Posted by Rhisiart Gwilym
on November 2, 2009, 5:20 pm, in reply to "Paxman on Iraq - "we were hoodwinked""
But that implies the polite acceptance of the claim that Paxman et al. are credible journalists. I know it's impolite, but I think that 'sleb-hack' is a more accurate description.
In Jeremy's case the accurate phrase is 'complacent-goodthinker millionaire sleb-hack'.
John Pilger is a journalist. I think Bob Fisk qualifies too. Their scars, earned in dangerous encounters in risky places in the pursuit of news, identify them. The inflated bums, bellies and sense of self-importance of the desk-flying sleb-hacks identify *them*.
Why would any savvy dissident want to take such puffed-up place-holders seriously -- as sources of reliable fact, I mean? As threats to the world's vulnerable people and places, obviously, they're to be taken as seriously as the criminal power-wielding gics who own them, and whom they serve.
Paxman's civilised, reasonable form of words, as reported here, are just the bromide with which he and his ilk kid themselves, each other, and any of us who are mislead into taking them seriously at their own estimate.
Responses: