Gus: as scores of people are killed in Iraq today, the US congress is preparing to pass a motion against Bushit...

-------

From the Washington Post

GOP Expects Defections as House Debates Iraq Resolution

By Lyndsey Layton and Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, February 12, 2007; Page A05

Three days of intense debate over the Iraq war begins in the House today, with Democrats planning to propose a narrowly worded rebuke of President Bush's troop buildup and Republicans girding for broad defections on their side.

Both parties will jockey for prime time before the C-SPAN cameras, with leaders claiming the best time slots and rank-and-file members trying to make the most of the five minutes each will be allotted. If all 435 House members use their five minutes, debate will last 36 hours. It is likely to begin by late morning and run until midnight tomorrow, Wednesday and Thursday. A vote is expected Friday.
----------------

Gus: here, in Aussiewonderland, Howardelle, the debate-stiffler, with her short-sighted looking glass, sees only one way to go through the rabbit hole... face first in the quagmire with a silly worm, and get stuck there until the mad-hatter turns up, unless the queen of spades arrives there first: "off with their heads!" she screams to say something pigheadedly ... while, according to the effluvial-rodent, everyone else is "wrong"...

"Sure but that does not make the sewer-rat right" says Alice as she wakes up to the drums of the Nielsen polls...

Today in the SMH (13/02/07) a pumped up Gerard Henderson goes firing willy-nilly with twisted barrels to shoot at duck shadows — all in support of his former boss, the current UnAustralian liar-in-chief of Kirribilly. Why bother respond but... How many times do we have to tell him his watery arguments do not hold to scratch and sniff...

Of the bad lot, here's one that leaks like the Titanic at 20,000 fathoms:

"On the other hand, Howard sincerely believed that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and that he was a threat to the West and some Muslim nations alike. " Says Gerard without blinking an eyelid or losing a comma. Bollocks!

If the rodent Ratus of the ratbag Right sincerely "believed" Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, this would only tell that Ratus was an imbecile. He's not. Just a cunning rat who plays the game of fibbing pursuit to suit the moment for his own benefit. No world leader worth his or her salt truly believed that Saddam had WMDs. Only the whipped up froth of the press, especially Murdoch's, was designed to make the public think Saddam could have. But those people in charge who had solid core intelligence at hand could not have have more doubt about the WMDs than believing Mother Theresa was a communist. Bush Blair and Howard knew the intelligence was cooked up, beefed up and sexed up to suit war. And war we were going to have for dinner... Full stop. Their generals would have had to know too. In these days of modern warfare one does not attack a place without knowing what's there. Since the so-called WMDs were so dangerous and intractable — had they been there, attacking Iraq was nothing less than a suicide mission for 50,000 US troops... No way Jose. The decorated brass of the US milit'ry would not have coped that. The coalitors of the willing had to know there was no WMDs... None. Zilch. Nada. nothing... We knew that. Howard knew that. The fog of deceit is slowly being lifted for the guilable public on the way the intelligence was badly cooked up to suit war... Howard knew it and followed the bad smell with his nose, to be a chum to the most inept president in the history of the USA.

Howard's amazing luck — a luck propped by porkies —is running out.

Sure there are insurgency in Iraq, but the longer the US troops stay the more insurgency there will be. Unequivocally. Shooting at windmills won't help. The deal Bushit Minus made was that, no matter what, we're going on an expedition to pump the Iraqi oil and that's that. No matter the mess that follows the war. Despicable.

From the ABC

Rudd's policy would destabilise Iraq, says PM

Prime Minister John Howard is trying to take control of the debate on Iraq by accusing the Opposition Leader of planning to abandon the country to terrorists.

--------------------

Gus: The presence of US troops in Iraq only exacerbates the problem. What is defined by Johnnee and Bushit as "terrorists", are often ordinary people who are fed up with the quagmire and the occupation — an occupation which was to last only a few months or one year max after Saddam's defeat, in which their front door is kicked in, every second day.

Four years after "mission accomplished", the situation has degraded badly mainly due to the US trying too bloody hard to impose their will on the diverse Iraqi people... Having upset the Sunnis for removing Saddam and having upset the Shia for not letting them run the country as a majority of the people, having shot a few Kurds by mistake and other such event, and having allowed by inefficacy, and participated in, the killings of many people (650,000), the US should pussyfoot out slowly from their victory against Saddam... but they carry on like conquerors. If you think that having tanks and Humvee on your street makes you feel safe, eventually the military circus wears very thin on your nerves, especially when people and neighbours are shot, including kids and women.

The slow but definite exit of troops from Iraq would not destabilise the country if done according to the Iraq study group recommendations... Slowly and carefully.

To the contrary, maintaining troops there "until the job is done" is an illusion of grand purpose — but an invitation for terrorist groups to stay there as well and multiply... Why would they go? They have the US troops as an excuse/reason to be there as well. In the case of more troops and so forth, who's going to win? No-one, especially not the Iraqi people.

How dare you poke fun at Mr Henderson in your column (PG bereft of humour) of the Weekend Rag, sorry Mag... ? Mr Henderson is suffering... and it's not nice to see someone of your educated calibre, dear Mr Adams, kick a poor soul who's sunk his life into the Sydney Destitute...

Yes, Gerard or PG (Poor Gerard as you call him), had a funnybone bypass a long time ago when he sat on his first cactus on behalf of the gasbagging ratbag right. But I sincerely believe his tormented subconscient is secretly telling him that he may have been wrong all along, for many useless years.

That is a tragic state of affairs — difficult sickness to come to term with (I'm not holding my breath he can see that). And as we've lampooned his laboured headlights on this site with major Bushit bypass of our own, we cannot underestimate the damage done to the thin (or thick?) veneer. So ease up, Mr Adams, our Henderson is an icon — an icon, so sadly blind to the spin factor embedded in his own craft. And that fact alone deserves our unreserved compassion at we strategically kick our flying boot in his backside.

I forgot to mention, as you raised the memory of Andrew Olle, that I met Andrew on a few casual occasions and it is my humble hunch that he would be turning in his grave at the caliber of people masquerading under the "Andrew Olle Media Lectures"... But then who am I to judge...? Knowing Andrew, he would do it quietly or he might let them talk so to discover what the enemy has in store... But the problem here, is that most modern pimply journos have no idea about the why and therefore of much. They just put pen to paper with "objectivity" and balance: exposing 50 per cent truth and 50 per cent porkies with the banality of an impartial edema.