Open mike 17/01/2015

Written By: - Date published: 7:00 am, January 17th, 2015 - 307 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

openmikeThe Authors of The Standard are now in holiday mode. Posting will be less regular and dependant on individual author enthusiasm.

Open mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose. The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step up to the mike …

307 comments on “Open mike 17/01/2015 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Paul 1
    17 January 2015 at 7:38 am

    6 Reasons to question 9/11
    http://benswann.com/6-reasons-to-question-and-investigate-911-on-the-13th-anniversary/

    And a 7th ( given the events of Paris and the behaviour of some bloggers to ev)
    Freedom of speech.

  2. b waghorn 2
    17 January 2015 at 8:15 am

    Paul I just watched the 7 building video you put up last night would it be possible that when the other buildings collapsed that they destabilized the 7th to the piont of collapse.

      • Chooky 2.1.1
        17 January 2015 at 1:45 pm

        +100 Paul…thanks ..there needs to be a proper investigation with so many scientists and engineers and architects asking for it

    • phillip ure 2.2
      17 January 2015 at 8:38 am

      @ waghorn..

      ..no..as already noted..this was an especially strengthened building..

      (..another fascinating aspect of that building collapse was the loss of all the evidence in major mob investigations etc of the time..)

      ..and a vibration bringing it down in such a matter..is pretty much impossible..

      ..it’s as possible as an aluminium-bodied plane passing thru three/four pentagon walls…

      ..that collapse of building seven was what first got me looking a bit closer at these claims..

      ..for a long time i just accepted the official-story..

      ..but building seven had me going w.t.f..!..and looking a bit closer..

      ..and there is more than enough going on there to have you going ‘w.t.f. is going/went on here..?..’

      ..another minor fact i find fascinating..

      ..is that this pilot..who could barely steer a cessna not long before this..

      ..before that second plane hit..it executed what has been described by pilots as a perfect parabolic-curve..

      ..precision flying of the highest degree..

      ..to put this plane into what was quite a small target..

      ..some feat/skill-leap..!..eh..?

      ..like i said..i’m no expert..but the official story stinks like a rotting beached whale..

      ..whatever angle you examine it from..evinces ‘whoar!’s..

      • b waghorn 2.2.1
        17 January 2015 at 8:48 am

        How do you have a team rig a building to collapse with no one noticing . is it possible that the builders of said building were crooks who increased profit buy using less steel and cement in the construction phase .

        • phillip ure 2.2.1.1
          17 January 2015 at 9:02 am

          1)..watch the doco…

          2)..no..like i said..this was one solid building..

          ..there are just two many impossibilities to accept the official-story..

          .and once you start looking..it opens up for you like a bursting ulcer..

          • phillip ure 2.2.1.1.1
            17 January 2015 at 9:15 am

            heh..!..make that ‘two’ a too…

            • Paul 2.2.1.1.1.1
              17 January 2015 at 12:56 pm

              Phil, this was one of the films I watched which made me think about 9/11
              ZERO: An Investigation into 9/11
              http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8XRMrMdn0NQ

              Zeitgeist and Loose Change were also films that made me question what we’d been told.

              After Iraq, why would someone trust what our government says.
              They lied to us about WMD together a war.

              Question everything.

          • b waghorn 2.2.1.1.2
            17 January 2015 at 9:23 am

            For every doco there is an equal an opposite doco / opinion especially after 13 years. Keeping a open mind though.

            • phillip ure 2.2.1.1.2.1
              17 January 2015 at 9:28 am

              there aren’t actually..i can’t think of any docos pushing the official-story..

              ..and that for the simple reason the official story falls over @ first glance..

              ..i wd urge you to attempt that large doco that was posted..

              ..and you can really watch as much into it as you like..( i did three hrs..)

              ..but if approached with an open mind..even one hour of it will be enough for you to be throwing the official story into the rubbish bin..

              ..(i wd be interested in hearing yr reactions to even an hr..)

              • phillip ure …
                17 January 2015 at 9:42 am

                ..and re the makers of that epic 5 hr doco..

                ..if they just ‘made that all up’..

                ..they deserve fucken multiple oscars..

                ..and what wd be interesting wd be st sit down with a sneerer like trp..(or a group of sneerers..even better..!..)

                ..and use the pause facility..

                ..for regular stops to ‘discuss’/explain what has been just viewed..

                ..that wd/cd be fun to do…

              • b waghorn …
                17 January 2015 at 12:59 pm

                What’s the name of the large doco not sure were it was posted should get a spare hour this arvo.

                • freedom …
                  17 January 2015 at 3:57 pm

                  http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/september-11-new-pearl-harbor/

                  it is called The New Pearl Harbour and it is recommended you watch it in chapters because there is an intimidating amount of information. Much of what is included has not previously been widely presented in the public domain. Where this documentary differs from most other 9/11 Truth films is the complete abscenece of theories on who dunnit and other distractionary suppositions. It is just facts, facts, questions, facts, a bit of debunking the debunkers and more facts.

                  Globally, the film has been shared extensively (especially with those who have been long term supporters of the Official Story) and naturally it has been discussed just as widely . I cannot stress this final point strongly enough but I am not aware of a single person, who after viewing the entire documentary, continues to believe the Official story.

                  • b waghorn …
                    17 January 2015 at 5:03 pm

                    cheers freedom got as far as all 4 planes crashed it wouldn’t surprise me if the us gov knew something was up and let it roll as for them chasing there tails when it comes to tracking and getting a response on the go I reckon that’s not that surprising.

                  • Colonial Rawshark …
                    17 January 2015 at 7:37 pm

                    There certainly are multiple unresolved problems with the Official Story.

                    • b waghorn …
                      17 January 2015 at 8:14 pm

                      There is but I’m still struggling to see out and out conspiracy. You’ve said else were that fire’s Havn’t brought down other buildings but how many of those other buildings had a large plane flown through the front window or had a large chunk of another building dropped on it.??

            • Colonial Rawshark 2.2.1.1.2.2
              17 January 2015 at 9:52 am

              How do you have a team rig a building to collapse with no one noticing . is it possible that the builders of said building were crooks who increased profit buy using less steel and cement in the construction phase .

              The rigging would have to be done over a period of many weeks. It would be done by sending in highly skilled “maintenance” personnel into the spaces in between the floors. People in the offices would not notice anything.

              (This more than anything gives me doubt that it was an engineered demolition – several people would have been needed to do this work – and if they did, where are they now?)

              The “cutting corner crooks” hypothesis is worth considering. We know that in China for instance there have been cases of apartment buildings collapsing, built with the rebar missing and sawdust filler in the concrete.

              In those cases however large identifiable sections (partial walls, partial floors) of the building tend to be seen; not everything is pulverised into a fine dust.

              • nadis …
                17 January 2015 at 12:56 pm

                Of course you could always read this:

                http://www.nist.gov/el/disasterstudies/wtc/faqs_wtctowers.cfm

                and this re the WTC 7 collapse. Fully explained:

                http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/factsheet/wtc_qa_082108.cfm

                Seriously, there are uglier conspiracies out their that are probably true and far more damaging. 9/11 fails on so many counts. since when would 9/11 be necessary for the US to invade other countries, wage a war against islamic extremists, formulate an entire foreign policy around oil or be the necessary condition for vast military and surveillance spending? It already had all those things.

                9/11 truthers seem to suffer from an inability to acknowledge simple facts (yesterdays kerosene discussion a great example of anti-science thinking).

                Seriously, we should all go through this question list for a sanity check on a regular basis (from http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-conspiracy-theory-director/)

                Nevertheless, we cannot just dismiss all such theories out of hand, because real conspiracies do sometimes happen. Instead we should look for signs that indicate a conspiracy theory is likely to be untrue. The more that it manifests the following characteristics, the less probable that the theory is grounded in reality:
                1. Proof of the conspiracy supposedly emerges from a pattern of “connecting the dots” between events that need not be causally connected. When no evidence supports these connections except the allegation of the conspiracy or when the evidence fits equally well to other causal connections—or to randomness—the conspiracy theory is likely to be false.

                2. The agents behind the pattern of the conspiracy would need nearly superhuman power to pull it off. People are usually not nearly so powerful as we think they are.

                3. The conspiracy is complex, and its successful completion demands a large number of elements.

                4. Similarly, the conspiracy involves large numbers of people who would all need to keep silent about their secrets. The more people involved, the less realistic it becomes.

                5. The conspiracy encompasses a grand ambition for control over a nation, economy or political system. If it suggests world domination, the theory is even less likely to be true.

                6. The conspiracy theory ratchets up from small events that might be true to much larger, much less probable events.

                7. The conspiracy theory assigns portentous, sinister meanings to what are most likely innocuous, insignificant events.

                8. The theory tends to commingle facts and speculations without distinguishing between the two and without assigning degrees of probability or of factuality.

                9. The theorist is indiscriminately suspicious of all government agencies or private groups, which suggests an inability to nuance differences between true and false conspiracies.

                10. The conspiracy theorist refuses to consider alternative explanations, rejecting all disconfirming evidence and blatantly seeking only confirmatory evidence to support what he or she has a priori determined to be the truth.

                • Colonial Rawshark …
                  17 January 2015 at 1:12 pm

                  The failure mode that NIST describes (fire driven heat expansion of the steel framework compromising the integrity of a single key building column thereby causing a progressive and symmetrical collapse of an entire skyscraper) is a fantasy.

                  I say that it is a fantasy because the failure mode described by NIST had never caused a real life skyscraper collapse after a fire before 9/11, and it has never caused a skyscraper collapse after a fire, since.

                  The fact that you don’t find that of any concern, is curious.

                  This video describes some other criticisms of NIST’s work, including ignoring or excluding evidence presented to them.

                  • Paul …
                    17 January 2015 at 1:23 pm

                    ‘The fact that you don’t find that of any concern, is curious.’

                    Wonder if nadis was remotely curious about Blair and Bush’s claims about WMD in 2003.
                    I find it amazing that people are still so trusting of these governments words after such a monumental lie as WMD.
                    They just won’t look at 9/1 and take the word of the official inquiry at face value. These guys lied once. Isn’t it worth checking the veracity of their claims?

                    • Colonial Rawshark …
                      17 January 2015 at 1:26 pm

                      Indeed it is. But enquiry and truth seeking is not their objective. Bolstering the preferred media narratives of the power elite, and shielding the power elite from uncomfortable questions, is however, IMO.

                    • Te Reo Putake …
                      17 January 2015 at 1:48 pm

                      If it’s uncomfortable bolstering the media narratives and shielding the power elite etc., why do do it?

                    • nadis …
                      17 January 2015 at 2:13 pm

                      If you read the report it wasn’t just heat expansion per se. It was the failure of aone critical junction casued by expansion which given other damage to the front of the building caused an overload failure. Not hard to accept.

                      Buildings with critical faults aren’t unusual. The Citibank building in NY was found (by an architectural office student intern) to have a potentially catastrophic fault in 1978. the building was secrtely stregthened so as not to alarm tenants. (Actually thats an indication that you could secretly add explosives to a building – oh well).

                      I remember visiting that building about a year after 9/11 and not being able to enter throught the front doors as armour (literally) was being added to support pillars (you can see them here: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cf/Citigroup.center.JPG). The building owner had determined that a truck bomb in the right place would be able to collpse the tower.

                      Actually I was skeptical at the time re WMD. I was – and still am – more of a believer in the GH Bush approach to Iraq rather the GW. GW Bush was an idiot. I thought the invasion of Afghanistan was defensible but I clearly recall saying at the time that the Iraqi invasion was unneccasary and unjustifiable. I never believed Saddam had a serious WMD program – at best he had left over stockpiles from the Iran/Iraq war which in the first instance probably came mostly from Germany, France and Italy with the facilitation of the US. Turns out Saddam didn’t even have much of that.

                      I don’t blindly trust Governement at all – I just don’t believe everything they say is a lie. 9/11 – I see no real evidence, and I have looked at a lot of stuff both pro and anti. On balance I think there is a nil chance it was inititiated by the US or ISraeli governments for whatever reason, I can’t even think of a big enough reason why it makes sense. And the logistical and technical challenges would involve thousands and still wouldnt work. Chance of keeoping it a secret =0. Were there numerous fuck ups -of course. A poignant video I saw (can’t recall what it is from) was an interview of an FBI agent involved in surveillance of islamic terrorist suspects at the time. The CIA had info about some of the hijackers but didn’t share with the FBI. This guy said had that info been shared, it wasn’t too unlikely that this scenario would have occured. An FBI surveillance agent – like him – would have followed the hijackers in question (i think it was the ones who flew from Boston) to the airport, watched them board, and phoned his colleagues in LA to take over surveillance in LA.

                      Is there a concerted conspiracy to collect as much digital information as possible by governements? Absolutely. The US, UK, China, Russia all pour tons of resource into this. There are other conspiracies I fear are true but most fail the logic test including 9/11.

                    • Colonial Rawshark …
                      17 January 2015 at 2:29 pm

                      As I said, no skyscraper prior to 9/11 had ever failed due to fire in the way that NIST described, and no skyscraper since 9/11 has either.

                      Note, I’m not saying “the government did 9/11.” I’m saying that the NIST report/official explanation is shonky and superficial. Whether deliberately or simply due to incompetence, I do not know.

                    • McFlock …
                      17 January 2015 at 7:41 pm

                      because all skyscrapers are built in exactly the same way, and all buiilding fires are exactly like have large aircaft fly into the building. /sarc

                • b waghorn …
                  17 January 2015 at 2:04 pm

                  Cheers nadis good reports

                  • Paul …
                    17 January 2015 at 2:42 pm

                    People are simply asking for a full and proper enquiry.
                    That did not happen.

                    @nadis
                    No real evidence?
                    I agree – there is no explanation in the official report for the collapse of Building 7 and it is the official conspiracy theory that lacks evidence in various key areas.
                    People are not propagating a theory about 9/11 – they are simply questioning the lack of evidence for the official theory.

                  • nadis …
                    17 January 2015 at 2:47 pm

                    You obviously didn’t read the links. NIST specifically compare WTC7 to other skyscraper fires and draw conclusions from that comparison.

                    Like most truthers, you dont read potential conflicting evidence. See #10 in the checklist.

                    And more importantly, if not the Government then who? You’ve implied in the past it was the USG:

                    The events of 9/11 have launched major wars, cost trillions of dollars, and helped the power elite justify a security and surveillance apparatus which is over taking every western democracy. There is nothing more “real world” than that.

                    Now if its not the USG then who? Or is your power elite something else (see #5 in the checklist)

                    • Paul …
                      17 January 2015 at 2:54 pm

                      Please avoid name calling ‘truther’
                      Happy to change my mind.
                      Just explain how Building 7 collapsed.
                      Many left wing people like me don’t see how it could have
                      The solution is a proper inquiry.
                      Not name calling.

                    • Te Reo Putake …
                      17 January 2015 at 3:27 pm

                      Paul, if you don’t want to be called a ‘truther’, don’t act like one. Don’t post truther links, don’t propagate truther madness. Personally I think the term ‘truth denier’ is more apt, because as you note, there is no actual alternative theory any more. There used to be some, but they were so laughable they’ve been dropped in favour of ‘we just want an enquiry, maaan’. If the truthers want one, why don’t they put their hands in their pockets and pay for one? Ok, technically, they did. They had a conference in Toronto that revealed …. wait for it …. nothing.

                      Paul, the right don’t need our help with their fantasies, but they certainly love it when the left wastes time navel gazing instead of organising. Whether it’s the racist birther movement, the head in the sand climate change deniers or the deluded truthers, it all wastes energy that should going into the actually important stuff.

                      Happily, the more time goes on the less time people waste on this shit. It’s only once or twice a year now on TS, 5 years ago it was once or twice a month. Soon it’ll die out alltogether and thank fuck for that.

                      You claim to be a lefty. About time you decided what side you’re on, bud. Are going to stick with the right’s boofheaded conspiracies or are you a man of the people who wants to challenge authority and change the world for the better?

                    • phillip ure …
                      17 January 2015 at 4:06 pm

                      @ trp..& nadis..

                      ..could either of you have a go @ explaining that perfect parabolic-arc precision flying the pilot of the second plane executed..to hit that building so precisely..

                      ..a pilot who previously/recently..

                      ..had been unable to pilot a cessna..?

                      ..no arguments about melting-metal there..eh..?

                      ..cd u have a go @ explaining that one..?

                    • joe90 …
                      17 January 2015 at 4:15 pm

                      .

                      .cd u have a go @ explaining that one..?

                      According to my brother, a 737 second seater, a few hours in the simulator and mum could’ve done it.

                    • Te Reo Putake …
                      17 January 2015 at 4:18 pm

                      Woosh, a point goes flying over Phil’s head in a perfect parabolic arc …

                      Coz I’m a generous mood (must be the heat) I’ll explain. It doesn’t matter one fucken bit what things you don’t understand about 9/11, Phil. The minutiae of madness won’t ease poverty, reverse climate change or even allow you to smoke yourself senseless legally. The whole truth denier circus has been a fourteen year fact free diversion from what is actually happening in our world. Dupes who waste time on it are just assisting the hegemonic forces that do exist (modern capitalism, to be specific) to get on with their agenda.

                      As a wise man once said, Phil, never mind the bollocks.

                    • Paul …
                      17 January 2015 at 4:35 pm

                      What’s the point in expressing a contrary opinion on this subject to you? All one gets is abuse.
                      I care about poverty, neoliberalism and climate change.
                      Clearly I am not allowed to express some disquiet about 9/11.
                      Many people who are left challenge authority by questioning 9/11!
                      trp, if you think talking about 9/11 is a waste of time, there’s a simple solution. Don’t engage in discussion about it yourself.

                    • nadis …
                      17 January 2015 at 4:57 pm

                      Free speech means you have the right to say it. Check. Everyone agrees.

                      It doesn’t mean what you say isn’t nonsense. And people equally have the right to say you sound like a moron.

                      Its strange that you (paul) feel the need to qualify what you say with “left wing [people like me”. In the US most truthers (who are also birthers, climate change deniers, believers in black helicopters, believers that FEMA is building concentration camps, believers in the whole contrails/mind control/HAARP/earthquakes etc etc tend to be what you would describe as a RWNJ. Odd how a “left wing” person like you adopts the language and belief system of people who think Rush Limbaugh, Glen Beck and Anne Coulter are left wing sell outs. Also interesting that that very right wing nut job community has low education, low engagement with normal society, racist attitudes, high engagement with fundamental religion, generally anti-science and I’m sure lower IQ than average.

                      You claim (again) there is no explanation in the official report for the collapse of Building 7/.

                      NO NO NO NO NO.

                      You are willfully ignoring things written in black and white. There is a rational explanation, endorsed by many engineers which explains exactly why WTC7 collapsed. READ the NIST report it explains exactly how failure of one link between a pillar and a girder will result in catastrophic failure nexactly like what happened. Whats your theory? Nano-thermite? (BTW NIST addresses that theory too).

                      You do come across like a whack job truther. People who deny anthropomorphic climate change can actually point to more data and research to support their POV than a 9/11 truther can. And yet you are black and white on both issues. Doesn’t that strike you as bizarre?

                    • Paul …
                      17 January 2015 at 5:04 pm

                      I don’t claim to be ‘black and white’ on the issue
                      I simply am not convinced.
                      An agnostic might be the best word to describe my view.
                      By the sound of it, I agree with you on almost everything else.
                      So let’s agree to differ, eh?
                      Phil seems to agree with me.
                      Would you call him a rwnj?
                      As does colonial viper?
                      Another rwnj?
                      Let’s just agree to disagree.

                    • Colonial Rawshark …
                      17 January 2015 at 9:30 pm

                      Paul. This is just TRP attempting to limit the range of your conversation and your activity on The Standard to what he can stomach. Via name calling or whatever else he deems fit to apply.

                    • Colonial Rawshark …
                      17 January 2015 at 9:34 pm

                      nadis wrote:

                      READ the NIST report it explains exactly how failure of one link between a pillar and a girder will result in catastrophic failure nexactly like what happened.

                      except it’s never happened before to a skyscraper and it’s never happened since.

                      Which is not surprising seeing that the steel infrastructure of these buildings is typically specified and over-engineered to support 5x to 10x normal loading, specifically to prevent single point catastrophic failure of the entire building.

                • Murray Rawshark …
                  17 January 2015 at 4:39 pm

                  +1 Thanks nadis. I just hope this infection of conspiracy theory leaves TS soon and we can go back to discussing stuff that’s having a real effect on us all.

                  • Paul …
                    17 January 2015 at 4:45 pm

                    Then discuss those things.
                    This is open mike.
                    Those of us interested in 9/11 ( topical again because of Events in France and new spy laws) can discuss that.

                    • Chooky …
                      18 January 2015 at 12:07 am

                      I am with you Paul…those buildings did not collapse like that because an aircraft flew into them….many engineers, scientists , architects are calling for a proper inquiry …I cant see why people would oppose this unless they like to put their head in the sand

                    • weka …
                      18 January 2015 at 12:13 am

                      “Then discuss those things.
                      This is open mike.
                      Those of us interested in 9/11 ( topical again because of Events in France and new spy laws) can discuss that.”

                      I’d like to have a conversation about what us lefties can do to prevent the worst effects of AGW, but I’m guessing if I tried to talk about that in OM I’d end up talking to myself (or god forbid, PG). Talking about 9/11 does divert energy away from other conversations, similarly to how troling does. i.e people get sucked into the conversation with the most energy or controversy. Doesn’t mean it’s the most important conversation though.

                  • nadis …
                    17 January 2015 at 5:07 pm

                    Phil – both of those are really easy.

                    the official reports addresss the melting metal (Aluminium alloy melting point 548C, heat of fire >1000C.

                    Unless you are all trembly from the drugs even you could fly a smooth turn. My 9 year old son can do it (I am a PPL). Ever flown a flight simulator? Even you can do it. Plus I’m not even sure where that report came from or how significant it is. Airliners aren’t built for acrobatics. They are designed to fly in stable configuration.

                    But read the reports – you obviously havent (which makes discussing with you kind of pointless) otherwise you’d know about the aluminum bit.

                    And just use google – ie

                    http://www.debunking911.com/moltensteel.htm

                    and this

                    http://www.911myths.com/WTCTHERM.pdf

                    (though that might be a bit too sciencey for most truthers)

                    • phillip ure …
                      17 January 2015 at 5:23 pm

                      nadis..people far more expert than me are the ones to question about that..

                      i just know..that experienced pilots..having studied the flight-path approach of that second plane..and that precision targeting..

                      ..have expressed wonderment at how he did it..

                      ..esp as he had been such a poor-pupil at the flying school just before he did that..

                      ..u may wave such uncomfortable-facts/questions away as a nothing..i can’t..

                      ..and/but like i said..i am no expert on this..

                      .so yr aluminium boiling points are flying over my head..(and what were you answering/addressing by that..?..)

                      ..i just know enough to know that there is so much more to know..

                    • Murray Rawshark …
                      17 January 2015 at 5:50 pm

                      I have spoken to two pilots – one who flew a small plane around Eden Park, and one who flew F-5 Freedom Fighters for the Brazilian Air Force. They both said there was nothing special in any of the WTC flying.

                      I think the necessary flying skills business is something invented because it will sound believable to many people, none of whom will have the slightest idea.

                      The structural stuff and thermodynamic stuff, and dynamical stuff that I’ve looked at is all exactly the same. Rubbish designed to fool the gullible.

                      Funnily enough, I never believed any of the lies about WMD.

                    • McFlock …
                      17 January 2015 at 7:55 pm

                      I suspect also that folks who did the “expert flying” argument wilfully confused “follow a specific predetermined flight path to within metres” with “fly plane into building any old way”.

                    • The Murphey …
                      17 January 2015 at 8:56 pm

                      @ Murray – If your ‘pilot friends’ genuinely told you this and you have accepted it then you have been taken for a ride or are making things up

                      Note: This is not a comment about 911 specifically other than to point out that piloting commercial airliners could not be further from the ‘Eden Park small plane or the F-5 fighter’ which at least would be piloted by licensed qualified persons

                      Joe90 and McFlock make similar uninformed comments which are beyond ignorant

                    • McFlock …
                      17 January 2015 at 9:14 pm

                      finally, a point. A point with no support other than a declamation from on high, but at least it wasn’t one of those pathetic “Q:…” things.

                      When you say that the small plane would be piloted by licensed, qualified persons – I’ve done it. Didn’t have my ppl. Did have an instructor who took off and landed, because those are the difficult bits. On a nice day, keeping the thing in the air and following a general course (I was even allowed to handle the approach) was a piece of piss, with minimal instruction and no preparation (the offer to take control was actually unexpected).

                      It was easy to maintain speed, course and height when I didn’t have to worry about the the difficult bits (taking off and landing).

                      No, it wasn’t a jet. But given that I’m an exception to your “qualified, licensed” yadda yadda, I suspect I have a better idea than you do. Unless you fly 757s, of course.

                    • Colonial Rawshark …
                      17 January 2015 at 9:21 pm

                      and one who flew F-5 Freedom Fighters for the Brazilian Air Force. They both said there was nothing special in any of the WTC flying.

                      Did they make any comment about the sustained low level flying (including course corrections) needed to fly an airliner (not a more nimble jet fighter or small plane) into the side of the Pentagon?

                    • The Murphey …
                      17 January 2015 at 9:29 pm

                      Q. MckFlock are you as illogical as the comments you wrote above in real life ?

                      I’ve done it. Didn’t have my ppl. Did have an instructor who took off and landed, because those are the difficult bits

                      So you can’t fly a plane but have taken a ‘test flight’ and your anecdote neither adds nor detracts from my comment to Murray about the ‘pilot friends’ or my reference to them being licensed and qualified

                      It does however leave gaping holes in any credibility you may feel you have writing nonsense such as this but thanks for writing it as I expect I won’t be alone in spotting the ‘errors’

                      No, it wasn’t a jet. But given that I’m an exception to your “qualified, licensed” yadda yadda, I suspect I have a better idea than you do. Unless you fly 757s, of course.

                      Woops

                    • Colonial Rawshark …
                      17 January 2015 at 9:37 pm

                      The Murphey: ha!!!

                    • McFlock …
                      17 January 2015 at 9:39 pm

                      oh, do you fly 757s?

                      BTW, why did you need to specify that I wrote the comments above in real life? Do you sometimes have difficulty separating reality from fantasy?

                    • Murray Rawshark …
                      18 January 2015 at 5:16 pm

                      “@ Murray – If your ‘pilot friends’ genuinely told you this and you have accepted it then you have been taken for a ride or are making things up”

                      This is why I hate discussing the WTC. Disagree with the conspiracy nutters and you quickly get called a shill or a liar. Well mate, go and stick it where the sun don’t shine. I don’t make stuff up. You have no fucking reason to suggest that I do. Get fucked.

                  • nadis …
                    17 January 2015 at 5:10 pm

                    i wouldn’t call them rwnj’s but I would call them logically challenged.

                • gsays …
                  17 January 2015 at 8:10 pm

                  hi there nadir,
                  are you aware of the links within nist and mr gw bush.
                  from memory they are familial, but dont quote me.
                  if so it makes the nist report not worth the paper it is written on.

                  • nadis …
                    17 January 2015 at 9:42 pm

                    Seriously? Actually you might be right. I think NIST is owned by the Rothschilds.

                    Link please or go back to your trailer.

                    • gsays …
                      17 January 2015 at 10:02 pm

                      hi nadis, i will have a look for you.
                      but what then…
                      what i am struggling to get is the nasty, unneeded comments.
                      i am enquiring to get closer to the truth than i feel we are now.

                      the other angle i dont get is that to question 12/9 you must be right wing.
                      clearly by looking at who is posting on this subject, this clearly isnt the case.

                    • gsays …
                      17 January 2015 at 10:43 pm

                      ahh yes, my wires were crossed.
                      the familial link is marvin bush, on the board of directors of securicom/stratasec the security company responsible for wtc, united airlines and dulles airport.
                      he is also a former director of hcc insurance holdings which had insurance on said buildings.

                      clearly i am not going to convince you of anything here.

                      i simply, from day dot, when seeing those three buildings collapse, thought they looked like a controlled demo.
                      the official line since then has never satisfied me.

                      an open mind rather than being certain of something.

                      my grandfather once told me only two are certain, the fool and the fully realized.

                    • Colonial Rawshark …
                      17 January 2015 at 10:48 pm

                      Those building collapses are almost certainly the result of controlled demolitions work but IMO the hardest to answer question is actually – where are all the people who planned, organised and implemented the operation? There must be a few dozen of them. And it would have taken a lot of money and specialised resources.

                      Yet no one has squeeled or leaked yet???

                    • McFlock …
                      17 January 2015 at 10:59 pm

                      I reckon that most of the demo experts were killed and put in the planes that were guided by remote control into the towers… /sarc

                    • Te Reo Putake …
                      17 January 2015 at 11:12 pm

                      Leaving aside the obvious stupidity of your controlled demolitions theory, your major point is valid, CV. The US of A can’t stop a gender confused military techie from releasing all sorts of sensitive data, an indiscrete intern from nearly bringing down a President or even arrange to commit a successful burglary in a sleepy Washington hotel.

                      But the most complex, technically advanced conspiracy in the history of the world, done for no actual advantage, but just for the hell of it, well that’s a piece of piss apparently.

                      Still, the illuminati/Deep State/Bilderburgers are chuffed that you still think there’s anything to it. As long as it keeps you from doing anything progressive, they’re well pleased at how you are responding to the stimulus. Obey, CV, Obey!

                    • nadis …
                      17 January 2015 at 11:19 pm

                      Or a contractor from strolling through the entire NSA database and downloading to a thumb drive.

                      What I don’t get is why pick on WTC 1,2 and 7. Surely 3,4,5 and 6 deserved controlled demolition too?

                    • phillip ure …
                      18 January 2015 at 5:27 pm

                      if it helps at all..the actual flight-path taken by plane 2 was the perfect parabolic curve..

                      ..(if u don’t know what a parabolic-curve is..i suggest you find out..before commenting/sneering..

                      ..and once again..this was executed by a piiot who a few weeks beforehand could not fly a cessna..

                      ..but nothing to see there..eh..?)

                    • McFlock …
                      18 January 2015 at 5:53 pm

                      First I’d like proof that you’re not using big words you don’t understand.

                    • Pascals bookie …
                      18 January 2015 at 8:55 pm

                      “i simply, from day dot, when seeing those three buildings collapse, thought they looked like a controlled demo.
                      the official line since then has never satisfied me.”

                      Except they don’t really look like controlled demos. And they certainly don’t sound like controlled demos.

                      When you look at controlled demos, the buildings slump, the whole building moves down at the same time. The WTC towers don’t fall like that at all, below the debris cloud, the building isn’t moving.

                      And there is the total absence of the sound of the explosions as the building falls. Truthers then fall back on claims that the explosions happened sometime before the collapse, or that they brought the towers down with a never before used technique of controlled demo, and this explains the differences between these collapses and every other controlled demo.

                      But that ignores the fact that it was supposedly the fact that they looked like controlled demos that was the evidence in the first place.

                      “It looks like an orange”

                      “Well, it’s ball shaped with dimples, but it’s too small and off-white, I’m pretty sure that’s a golf ball”

                      “It’s obviously a genetically engineered orange, because they don’t want you to know it’s an orange!”

  3. Paul 3
    17 January 2015 at 8:16 am

    Have you read Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein?
    Is it happening now in France?
    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article40712.htm

    • Pete George 4.1
      17 January 2015 at 8:53 am

      Notice of a real threat?

      The Herald has this week tracked multiple Facebook pages of Kiwis that have carried recruitment-style material for Isis.

      One such person took to social media this week after French police shot dead three Islamic terrorists in Paris, saying: “My dear beloved brothers and sisters, its time to wake up. Get ur guns, get ur knifes, get ur boots, train intensively, increase your (faith) and (certainty), study the virtues of Jihad (for the sake of Allah).”

      Contacted by the Herald, he asked for $2,000 for an interview and refused to talk when told he wouldn’t get any money.

      Another page displayed imagery of gun-wielding fighters wearing the keffiyeh headdress in Isis colours carrying the organisation’s slogans. The message posted with the images was: “Just 1 bullet away from jannah [paradise].”

      The Facebook account owner — who gives the Middle East as his current location — was linked last year to the Avondale Islamic Centre shut by the Muslim community after concerns about the style of preaching. The man was visited by police after threats to Herald staff covering the mosque conflict.

      Relative to other countries it is a low threat but there does seem to be actual cause for concern.

      I think most people would accept the need for some level of surveillance of this sort of thing.

      • Draco T Bastard 4.1.1
        17 January 2015 at 9:06 am

        Relative to other countries it is a low threat but there does seem to be actual cause for concern.

        Not really – there’s still less chance of dying from a terrorist attack than walking down to the dairy to buy some milk.

        I think most people would accept the need for some level of surveillance of this sort of thing.

        But is that what these new powers are being used for? After all, we know that the police and SIS have spied upon the Greens simply because they want to protect the environment.

        • weka 4.1.1.1
          17 January 2015 at 9:12 am

          “Not really – there’s still less chance of dying from a terrorist attack than walking down to the dairy to buy some milk.”

          Apparently even less than that. More chance of being hit by lightening than dying in a terrorist attack.

          It’s all about creating a culture of fear, and the spy bosses are just as into that as the terrorists.

          • Harriet 4.1.1.1.1
            17 January 2015 at 10:01 am

            “….It’s all about creating a culture of fear, and the spy bosses are just as into that as the terrorists…..”

            Hardly.

            Security agencies need to be 100% right.

            While terrorists just need 1 chance. And no luck.

            • North 4.1.1.1.1.1
              17 January 2015 at 10:22 am

              Yes, 100% right they need to be. As do contributors to TS in respect of which war people are talking about. For fear of complete loss of credibility otherwise – eg. Harriet’s triumphalism of yesterday – “Wrong war !!!” re Churchill’s role in Gallipoli.

              http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-16012015/#comment-952031

              Oh the shame…….and then the dirty talk. Double shame !

            • phillip ure 4.1.1.1.1.2
              17 January 2015 at 10:27 am

              yeah..that’s right harriett..

              ..it is a total nonsense that govts’ create climates of fear to justify increased spooking powers..

              ..ridiculous to even consider it as a possibility..eh..?

              ..got any other wisdoms/insights you’d like to share with us..?

              ..still feasting on the placenta of the unborn..?

              ..to retain yr ‘youthful-looks’..?

              ..and harriet..plse explain yr knee-slapping/jaw-dropping exhibition of ignorance..

              ..in yr claims churchill had no role to play in the clusterfuck that was gallipoli..

              ..gonna withdraw/explain that..?

            • weka 4.1.1.1.1.3
              17 January 2015 at 10:41 am

              “Hardly.

              Security agencies need to be 100% right.

              While terrorists just need 1 chance. And no luck.”

              That doesn’t even make sense.

              Spies don’t need to be 100% right. If they did we wouldn’t be having this conversation.

            • Paul 4.1.1.1.1.4
              17 January 2015 at 11:59 am

              Just checking the calibre of you Harriet.
              Do you accept you got it wrong about Churchill yesterday?
              Just checking who I’m up against when we debate other issues such as Israel and Gaza.
              What’s your knowledge of the history of Palestine since 1900?

            • Murray Rawshark 4.1.1.1.1.5
              17 January 2015 at 4:54 pm

              The squirrels do not have a 100% record. I agree with you that they should, and are therefore worthless and must be disbanded. You are indeed wise, Harriet.

          • Descendant Of Sssmith 4.1.1.1.2
            17 January 2015 at 11:11 am

            “Apparently even less than that. More chance of being hit by lightening”

            Some sort of new post-colonial assimilation policy perhaps or maybe this is what Michael Jackson suffered from.

        • Pete George 4.1.1.2
          17 January 2015 at 9:20 am

          After all, we know that the police and SIS have spied upon the Greens simply because they want to protect the environment.

          We? I don’t know that. Could you please provide proof.

          • phillip ure 4.1.1.2.1
            17 January 2015 at 9:34 am

            come off it p.g..stop trying it on..

            ..u well know the spooks/govt view environmentalists as economic-terrorists..

            ..with their ‘threats’ to the dairy industry etc..

            ..(tho’ of course..there are ironies to be had..it is the external forces of capitalism/market-rules! and international environmental-pressures..and their own hubris..

            ..that have sounded the death-knell for the dairy industry..

            ..not wild-eyed vegans like me..

            ..(however much i may have wanted to..

            ..i am just a spectator..)

          • Colonial Rawshark 4.1.1.2.2
            17 January 2015 at 10:07 am

            We? I don’t know that. Could you please provide proof.

            You have doubts that NZ security services have spied on political party members and MPs?

            What justification do you have for entertaining such doubts?

            More than a year after Snowden/Greenwald began revealing the true extent of mass surveillance, why is it that you remain unaware that FVEY capabilities have been used to undemocratically spy on politicians and government officials throughout the western world?

            • Te Reo Putake 4.1.1.2.2.1
              17 January 2015 at 10:14 am

              Hard to believe that United Future candidate Peter George (failed) is unaware of the scandal around his bouffant haired leader, the journalist Andrea Vance and the report into the GCSB, but perhaps he leads a sheltered life blissfully free from the distractions and intrusions of life as we live it in the 21st century.

            • weka 4.1.1.2.2.2
              17 January 2015 at 10:14 am

              Biege tinted glasses and daily consumption of large doses of willful ignorance.

          • Draco T Bastard 4.1.1.2.3
            17 January 2015 at 10:38 am

            http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10555609
            http://thestandard.org.nz/rob-gilchrist-on-nicky-hager/
            http://www.nickyhager.info/crossing-the-line-the-activist-who-turned-police-informer/

            There’s more but I’m sure you get the general idea. Being green in any form in NZ brings you to the attention of the authorities and it’s not because they want to help.

            • weka 4.1.1.2.3.1
              17 January 2015 at 10:42 am

              Really interested to see what Pete makes of that.

            • Pete George 4.1.1.2.3.2
              17 January 2015 at 11:53 am

              Nothing there proves anything like “simply because they want to protect the environment”.

              Keith Locke joined the Socialist Action League in 1970. He was too radical for Labour, which tried to expel him in 1974.

              That doesn’t sound like he simply wanted to protect the environment but I don’t know what Labour was like in the seventies – although it was one of their more popular periods under Norm Kirk.

              Former Labour leader Helen Clark, Prime Minister for almost all of Locke’s Parliamentary career, said she had no knowledge of the SIS spying on Locke or any other MP.

              It would probably be scandalous if an MP was spied on by the SIS.

              It would be scandalous if spying on any MP was justified.

              • weka …
                17 January 2015 at 1:02 pm

                “probably” roflnui.

                Squirmweasel (and my apologies to the mustelid family who are obviously quite cool). You think that the National govt isn’t concerned about environmental activists as well. That makes you doubly an idiot.

                Good to know you think socialist are way more evil than environmentalists 🙄

              • Draco T Bastard …
                17 January 2015 at 6:36 pm

                I believe, PG, that that BS you wrote amounts to grasping at straws.

    • Paul 4.2
      17 January 2015 at 11:50 am

      The New Zealand Herald’s front page this morning an exercise in scaremongering.
      Unbelievably poor journalism.
      No surprises such promotion of fear is supported – not condemned – by Harriet the Hater and pg

    • Murray Rawshark 4.3
      17 January 2015 at 4:51 pm

      I wonder how many lists I got on for posting “Je ne suis pas Charlie Hebdo” and “Je suis Derek Fox”? The article makes it look like the SIS get their info from trawling Facebook. The sooner we get rid of them, and the GCSB, the better. They don’t work for us.

  5. North 5
    17 January 2015 at 8:33 am

    Can’t be all bad though. Imagine the business opportunities in the outsourcing.
    New meaning to those dodgy ads – “Earn $XXX per month from your own homephone/PC !” ?

    • weka 6.1
      17 January 2015 at 9:00 am

      heh heh, that’s what I was thinking. In an effort not apply various mental health adjectives my thesaurus offers deeply peculiar.

    • weka 6.2
      17 January 2015 at 9:03 am

      wow, that second link is amazing, well done The Guardian.

    • phillip ure 6.3
      17 January 2015 at 9:08 am

      i guess..trp..u think oswald acted alone..

      ..and that fdr didn’t know the japanese were going to attack pearl harbour..

      ..eh..?

      ..and that the gulf of tonkin accident was a commie-provocation..

      ..and so many others from a list of official-stories..eh..?

      • Te Reo Putake 6.3.1
        17 January 2015 at 9:54 am

        False equivalence, Phil. I am by nature, education and upbringing a rational person. And, like The Clash back in the garage, my bullshit detector is effective.

        • phillip ure 6.3.1.1
          17 January 2015 at 10:11 am

          if so..it is clear you have not really looked at this one..

          ,..where all the ‘bullshit’..is in the official story..

          ..here’s an idea..

          ..why not watch just the first hr of that doco..

          ..and then come back here and demolish what you have seen..for us..

          ..put yr p.o.v. from a position of knowledge..

          ..put those finely-honed ‘bullshit-detectors’ to work..

          ..walk the talk..eh..?

          ….and re the clash..

          ..i was an early fanboy..and saw them live about five times..

          ..but they thought they were harbingers/agents of social change..

          ..but they weren’t..eh..?

          ..and while i derive much pleasure from much music from that era..and will seek it out..

          ..do i still seek out the clash..?..no..

          ..do you..?

          • Te Reo Putake 6.3.1.1.1
            17 January 2015 at 10:25 am

            Demolish … ironic choice of words, Phil!

            I think I’ll just discuss it tonite with Elvis while he cooks my chips. Hopefully Lord Lucan will be around to offer his advice, too. If not, I’ll try horse whispering. Shergar lives in a paddock just down the road. Mind you he’s such a negative bugger, last time I asked him he just said naaaaayyy and pawed at some dried up horse shit. Much like you, in fact.

            • phillip ure 6.3.1.1.1.1
              17 January 2015 at 10:36 am

              see..you just show yrslf up as a braying-fool..by retreating into that specious-bullshit..(my ‘detectors’ are going off/ballistic..’he’s doing avoidance..!..he’s doing avoidance..!’..)

              ..how about answering that list of official-stories you do or don’t agree with i posted..?

              ..or are you a 100% true-believer/parroter..?

              • Te Reo Putake …
                17 January 2015 at 10:48 am

                Waffle World, The Home of Fail Ure.

                • phillip ure …
                  17 January 2015 at 10:50 am

                  ah..!..retreating to the ad hom..

                  ..i accept yr flag of surrender..

                  • Te Reo Putake …
                    17 January 2015 at 10:58 am

                    Try not insert the sharp end by mistake.

                    • phillip ure …
                      17 January 2015 at 11:22 am

                      thanks for the warning..

                      ..do you want yr/the white-flag back..?

                      ..or do you have plenty more in stock/to hand..?

                    • Te Reo Putake …
                      17 January 2015 at 11:59 am

                      It’s not my white flag, I’m returning the one you used the other day when you were caught bullshitting. Sorry for any confusion, which is entirely at your end.

                    • phillip ure …
                      17 January 2015 at 12:19 pm

                      wow…!..u really r lying on yr back..

                      ..paws in the air..and mewling defeat..aren’t you..?

                      ..maybe..to recover..a warm bath..?

                      ..some time alone..?

                      ..and i guess there is no chance/hope of you ‘walking the talk’..eh..?

                      ..’braying’ is all you’ve got..eh..?

                    • McFlock …
                      17 January 2015 at 8:09 pm

                      pu’s declared victory so many times he should be in front of a large banner that says “mission accomplished”.

        • The Murphey 6.3.1.2
          17 January 2015 at 11:10 am

          Q. Do you overrate yourself TRP ?

      • nadis 6.3.2
        17 January 2015 at 1:12 pm

        oswald – yes, acted alone. the lack of factual info to the contrary in the 50 years since leads me to that conclusion.

        fdr – no didnt know. US had some indications someting was to happen, but specific info didnt reach Washington till after the attack.

        tonkin incident- this was a beat up and it is well documented. The first incident occurred when the USS Maddox fired long range warning shots at North Vietnamese patrol boats and claimed the NV fired first. The NV were on real edge having just captured a land based team of US operatives in the area the day before. The second incident – two days later – was the real excuse for the congressional resolution. Lyndon Johnson famously said (in private) “For all I know, they (the Maddox) were shooting at whales out there” (or words to that effect).

        Declassified US intelligence papers clearly show the second incident never happened as described to the US public, and that the true version of the first incident also was not as described at the time.

        • phillip ure 6.3.2.1
          17 January 2015 at 4:23 pm

          ok nadis..

          ..thanks for answering what trp ran away from..

          ..and oswald acted alone eh..?..whoar..?

          ..(and..um..!..how much do you actually know about that case..?

          ..r u of an age to have lived it..?..)

          ..and u just didn’t know that fdr knew..?..and he let it happen..so the american people wd let him join the european war..

          ..much like 9/11..that attack galvanised/enraged the american people..

          ..and swept away that anti-war sentiment which had been in the dominance to that moment..and which fdr had been fighting to change….

          ..(it’s quite fascinating..that one..and like 9/11..it has unexplainable by official story snail-trails all over it..)

          ..tell me this nadis..why do you reckon cheney sat in the control room in washington for the hours these planes flew about..?

          ..blocking any/all urgings by his military people to scramble fighters..?

          ..so in the most militarised nation in history…

          ..nothing was done for hours..about planes they ‘knew’ had been hijacked..

          ..and he just sat and watched/tracked them as they flew towards new york..

          ..but no fighters scrambled..eh..?

          ..and that is just another w.t.f!..one of so so many…

          • nadis 6.3.2.1.1
            17 January 2015 at 10:47 pm

            I keep saying to myself “don’t engage with these idiots, nothing good can come from it”

            Phil – you are making shit up. Do you actually know any of your assertions to be true or did they come to you in a dream.

            why do you reckon cheney sat in the control room in washington for the hours these planes flew about..?

            ..blocking any/all urgings by his military people to scramble fighters..?

            ..so in the most militarised nation in history…

            ..nothing was done for hours..about planes they ‘knew’ had been hijacked..

            ..and he just sat and watched/tracked them as they flew towards new york..

            ..but no fighters scrambled..eh..?

            Pretty much everything you stated there is provably incorrect, i.e.,

            http://www.historycommons.org/timeline.jsp?day_of_9/11=dickcheney&timeline=complete_911_timeline

            • phillip ure 6.3.2.1.1.1
              18 January 2015 at 6:39 am

              (from yr link..)

              “..According to the 9/11 Commission, Vice President Dick Cheney is told that the Air Force is trying to establish a combat air patrol (CAP) over Washington. Cheney, who is in the Presidential Emergency Operations Center (PEOC) below the White House, then calls President Bush on Air Force One to discuss the rules of engagement for this CAP. Cheney later tells the 9/11 Commission that he’d felt “it did no good to establish the CAP unless the pilots had instructions on whether they were authorized to shoot if the plane would not divert.” He recalls that “the president signed off on that concept.” Bush will recall this phone call and emphasize to the 9/11 Commission that, during it, he had authorized the shootdown of hijacked aircraft. National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, who is in the PEOC with Cheney, will tell the Commission she recalls hearing Cheney inform the president: “Sir, the CAPs are up. Sir, they’re going to want to know what to do.” Then she hears Cheney say, “Yes sir.”

              However, as the Commission will later note, “Among the sources that reflect other important events that morning there is no documentary evidence for this call..”

              (clear as mud..eh..?..)

    • Draco T Bastard 6.4
      17 January 2015 at 9:19 am

      Global warming’s terrifying new extreme: 2014 was Earth’s hottest year on record

      Despite a relatively cool year in the eastern U.S. — anomalous to pretty much everywhere else — global temperatures as a whole were 1.26 degrees Fahrenheit over the 20th century average, the scientists said. Particularly significant is the fact that they got that high without a boost from an El Niño, the weather pattern that helped elevate the previous warmest-ever years to their record status.

      And make no mistake: this was part of a long-term trend. Nine of the ten hottest years, with 1998 as an exception, have occurred in the 21st century. If you were born after 1976, to put it in even starker terms, you have no idea what a cooler-than-average year even feels like.

      My bold.

      Wonder how the denialists are going to spin this because they will do so. After all, they have to protect their profits from the sales of climate changing fossil fuels.

      And I’ve been seeing articles about how great the new low prices for fuel are for motorists. We obviously need to start heavily regulating car usage because the ‘free-market’ will obviously just keep destroying everything it touches.

      • b waghorn 6.4.1
        17 January 2015 at 9:28 am

        What we need is governments with the courage to make real radical changes not tinker around with little rules and regs

        • Colonial Rawshark 6.4.1.1
          17 January 2015 at 10:19 am

          +100

          The Political Party Left has virtually no vision on this however, as they all feel limited by having to appease the expectations of the top 20% of society, as well as the tightly enforced neoliberal/free market orthodoxy.

          On another cheery note, I think fossil fuel depletion is going to become the most severe problem over the next 15 years. We will be having to deal with the worsening effects of climate change when the concentrated energy our civilisation relies on becomes unaffordable/unavailable in earnest.

    • Paul 6.5
      17 January 2015 at 11:30 am

      OK it is clear you accept the official conspirCy theory at 9/11.
      Do you also still believe in the official conspiracy theory about WMD in Iraq.
      Madness to question the official story surely.

      • The Murphey 6.5.1
        17 January 2015 at 11:36 am

        “I am by nature, education and upbringing a rational person. And, like The Clash back in the garage, my bullshit detector is effective.”

        Q. Paul what are you hoping to achieve ?

        All you need to understand is in the comment above if you are able to interpret what message it actually conveys

        • Paul 6.5.1.1
          17 January 2015 at 12:23 pm

          I am hoping that people look at issues like 9 /11 with an open mind.

          • The Murphey 6.5.1.1.1
            17 January 2015 at 12:40 pm

            Q. Do you feel it might be a more efficient use of energy engaging with people who do have an open mind ?

            TRP has stated clearly his (?) position with regards to 911 so I would not see this as your ‘target demographic’

            Perhaps consider dripping information into conversations (at the appropriate and opportune time) with those who provide a more open platform

            • Paul 6.5.1.1.1.1
              17 January 2015 at 12:49 pm

              Many people read this blog who don’t comment.
              They may investigate Building 7 themselves.

              • The Murphey …
                17 January 2015 at 1:27 pm

                I understand where you’re coming from.

                Building 7 is one element (of many) which have not been adequately investigated or published in an official capacity worthy of the consequences from that date

                That 911 was a catalyst for violent atrocities and removal of ‘freedoms’ via nefarious and collaborative global ‘laws’ the worlds populace are living with today is un-deniable

                The consequences and outcomes are not exactly new territory so far as accepted human history is concerned and in my opinion the question of ‘WHY’ is more significant than the question of ‘WHAT HOW WHO’

                Humanity is living inside a psychological operation which is unimaginable in its depth of deception to people from all walks of life because they have accepted the deceptions as real life

                Consider ‘the news’ and ‘advertising’ as lower level yet crucial examples of the operation thongs of people simply accept

                We may never get know what transpired leading into 911 or on the day so people are left to speculate where a vacuum has been created which in part can be filled in by observing the outcomes and events which have occurred since that day

                Any and every opinion is valid even well after such time as truth is no longer hidden from humanity as a whole

                • Pascals bookie …
                  17 January 2015 at 5:49 pm

                  There are loads of good reads out there detailing how wtc7 came down, and the critics of the NIST report usually misrepresent it.

                  Other things 9/11 truthers often say that are actually false include:

                  The buildings fell into their own footprint. Nope.

                  They fell at free fall speed. Nope.

                  iron speheres found at the site could only be explained by thermite. Nope.

                  Etc.

                  But for me the most odd thing about truthers os their failure to ask the other sort of questions. Not just the ones about how hard it would have been to carry out such an operation, (rigging the building with thermite, keeping everyone quiet about it for over a decade now, etc), but questions like:

                  Why would the conspirators do it when a much simpler operation could have achieved the same effect?

                  Why hasn’t Al Qaeda maintained a position that they were not responsible, if they were not? Why have they boasted about doing it and celebrated the martyrs when they could have used the fact they are being framed as very strong propaganda for their cause? AQ prime stratgeic goal is to get rid of what they consider the apostate regimes in the middle east and replace them with ‘properly’ Islamic ones. The medium strategy is to convince Muslims in the Middle east that the regimes ruling them are puppets of western states that hate Muslims. If AQ didn;t do this, then shouting that from the rooftops would be grade A propaganda for them. And yet they are not.

                  • Pascals bookie …
                    17 January 2015 at 5:55 pm

                    I guess, in short.

                    We have a bunch of people who are proud of the fact they did it. They released ‘martyrdom videos of the hijackers.

                    Everything we know about their organisation suggests that this sort of operation is the sort of thing they would dream of doing for very clear strategic reasons, and they claim to have done it.

                    On the other hand, we have a skeptics who can’t put forward an alternative hypothesis, but raise objections based around the fact that you can’t actually completely model the collapse of a building right down to the last square centimeter once it has collapsed and is lying in a smoky rubble.

                    • Anne …
                      17 January 2015 at 6:40 pm

                      Thanks Pascals bookie. Needed your incisive and astute delivery.

                    • gsays …
                      17 January 2015 at 8:17 pm

                      gday pascal..
                      “…actually completely model the collapse of a building right down to the last square centimeter once it has collapsed and is lying in a smoky rubble.”
                      it was three buidings, sorry for the pedantry.

                    • McFlock …
                      17 January 2015 at 8:19 pm

                      Agreed, Anne. Thanks PB.

                    • The Murphey …
                      17 January 2015 at 9:05 pm

                      Q. Was it something specifically you read in my comment that solicited such an unrefined response ?

                      It seems you have run off on tangents of your own making that Anne has mistaken for ‘incisive and astute delivery’

                      Perhaps read my comment again (if you like) with a little less preconceived notion attached to it and see what else you can find in there

                    • Colonial Rawshark …
                      17 January 2015 at 9:12 pm

                      We have a bunch of people who are proud of the fact they did it. They released ‘martyrdom videos of the hijackers.

                      Sorry PB, you just conflated the act of crashing passenger airliners into the Twin Towers (an impact which they had been architecturally designed from the start to absorb), with the subsequent collapse of those Towers (for which the Official Narrative is incoherent with the observed facts).

                      I expect sharper reasoning from you.

                    • Pascals bookie …
                      18 January 2015 at 11:33 am

                      No I didn’t CV.

                      But to be clear, are you saying that truthers do not consider the events of 9/11 to have been a ‘false flag’ event?

                      Coz google strongly suggests otherwise.

                      And I’m pretty sure that if I searched this site I’d find plenty of comments from yourself, and certainly many from Ev saying that AQ couldn’t have done it, or didn’t do it, or that there is no proof they did it, or that the hijackers are still alive etc etc etc.

                      This is typical Truther rhetoric; get called on something and claim that ‘no that’s not we are saying at all’ when it’s something they say all the time and at great length.

                      So it’s, unfortunately, exactly what I’ve come to expect from you on this subject, and anyone can check the archives here to look for that pattern.

  7. Pete George 7
    17 January 2015 at 8:56 am

    Does anyone know if there is any official designation of the term ‘Aotearoa New Zealand’? Or it just used by some people and organisations arbitrarily?

    • Te Reo Putake 7.1
      17 January 2015 at 9:15 am

      disingenuous: dɪsɪnˈdʒɛnjʊəs/

      Adjective: Not candid or sincere, typically by pretending that one knows less about something than one really does.

    • North 7.2
      17 January 2015 at 10:10 am

      “Je Suis Google and I’m at your service Pete”. But of course you don’t need my help…….you already know the Aotearoa/NZ answer. That’s your schtick. Butter wouldn’t melt in the mouth disingenuity, as TRP identifies.

      • Pete George 7.2.1
        17 January 2015 at 11:58 am

        I have no idea what’s behind the use of Aotearoa New Zealand and whether it’s an official term or one being promoted without due process. I asked to see if anyone knew.

        • Te Reo Putake 7.2.1.1
          17 January 2015 at 12:09 pm

          Completely agree with your first four words, Pete. As for the rest, well promotion is part of due process. Many organisations use Aotearoa/NZ. Even more don’t. It’s entirely up to them individually whether they do or do not.

          Strange path for you to be wandering down. I never took you for a cliche talk radio/taxi driver style racist.

          • Pete George 7.2.1.1.1
            17 January 2015 at 12:22 pm

            I don’t know what’s racist asking about it.

            Private organisations can call themselves anything they like. It seems odd that the Race Relations Commissioner would if it’s not an officially designated term.

            http://www.hrc.co.nz/race-relations/race-relations-day-2014/

            • Paul 7.2.1.1.1.1
              17 January 2015 at 12:24 pm

              zzzzzz

            • weka 7.2.1.1.1.2
              17 January 2015 at 12:33 pm

              Who would designate it if the HRC didn’t?

              Te Reo Māori has been an official language of NZ since 1987. Why is that not enough for you Pete?

              Irony alert. Pete’s link, which appears to be the basis of his complaint, is to the HRC’s page on the Race Relations Day 2014. It marks the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. The 2014 theme is “I am Aotearoa New Zealand…te ranga tahi, together we grow.”

            • framu 7.2.1.1.1.3
              19 January 2015 at 11:58 am

              “I don’t know what’s racist asking about it.”

              the bit where you complaining about the use of a maori word perhaps?

          • weka 7.2.1.1.2
            17 January 2015 at 12:27 pm

            But they haven’t asked white men of Pete’s class whether it’s ok to use one of NZ’s treaty partner’s words for ēnei whenua.

            • Pete George 7.2.1.1.2.1
              18 January 2015 at 5:07 am

              Have they asked any of the treaty partners? I don’t think ‘Aotearoa New Zealand’ should be imposed without debate – discussion involving all partners.

              I don’t like ‘Aotearoa New Zealand’ for two reasons – it’s too long winded, and I’d prefer to drop the ‘New Zealand’ part.

              But I think it should be discussed and decided through a proper process. I suspect it’s a bit too soon though, as per the flag change there’s probably too many entrenched European-centric views around still. I think and hope the time is right to change to a more appropriate flag, but a name change for the country will be harder.

              • Te Reo Putake …
                18 January 2015 at 8:48 am

                It’s not being imposed, you racist tool. And yes, you are racist. You’re only trying to cover your arse by saying you’d prefer ‘aotearoa’ here on TS; that was something you managed to omit from your actual dog whistle post on yawn NZ.

                • Pete George …
                  18 January 2015 at 9:27 am

                  You’re making ignorant accusations, unless you’re deliberately just being obnoxious and abusive. Not sure what you get out of that approach, it doesn’t prove anything other than your nasty nature here.

                  My post was on a specific part of the issue. My next one will cover it some more.

                  • marty mars …
                    18 January 2015 at 9:38 am

                    yeah well fair warning to you if you try and put words or interpretations onto tangata whenua without knowing anything about it – this is something you have done in the past – stick to YOUR view and don’t try to be a big man and speak for others

                    • Pete George …
                      18 January 2015 at 9:48 am

                      Funny that you throw some unspecified historical accusation at me while supporting TRP’s dishonesty.

                      Who are you speaking for? Why don’t you stick to YOUR view? I don’t think you have exclusive rights to putting interpretations onto tangata whenua.

                    • marty mars …
                      18 January 2015 at 10:03 am

                      and so it begins – I’m speaking for me you are speaking for you geddit? Make sense now? Got through your ego yet? Do I need to repeat it?

                      Your history here in regards to this issue has been a cause of discomfort for me and I don’t forget even if you do. Show some fucken respect for others and understand your own bias and worldview. You are who you are and you are not who you are not – if you think deeply on that you won’t go off on tangents and spout rubbish.

                    • Pete George …
                      18 January 2015 at 10:05 am

                      “Show some fucken respect for others”

                      Ditto.

                    • marty mars …
                      18 January 2015 at 10:07 am

                      you did it and I have not forgotten – fact

                      I have given you fair warning not to do it this time – fact

                    • Pete George …
                      18 January 2015 at 10:15 am

                      I’ll say what I want to now and in the future. I don’t feel I should have to clear everything with you. Do you think you’re the tangata whenua police?

                    • marty mars …
                      18 January 2015 at 10:24 am

                      you are a rude supercilious prick – say what you like and so will I.

              • Molly …
                18 January 2015 at 9:22 am

                “I don’t like ‘Aotearoa New Zealand’ for two reasons – it’s too long winded, and I’d prefer to drop the ‘New Zealand’ part. “

                That is one post on your blog that I’d visit your site to read.

                Make sure that you post the link here when you finish.

              • marty mars …
                18 January 2015 at 9:27 am

                I agree pete – I’d get rid of the NZ bit and sorry to those who will bring up the wars and so on – in the same way if it was me I’d revert back to all the original names – this will provide work (all the new signage, interpretations for each town, all the new paperwork) for many, a sense of history for many as they argue left, right and centre, it will get people into politics as again their true colours come out as we have seen with the big ‘h’ in Whanganui, it will create tourism as this could be a big campaign to bring people over – ecocultural tourism is popular, it will create slightly more equality as tangata whenua see their language out their more and their stories and history, it will create better relationships between people as the pronunciation is discussed, corrected and complimented, and so on and I good carry on for quite a while with the benefits.

                • Pete George …
                  18 January 2015 at 9:43 am

                  And I largely agree with that, except that I don’t think all names need to change, like when there’s no significant history of a local name or when a new name is more appropriate. For example I think names like Auckland or Dunedin represent something specifically modern and different to various localities and landmarks within them (like Maungakiekie / One Tree Hill which should at least have a dual name).

                  Original/local names generally mean more to me than many of the changed names, for example (Mount) Taranaki is appropriate, and John Perceval, 2nd Earl of Egmont means nothing to me.

                  Mt Cook and Aoraki have a stronger case to retain dual names due to the historical significance of both.

        • Rawsharkosaurus 7.2.1.2
          17 January 2015 at 1:05 pm

          Phrases are not required to follow any due process whatsoever.

  8. Draco T Bastard 8
    17 January 2015 at 9:00 am

    How Austerity Economics Turned Europe Into the Hunger Games

    A nasty strain of austerity capitalism has taken over Europe, leaving broken lives in its wake. Researchers Servaas Storm and C.W.M. Naastepad, senior lecturers in economics at Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands, consider how things got so bad, what role economists and misguided policy-makers have played, and how to change course. According to them, most everybody is getting the story about Europe dead wrong. In the following interview, they discuss findings which show that when countries try to compete with each other by lowering wages and slashing the social safety net, the costs are high both economically and socially. Cooperative and regulated capitalism, they argue, is a far better path.

    And NZ follows the same path of competition driving living standards down for the majority and increasing poverty all in the hope that some rich people will come here to get richer.

  9. phillip ure 9
    17 January 2015 at 9:06 am

    a new favourite word..

    “..It’s time to dust off the word weltschmerz..

    ..Unlike angst or ennui – weltschmerz springs precisely from seeing that things could and should be better..”

    (cont..)

    http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2015/jan/16/time-dust-off-word-weltschmerz

  10. Jepenseque 10
    17 January 2015 at 9:18 am

    Hi all, a right leaning voter here and have generally enjoyed reading the standard to get the opposing view.

    Things have gone downhill here recently can I say..

    A few problems:

    1. Overwhelming focus on and hatred of John Key.

    2. Growing rise of conspiracy theories.

    3. Lack of discussion of an alternative vision and more importantly, an alternative plan.

    I know the authors are diverse in viewpoints and backgrounds but maybe there could be more structure on the raison d’etre of the site. What exactly is the outcome you as a group of contributors can agree on?

    The best blog in NZ right now is transport blog. Clear, expert, campaigning but not shrill. Has influence. Respected.

    Cheers

    • tc 10.1
      17 January 2015 at 9:33 am

      Thanks for calling.

    • Kevin 10.2
      17 January 2015 at 9:51 am

      It’s Open Mic, people can talk about whatever takes their fancy, within reason. Would you prefer that it was censored?

    • Colonial Rawshark 10.3
      17 January 2015 at 10:12 am

      3. Lack of discussion of an alternative vision and more importantly, an alternative plan.

      Jepenseque, I agree with you that this is something that we at The Standard need to put some more focus on.

      As for the hating John Key bit…that’s a fair enough comment as well. Even if he were gone, some other little ***t would simply replace him and the system would remain unchanged.

      As for the “conspiracy theories” – well, just occasionally they end up being proven as conspiracy facts.

      Thanks for your comments.

      • Bill 10.3.1
        17 January 2015 at 11:15 am

        There are conspiracies and denial and lying and mis-directing and so on (municipal public transport, Tonkin, Peatl Harbour etc)…then there is the utter fucking waste of space and time of conspiracy theories (boston, hedbo, 9/11 etc) .

        • Colonial Rawshark 10.3.1.1
          17 January 2015 at 11:22 am

          Boston was likely incompetence on behalf of the security and surveillance state, who knew about those perps, had been warned about them, had spoken to them before.

          Ditto Charlie Hebdo.

          So even though it may not be “conspiracy” per se, I would say that “conspiracy to cover-ass” is a definite.

          • Bill 10.3.1.1.1
            17 January 2015 at 11:51 am

            Nah. You don’t so much ‘conspire’ to cover your arse – it’s all done on the hoof and in the hope that it doesn’t unravel. And sure, there’ll a wee bit of ensuring everyone is on the same page…that stories are straight..

            Anyway, I have no problem in entertaining the idea that authorities knew in a general sense that something was on the cards pre-9/11. I also have no problem accepting the possibility they may have chosen to let things play out for very cynical self serving reasons…and then got a fuck of a shock.

            And I have no problem entertaining the possibility that some random, known and dangerous individuals are allowed to roam on the off-chance they act out and provide propaganda opportunities for increasing surveillance etc.

            I also have no doubt that fragile individuals have been groomed and entrapped by security agencies desperate to justify their powers and actions. (There was an intelligent and thorough article I read a year or so back that broke down the ‘terrorist arrests’ in the US and that basically pointed to this happening on a fairly regular basis. If I ever find it again….)

            I guess what I’m getting at is that duplicitous, amoral bastards seeking to use their power to game situations and the aftermath of given events is not the same..isn’t even close…to the bullshit and nonsense people build conspiracy theories on.

            Just as a side note – I can’t be the only one who notices a certain use of language (patterns) in the writing of conspiracy theorists, am I? 😉

            • Colonial Rawshark 10.3.1.1.1.1
              17 January 2015 at 11:53 am

              Well at the least, would you agree that there was a conspiracy at the highest levels of US government to use the 9/11 event to justify the Iraq war and regime change Saddam Hussein, objectives which had absolutely nothing to do with the WTC attacks, Al Qaeda or Osama Bin Laden.

              • Bill …
                17 January 2015 at 12:10 pm

                Like I said “duplicitous, amoral bastards seeking to use their power to game situations and the aftermath of given events is not the same (as)…”

                And all that energy that went into, and that still goes into, trying to convince people of “the real” reasons behind the collapse of the Twin Towers, is all that energy and focus ignoring the very real shenanigans of Bush, Blair, the intelligence agencies and the whole ‘coalition of the willing’ or whatever in the aftermath of 9/11 and the on-going, slow creep ‘lock-down’ that’s in progress.

                After-thought. In 30s Germany, how much success of the National Socialists can reasonably be attributed to people simply not caring very much and seeing a degree of justification to all the anti-semite bullshit? (Not that they themselves were anti-semitic of course!) 😉

                I guess I’m wondering because it seems that most people in NZ don’t really care these days, and apologists of various degrees for anti-Islamic bullshit are ten a penny.

                • Colonial Rawshark …
                  17 January 2015 at 12:18 pm

                  If your Auckland investment property went up in value $40K last year, and you just bought yourself a 60″ curved screen UHD TV for three grand on special, life is too good to worry about such minor details.

              • Te Reo Putake …
                17 January 2015 at 12:15 pm

                That’s not a conspiracy, sadly, it’s just the normal workings of Government. Piss poor though it was, it was out in the open. And while it was clearly wrong and based on bullshit intelligence, (40 minutes, my hairy arse!) it was debated in the various houses, senates and parliaments of the countries involved and agreed to in public. Far from being a conspiracy, it was widely publicised, debated and opposed on the street by tens of thousands of people.

                It was wrong, but it was a very public wrong.

            • Murray Rawshark 10.3.1.1.1.2
              17 January 2015 at 5:14 pm

              +1 Bill. That’s pretty much my take on the whole business.

              I think certain people almost need conspiracies so they can feel important with their special knowledge. It’s a surrender to the alienation of capitalism. It is very easy to see how superior some of the truthers feel right here on this blog.

            • gsays 10.3.1.1.1.3
              17 January 2015 at 8:24 pm

              gday bill,
              from what i understand, for people who dont accept the official line about 12/9, there are two groups, mihop and lihop.
              made it happen on purpose and let it happen on purpose.

              from that comment i take it you are of the latter.
              personally i was mihop but am finding myself more lihop.

              is it a modern thing to view those who swallow the official line ref 12/9 as the real conspiracy folk?

      • greywarshark 10.3.2
        17 January 2015 at 1:26 pm

        CR
        Well put and with such dignity and rationality too. See RW troles, what a good example we set. Dignified. Listend to. Respected. Can’t be ignored. Determined. Progressive. Committed. Incisive.

    • weka 10.4
      17 January 2015 at 10:21 am

      “Things have gone downhill here recently can I say..”

      People have been saying this for a long time.

    • weka 10.5
      17 January 2015 at 10:48 am

      “Clear, expert, campaigning but not shrill. Has influence. Respected.”

      And yet the standard’s readership numbers have been increasing for years. It’s got respect, just not from the establishment.

      • Jepenseque 10.5.1
        17 January 2015 at 1:18 pm

        Fair call I wasn’t aware of the readership being so strong.

        My post came out of my dwindling appreciation of the content here vis a vis the transport blog for example where there is a clear agenda, well researched in depth discussion and argument and a more reasonable tone.

        This blog I think has a very much “opposition” focus it seems. Rather than a more pro-active what do we want to change and how are we actually going to do it approach.

        Cheers

        • weka 10.5.1.1
          17 January 2015 at 4:16 pm

          I’d also like to see something more proactive, but part of the core reason for the standard’s success is that it organises fairly anarchicly and authors are free to write about what they want when they want. To achieve what you suggest would require them organising differently and that would fundamentally change the place. I’m not sure it’s worth the risk to be honest.

          What could happen is for new people to step up and write posts that are proactive and facilitate strategies for change. This could also happen in the comments. No-one (myself included) is able or willing to do that thus far.

    • Stephanie Rodgers 10.6
      17 January 2015 at 11:48 am

      1. Overwhelming focus on and hatred of John Key.

      In the past week I count:

      8 Open Mike posts.

      3 posts about John Key, none of which I would describe as “hateful” – one about his text messages, one about the media’s fixation with his family, and one reprinting a cartoon from that terrible left-wing rag, the Herald.

      19 posts about not-John-Key.

      … so to be honest, I find your arguments lacking substance.

      • Jepenseque 10.6.1
        17 January 2015 at 1:21 pm

        Stephanie your most recent post on this site is about the ground breaking issue of John Key’s texts.

        Cheers

        • Stephanie Rodgers 10.6.1.1
          17 January 2015 at 4:52 pm

          You’re shifting the goalposts. You clearly said there is “an overwhelming focus on and hatred of John Key”. Simply posting about John Key – on a newsworthy issue of the day which calls into question serious topics like freedom of information and transparency in government – is neither “overwhelming” nor “hatred”.

          The fact you have nothing to offer except “you wrote one post about an issue I don’t care about” further confirms to me that your ~friendly advice~ about the direction of The Standard is insincere and lacking credibility.

          • Jepenseque 10.6.1.1.3
            18 January 2015 at 9:49 am

            Not really I just thought your comment was ironic given your most recent post.

            As to the numbers:

            I count 64 posts tagged john key in last couple of months vs 16 for Andrew little (at a time when he has just become leader)

            Hatred might be a bit strong in retrospect (and wasn’t thinking of your posts in particular definitely). But there is definitely a current of virulent opposition, unpleasent feeling towards him. I just think it doesn’t actually get you where you want to go.

            Cheers

    • Clemgeopin 10.7
      17 January 2015 at 12:23 pm

      3. Lack of discussion of an alternative vision and more importantly, an alternative plan

      Let us hear your own alternative vision and an alternate plan, if you have one. Do you?

    • Truth Will Out 10.8
      17 January 2015 at 12:40 pm

      @Jepenseque

      I visited Kiwiblog for the first time ever yesterday.

      Filled with spiteful, hateful, vindictive comments and sweeping derogatory generalisations about the citizens of this country.

      Clearly right wing then.

      Never visited Whaleoil either.

      No need to.

      The media coverage about Cameron Slater alone is enough to induce vomiting.

      And then there is his relationship with the Prime Minister, and vice versa.

      Like attracts like.

      Clearly even psychopaths and sociopaths can like each other, or at least mutually agree to admire each other’s spitefulness and contempt for other members of the human species.

      Dirty Politics simply removed the mask John Key wears, revealing the precious, narcissistic, vindictive, spiteful little git that he is.

      As well as his obvious allergy to criticism.

      It also revealed how low his supporters are willing to sink in order to defend and protect the object of their obvious desire.

      It also occurred to me that a journalist should just do the obvious, which is to phone Cameron Slater’s mother up and ask her what she thinks of her son’s attitude and behaviour.

      If she approves of it then we will all know that insanity runs in their family.

      If she refuses to comment it would be rather funny.

      Either way, it would be an interesting exercise, yet another knife through the heart of darkness which is increasingly rearing it’s ugly head among right wing people in this country.

      And the funny thing about the term “conspiracy theories” is that Richard Nixon never knew just how much John Key was going to resemble him decades later, after he coined the term to discredit his accusers.

      I can’t describe how delicious it feels to be watching you clowns increasingly running out of corners to hide in as the chickens of your self interest come home to roost, everywhere we look these days.

      • Murray Rawshark 10.8.1
        17 January 2015 at 5:23 pm

        If Whalespew’s mother answered it would be weird. You’ve missed the truth on this one.

        • alwyn 10.8.1.1
          17 January 2015 at 5:45 pm

          Perhaps he thinks that the Herald reporters get their stories through the use of a Ouija board?
          On second thoughts, after looking at today’s stories, I think they do.

          • ropata:rorschach 10.8.1.1.1
            17 January 2015 at 9:55 pm

            Does Cameron Slater have a mother? I thought he emerged from the slimy Orc-pits of Mt. Eden, called forth at the bidding of Dark Mistress J’Collins.

            Together they plot the return of the Great Old Ones, and their quest has left one-proud journalists gibbering insanely as they read Slater’s obscene manuscripts of forbidden lore.

    • Molly 10.9
      18 January 2015 at 9:41 am

      Went to a Generation Zero presentation a couple of years ago when a student stood up and asked Patrick Reynolds about what to do when discussing the politics around the lack of long-term sustainable transport planning. I remember distinctly the slight tang of superciliousness in his reply (which I can’t remember completely but here is the gist): “What to say when talking about the politics? You shouldn’t be talking about politics at all. Just make your arguments clear. I make sure that posts are systematically written so that arguments against it can be easily dismissed. ”

      The student sat down embarrassed, and I thought that Patrick Reynolds – for all his astute and clear thinking on transport, would not be someone who promoted open discussion. I still enjoy his posts, but also get the sense that it promotes a discussion that wouldn’t take into account the input from those they don’t mix with. Their posts on South Auckland are few and far between and don’t have the same rigorousness applied as others – for example. And despite the large population in it, there is little advocacy for improved and alternative public transport in that area (compared to their stomping grounds).

      • Jepenseque 10.9.1
        18 January 2015 at 10:03 am

        Excellent and interesting critique. I’m not from Auckland so hadn’t picked up on the differences. Thanks for your response.

  11. Clemgeopin 11
    17 January 2015 at 10:11 am

    @ mickysavage

    ‘TV3 and more of the same’

    This article does not seem to link to the front page. Please check.

    • mickysavage 11.1
      17 January 2015 at 1:20 pm

      Hi technical problem. An earlier version went up and I have delayed it so that I can fix it. Will be up at 2.

  12. Harriet 12
    17 January 2015 at 10:42 am

    Let’s face it, if a country has to choose between two groups, the choice is obvious.

    The Jews are always in your face. You get a few Jews together and before you can do anything about it, a hospital springs up. And the schools, oy veh! One after another. And what about those little shops? All over the place. Before you know it, you have to deal with some Jewish tailor and some Jewish dentist. Disgusting.

    Whereas the Muslims. They just build mosques. And you don’t have to worry about them because you can’t go into their neighborhoods anyway.

    If you have the choice of having Jews or Muslims in your country, the Progressives have just the answer you would expect.

    Israel also perfected socialism – which is more than likely to be the reason why so many of NZ’s left hate them. They utterly failed at it.

    [Stephanie: Open Mike is a more relaxed environment, but please refer to our Policy: “We encourage robust debate and we’re tolerant of dissenting views. But this site is run for reasonably rational debate between dissenting viewpoints”. Even ~ironic~ anti-Semitism does not meet the bar of “reasonably rational”. It’s also clearly meant to start a flamewar. You’re in auto-moderation until your behaviour improves.]

    • Draco T Bastard 12.1
      17 January 2015 at 10:46 am

      Another load of ignorance and hate from Harriet.

      • Harriet 12.1.1
        17 January 2015 at 11:12 am

        Hardly.

        It was you lot who were endleesly calling for Islrael to ‘show restraint’ for having missles tossed at them daily – for 13 long years.

        I haven’t read one comment here yet that says Muslims should ‘show restraint’ for simply being ‘offended’.

        Ignorance alright.

        • Colonial Rawshark 12.1.1.1
          17 January 2015 at 11:15 am

          You’re a fool and a bigot Harriet.

          Israel used million dollar munitions and the most advanced weapon systems in the world to massacre roughly a thousand children in Palestine last year.

          They also used the massacre against Palestinians to test out and market new weapons that are being developed by the Israeli arms industry.

          Fuck off.

          • Harriet 12.1.1.1.1
            17 January 2015 at 11:28 am

            So why did the British commander in Afganistan call them the ‘most moral army in history’ ?

            Maybe it had something to do with Israel taking the expensive option – using guided weapons systems so as not to cause collateral damage.

            And also that they loaded weapons with just enough firepower to do the job and no more.

            Both actions are not called for in the Rules of War.

            ‘…fuck off…”

            Show restraint.

            • Colonial Rawshark 12.1.1.1.1.1
              17 January 2015 at 11:44 am

              Ahhhhh the shameless, grovelling Israeli child massacre apologist now has the gall to ask others to show restraint.

              Fuck you and the horse you rode in on.

              So why did the British commander in Afganistan call them the ‘most moral army in history’ ?

              Ahhh yes, the Brits would know. Not surprised that you are an apologist for them as well.

              British forces kill and abuse Afghan civilians – scores of cases

              http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/mar/29/afghanistan-british-army-crimes

              MI5 and MI6 implicated in CIA extraordinary renditions of innocents

              http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014/dec/10/british-mps-demand-inquiry-cia-abductions

              • Paul …
                17 January 2015 at 12:30 pm

                Harriet has already shown, through her lack of knowledge ( yet forthright and bullish opinions) that she lacks the expertise and wisdom to discuss issues concerning the Middle East.
                Yet to hear a retraction from her about Gallipoli yet.

                • Colonial Rawshark …
                  17 January 2015 at 12:41 pm

                  These knowing shills on the side of the power elite make my skin crawl.

                • Harriet …
                  17 January 2015 at 8:22 pm

                  “…..Yet to hear a retraction from her about Gallipoli yet….”

                  I won’t retract anything. Churchill prepared the naval bombardment as he was attached to the navy. Much later others[more than likely the ARMY] decided on a landing.

                  Lord Kitchener was the commander of all that – not Churchill.

            • North 12.1.1.1.1.2
              17 January 2015 at 11:45 am

              Harriet-Iscariot wages war on humanity, viz. everyone except Netanyahu and his enablers……..for how many successive days now ?

            • joe90 12.1.1.1.1.3
              17 January 2015 at 11:46 am

              So why did the British commander in Afganistan call them the ‘most moral army in history’ ?

              Murdering their own an action of a moral institution, fuck off.

              In one of the most decisive, shocking incidents of a brutal war, NRG reports (Hebrew) that the IDF killed three of its own soldiers after it feared they’d been captured by Hamas fighters. The incident was one in which Lt. Goldin was captured (possibly after he’d already been killed) and two of his comrades were killed. Amir Rappoport, writing for NRG, says:

              As a result of activation of the Hannibal Directive, three IDF soldiers were killed and 120 [ed., the actual number was 160] Palestinian civilians were killed from cannon fire [as a result of IDF fire that destroyed the surrounding neighborhood].

              The incident [the Hamas attack] resulted from dealing with the tunnels, during which a suspected Hamas cell emerged from one of the houses. The cell included a suicide bomber and began a battle during which three of the Givati soldiers were killed. It should be stated that in the process of attempting to stop the “kidnapping” of Hadar Goldin, the Hannibal Directive was implemented. This resulted, according to Palestinian sources, in 120 deaths, the majority of which were civilians.

              …A number of terrorists emerged from a tunnel in Rafah with the goal of “kidnapping” a soldier. At the same time, Givati troops were on patrol in the area, under the command of Maj. Benaya Sarel, attempting to locate and destroy tunnels. The force met a cell in an open area between the houses where there it had identified an open shaft. That’s where they [the Palestinian force] took the missing soldier and the same shaft from which they [originally] emerged [for their attack]. Givati forces recognized that a “kidnapping” had occurred and, according to reports, activated the Hannibal Directive, according to which the IDF lays down fire in the direction of the “kidnappers.”

              Afterward, they commenced heavy fire in that direction, which it appears struck all the fighters [both the Hamas cell and captured IDF soldiers]. Other units arrived to assist in freeing them, at which time they understood the team leader was missing.

              http://www.richardsilverstein.com/2014/08/30/idf-killed-three-of-its-own-soldiers-after-declaring-hannibal-directive/

              http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannibal_Directive

            • greywarshark 12.1.1.1.1.4
              17 January 2015 at 12:00 pm

              Why not respond to this unpleasant little trole with some agreed behaviour that is utilised in such circumstances? There could be a rule of thumb that results in such detritus getting frozen out, sent to coventry. And the discussion continuing on the points raised but ignoring the egregious RW troles that pop up.

              Otherwise the forecast practice of distracting good blogs attempting reasoned discussion and interchange is being played out in front of our eyes.

            • North 12.1.1.1.1.5
              17 January 2015 at 12:19 pm

              Israel taking the expensive option, guided missiles to avoid collateral damage, my arse ! The Gaza Strip is Collateral City – all 360 square kilometres and 1.8 million inhabitants of it. Think the patch of land Titirangi latitude across to Glendowie longtitude down short of Manukau City.

              After its ‘restrained’ biennial exercises in the murder of Gazans (each time murder 100 fold of Paris) Israel has vast change left over from the $US3,000,000,000 annual military aid it gets from the US. The murder bill might deplete a little the illegal settlements budget but it’s still virtually unlimited.

              “Show restraint…..” urges Harriet. I take it that’s a promise of no more rape talk from that one, for today at least.

            • Truth Will Out 12.1.1.1.1.6
              17 January 2015 at 12:50 pm

              Don’t be too hard on Harriet guys, her mental illness is hard enough to live with as it is.

              And that’s for everyone else, before we even think about how hard it must be for her.

              Forgive her for her psychosis.

              She’s just worried that there might be some truth in the ideas of karma and reincarnation.

              Secretly, she’s terrified that when she returns to the darkness from which she came she might end up being recycled as a Palestinian.

        • Draco T Bastard 12.1.1.2
          17 January 2015 at 11:25 pm

          It was you lot who were endleesly calling for Islrael to ‘show restraint’ for having missles tossed at them daily – for 13 long years.

          You may not have noticed but it was the Jews that invaded Palestine and have been killing Palestinians by the hundreds every year ever since.

    • weka 12.2
      17 January 2015 at 10:46 am

      “a hospital springs up”

      Arab physicians and scholars laid the basis for medical practice in Europe

      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1322233/

      You’re an idiot. And a bigoted one at that.

    • Colonial Rawshark 12.3
      17 January 2015 at 11:19 am

      Israel also perfected socialism – which is more than likely to be the reason why so many of NZ’s left hate them. They utterly failed at it.

      Israel runs a system of legalised Apartheid. The “socialism” you speak of consists of lands confiscated at gun point from Palestinians by Israeli militants in the 1930s, 1940s and 1950s.

      You really are an idiot.

    • Murray Rawshark 12.4
      17 January 2015 at 5:25 pm

      Harriet is an ignorant racist and a liar. Yuck.

  13. phillip ure 13
    17 January 2015 at 11:18 am

    (this just in..)

    “..Major Health Study: Long-Time Pot Smokers Face Little Damage to Their Lungs..

    ..Some coughing maybe; but serious issues – no..”

    (cont..)

    http://www.alternet.org/drugs/pot-not-bad-your-lungs

  14. Philip Ferguson 14
    17 January 2015 at 11:56 am

    Andrew Little advertising for new press secretary; veteran working class activist Don Franks takes a look:

    Labour Party leader Andrew Little is advertising for a new chief press secretary to head his party’s media and communications strategy.

    A nice well paid office job here for somebody, but there’s a catch. The successful applicant is expected to ensure Little appears “in a positive story on the 6pm news at least twice a week”.

    At first glance that might seem a tough assignment.

    Most TV news is about disaster and the positive stuff rarely involves parliamentary politics.

    At the best of times parliamentary politics is unattractive, and these are not Labour’s best of times.

    Andrew Little leads a parliamentary party which wants to become the government without worrying any business interests. That means making no substantial promises to ecologists, low-paid workers, welfare beneficiaries, low decile schools, depressed rural regions, public hospitals or gang members. Getting close to a majority of the population.

    That’s the difficulty of the job, but there is some upside. Full at: Labour Party leader Andrew Little is advertising for a new chief press secretary to head his party’s media and communications strategy.

    Full at: https://rdln.wordpress.com/2015/01/16/andrew-little-is-a-cake-of-soap/

    Phil

    [Stephanie: Edited to remove duplicate quotes. It’s not necessary to dump a massive excerpt when linking to an offsite article.]

  15. Philip Ferguson 15
    17 January 2015 at 12:07 pm

    Whatever did happen to workers resistance?
    https://rdln.wordpress.com/2015/01/17/whatever-happened-to-workers-resistance/

    And how do we start to turn things around?

    Phil

    • Te Reo Putake 15.1
      17 January 2015 at 12:20 pm

      Great article, Philip. I agree that the change began earlier than the eighties, though 84 was clearly a benchmark of sorts.

      For mine, I would say we have had a generational change where insecurity of work and the end of the social contract are the new normal. The social consensus that guided us post war was essentially small ‘s’ socialist. The current default is look after No1.

  16. greywarshark 16
    17 January 2015 at 12:08 pm

    Prosecutors said Cairns lied under oath when he said he had never cheated at cricket or contemplated doing so.

    This is Radionz news. How can it be part of a legal charge that someone thought or not about something that was illegal? How can thinking, whether that thought is spoken or written or not, be something that can be illegal or included in a legal challenge?

    Our whole moral system is based on thinking what is right or wrong, knowing what is legal or illegal. Contemplating behaviours is necessary to understanding what they are and comprehending their rightness or not. It used to be illegal to use certain swear words in NZ, and also illegal to transport documents containing such words in our postal system making it hard to mount a defence. It sounds as if this type of stupidity and rigidity is raising its head in the UK.
    http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/world/263857/chris-cairns-pleads-not-guilty-to-perjury

    • Te Reo Putake 16.1
      17 January 2015 at 12:39 pm

      It’s been a legal concept forever, gs. The lack of a guilty mind is also a defence, so it cuts both ways.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mens_rea

      edit: ‘contemplating’ also includes discussing with others, which I guess the witnesses for the prosecution are going to say happened.

      Personally, I really hope he’s not guilty.

      • greywarshark 16.1.1
        17 January 2015 at 4:46 pm

        If only the person knows what they have thought then it is a specious charge because that is their business and they can lie about it. And there is no real way of finding out the truth I believe. Lie detectors were not the great aid to crime solving, I understand. The mere thought of being given a test would elevate my blood pressure and all sorts of anxiety.

        And it seems that this is the thinking that led to the Tuhoe raid. Wild talk, talk of doing something violent eavesdropped by the police, excuse for descending en masse by the Force. Not what I consider respect for privacy or the individual or the rule of law as I understand it.

        • Te Reo Putake 16.1.1.1
          17 January 2015 at 5:08 pm

          You may be missing the point, gs. It’s not about guessing what a person thought. Contemplation can be expressed. In fact we are contemplating the possibilities right now!

          Cairns said in his libel trial that he “never cheated at cricket and would never contemplate doing so”. That’s a direct quote.

          The prosecution have witnesses (including Brendan McCullum apparently) who are going to say that Cairns did in fact contemplate cheating. Presumably, they are going to say that the contemplation took the form of discussions about cheating, how and when to do it and what the payoff would be. Even if the cheating never happened, they are going to say he lied when he said he never contemplated doing it.

          Even worse will be the testimony of Lou Vincent, if it is believed. He has apparently named the ringleader amongst the players. Not hard to guess what name he has put forward, eh. Mind you, as an admitted cheat, he doesn’t have much credibility.

          But if any contrary testimony is accepted, even just talking about the possibility of cheating, then Cairns lied in the libel case. And committed perjury.

    • Murray Rawshark 16.2
      17 January 2015 at 5:34 pm

      The charge is perjury, not contemplating cheating. The thoughts are not illegal, but lying about them under oath is, despite the fact that 99% of poaka who give evidence tell porkies. Still, unless there are witnesses with whom Cairns discussed his cheating thoughts, I imagine it would be a hard case to prove.

  17. weka 17
    17 January 2015 at 1:10 pm

    Abortion data handed out by mistake,

    A privacy breach blunder has resulted in personal details of more than 600 females, some as young as 13, who had abortions in the central North Island being given to a reporter.

    The data was mistakenly released by a junior staff member at the Lakes District Health Board who was assisting on an official information request made by the newspaper.

    The medical information includes dates of birth, National Health Index numbers, ethnic descriptions, termination details and the suburb in the town where the women live.

    The Ministry of Health is investigating and the health board has apologised for the breach.

    Lakes DHB chief executive Ron Dunham said it was deeply disappointing that an Excel document containing coded patient information was handed to the reporter.

    “Although the women cannot be identified by the coded information released we are taking the situation seriously,” he said.

    hmm, well the NHI number identifies the person.

    Trying to imagine why they had created that spreadsheet in the first place.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/65138103/Abortion-data-handed-out-by-mistake

    • Colonial Rawshark 17.1
      17 January 2015 at 1:24 pm

      Trying to imagine why they had created that spreadsheet in the first place.

      statistical/epidemiological analysis consolidating data reporting from different clinical centres would be my guess.

      • weka 17.1.1
        17 January 2015 at 2:33 pm

        why the NHI numbers then?

        • Colonial Rawshark 17.1.1.1
          17 January 2015 at 2:42 pm

          I presume to track if a person has had multiple abortions across multiple centres, and to cross reference what other health services that person has used.

          • weka 17.1.1.1.1
            17 January 2015 at 3:51 pm

            why?

            • Colonial Rawshark 17.1.1.1.1.1
              17 January 2015 at 4:07 pm

              The answers to that question are probably pretty self evident, but targeting of health information and identification of high use individuals and their characteristics would likely be among them.

              • weka …
                17 January 2015 at 4:11 pm

                If they were self evident I wouldn’t have asked CV.

                Still don’t see how they need the NHI numbers. How would they be targeting such information based on NHI?

                Why would they need to identify high use indiviudals?

                • b waghorn …
                  17 January 2015 at 8:31 pm

                  “Why would they need to identify high use indiviudals?”
                  Could be they want to try to identity trends so they can work out how to lessen the number of abortions or possible budget for providing the service.

                • Colonial Rawshark …
                  17 January 2015 at 8:40 pm

                  I pointed out that there are useful statistical and clinical research which can be done with this data. Sorry I don’t have anything else to add at this point.

                  Why don’t you state your main concerns and then maybe we can discuss that.

                  • weka …
                    17 January 2015 at 11:00 pm

                    Privacy and consent issues. I can’t see why the NHI numbers would be needed for stats on service use etc. If as you say they want to track individuals, that’s serious shit for a DHB to be involved in.

                    It also means that there is a very wide spread of who can access information about who has an abortion (or presumably any medical procedure).

                    • Colonial Rawshark …
                      17 January 2015 at 11:32 pm

                      As McFlock has pointed out, there are possibly serious training/management/systems failures involved here.

                      It also means that there is a very wide spread of who can access information about who has an abortion (or presumably any medical procedure).

                      In some ways, although “very wide spread” is somewhat of an exaggeration as you will need to be in particular offices and particular roles to have access.

                    • weka …
                      17 January 2015 at 11:36 pm

                      Wide spread… I was referring to your suggestion that NHIs were necessary for stats. If they were that accessible then access would be being given to admin departments. That shouldn’t be happening (and from what McFlock says below, it’s not).

                      NHI numbers are used very liberally, so it’s up to the systems to protect privacy. I think in many instances it’s left to the individuals with access, which means in situations like this mistakes can be made.

                    • Sacha …
                      17 January 2015 at 11:36 pm

                      The NHI numbergives access to other details like ethnicity and location. Not meant to be left in publicly-released information sets though. Disciplinary action likely.

                    • McFlock …
                      17 January 2015 at 11:44 pm

                      Funnily enough, I think it’s possibly a case where moving to national data integration would solve a lot of these issues.
                      I’m not sure why exactly a junior staffer needs access to individual information – it’s easy enough to restrict their access to aggregate queries. And that level of access control would be applied compulsorily and uniformly across the nation with required authorisation levels to get an individual’s information to the emergency room. And one fuckup with DHB A can be patched across all DHBs at once.

                      Rather leaving each dhb to get with the program depending on how much money they want to give IT that year.

                    • weka …
                      17 January 2015 at 11:53 pm

                      “The NHI numbergives access to other details like ethnicity and location. Not meant to be left in publicly-released information sets though. Disciplinary action likely.”

                      Yes, the issue of the release. But I brought up the other issue of the NHI number being used in such a way. McFlock says it’s encrypted for researchers, are you saying it’s not?

                    • weka …
                      18 January 2015 at 12:00 am

                      “Rather leaving each dhb to get with the program depending on how much money they want to give IT that year.”

                      I get this theoretically, but unfortunately I trust national systems even less (being a WINZ client esp). We are losing a lot of privacy rights via tech systems and we don’t even realise it. I think WINZ are on a national system now, and because all documents must be scanned into the computer this means any case manager in NZ can access them. Not sure about the call centre or other office staff. Given the MSD’s ineptitude around IT, and the govt’s open contempt for beneficiaries, I have little faith that protections are being built in or that teh system isn’t being abused or people’s right’s neglected.

                      The health system will treat its patients better, but there is still this idea that people within the system can be trusted therefore you don’t have to build the protections in. Works until it doesn’t, as this case today shows.

                    • McFlock …
                      18 January 2015 at 12:03 am

                      @weka
                      might be different ends of the same branch: if Sacha has worked in a DHB and I had worked in a research unit, Sacha might routinely work with NHI data and I would have only been allowed the encrypted NHI data at most.

                    • weka …
                      18 January 2015 at 12:06 am

                      ok, got that below too. So we still don’t know in what ways the NHIs are attached to data and why.

                    • McFlock …
                      18 January 2015 at 12:14 am

                      yeah that is the flipside of national IT systems, like when the cops did an audit of who accessed case files and disciplined a few cops who’d looked up high-profile cases they’d had nothing to do with.

                      Or, indeed, Snowden/Manning.

                      I’ve had some ideas on the matter over the years, especially in cases that meet a threshold requiring higher authority sign-off, but it’snot really my department. My impression is that there’s so much tech disparity across dhbs that we’re nowhere near it yet.

                    • McFlock …
                      18 January 2015 at 12:26 am

                      NHIs are the unique identifier for individuals in the MoH database. So we know that Joe Blogs born 7 feb in lakes dhb (NHI6655) is not the same as joe blogs born 7 feb in lakes (NHI6656).

                      Sometimes the treatment rates (i.e. load on DHB resources) are larger than the numbers of individuals receiving that treatment – dialysis for example.

                      A researcher has no need for name or even NHI, but they still might need to identify recurring admissions, so “NHI6656” gets flipped to “erkjgfqe8947tr249gtwj” or something.

                    • Sacha …
                      18 January 2015 at 10:05 am

                      Administrative use of data is handled differently than research use, yes. The datasets are typically smaller and narrower, but in either case the NHI is the only common key. You can however use it to shape the data to extract and then either encrypt or remove it from the results before they are analysed and shared.

                      Some well-publicised cases of deliberate breaches of access by DHB staff in the last couple of years resulted in firings, but this one could be a more innocent training or management issue.

                      Better health IT systems can increase rather than reduce privacy – but only if they are designed and governed properly. Ongoing training, audit and enforcement of ethical obligations is the challenge. NZ has some good technical standards, but is lacking in the human and organisational factors that are crucial for success.

                      I have officially advised the National Health IT Board on some of those matters, and they have chosen what to hear and what to ignore. It’s a highly politicised space. We had an interesting session on this stuff at Internet NZ’s 2014 Nethui conference in Auckland but I can’t see it online anywhere.

      • McFlock 17.1.2
        17 January 2015 at 8:44 pm

        Not so sure on that:

        The data was mistakenly released by a junior staff member at the Lakes District Health Board who was assisting on an official information request made by the newspaper.

        My guess is that it’s a database export (i.e. the db they use for logistics, planning, and maybe even physician/resource allocation for dhb departments and theatres) as a response to a query along the lines of “how many abortions in Lakes DHB in time-period X?”, and the staff member hadn’t run it by a superior. Still gobsmacking that the staffer hadn’t been drilled in confidentiality, though. Should be the first thing you’re told, with extreme emphasis, as soon as you’re in the door and before you find out what the printer code is.

        • weka 17.1.2.1
          17 January 2015 at 10:56 pm

          Would it be normal for the NHI number to be on such an export though? You don’t need that piece of info to work with stats on abortion numbers.

          • McFlock 17.1.2.1.1
            17 January 2015 at 11:25 pm

            shit no.
            MoH does encrypted NHIs for researchers who might need to look at multiple admissions for individuals in a particular dataset (or exclude multiple admissions), but the unencrypted NHI is the bit that appears on correspondence with the patient’s name.

            But if the staffer had complete access to a records database, they might have dragged the wrong field down when selecting what they want to export to excel. But even then, individual records would be withheld from media in place of totals according to the requested demographic cuts, if those cuts could not conceivably identify an individual.

            Personally, I’d consider (with a manager making the final call on exactly what data is releasable) doing totals for ages <16, 16-18, 18-24. 25-29, 30-34, 35-39, and 40+. Then totals for ethnicity, maybe town depending on population size.

            But really the request should probably have gone through the DHB comms unit to the planning unit, who would have then fired it back to comms according to the criteria of doable and legal/confidential (and whether they should charge money), and comms packages it and deals with the reporter.
            It seems odd that a junior staffer would be dealing directly with media.

            Oh, the example that comes to mind was the air crash in california, and the TV station got a report that the crew were named “sum Ting Wong”, “Wi Tu Lo”, “Ho Lee Fuk”, and “Bang Ding Ow”. They said that NTSB had confirmed the names, and it turns out they’d spoken to an intern who was then hiffed for the mistake.

            • weka 17.1.2.1.1.1
              17 January 2015 at 11:33 pm

              “MoH does encrypted NHIs for researchers who might need to look at multiple admissions for individuals in a particular dataset (or exclude multiple admissions), but the unencrypted NHI is the bit that appears on correspondence with the patient’s name.”

              Thanks, that’s what I would expect, but there’s so much weird shit happening with personal information now so it’s hard to know what systems are being developped.

              • McFlock …
                17 January 2015 at 11:50 pm

                My understanding (haven’t dealt with them personally, know researchers who have) is that the national Abortion Supervisory Committee is that getting data off them requires exhaustive ethics approvals, lots of signatures about confidentiality under threat of prison, and still wouldn’t get down to individual levels.

                They’ll probably have something to say to Lakes DHB next week.

                • weka …
                  18 January 2015 at 12:05 am

                  ok, that’s external reserachers. What about internal stats people? DHB wants to know how many abortions happened in 2014, by age, ethnicity, area, type of proceedure, complications etc. No need for the NHI numbers right?

                  • McFlock …
                    18 January 2015 at 12:35 am

                    Depends on the information being requested – they might want number of abortions, or maybe they want number of women receiving an abortion. But I wouldn’t expect junior staffers to have access to data that full-on.

                    Back in the day, one unit I was with was doing an different stats job for another contract we took on – I didn’t have access to their data, as the file was was encrypted on a server that was encrypted and I didn’t have access to.

    • McFlock 17.2
      17 January 2015 at 8:32 pm

      Someone should be fired for that. Possibly multiple people.

      • b waghorn 17.2.1
        17 January 2015 at 8:38 pm

        You never pushed the wrong key at work? Or left the wrong gate open on the farm? Put the washing out only for it to rain? Shit happens sometimes.

        • McFlock 17.2.1.1
          17 January 2015 at 8:54 pm

          Of course I have.

          But my stumpy fingers sending a “frank” email to a group rather than my mate is not in the same league as, e.g., a nuclear engineer stuffing the coolant system and causing a meltdown.

          And in this case, confidentiality is what might be termed a “mission critical” function. Failure to maintain confidentiality of medical records should be regarded as possible gross misconduct. Especially with abortion data, some of the most sensitive of all health records.

          • b waghorn 17.2.1.1.1
            17 January 2015 at 9:02 pm

            Yes it is a cock up but calling for multiple people to be sacked? If they have form then maybe demote or shift to a less sensitive area other than that a bloody stern talking to should suffice.

            • McFlock 17.2.1.1.1.1
              17 January 2015 at 9:32 pm

              Nope.
              This is serious. The only way to keep those services accessible to patients is to ensure confidentiality.

              Let me put it this way: if the importance of maintaining patient confidentiality was not explained to the degree that breaking confidentiality was not clearly gross misconduct to the staff member, then that is a management failure serious enough to be misconduct by the management.

              • weka …
                17 January 2015 at 11:02 pm

                I agree. We’re getting really bloody slack around this in NZ and mistakes should have serious consequences, including up the line.

                However, the issue also remains about why the personally identifying data is being used in this way.

                • Draco T Bastard …
                  17 January 2015 at 11:05 pm

                  It certainly has something to do with being slack but it’s mostly to do with being bloody cheap and not getting the proper tools.

                  • weka …
                    17 January 2015 at 11:21 pm

                    I was thinking that, the slackness is because we’re not using technology well (rather than just giving up on ethics, although with Ministers like Paula Bennett it’s hard to tell). Not putting good systems in place, and not keeping up systems/ethics with tech.

      • Draco T Bastard 17.2.2
        17 January 2015 at 11:03 pm

        Yep. The person who authorised using MS Office for such critical files instead of getting proper software that wouldn’t even allow such information to be sent via email.

        • McFlock 17.2.2.1
          17 January 2015 at 11:32 pm

          I doubt msexcel is the tool of choice – it might have been the format requested by the reporter.

          The issue is choosing to give that information to the reporter.

          • Sacha 17.2.2.1.1
            17 January 2015 at 11:44 pm

            Excel would be the only tool provided to a junior staff member in a small DHB.

            • McFlock 17.2.2.1.1.1
              17 January 2015 at 11:58 pm

              [facepalm]
              If that’s true, I have visions of shared drives full of excel files named “admissions 2006.xlsx”, “deaths 2006.xlsx”, and so on, all with NHI, home address, names, etc.

              And usr/pwd post-its on monitors.

              Sigh.

    • Colonial Rawshark 19.1
      17 January 2015 at 3:46 pm

      Hedges is such a remarkable and clear moral voice. Thanks for the link.

    • Colonial Rawshark 19.2
      17 January 2015 at 3:47 pm

      The evil of predatory global capitalism and empire has spawned the evil of terrorism. And rather than understand the roots of that rage and attempt to ameliorate it, we have built sophisticated mechanisms of security and surveillance, passed laws that permit the targeted assassinations and torture of the weak, and amassed modern armies and the machines of industrial warfare to dominate the world by force. This is not about justice. It is not about the war on terror. It is not about liberty or democracy. It is not about the freedom of expression. It is about the mad scramble by the privileged to survive at the expense of the poor. And the poor know it.

  20. joe90 20
    17 January 2015 at 3:26 pm

    NOAA Summary Information – December 2014

    Global highlights: Calendar Year 2014

    For extended analysis of global climate patterns, please see our full Annual report.

    • During 2014, the average temperature across global land and ocean surfaces was 1.24°F (0.69°C) above the 20th century average. This was the highest among all 135 years in the 1880-2014 record, surpassing the previous records of 2005 and 2010 by 0.07°F (0.04°C).
    • Record warmth was spread around the world, including Far East Russia into western Alaska, the western United States, parts of interior South America, most of Europe stretching into northern Africa, parts of eastern and western coastal Australia, much of the northeastern Pacific around the Gulf of Alaska, the central to western equatorial Pacific, large swaths of northwestern and southeastern Atlantic, most of the Norwegian Sea, and parts of the central to southern Indian Ocean.
    • During 2014, the globally-averaged land surface temperature was 1.80°F (1.00°C) above the 20th century average. This was the fourth highest among all years in the 1880-2014 record.
    • During 2014, the globally-averaged sea surface temperature was 1.03°F (0.57°C) above the 20th century average. This was the highest among all years in the 1880-2014 record, surpassing the previous records of 1998 and 2003 by 0.09°F (0.05°C).
    • Looking above Earth’s surface at certain layers of the atmosphere, two different analyses examined NOAA satellite-based data records for the lower and middle troposphere and the lower stratosphere.
    • The 2014 temperature for the lower troposphere (roughly the lowest five miles of the atmosphere) was third highest in the 1979-2014 record, at 0.50°F (0.28°C) above the 1981-2010 average, as analyzed by the University of Alabama Huntsville (UAH), and sixth highest on record, at 0.29°F (0.16°C) above the 1981-2010 average, as analyzed by Remote Sensing Systems (RSS).
    • The 2014 temperature for the mid-troposphere (roughly two miles to six miles above the surface) was third highest in the 1979-2014 record, at 0.32°F (0.18°C) above the 1981-2010 average, as analyzed by UAH, and sixth highest on record, at 0.25°F (0.14°C) above the 1981-2010 average, as analyzed by RSS.
    • The temperature for the lower stratosphere (roughly 10 miles to 13 miles above the surface) was 13th lowest in the 1979-2014 record, at 0.56°F (0.31°C) below the 1981-2010 average, as analyzed by UAH, and also 13th lowest on record, at 0.41°F (0.23°C) below the 1981-2010 average, as analyzed by RSS. The stratospheric temperature is decreasing on average while the lower and middle troposphere temperatures are increasing on average, consistent with expectations in a greenhouse-warmed world.
    • According to data from NOAA analyzed by the Rutgers Global Snow Lab, the average annual Northern Hemisphere snow cover extent during 2014 was 24.95 million square miles, and near the middle of the historical record. The first half of 2014 saw generally below-normal snow cover extent, with above-average coverage later in the year.
    • Recent polar sea ice extent trends continued in 2014. The average annual sea ice extent in the Arctic was 10.99 million square miles, the sixth smallest annual value of the 36-year period of record. The annual Antarctic sea ice extent was record large for the second consecutive year, at 13.08 million square miles.

    • joe90 20.1
      17 January 2015 at 3:36 pm

      To compound the pessimism –

      A team of scientists, in a groundbreaking analysis of data from hundreds of sources, has concluded that humans are on the verge of causing unprecedented damage to the oceans and the animals living in them.“We may be sitting on a precipice of a major extinction event,” said Douglas J. McCauley, an ecologist at the University of California, Santa Barbara, and an author of the new research, which was published on Thursday in the journal Science.But there is still time to avert catastrophe, Dr. McCauley and his colleagues also found. Compared with the continents, the oceans are mostly intact, still wild enough to bounce back to ecological health.“We’re lucky in many ways,” said Malin L. Pinsky, a marine biologist at Rutgers University and another author of the new report. “The impacts are accelerating, but they’re not so bad we can’t reverse them.”

      http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/16/science/earth/study-raises-alarm-for-health-of-ocean-life.html?

      • marty mars 20.1.1
        17 January 2015 at 10:29 pm

        we are fucked and taking a lot of flora and fauna with us – funny though, I’ve got another son due to be born 5 feb – I refuse to lie down and give up – I’ll be teaching him the basics of how to live in this world of decreasing species, increasing temperatures and general slide back to the past and that means I’ll be teaching him about resilience and community and how the old ways are the new ways.

        • Colonial Rawshark 20.1.1.1
          17 January 2015 at 10:36 pm

          Exactly. Including the importance of spirituality, faith and traditions.

        • weka 20.1.1.2
          17 January 2015 at 11:04 pm

          I know this is easy to say seeing as how I don’t have kids, but I’d also be teaching them to take to the streets (not that we have that long).

        • joe90 20.1.1.3
          17 January 2015 at 11:18 pm

          Hymn works for me.

          http://youtu.be/4xjPODksI08

        • weka 20.1.1.4
          17 January 2015 at 11:28 pm

          “we are fucked and taking a lot of flora and fauna with us”

          That marine biologist thinks there is still time to change.

          Ocean Life Faces Mass Extinction, Broad Study Says

          A team of scientists, in a groundbreaking analysis of data from hundreds of sources, has concluded that humans are on the verge of causing unprecedented damage to the oceans and the animals living in them.

          thanks NYT, but it would have been good if you’d pointed out how that’s going to affect humans, because too many people are going to read that and think how sad and then just carry on as normal. Try headlining human extinction.

          This is good,

          “Fundamentally, we’re a terrestrial predator,” he said. “It’s hard for an ape to drive something in the ocean extinct.”

  21. Draco T Bastard 21
    17 January 2015 at 5:11 pm

    According to the US prosecuting war criminals is “counterproductive to the cause of peace.”

    • Murray Rawshark 21.1
      17 January 2015 at 5:42 pm

      According to the US prosecuting “our” war criminals is “counterproductive to the cause of peace.” The other side’s war criminals just get murdered.

      • Colonial Rawshark 21.1.1
        17 January 2015 at 10:05 pm

        But odd how whistleblowers revealing US war crimes do get prosecuted.

        • Draco T Bastard 21.1.1.1
          17 January 2015 at 11:00 pm

          Not odd at all once you realise that the US Administration works tirelessly to prevent their war criminals from being brought to justice.

  22. greywarshark 22
    17 January 2015 at 9:24 pm

    If ever it’s a quiet day here I’ll just put up something provocative about the Twin Towers and start the Fireworks.

    In the meantime joe90 has put up a detailed pair of ecological rports that look quite important for our near and hopefully far future. See O/m 17/1/2015 20 and 20.1.
    edited

    • weka 22.1
      17 January 2015 at 11:12 pm

      ae, fiddling while Rome burns.

      What shall we do instead?

      • greywarshark 22.1.1
        18 January 2015 at 1:25 pm

        @ Weka
        We might try to think for ourselves and ask ourselves what is the critical thing to discuss in depth, not ask me. We’re all indivduals right. It seems you are into asking searching rhetorical questions again.