Congratulations Mike!

Written By: - Date published: 12:25 pm, January 20th, 2010 - 82 comments
Categories: uncategorized - Tags:

Good to see that Mike Moore has been appointed our new Ambassador to Washington. Mike’s energy and connections in Washington and the world will be an asset. It’ll also be a lot more satisfying for him than life as an author and columnist. Mike’s a  big picture man and gives 110 per cent  – we wish him well.

82 comments on “Congratulations Mike! ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. gitmo 1
    20 January 2010 at 12:36 pm

    I’ll second that … I expect this is one appointment that people on all sides (apart from the truly politically entrenched/retarded) can applaud.

    • the sprout 1.1
      20 January 2010 at 8:03 pm

      “Mike’s a big picture man”

      yeah, I remember him on the tv in 1993 Election night claiming victory; definitely not a details man

      “gives 110 per cent”

      hmm, well with his age and health that should equate to about 20% of an able person

  2. Andrei 2
    20 January 2010 at 12:39 pm

    Its hard to imagine a better choice for the job – a fantastic appointment

  4. mickysavage 4
    20 January 2010 at 12:43 pm

    The wingnuts will go spare …

  5. travellerev 5
    20 January 2010 at 12:59 pm

    Sweet FH,

    If you wanted any proof on the total Geo-political ignorance of the average Kiwi look no further.

    Let me introduce you to Mike Moore as he is known internationally:

    Former head of the WTO.

    Member of the Bilderberg group

    Member of the Trilateral commission.

    And the writer of: “Saving Globalism” no less.

    With him in the States and our PM Wall street goofer over here at least we don’t have to guess were the orders come from.

    Welcome to the New World Order and Lord have mercy.

    • fizzleplug 5.1
      20 January 2010 at 1:06 pm

      I assume that you have no issue with Helen Clark holding her position at the UN though.

      I for one think it is an inspired choice, and shows that sometimes the good of the country can transcend politics.

    • Rob 5.2
      20 January 2010 at 1:30 pm

      Mentioning the Bilderberg group on an intelligent website… means you think the New World order is coming, and that the barcodes on your food will soon be on you…

      Crazy man, crazy!!

    • Scott 5.3
      20 January 2010 at 2:11 pm

      I hope Moore remembers to pack his sacred robes. With all the sinister shadowy organisations he’s a member of, there sure will be a lot of baby-sacrificing to be done.

    • Rich 5.4
      20 January 2010 at 2:59 pm

      When in his presence, be sure to wear your tinfoil hat.

      BTW, which hollowed out volcano does he live in when in NZ? Taranaki or Ruapehu?

  6. BLiP 6
    20 January 2010 at 1:09 pm

    Lamb burgers all round.

  7. torydog 7
    20 January 2010 at 1:17 pm

    great, a man who is still bitter about being ditched as labour leader 20 years ago…….no wonder the tories love him.

    • Rex Widerstrom 7.1
      20 January 2010 at 1:31 pm

      And so he should be, IMHO. We might have had a very different NZ to the one we have now if Labour hadn’t lost it’s bottle and finally fallen for the coup Clark had been plotting since her first branch meting and escalated as soon as it was apparent Lange was mortally wounded.

      We’d have had a truly national debate aboiut a lot of things, as Moore was wont to float ideas and get his feedback direct, not through sterile focus groups and a tight inner circle.

      And imagine Moore on “Letterman”*… NZ would have had a top notch salesman full of energy and ideas (but willing to consult on them) tirelessly spruiking the country, able to handle himself as easily at a Workingmen’s Club as a at a meet with some potentate.

      Rather like Lange, provided he’d had a focused and capable Cabinet to do the micro stuff, he could have made a huge contribution.

      * Yes I know he probably wouldn’t still be PM, I’m just making the comparison with recent incumbents.

  8. Santi 8
    20 January 2010 at 2:06 pm

    The Dutch Einstein travellerev strikes again, this time wearing a huge tin-foil hat.

  9. Meg 9
    20 January 2010 at 2:08 pm

    Guess I’m “truly politically entrenched/retarded” then. I can live with that

  10. Hymn @ Himself 10
    20 January 2010 at 2:11 pm

    Anyone recall what happened at the WTO when Mr. Moore was its CEO..?

  11. roger nome 11
    20 January 2010 at 2:35 pm

    man, this has to be one of the most confusing posts i’ve ever read on a blog. a dude who’s about as far-right as you can get being praised like a demagogue on a left wing blog. also, does no one remember the “mike or the dyke” campaign he ran against Helen Clarke? truly, we have entered the twilight zone.

    also, trav might go a bit far with the conspiracy theory stuff, but you guys shouldn’t be so glib in dismissing her criticisms of the global banking/US empire. i’m taking it that none of you have seen zeitgeist addendum?

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7065205277695921912#

    • Scott 11.1
      20 January 2010 at 2:46 pm

      OMG now it’s the Zeitgeist movement!

      (I just need to nip out and get my tin foil hat. Back soon).

      • felix 11.1.1
        20 January 2010 at 3:14 pm

        You’re actually preventing any serious discussion of Moore’s world view with your offhand dismissal.

        • Scott 11.1.1.1
          20 January 2010 at 3:19 pm

          I have no time for conspiracy cranks. Surely they are the ones preventing serious discussion in this thread.

          • roger nome 11.1.1.1.1
            20 January 2010 at 3:21 pm

            Scott:

            How do you explain building 7? seriously. you have to admit, it’s pretty damn strange.

          • felix 11.1.1.1.2
            20 January 2010 at 3:52 pm

            You were the first to raise the idea of “conspiracy” in this thread Scott.

            All Ev said was that Moore is/was:

            Former head of the WTO.

            Member of the Bilderberg group

            Member of the Trilateral commission.

            And the writer of: “Saving Globalism’ no less.

            Perfectly valid reference points in considering his world view, his prejudices, his loyalties etc.

            It’s you who is lowering the tone by trying to take the discussion off into lala land with your jokes about secret societies and magical robes.

            • Scott 11.1.1.1.2.1
              20 January 2010 at 4:25 pm

              To quote travellerev:

              “Welcome to the New World Order”

              Looks like it wasn’t me taking the discussion off into lala land after all. It was already there.

              • felix …
                20 January 2010 at 5:00 pm

                You’re not familiar with the phrase? George Bush Snr’s wasn’t it?

                It’s not lala land to discuss the actions and motivations of the most powerful people in the world Scott. Your condescending attitude to anyone who wishes to do so is a little worrying.

              • the sprout …
                20 January 2010 at 8:08 pm

                You really are just parading your ignorance Scott.
                Which does however explain your political views.

            • Scott 11.1.1.1.2.2
              20 January 2010 at 8:46 pm

              Felix, you’re being disingenuous. Bush I may have coined the phrase “New World Order”, but nowadays it has an entirely different meaning, as I’m sure you know. Try Googling the term and see what you get.

              I’m happy for anyone to challenge authority. But I have no time for arguments there is some shadowy cabal controlling the world. Which is why I get annoyed when someone derails a debate with a crackpot conspiracy theory.

              Sprout, I can’t be bothered getting into an argument with you over who on this thread is parading their ignorance. And your assumptions about what my politics are may well be erroneous.

              I’m sure we won’t convince each other, so let’s just leave it at that.

              • felix …
                20 January 2010 at 9:09 pm

                But no-one’s mentioned shadowy cabals except you Scott – unless you think the WTO, The Bilderberg Group and The Trilateral Commission count as such.

              • the sprout …
                20 January 2010 at 9:21 pm

                Looking at your website Scott I’d say you were pretty politically confused, which would be consonant with a position of ignorance.

              • Scott …
                20 January 2010 at 9:55 pm

                Sprout, I’m a political moderate on most matters. I don’t feel confused at all. I make my mind up on issues on a case by case basis, based on evidence, not ideology. If that troubles you them I’m sorry.

                Felix, I wasn’t the person who first mentioned the NWO.

              • the sprout …
                20 January 2010 at 10:03 pm

                oh riiiiight. so you don’t have an ideology.
                guess you don’t have an accent either?

              • Scott …
                20 January 2010 at 10:07 pm

                Sprout, this discussion has become tedious and it is late. Good night.

              • felix …
                20 January 2010 at 10:07 pm

                Scott, the fact that you think that even the mention of such things warrants ridicule is the very aspect of your comments I was highlighting.

                This prevents any serious discussion of Moore’s role in world affairs as it renders huge parts of his life and career unmentionable without inviting your petty sniping.

                I know you think trav is a conspiracy nut but that doesn’t mean you have to pour scorn on everything she says without even addressing the relevance.

              • the sprout …
                20 January 2010 at 10:15 pm

                Like to dish it but not so good at taking it, eh Scott.

              • Scott …
                21 January 2010 at 6:43 am

                Felix, it is your labouring of this point that has derailed the discussion. I made my point, but you can’t seem to let this go.

                Sprout, I prefer not to exchange petty insults with you. Call me ignorant if it makes you feel better. I don’t intend to stoop to your level.

              • felix …
                21 January 2010 at 7:33 am

                Yes I derailed the discussion and brought it down from the lofty heights where you were more comfortable – “LOLZ TINFOIL HATZ zOMGZ NUTTERZ!!”

                Whatever.

              • travellerev …
                21 January 2010 at 12:07 pm

                Hi Scott,

                Here are some definitions you might need to get your mind straight about some of your remarks:

                Conspiracy

                1/ a secret agreement between two or more people to perform an unlawful act.

                Example: Billy and Bob spot a house full of valuables and no locks. They decide to wait until dark to robe the place and while they’re at it ask cousin John to provide the get-away car. They don’t tell anybody else.

                .Conspiracy theory

                1/ A hypothesis alleging that the members of a coordinated group are, and/or were, secretly working together to commit illegal or wrongful actions.

                Example: Only minutes after two Towers collapse from the impact of two planes we are told that it was 19 hijackers with box cutters who perpetrated this heinous crime.

                The third building collapsing that same day without any explanation or even theory for at least seven years after the event is if possible not even mentioned.

                No solid crime investigation and crime scene investigation was ever performed.

                Not only that the reason why these 19 hijackers did this evil thing is:

                1/ Because they were send by Osama bin Laden

                2/ Saddam Hussein send them

                3/ cleric Anwar al Awlaki from Yemen inspired them, the fort Hood killer and the underpants bomber.

                All of these “theories” are presented as the truth. Classic Conspiracy theorising as in believing your theory to be the truth without a shred of proof.

                Conspiracy nutter

                Term is usually used as a pejorative label, meaning paranoid, nutty, marginal, and certainly untrue.

                Example:
                Those of us believing that 19 hijackers send by Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein or cleric Anwar al Awlaki all of whom are evil nasty freedom and Jew hating rag heads just because we are told that this is so by our governments.

                Conspiracy Sceptic

                Person who would like to see a real and independent investigation based on science, solid crime scene investigation and police investigation.

                Examples:

                Architects and Engineers for 911 truth

                Scientists for 911 truth

                Pilots for 911 truth

                Patriots, survivors and family members for 911 truth

                Religious leaders for 911 truth

                Political leaders for 911 truth

                Lawyers for 911 truth

                Fire fighters for 911 truth

                Now to get back to the actual thread: Mike Moore when simply googled by a relative newcomer in the New Zealand political world shows up in a lot of places with a strong Globalist view.

                Globalism in my view is not a benign peace loving emergence of the knowledge that all of us are just human beings working together for the greater good of all mankind. If that were the case we would see people with flowers in their hands instead of big guns with Christian code numbers in Muslim countries going well beyond the assumption that maybe we have been led into a new era of Crusades against millions of innocent people jut because they happened to have a religion we don’t like. That and the fact that most of them live on “our” oil.

                Globalism in my view is the concentration of power instead of in the hands of the people into the hands of impenetrable secretive corporate entities owned by a few whose interests directly may or may not oppose those of the the elected power concentrations of groups of “free” people commonly known as countries, Governments or we the people.

                Mike Moore’s open idealisation of Globalism as the only “natural” progression for man kind and the fact that an openly regressive (as in invasive rights of police and the deminishing of your right to privacy, draconian prison laws and the open privilegeisation (new word alert) of the already wealthy and the killing off of social benefits for those not so privileged) government and his advocacy of a new “strategic” Pacific trade agreement with a country involved in at least 1 illegal war of aggression make me very weary of the reasons as to why he was picked for the job of ambassador to the US.

                [lprent: Looks like a lot of links there… No wonder it went into spam..]

              • Scott …
                21 January 2010 at 8:10 pm

                Travellerev, if I respond Felix will get cross again.

              • felix …
                21 January 2010 at 8:18 pm

                I’m not the slightest bit interested in preventing the type of conversation trav is trying to have with you.

                If you’re not up for it just say so but don’t blame me. I won’t interfere.

      • roger nome 11.1.2
        20 January 2010 at 3:19 pm

        “I just need to nip out and get my tin foil hat. Back soon”

        lol – i know, the first one is a bit hard to take seriously. way too many assumptions. but seriously, can you poke any holes in their criticism of the US banking empire? i find it hard to.

      • Brenton 11.1.3
        21 January 2010 at 3:28 am

        The Zeitgeist Movement has nothing to do with conspiracy theories.

        • chris 11.1.3.1
          21 January 2010 at 11:25 pm

          apart from perpetuating a whole bunch and being the mouth piece for a bunch of insane libertarians, nope, absolutely nothing!

    • Bright Red 11.2
      20 January 2010 at 3:23 pm

      like I say, roger, I think John A’s saying more than he appears to be. Particularly the comemnt on Moore as author and column writer,. Bit of a coded ‘shove off’ message, no?

      • roger nome 11.2.1
        20 January 2010 at 3:42 pm

        yeah, i get ya BR – bit sophisticated for me in my present state – stayed up all last night reading …. again …..

    • travellerev 11.3
      20 January 2010 at 7:34 pm

      Or the Money Masters, Money as Debt and Money as debt II

      And when those of you still walking around with bare head have seen these maybe you would like to remember that when the Reserve Act was signed after the 1988 economic crisis here in Little old NZ it was Lange who signed the right of the NZ people to decide over their own currency to the international privately owned banking cartel but it was Mike Moore who was Minister of External Relations and Trade 1988-90 and Deputy Minister of Finance 1988-90. According to Wikipedia.

      Oh, and that was also when John Key helped Andrew Krieger to earn over 300 million in one afternoon just four days after Black Monday, profiting form the panic concerning the NZ Dollar.
      The Reserve Bank actually phoned the Bankers trust bank in NY to tell them to fuck off playing with the entire NZ economy.

      Small world eh?

      By the way here are some of the NWO leaders telling us what they want to do.

      Cheers

    • travellerev 11.4
      20 January 2010 at 7:42 pm

      Hi RN,

      The good news is that more than a 1000 (verified) Architects and Engineers amongst whom at least 60 aeronautic and space engineers and some pretty heavy duty Architects have now signed the Architects and Engineers petition for a new and independent investigation.

  12. Blue 12
    20 January 2010 at 2:53 pm

    After the comment pieces he wrote for the Herald a year or two ago while Helen Clark was still PM, I couldn’t be happier to see the back of him.

  13. Lindsey 13
    20 January 2010 at 3:06 pm

    I am with Blue and the Nome. I can remember when everthing that used to come from the Labour Party started having MMSC (Mike Moore Supporter’s Club) on it, and as canvassers we had to ask people if they were Mike Moore supporters, not just Labour supporters. A Cult of the Leader of monstrous proportions. Plus, when he was dumped one of his “Beagle Boys” put homophobic grafitti on my fence.
    Bastards!

    • Bored 13.1
      20 January 2010 at 3:41 pm

      Me too with Blue and Nome… the guy ( he is too unspeakable to name) began life with a social democratic party and adopted the ideology of the new right whilst maintaining that he was still “Labour”. I see no reason to congratulate him ever, his presence anywhere near our political discourse is highly undesirable.

  14. Brett Dale 14
    20 January 2010 at 4:52 pm

    Well done Mike, I like him a lot, he seems a decent fella.

  15. bobo 15
    20 January 2010 at 6:38 pm

    Bringing back the Lamb Burger 🙂 good luck to him if he can do something for NZ over there, but too far right for Labour these days, always seemed like a disgruntled employee in his later years who hated Clarke, that’s politics I guess.

  16. the sprout 16
    20 January 2010 at 7:53 pm

    One of the original traitorous neo-con arseholes that set the Labour Party back 20 years.
    No wonder Moore’s popular with the Key administration.

  17. Jonathan 17
    20 January 2010 at 8:28 pm

    Good riddance to the most rightwing and socially conservative leader the Labour Party has ever had the misfortune of having. Hopefully this also puts an end to the reactionary crap he writes in the herald every now and then. I’d prefer Garth George to Mike Moore and that’s saying something.

  18. gitmo 18
    20 January 2010 at 9:19 pm

    What an odd thread !

    I can only conclude that.

    1. Some people are unable to see past partisan politics.
    2. The cult of St Helen of Labour is still strong and woe betide anyone who crosses the cults path.
    3. Some peoples ideas of right wing appear to be anything to the right of Karl Marx.
    4. Some peoples fascination with 911 will never be satiated.

    • travellerev 18.1
      21 January 2010 at 12:19 pm

      Gitmo,

      At this moment a group of young New Zealand men who enlisted into the army to defend this country and who are possibly some of the more courageous amongst us are fighting in Afghanistan. They run the very real risk of being killed. They are there because so they believe that their country send them there to fight an enemy who hates us and because our allies asked us to send them there. That is a very real consequence of the decisions made after that fateful day.

      More than 1 million Iraqis have died and more than 4 million Iraqis have been displaced in the wake of that fateful day. 70.000 heroes (the men and women who ran towards those buildings instead of away and who for months tried to rescue and clean up after that day) are sick or dying as the result of the dust they breathed in and hundreds of thousands of US troops are sick or suffer from PTSD because of what they went or are going trough as the direct result of what happened that day.

      Don’t you think that all those people:

      The millions of Afghanistani, Iraqi, Americans and those Kiwi SAS men who had nothing to do with 911 deserve to know why they or their family members are dying or ill or lost?

      • Bill 18.1.1
        21 January 2010 at 12:39 pm

        @ trav.

        I’ve never responded to any of your 9/11 comments. But I will now.

        It really does not matter whether the US government was complicit in the destruction of the twin towers any more than whether they were complicit in the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbour.

        Let’s say the buildings spontaneously fell down.

        The way the spontaneous falling down of the buildings was used by governments to unleash a series of events that have had and continue to have massive consequences is what matters.

        Anything else is a distraction.

        For the record, I do not believe that the US government or their agents brought down the twin towers. That I believe the US government or it’s agents are capable of such levels of cynicism is beside the point.

        • travellerev 18.1.1.1
          21 January 2010 at 1:23 pm

          Bill,

          First we don’t know if the US government was complicit in the attacks. That would be just a theory and we as a movement are not and never were in the business of crank theories.

          All we want is a new and independent investigation.

          Why? Well, contrary to you notion that the fact that the events have been used to start two wars is what really matters and all else is a distraction, the events themselves are very real, pivotal events in the lives of thousands of people.

          For example Bill, I don’t know if you are a parent but Patty Casazza and Bob McIlvaine most definitely were on that day and they want to know who killed their beloved children. They are desperate to find out what really happened and there is no and never will be any closure until they do. For them 911 is very much happening today.

          With them 80.000 New Yorkers want a new investigation.

          There were some three thousand people killed on that day alone and they all had parents, children, aunts and uncles, and cousins. One such cousin was Luke Rudowski. He was the founder of WeAreChange. HE would like to know why is uncle died on that day. Another one is Cosmos whose uncle was in the crashed plane

          70.000 first responders want a new investigation and I can go on and on and on.

          Every year the fire fighters and police commemorate the events of that day here in New Zealand and a Kiwi died on that day. Perhaps his family would like to know who killed him.

          There are people in Japan, Canada, Italy and Spain who lost family on that day and they want to know who killed their loved ones.

          If those buildings spontaneously collapsed that perhaps the builders should be in front of a judge. Eh? Buildings of that size spontaneously collapsing would send a surge of panic I would have thought throughout all the Architects and Engineers who build these buildings I would have thought.

          So don’t you friggin tell me that all those people who lost loved ones and who are denied a proper and independent investigation into the crime that killed their loved ones should shut up and get on with it because you want to to see the “bigger” picture.

          We are talking real people who are grieving and asking questions as to why their loved ones were not protected in the most militarised country in the fucking universe, so don’t you patronise me or those people because you can’t handle the very real implications if the result of that investigation does not point to 19 raghead hijackers and a mad man in a cave in Afghanistan.

          And while you’re at it why don’t you try to imagine what it will be like for those family members of the SAS soldiers here in NZ when their much loved child or dad comes home in a body bag from a country we have no place to be in if only because the US government used the events of 911 to start a war they planned well in advance of the events.

          Imagine their reaction when you tell them that they have no right to ask for an investigation as to why their loved ones died in an illegal war of aggression even by your own reasoning. Eh?

          Anyway thanks for the reaction.

          • Bill 18.1.1.1.1
            21 January 2010 at 2:08 pm

            Trav.

            I have no doubt that family members of people who died in the twin tower collapses hold that their loved ones died because of blow back from US foreign policy in the Middle East and beyond

            I also have no doubt that family members of people who died in the twin tower collapses hold that their loved ones died simply because Arabs are hate filled fuckers and lunatics.

            And I have no doubt that family members of people who died in the twin tower collapses hold that their loved ones did because of some Zionist conspiracy.

            And so on.

            Family members will explain and justify and make sense of their loss as best they can according to and shaped by their world view, just as surviving family members have done with other similar situations such as the Lockerbie bombing, or the multiple bombings over many years in Northern Ireland or the various surviving wedding party guests in Afghanistan or whatever and wherever this ‘out of the blue’ shit happens.

            And some will be unable to accept the unjust fact of their loved ones death. They will seek for definitive answers and hold that such surety can be approached through independent investigations or new independent investigations or perhaps by torturing this or that person or talking to somebody who’s whereabouts are unknown….or whatever…it’s all chasing chimeras.

            Meanwhile, the reality of 9/11 is that the only people who could give definitive answers as to why they flew aircraft into those buildings died.

            The reality is that 9/11 was pounced on by politicians and policy makers and used as an excuse to execute various strategies and plans that have led to, and will continue to lead to many, many ‘pivotal moments’ , unanswered and unanswerable questions for who knows how many people of whatever persuasion, religion or skin colour in the Middle East and beyond.

            And some will construct ‘comforting enough’ answers that allow them to move on in life and others wont.

        • roger nome 18.1.1.2
          22 January 2010 at 10:39 am

          I respectfully disagree bill. Although i can see where you’re coming from i have a quite different take.

          IMO, the only thing that’s going to shake up the US political system is a massive crisis of confidence in the whole political and institutional structure of the country, and if the US public were to find out that the government had killed thousands of its own citisens in a false-flag terror attack, that’s just what we we have. The benefits to the entire planet of this are potentially gigantic. So i can’t agree with you that the US Government’s complicity, or absence of, in the 9/11 attacks is irrelivant.

  19. torydog 19
    21 January 2010 at 8:47 am

    Yep Gitmo, i am a follower of the “cult of St Helen”, but only because i like strong sensible decent leadership….obviously right wingers dont like that.

  20. DavidW 20
    21 January 2010 at 9:27 am

    Nah dog, we can agree on the description “strong leadership”. Its just the concommitant use of the words “sensible” and especially “decent” that we object to mightily.

    Good onya Mike.

    When one fits a job requirement for Ambo to US with the person profile of MM, there is a pretty strong match.

    • roger nome 20.1
      22 January 2010 at 10:43 am

      Shorter David:

      “Us rich folks can never have enough money. Helen=evil, Mike Moore=god.”

  21. Hymn & Himself 21
    21 January 2010 at 11:54 am

    Lambburger = a new one on me. One word, right?

    Could this have been the one word to send the enzed sheep (industry) south.?

    Now the lambburger utterer is going north, where I’m told beef is going south..?

    Do we have a connect here.. like southern man to move and shake northern climes..

    Cripes, don’t we have enough climate change already!!

  22. travellerev 22
    21 January 2010 at 12:08 pm

    Bugger to many links, back in purgatory.

Links to post