Harold Pinter

[sunnysan]

Hypocrite

I dont think he was ever claiming to be a philanthropist, he is a playwrite, author and political commetator.

To equate the policies he is critical of to the Western economic and political system is at best oversimplified, and at worst wrong.

His criticism of American foreign policy is IMHO, valid. However, I would also state that during the height of the Roman empire, the same criticisms could have been aimed at the Roman Senate

However, what seems to be thin on the ground among critics of American policy in particular, are viable alternatives or speculation as to what the world would be like in the absence of America as a superpower.

In the case of the UK's collusion with the US, its once again easy to level criticism at the government and much harder to take decisions when you are are the person in power, but the fact remains .....

A) The goverments of two of the most powerful western democracies, lied to the electorates of their own countries in order to go to war with a country that did not pose a threat.

B) Both these countries defied internal law to do it

C) Both of these regimes are still in power.

If you want examples of taking the moral high ground and hypocrisy, look not further.

[Joe Black]

Very moving, starts off slow, but works itself up into a rapture of political dissent, peppered with the political speech we have become so accustomed too, applying the Orwellian concepts of truth to the current political status quo...the theatrical delivery and persuasive oratory of this lecture IMHO is reason enough to watch it

You might notice I trimmed/edited your quote sunny, unfortunately someone didn't do the same with Pinters 'speech', if you can call it that. Diatribe I guess is the word which springs more to mind.

Theatrical indeed, or at least attempting to be. Still, such things do not make an argument persuasive if the words or ideas themselves do not carry weight or meaning, no more than reciting any of the new Labour government's policies in the manner or tone of Shakespeare would make them any more worthy.

Great words and ideas deserve great speeches full of power and passion, but Pinter lacks the first two and I would question if he even provides the others....

[scotspine]

please - leave your bard out of this we have ours [rab] and you have yours [will]. what happy equilibrium. shall i compare thee to a summer's er...no

[DodgyAgent]

More cut'n'paste sludge from DA - he is well-qualified though, what with all the excrement he posts on job boards.

How are you today sausage jockey?

[xoggoth]

Afraid that's human nature. Why single out Pinter? We should not criticise people for their failings, why bother when we all have much the same ones?

The ones we should have a go at and the ones we should seek to bring down are the ones who have the power to inflict their fecking human failings on the rest of us. Precisely what Pinter is doing.

[DodgyAgent]

Afraid that's human nature. Why single out Pinter? We should not criticise people for their failings, why bother when we all have much the same ones?

The ones we should have a go at and the ones we should seek to bring down are the ones who have the power to inflict their fecking human failings on the rest of us. Precisely what Pinter is doing.

I think people like Pinter should be exposed for what they are; guilt ridden hypocrites. His points may have some validity and he has every right to express them. The man himself is a fanatical left wing maniac who will lend his support to any murdering individual or regime that shares his hate of what is in essence himself i.e anything that represents the cultural and materialistic identity of the West..

Excusing a person, particularly when that person is in a position of considerable influence, because he is somehow imperfect is not acceptable.

[xoggoth]

I know bugger all about Pinter Dodgy. You are probably right. He may well be a twisted lefty anti-western bastard for all I know. That isn't my point. I simply believe that in weighing up threats to our way of life we should concern ourselves with actualities not unknowns like motives and personalities. I simply doubt that Pinter's influence is a very real threat these days. He is very much yesterday's icon.

Confucious he say "Little bad tempered naked man threaten no one, very big sweet tempered man in armour holding axe is threat to all" Well actually he didn't but he should have done.

[Mailman]

but the fact remains .....

A) The goverments of two of the most powerful western democracies, lied to the electorates of their own countries in order to go to war with a country that did not pose a threat.

This is in effect a lie itself. Neither America, nor Britain purposely lied to their populations about going to war. IF you must continue with your own lie then you must also agree that every intelligence agency around the world lied to the respective Governments with their assessments.

B) Both these countries defied internal law to do it

Wrong again, the UN already had resolutions in place that allowed for actions to be taken.

C) Both of these regimes are still in power.

How perceptive of you. You might have also noticed that there have been a couple elections since the war started and both were reelected with rather large majorities.

If you want examples of taking the moral high ground and hypocrisy, look not further.

You have got one thing right...we dont have to look much further than yourself

Mailman

[threaded]

Aren't playwrights like fantastic, they can, like, string words together and sh1t.