Open mike 13/10/2019

94 comments on “Open mike 13/10/2019 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Sacha 1

   13 October 2019 at 7:47 am

   When not to 'debate'.

   http://www.armoxon.com/2017/09/bubbles-10-both-sides.html

   Some people’s ideas are genocide and slavery. They don’t want to win a debate, they just want to be listed on the exchange. They don’t have ideas, as such. They have intentions. The idea is a seat at the table.
   …

   People do not have a right to a platform for their ideas. People do not have the right to a debate. However, people do have a right to not have to hear that their worth as human beings, their very existence in society, is something that is up for debate.
   …

   A debate must be in good faith. Sometimes it is inappropriate to have a debate against someone who's intentions are not in good faith. Sometimes you have to 'change the locks'. Sometimes it becomes necessary to simply say, “What you believe is that some people have less worth than other people, and I think that is an indecent position to take. As a result, there are no details you can present within that framework that interest me in the slightest, and I don’t see any point in any debate about those details.”
   • phillip ure 1.1

     13 October 2019 at 9:55 am

     you really are reciting the authoritarian-mantra..aren't you…?

     deciding who can and who can't be heard..

     a propensity that is both strong (and wrong) in many of my fellow leftwing travellers…

     most disturbing..it is..
     • Sacha 1.1.1

       13 October 2019 at 10:02 am

       You really did not understand the article I linked to, did you? It talks only about individuals choosing how to act.
       • phillip ure 1.1.1.1

         13 October 2019 at 10:28 am

         um..!..correct me if i'm wrong – but i recall you arguing here for me to be shut down for 'not debating in good faith'..

         which is why the first line on this excerpt you chose to link to..jumped out at me..

         'A debate must be in good faith. Sometimes it is inappropriate to have a debate against someone who's intentions are not in good faith. Sometimes you have to 'change the locks'

         and it does seem to me that looking at the excerpts you chose to highlight..that you are arguing for the censorship – of the likes of me..

         have i misunderstood that in some way..?
         • Sacha 1.1.1.1.1

           13 October 2019 at 10:59 am

           Moderators can choose to respond to bad faith arguments however they want.
           • phillip ure 1.1.1.1.1.1

             13 October 2019 at 11:21 am

             ???

             how does that relate – in any way..to the clarification – i was seeking..?

             and i see you even have a name for them – 'bad faith arguments'..

             have you acronymed that yet..?
             • Sacha …

               13 October 2019 at 11:29 am

               I can't do anything about your comprehension. Enjoy the sun.
               • phillip ure …

                 13 October 2019 at 11:42 am

                 so we will just leave your non-answer to sit there and fester ..eh..?

                 readers can ask themselves why you will/can not answer quite a straightforward query..

                 you cutting and running..eh..?

                 i actually think that at heart authoritarians are bullies looking for back-up..

                 do you think a case can be made for that..?
                 • The Al1en …

                   13 October 2019 at 11:53 am

                   Come on, Philip, you can't call the cut and run line and retain credibility when you yourself did the same thing only a few of days ago.
                   • Sacha …

                     13 October 2019 at 12:03 pm

                     Just no point in continuing a discussion with someone who does not understand words like 'censorship'. I trust others to have enough nous to make sense of what is already there.
                 • Incognito …

                   13 October 2019 at 12:05 pm

                   It is not compulsory to answer questions posed by other commenters, least in OM. You know this and do it yourself, from time to time. Rather than displaying your dissatisfaction with Sacha’s reason for “cutting and running” from you, you may want to consider a different response or just leave it and move on and enjoy your time in the sun at a bach in Raglan. I know what I’d do 😉
                   • phillip ure …

                     13 October 2019 at 1:08 pm

                     of course i understand it is not complusory to answer questions..

                     (i would also oppose a dictum such as that..)

                     but in this case it was the first post of the day..

                     which is often presented by the poster as a discussion topic..

                     and this is what i responded to..

                     and i feel i have been unfailingly polite in my queries..

                     so 'surprise' rather than the 'dissatifaction' you attribute to me is my reaction to the cutting and running of the presenter..

                     and like i said – readers can make of that what they will..

                     that's all…no biggie..

                     and not so much a bach..more a caravan made in masterton in 1957 – even nicer i wd argue..(it has wheels..)

                     and not in but 'near raglan'..and once again 'even nicer' i wd argue..

                     mind you – raglan itself is pretty nice – for a town..
                   • Incognito []

                     13 October 2019 at 1:34 pm

                     I apologise for misreading “a beach near raglan” as “a bach at Raglan”. Very sloppy of me.

                     Even though a commenter may intend to start a “discussion topic”, and even if they happen to post the “first post of the day”, they may feel it is an exercise in futility to engage with another commenter on that topic for various reasons. A wise thing to do is to politely state the reason(s) and not engage further. Or they may simply ignore the other commenter. All quite civil and freedom of speech does allow to not engage. Take it or leave it, Phil.
           • phillip ure 1.1.1.1.1.2

             13 October 2019 at 12:52 pm

             re yr 'bad faith arguments'..

             cd you plse define/clarify for me what exactly a 'bad faith argument' is..

             and perhaps as further clarification/an example – you could apply those definitions to the animal-rights arguments i present(ed)..

             and perhaps tell me why you thought you had the grounds to accuse me of 'bad faith' arguing at that time..?

             and if an argument is challenging to the listener – as clearly mine were to/for you – do they morph into 'bad faith' arguments..?

             and – as explanation – my reasons for opposing such subjective censorship – is because it is so just that – 'subjective'..

             and this makes it wide open to abuse/to shutting down issues you don't want discussed/to silencing people you don't 'like'..for whatever tenuous reasons…

             and because it is so open to abuse – this is why it must not be countenanced..

             and really – the best-ever takedown of authoritarianism has to be cartman..

             in his 'respect my authority!' role…

             doesn't it..?
         • mauī 1.1.1.1.2

           13 October 2019 at 11:23 am

           Absolutely correct… yet again Phil.

           If you don't tow the line we will impeach you or label you Alex Jones they say….
       • The Al1en 1.1.1.2

         13 October 2019 at 12:00 pm

         He really didn't, did he?

         I find when opposing one using bad faith arguments as you laid out, despite best intentions, it's frequently easier to just show where they are wrong and leave it to the ether. The problems arise when one tries to counter the shifting goalposts that often come when debating a BFA, and as we know from here, come they do… Along with the insults and straw men and because you've written this it must mean you believe this type of foolery.

         I like how you have practiced what you preached and not got involved here. A fine example.
         • Sacha 1.1.1.2.1

           13 October 2019 at 12:06 pm

           Thank you. We all have better things to do.
   • marty mars 1.2

     13 October 2019 at 10:13 am

     I can't stand the 'both sides' debate – (usually made by those with privilege imo) – for the reasons stated in the article linked to above

     Let's state the obvious: People who intend to deliberately harm others lie to do so. They do so instrumentally, because lies are a useful tool. They debate instrumentally, for the same reason. They equivocate their lies as equal to the truth for the same reason.

     Saying ‘both sides are the same,’ when one side is a lie and the other the truth, always promotes the lie and degrades the truth. Thus, attempts to create contexts in which both sides are essentially just opposite views of entirely equal value should always be understood as attempts to disguise a lie.

     Put it another way: A ‘both sides are the same’ argument is never a neutral position. It is a false front disguising itself as a neutral position, and is intended, either with conscious intentionality or unconscious desire for comfortable ignorance, to elevate a lie.
     • Anne 1.2.1

       13 October 2019 at 10:59 am

       That quote mm is spot on and it happens almost on a daily basis these days.

       The best example though has been the 'two sides' theory of Climate Change. There was never two sides. There was the truth and there were the lies. It should not be forgotten that some 10 or so years ago, the liars went so far as to hack into a prominent British scientist's (there might have been more than one) emails and altered figures to make it look like the material contained was faulty and the scientist(s) incompetent.

       And for years the gullible and ignorant MSM around the world went along with the two-side theory and must take a large dose of the blame for the delay in forcing the necessary changes required to save life on Earth.
       • The Chairman 1.2.1.1

         13 October 2019 at 11:41 am

         "Altered figures", you say.

         Do you have a link for that, Anne? We wouldn't want people to think you were arguing in bad faith in a discussion about "bad faith arguments".

         [speaking of bad faith, consider this a warning that if you continue to poke at and bait commenters you’ll get another ban. I can see no reason at all for questioning Anne’s good faith here. By all means ask for more information from her, but taking a potshot at the same time is going to cause problems – weka]
         • Anne 1.2.1.1.1

           13 October 2019 at 11:58 am

           Go find it for yourself [deleted uncalled for insult]. Won't take you long. It was spread all over the international media at the time.
           • The Chairman 1.2.1.1.1.1

             13 October 2019 at 12:12 pm

             You made the assertion, Anne. Hence, it's not my job to back your claim. My understanding is (on this site) it's yours – i.e. those who make an assertion.
             • Incognito …

               13 October 2019 at 12:17 pm

               I think Anne might be referring to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatic_Research_Unit_email_controversy

               Moderators often act as Schoolmasters having to break up shit fights about shit 🙁
               • Climaction …

                 13 October 2019 at 12:46 pm

                 I can’t see anything in that article that mentions altering of documents. Filtering, sure. But not out and out altering.

                 think Anne might be misguided on this one.

                 “Climategate” certainly wasn’t helped by terminology like “hide the decline” and “proxy measurements”

                 but another example of Russian meddling to keep western eyes away from the massive ecological disaster that is Russia and China.
                 • joe90 …

                   13 October 2019 at 1:06 pm

                   Citing out of context is an out and out alteration.
                   • The Chairman …

                     13 October 2019 at 1:19 pm

                     While citing discussion out of context may also alter perception it's not altering figures per se.
                   • Incognito []

                     13 October 2019 at 1:44 pm

                     Oh great! You are bogged down again by pedantic nitpickery and thus missing (again!) the main message of Anne’s comment @ 1.2.1, which was a direct response to marty mars @ 1.2. In fact, you kinda prove their point, which I find most ironic but not too surprising.
                   • joe90 …

                     13 October 2019 at 1:28 pm

                     Citing out of context is a dishonest manipulation that alters an author's intended syntax.
                 • The Chairman …

                   13 October 2019 at 1:10 pm

                   I concur, Climaction. I didn't see anything in there mentioning the hackers altered the figures.
               • Anne …

                 13 October 2019 at 1:04 pm

                 That is the one. Thanks Incognito. I couldn't recall the details off the top of my head.

                 Poor little TC. It's gonna take him a long time to absorb all of that material so we can expect not to hear from him for a while. Troubling to think that someone who sold himself as a Green supporter and voter in times past didn't know what I was talking about. 😉
               • The Chairman …

                 13 October 2019 at 2:12 pm

                 Oh great! You are bogged down again by pedantic nitpickery and thus missing (again!) the main message of Anne’s comment @ 1.2.1, which was a direct response to marty mars @ 1.2. In fact, you kinda prove their point, which I find most ironic but not too surprising.

                 Not at all.

                 It's not that I didn't get the gist of her comment. It's what you claimed to merely be "pedantic nitpickery" which was the point I was highlighting (albeit indirectly) to Anne. And which weakened the validity of her comment.

                 While there was altering via context, there was no altering of figures (by the hackers) as Anne claimed. Placing the faith of her argument in question in a discussion about bad faith arguments.
                 • Incognito …

                   13 October 2019 at 2:28 pm

                   I see, you are doubling down on the nitpickery and questioning the good faith of Anne’s comment. Way to go, champ. Perhaps you may want to re-read the whole thread and then go back up the thread and comment on the gist or have you sunk too deep into death by detail dump.
                   • The Chairman …

                     13 October 2019 at 2:48 pm

                     Of course I'm doubling down. Why wouldn't I be? It was the point I was making. And the reason I posted it. Anne stating they altered figures brought the good faith of her comment into question.

                     [Because you had been warned by weka about questioning Anne’s good faith here. By doubling down, you show that you, in fact, are acting in bad faith. In addition, you have made zero useful contribution today in any thread on this site and your dull drudgery is getting tedious. Take the rest of the day off – Incognito]
                   • Incognito []

                     13 October 2019 at 3:03 pm

                     See my Moderation note @ 2:48 PM.
                 • Anne …

                   13 October 2019 at 4:09 pm

                   While there was altering via context, there was no altering of figures (by the hackers) as Anne claimed.

                   Oh, so it was some of the wording that was altered not the figures. Same result. The documents were mischievously changed to make it look like the scientists were incompetent.

                   I may not have recalled the details exactly but I do remember the CC deniers vociferously accusing the scientists of misinformation.

                   Unfortunately the media were remiss in giving the outcome of the several inquiries by British, European and American agencies the same level of prominence as the original accusations which, in itself, was an example of irresponsible media coverage.

                   Thanks TC for affording my and Marty Mar's commentaries the prominence they would not otherwise have received.
                   • Anne …

                     13 October 2019 at 4:27 pm

                     And here is a quote from the text supplied by Incognito @ 1217pm to back up my claims:

                     Concerns about the media's role in promoting early allegations while also minimising later coverage exonerating the scientists were raised by journalists and policy experts. Historian Spencer R. Weart of the American Institute of Physics said the incident was unprecedented in the history of science, having "never before seen a set of people accuse an entire community of scientists of deliberate deception and other professional malfeasance". The United States National Academy of Sciences expressed concern and condemned what they called "political assaults on scientists and climate scientists in particular".
         • weka 1.2.1.1.2

           13 October 2019 at 1:52 pm

           mod note for you TC.
       • Drowsy M. Kram 1.2.1.2

         13 October 2019 at 12:41 pm

         Typical ‘bad faith’ activity, much like National's persistent Dirty Politics tactics.

         Misrepresentation is another bad faith activity – for example, someone asserting they are “more left than most“, while only referring to Prime Minister Ardern on a first name basis
   • OnceWasTim 1.3

     13 October 2019 at 1:40 pm

     Now now kids! Go to your corners. And for homework, you're expected to determine what sort of polygon you all belong to. I want it on my desk first thing in the morning!

     (We've got the inspector coming and our funding depends on it)
2. joe90 2

   13 October 2019 at 9:45 am

   Erdogan's on his way to committing a war crime.

   Article 49: Deportations, transfers, evacuations.

   Article 49. Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory to the territory of the Occupying Power or to that of any other country, occupied or not, are prohibited, regardless of their motive.

   – Fourth Geneva Covention.

   https://twitter.com/OARichardEngel/status/1182953806277021697

   ISTANBUL (Reuters) – As Turkish troops finalize plans to attack northeast Syria, Ankara’s scheme to move millions of refugees into conquered territory there is alarming some Western allies as much as the military operation itself.

   Addressing world leaders at the United Nations two weeks ago, President Tayyip Erdogan held up a map of the region setting out ambitious proposals to build dozens of new villages and towns to settle Syrian refugees.

   His map showed that 1 million Syrians would be housed in the northeast, but Erdogan told the U.N. General Assembly that even more – up to 2 million – refugees could settle there once Turkish soldiers take control.

   https://www.reuters.com/article/us-syria-security-turkey-refugees-graphi/turkeys-plan-to-settle-refugees-in-northeast-syria-alarms-allies-idUSKBN1WN28J
   • joe90 2.1

     13 October 2019 at 10:51 am

     Turkish-backed Arab militias are executing Kurds.

     https://twitter.com/RojavaIC/status/1182980590074843136

     https://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/news/2019/10/12/kurdish-party-leader-killed-in-turkish-ambush-in-syria
     • joe90 2.1.1

       13 October 2019 at 1:22 pm

       Reports that Hevrin Khalaf was stopped in her armoured SUV by Turkish-backed mercenary factions, her driver executed, and she was either stoned to death or shot and then stoned.
     • marty mars 2.1.2

       13 October 2019 at 1:34 pm

       disgusting bastards
   • AB 2.2

     13 October 2019 at 11:22 am

     David Graeber on Rojava as "..one of the most exciting political developments … since the anarchists in Spain in the 1930's. Makes the case that the Kurds in Syria do not have any intention to create, or even a concept of, a single Kurdish state across Syria and Turkey. Instead, Erdogan is an authoritarian who fears political contamination of his domestic Kurdish population by such deeply democratic ideas. Also says that although the origins of IS/ISIS are murky, it is likely a creation of the Turkish secret police and various Gulf States. From Novara Media a few days ago.
     • greywarshark 2.2.1

       13 October 2019 at 11:32 am

       Gosh that's alarming. And the comments were interesting. I thought this one made a point that can be seen as resulting in continuing fighting and killing.

       palim palim 3 days ago I think the problem we will face in the future will be eco-fascism. The right won't be able to ignore climate change anymore so they gonna "protect the moderate climate zones from refugees" or something like that.
   • joe90 2.3

     13 October 2019 at 3:26 pm

     The fucker greenlighted Erdogan. The US had advance knowledge that Turkey was going to invade and bailed on the Kurds.

     Today, President Donald J. Trump spoke with President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey by telephone. Turkey will soon be moving forward with its long-planned operation into Northern Syria. The United States Armed Forces will not support or be involved in the operation, and United States forces, having defeated the ISIS territorial “Caliphate,” will no longer be in the immediate area.

     The United States Government has pressed France, Germany, and other European nations, from which many captured ISIS fighters came, to take them back, but they did not want them and refused. The United States will not hold them for what could be many years and great cost to the United States taxpayer. Turkey will now be responsible for all ISIS fighters in the area captured over the past two years in the wake of the defeat of the territorial “Caliphate” by the United States.

     https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/statement-press-secretary-85/
3. A 3

   13 October 2019 at 10:49 am

   We have a fugitive on the run from the FBI somewhere in NZ – how exciting! Someone knows where he is…

   Michael Pratt is a Kiwi who ran the GirlsDoPorn site and sounds like scum who has issues with mummy. Pic in link although he may have shaved.

   https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12275965
   • A 3.1

     13 October 2019 at 10:57 am

     Ex assistant has testified

     'I have seen Michael Pratt attack an employee. [Another colleague] has shown me scars where Michael Pratt stabbed him,' Moser said in court transcripts.

     'I have seen him at his drunkest. I have seen the worst parts of him. I know what he's capable of. I think I understand the way his mind works and that's scary,' Moser told the court.

     A right charmer.

     https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7555739/Whistleblower-testifies-against-owner-Girls-Porn-lawsuit.html
     • greywarshark 3.1.1

       13 October 2019 at 12:18 pm

       I think that NZr dyes his hair – he is black in that photo but he could go light to escape notice.

       It made me think of a previous male kiwi who made money from spying on females. Kiwi men have wide talents and I think some of them excel in devious sexual behaviour reflecting the lingering Victorian approach in our culture. This one spied on Princess Diana as she worked out at the gym where she was a member.

       1993 – The gym rat:
       New Zealand squash was proud of Bryce Taylor, leading junior then long-time coach of Susan Devoy. Then Taylor installed secret cameras in a gym in London to take secret photos of Princess Diana working out. He sold the pics to the Mirror group for hundreds of thousands of pounds. Legal action followed, not surprisingly. Taylor was reviled and became known as the gym rat. http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/10242790/Romanos-NZs-sporting-history-sorry-moments

       http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/november/9/newsid_2515000/2515739.stm

       A Bryce Taylor sold images to gettypictures. They included sports shots and people in general and images of celebrities, bodies and activities are probably quite lucrative as a commercial venture.

       Princess Diana however developed a cunning ploy to merge with the background and spoil the male and money stimulating images.

       Princess Diana: The hidden message in her gym gear 3/7/2019 https://www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyle/news/article.cfm?c_id=6&objectid=12246109
       • A 3.1.1.1

         13 October 2019 at 7:33 pm

         Classy Di.

         I worry that inappropriate filming isn't taken seriously enough in NZ. We still have people filmed after accidents for example, and then there's the case of the GP who filmed his colleagues but can still practice as a doctor.

         Life as a female is hard enough without having to be concerned that you might have been filmed during a smear test.
4. The Chairman 4

   13 October 2019 at 11:14 am

   While Jacinda was away at the UN, a petition (see link below) was delivered to her office.

   https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/115998910/calls-for-urgent-changes-to-broken-welfare-system

   Executive officer for CPAG, Georgie Craw, said the welfare system was "broken" and the petition was calling on the Government to put "kindness and compassion at the heart of of the system".

   By delivering the petition to Ardern's office, Craw said she hoped the prime minister would "provide some leadership".

   Did Jacinda comment on this petition on her return?

   Is she even aware of it?

   Will she or did she give any indication on delivering on the hope she will provide some leadership on this?

   One of the main concerns in this petition is the definition of a relationship, potentially putting people in the position of being trapped in an abusive relationship.
   • Incognito 4.1

     13 October 2019 at 12:26 pm

     Please report back when you have found the answers to your three questions. In the meantime, feel free to debate the issue.
     • The Chairman 4.1.1

       13 October 2019 at 12:48 pm

       Please report back when you have found the answers to your three questions.

       Wasn't having any luck elsewhere, hence I asked here.

       Nevertheless, here's a little more insight.

       https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/393609/welfare-system-needs-to-change-how-it-defines-relationships-report
       • Incognito 4.1.1.1

         13 October 2019 at 1:17 pm

         Have you tried your extensive network of people you know? Have you asked the PM? Have you asked Georgie Craw? Are you seriously expecting to find the answers to your three questions on this site when you did not have “any luck elsewhere”?

         A link providing “insight” is a great way to start a genuine debate IMHO.
         • The Chairman 4.1.1.1.1

           13 October 2019 at 1:41 pm

           Are you seriously expecting to find the answers to your three questions on this site when you did not have “any luck elsewhere”?

           Indeed. There is a large and somewhat informed community here that may be able to provide these answers.

           Unfortunately, the petition was taken to Jacinda when she was out of the country, seemingly (as the media spotlight has seemed to moved on) allowing her to escape having to comment.

           Re the further insight, the more info one has on an issue the better one can discuss and debate the issue.

           As for the issue itself, I don't have a problem with it being urgently addressed. Do you?
           • Incognito 4.1.1.1.1.1

             13 October 2019 at 1:57 pm

             Unfortunately, the petition was taken to Jacinda when she was out of the country, seemingly (as the media spotlight has seemed to moved on) allowing her to escape having to comment.

             Again, you severely damage any credibility you may have. Even to insinuate that the PM’s trip to the UN was an attempt (?) to be away when the petition was delivered to her office shows a kind of thinking that has little bearing in reality.

             I have already told you to feel free to debate the issue so why do you ask me?
             • The Chairman …

               13 October 2019 at 2:25 pm

               Again, you severely damage any credibility you may have. Even to insinuate that the PM’s trip to the UN was an attempt (?) to be away when the petition was delivered to her office shows a kind of thinking that has little bearing in reality.

               I wasn't insinuating that at all.

               I was making a point (albeit indirectly) that the petition delivery was badly timed. And as a consequence of that, it seems Jacinda escaped having to comment.

               I was asking you so as to ascertain your position on the matter to see if there was anything there we disagreed upon, thus perhaps providing a point of debate.
               • Incognito …

                 13 October 2019 at 2:41 pm

                 Right, the timing of delivery of the petition had nothing to do with the PM and her trip to the UN. It was merely convenient for the PM that she was away at the time, was it, so that she could escape having to comment? Your bias has nothing to do with the way you paint a picture and how you formulate and phrase your comments, has it?

                 If an issue is important enough that you feel it needs to be addressed urgently you have “a large and somewhat informed community here” at your beg and call to start a debate with. So, debate away. We are waiting with bated breath.
               • Incognito …

                 13 October 2019 at 3:40 pm

                 So, after all your Morris dancing on a pinhead, you do not want to debate this topic! Your credibility as a genuine good faith commenter has taken another major self-inflicted hit.

                 My apologies to all of you who cannot read comments that go straight into Trash in the back-end.
                 • Sacha …

                   13 October 2019 at 8:01 pm

                   Thanks for clarifying. Did wonder if there was more going on than we could see.
                   • Incognito …

                     13 October 2019 at 9:19 pm

                     You did not miss anything until after I gave him the rest of the day off around 3:00 PM and one comment from TC @ 3:13 PM went straight into Trash. That particular comment clearly showed that it all been an enormous waste of time 🙁
                   • In Vino …

                     13 October 2019 at 9:42 pm

                     Yes, thanks Incognito. I have given up pointing out how often concern troll TC keeps blowing his own cover. You nailed this one nicely. Most would give up, but TC seems strangely determined to persist.
                   • Incognito []

                     13 October 2019 at 9:49 pm

                     I can tell you that some moderators are not enamoured with his behaviour and if he’s not willing to change his ways here he’ll lose his commenting privilege.
5. joe90 5

   13 October 2019 at 12:11 pm

   Fun watching this mob turn on each other.

   https://twitter.com/MSNBC/status/1182982522709446656
6. greywarshark 6

   13 October 2019 at 1:34 pm

   Brexit continuing…

   https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/12/support-grows-for-new-brexit-poll-amid-fears-pm-plan

   https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/10/hopes-rise-eu-agrees-boost-brexit-talks-191012061340965.html

   https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-politics-50030001
   Northern Ireland must stay in a "full UK customs union" after Brexit, the Democratic Unionist Party's (DUP) deputy leader Nigel Dodds has said….

   Mr Dodds said: "There is a lot of stuff coming from Brussels, pushed by the Europeans in the last hours. "One thing is sure – Northern Ireland must remain fully part of the UK customs union and Boris Johnson knows it very well," he told the Italian newspaper La Repubblica.
   .

   Is Boris Johnson about to snatch Brexit victory from the jaws of defeat? (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dt6GdgladVk
7. millsy 7

   13 October 2019 at 5:00 pm

   Anyone know the deal with the ECan results. According to stuff, there is a shitload of greenies on there, but Im not taking their word for it?
   • Exkiwiforces 7.1

     13 October 2019 at 5:28 pm

     Here is a article from Stuff.co and from the sound of it, a young and progressive ECAN after the last 9yrs of BS! I hope they give the members of “The No Mates Party” and their lackeys a two finger salute.

     https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/local-body-elections/116510981/new-canterbury-regional-council-younger-greener-gender-balanced
     • millsy 7.1.1

       13 October 2019 at 5:31 pm

       Yeah I saw that, but wasnt too sure if the truth was being tweaked or not.
8. joe90 8

   13 October 2019 at 5:00 pm

   Erdogan's making friends and influencing people.

   France and Cyprus are conducting naval maneuvers off Cyprus as the east Mediterranean island nation is embroiled in a tense dispute with Turkey over offshore gas drilling.

   Two French frigates heading to Syria plan to take part in "routine" exercises in Cypriot waters this weekend, a French military spokesman, Col. Frederic Barbry, said Saturday.

   [..']

   The maneuvers come as a Turkish drill ship, which is escorted by warships, is poised to start drilling inside waters where Cyprus has licensed French energy company Total and Italian partner Eni to explore for gas.

   Another warship-escorted Turkish drill ship began drilling in Cyprus' exclusive economic zone in June. The European Union and other countries have condemned Turkey's gas search inside Cypriot waters as illegal.

   https://www.france24.com/en/20191012-france-joins-cyprus-for-naval-manoeuvres-amid-turkey-gas-dispute?ref=tw_i
   • greywarshark 8.1

     13 October 2019 at 5:37 pm

     Is USA intransigence and Make USA great again having an affect on Turkey's right wing leader? Does he scent an uprising of the previous greatness of Turkey before it got cut to size? Are we going to have everyplace realise how globalism can limit or advance them, and choosing to advance, expand, shoulder others out of the way.? No more Mr Nice Guy stuff.
     • joe90 8.1.1

       13 October 2019 at 6:32 pm

       Erdogan fancies himself as a neo-ottoman, a later-day Sultan mandated to expand Turkey and rebuild the Empire. The west's readiness to sit on it's hands and watch a bloody civil war rage in Syria and the power he has as gate keeper with yay or nay over the movement of refugees into Western Europe has emboldened him.

       His recent ability to manipulate tRump is the icing on the cake.

       He's gone large and thrown down the glove, stop me if you dare!

       https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/06/22/erdogan-is-making-the-ottoman-empire-great-again/
9. AB 9

   13 October 2019 at 6:04 pm

   Sanders represents a movement that will live on after him – whether he wins or loses. According to Michael Brooks – one of the best and most historically conscious commentators around.
10. Anne 10

    13 October 2019 at 6:34 pm

    Latest Newshub Reid Research Poll:

    Labour was the only party to lose support in Newshub's poll. It's now on 41.6 percent – smacked down by 9.2 percent.

    Most of that went to National, which is on 43.9 percent – up 6.5. This is enough to overtake Labour, and that's manna from heaven for the Nats and leader Simon Bridges.

    But it's not enough to rule because the Greens are on 6.3 percent – up 0.1 percent – and keeping Labour in power.

    https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2019/10/jacinda-ardern-labour-take-massive-tumble-in-new-newshub-reid-research-poll.html

    Maybe the woeful handling of the Labour sexual harassment claims were a significant factor in Labour's plunge. In saying that, sections of the media were equally as woeful in their reporting of the claims and one of the worst culprits was Newshub. Facts were misrepresented or left out altogether leaving a distorted impression of what we actually came to know seems to have happened. They will hopefully be confirmed by the Inquiry.

    I think its time for the Labour Party to stand up and call out those media commentators responsible. They are currently letting them get away with political murder.
    • ScottGN 10.1

      13 October 2019 at 6:52 pm

      So in spite of Newshub’s (and the Herald’s) dramatic headlines the poll shows the same electoral outcome that polls have been suggesting for well over a year now? Namely that Labour plus the Greens have enough support to form majority government without NZFirst.
      • Anne 10.1.1

        13 October 2019 at 6:59 pm

        It will be spun as a marked trend downwards for Labour though ScottGN. The sort of angle that over time voters will believe.

        I agree with this extract from Martyn Bradbury's summing up:

        No one should be shocked or surprised by this sudden drop in Labour support and Jacinda’s personal preferred PM numbers. This Poll was taken at the height of major media pundits and journalists falsely accusing Jacinda of knowing about and covering up a sexual assault as spelt out in grim detail by The Spinoff.

        The woeful handling was down to some members of the Labour Party hierarchy and had nothing to do with Jacinda Ardern. That was a mischievous beat-up by the media.

        It's a big wake-up call for Labour. This is the sort of media assassination they can expect to see next year.
        • ScottGN 10.1.1.1

          13 October 2019 at 7:31 pm

          I agree completely Anne. It’s worrisome that Labour doesn’t seem to have figured out a strategy to deal with what is, essentially, a hostile media. Also the party needs to get its shit together. Relying on Jacinda and her popularity to get them out of trouble that they don’t seem able to anticipate is not going to work long term. Her personal brand and credibility are political commodities that need to be treasured not wasted on every party crisis that comes along. It’s inconceivable that National would have put Key in the position that Labour put Ardern in over the sex assault scandal, they knew only too well that he was their ticket to government .
      • Psycho Milt 10.1.2

        13 October 2019 at 8:36 pm

        So in spite of Newshub’s (and the Herald’s) dramatic headlines the poll shows the same electoral outcome that polls have been suggesting for well over a year now?

        Yep. Not that you'd guess that from Newshub's reporting. Oh no, with disastrous setbacks like polls showing Labour and the Greens could govern alone, however will the government win a second term?
    • Incognito 10.2

      13 October 2019 at 7:20 pm

      So, this poll bump is not due to Chris Luxon’s shock announcement that he’s seeking party nomination to stand in Botany? Oh well, it looks like we keep the same Government in 2020 anyway.
      • Anne 10.2.1

        13 October 2019 at 7:31 pm

        Not really Incognito. Bradbury's article on the Daily Blog is worth a read. I agree with most of it. He points out the Greens should have picked up more of that 9.2% Labour loss and I have to agree. Politics is about more than just niceness and kindness. Both parties need to stand up more to the aggression coming from both the Nats and the ‘gotcha’ media hoons.

        Most of the poll would have been conducted before the Luxon announcement.
        • Incognito 10.2.1.1

          13 October 2019 at 7:54 pm

          My apologies to you, Anne, I was kidding about Luxon.

          Anyway, I read Bradbury’s post upon your recommendation and came away slightly disappointed. He did not mention the other June poll, which is/was much more in line with the poll released tonight. Have a look at Micky’s post on the two June polls: https://thestandard.org.nz/two-polls-out-tonight/
          • Anne 10.2.1.1.1

            13 October 2019 at 8:11 pm

            If you're referring to the TVNZ Colmar Brunton yes it is closer to tonight's poll but I don't see the relevance. It was four months ago under different circumstances.

            Yes I'm easily suckable. Include an emoticon in future. 😉

            Where is everybody tonight? Polls usually bring them out of the woodwork.
            • Incognito 10.2.1.1.1.1

              13 October 2019 at 10:27 pm

              First a confession: I don’t like talking (too) much about polls.

              I think it is relevant because two polls came out around the same time, about four months ago, and they were at odds with each other and with previous polls. One of these polls is now used by some (…) as the benchmark against which to compare today’s poll. The other one is completely ignored!?

              It shouldn’t matter which company conducts the poll because they all claim to be objective and method-neutral, i.e. they claim to give an accurate snapshot. If, however, a certain media story is causing these big swings then polls become largely meaningless in predicting the outcome of an election that is most likely a year away.

              What polls might show is party vulnerability and what’s currently cooking in the voter-eligible population. So, they might be good for setting party strategy.

              I would not read too much into those polls; they all are as good as each other.

              Some of the poll aficionados here might correct me on my wayward thinking.

              Where is everybody tonight? Polls usually bring them out of the woodwork.

              I’ve banned them all for the day 😉
              • Anne …

                14 October 2019 at 10:05 am

                I’ve banned them all for the day 😉

                That it explains it. Good idea to shut em up every once in a while. 🙂
    • Climaction 10.3

      13 October 2019 at 11:11 pm

      Pretty hope-full there Anne. When polls come out before enquirieis launched months ago, the damage has been done. Not by the media either.

      but keep blaming them, instead of getting them on side
      • Incognito 10.3.1

        13 October 2019 at 11:31 pm

        You seem to have missed that Anne was suggesting “the woeful handling of the Labour sexual harassment claims were a significant factor in Labour's plunge”. But maybe it didn’t suit your snarky comment.

        How do you suggest “getting them on side” and how does this differ from what Anne was saying?
11. A 11

    13 October 2019 at 7:35 pm

    5G halted in Devonshire! Good to see skeptical thinking is gradually winning over entertainment.

    https://www.collective-evolution.com/2019/10/09/health-devonshire-uk-halts-the-installation-of-5g-over-serious-health-concerns/
    • A 11.1

      13 October 2019 at 7:37 pm

      “Putting in tens of millions of 5G antennae without a single biological test of safety has got to be about the stupidest idea anyone has had in the history of the world.” – Dr. Martin L. Pall, PhD and Professor Emeritus of Biochemistry and Basic Medical Sciences at Washington State University

      True that.

      Still time to sign the petition https://www.toko.org.nz/petitions/precautionary-principle-for-5g-in-aotearoa-1
      • Andre 11.1.1

        13 October 2019 at 8:07 pm

        *sigh*

        Just in case there's new readers that weren't around for previous go-arounds on the topic of 5G safety, here's a piece that takes a brief look at the extensive testing that has already been done and explains why the evidence and what we know of physics points to there being no danger from deploying 5g.

        https://www.androidauthority.com/5g-dangers-895776/

        People may have heard mutterings about 5G messing up weather forecasts. The US is the only country apparently planning to use a frequency band near 20GHz for 5G. There's a frequency very close to 20 GHz that weather satellites use to measure water vapour in the upper atmosphere, so there's a concern terrestrial emissions near 20GHz will mess up the measurements. But if that happens, it will only be a local problem in the US.
        • greywarshark 11.1.1.1

          13 October 2019 at 8:30 pm

          A quote comes to mind "First they came…"

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_…

          So that will only affect US. What will only affect us? There will be something that will sooner or later. And then we will hear of numbers of affects from across the world.
          • Psycho Milt 11.1.1.1.1

            13 October 2019 at 8:38 pm

            What will only affect us? There will be something that will sooner or later.

            The sky might fall on our heads?
          • KJT 11.1.1.1.2

            14 October 2019 at 9:15 am

            5G, is just another set of radio frequencies. In the range that has been used with no evidence of general harm, for over a century.

            If you are really worried about RF, perhaps you should cut off the power to your house. House wiring is a more proximate, and much more powerful source of radio frequency radiation.
12. joe90 12

    13 October 2019 at 8:56 pm

    President Warren does sound rather nice.

    https://twitter.com/PpollingNumbers/status/1183079555709505537
13. Stuart Munro. 13

    14 October 2019 at 12:04 am

    Downward mobility – a datum that might prove a good measure of actual government performance.
14. Pat 14

    14 October 2019 at 2:03 am

    "Mark Carney also told the Guardian it was possible that the global transition needed to tackle the climate crisis could result in an abrupt financial collapse. He said the longer action to reverse emissions was delayed, the more the risk of collapse would grow."

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/oct/13/firms-ignoring-climate-crisis-bankrupt-mark-carney-bank-england-governor

    Collapse would appear to have become a mainstream proposition

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS