Tuesday, August 18, 2009

Biased war museum? No...


I can't remember if I've put this up here already.

A while ago, teh Paris and I toured our national capital's war memorial. It had the usual glorification of war exhibits, with life-size dioramas of trenches and lots and lots of guns. Fine, it's a war memorial.

But this small sign in the modern war section made me whip out my camera and record it for my own benefit.

It reads:
As an invasion of Iraq grew more likely, community concern about Australian involvement culminated in protests across the country. Many refused to accept the stated reasons for invasion and some questioned its legality, while others supported Australia's role, believing that Saddam Hussein should be removed from power.


Wow. Just, wow. That has to be most biased statement I've ever seen in a museum.

8 comments:

  1. Really? You should go to the Hiroshima war museum some day.

    ReplyDelete
  2. yeah that one made me look twice too. damn public servants.

    Just one other thing I noticed about the War Memorial when I visited last... the biggest and bloodiest war in Australia's history, the one where the Aboriginal population was almost wiped out by British invaders, doesn't get a single mention.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Yeah, that's a semantics thing. That aint a war in the same way the Congo Free State aint a genocide.

    ReplyDelete
  4. the country was invaded, the inhabitants were slaughtered mercilessly, and the invading force continues to occupy. can't see any way it's not a war, except that it is only the victors who get to write the history.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Rule number one in recording history - it's only a war if both sides are white.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Unless it's a race war (Gah! The beatles 'Helter Skelter' just started playing on my on Itunes).

    ReplyDelete