A Ms Luke joins the Conga line of Fools who blame Howard for Bali. Like Brian Deegan, she lost someone close and in her grief and confusion forgets to blame the people who detonated the bomb, the terrorists.

Ms Luke, who recently joined the Greens and does not rule out a future political career, is just weeks away from completing a degree in environmental science and management. She said she was attracted to the Greens because the party was ethical and had sound economic policies based on sustainable development principles.

and had sound economic policies! Wow!

“I believe in long-term, peaceful solutions such as education, not increasing security out of control,” Ms Luke said.

Don’t we all, but to have education we also need political stability (read democracy) and a clear separation of powers so the clerics are unable to teach hate in their ‘schools’. Nothing the Greens have ever said remotely looks like an answer to that problem. I can only wonder why the editor of the Weekend Australian thought the piece worthy of column space. Maybe he just wants to point out to readers the shallowness of the Greens.

The dark forces have conjured up another Leading Somebody who has an opinion contrary to the PM’s and in doing so expect the voters to instantly connect the Leading Somebody’s opinion as gospel handed down from Mount Kosciusko and the PM as ignoring said gospel.

Aware of the imminence of war based on a false assumption or calculated deceit, a leading scientist tries to get word to the Prime Minister but is thwarted by his own masters. In desperation and in a “personal capacity”, he dispatches his own missive to the PM. Instead of taking heed, the PM proceeds to declare war while the Government compiles a dirt sheet to discredit the scientist should the media learn of his failed attempt to influence the PM. Read like plot of some fanciful, B-grade political thriller about thuggish suppression of dissenting individuals, craven bureaucracy and self-interested manipulation of truth? Depressingly, of course, it is all too real.

Leading Scientist Bob Mathews has an opinion about the lack of WMDs and writes to John Howard telling him so. Instead of taking heed, the PM proceeds to declare war. The hide of the man. The smugness of it all. Fancy a PM not dropping everything, altering our foreign policy and opting out of alliances on the gospel handed down by a scientist. A quick Google for Mathews brings up this;

Bob Mathews is a Principal Research Scientist in the Nuclear Biological and Chemical Defence and Arms Control Section of the Australian Defence Science and Technology Organisation (DSTO). His main current scientific research interest is the application for treaty purposes of methods for the detection and analysis of organic chemicals, and the development of verification procedures.

So I’ll give him technical expertise, but that’s it. I’ve known scientists who know everything there is to know about a specific subject and yet can’t change a tyre or tell me what’s going on in the world. What does Bob know of el-Quaida? Is he on the Intelligence briefing circuit? Has he studied terrorism itself? Has he been involved in diplomatic briefs from the US and the UK. Is he an expert on the Middle East or has he authored any papers on JI? The sentence;

Aware of the imminence of war based on a false assumption or calculated deceit and ..B-grade political thriller about thuggish suppression of dissenting individuals, craven bureaucracy and self-interested manipulation of truth? Depressingly, of course, it is all too real

does say something about the politics of the author so I get the impression that even if there was evidence of WMDs aplenty he would have come up with some other reason to have this matter brought into the media during an election Have we progressed from a ‘Group of Eminent Doctors/Scientists/ Humanitarians to a ‘Leading Scientist’ program of opinions contrary to Howard?s way of doing things. Is there a Committee to Destabilize Howard somewhere in the Dark Forces HQ with a programme of dissenting opinions that are to be released weekly during the campaign and daily in the last week? I really don’t know, although it looks like there is, but what I do know is most discerning voters acknowledge a PM has to consider all opinions and facts in his decision making process and having done so must decide. He would have had hundreds of opinions to consider before committing to Iraq and so when I hear of one letter that wasn’t listed in the bibliography of the opinions considered, I can only say; So bloody what!

The ALP has announced its defence policy. Mark Latham has vowed to make Australia “impregnable” by expanding the army by one battalion. Well, that’s what it says here They promise;

* a new light infantry battalion with about 750 troops to be based in Townsville * the parachute battalion group at Holsworthy in Sydney to be moved to the Townsville * a new entitlement of reunion travel for non-custodial parents in the defence forces who were posted away from their children, and * A new Australian Defence Force medal for volunteers who had served three years in the ADF since World War II. * In addition, Mr Latham said Labor would encourage regular military exercises with New Zealand to create greater synergies between the two defence forces.

That’s it? Reunion travel – yeah yeah! Kiwi synergies – yeah yeah! New medal – big deal! Moving 3RAR (Para) to Townsville – Why? They don’t walk to the battle zone (para does suggests they fly) …so they’re 90 minutes closer to something. Big deal! Lavarack Barracks is going to get crowded but don’t worry – neither the new battalion nor the 3RAR move isn’t planned for four to five years. I might add that the only reason any-one is talking about more battalions comes from the fact that the ALP have been busy cutting battalions out of the ORBAT for years.

A Labor Government will, as a matter of priority, re-invigorate the critical role of the Reserves.

Great throw-away line. Is there a brigade in the Reserve that is fully manned, kitted and ready to go anywhere? I think not. Yet if Labour plan to have a brigade and a battalion group ready to deploy to different theatres at different times at little notice and the Reserves are going to back them up, then they need to do some more sums. Six months after deployment all the regular troops will be looking for replacement. If the Reserves are being reinvigorated can we have the dollars to do that included in the plan.

Modifications to common induction training to assist in the recruitment and retention of Reserve personnel.

Many years ago the ADF was forced to cut Recruit Training in half because Reserve soldiers had difficulty getting away from their jobs for three months at a time for Recruit and Corp training. The regular army had to ‘half train’ everyone. Standards dropped. Are the Modifications to common induction training heading back down the road of falling standards?

To defend Australia without having to rely on the combat forces of other countries.

That must have been included as a sop to the Left-wing so they can tell Uncle Sam to go jump. Stupid and meaningless. The last time our country needed defending against an incursion we need hundreds of thousands of Americans to help us. The Coalition hasn’t done everything they should either, but they do have a plan and it doesn’t start with a paltry $300 odd million. This sort of insurance policy is big and bottom lines are in the billions.

Mr Latham said terrorism must be dealt with at its source, by eliminating organisations like JI, not by fighting wars on the other side of the world, or by Mr Howard returning to the doctrine of pre-emption.

Terrorism must be dealt with at its source – I agree but if you think that the source of terrorism is in some suburb in Jakarta or Mindanao then you just haven’t thought it through. Neutralizing current JI terrorists will not stop other like minded Moslems heading off to the heart of Islam for training or finance. Berlin and Hiroshima didn’t fall because the US, Britain and Australia made their countries impregnable. They fell because we took the war to them -we attacked their homeland, their industry and their logistics and made it impossible for them to continue the wage war. And don’t confuse the issue with…But, they don’t have a homeland. They do and the US are there now. Fighting In Iraq and Afghanistan and intelligence gathering in Iran and Saudi Arabia. If you don’t understand that basic tenet then get the hell out of the debate.

What began as a benign Sunday morning chat on television between Howard and veteran Canberra interviewer Laurie Oakes has become a religion with John Quiggin, Tim Dunlop and Chris Shiels. What Howard said;

What Howard said in reply to Oakes’ question was quite equivocal, full of “ifs”: “If you believed somebody was going to launch an attack against your country, either of a conventional kind or of a terrorist kind, and you had the capacity to stop it and there was no alternative other than to use that capacity, then you would have to use it.”

At 7:14 this morning John Quiggan posts on the matter.

Call me naive, but I think that on an issue like national security, a government ought to offer coherent policies rather than soundbites. Howard’s statements over the weekend fail this test. On the one hand, he reiterated the view that Australia would undertake pre-emptive strikes against terrorist targets in neighbouring countries. On the other hand, he announced the formation of Federal Police counterterrorism teams to operate in South-East Asia

Apparently having Federal Police overseas, as they are already, and having a last ditch stand of pre-emptive strikes is mutually exclusive. I can’t see why. And if Howard’s quotes are only soundbites what are Lathams -gospel? By 10:30 Tim Dunlop had worked up enough steam to post on the same point making it the Anti-Howard post for the day. Here’s Tim’s Orwellian piece-de-resistance.

If the Howard government loses this election–which is well within the bounds of possibility–it will be this sort of too-clever-by-half manipulation of the electorate that will be the reason. John Howard made trustworthiness the catchphrase of the election–his Orwellian piece-de-resistance–and this sort of flim-flam brings the issue nicely into focus

Two hours later, after studying his negative-spin dictionary ‘Sir Echo’ Chris Shiels attacks. Full of coffee or something worse he lines up Howard – all barrels but no clear sight picture.

Rodent, hoisted, petard, etc John Howard’s pre-emption ploy isn’t dead in the water; it’s alive and imploding within the Coalition. This issue has everything: Howard ruthlessly exploiting national security for domestic political scare campaign purposes, hyperbolic lies piled upon hyperbolic lies, regional contempt (with implicit racism), and now hysterical flip flops and backflips. Yes, we can see the whole wretched form of this most dreadful of Australian governments in full ugly flight, but on this occasion blowing up in its own face. The media transcripts will be here in due course (more at Tim’s and John’s places). If the Howardians don’t change their medication quick smart, they’ll be a smoking ruin come election day.

Imploding, hyperbolic lies, regional contempt, implicit racism and most dreadful of Australian Governments….Wow. ‘Pre-emptive’ has certainly become the currency of left-wing mantra. Guys, all nations reserve the right to a pre-emptive strike just before they are attacked. It isn’t just a recently thought of right-wing swear word – its a last ditch tactic after diplomacy and all other means to resolution have failed. Get over it. At Back Pages a reader comments;

i love back pages. just when i was feeling downhearted and defeatist i read today’s pieces and it’s like someone’s put zoloft in the lemonade.

Zoloft, a cure for depression, social anxiety disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder, panic disorder and obsessive-compulsive disorder might be better prescribed for Chris. His ‘panic disorder’ needs medication.

In a national ACNielsen Poll fifty-four per cent nominated Mr Costello as the treasurer they would prefer, compared with 32 per cent who named Mr Crean. Labor has targeted Mr Costello by saying a vote for John Howard is a vote for a Costello government. Now this is only conjecture but what isn’t, what is a laid down fact, is that a vote for Latham is a vote for Crean as Treasurer. Frightening. Latham, can you let Crean out of his cage so the voters can remind themselves of the mans measure? Short. I like the add bringing up Latham’s history with the Liverpool City Council. Telling, isn’t it?. As Slatts says;

They’re even having sport with his lame slogan borrowed from the hapless Kerry campaign, “Ease the squeeze”. “Latham will squeeze the fees”, the Libs are ho-hoing in regard to his class-hatred inspired attack on private school grants. That’s without mentioning the council worker he king-hit, the road-rage incident with a council opponent, the arm-breaking attack on a Sydney taxi driver and the porn show he put on for his in-laws at a restaurant.

The Poll Bludger (scroll down to ‘Hold the Mayo) scribes on Brian Deegan, high-profile independent and would-be slayer of Alexander Downer.

…(Deegan) appeared to abandon any notion of extending his electoral appeal beyond the ideological fringe with his reaction to the Jakarta bombing, suggesting that the Australian Government ‘negotiate’ with Jemaah Islamiah”. The Advertiser today carries a poll conducted on Wednesday surveying 530 voters in the seat of Mayo which puts support for Deegan at 13.5 per cent after the undecided vote is distributed, seven points down on a similar poll conducted in May. Downer is safe and sound on 53 per cent. The poll will come as a shock to the Australian Democrats, who came agonizingly close to winning the seat in 1998 but are now recording a miserable 1 per cent.

13.5 % is not a surprise, however it does reinforce one’s faith in the Aussie voter’s ability to recognize an ideological fool. Meanwhile the latest Morgan Poll gives it to Labour as they report two-party support for the ALP was down 1.5% to 53% while Coalition support was up to 47%. This would suggest a comfortable Labor win, if the same result is achieved in the election on 9 October 2004. Palmer’s Oz Politics has a good summary of this and of Centrebet odds that are being repeatedly quoted as a better indicator than polls. Under the heading – Another day, another millimetre in Howard’s direction, odds are heavily in favour of the Coalition with quotes of Coalition $1.28: Labour $3.30 Looking for a bet on the outcome? Yobbo is offering up to take bets up to and including $1000 AUD. So – any takers? None so far and commenter Paul from Paul and Carls nails it in his usual subtle and genteel manner;

I haven?t been able to get any takers, offering 3.1 on the One pod sod. Could only get one $20 bet on Kerry- none of these pinkos will put their money where their skip-like gobs are; pansies.

Too much going on at home to blog but some reading has brought to light two excellent political blogs. Look to the left sidebar and if you don’t have to waste a whole day as ‘Mr Fixit’ around the home like I do, then go read some non-emotive analysis of the Aussie election. Particularly of note is Palmer’s Oz Politics that has plenty of reference for those whose interest in politics is not matched by a political science degree. Notably missing in both blogs is the ‘Howard Hating’ mentality so prevalent in too much of the debate. Just the facts.

Correct me if I’m wrong or being cynical but surely the only purpose is to drain votes off the Greens Drew Hutton and the Dems What’shis face? If I’m wrong please tell me. I’m sure someone will. But if I’m correct and it works, well and good. UPDATE: Graham at Ambit Gambit has more