43543Re: Media Monitors and information gathering
- Jun 7, 2007Let's get the story straight, Robert.
Some decades ago you ditched revolutionary politics to disappear into the anti- worker
swamp that is NSW ALP politics. You have this fixation with the SWP/DSP. It's not a political
disagreement now, and I haven't seen in any of your postings on this list that it ever was.
They did you wrong in some long forgotten factional battle. Maybe they did, although
they're ain't many "theys" left from 1970. Maybe you just wanted to be a big political fish
in a small political pond - the "far left: of the NSW ALP. I don't know.
You talk of venom and hysteria.
What a comrade without an axe to grind would have done would have been to ask a couple
of questions before trashing somebody's reputation. But you have an axe to grind,
And Robert, you still have nothing to say on why Sue Bolton, of the DSP and Socialist
Alliance, and Peter Murray, who has been highly critical of the DSP, agree on this.
Nothing to say.
You just play the person, like you always did. The person (oh good lord knock off this
neanderthal "bloke" crap!) who you so easily chose to vilify after he was verballed by his
boss has done nothing wrong. Please Robert There are any number of cues in your post
that you are being fed this from your ALP mates.
Here's the lesson fo those people who might be accidentally duped into taking Mr Gould
Worker gets hung out to dry by boss.
Worker looks for solidarity from Bob Gould.
Does worker's position affect Gould's fixation with defending his historic sell out to the
No - Gould says nothing.
Yes - Gould says boss was right to hang worker out to dry.
Really Mr Gould - how many ostensibly left ALP millionaires does the Australian left need?
I'll help you.
--- In GreenLeft_discussion@yahoogroups.com, "bobgould987" <bobgould987@...>
> By Bob Gould
> People engaged in spin, particularly those like the verbally abusive
> Peter Murray, should at least try to get their story straight and be
> fairly careful about how they organise their arguments.
> The blustering Peter Murray asserts: "At some point, the meeting went
> from public to private. It was not made clear when, but the ETU is
> mistaken in its claim that the [meeting] was not open to the media."
> How does Murray know all that? He wasn't there, so he must be relying
> on somebody else's say so, possibly his friend who did the taping.
> Well, if he was interested in trying to sort out what actually
> happened, he could go and read the whole of Dean Mighell's speech,
> which is on the Media Monitors website.
> It's quite clear from Mighell's remarks that he doesn't believe the
> media are present, but he has a suspicion that somebody else is
> recording the meeting, and we now know who that was.
> Further in his contribution, again presumably relying on his anonymous
> informant, Murray claims that at no stage did Mighell say that the
> section of the meeting open to the media was over.
> I prefer to believe Mighell's account of events rather than rely on
> Murray's anonymous informant, but that's all speculation on Murray's
> part and on my part.
> This could easily be cleared up if the bloke who did the taping,
> and/or Sue Bolton, answered my very reasonable questions on these
> events: have they had any contact with Dean Mighell or other ETU
> officials since the story broke on Friday, and what did Mighell or the
> other officials say to them and what did Bolton and the bloke say to
> In that kind of face-to-face situation it's likely that some sort of
> clarity would have emerged about what actually happened. The left and
> labour movement public have a right to know what happened.
> Certainly, when Graeme Matthews wrote his article in Green Left Weekly
> he accepted Dean Mighell's account of events.
> I find the attacks on Mighell by ostensible leftists such as Murray
> and Raven, when he's under attack from the right in all its forms,
> deeply offensive as a socialist.
> The venom and hysteria people like Murray are directing against me for
> asking legitimate questions from a socialist point of view underlines
> just how bizarre this series events is becoming.
> I ask a further question based on Raven's attack on ETU officials as
> part of "Hard Labor" and his defence of Media Monitors. Is it
> seriously being proposed that socialists should treat as normal media
> activity that Media Monitors, via their representative, should
> routinely go "on spec" as the Media Monitors manager put it, to
> meetings of workers' organisations to record material to onsell to
> their clients, many of which are vicious opponents of the labour movement?
> It's also worth saying that all of this is happening in the context of
> sustained attack on the labour movement by all of the forces of
> reaction in this country. The leaders of the Socialist Alliance would
> be better served by providing a sensible answer on this matter, rather
> than relying on Murray's verbal abuse of me in the hope that this
> matter will somehow go away.
- << Previous post in topic