Bob Brown is one of the few principled politicians in Australia, and nothing in this article convinces me otherwise. His concern for the Kurds in 1991 is based on the same principles that led him to oppose the war on Iraq in 2003. He sees the Western nations pose and posture and pretend to be so concerned for Iraqis, when they really couldn't care less what happened to them, as long as business interests are maintained and propagated. It is a shame that the author of this article is not listening, looking and reading more deeply and widely, in order to have more material with which to think and then write about. We have quite enough journalists writing crudely and shallowly in the media as it is.

Sue, you seem to be missing Mr. Philip's point. Senator Brown may very well be 'principled' but he's still a politician.

His stance on Iraq has clearly changed after 10 years, for his party’s political benefit. In '91 it was about the Kurds, and now for Doctor Bob- Iraq is all about oil, imperialism, international law, and apparently 'sham' elections.

What a sad and venom-filled piece of invective - is this really the calibre of postgrad journalism students at UQ? Like some of the other 'journalists' who moonlight in these forums, this Philip chraracter really needs to go back and learn some basic fact-gathering techniques.

When Brown and the Greens were calling for intervention in Iraq in 1991, it was at a time when Saddam's regime had WMDs and was using them against the Kurdish minority, amongst others. Brown and the Greens are opposed to the current military 'adventure' by the Coalition of the Witless because it was justified by a lie - that Saddam's regime still had the WMDs. Far from being inconsistent, Brown and the Greens have maintained their position with respect to the WMDs, as opposed to the US and their flunkies - who have gone from supporting Saddam and supplying his regime with with arms including WMDs to replacing his vile regime with one more amenable to Western desire for oil.

Similarly, the Greens supported Latham's stance on the Tasmanian forests until Latham caved in to the self-interested demands of the forestry unions and Tasmanian ALP politicians. Nothing inconsistent there either, except in Labor's shameless vote-buying attempts.

This student needs to do much more research and to learn to argue coherently and logically before he has a prayer of getting a PhD. On the other hand, wasn't it UQ that awarded Joh an honorary doctorate?

Journalism certainly has changed; it seems like they no longer wish to research their claims before publishing them.

The war on Iraq is all about finding a scapegoat for America's testosterone levels, the want to have a war, to demonstrate how much power they control through arms. And the reward? Black gold, oil, and the installment of a political party in favour of American society.

And with politicians; how many of them care about the people and their views? How many will get out of their alabaster towers or Kirribilli mansions to see what the democracy wants? And least Brown gets out there and participates.