Friday, January 23, 2009

Plain wrong

I am staggered by the Frank Devine editorial piece on the front of The Australian’s Features supplement today. His headline “History will smile on Bush, even if he didn’t suit The Times” led me to expect a reasonable hypothesis of why the fundamental errors Bush made in his term of office will largely be forgotten as they become history. An inoffensive opinion, although one I do not agree with.

Instead what I got was a rather naive defence of why Bush was actually right in everything he did. Sorry, but I thought we had moved on from that? He starts by asserting that Bush was the right man for the job because otherwise it would have been Al Gore, “Imagine what would have happened if a president Gore had been in charge. First, the grand symbolism of signing Kyoto. Then the voice of the world's most powerful nation added to assertions that we were at the brink of the precipice and must take instant action to dismantle our economic, industrial and social systems, or go over. Then might have followed the surrender of authority by elected governments to the UN and the more ad hoc NGOs.”

Er, OK. At this point (paragraph three) I was in no doubt as to the man’s political allegiances, or his tendancy for the dramatic, but I had to read on because, frankly, I enjoy being incredulous now and again.

So the article goes on to assure us all that “Bush's twin attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq were courageous and logical”, riiiiight, and that everyone honestly believed Sadam had nuclear weapons. Yes indeed, that’s what all the paperwork turned up in Ol’ Blighty suggests… doesn’t it?

But I was absolutely reassured that no reader would believe this article unless he already shared Devine’s beliefs, when the article concluded on two erroneous facts. The second I will reveal first – because it is just nonsense. The first I will save for the end as entirely offensive and innacurate.

“The American commentator Charles Krauthammer sees an Iraq "turned from aggressive hostile power in the heart of the Middle East to an emerging democracy openly allied with the United States".”

And;

“History takes more note of the outcome of military conflict than of the processes.” Right, that’s why we never hear about the holocaust right?

2 comments:

C Agius said...

Unbelieveable! I'm with you. Weapons of mass deception - that's all I have to say!

Nicole said...

Geeeeez....is it April 1st already?

Locations of visitors to this page