Open mike 24/12/2012

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, December 24th, 2012 - 78 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

Open mike is your post. For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the link to Policy in the banner).

Step right up to the mike…

78 comments on “Open mike 24/12/2012 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Morrissey 1
    24 December 2012 at 6:54 am

    Sacha Baron Cohen on Letterman show, 15.8.09 (WARNING: It’s disgusting.)

    Imagine if there’d been vacuous TV talkshows in the Third Reich…

    August 15th, 2009

    It’s 1942. Brave little Germany is under the terrorist threat posed by 
the continued existence of the Warsaw ghetto, which all thoughtful 
analysts, journalists and comedians agree is just a terrorist scourge that has to 
be eliminated. Mein host David Leitermann’s guest tonight is a zany Nazi 
comedian who’s fooled the desperate Jewish resistance in Poland into 
granting him an interview, then used this to further the Nazi state’s 
campaign of vilification against the Jewish resistance.

    Imagine the chilling atmosphere of such an occasion. Imagine the braying of abuse, the obscene indifference to reality of the host and the murderous idiocy of the audience. Imagine laughter being elicited in the service of a totalitarian state.

    Imagine something, in other words, like the following interview, which actually took place on CBS television the other day….

    DAVID LETTERMAN: You interviewed a terrorist. 

    SACHA BARON COHEN: Yeah, I interviewed a terrorist.
    
LETTERMAN: How’d you do that? It can’t be EASY to find a terrorist! 

    BARON COHEN: Well it’s not easy to get in touch with a terrorist. Your 
government has been trying to find one for the past nine years! [turns and mugs to audience, repeatedly raising eyebrows Groucho Marx-style]
    AUDIENCE: Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! 

    LETTERMAN: Ha ha ha ha ha! You’re right! 

    AUDIENCE: Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! 

    BARON COHEN: To get in touch with the terrorist, I used a CIA contact. 

    LEITERMANN: [spluttering with laughter] Bruno has a CIA contact!?!?!? 

    AUDIENCE: Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! 

    BARON COHEN: Yes. These were really nasty terrorists, from the Al Aqsa 
Martyr’s Brigade, the world’s leading suicide bombers.
    
AUDIENCE: Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!
    
LEITERMANN: Ha ha ha ha ha! Okay, now, what’s this clip we’re going 
to see from the movie?
    
BARON COHEN: Here’s where I talk to the terrorist, and insult him, and 
he hasn’t got a CLUE what I was saying!
    
AUDIENCE: Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! 


    [Cue clip from show] 

    BRUNO: Here’s a tip, you guys should lose the beards. Your King Osama 
looks like a dirty Santa Claus! 

    CONTEMPTIBLE ARAB FALL-GUY: [to interpreter] What’s he saying?
    [End of clip]

    AUDIENCE: Ha ha ha ha ha!

    [Hearty, sustained applause, general mirthfulness]

    
LETTERMAN: Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! So funny, and so brave! Bruno 
opens this Thursday. Sacha Baron Cohen!
    
AUDIENCE: Heil! Heil! Heil!…..

    ALAN KALTER: [sotto voce] Am I the only one who’s noticed the guy’s 
unfunny?
    
PAUL SHAFFER: [sotto voce] Somebody get a can of deodorant….

    ———————————————————————————
    Get into the spirit and dutifully laugh along with Letterman and his Pavlovian audience…

    • Populuxe1 1.1
      24 December 2012 at 1:14 pm

      You do, I hope, understand that SBC is in character. Yes?

      • Morrissey 1.1.1
        24 December 2012 at 1:46 pm

        You need to look at the video of the Letterman show. He was telling the lie as Sacha Baron Cohen. That’s why he was found guilty of libel.

        • McFliper 1.1.1.1
          24 December 2012 at 2:05 pm

          really? “found guilty of libel”?
          Normally these cases are settled with no judgement. Got any eviden- lol for a moment I forgot whom I was asking.

          • Morrissey 1.1.1.1.1
            24 December 2012 at 2:32 pm

            Sorry, you’re correct, McFliper. The slanderers settled out of court.

            • McFliper 1.1.1.1.1.1
              24 December 2012 at 3:38 pm

              Was there an admission of defamation in the settlement? Links please.

              Otherwise your “found guilty” line might have taken you well within the territory of defamation, yourself.

              • Morrissey …
                24 December 2012 at 5:14 pm

                Was there an admission of defamation in the settlement?

                I’m sure the lawyers made sure that no such admission was made. Maybe the hardline Israel shill Sacha Baron Cohen decided to part with a substantial sum of money simply as a humanitarian gesture to the Christian Palestinian peace activist group he so thoroughly derided and defamed. Or perhaps it was just another example of Baron Cohen’s brilliant “irony”.

                Links please.

                There you go…
                http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/david-letterman-sacha-baron-cohen-bruno-lawsuit–352162

                Note how the Hollywood Reporter tries to minimize and distort the issue, turning it into a joke by running an accompanying feature called “18 of Hollywood’s Outrageous Entertainment Lawsuits”—as if it was a case about entertainment, rather than libel.

                Otherwise your “found guilty” line might have taken you well within the territory of defamation, yourself.

                I’ve already conceded that he wasn’t found guilty, and pointed out his humanitarian donation to the peace activist.

                Now, will that be enough to stave off the lawyers?

                • McFliper …
                  24 December 2012 at 5:48 pm

                  Nope. At legal fees of hundreds or thousands of dollars an hour, settlements are often cheaper than successfully defending a suit.

                  In case you don’t recall your assertions, this case was supposed to be evidence that SBC was a “hardline Israel shill”. Now you can’t even prove he actually defamed anyone. And if he was factually wrong, his producers and himself might have been misled into thinking the guy was a terrorist by locals eager to pick up a commission.

                  You seem to have put a lot of structural load on that wee aluminium truss.

                  • Morrissey …
                    24 December 2012 at 6:10 pm

                    Okay, he traveled to the Occupied Territories and accidentally told lies about a Christian peace activist. He’s a moral and serious person, and it was all done for a laugh.

                    Have it your way.

                    • McFliper …
                      24 December 2012 at 7:06 pm

                      No, that’s equally dumb. But because SBC probably made a dickish move it doesn’t mean that he’s a tool of Mossad’s propaganda wing, does it?

                    • McFliper …
                      24 December 2012 at 7:08 pm

                      Oh, and didn’t he travel to Lebanon?

      • felixviper 1.1.2
        24 December 2012 at 2:12 pm

        Nope, just as himself. Not that there’s anything notable about the interview, mind.

        • Morrissey 1.1.2.1
          24 December 2012 at 2:30 pm

          Not that there’s anything notable about the interview…

          Really?

          You don’t think there’s anything notable about someone humiliating and slandering a man for the sake of “entertainment”, and then slandering him further by repeating the lie on television?

          The courts obviously were a lot less indulgent than you are.

          • felixviper 1.1.2.1.1
            24 December 2012 at 2:55 pm

            Where’s the humiliation and slander? Are we watching the same video?

            • Morrissey 1.1.2.1.1.1
              24 December 2012 at 3:00 pm

              You are either drunk or stupid.

              • felixviper …
                24 December 2012 at 3:41 pm

                Why don’t you just explain what you mean instead of expecting us to read your mind?

                All I saw was Cohen being interviewed about his movie. Tell me what I’m missing, if you can find the time.

                • McFliper …
                  24 December 2012 at 3:50 pm

                  Morrissey seems to think that calling the dude a terrorist was untrue (seems to be the case). If so it was defamation, fair enough. But the quantum leap seems to be that because the person who was apparently defamed was from the Levant, this means that SBC is a Zionist propagandist of the worst order.

                  And that’s assuming it wasn’t simply a frivolous lawsuit settled because it was the most cost-effective method of resolution.

                  • felixviper …
                    24 December 2012 at 4:03 pm

                    Ah. And here’s me thinking he’s a particularly clever master of disguise when all along he was just a reptilian shape-shifter.

                    Cheated.

                  • Morrissey …
                    24 December 2012 at 6:06 pm

                    But the quantum leap seems to be that because the person who was apparently defamed was from the Levant, this means that SBC is a Zionist propagandist of the worst order.

                    There is no “quantum leap” involved. The facts speak for themselves. In his zeal to deride, ridicule and demean the people in the Occupied Territories (not the gun-toting, violent illegal “settlers”, but the indigenous Arabs) Baron Cohen set up an interview with a Christian peace activist in Hebron and then pretended he had bravely interviewed a Muslim terrorist. I think that libeling a Christian peace activist like that is indeed propaganda of the worst sort.

                    …assuming it wasn’t simply a frivolous lawsuit…

                    I wonder if a malicious ideologue said that YOU were a terrorist and placed your life in peril like that, whether you would appreciate people laughingly speaking of your predicament as “frivolous”.

                    • McFliper …
                      24 December 2012 at 7:04 pm

                      Assuming that I:
                      a) wasn’t a terrorist; or
                      b) had not misled the producers into thinking I was a terrorist so I got money;
                      then yes, the my lawsuit would be valid.

                      and if:
                      c) someone else had told the producers that I was a terrorist so they got a commission

                      then my lawsuit would be merely due to the fact that the producers hadn’t checked their informants’ bona fides.

                      But you have done nothing to say that b and c were false, even if I grant you that a is false. Which it almost certainly is, because terrorists aren’t known for suing for defamation.

                      And yeah, it’s a quantum leap to assume that one person’s being possibly defamed is indicative that SBC is a rabid Zionist propagandist.

                • Morrissey …
                  24 December 2012 at 5:57 pm

                  Why don’t you just explain what you mean instead of expecting us to read your mind?

                  What? I’ve not only explained it exhaustively, I’ve posted a transcript* and the television clip itself.

                  All I saw was Cohen being interviewed about his movie. Tell me what I’m missing, if you can find the time.

                  I’m happy to go through it for you, and I assume you’re genuine.

                  You need to read the transcript. You’ll see that Sasha Baron Cohen—not pretending to be Bruno, but speaking as Sasha Baron Cohen—uses the word “terrorist” four times, and the term “suicide bombers”. He leads Letterman and the audience to believe that Abu Aita, a Christian peace activist, is a member of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, and then shows a clip of himself as Bruno abusively interviewing Abu Aita, joking about “your king Osama” to the bewildered Palestinian.

                  There were real and serious repercussions for Abu Aita after this; not only was he libeled in front of the world, but he was suspected by the locals in the Occupied Territories of deliberately and knowingly participating in the unfunny charade.

                  You really should watch it, and read the transcript I provided. Then you’ll see why Sasha Baron Cohen handed over a huge amount of money to people he would otherwise see exterminated.

                  * Okay, okay, Te Reo, it segues (appropriately) into a Nazi rally at the end, but everything up to that is genuine.

                  • felixviper …
                    24 December 2012 at 6:58 pm

                    Morrissey, what was so hard about explaining that? None of that information was in the video, the transcript, or your comments until this one.

                    Not a fucking mind reader mate.

                    • Morrissey …
                      24 December 2012 at 8:41 pm

                      Morrissey, what was so hard about explaining that? None of that information was in the video, the transcript, or your comments until this one.

                      Not a fucking mind reader mate.

                      I hope it was of some help.

                      I’m sorry about calling you “drunk or stupid”; you know I didn’t mean it.

                    • felixviper …
                      24 December 2012 at 11:47 pm

                      No worries, I’ve been called worse and often deserved it 😉

                      Merry Christmas.

        • Morrissey 1.1.2.2
          24 December 2012 at 8:38 pm

          Oh, and didn’t he travel to Lebanon?

          He met Abu Aita and filmed his humiliation in Hebron, in the Occupied West Bank.

          Your other fantasy, about the cunning Arab criminal masterminds duping the gullible English and Americans into thinking they were terrorists is beyond idiotic.

  2. The Al1en 2
    24 December 2012 at 7:03 am

    I was going to save this for tomorrow, but I couldn’t wait for you to open your present.

    Just like all the other aliens here, regardless of who came first, this country is special.
    All who wash up on these shores, or indeed, crash land to earth here, are special.
    I truly believe if we unite behind what binds us rather than fight over what divides us, we can set an example and save the world from itself.

    As a real al1en, to my extended kiwi family. Song six and the album’s title track @www.al1en.org

    Human (R)evolution.

    A particle tide, we glide and revolve and revolve and revolve.
    Then gravity slides, collide and evolve and evolve and evolve.
    Such a little thing, sailed the solar wind. Became the spark to a new evolution.
    Such a pretty thing, could be anything. Could be the start of a new revolution.

    We are home. We are arrived. We are the stardust that fell from the sky.
    We are the face of this world come alive. We are the children born to survive.

    The genesis tribes, divide and get old and devolve and dissolve.
    Let unity bind, combine and evolve and evolve and evolve.
    Such a simple thing, but it’s everything. It’s like the start of our own evolution.
    Such a little thing, but we’re everything. We are the start of the Human revolution.

    We are the hope. We are the light. We are the stardust caught on the tide.
    We are the face of a world come undone. We are the children who sail round the sun.
    We are the hope, the welcoming might. We are the stardust that blinds in night.
    We are the fate of this world come undone. But we’re still the children borne from a sun.

    That’s why I always shine.

    • Napkins 2.1
      24 December 2012 at 8:34 am

      This.

    • Rogue Trooper 2.2
      24 December 2012 at 4:26 pm

      Like! (now come and slice the cheese) 🙂

      • The Al1en 2.2.1
        24 December 2012 at 7:56 pm

        Thank you.

        The ninth track will go up tomorrow and is for my own and all other solo mums.
        Merry xmas, Paula Bennett. 😉

        Track seven is my Dr Evil song, and one I’ll send to One Direction unless the world pays me one million dollars 😆

        Track eight, woke up at my desktop and it was playing. Thank you very much who or whatever.

        And that’s only the half of it.
        I started writing in April, and it turns out I’m as prolific as I am committed to my battle.
        Just shows that with the right motivation, even al1ens can be aspirational, though I don’t think I’m what John had in mind.

  3. Draco T Bastard 3
    24 December 2012 at 7:15 am

    The Lie that Prosecuting Bank Fraud Will Destabilize the Economy Is What Is REALLY Destroying the Economy

    James Galbraith recently said that “at the root of the crisis we find the largest financial swindle in world history”, where “counterfeit” mortgages were “laundered” by the banks.

    As he has repeatedly noted, the economy will not recover until the perpetrators of the frauds which caused our current economic crisis are held accountable, so that trust can be restored. See this, this and this.

    No wonder James Galbraith has said economists should move into the background, and “criminologists to the forefront.”

    The bottom line is that the Departments of Justice and Treasury have it exactly backwards: by failing to prosecute criminal fraud, they are destabilizing the economy … and ensuring future crashes.

    Over the years governments and the justice system have become less and less likely to prosecute banks and other white collar criminals when they breach the law. This is, of course, resulting in ever increasing amounts of such crime which is inevitably increasing the instability of the financial system.

    • Napkins 3.1
      24 December 2012 at 8:33 am

      Yes, it appears that Too Big to Fail has now become Too Big to Jail. An unaccountable financial aristocracy.

    • Polish Pride 3.2
      24 December 2012 at 10:20 am

      Econoovbmists should move to the background. They are actually part of the problem. Economists deal with the question of how best to allocate resources and what system to use to do this. For most it is simpler still they believe the best system is capitalism so they then have a much narrower focus around which levers need to be pulled under capitalism to get the desired effect those running an economy is seeking.

      What is instead needed is the skillset of a Business Analyst and not an Economist. A good Busiiness Analyst instead identifies the root of the problem that needs to be solved and starts from there. Another way to put this is that they identify the true and base requirement.
      The root of the problem or base requirement is that we need a system to satisfy the needs and wants of human beings. The question then becomes how to we do this. Once this has been established (not a small exercise but it IS be a logical one) it can then be compared with where our current system is and what needs to change to meet the system derived from the base requirement.

  4. Draco T Bastard 4
    24 December 2012 at 7:22 am

    For Poor, Leap to College Often Ends in a Hard Fall
    Although it’s about upward social mobility and how it pretty much doesn’t exist any more I think the crucial point that it makes is this bit:

    Four years later, their story seems less like a tribute to upward mobility than a study of obstacles in an age of soaring economic inequality. Not one of them has a four-year degree. Only one is still studying full time, and two have crushing debts. Angelica, who left Emory owing more than $60,000, is a clerk in a Galveston furniture store.

    Each showed the ability to do college work, even excel at it. But the need to earn money brought one set of strains, campus alienation brought others, and ties to boyfriends not in school added complications. With little guidance from family or school officials, college became a leap that they braved without a safety net.

    The society has, quite simply, thrown away all that talent and, IMO, we’ll see such waste here in NZ as well and it’s that waste that prevents NZ from progressing as well as it should.

  5. Raymond a Francis 5
    24 December 2012 at 8:29 am

    There is an”interesting” story doing the rounds of right wing blogs bagging Claire Curran and the Union for not handing out a hamper to someone not in the Union
    What do they think unions are for, carrying the load for non members
    I don’t think so!

    • mickysavage 5.1
      24 December 2012 at 9:05 am

      Aye it shows the typical response by the right to the trade union movement. Of course they should share the benefits that the members have created and no way should they be forced to contribute …

      • Roflcopter 5.1.1
        24 December 2012 at 9:54 am

        Really? It seems the hampers were donated by the public for those made redundant…

        • Te Reo Putake 5.1.1.1
          24 December 2012 at 10:19 am

          The collection was organised by the union. If they didn’t want to pass on the proceeds to a scab, who can blame them? After all, passing on union benefits to non-union members is illegal in NZ under our employment law, so why shouldn’t it apply to other union activities?

        • One Tāne Viper 5.1.1.2
          24 December 2012 at 11:36 am

          “It seems” the only person claiming he’s been called a National Party supporting scab is a National Party supporter.

          ‘Mr Ingram said he was disappointed Mr Fenwick had contacted the Otago Daily Times instead of raising the matter with him. He did not see the list of recipients but said ”many” people who were not in the union got hampers and it was ”probably an oversight”.’

          So perhaps the real headline is “Tory tells stories, other Tories listen.”

  6. karol 6
    24 December 2012 at 8:51 am

    In the light of the ways wikileaks was starved of funding, a new Freedom of the Press Foundation has been launched:

    http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/12/20121222155259710309.html

    Enter the Freedom of the Press Foundation. Headed by a combination of independent media enthusiasts, journalists, and free speech activists (and in most cases, probably all of the above), the new organisation launched this past week, taking in over $100,000 before the end of its first week. While the financial blockade placed on Wikileaks initially inspired the organisation, its goals are much broader: The Foundation plans to leverage crowd power to fund a variety of journalism organisations focused on transparency. Selection will focus on organisations that do innovative work but may not receive enough public attention.

    Visitors to the site choose the amount they wish to donate, and are presented with sliding bars that can be toggled to decide how much money goes to each of four organisations. In addition to Wikileaks, donors can give to MuckRock News, an organisation that helps citizens easily file Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests in the United States; The Uptake, a local journalism site focused on government transparency looking to go national; and The National Security Archive, an organisation with the lofty goal of expanding citizen access to government information.

    Timm says that they plan to expand to include “a variety of innovative transparency and journalism organisations that tackle the problem of secrecy from different angles”, both in the United States and internationally.

    MuckRock News has an article on the new foundation:

    http://www.niemanlab.org/2012/12/for-muckrock-com-the-new-freedom-of-the-press-association-will-mean-more-muck-more-rocks/

    The just-launched Freedom of the Press Foundation has identified MuckRock as one of four news organizations that will benefit from its system of crowdsourced donations. The best-known of the four is WikiLeaks.

    The foundation’s board is a who’s who of media activists, including Pentagon Papers whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg, Electronic Frontier Foundation co-founder John Perry Barlow, Josh Stearns of Free Press and the journalist Glenn Greenwald, now with The Guardian.

    “The Freedom of the Press Foundation can be a first step away from the edge of a cliff,” writes Dan Gillmor, author of We the Media and Mediactive. “But it needs to be recognized and used by as many people as possible, as fast as possible. And journalists, in particular, need to offer their support in every way. This is ultimately about their future, whether they recognize it or not. But it’s more fundamentally about all of us.”

    • Polish Pride 6.1
      24 December 2012 at 10:24 am

      Thanks for posting that – its great to see things starting to change for the better.

    • Rogue Trooper 6.2
      24 December 2012 at 4:38 pm

      continue to keep that “clit” hard karol 🙂 (well, that is a little bit n0rty i know), Hey, whatta ya gonna do? sit back and bend over forward? i been meditating on that n0rtiness today meslf: Oh Well 🙂
      may have been “abuse”; may have been invited? ;): however, as i have described to a couple of pastors, sets one up for future blessings (lest we search in the Dark). no it wasn’t abuse :), (Nietzsche)

      -(pastor said i was the first man he had met who came to Our Lord through Fred)

  7. bad12 7
    24 December 2012 at 9:13 am

    The high Court has given the Corrections Department and it’s Minister Ann Tolley a slap saying that the ban on prison inmates smoking is unlawful,

    Having been challenged in the Court on the legality of the ban by an inmate of the maximum security Auckland Prison at Paremoremo it appears that the Minister has produced a ‘new’ set of regulations which She and the Corrections Department believe legitimize it’s stance as it appears that the High Court challenge to the legitimacy of the smoking ban only covered the ‘old’ set of regulations,

    Obviously the inmate, (Arthur Taylor), who approached the High Court with the claim that the original regulations were not lawful can now repeat the whole process with a fair chance of having the High Court agree with Him,

    Corrections this morning told RadioNZ National that should this occur the Minister will then pass legislation to overturn any Judges ruling upon the legality of the smoking ban,

    A marvelous mis-use of the power of the Executive, lock up offenders in our jails and offend against them while you do so, when called to account simply retrospectively legislate your unlawful actions to be legal…

    • vivaciousviper 7.1
      24 December 2012 at 9:27 am

      @Bad12,Lol, It also looks like great minds think alike,they were posted at the same time 🙂
      Nacts are the ‘cowboy warriors’ of NZ politics.

      • bad12 7.1.1
        24 December 2012 at 10:14 am

        vv, LOLZ, i am not so sure about attaching the epithet ‘great’ to the pile atop my shoulders, although feel free to do so for yourself,

        Incidently i know the inmate,(Arthur Taylor), quite well, and we managed to mis-spend quite a number of the years of our youth in the same institutions…

      • Rogue Trooper 7.1.2
        24 December 2012 at 4:42 pm

        thats the “Right” for ya;
        while i think of it, reform is not viable; we are back to the big R(evolution).
        just keep sowing them seeds pa’

    • Dr Terry 7.2
      24 December 2012 at 9:31 am

      This government has only one policy toward the unfortunate, and that is “punish and punish again”, just as much as possible.

    • bad12 7.3
      25 December 2012 at 6:43 am

      Just as an afterthought i have to wonder if the Minister of Corrections Ann Tolley came up with the ‘new’ set of regulations banning smoking in prisons after the paperwork had been filed at the High Court at Auckland challenging the legality of the original smoking ban,

      If so, it would seem that Tolley has at least acted in a manner contemptuous of the High Court and more to the point has attempted to pervert the course of justice…

  8. vivaciousviper 8
    24 December 2012 at 9:13 am

    Just another thing to add to the list of court decisions that go against the nact govt,
    ‘Headline on the herald, ‘Prison smokes ban unlawful’

    A judge has ruled a smoking ban is unlawful, – a victory for a career criminal
    Arthur Taylor,who challenged it in court.

    Corrections minister say’s it has been a great success and the govt will
    change the law if it has to.

    This brings me to believe that anything these happless generals bring in should
    be tested in court,including their debilitating,discriminatory,oppressive welfare
    changes next year,to name one.

  9. AwakeWhileSleeping 9
    24 December 2012 at 9:55 am

    Quote #1 “National are supported by small business people, but National’s interests are large corporate monopolies and the Party’s balancing act is to appeal to small business social morality while ignoring small business economic interests. Expect a lot more bennie bashing in 2013. ”

    Quote #2 “Key’s ability to appeal to the anti-intellectualism of his supporters by dismantling the responsibilities of the Prime Ministership down to a pop culture youtube clip could come unstuck if we had a Jon Stewart type who could highlight this, sadly satire in this country is as dead as investigative journalism.”

    http://tumeke.blogspot.co.nz/2012/12/tumeke-political-review-2012-2013.html

    Scott Yorke, please get onto #2

  10. muzza 10
    24 December 2012 at 10:14 am

    Military warned : No cover-ups

    What, over and above the cover up already put in place here!

    Military bosses were told “it is important the RNZAF does not cover up” its illegal shipment of pyrotechnic canisters which endangered the lives of hundreds of passengers on an Air New Zealand flight.

    Investigators found “a considerable number of larger organisational factors and preconditions” led to the safety breach. It also emerged the canisters flown to Canada were actually more dangerous than previously revealed. Neither was properly wrapped or had “safety pins” in place to stop accidental ignition, and one was damaged

    What a bloody shambles!

    • One Tāne Viper 11.1
      24 December 2012 at 11:08 am

      “Too poor to buy electricity…” It doesn’t matter how many elements of truth you can cobble together if you’re not seeing the whole picture.

      No-one is too poor to make electricity. The solutions to “third world problems” come from people in the developing world, not well-meaning citizens of the USA claiming that “the whole planet is our homeland”. Hubris much?

      • Polish Pride 11.1.1
        25 December 2012 at 11:35 am

        Ever been to a third world country? Or to somewhere without electricity….? If you had I doubt you would have made such a comment. Even though that is besidev the point. Try listening to the whole message….with an open mind, not just selecting one tiny part to focus in on, you might actually learn something OTV. Research a little on the history of US foreign policy. The overthrowing of democratically elected govts, the installation of dictators and what has happened thereafter and just ask one question – Why? The answer as with most things is to follow the money….

        But just to be clear their are many many many people in the world without electricity, there are many people without things even more basic than that – try enough food and clean drinking water….. To pretty much say that if they don’t have elect ridiculous ricity it is their own fault is so beyond ridiculous it just isn’t funny. How are they supposed to get knowledge on how to create their own electricity? Perhaps you think they should use google? I’ll let you figure out the flaw there…

      • Polish Pride 11.1.2
        25 December 2012 at 12:07 pm

        Perhaps you should take a look at the book instead. You could read it and then make up your own mind.
        http://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/product-reviews/0452287081/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1

  12. Morrissey 12
    24 December 2012 at 10:57 am

    It’s been a big year for Prince Hal
    Drinking, snorting coke, cavorting with prostitutes and now….

    And now he’s killed a peasant…

    Wonder if the Queen will incorporate this splendid news into her speech tomorrow…
    http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4711647/prince-harry-kills-first-taliban-chief.html

    • Te Reo Putake 12.1
      24 December 2012 at 11:08 am

      Now we know why the Xmas message is going out in 3D; the kill shot should be spectacular!

      Just as an aside, the article reads like bs from start to finish. Big H? Really? More like the interview was conducted from the safety of Wapping and the interviewee was the hack’s typewriter.

    • One Tāne Viper 12.2
      24 December 2012 at 11:12 am

      Why don’t they just call him Lieutenant Kijé and have done with it?

    • Populuxe1 12.3
      24 December 2012 at 1:18 pm

      Citing The Sun as valid source is a new low, even for you Morrissey. But at least we know have some idea of the gutters you go trawling around in to support your increasingly desperate accusations.

      • Morrissey 12.3.1
        24 December 2012 at 1:44 pm

        Good Lord!

        Talk about terminally bewildered.

        • Populuxe1 12.3.1.1
          24 December 2012 at 8:56 pm

          If your mother had been a ticking fruitcake, died in a blaze of press speculation, and you had always grown up knowing you were the spare, you might have some issues too – but only a spiteful little gimp like you with this weird obsession with famous people would be salivating at the prospect.

          • Morrissey 12.3.1.1.1
            24 December 2012 at 9:04 pm

            Good Lord, you sound like a Sun four-page feature spread yourself!

            I don’t mean to upset you, my friend.

            I wish you a merry Christmas.

  13. Kevin Welsh 13
    24 December 2012 at 1:31 pm

    Merry Christmas to all who frequent TS; writers, commenters and even those who just read to to get another point-of-view. Off to Milford Sound to have Christmas with the whanau which I am looking forward to. Take care all and, if you are driving, be safe. All the best for 2013.

  14. Morrissey 14
    24 December 2012 at 2:58 pm

    Do they even know it’s Xmas Time?!
    SANTA IS COMING…

    Meanwhile, at ground level in Afghanistan….

    http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/breaking-news/us-soldier-pleads-guilty-to-urinating-on-afghan-bodies/story-e6freoo6-1226542198975

  15. Rogue Trooper 15
    24 December 2012 at 5:06 pm

    here is a seed that fell my way this morning;
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vinmonopolet
    much more to share, yet i better go and collect my thoughts.

    -“Silver Springs” (i shall be back)

    Hebrews 1:2
    1:7
    Proverbs 10-
    Hebrews 2:1,6,8,10,11,12,17,18.

    -John (may God Bless you all tomorrow)

  16. Rogue Trooper 16
    24 December 2012 at 5:07 pm

    (crush that over some ice this season Judith as you watch the carnage unfold)

  17. Rogue Trooper 17
    24 December 2012 at 5:11 pm

    btw, Excellent work Mark. Story!!! (sooner you replace that colonialist clown the better) 🙂

  18. Rogue Trooper 18
    24 December 2012 at 7:28 pm

    ahhh, before i forget to remember; locally there is some aquatic “desperation” apparently; “Desperado” (eagles shitting where they harvest) Welcome to water meterage in the “provinces”

    -why don’t you come to your senses?

  19. kiwicommie 19
    25 December 2012 at 3:53 am

    “Americans are absolutely beside themselves, and very, very uptight.”
    Was reading the Herald today, and this is full of total crap. Australia is the worst, every time I visit there I get searched. The US staff have always been polite to me, it seems that the Herald is pulling this whole article out of it’s ass. The US wouldn’t kick you out for spelling your name wrong, you would have to go out of your way to piss them off.