Webdiary - Independent, Ethical, Accountable and Transparent
header_02 home about login header_06
header_07
search_bar_left
date_box_left
date_box_right.jpg
search_bar_right
sidebar-top content-top

A completely independent space to debate the world

by David Roffey

David's Archive is here

As has been related by Margo elsewhere, one step on my journey to this place was a meeting with our local MP, Tony Abbott, to express our concerns about the way the war in Iraq had been handled. In that meeting Abbott said “if in the end there are no WMD and Iraq has a fundamentalist government, it won’t have been worth it”. We asked him if he was prepared to debate that in a public forum, and to his credit he said yes, and duly did – you can read a full transcript of the debate at the North Shore Peace and Democracy website.

When we came to advertise the debate with a media release, Margo pitched up in our dining room with a bottle of red and (with frequent breaks for her to nip outside for a smoke) we talked into the night about how hard it was getting to have real debate in Australian politics – both sides just shout slogans and issue soundbites that belittle or ignore the other side – and there almost always is a real point of concern in the view from the other side.

NSP&D has carried on organising opportunities for people to debate issues in person – now once a month on the last Thursday – see the website for details – in the same tradition as Politics in the Pub. But these gatherings of 50 to 100 people can only reach a few (and only a few can reach them).

Webdiary has been, and will be, an exciting experiment in taking the debate to anyone in reach of the internet – all of Australia, and many from abroad. It has covered an amazing range of topics of both parochial and global concern.

It was looking increasingly uncomfortable as the lead-strings from Fairfax got more stretched and twisted – and the question of what was exactly meant when a Webdiarist asked “what has you organisation said about this?” became harder to define.

As a completely independent site for debating the world, I believe we – you - have the potential to play a significant role in political, economic and plain human debate for the future. Imagine

left
right
[ category: ]
spacer

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

re: A completely independent space to debate the world

By the by, that North Shore Peace and Democracy webpage still has the Lancet report up as uncontested (seeing as there are no other reports mentioned) and more importantly, factual. Since various later reports (the UN report being the largest and most comprehensive sample) have placed the number well under that forwarded by the Lancet (for what seems cheap political purposes - the at the time upcoming US election) there should be some sort of correction forwarded to them perhaps? I mean, if even Alan Ramsey stopped using Lancet, due to the Lancet reports discrediting as a serious and precise item of work, don't they think it might be time to get with the program?

Or does that ruin the whole 'Coalition of the Rampant Warmongering Childkiller Oil Industrial-Military Complex Neo-Cons killed more Iraqi's than Saddam did averaged out' line? Is it all a conspiracy?

Sorry for the slight outpouring of venom, but only the Plastic Turkey myth is more commonly used and more shatteringly debunked than the 100,000 Lancet report. After over a year and a half, you would think they could get it right?

re: A completely independent space to debate the world

As a reader of Webdiary for about a year now, my observations are that the Right will cling to their beliefs no matter what this government does. I reckon Howard could suddenly develop a social conscience and reverse all his conservative policies and they would still think he was the chosen one.

Stuart, I'm struggling with your post. I don't really get what your point is. People are dead, people are dying everyday. It seems to me that 100,000 is a number you can't deal with. What number is Ok for you?

re: A completely independent space to debate the world

PS: Stuart, while we're worrying about accuracy, 29 October 2004 isn't quite "over a year and a half" ago.

re: A completely independent space to debate the world

The John Hopkins report published in the Lancet is still up because it is still factual. The UN report is based on a sample that predates the Johns Hopkins sample by several months, and itself has problems with sampling in the key areas, particularly Falluja. The numbers in the UN report if anything bolster the Johns Hopkins ones, since, comparing at the early date of the sample, they support a total for deaths from violence which is a substantial multiple of the Iraq Body Count numbers, and the UN sample was complete before the main growth in the insurgency. When the full Johns Hopkins report is published, we can have this debate again, but right now I am not aware of any serious scientific problem with their work that isn't fully discussed in the preliminary report itself. Read the reports, not the journalism.

re: A completely independent space to debate the world

I've added the discussion of the UNDP Iraq Living Conditions Survey and how it supports rather than debunks the Johns Hopkins Uni / Lancet survey to the NSPD site.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
© 2005-2011, Webdiary Pty Ltd
Disclaimer: This site is home to many debates, and the views expressed on this site are not necessarily those of the site editors.
Contributors submit comments on their own responsibility: if you believe that a comment is incorrect or offensive in any way,
please submit a comment to that effect and we will make corrections or deletions as necessary.
Margo Kingston Photo © Elaine Campaner

Recent Comments

David Roffey: {whimper} in Not with a bang ... 13 weeks 6 days ago
Jenny Hume: So long mate in Not with a bang ... 14 weeks 14 hours ago
Fiona Reynolds: Reds (under beds?) in Not with a bang ... 14 weeks 2 days ago
Justin Obodie: Why not, with a bang? in Not with a bang ... 14 weeks 2 days ago
Fiona Reynolds: Dear Albatross in Not with a bang ... 14 weeks 2 days ago
Michael Talbot-Wilson: Good luck in Not with a bang ... 14 weeks 2 days ago
Fiona Reynolds: Goodnight and good luck in Not with a bang ... 14 weeks 3 days ago
Margo Kingston: bye, babe in Not with a bang ... 15 weeks 14 hours ago