Open mike 04/01/2025

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, January 4th, 2025 - 27 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 Policy).

Step up to the mike …

27 comments on “Open mike 04/01/2025 ”

  1. Jack 1
    4 January 2025 at 7:20 am

    NZME's NZ Herald appears to be unashamedly showing its true colours, in todays "News Worth Knowing" advertisement featuring three jovial Coalition leaders.

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/1be55ss-HEOfbDnwznpZPGhO12xcaJMgt/view?usp=sharing

    Reply
    • SPC 2.1
      4 January 2025 at 4:58 pm

      In human society there is the democratic accountability component. The elites are aware of this and are active changing the rules to try and prevent correction to their extremist order design.

      Reply
  3. KJT 3
    4 January 2025 at 8:09 am

    And. Another excellent piece from Anne Salmond.

    Anne Salmond: Hunger Games in the Beehive

    Reply
    • SPC 3.1
      4 January 2025 at 5:00 pm

      They no longer want the nation state to be accountable for "charity to the poor", or the adequacy of taxpayer public health care.

      Reply
  4. Ad 4
    4 January 2025 at 9:59 am

    So, if you had the money and you could save a bit of New Zealand that wasn't otherwise going to be saved, would you give your money to NZNatureFund?

    This Newsroom article puts an inevitably negative frame upon it as creeping baseline funding displacement:

    https://newsroom.co.nz/2025/01/03/docs-big-donation-drive-gets-mixed-reviews/

    This summarises many of the big projects that NZNatureFund actually does:

    https://nznaturefund.org/projects/

    If you want to be a largely grssroots and hence very small scale effort in actual conservation work, there's myriad to choose from, and Ford and Bird are as good a clearning-house as any to get in with them.

    There are others operating on a regional scale but with little central government input, like https://arkinthepark.org.nz/ As ever so much of their work relies on a few paid staff and otherwise scores and scores of volunteers over years and years.

    Then there's the fully private version like Santuary Mountain Maungatautiri which is 3,300 hectares of fully fenced enclosure, and about the only pace I've seen 10 Tuatara in sunlight and looking very comfortable with it.
    https://www.sanctuarymountain.co.nz/

    But then there's NZNatureFund, which is a medium-scale donor aggregator to actually assist DoC with some of the big projects – the biggest one to date is the full eradication of pests from Auckland Island which would be a mighty feat.

    I have a sneaking suspicion that DoC projects have the depth of emotional appeal that enable donors both locally and from afar to do some good. I can't see a hard line policy distinction for decreasing donor influence on DoC – in fact it's more like the state is lagging behind in capturing private conservation donations when there are so many large and medium scale models across the country already operating and doing very solid work.

    But still worth a policy discussion.

    Reply
  5. Jenny 5
    4 January 2025 at 11:11 am

    At UN HQ: UN Special Rapporteur Calls for Global Recognition of Gaza Genocide and Decisive Action

    https://law4palestine.org/at-un-hq-law-for-palestine-briefs-states-on-their-international-legal-responsibilities-for-palestine-states-urged-to-cease-relations-supporting-israels-unlawful-occupation-and-apartheid/

    Will New Zealand lawmakers heed her call?

    The Genocide Convention to which New Zealand is a signatory, stipulates that all countries that, detect a genocide is being committed, must take all actions to prevent it.
    Does the Luxon administration believe in upholding the international rule of law, or not?
    Does our parliamentary opposition have the courage to hold them to account?

    Proposed Parliamentary members bill:

    That the government of, Aotearoa New Zealand officially recognise that a genocide is being committed in the Middle Eastern enclave of Gaza against the indigenous Palestinian population of that territory.

    Reply
  6. tWig 6
    4 January 2025 at 11:28 am

    The Guardian calls Musk, who is trolling the UK, and Starmer specifically, 'the world's richest pub bore'. Well called.

    Reply
  7. Jenny 7
    4 January 2025 at 11:35 am

    Would we have done our best to save Anne Frank and the countless others like her, if we could have?

    Have our lawmakers done their best to save Hind Rajab and the countless others like her, as they should have?

    Hind Rajab The Anne Frank of Palestine by Indie Nile

    Reply
    • Ad 7.1
      4 January 2025 at 1:19 pm

      Lawmakers? Really?

      It's a safe assertion that from southern Turkey to northern Iraq, all the way to the Sinai, and down to Yemen, international law isn't having any effect on peaceful outcomes.

      Reply
    • SPC 7.2
      4 January 2025 at 5:25 pm

      Action is mobilised at the international level.

      Can the UNGA can find work arounds for the UNSC roadblocks?

      Reply
      • Jenny 7.2.1
        5 January 2025 at 10:04 am

        SPC @7.2

        4 January 2025 at 5:25 pm

        Action is mobilised at the international level.

        Can the UNGA can find work arounds for the UNSC roadblocks?

        The answer to your question SPC is, No.
        But you probably knew that.

        By design; majority votes in the UNGA are non-binding, making the UNGA powerless to decide on the evidence of acts of genocide. Even the UNSC is powerless to decide on the evidence of acts of genocide, if just one of its permanent members uses their veto to quash any proposed motion.

        If only just one member of the UNSC uses its veto. even for a vote on the crime of genocide, the UNGA and the UNSC are both rendered powerless to act.

        But….

        When it comes to the crime of genocide the UNGA and the UNSC don't need to decide to act against a genocide.

        The decision to act against the crime of genocide was made in 1948 when the Genocide Convention was first agreed to by its founding signatories.

        By design; The Genocide Convention specifically calls on all states that are signatories to the Genocide Convention to act if they detect a genocide.

        A fact that the Russian Federation falsely exploited as a political figleaf to cover its unprovoked attack on Ukraine.

        Waiting on a decision of the UNGA and the UNSC and ICJ is a cowardly abrogation of this country's responsibilities as a signatory the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. (The Genocide Convention)

        If the government of New Zealand officially decides, that based on evidence put
        before them, that there is a plausible case that a genocide is being committed in Gaza by the state of Israel, then this country is legally bound to make, to the best of our ability, efforts to prevent it.

        It is for this purpose that I have suggested that at least one concerned MP put a private Members Bill in the ballot to decide the issue.

        Reply
        • SPC 7.2.1.1
          5 January 2025 at 10:18 am

          An individual nations capacity might well be limited.

          There is the possibility for the UNGA to engage in dialogue with the ICC through 'quasi-judicial' resolutions, in coordinating collective responses to a recalcitrant State and individual perpetrators and also through the possible assumption of a referral power.

          https://www.jstor.org/stable/26800626

          https://www.jstor.org/page-scan-delivery/get-page-scan/26800626/0

          Reply
          • Jenny 7.2.1.1.1
            5 January 2025 at 6:29 pm

            If New Zealand or any other signatory to the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, determine that a genocide is being committed, nowhere in the convention is it written that they have to wait on 'the possible assumption of a referral power' before taking action to prevent that genocide.

            That the nations represented in the UN General Assembly even has trouble referring cases to the ICC without being vetoed by the UN Security Council, pretty much confirms the impotence of the assembly of nations in the General Assembly, Which is the way it was designed from its founding after World War II by the victorious world powers of the time, Britain, China, France, USA, USSR/Russia. These five global powers still keep decision making power in the UN to themselves to this very day.

            The UNSC is the ultimate decision making body of the UN, but as your link, SPC, makes clear the UNSC is strapped by the veto not to make decisions that go against any of the interests of the five permanent members, or their allies.

            From your link:

            …..The role of the United Nations Security Council ('UNSC') in the enforcement of international criminal law has a chequered and controversial record, not least with respect to its power to make a referral to the International Criminal Court ('ICC'). Double standards permeate UNSC decision-making, with permanent members of the UNSC in particular criticized for impeding ICC scrutiny of its own nationals and those of its client states …..

            On the occasions where the nations of the General Assembly do come to an agreement, and the nations of the Security Council don't veto it, then that international agreement is often codified as a United Nations International Convention, binding on the signatory countries that ratify that convention.

            The United Nations ban on ozone depleting CFCs known as the Vienna Convention is one example of a United Nations international convention that is binding on its signatories.

            https://legal.un.org/avl/ha/vcpol/vcpol.html

            The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), is another of the United Nations conventions that is binding on its signatories, making it one of the conventions that makes up part of what is generally referred to as, 'the international rules-based order', (or system).

            NZDF's Red Sea deployment extended

            https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/nzdf%E2%80%99s-red-sea-deployment-extended

            New Zealand has extended its contribution to the US-led coalition working to uphold maritime security in the Red Sea, Defence Minister Judith Collins and Foreign Minister Winston Peters announced today…..

            “This decision demonstrates our support to the international rules-based system and freedom of navigation.”….

            The deployment is mandated to conclude on 31 January 2025.

            The US is not a signatory to The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS,) but demands that China, also not a signatory, adhere to its principles.

            https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/us-state-department-picks-apart-prcs-south-china-sea-customary-law-claim

            The US and other supporters of the 'Rules-based International order' don't wait for a ruling from the ICC or ICJ on breaches of the UN Convention on the law of the Sea before acting on enforcing it.

            Nor do we. We did not wait for 'the possible assumption of a referral power' before deciding the Houtis enforcement of a blockade on ships heading for Israel, was illegal under maritime law.

            If this country determines that Israel is committing genocide, then neither should we wait for 'the possible assumption of a referral power' before taking action under our legal obligations to the Genocide Convention.

            Tell me SPC, after all this, do you still stand by your contention, that it not a genocide, because the IDF issue warnings to the Palestinians to leave an area before they start destroying the buildings and infrastructure and killing those remaining in that area?

            I would be grateful if you could let me know your answer.

            Israel's intent to commit Genocide is not hard to prove.

            Amnesty International

            26 Feb 2024 — Israel defying ICJ ruling to prevent genocide by failing to allow adequate humanitarian aid to reach Gaza……

            The Guardian

            3 Jan 2024 — A group of prominent Israelis has accused the country's judicial authorities of ignoring “extensive and blatant” incitement to genocide……

            Al Jazeera

            14 Jan 2024 — A database of 500 statements showing Israeli incitement to genocide provides ample evidence of genocidal intent…..

            NBC News

            13 Nov 2023 — “Some of that rhetoric can be seen as potentially genocidal from the way that it dehumanizes Palestinian civilians,”….

            Jewish Currents

            https://jewishcurrents.org › a-textbook-case-of-genocide

            13 Oct 2023 — Under international law, the crime of genocide is defined by “the intent … Indeed, Israel's genocidal assault on Gaza is quite explicit,…..

            Reply
            • SPC 7.2.1.1.1.1
              5 January 2025 at 7:30 pm

              Without the possible assumption of a referral power by a collective of nations at the UNGA level, there would not be effective action.

              Action such as the recent Red Sea one, requires nations to work together. It followed Resolution 2722 at the UNSC.

              As I posted a few days back.

              https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-03-01-2025/#comment-2020540

              The ICC has yet to issue arrest warrants as per incitement to genocide, the first part of a process to punish this.

              Statements by individuals do not provide evidence of a collective guilt as per a plan to act on the incitement. Deeds do, such as denial of access to aid to civilians.

              do you still stand by your contention, that it not a genocide, because the IDF issue warnings to the Palestinians to leave an area before they start destroying the buildings and infrastructure and killing those remaining in that area?

              All the information you cited was known to the ICC and it only concluded there was a case to answer.

              So far it has limited its action to issuing warrants for crimes against humanity and war crimes.

              Reply
  8. adam 8
    4 January 2025 at 1:00 pm

    Militarism is a sad joke. Why the US kills so many of it's own, start by looking at the military, it's place in society. A poor to non-existence mental health system. Economic depravity.

    Reply
  9. georgecom 9
    4 January 2025 at 2:24 pm

    I made a short submission today, as follows, on David Seymours TOW bill. Little to do with the TOW, but more about claims of Maori Privilege which underpin his philosophy.

    I have heard David Seymour and others who publicly support this Bill, such as Don Brash, Hobsons Choice, Tax payers union, talk about "Maori Privilege" as a reason to revisit the Treaty of Waitangi. I think any detailed study of privilege in New Zealand would reveal that privilege, power and influence sits alongside wealth. Those with the highest concentration of wealth enjoy a higher concentration of power, influence and privilege. I think any detailed study will show that wealth and privilege is concentrated, disproportionately, with older/old pakeha males. Should the promoters of this Bill want to seriously address unequal privilege in this country the place to start is the (unequal) distribution of wealth. A good place to begin is the introduction of a comprehensive Capital Gains Tax.

    Reply
    • weka 9.1
      4 January 2025 at 2:46 pm

      nice one.

      Reply
    • Ad 9.2
      4 January 2025 at 3:28 pm

      It will be a collective sigh of relief for all parties except for ACT when it is voted down and killed off dead in the next couple of months.

      Then we can all get back to focusing on the ruination this government is making of our society, environment, and economy.

      Reply
    • SPC 9.3
      4 January 2025 at 4:53 pm

      The real threat looming is the C of C being part of an international agenda to make foreign investors sovereign, rather than nation state.

      The next level to the fast-tracking legislation to diminish nation state rules based processes.

      Reply
  10. SPC 10
    4 January 2025 at 4:48 pm

    As they cost less than a packet of smokes, there is not much of a cost barrier.

    https://www.1news.co.nz/2024/12/31/vaping-kits-to-be-made-free-for-smokers-to-help-them-quit/

    Reply
  11. Ed1 11
    4 January 2025 at 5:32 pm

    I appreciate the links to other sites in the right hand column, but it seems that our news, and more especially political comment, is becoming more and more fragmented.

    I saw an article recently that referred to an old post by David Farrar on using "Free Speech" as a vehicle for attacking human rights generally, legitimising strong political views – I think it was referred to in a recent post by a left commentator, but I cannot remember who or when – it covered recent activity regarding a "Human Rights" appointment to make objections to government policy more difficult to get action on – can anyone remember such an article? – I think it was in the last two weeks.

    Reply

Leave a Comment