Anzac Day deconstructed

Those who know me well (and there are not a lot of those about) would be aware that one of my main purposes for postponing my suicide is to culture jam Anzac Day.

So, to further that aim, I ask you to consider the following:

Rear Admiral Tim Barrett was heard on TV saying "...celebrating our fighting prowess..."
So...  Anzac Day is about "celebrating"?  (Oh yeah, I'm celebrating all right...)    And it's about "our fighting prowess" is it?   (They didn't show a shot of his genital region, but I would not have been surprised to see a massive erection distorting the cut of his naval uniform.)   What a man !!!  Now, about those recent sexual assault cases the Navy has had to deal with... 

And then we have my old mate, Cardinal Pell, who is quoted in the Sydney Morning Herald as saying that "Anzac Day represents the legend of Australia" (whatever that means), and he went on (as he is wont to do) to say that this legend stands for "a devotion to duty and a preparedness to put yourself on the line for what you believe in."   He fails to explain how this "legend" is any different to those which motivated the Nazis, the dreaded communists, the Taliban, or al Qaeda.

And another thing:   Who in their right mind thought it was a good idea to have a column of US Marines  marching with our diggers in Darwin's Anzac Day parade?   So now our imperial masters are part of the propaganda circus that Anzac Day has become?  I feel sick!

In closing, I'd like to share with you a letter I had published in the local paper on Anzac Day:

   Anzac Day is upon us again.  
   Again, we will witness politicians and religious leaders
around the country failing to denounce our participation in
 wars we should never have joined.
   Again, we will hear countless "patriots" regurgitate that
hypnotic propaganda phrase "they served their country"
when in fact they served the imperial agenda of a foreign
power to which we should have had the guts to firmly say
"No way!".
    Again, we will hear nebulous terms such as "freedom" and
"democracy" done to death in an orgy of self-congratulation. 
   Again, the sombre remembrance of the dead and the futility
of war will be  replaced by marching bands, chest-puffed
strutting, clapping and cheering, in yet another obscene
display of war-justification.
   Or, for something different this year, the Gazzette could
print the lyrics of Eric Bogle's sobering song "And The Band
Played Waltzing Matilda" as part of its Anzac Day feature.
(You can also listen to that song on YouTube as you crack
your patriotic tinny.)

Thank you, Major General Stretton

Thank you for having the courage and integrity to speak the truth in the face of so many official (American?) lies shaping our pathetic foreign (American?) policy.

What am I referring to? READ THIS >>>

I would add that not only is the Afghan Army infiltrated by the Taliban (just as the ARVN was infiltrated by the Viet Cong), but that it is run, in the main, by a bunch of very corrupt warlords whose troops we should _not_ be training at all. We are merely training both sides of what will devolve into a very bloody civil war after we (the invaders) leave.

And about Stretton's claim that we invaded Afghanistan to get bin Laden, well, even on that score I would argue that a full blown war, "regime change", and the ensuing massive "collateral damage" was _not_ the way to go. This was eloquently proven by the events which finally lead to bin Laden's demise in Pakistan. If you can do that in Pakistan, why not do that in Afghanistan?

Is Major General Cantwell deluded?

In an interesting display typical of a military man hypnotised by the propaganda of his own organisation, Cantwell uttered this gem:

"...foreign military forces trying to bring security to Afghanistan..."

Full story here >>>

He has clearly failed to cognite to the fact that before 9/11, the Afghans only had one mob killing them in the name of 'security' - the Taliban. Now they have three mobs falling all over each other to 'save' the country by killing it, suspect by suspect, till the paranoia runs out of bodies:

[1] The Taliban.

[2] The occupation forces.

[3] The corrupt and self-serving warlords who are the backbone of the U.S. puppet government's "Afghan Army", and whose troops we are training to do a "better job" (for the warlords.)

Cantwell, sounding more and more like a modern day Colonel Blimp, seems to have learned nothing from the debacle that was the Vietnam war. He clearly fails to understand that the "mission" in Afghanistan has failed, and that after the inevitable disengagement by the invaders (us), the country will purge itself of those who aligned themselves with the invaders and whatever regime finally evolves from the mess the invasion created will be one which the people feel is free from foreign manipulation.

Another thing of which Cantwell seems to be completely oblivious is that he was nothing more than a useful petty stooge in America's game of empire. Or was he actively working for the Yanks? Was he a traitor to Australia's independence?

Addendum:  23 Sept 2012:  I've just finished watching an interview with Major General Cantwell (retired).  He talks about his PTSD, his pain, his anguish.

I can empathise with him on those issues.

But when he talks about how the Afghanistan war is not worth the Australian lives lost, we part company because, in typical "patriot" fashion, he talks within a context that clearly deems only our soldiers' lives as precious.  And he still spins the propaganda about how our mission there was noble, good, and just.  Utter bollocks!

He has clearly not yet cottoned on to the whole scam that is the Afghanistan war.  And I distrust his "I blame myself for the deaths of our diggers" gambit.  I suspect he's fishing for "No, you're not to blame, poor diddums, you were just doing your job."  I see it as a perverse way of seeking validation, ... or covering his arse lest the future sees the war as the atrocity it surely was. 

And again it's all about how our diggers' deaths are a big tragedy but nothing is said about the tragedy of the tens of thousands of Afghanis killed, and a country utterly trashed.

He seems to not care that we've empowered the corrupt and the warlords.  He says nothing about how we're training and arming people who will, after our departure, revert to settling old scores, and now new ones, i.e the getting even with those who aided the invaders (us).

Oh no, Mr Cantwell, its just not good enough.  Come clean and denounce the war for what it was:  The collective punishment of the Afghan people because their Taliban masters had the temerity to demand evidence of Osama bin Laden's guilt before agreeing to hand him over to the Americans.  It was purely a revenge attack to assuage America's rage over the 9/11 attacks.  It was purely America's business.  We should have played no part in it whatsoever.   And here's the irony:  Since when is revenge and retribution a Christian thing?  Isn't America supposed to be the epitome of a nation with solid Christian values?

For your penance, Mr Cantwell, go read Jesus's Sermon On The Mount and meditate at length about what Jesus was teaching.  Don't you dare call yourself a Christian until you can see the evil in wars.  Especially the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

And another thing (oh yeah, I'm pretty ropable right now), we are in Afghanistan because George W. Bush's erstwhile lap dog, Prime Minister John HoWARd, committed our troops to that lunatic's war.  The same George W. Bush who, when justifying his Iraq war a short while later, said that God told him to do it.

Mr Cantwell, admit you happily served madmen!  Go on!  Admit it!  The truth can set you free!

Addendum:  28 Oct 2012:   I'm currently reading his autobiography, and I've so far only read up to the where he's serving  with the British in the 1990 Gulf War.  It seems he's still using the convenient "history" of those who sold him that war.  Seems he has done no deeper research since.

He is apparently unaware that during the Iraq-Iran War, the US covertly supported Saddam Hussein. 

He fails to mention that at the diplomatic level, the US virtually gave a green light to Saddam Hussein to invade Kuwait.      He fails to mention that Iraq, seriously weakened and exhausted after eight years of heavy war with Iran, would not have gone ahead with an invasion of Kuwait, had Ambassador Glaspie been much more direct and honest about the US's position on the planned invasion.  Not even Saddam Hussein would have been silly enough to take on the military might of the US (and its major UN allies)  with his seriously weakened military.  Clearly the US lulled Saddam into going ahead with his invasion of Kuwait and Cantwell does not mention any of this.  Seems he prefers the sanitised version of history.

I might do a review of the entire book if his war justifying crap gets me angry enough.  Grrrrr...

Elizabeth Farrelly tells it like it is

She tells it like it is about Julian Assange, about our relationship with the U.S., and about the gutlessness and venality of the Gillard government.

Here's what she says >>>

Cardinal Pell's telling porkies again...

Watching the ABC's QandA tonight, Cardinal George Pell, climate skeptic, admirer of Tony Abbott, all round truth teller about things like non-existent gods, etc, had this gem of wisdom for the True Believers:

"Hitler killed fifty million in WWII." (Or words to that effect.)

What a load of cobblers.

I needn't go on, except if you're so stupid that you can't see the crap that the Cardinal is speaking, in which case, you can ask for clarification via the "comments" facility of this blog.

Oh, and another thing... In case you were wondering, a poll taken during the show indicated that 76% of respondents did NOT think that having religious beliefs made the world a better place.

Says it all, really...

Puzzle time...

OK, all you wise ones, answer me this:

Do you like something because it's nice, or is it nice because you like it?