Dirty tricks Down Under as the right-wing Liberal Party of pro-Bush PM John Howard struggles to retain its majority in Parliament. A group of Liberal operatives, one of them married to the local Liberal MP, took it upon themselves to distribute fake pro-jihad flyers in the Sydney suburb of Lyndsay:
Bogus flyers from a fake organisation called the Islamic Australia Federation were distributed through the letterboxes of voters in a marginal seat, claiming the Labor opposition sympathised with Islamic terrorists.
The leaflets referred to the men imprisoned for the 2002 nightclub bomb attacks in Bali, which left more than 200 people dead. The flyers also claimed Labor support for the building of new mosques in the area.
Howard has made it clear the stunt was not authorised by his party, but the damage has been immense. With only two days to go before the country goes to the polls, it overshadowed the prime minister's final rallying call to voters today asking them to trust him with Australia's future.
A team of Labor officials found five men posting the clumsily printed flyers - the phrase Allah Akbar, God is Great, had been misspelled as Ala Akba - through letterboxes in the early hours of the morning.
The effect on Howard's poll numbers has been somewhat less than salutary.
What, you may ask, does this have to do with LGF? Quite a lot, actually. Leaving aside the wailing and gnashing of teeth that will accompany a Labor victory, this is a preview of the sort of election shenanigans that will start erupting in a certain other large democracy any day now -- with, one surmises, the tacit approval of Republican blogger Charles Johnson. One is also reminded of the howls of outrage that greeted another recent dirty-tricks campaign at a university in Washington, the intent of which was to smear conservatives as being rabid, genocidal Muslim-haters. Which couldn't, of course, be further from the truth.
[UPDATE 11/24 - Howard lost; wailing, teeth-gnashing imminent.]
21 comments:
thumb down to this article. I don't see why should LGF post such article, LGF is not neutral, he is already stating his side. just like your blog, would you be interesting in watching daily kos or another blog on the left? would you be watching moveon.org or mediamatters?
in addition, it is really idiotic to call howard party pro-bush. they stood with America in the war, and they send their army to support us army in a war authorized by democrats and republicans both. you should say pro-america and you should be thankful for them. what you want? a party that will never support you if you need them?
irq1
@03:03:00 AM
Howard is pro-bush, speaking from Australia I can tell you he isn't too fond of Democrats. The last time he commented on American politics he was bashing the Democrats (in particular Barack Obama).
So yeah, he's pro-bush, pro-republican and pro-bullshit.
As for LGF, this is highlighting their hypocrisy, it would seem dirty lying and trickery is acceptable only when conservatives do it. What this post highlights is the hypocrisy in LGF, not their supposed stance, which initself is hypocritical.
Needing an ally for Iraq is not a legitimate need since the invasion is not legitimate.
The shameful caving to the post-9/11 mob zeitgeist by the democrats does not give the invasion legitimacy either.
"since the invasion is not legitimate.
The shameful caving to the post-9/11 mob zeitgeist by the democrats does not give the invasion legitimacy either"
who decided that? by the way needless to say I m iraqi. as a principle , invading another country is wrong. but Saddam was a threat to peace, which is in UN charter , it is responsibility of members of UN to deal with any threat to the world peace.
I don't want to enter this debate however. because i know we will get into WMD and that debate that already answered many times.
the fact that if Americans reject an ally because it allies itself with that government and that action you think illegal, how you expect you will get more allies that you will count on them? I mean , in future, australia and any other ocuntry should think 1000 times before deciding to ally, because some Americans will call them pro-[enter president name here] and pro-bullshit
interesting.
on the other hand what's wrong with criticizing democrats? particularly obama. his foreign policy is retarded.
irq1
anon @7:57
Whether or not the invasion was "legitimate" is a subject for debate, but what is or SHOULD BE clear is that we must not leave Iraq until it is secure. The Iraqis deserve at least that. I hope the Aussies keep this in mind when they vote.
Aaand let the seethefest begin!
What else to expect other than longings for the good old past, some mindless we-won-anywayism, a grim prophecy with a pathetic ending statement, (and an even dumber response), .. Yes guys, it's your typical day out at LGF.
And last but not least, a complaint from an Australian lizard about the stupid pre-emptive bashing that the others are spewing.
I almost missed this one with some funny rubbish:
#50 Pawn of the Oppressor
Well of course the NYT is psyched, for them it's like one of Satan's generals falling in battle. Hell, half the paper is probably written by Islamist stringers these days...
Keep laughing assholes, we'll see what's so funny when the NYT closes its doors. How are those circulation numbers doing?"
Gee, I don't know Pawny, for a third place (as of March 07) on the list for most distributed newspapers in America and over a million copies every day, the NYT doesn't seem to be doing so bad..
Hey Sphinx,
You might want to rethink the NYT's "the NYT doesn't seem to be doing so bad..."
Wall Street says you don't know what you're talking about. Falling almost as fast as your brothers Al-Qaeda.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=NYT&t=5y&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=
Wow, by giving me a stocks chart of the NYT company, you totally prove to me that the newspaper itself really will vanish off the face of the earth very soon. By that logic, every single corporation will inevitably fall into bankruptcy, because at some point, the stock rates were falling on all charts.
Maybe you weren't aware that I wasn't referring to the claim about circulation numbers, but the dumb assumption that because in some lizard's parallel world the NYT is an evil entity, it will be gone very soon. And with the current number of copies sold every day, there is no reason to believe that, even IF they were more at some point in the past.
Get real for once, will you? Thanks. And don't become a financial consultant.
"Falling almost as fast as your brothers Al-Qaeda"
Typical loon with some stupid-ass logic: "You're not with us, so you must be with Al Qaeda"
Al Qaeda were never my brothers. They're just a bunch of lunatics with weapons. As for you, you're just plain stupid.
OT-
Another disgruntled anti-idiotarian caught in the, well, whatever-you-want-to-call-it fracas here. Posted primarily because I figured you guys would dig the image of the deflated green football. lol
to The Sphinx,
nobody said NYT will close down next year or so. this means if NYT keep bullshitting, people will stop buying it. this includes liberals. don't think liberal america likes that. there are still many people don't like this stuff. sorry sphinx to disappoint you. I wonder what you write about freedom of press in your native country or other islamic countries.
oh wait, it is all fault of the west by installing McDictators in the islamic world.
NYT sucks by the way, but not all the time. but every media that beat for Islamists and apologize to them sucks, also any newspaper apologize for nazis. so the rule is the same, not targetting islamists alone.
irq1
Hey Sphinx,
Not so stupid to realize the NYT is dependent upon a set of stockholders that are none too happy with the performance of the company and expect a return on their investment.
Even a dumbass, American hating loon like you ought to understand that anybody can give away papers with a free donut to keep circulation numbers up - but they can't do it forever.
I don't care for Charles Johnson but you've got to be one of the lamest posters I've ever had the displeasure of reading.
I don't know really, if the idea of newspapers vanishing eventually just because they're "bullshitting" was the norm, then every single tabloid on this planet would cease to exist very, _very_ quickly.
And I need say nothing about press in my own country (Egypt) other than that it's rubbish. The issue however isn't about comparisons.
Well anon jackass, in your world there doesn't seem to be the concept that people actually can disagree with you. Maybe that's why I'm driving you nuts.
If rubbish full-of-crap papers like the German "Bild-Zeitung" find hundreds of thousands of readers every day, even though I don't see any reason why ANYBODY should stoop down to that level, then the paper is here to stay. Wishing the NYT away may be fun for you, but it's just as productive as yelling at the moon.
And claiming that I hate America is just rich. I have more American friends than you can count. However it seems that in your world of one-dimensional thinking, it's impossible to disagree with a government while liking its people. Your mindset is clearly too linear for its own good. Maybe if you learned to think in higher-dimensions, you wouldn't be making such an idiot out of yourself.
Glad to be a thorn in your side.
"I have more American friends than you can count."
You're average wingnut has trouble with numbers so if you've got more than one friend...they can't count.
The "Sphinx",
You bother me? Don't flatter yourself. I find you amusing, yet irrelevant.
As for the thorn in my side, I was thinking you more a bug in the potato salad of the humanity picnic. Kind of like Egypt.
I know why you hate America and left Egypt. So why the disdain for C.J.? Understandable, but just curious. Did he scorn you?
Your way of acting as if you know me better than you really do is funny.
And why I don't like the guy? The evidence is all here. I also once exposed his drooling sheep squad on my own blog and he didn't take it like the honourable guy they try to portrait him as.
Anyway I'll stop wasting my time with the likes of you. Ta ta.
Sphinx,
Your way of acting as if you know me better than you really do is funny.
Running from a good fight like you're running from Egypt. Don't blame you for the latter...
You bother me? Don't flatter yourself. I find you amusing, yet irrelevant.
Yet Sphinx is somehow relevant enough to respond to.
I always get a good laugh out of the "You're nothing! You're powerless! Nobody cares about you or listens to you! So I'm going to keep coming here day after day to tell you that until you believe it!" routine.
From anonymous to anonymous...making this a little hard to follow.
Yet Sphinx is somehow relevant enough to respond to.
Isn't that a purpose of a comments section? To respond? Besides, I thought you might like to respond to something besides LGF and I won't be hanging for too long. Demanding an echo chamber is what you guys criticize Charles for, is it not?
"who decided that? by the way needless to say I m iraqi. as a principle , invading another country is wrong. but Saddam was a threat to peace, which is in UN charter , it is responsibility of members of UN to deal with any threat to the world peace."
Well, the US still did not have a reason based on self-defense to attack (unlike the Afghanistan invasion) and the whole nation-building, dictator-topplng benevolence spiel is dumb since there are plenty countries that would have to be invaded if that rationale was universalized.
"I mean , in future, australia and any other ocuntry should think 1000 times before deciding to ally, because some Americans will call them pro-[enter president name here] and pro-bullshit"
Nope, it's up to the country to decide whether a war is legitimate or not, and Australia will feel welcome into any war as long as the war is justified. It's the US fault for dragging allied governments into a war Bush said would be easy.
Post a Comment