Seems like Pilger's even going up against Australia. He has always been for the Aboriginies, but to call us an empire, scary thoughts indeed. http://www.johnpilger.com/page.asp?partid=478 Seems like rhetoric, but part of me keeps wondering, he makes some pretty valid points, (the oil from East Timor), the uranium mining, and the branding of the howard government... Interesting, still looking for corroberating sources though.
Interesting article. Am I to assume that this indicates a slow shift in the Australian polity toward disassembling the Australian nation a la Canada? ~String
Canada became disassembled ?. I thought this indicated that not even seemingly benign countries are benign. Australia could be a minor empire, hanging off china or the USA in Asia.
Challanger im open minded enough to question australia and god knows i was no fan of the previous goverment but to say that the apology is a) a sign we are an empire and b) that it was a "political train wreck" The fact that it dissapeared so fast rather than hanging around in political debate (rather than just in the mind of the public and underlying the pollies actions) is a sign that they were serious. If it was politically motervated i would have expected to hear more denouncments of brendon nelson both in the parliment and in the news as well as other liberalls like wilson tucky and tony abott. I lissioned to ALOT of the senate debate especially and labor seemed to be quite delibratly pulling there punches compared to what they COULD have dished out. Compare that debate to the "forward with fairness" bill and you will see that ALOT of political capital could have been gained from the issue and yet it was left alone As for unrainium mining i didnt read that far into the artical so i will comment tomorow maybe. I would really like to read some of his other work before passing judgment on whats behind his atitudes and wether its a delbrate atack on the country or a fair commentry. I dont actually trust journilists after what was being run in the papers pre election, i read mainly the issues pages (written by people whos views are on the public record like downer and Natasa) of the paper, laugh at the letters to the editor and then use the whole thing (except the TV guide) to line the bottom of the guinipig cage.
I thought that was wierd to, he always wanted an apology from the Australian govt. As for Pilger, He's been a journalist since vietnam, covered numerous areas of conflict and made many acclaimed films. however, he does tend to omit stuff sometimes. I'm wondering if R.Fisk has an opinion on this yet.
challanger, Im not sure how much atention you pay to parliment but if your interested the relivent debate was the "motion to take note of the apology to the stolen generation" in the senate. Unlike the "debate" in the house this one wasnt limited by speakers or by the media atention so it was VERY interesting to watch. Labor, the greens, the democrats and SOME liberals were looking at the issue as a single issue but ALOT of the liberals and the family first sentor were more interested in praising the so called "aborigional intervention" than speaking to the apology. Now on any other bill (for example the "forward with fairness 2008" bill) this would be expected (after all the now oposition is trying to establish relivence) but not on this motion. It sounded to much like wison tucky on the steps of parliment with his "we can all go home now, everythings fixed" speach. So anyway i will try to read the whole artical tomorow (although i probably wont get to it untill wed) but i do find im rather turned off by this atitude already. Of course i may have misunderstood and i will reserve judgement
Ok i read my way through that whole artical and i will point out the passages i dissagree with. I most certianly agree with his comments that aborigional health is third world AT BEST. Being interested in health policy i have come across aborigional health on a daily basis and hes right that 17 year gap in life expectancy and the infant mortality rate in aborigional comunities is behond a joke. However i do belive the goverment is trying to do something to change this, they have already signed a document (oposed by the oposition i might add) that REQUIRES the federal goverment to bring the life expectancy up to paridy by 2010 (i think) Timor im not so sure about, australia DID SEEM to be finally making the right moves in timor but its possable that the goverment was acting dishonestly. As for standing around while people looted and burnt and doing nothing i would have to dissagree 100%. This is a personal opinion but i DONT belive our troops would sit on there hands and do nothing, nor would the inteligence agents (especially when we had people resigning publicly from the ONA over iraq) why would they stay quite on timor? The solomons is another issue again because we dont just have troops and police there but ALOT of public servants as well surposedly teaching how to run the country. Personally im again quite willing to trust goverment departments more than i trust pollies and i also trust the police (at least the state police) and as long as none have spoken against our actions im quite willing to give them the benifit of the doubt. My opinion is that the artical is written from a rather critical perspective. He has only looked at the negitives even in things that are ment to be steps to move forward (like the apology). All though i admit he has some points (like the aborigional health problem and the fact that none of the recomendations in the "Little children are sacred" report have made it into the goverments actions) i dont think everything is as black as he paints it. My belife is that the howard goverment has screwed up ALOT of things and Rudd needs some time to fix them. If this had come out in 3 years when we were going to the polls i would be MUCH more concerned
Scary is young buck Anglos so emasculated that commiserating over the proper fondling of their worry beads passes for Darwinian demonstration of testicular prowess.
