Prufrocks vandalism costs him $1500

Ari, I was too young to know what was happening at the time of the Iran/Iraq war, but now that I do know, of course I was opposed to US policy, as I am opposed to any government that stokes horrific wars and feeds arms and money into the perpetrators.

As for assuming the US policy is never tyrannical, well you might want to ask certin Vietnamese and Iraqi families about that. They would be the ones that have lost everything as a result of some cock-eyed view that we know what’s best for them.

As for you bonfire, they should sign you up for the George W Bush propaganda bandwagon… no, hang on, even the staunchest republicans have now acknoweldged there are (and were) no weapons. Looks like you are on your own.

So you were against US policy at the time when it was propping up Hussein.

But when the US changes its policy and starts going after Arab tyrants you are against that as well.

Does that mean the best option is simply to stick our heads in the sand and hope it all goes away?

softheads often buy the party line and refuse to acknowledge facts.

there was a UN mandate for an invasion.

and as for there being no WMD’s, all i can say is that there is a hell of a lot of empty desert in Iraq.

yes, there was UN authorisation AND there were weapons stockpiles all over the place. I think the tooth fairy was also recently spotted handing out 5 dinar notes to malnourished and toothless Iraqi children.

But seriously Ari, the Iran-Iraq war? I thought ‘we’ were against the ayatollahs at that time. That was when Diamond Donny Rumsfeld was pictured happily doing weapons deals with “our friend” Saddam, so please, no crocodile tears now.

Agreed that the UN is irrelevant, but there was technically already a UN mandate, the argument before invasion was a political exercise to re-state the mandate and shore up support for the US-led invasion.

Boring references to the exact resolutions involved follow:

UN Security Council resolution 687 (1991) required Iraq to destroy its weapons of mass destruction and comply with verification. It seems to have done the former, but not the latter.

UN Security Council resolution 678 (1990) “authorized Member States to use all necessary means to uphold and implement its resolution 660 (1990) of 2 August 1990 and all relevant resolutions subsequent to resolution 660 (1990) and to restore international peace and security in the area”. The weapons of mass destruction and compliance resolution (687) was covered by this.

Yes Ari, let’s talk about Canberra…. been to the mall lately?

“UN mandate for the attack on Iraq? No, sorry, maybe in 1991, but not this time.”

This is not true. There was an existing mandate to take action if Hussein failed to live up to certain undertakings.

He didn’t, but instead of just invading, the coalition went back to the UN to get an even more explicit statement (which wasn’t agreed to).

As for the claim that numbers of coalition-caused civilian casualties are approaching Hussein’s toll – that’s rubbish. The Lancet study (based on very flawed methodology) came up with a figure of 100,000. I don’t accept this as true, but for argument’s sake let’s just agree it is. The numbers of civilian dead under Hussein were in the 100s of thousands (quite apart from the millions killed in the Iraq/Iran war)- every week they kep finding more mass graves. Why not ask a Kurd or marsh Arab if life was better under Hussein?

Sanctions were not the cause of children dying, there were UN programs to provide medicines etc. These failed due to rorting at the UN and Hussein’s own diversion of money and aid to his own ends. One of the saddest stories to come out of Iraq since the war was the way Hussein forced people to keep the bodies of dead children so he could collect them for a huge parade in front of the media to pander to ill-informed western viewers.

Anyway, could we please get back to Canberra topics?

Bonfire, bonfire. Learn about things before you make claims. UN mandate for the attack on Iraq? No, sorry, maybe in 1991, but not this time.

As for freeing people from the jackboot of tyranny, if you do the sums, you’ll find that the US and allies are quickly approaching the numbers of dead achieved under 35 years of Saddam Hussein. In fact, if you count all the kids that died due to the decade of sanctions, you are way up over a million. Not to mention the boom in Leukemia and birth defects that have resulted since the wars began.

yay for freedom!

BTW, I have a new slogan for your website: “History will forget us, because we are forgettable!”

mong on. you are a soft headed idiot.

if freeing people from the jackboot of tyranny is wrong, what in your blinkered world is right ?

an army exists to enforce a nations diplomatic aims. our armed forces went and did that. along with many many others, under a UN mandate.

mr prufrock committeed acts of vandalism. he admits it, it doesnt matter what his reasons were – for all i know he felt sad cos his mum took his rubber dolly away.

Army of zombies.

I guess when Stanhope raises his own army and sends them to Iraq then it will be relevant to this website.

Stanhope COULD raise an army you know.

He’s also lost his job and has to pay a fine of $1500, as well as carry a conviction with him for the rest of his life.

Should’ve thought about that before he took the spray can out.

Not taking consideration of the (possible) full consequences of one’s actions is a sign of both immaturity and stupidity.

I love the way this gets twisted. Read the report: he accepts what he did was wrong and illegal. He paid the costs of cleaning. He’s been slandered in the media and on lame-brained chat sites like this. He’s also lost his job and has to pay a fine of $1500, as well as carry a conviction with him for the rest of his life.

And then certain people come on here and bang on about how that’s democracy and equality and that’s what the public wants, therefore it must be right. It’s a stupid media-driven campaign. It might have been titilating for Canberrans for a day or two, i can understand that, but the whole thing has been so outrageously overblown, as if it’s some huge issue of pulic morality. Give me a goddamn break.

Mong-on, I have no doubt that Mr. Prufrock cares very deeply about the war in Iraq. That’s not really the issue.

For instance, I care very deeply about a number of things, some of which you probably either don’t care about or disagree with me about (which, beleive it or not, is something people are perfectly entitled to do. Yes, people are allowed to support our continued involvement in Iraq. I know it may sound crazy, but there are people who do. If they wanted to spray paint on your wall “don’t abandon the Iraquis to get slaughtered again”, would you support it? Probably not).

That doesn’t mean that I have the right to spray-paint propoganda about the things I care deeply about on your personal property, just becase I happen to care deeply about them.

You can’t do whatever the hell you like just becuase you care deeply about something. The method is completely separable from the message. The only way Mr. Prufrock’s message would not be separable from his method is if he spraypainted “Everybody should be able to spraypaint wherever they want”.

Is this name OK, johnboy, you “unscrupulous person”?

There goes the moron relativist again. Just because things are similar does not mean they are equal.

And yes, you can, and should, separate the means from the end.

You’re a terrifyingly unscrupulous person.

My question was about the war, not about the wall. You can’t separate Bruford’s message from his method. Now about that war…?

And I proudly wear the crown you’ve placed on my head, but I thought we weren’t allowed to swear on this site?

Well Mong-On, he was always free to stand anywhere he liked and SAY whatever he believed.

Frankly, if you think vandalism of ther people’s property is OK as long as you agree with their reasons, then you’re a prize wanker.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Personally i choose to judge actions rather than motivations.

So very dated I know.

Thanks bonfire. I’m just pleased that Mr Bruford had the cojones to stand up in court and say that the war was wrong. How do you feel now about it? Enough said.

Yes, and on the same day a number of drink drivers were given a mere slap on the wrist for their misdeeds. The magistrate wanted to “send a message to the community.” So much for equality before the media… I mean “law”.