Racist Aussie attacks the Holy One

"In his latest column for the New Statesman, John Pilger looks back on the US presidential campaigns he has reported and draws parallels with the current 'ritual danse macabre' that covers for democracy and the veiled propaganda that accompanies it.

The former president of Tanzania Julius Nyerere once asked, "Why haven’t we all got a vote in the US election? Surely everyone with a TV set has earned that right just for enduring the merciless bombardment every four years." Having reported four presidential election campaigns, from the Kennedys to Nixon, Carter to Reagan, with their Zeppelins of platitudes, robotic followers and rictal wives, I can sympathise. But what difference would the vote make? Of the presidential candidates I have interviewed, only George C Wallace, governor of Alabama, spoke the truth. "There’s not a dime’s worth of difference between the Democrats and Republicans," he said. And he was shot.

What struck me, living and working in the United States, was that presidential campaigns were a parody, entertaining and often grotesque. They are a ritual danse macabre of flags, balloons and bullshit, designed to camouflage a venal system based on money power, human division and a culture of permanent war.

Travelling with Robert Kennedy in 1968 was eye-opening for me. To audiences of the poor, Kennedy would present himself as a saviour. The words "change" and "hope" were used relentlessly and cynically. For audiences of fearful whites, he would use racist codes, such as "law and order". With those opposed to the invasion of Vietnam, he would attack "putting American boys in the line of fire", but never say when he would withdraw them. That year (after Kennedy was assassinated), Richard Nixon used a version of the same, malleable speech to win the presidency. Thereafter, it was used successfully by Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton and the two Bushes. Carter promised a foreign policy based on "human rights" – and practised the very opposite. Reagan’s "freedom agenda" was a bloodbath in central America. Clinton "solemnly pledged" universal health care and tore down the last safety net of the Depression.

Nothing has changed. Barack Obama is a glossy Uncle Tom who would bomb Pakistan. Hillary Clinton, another bomber, is anti-feminist. John McCain’s one distinction is that he has personally bombed a country. They all believe the US is not subject to the rules of human behaviour, because it is "a city upon a hill", regardless that most of humanity sees it as a monumental bully which, since 1945, has overthrown 50 governments, many of them democracies, and bombed 30 nations, destroying millions of lives.

If you wonder why this holocaust is not an "issue" in the current campaign, you might ask the BBC, which is responsible for reporting the campaign to much of the world, or better still Justin Webb, the BBC’s North America editor. In a Radio 4 series last year, Webb displayed the kind of sycophancy that evokes the 1930s appeaser Geoffrey Dawson, then editor of the London Times. Condoleezza Rice cannot be too mendacious for Webb. According to Rice, the US is "supporting the democratic aspirations of all people". For Webb, who believes American patriotism "creates a feeling of happiness and solidity", the crimes committed in the name of this patriotism, such as support for war and injustice in the Middle East for the past 25 years, and in Latin America, are irrelevant. Indeed, those who resist such an epic assault on democracy are guilty of "anti-Americanism", says Webb, apparently unaware of the totalitarian origins of this term of abuse. Journalists in Nazi Berlin would damn critics of the Reich as "anti-German".

Moreover, his treacle about the "ideals" and "core values" that make up America’s sanctified "set of ideas about human conduct" denies us a true sense of the destruction of American democracy: the dismantling of the Bill of Rights, habeas corpus and separation of powers. Here is Webb on the campaign trail: "[This] is not about mass politics. It is a celebration of the one-to-one relationship between an individual American and his or her putative commander-in-chief." He calls this "dizzying". And Webb on Bush: "Let us not forget that while the candidates win, lose, win again... there is a world to be run and President Bush is still running it." The emphasis in the BBC text actually links to the White House website.

None of this drivel is journalism. It is anti-journalism, worthy of a minor courtier of a great power. Webb is not exceptional. His boss Helen Boaden, director of BBC News, sent this reply to a viewer who had protested the prevalence of propaganda as the basis of news: "It is simply a fact that Bush has tried to export democracy [to Iraq] and that this has been troublesome."

And her source for this "fact"? Quotations from Bush and Blair saying it is a fact."

Reading is FUNdamental...
 
It looks to me as though this journalist is attacking the US and our foriegn policies more than he is attacking Obama.

The situation is what it is. We have created it by having 6 decades of arrogance and meddling.

Obama is doing nothing more than continuing the tradition of political candidates from decades past.

Anyone who expects candidates to remember their campaign promises is either delusional or stupid.
 
indisputable said:
Obama "believes he will keep his promises", ergo, you called him "either delusional or stupid".

Racist!
Click to expand...

How in the hell do you know what he believes.

Oh thats right, you do have the gift of knowing that sort of thing. I forgot that you could tell that Obama wasn't really a christian, despite 20 years of active church membership.

But you still missed the point of the post I made.

I said "Anyone who expects candidates to remember their campaign promises is either delusional or stupid.".

That is obviously not referring to a candidate, but to the voters.
 
remember now political advertisements are specifically exempt from the truth in advertising laws for some strange unknown reason ;)
 
AssHatZombie said:
Solitary, you miss the point. Why is it he must abandon the truth and start mouthing zionist platitudes in first place?
Click to expand...


"mouthing zionist platitudes"?

I think what I said in this thread was that the article was slamming the USA more than it was slamming Obama, and that anyone who expects politicians to keep their campaign promises is either delusional or stupid.

I am pretty sure I didn't mention "zionists platitudes".

And what Obama need to do is get elected. That usually means compromise. It certainly means maintaining appearances.
 
Solitary said:
"mouthing zionist platitudes"?

I think what I said in this thread was that the article was slamming the USA more than it was slamming Obama, and that anyone who expects politicians to keep their campaign promises is either delusional or stupid.

I am pretty sure I didn't mention "zionists platitudes".

And what Obama need to do is get elected. That usually means compromise. It certainly means maintaining appearances.
Click to expand...


The article is about how our ambitious politicians must accept the agenda of the military industrial complex to get elected.

I brought up zionist platitudes. Obama was forced to mouth them as a precondition of continuing in his quest for presidency.
 
AssHatZombie said:
The article is about how our ambitious politicians must accept the agenda of the military industrial complex to get elected.

I brought up zionist platitudes. Obama was forced to mouth them as a precondition of continuing in his quest for presidency.
Click to expand...

War is about all the USA is good at. We can't build a car worth a shit, can't build TVs anymore, and most of our industry is gone. But in our 225 year history we have averaged a war every 20 years. Of course he mouthed the words. He knows what it takes to get elected.

The only politicians I know of that didn't feed us a line of bullshit were George Wallace (mentioned in the article) and Dennis Kucinich. Wallace was shot and Dennis was not exactly a rousing success in his campaign.

You want to change the way things work, I will applaud you if you can. But until things change, its the way people get elected to the highest office. We have become a nation of muckrakers and gossip mongers. We focus, not on real issues, but on trivial nonsense.

And the difference between the two major parties is neglible, and the real issues are ignored.
 
Solitary said:
War is about all the USA is good at. We can't build a car worth a shit, can't build TVs anymore, and most of our industry is gone. But in our 225 year history we have averaged a war every 20 years. Of course he mouthed the words. He knows what it takes to get elected.
Click to expand...
And how many bombs will he launch to maintain support? This is the point of the article. All politicians are uncle toms on this zionist plantation. IT is about race, but not in the way you think.
The only politicians I know of that didn't feed us a line of bullshit were George Wallace (mentioned in the article) and Dennis Kucinich. Wallace was shot and Dennis was not exactly a rousing success in his campaign.

You want to change the way things work, I will applaud you if you can. But until things change, its the way people get elected to the highest office. We have become a nation of muckrakers and gossip mongers. We focus, not on real issues, but on trivial nonsense.

And the difference between the two major parties is neglible, and the real issues are ignored.
Click to expand...

So why do you attack someone who points out the truth? Are you sick?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top