, Bush, and Blair (not the one here, the other one).  Since the odds of any single individual dying in a terrorist attack are infinitesimal, and since he will be defended with or without his consent anyway, he plays the cynical game of pretending he’s above it all.  The fact that he’d be just as much a target as anyone else is moderated by the fact that the Islamists will have to wade through thousands, millions of active defenders of civilization before they could get to him.

      Marr is a coward and simply the kind of friction the rest of us have to put up with along with all the benefits of Western Civilization (which, come to think of it, is the only civilization current on the planet).

      Posted by Steve Skubinna on 2006 04 27 at 04:53 PM • permalink

 

    1. You’ve got to worry when the only person who made sense in that excerpt was the One Nation guy…

      Posted by Quentin George on 2006 04 27 at 05:03 PM • permalink

 

    1. Moonbat detection indicator: anyone who uses either or both of these phrases – “dog whistle politics”(where you accuse your enemy of inciting a response resulting from what they don’t say) and “tipping point” (uhh… do they mean critical mass?).

      Posted by der FRED on 2006 04 27 at 05:22 PM • permalink

 

    1. #22 Paco.  Robert Hughes may be a brilliant writer and thinker. A lot of Australians, however, remember him chiefly for the facts (a) that he has pontificated that racism is endemic in Australia and (b) when he had the run in with the WA Crown Prosecutor (see #24) who happened to be of Indian descent, Hughes reportedly referred to him as a “curry muncher”. For our American posters, c.f “jigaboo”.

      In other words, his anti racism is only, as they say “abstract”!!

      Posted by Consuela Potez on 2006 04 27 at 06:05 PM • permalink

 

    1. So Tim, you recognise the fact that Insight is a poor forum for debate, and the quality of the debate is adversely affected – Yet you attack those who chose to participate.  By your own definition, weren’t they the victims of the above process?

      Anyway, I’m glad to see that PW acknowledges the fact that Miranda Devine is a moron.

      Posted by gustov_deleft on 2006 04 27 at 06:21 PM • permalink

 

    1. Normally you’d think, as Tim notes,  having a lot of people in a debate would only allow for short positional statements. However when you have Marr, he seems to be able to talk as if he’s the only bloke in the room. The guy needs a mute button.

      Posted by Francis H on 2006 04 27 at 06:26 PM • permalink

 

    1. #36 That’s Miranda Divide not Miranda Devine. Not good on detail are you Gustov?

      Posted by lingus4 on 2006 04 27 at 06:27 PM • permalink

 

    1. Gustov,
      Your comprehension skills are a bit weak, me old china.  PW called Miranda Divide a moron, not Miranda Devine.

      On a more serious point, if someone like Marr spouts absolute inane shite, he deserves to be attacked, no matter what the limitations of the forum may be.

      Posted by Toryhere2 on 2006 04 27 at 06:32 PM • permalink

 

    1. Welcome Gusty, it’s great to have some intellectual input on a Friday – and the old, glad to see you acknowledge something you didn’t say is a classic. To build on your point, I would like to say that many who post here have germs, and so there.

      Gravy Davey Marr always starts to get the head wobbles when he is up on his soapbox, and not having seen the program, I can imagine he was just about head-butting the people sitting next to him. I have noticed the same thing when Red Kerry O’Brien is interviewing/giving one of his speeches to the Prime Minister at 7.30.

      Posted by Margos Maid on 2006 04 27 at 06:37 PM • permalink

 

    1. Overseas readers should be a wary of accepting ‘The Fatal Shore’ as an accurate record. Hughes did little original research and much of the book’s content is derived from other works, which in turn are not terribly kosher. For example, Hughes relied heavily on Lyndall Ryan’s conclusion in “The Aboriginal Tasmanians” that the colonial government had instituted “a conscious policy of genocide”. A claim that has subsequently been thoroughly discredited. ‘The Fatal Shore’ has been described by some as ‘pop’ history which probably explains its international success.

      Posted by Boss Hog on 2006 04 27 at 06:50 PM • permalink

 

    1. Tim declines an invitation to appear on national television, choosing instead to criticise the participants from the protection of his own heavily moderated forum.

      Put whatever spin you want on it guys, but it looks really, really lame.

      Posted by gustov_deleft on 2006 04 27 at 07:13 PM • permalink

 

    1. You’ve got to worry when the only person who made sense in that excerpt was the One Nation guy

      My thoughts too.

      Posted by Andjam on 2006 04 27 at 07:26 PM • permalink

 

    1. Put whatever spin you want on it guys, but it looks really, really lame.

      Spoken by one who knows lame intimately.  And who can’t read well enough to distinguish the word divide from the word devine.

      Posted by RebeccaH on 2006 04 27 at 07:27 PM • permalink

 

    1. Oooh, gustov, you are soooo macho. You’ve like totally PWNED Tim, yeah.

      Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 04 27 at 07:29 PM • permalink

 

    1. “…protection of his own heavily moderated forum.”

      It’s our forum, too, and none of us seem intent on getting banned.

      Posted by Steve Skubinna on 2006 04 27 at 07:42 PM • permalink

 

    1. When the Koran allows lies to be told in the defence of Islam (What a weak and shallow Brain washing Politico-religion it must be).  Who would believe one word those sad Muslim Bastards had to say on any subject.

      Posted by Howzat on 2006 04 27 at 07:47 PM • permalink

 

    1. Gustov—yeah, that’s why Tim’s been hiding in his NEWSPAPER COLUMN all this time…

      Posted by richard mcenroe on 2006 04 27 at 08:10 PM • permalink

 

    1. Full credit to Gusty that he has overcome his apparent reading-comprehension problems to make it through the heavy moderation procedures here.

      Posted by Margos Maid on 2006 04 27 at 08:19 PM • permalink

 

    1. #33.

      I think Mr Vinnicombe is from the Bankstown area – I am sent copies of the local rag from there (The Torch), and he writes quite a few letters to it. They also publish quite a few letters from people deriding him as a bigot. But generally his letters are balanced and quite polite.

      Posted by kae on 2006 04 27 at 08:19 PM • permalink

 

    1. # 47 Howzat

      When the Koran allows lies to be told in the defence of Islam (What a weak and shallow Brain washing Politico-religion it must be).  Who would believe one word those sad Muslim Bastards had to say on any subject.

      My thoughts exactly. How can you trust anything said by anyone who professes to be of the RoP?

      #50

      oops, that shoulda been racist bigot.

      Posted by kae on 2006 04 27 at 08:26 PM • permalink

 

    1. KARA-ALI: Muslims did not kill 88 people. Listen – no, no, this is very important. This is exactly, unfortunately, exactly the language that breeds extremists for Muslim youth. They listen to you and they go out very angry and frustrated.

      Yeah, right. Moose-lims don’t kill people.
      And if you upset Moose-lim youths by saying bad stuff about Moose-lims, well, they will become extremists and go out very angry and frustrated (and they might do bad stuff, but they won’t be Moose-lims then).

      Posted by kae on 2006 04 27 at 08:30 PM • permalink

 

    1. Tim declines an invitation to appear on national television, choosing instead to criticise the participants from the protection of his own heavily moderated forum.

      He didn’t criticise the participants* you great steaming nit, he criticised what they said.

      * That’s my job.  Pillock.

      Posted by Pixy Misa on 2006 04 27 at 08:49 PM • permalink

 

    1. Muslims don’t kill people. Bombs strapped to Muslims kill people.

      Gustov: your style of debate would work well in a crowd. You’re all tip and no iceberg, mate.

      Paco: bear in mind that Hughes, while a crafty orator like his brother Tom, has a certain expat bitterness toward Australia. His culpable driving case brought out the worst in the old bastard.

      Posted by Henry boy on 2006 04 27 at 08:51 PM • permalink

 

    1. #22- Hughes is a classic Australian-hating leftie luvvie, who’s persona non grata here due to getting shitfaced in an SUV (when the shortarsed little prick couldn’t even see over the dash) and plowing into a couple of locals in WA and doing a runner.

      Perfect walking example of a mouthy pinko “historian” who channels Manning Clark while slurping up a tenured stipend and lots of claret. Fuckwit who’s roundly ignored by everyone except those of his (thankfully) shrinking ilk.

      Posted by Habib on 2006 04 27 at 09:14 PM • permalink

 

    1. Marr…is this guy an arsehole or what???
      I made exactly the same point about the Cronulla riots when Marr lamented about Australia’s lack of anger, while I listened to his rant in disbelief.

      Posted by Brian on 2006 04 27 at 09:16 PM • permalink

 

    1. DOUREIHI: No-one is suggesting that the Muslims in this country are engaged in subversive activity to alter the political reality in this country.
      Allow me then, to be the first to suggest it.

      Posted by Infidel Tiger on 2006 04 27 at 09:19 PM • permalink

 

    1. The Fatal Shore is ok. One of the better single-volume works on Australian History. He tends to take the ‘boo-hiss’ version of colonisation though.

      Posted by Tasman on 2006 04 27 at 09:19 PM • permalink

 

    1. Paco: If you want to read about Australian history, then go to Geoffrey Blainey. For his credentials look no further than the fact that he was kicked out of Melbourne University by the pinko’s. Turns out he actually thinks Oz is a decent place. Bastard!

      Posted by Infidel Tiger on 2006 04 27 at 09:23 PM • permalink

 

    1. Also read Kieth Windschuttle who’s been doing a bang up job of exposing revisionism and fraud, both endemic in current Australian history academia.

      The Fatal Shore was produced in a BBC/ABC joint production, notable for it’s tedious, ttiresome and turgid self-indulgence. Get a DVD if the seconal isn’t cutting it any more.

      If you want a real hoot, read anything by Henry Reynolds- crazier than a bedbug, and some of the most leg-wetting, pure inventional, polemic fiction you’ll find this side of L. Ron Hubbard.

      He’s regarded as an authoritative source by most Australian governments and the High Court.

      Posted by Habib on 2006 04 27 at 09:32 PM • permalink

 

    1. #36- Gusty me old mate, what he’s saying is that Insight, like every other forum on australian public broadcasters, is so infested with carping lefties that anyone with a contrary view is shouted down and ridiculed- there is never even the slightest attempt to achieve balance or hold a rational debate, it’s just an hour of screeching moonbats flapping into each other, producing rpetetive rhethoric like a fruitbat produces shit like araldite.

      Posted by Habib on 2006 04 27 at 09:36 PM • permalink

 

    1. Bah… Windschuttle and his fact-checking has ruined history in this country. He will stoop to anything, even checking footnotes.

      Posted by Margos Maid on 2006 04 27 at 09:41 PM • permalink

 

    1. #60

      Henry Reynolds debates Keith Windschuttle linky

      Many of the usual moonbats.

      Posted by kae on 2006 04 27 at 09:42 PM • permalink

 

    1. Dead right, Country Member and Habib.  Hughes is a classic example of the Andrew Bartlett syndrome, ie, all for feminism, anti racism, diversity, multiculturalism, open borders, compassion or whatever in the abstract but when they are actually crossed, incommoded or inconvenienced in any way by a women, an “ethnic” or a member of some other allegedly marginalised group they tend to behave very badly indeed!! .

      Posted by Consuela Potez on 2006 04 27 at 09:46 PM • permalink

 

    1. The Australian History of Henry Reynolds here by Geoffrey Partington. How Reynolds’ conclusions were used by the High Court in the Mabo decision, and more…

      Posted by kae on 2006 04 27 at 09:47 PM • permalink

 

    1. …you can just show yourself to be a colossal moron and heir-apparent to Miranda Divide.

      “Heir-apparent”?  I think Gusty is actually the illegitimate love child of Miranda Divide.  Clearly much of Miranda’s personal issues were passed to her offspring before she tottered off to the nearest hole, where she emerges on rare occasion to grace us with her presence.

      The father is unknown, probably by choice.  Can’t say as I blame the dude.

      Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 04 27 at 09:49 PM • permalink

 

    1. or she might have eaten his head after copulation

      Posted by kae on 2006 04 27 at 09:56 PM • permalink

 

    1. #41. Overseas readers should be a wary of accepting ‘The Fatal Shore’ as an accurate record.

      Hughes ‘Culture of Complaint’ is a much better effort, if somewhat dated.

      Regarding SBS’s Insight, it generally champions left wing views. I appeared on its election debate last federal election. Brockie opened by asking me what issues concerned the punters in my cab. ‘Security and interest rates’, I told her.

      However for the next 59 minutes she engineered and moderated a debate around the issues of health and education, Labor’s central platform. Issues on which Labor was subsequently trounced.

      It’s little wonder Tim elected to stay home. Debate it ain’t.

      Posted by JAFA on 2006 04 27 at 09:56 PM • permalink

 

    1. I think many have missed the possibility that Peter Costello was engaging in a little sibling rivalry with his brother Tim, who in a Press Club address last December, [so missed by many], claimed [as a Christian too] that he was not at all fussed if Moslems get to apply their ‘Sharia social law’ to marriage etc in Australia. He tried to separate it from The Sharia Law, the simpleton..
      Peter obviously thinks that’s naive, and he’s right.
      Does Tim approve of multiple wives and chattel women, for instance?

      Oh well, if it comes to Australians getting what they really want it should be easy: “Out in the Streets!!”
      Marr is a Closet Frog-lover.

      Posted by Barrie on 2006 04 27 at 10:05 PM • permalink

 

    1. SBS uses its small advertising income as a figleaf to disguise the fact that it is still a huge impost on Australian taxpayers, and yet the bias is perhaps more obvious than the ABC. The taxpayer funded employees have been known to put out joint-signed letters to the editors about lefty issues of the day.

      Of course the dirty movies are good, but now I have my subscription to Jugz magazine Readers’ Wives edition, I am doubting it can justify its existence.

      Posted by Margos Maid on 2006 04 27 at 10:05 PM • permalink

 

    1. thank God a terrorist hasn’t so much as exploded a firecracker in this country

      What absolute bullshit.

      Moreover, how many have been prevented through the countermeasures he is so upset about?

      Posted by Dan Lewis on 2006 04 27 at 10:08 PM • permalink

 

    1. #71 dont forget Russell Street or the Hilton Hotel bombing.

      Posted by lingus4 on 2006 04 27 at 10:17 PM • permalink

 

    1. ‘They listen to you and they go out very angry and frustrated.’

      That is the exact point. He is saying that Muslim youth is incapable of facing suspicion and adversity and is instead likely to turn feral, hate Australians and the West and join some jihadi organisation?

      Ergo, dont dare to criticise Muslims in case they go off the deep end and become terrorists.

      He is simply confirming the opinion we have developed by watching events and accepting the evidence of our own eyes.

      Posted by dee on 2006 04 27 at 10:28 PM • permalink

 

    1. #73

      That is the exact point. He is saying that Muslim youth is incapable of facing suspicion and adversity and is instead likely to turn feral, hate Australians and the West and join some jihadi organisation?

      what d’ya mean turn feral?

      Posted by kae on 2006 04 27 at 10:36 PM • permalink

 

    1. #71 & #72

      Actually here’s a semi-useful factoid:  the only bomb attack in Brisbane was by Croat weirdos who tried to blow up the Serbian Club on Vulture St, South Brisbane, but managed only to kill some poor bastard – an American businessman who happened to be strolling past at the time.

      Posted by murph on 2006 04 27 at 10:47 PM • permalink

 

    1. If Dave really wants to explore the “dangers of sharia law” he could try cruising Haldon St.Lakemba with a couple of his mincing mates any Saturday night.Any public display of overt affection for one of the “mates” is guaranteed to result in the instant and painful application of the Lakemba interpretation of sharia law as practiced by homo-hating locals.Dave might be well known for preaching tolerance for them from a safe distance(like nowhere further West than the ABC studios) but I doubt that his carefully crafted image would save him from a good kicking in the mean streets of South-Western Sydney.

      Posted by Lew on 2006 04 27 at 10:51 PM • permalink

 

    1. #75

      I’m pretty sure that bombers aren’t renowned for their discernment and intelligence.

      Posted by kae on 2006 04 27 at 10:54 PM • permalink

 

    1. #75 More bombings in Australia. This example in WA of Chinese restaurants by nazi types.

      Posted by lingus4 on 2006 04 27 at 11:04 PM • permalink

 

    1. David is a Westy at heart.  All those nancy boys with a thin veneer of culture and no real brains always are.

      Posted by Toryhere2 on 2006 04 28 at 01:20 AM • permalink

 

    1. #78 recently neo-nazis have been attacking mosques in WA also.

      Link

      Posted by gustov_deleft on 2006 04 28 at 04:01 AM • permalink

 

    1. gustov_deleft

      There are some strange ratbags and conspiracy theorists in gero. I was living there and visiting a mate when a “nazi” nut shot another just down the road.
      Most of the Muslims in Gero are christmas Islanders and good people. A pox on the dickheads doing the vandalism.

      Posted by thefrollickingmole on 2006 04 28 at 04:28 AM • permalink

 

    1. #35 I have misgivings about the Fatal Shore. I have had the pleasure of hearing Robert Hughes (20 years ago when the connotations were different) say to me, `So you’re a palaeocon, like me,’ so I have a slight interest. But he seemed to me completely genuine when he denied calling the man a `curry muncher’ on the grounds that he’d never heard the expression. Nor had I. Nor had anyone I spoke to about it. I only saw the expression, years later, as the ironic name of a curry house, near the MCG, called `Curry Munchers’. It was a classic manufactured complaint.

      Posted by Andrew R on 2006 04 28 at 05:13 AM • permalink

 

    1. #79 Toryhere2

      David is a Westy at heart

      That’s very insulting to Westies.

      Posted by Janice on 2006 04 28 at 05:24 AM • permalink

 

    1. No-one is suggesting that the Muslims in this country are engaged in subversive activity to alter the political reality in this country.
      Hmmm. There are a couple of court cases going on which involve allegations of them plotting maximum damage and pain, whether to innocent women and children or not. Taquiya is an ongoing tactic of deception.
      As for David Marr and the Australia he loves to hate: he would have explored at least as far west as Norton Street, Leichhardt. Oxford Street and environs would harbour more sirens.
      Hughes? Somewhat jaundiced views. Safer on art than politics.

      Posted by blogstrop on 2006 04 28 at 06:43 AM • permalink

 

    1. Gusto_bereft: this forum is much more open than Insight – if you actually have anything of substance to say, go for it.

      Posted by blogstrop on 2006 04 28 at 06:47 AM • permalink

 

    1. Hmmm, so Hughes is both a paleocon and a lefty?

      I’d go with paleocon, leavened with a dose of working-class consciousness.

      I won’t argue with Aussies about their own history, but it is incorrect to say that he did little original research for ‘The Fatal Shore.’ He read through an awful lot of correspondence and court cases of the convicts, etc.

      Posted by Harry Eagar on 2006 04 28 at 01:06 PM • permalink

 

    1. Should’ve gone Tim.  It would’ve made this households day seeing you give it to the likes of Marr and the other idiots in the audience.

      Sadly the only ‘right-of-centre’ people Insight ever get are hacks from One Nation or others who cannot articulate a good line of argument.

      Posted by tdw77 on 2006 04 28 at 06:43 PM • permalink

 

    1. If Hughes has working-class consciousness, it’s by way of imagination. He went to one of the most expensive schools in the country, his brother is a QC and was Attorney-General. (Catholic tribalism does facilitate the imagination, however.)

      Posted by Andrew R on 2006 04 28 at 07:16 PM • permalink

 

    1. Did right not to go. A setup that sticks out (in retrospect) like dogs’ balls: they would’ve plonked you in a nice little box with the One Nation nutter. “And in the conservative corner…!”

      Posted by Henry boy on 2006 04 28 at 07:16 PM • permalink

 

Page 1 of 1 pages

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.