Dave Sharma John Howard
(Image: AAP/Dean Lewins)

Crikey readers never turn down an opportunity to roast John Howard. Yesterday, it was in response to a recently released study pointing to how the Howard government hampered their own (deeply unpopular) Iraq war plans (as well as on Howard’s continued presence around elections). Elsewhere, readers had their say on the Mark Latham defamation case settlement, and on the desperate need for an anti-corruption body at a federal level.

On the Howard government’s Iraq preparation

zut alors writes: Howard wasn’t sufficiently “terrified of public opposition” when he blithely ignored one million Australians marching in anti-Iraq war protests. Our countrymen are generally an apathetic bunch but feeling was intense. Howard committed us to the unnecessary bloodbath regardless. And then became self-righteous and defensive when Iraqi asylum seekers began washing up on our shores. I wonder if Dubya still bothers sending an Xmas card.

Adrian Jackson writes: I wonder why the Liberal party keeps trotting out John Howard at election time? His presence in Wentworth and Victoria made no positive impact on the Liberal vote and perhaps the opposite. Australia realised that they did not want this Iraq war monger in 2007 when they voted the Liberals out and Howard lost his seat. I realised he was a war monger in 2003, opposed his policy on Iraq and was suspended from the Liberal Party for 12 months for it.

On the Latham-Faruqi defamation payout

redfurnhood: Faruqi has his legal costs and a payout; Latham does not admit the imputations claimed against him and calls action against him “lawfare”. The real “lawfare” was Latham’s outrageous and absurd defence, thrown out by the court, and his claim that action against his slurs is “outrage/censorship tactics”. Faruqi was right to challenge Latham’s florid accusations. No one should have to bear calumny in silence, whether they are journalists or not.

Vasco writes: Latham has got a nice little taxpayer funded income from his stellar career in federal parliament. He’ll roll into that retirement home, the NSW upper house. Not only more public money to wallow in but protection of parliamentary privilege to slander all and sundry. Heaven on a stick and we get to pay to enable this travesty.

On the push for a federal corruption authority

Ng GJB writes: All political parties have skeletons, its not really of interest unless there is activity that reduces effective fair governance for Australian citizens exclusively; or benefits in some manner persons or organisations for unexplained reasons. One thing I am sure all parties will support is that this investigative body will not delve to far into the past…

Gerard Murtagh writes: A funding formula and resources need to be locked into the bill so that Government cannot simply starve it to death, as is happening in NSW.

Send your comments, corrections, clarifications and cock-ups to [email protected]. We reserve the right to edit comments for length and clarity. Please include your full name.