tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post6646979104655834467..comments2024-03-01T08:19:54.547+00:00Comments on BobFromBrockley: Cosmopolitanism or nationalism?bobhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15439386754907203808noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-26136429298101519362007-12-17T19:37:00.000+00:002007-12-17T19:37:00.000+00:00I look forward to your review of David Hirsh's pap...I look forward to your review of David Hirsh's paper!ro.ber.linhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03592977624103002816noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-5242795183251913852007-12-10T11:59:00.000+00:002007-12-10T11:59:00.000+00:00"Galloway's nationalist methodology..."I would say..."Galloway's nationalist methodology..."<BR/><BR/>I would say, Bob, that using the M word is honoring that creature too much ;-)SnoopyTheGoonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00920565522498918323noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-10197251322317134432007-12-06T13:09:00.000+00:002007-12-06T13:09:00.000+00:00I hate Galloway, but I think he was -- if not Bora...I hate Galloway, but I think he was -- if not Borat-ed -- at least <BR/>somewhat sandbagged by those two. I don't know Klein, other than as the author of the "Schmoozing" book. But I do know Humphries. I have listened to his radio show plenty of times. He is a firmly rightwing ideological man with a worldview in which Galloway is a demon. And his show reflects him exactly.<BR/><BR/>"False pretenses?" Well, it depends on what you mean. If you say to a public, elected person: "I'd like to interview you," you don't generally mean "I'd like to correct you on tape and create a hostile atmosphere and make some audio-theater and play it for the folks back home." That's a bit different from other methods of interrogation that interviewers <BR/>use. It's one thing for Oriana Fallaci to sneer at Arafat on tape, but I'm afraid Klein and Humphries don't have quite her authority and panache.<BR/><BR/>Also, I think you can tell from the tone of their voices (especially the man with the younger-sounding voice -- Klein, I guess) that they're after Galloway's hide. And at some point Galloway smells a rat, and I don't think he was completely wrong to do so. Klein may be, technically, not an Israeli or an employee of Israeli media, but, as Galloway said, "he might as well be." Humphries might not be a ZOG agent, but if there were such a thing as ZOG, Humphries could be its spokesman.<BR/><BR/>At the same time, a public, elected person is obliged to put up with hostile questioning, being made to face his contradictions or lies, or being forced to make himself clear. But K/H went ever so slightly over a line, I think. And you have to separate this from your extreme distaste for Galloway.<BR/><BR/>Galloway was being quite rational. You can see -- once you accept his <BR/>political definitions and morality -- that he's making sense. So, if you're an interviewer in this position you can either let the man talk, and poke and prod him; or try to make HIM accept YOUR political definitions and <BR/>morality. Which he isn't going to do. And Galloway isn't going to do it even hypothetically.<BR/><BR/>Humphries is from /Talk Radio Something./ OK, so what? Mumia abu-Jamal no doubt had press credentials from some outfit or "news service."<BR/><BR/>If a reporter from Stormfront elevision or Turner Diary Media Outlet wanted to interview you, you'd know right away what he was up to. And you could accept or decline his request. But what if he had credentials from, say, "The Deep River Press Service," which was not /actually/ Stormfront, but completely sympathetic and ideologically identical to Stormfront? And halfway through the interview you smelled a rat?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-78337794884635179372007-12-06T02:31:00.000+00:002007-12-06T02:31:00.000+00:00http://bp0.blogger.com/_0DVLsXg6DV4/Rz0_6pGTXJI/AA...http://bp0.blogger.com/_0DVLsXg6DV4/Rz0_6pGTXJI/AAAAAAAAAOY/TDzH6oDpACo/s1600-h/zhitlovsky+with+quote.jpg<BR/><BR/>you know what it is.The Whttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16228419280217655558noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-66574715975707850852007-12-05T13:48:00.000+00:002007-12-05T13:48:00.000+00:00'Osama bin Laden is a terrorist since the al-Qaida...'Osama bin Laden is a terrorist since the al-Qaida chieftain, whom Galloway claimed was "armed and financed by the U.S." in the 1970s and 1980s'<BR/><BR/>Never mind that this is utter bollocks, and that all authoritative authors on this subject (e.g. Jason Burke, Steve Coll, Lawrence Wright) show that bin Laden organised and supplied his handful of Arab fighters without any American or Western assistance.<BR/><BR/>Never mind also that George regretted the passing of the USSR, which was responsible for invading Afghanistan in 1979 and turning the country into a charnel house (so much for 'anti-imperialism', you Dundee prick; so much for your supposed support for persecuted Moslems you charity-robbing cunt).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com