Aussie forest fires...

tis article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/feb/09/australia-fires-natural-disaster has also copped a lot of criticism. i personally think it's patronising, factually incorrect and incredibly insensitive. basically the writer is completely fucking wrong, despite having the beginnings of a couple of good points.

I agree it's timing in insensitive and appreciate that you have been affected by this, but how is this article inaccurate? I have read the salient points made in other articles in the last year, namely that bushfire is a natural process that has been suppressed in recent decades. Is this wrong? I do not want to underplay the loss of life or the possible criminal cause of the fire, but are lessons not to be learned?