Daily Review 17/03/2017

28 comments on “Daily Review 17/03/2017 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. tory 1

   17 March 2017 at 6:33 pm

   What, DotCom shown to be bullshitting (again)?
   http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11820379
   No , this clearly is proof that the SFO takes its orders from John Key and that the USA runs NZ…
   • james 1.1

     17 March 2017 at 6:53 pm

     Yep – Kim Dotcon shown to be less than credible – yet again.

     Sooner he is out of the country NZ will be the better for it.
   • NewsFlash 1.2

     17 March 2017 at 6:59 pm

     Who’s John Key?
   • One Anonymous Bloke 1.3

     17 March 2017 at 7:15 pm

     The SFO are late to the party. Greenwald cast doubt on its authenticity in 2014.

     It’s lovely to see you clutching at straws though. Keep it up.
   • Anne 1.4

     17 March 2017 at 7:51 pm

     What, so the email was a forgery? Dotcom was the victim of Dirty Politics? Figures doesn’t it…
2. james 2

   17 March 2017 at 7:20 pm

   Labour MP calls to scalp a Philip Smith

   http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/03/labour-mp-regrets-call-to-scalp-toupee-killer.html

   Class act that Nash.

   Given that the guy had his rights breached – according to the Judge – There is no place for an MP to call for such a brutal reaction.

   Next he will be calling for people to be raped or stoned for standing up for their rights as well.
   • Cinny 2.1

     17 March 2017 at 8:46 pm

     Dang James

     Philip Smith horrifically abused an innocent child, then went on to kill the childs father.

     Can’t even believe it actually went to court and the judge determined that removing Smiths toupee was a breach of his human rights. A psychologist appealing to the judge that Smiths self esteem was damaged. Is there anyone in NZ that agrees Smith should be compensated for having his feelings hurt when his bald spot was exposed?
     • James 2.1.1

       17 March 2017 at 9:39 pm

       Are you saying he should be denied his rights because of past crimes ?
       • McFlock 2.1.1.1

         17 March 2017 at 9:47 pm

         He’s in prison, isn’t he?
         • Muttonbird 2.1.1.1.1

           18 March 2017 at 12:22 am

           I’ve seen it all now. James is defending Philip Smith.
           • James 2.1.1.1.1.1

             18 March 2017 at 8:32 am

             Do you think it’s acceptable for an mp to call for him to be scalped ? (Which is what I’m discussing). Not defending smith at all.

             The labour MP is the one who’s actions are disgusting and calling for extreme violence in this instance.
             • Muttonbird …

               18 March 2017 at 1:40 pm

               It was ridiculous of course, something I’d expect from Judith Collins or some other rwnj.

               Curious though that National supporters like yourself are so rattled they now defend rapists and murderers in an attempt to get a hit on Labour.

               It shouldn’t be lost Nash is a National Voter pin-up boy. One they’d like to have, and is quietly referred to as being in the wrong party. He’s on the right of Labour, and seems to have been stalking the Garth McVicar vote in this instance.
             • Draco T Bastard …

               18 March 2017 at 10:38 pm

               Do you think it’s acceptable for an mp to call for him to be scalped ?

               No and neither does Nash.

               People do stupid things in the heat of the moment and regret it later.
       • Cinny 2.1.1.2

         18 March 2017 at 8:32 am

         James, when a man loses his hair because of his genetics, vanity is the only reason they would choose to wear a wig.

         With that in mind, who does he want to look nice for in prison? He’s probably in segregation.

         James are you standing up to support the vanity of a kiddy f$%ker and murderer?

         Come on James, even you aren’t that sick and twisted. Do you really believe a prisoner had his ‘human rights’ breached because someone took his wig away?

         Judges make decisions that many of us wonder about at times, but this one is a real head scratcher.
         • James 2.1.1.2.1

           18 March 2017 at 12:39 pm

           You are deliberately ignoring the point. A member of parliament called for him to be scalped.

           And you are willing to call that out as inappropriate.

           Just because the guy is scum – it does not make calling for him to be attacked acceptable – it makes you no better than apologist for other acts of violence.

           Using your logic – if a woman is scum (and their are plenty of cases thru the courts). Would you be accepting of calls to violence towards them ?
       • Draco T Bastard 2.1.1.3

         18 March 2017 at 10:32 pm

         Isn’t that exactly what National did when they removed prisoners right to vote?
   • bwaghorn 2.2

     17 March 2017 at 9:34 pm

     skelping is to good for him , lethal injection would solve his hair problem.
3. One Two 3

   17 March 2017 at 7:22 pm

   McDonald’s you are actually a disgusting excuse of a restaurant…
4. marty mars 4

   17 March 2017 at 7:32 pm

   funny

   During an interview on Morning Report responding to that deal, Mr Little said his Māori MPs were definitely not seeking the protection of a high list ranking.

   “They are fearful of a high list place because they don’t want to give the impression that they are kind of being held up by belts and braces.”

   When asked if they were advocating for a low list place, Mr Little said yes.

   Oh please put me low on the list, please I beg you LOL – but then

   The MP for Hauraki-Waikato, Nanaia Mahuta, and Kelvin Davis, MP for Te Tai Tokerau – who will be going up against the Mana leader, Hone Harawira, at the election – would not say whether they had sought a low list spot, saying that was a matter for the party.”

   The MP for Tai Hauauru, Adrian Rurawhe, said while he would always prefer to be an electorate MP, he had not requested a low list ranking.

   “I haven’t asked anything,” he said. “It is a distraction, I didn’t go on the list last time but the party will decide if they are going to allow us to remain on the list or not.”

   The MP for Tāmaki Makaurau, Peeni Henare, also said he had made no requests about list placements.

   http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/326789/labour%27s-maori-mps-tepid-about-low-list-rankings

   imo the low list ranking is an unequivocal signal that will not be missed or misinterpreted. I wonder which MP’s Little was talking about? Who actually asked for a low list ranking?

   And it is good that labour realise they will not win or lose this election around the Māori seats, but boy those Māori MP’s within Labour must be wondering what the heck…
   • weka 4.1

     17 March 2017 at 9:09 pm

     Not sure what is going on there tbh. The audio being referred to is the one from last month where Little said the thing about kaupapa. Right at the end he says some stuff about the list, but he isn’t really saying that they are advocating for a low list place but that they weren’t asking for a special high place and wanted to campaign on the electorate. It’s in the context of the Kelvin Davis thing (the idea that he should be high on the list in case Harawira takes the seat). RNZ are saying that Little said the Māori MPs want low listing placings, but I don’t think he did.

     Still not brilliant, but I reckon that Jane Patterson is doing a bit of shit-stirring there. It’s also unusually misleading for RNZ to not say that the quotes they are referring to are from nearly 4 weeks ago.

     But yeah, it must be weird for the Māori MPs. I’ve been wondering if there are politics going on around Davis/Jackson being high profile too.

     From 4 weeks ago, starts around 6mins30,

     http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport/audio/201833972/labour's-andrew-little-dismisses-maori-mana-deal

     From this morning

     http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport/audio/201836952/battle-for-maori-seats-heats-up
     • marty mars 4.1.1

       17 March 2017 at 9:39 pm

       Very dicey when they supposedly quote something and then can’t link to it – I wonder what the hell is going on with that because this report seemed very explicit in the detail.
       • weka 4.1.1.1

         18 March 2017 at 11:16 am

         The link is there, just they weren’t explicit that the bit they were quoting was old. I had to open the audio to see it was that one from last month, and then listen to see what the context was. I do think they have misrepresented what Little was saying (although I think what he said was off too, just not in the way they have made out). Weird, but I guess that’s just how the MSM rolls. Pretty mild beat up I guess, but it pisses me off to see that shit stirring going on around Māori politics when Pākehā are generally ill equipped to understand it even when presented straight.
     • Anne 4.1.2

       17 March 2017 at 9:52 pm

       I reckon that Jane Patterson is doing a bit of shit-stirring there.

       And it wouldn’t be for the first time either. She’s done a few biased online opinion pieces in the past.
5. joe90 5

   17 March 2017 at 8:28 pm

   Truth will out.

   Except none of that happened.

   After a documentarian released video this past weekend that dispels the myth of the Mike Brown corner-store robbery, more information is emerging about the n-word-using patrolman who was accused of racial discrimination and excessive force even before he pumped at least six bullets into Brown on Aug. 9, 2014, killing him. New court papers reveal that Brown never tried to take the officer’s gun, never struck the officer and did not initiate any contact with Wilson, who was cleared of wrongdoing by a secret grand jury in November 2014.

   As part of a civil suit filed last year against Wilson, a court document reveals some stunning admissions from the former Ferguson police officer. In a court docket filed Dec. 28, the cop who killed Brown admitted to using racial slurs, cursing at Brown before he was killed and grabbing him without provocation.

   […]

   The next part of the testimony will confound the conservatives who stated that Wilson did not shoot Brown in the back. Wilson admits that after the first shot, Brown started running away from him and he fired another shot, which missed Brown. Wilson basically admits that he fired at Brown and the bullet hit a building close by.

   Wilson agrees that after the second bullet was fired, the teen turned around, faced the officer and—although Wilson was trained in “defensive tactics and techniques”—began shooting as soon as Brown started running toward him.

   He fired 10 times.

   After shooting Brown in the face, Wilson kept firing, shooting him again in the top of the head.

   http://www.theroot.com/everything-you-think-you-know-about-the-death-of-mike-b-1793261221
6. Macro 6

   17 March 2017 at 8:44 pm

   Mulvaney wants to be “compassionate to tax payers”…..

   On after-school programs, Mulvaney said services intended to help feed hungry students in order to improve their academic performance deserve to be cut because proof of that progress has not materialized.

   “They’re supposed to be educational programs, right? I mean, that’s what they’re supposed to do. They’re supposed to help kids who don’t get fed at home get fed so they do better in school,” Mulvaney said. “Guess what? There’s no demonstrable evidence they’re actually doing that. There’s no demonstrable evidence they’re actually helping results, helping kids do better in school… the way we justified it was, these programs are going to help these kids do better in school and get better jobs. And we can’t prove that that’s happening.”

   http://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/mick-mulvaney-donald-trump-budget-meals-on-wheels-236144

   Yeah! Let the little brats go hungry why don’t cha…

   By the way there are numerous studies that giving kids breakfast in schools has many beneficial outcomes..

   Mulvaney only needed to look up this US study to see that his reasoning is based on bullshit.
   https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3737458/
   The conclusion:

   Summary of the effect of breakfast on behavior and academic performance

   Overall, the evidence suggests beneficial effects of breakfast for on-task behavior in the classroom, mainly in younger children <13 years. This effect was apparent in children who were well-nourished, undernourished and/or from deprived or low SES backgrounds. For school performance outcomes, evidence suggests a positive association between habitual breakfast frequency and quality on school grades or achievement test scores. Similarly, evidence from SBPs suggest a positive effect on school performance, particularly mathematics grades and arithmetic scores and in undernourished children and/or children from deprived or low SES backgrounds. The positive effects of breakfast on academic performance appear clearer than those on behavior, probably due to the difficulties surrounding accurate measures of behavior which are inherently subjective in nature. These outcomes are ecologically valid, have more relevance to pupils, parents, teachers, and educational policy makers and as a result may produce most impact.
7. marty mars 7

   17 March 2017 at 8:45 pm

   I am going to miss The Archdruid Report – for me JMG’s writing crystalized many things, teased out threads and thoughts which gave so much meaning to the scrambling meaninglessness of so much and showed me what good writing could achieve. I didn’t agree with everything but I did agree with a lot of what JMG wrote.

   As he has said/paraphrased – ‘we don’t yet know how to live’ – so true, so very true…

   Nietzsche elsewhere characterized moral philosophy as the use of bad logic to prop up inherited prejudices. The gibe’s a good one, and generally far more accurate than not, but again it’s easy to misunderstand. Nietzsche was not saying that morality is a waste of time and we all ought to run out and do whatever happens to come into our heads, from whatever source. He was saying that we don’t yet know the first thing about morality, because we’ve allowed bad logic and inherited prejudices to get in the way of asking the necessary questions—because we haven’t realized that we don’t yet have any clear idea of how to live.

   … The peak oil crisis that called The Archdruid Report into being came about because human beings have as yet no clear idea how to get along with the biosphere that supports all our lives; the broader theme that became the core of my essays here over the years, the decline and fall of industrial civilization, shows with painful clarity that human beings have as yet no clear idea how to deal with the normal and healthy cycles of historical change; the impending fall of the United States’ global empire demonstrates the same point on a more immediate and, to my American readers, more personal scale. Chase down any of the varied ramblings this blog has engaged in over the years, and you’ll find that most if not all of them have the same recognition at their heart: we don’t yet know how to live, and maybe we should get to work figuring that out.

   http://thearchdruidreport.blogspot.co.nz/2017/03/how-should-we-then-live.html
   • gsays 7.1

     18 March 2017 at 8:12 am

     Cheers for the link Marty, a good wee read.
     Some mental chewing gum.

     As to morals, ethics, how to live, I have found access to a still mind to be the most powerful, helpful tool.
     What is needed to be said or done will become apparent.

     Often silence is what is needed.
8. Red Hand 8

   18 March 2017 at 7:04 pm

   Le Monde puts a negative spin on the Merkel Trump meeting.

   Madeleine Albright tweets her Trump Budget concerns and urges “proper funding of all instruments of our national power”.

   http://www.lemonde.fr/chroniques-de-la-presidence-trump/article/2017/03/18/la-journee-de-donald-trump-clinton-prete-a-sortir-du-bois-merkel-a-la-maison-blanche_5096562_5077160.html

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS