Open mike 04/03/2015

Written By: - Date published: 6:31 am, March 4th, 2015 - 415 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

openmike 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 …

415 comments on “Open mike 04/03/2015 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Paul 1
    4 March 2015 at 6:40 am

    The Herald claims it’s about to do some journalism about spying.
    I’ll believe it when I see it.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11411221

    • Incognito 1.1
      4 March 2015 at 7:31 am

      Who would have thought that Middle Earth with its innocent and harmless Hobbits is up to its eyeballs in the Five Eyes Spy Network? Anyway, that’s all fiction and a “smear campaign from the Left and its [L]ittle henchmen”; the Government PR machine is preparing a counter attack as we speak. I am glad that the raid on Hager has not stopped him from exposing these things. Who’s going to take the keys off Key?

  2. Lindsey 2
    4 March 2015 at 6:51 am

    When did they last do journalism?

  3. Morrissey 3
    4 March 2015 at 7:11 am

    “She’s bored…it’s not stretching her…she’s probably had enough.”
    Was Jim Mora REALLY talking about Dame Maggie Smith?
    The Panel, Radio NZ National, Tuesday 3 March 2015
    Jim Mora, Tony Doe, Josie Pagani, Zara Potts

    In the pre-show segment, the usual array of “light” material, including dodgy research (today’s, as so often, was about coffee-drinking), “pearls of wisdom from Warren Buffett” and the pending retirement of Dame Maggie Smith from Downton Abbey. It’s during this last item that the host reveals what he is really thinking by the following supreme act of projection….

    JOSIE PAGANI: Some of these series, like Grey’s Anatomy just keep going and going and going, long after they’ve outstayed their welcome.
    ZARA POTTS: Did it begin with Dallas? Did Dallas begin that trend of just going on and on?
    JIM MORA: Oh it’s been going on and on….
    JOSIE PAGANI: Just know when your time’s up, and just go with good grace, and mind the cockroach.
    TONY DOE: I blame M*A*S*H for all of that.
    MORA: I reckon she’s BORED.
    ZARA POTTS: Who?
    MORA: Maggie.
    ZARA POTTS: Do you think?
    MORA: Yeah. It’s not stretching her, is it?
    ZARA POTTS: Noooo…
    MORA: And she’s basically playing…. I mean they introduced that romance with that Polish….
    ZARA POTTS: I stopped watching after Season One.
    MORA: She’s probably had enough.
    JOSIE PAGANI: I’ve never seen a single episode.
    MORA: Of Downton Abbey?
    JOSIE PAGANI: No, I’m more of a Breaking Bad, Sopranos person.
    ZARA POTTS: I’m with you.
    MORA: It’s a lot LIKE Breaking Bad—
    ZARA POTTS: A ha ha ha ha ha ha!
    JOSIE PAGANI:The costumes—-

    et cetera, et cetera….

    After the 4 o’clock news, it’s time for the Panel proper—and for the mandatory reintroductions of his guests. Jim Mora probably hates having to do this, wittering away for several minutes, saying nothing of interest to people who have been on his program dozens, possibly scores, of times—-but his producers obviously force him to go through the painful process at the start of every program. He copes with it by indulging in small amusements, like composing cringe-inducing alliterations….

    MORA: On the Panel today, a Pair of Pundits Proficient in Politics and Prolific with Pro-o-o-ose!
    JOSIE PAGANI: Snort.
    MORA: Tony Doe, from the Transtasman Political Newsletter and the Main Report, and Josie Pagani, communications consultant. Good afternoon.
    JOSIE PAGANI: That was very GOOD, Jim!
    MORA: Is “communications consultant” all right or….?
    JOSIE PAGANI: No, the bit before it! Yeah that’ll do. Ha ha ha ha!
    TONY DOE: Ha ha ha ha!
    MORA: You’re just back from school camp.
    JOSIE PAGANI: I am. Yes, this is the Raumati South primary school. I went away, and it was great. There were some WONDERFUL teachers, a couple of young male teachers leading it, and they got the balance between risk and safety just right. So all us parents got the chance to water-bomb our kids with giant medieval catapults, and chuck them off ropes into rivers and it was great! Although I think I may have taken it a step too far when I found myself supervising my son and friends as they tested an electric fence by holding hands to see who got the biggest shock!
    MORA: Who’d get the biggest shock?
    JOSIE PAGANI: Well, the one at the back! It was actually a very good scientific experiment. It was a really good camp. It’s worth doing!

    MORA: Well done. Well done. I’m sure you had a great time. Ah, um, Tony Doe, you’ve released this new song.
    TONY DOE: Yes. Soundhouse New Zealand here in Christchurch–Dmitry Novokov’s label—have done a great job with the production and mastering and I think it’ll be up on i-Tunes fairly soon.
    MORA: Okay. We’re going to play a little snatch of it now. I haven’t heard this yet. This is called “How Do You Embrace the Earth?”

    ….[Cue music. Acoustic guitars and a male voice belting out: “You can take a fan and flame it, you can take a gorge and span it, walk a hundred miles to get things do-o-o-one……”]

    MORA: That’s YOU!
    JOSIE PAGANI: Is that YOU singing?
    TONY DOE: Yes it is.
    MORA: That’s YOU!
    JOSIE PAGANI: That’s a very impressive political pundit!
    MORA: Yeah he is, isn’t he!
    TONY DOE: Ha ha ha!
    MORA: The very versatile Tony Doe. Uh, um, we’re not doing it justice of course, it’s about three minutes long and so….
    TONY DOE: Yeah.
    MORA: Well DONE.
    TONY DOE: Thank you. Yeah.
    MORA: And is it an ecological song?
    TONY DOE: Yeah it is. it sort of came to me, I’ve been reading a lot about people who go and do these Greenpeace things, and go in front of whaling ships in their boats and so on, and I’m just thinking, you know, it takes a lot of guts to do that. It just made me think about it and as I was strolling along to work one day the thing came into my head. We put some music together, did some demos and we’ve moved it on from that point.
    MORA: Well DONE.
    TONY DOE: [modestly] So yeah. Pleased to be able to get it out to a wider audience.
    MORA: Fantastic! I’ll have a listen to the full version after The Panel. So, ahhhhh, um, it’s your other expertise we require from now on. And let’s talk about… um… The cost of implementing a new childcare system has gone up from an estimated thirty million dollars to a hundred and sixty-three million dollars….

    ………..

    Later in the program, Mora briefly lapsed from his studied “nice” mode and revealed a glimpse of the darkness lurking within. This has happened before. While he is never going to be a brute of the airwaves like Larry “Lackwit” Williams over on NewstalkZB, Jim Mora nevertheless shares something of the Lackwit’s contempt for other people. Mora is far more intelligent than Williams, but you get the feeling that there’s a similarly unpleasant side to him. This afternoon it came out when he was talking to the chairman of the National Army Museum Board of Trustees Matthew Beattie.…

    MORA: Why not at Waiouru? Wouldn’t you like to stage this kind of Conflict Museum yourself?
    MATTHEW BEATTIE: We already do that.
    MORA: [voice suddenly rising in irritation] I KNOW, but….

    A couple of minutes later, at the end of the interview, he said “Thank you Matthew” in a testy, huffy tone. I’m almost certain his teeth were gritted. Many years ago, the legendary Auckland commercial radio broadcaster Alice Worsley spoke about how she always smiled when she spoke on the radio—even though nobody could see her, she said, the listeners could sense it in her voice. Jim Mora clearly never took any such advice on board.

    Later, during a discussion about the possibility of MPs refusing to take a payrise, Mora demonstrates another of his achilles heels: his crucial lack of judgement, as shown by his predilection for shallow, nasty newspaper columnists. He went through a stage a few years ago of quoting, whenever possible, the thoroughly nasty New York Times chickenhawk David Brooks. But even if he is a political extremist, a liar, and a coward, there is no denying that Brooks is a forceful writer and an intelligent person. You can understand why Jim Mora might be disposed to quote him from time to time. Today, however, Mora chose to quote someone who is nothing more than nasty and extremely shallow. Without a doubt, this was the nadir of today’s program….

    MORA: Was it Kerre Woodham who wrote a column saying that most MPs do not have the talent to pull a big salary in the private sector?

    • Paul 3.1
      4 March 2015 at 7:22 am

      “MORA: On the Panel today, a Pair of Pundits Proficient in Politics and Prolific with Pro-o-o-ose!”

      Not Pagani then.
      How she does she get on all these programmes?
      By being the voice of neoliberalism while claiming to talk for the Labour movement.

  4. dv 4
    4 March 2015 at 7:12 am

    Herald working With Hager!!!

    • Colonial Rawshark 4.1
      4 March 2015 at 8:17 am

      😯

    • mary_a 4.2
      4 March 2015 at 4:48 pm

      @ dv –

      Yes, I thought it was a bit of a strange combination when I read about it this morning.

      However, NZH needs some serious instruction on investigative journalism technique I’d say, having ignored it for quite a while and who better than top NZ investigative journalist, Nicky Hager to show the Herald’s team how to do their job.

      Seriously though, if Hager is involved and to a lesser extent NZH’s David Fisher, you can be sure the outcome will be something we are unlikely to forget in a hurry!

      Hope Key is a tad antsy over this! More clean undies coming up PM?

      The names Hager, Greenwald and Snowden linked together exposing some nasty spying business involving NZ, must be quite a spine chilling experience for John Key!

      The PM could become so uncomfortable at the thought of what’s likely to emerge after Hager has got his teeth into this spying issue, it’s possible he might consider closing down Hager’s information and communication sources! In the best interests of the country of course!

      Hope Nicky is prepared for another raid of his property!

      After all, isn’t this how the great dictator operates?

  5. amirite 5
    4 March 2015 at 7:21 am

    Teina Pora is finally free after 21 years! The one good thing about being tied to the UK was the Privy Council. Now that option is no more available, we need an independent body to oversee our justice system processes.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11411064

    • Ovid 5.1
      4 March 2015 at 7:36 am

      Jacinda Ardern is right. NZ really needs a Criminal Cases Review Commission.

    • Pasupial 5.2
      4 March 2015 at 11:20 am

      Lots of questions yet to be answered about this case. Hopefully some of our parliamentary representatives will be up to asking them.

      Police and Crown Prosecutors built their careers on setting Teina Pora up, then those same Police and Crown Prosecutors moved up the ranks of power. Left for them to decide, Pora would have rotted away forever, external legal minds with no fear or favour have freed him.

      Deep questions about NZs so called justice system must now be asked. How many innocent men and women have been set up by the NZ Police and now languish in jail? No sane democracy would continue without now demanding action on this front.

      http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2015/03/03/teina-poras-horror-ends-how-did-nz-justice-get-it-so-wrong/#sthash.5r28tkm3.dpuf

      1993, March 23: Teina Pora charged with burglary, sexual violation and murder.

      1994, June: Pora convicted as a party to the rape and murder on the basis of confessions he made. Sentenced to life in prison.

      1996, May: Rewa arrested after attacking a young woman in the inner Auckland suburb of Remuera, DNA from Rewa’s father found to match semen from Burdett crimescene.

      1998: Rewa eventually convicted of the rape of 27 women, including Ms Burdett but two juries fail to reach a verdict on murder.

      1999: Court of Appeal quashed Pora’s convictions as a result of the DNA evidence implicating Rewa and evidence that Rewa acted alone.

      2000, June: Pora was again convicted at his retrial, based on his confessions and witnesses, some of whom it later emerged were paid. His appeal to the Court of Appeal was dismissed…

      2012, May: Police’s criminal profiling expert goes public in Herald with view Pora not involved; Pora’s team sue police claiming it is unlawfully withholding evidence, Ms Burdett’s brother says Pora is innocent.

      2013, February: It is revealed police paid some prosecution witnesses.

      http://www.odt.co.nz/news/national/335141/teina-pora-finally-free

      • alwyn 5.2.1
        4 March 2015 at 12:42 pm

        You say

        “2013, February: It is revealed police paid some prosecution witnesses.”

        Do you have anything further as to who these paid witnesses were?
        If, for example they were expert witnesses I imagine that they would normally be paid. I don’t know, and the ODT doesn’t help, whether this is meaningful or not.

        • Murray Rawshark 5.2.1.1
          4 March 2015 at 6:06 pm

          They were not expert witnesses.

          “Wright-St Clair’s advice was followed until nine months later when Pora was arrested on the warrants. Eventually Aunty Terry testified and claimed Pora had admitted it. The police have declined the Herald’s Official Information Act request for information about payments made to witnesses in the Burdett court cases but court documents show the aunt was paid $5000 after giving evidence at Pora’s first trial. She is one of three witnesses in trials associated with the murder known to have been paid.”

          “A witness paid $3,000, another paid $7000 and a jailhouse informant testified in court cases to the effect that Pora and Rewa knew each other. All were granted name suppression.”

          http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10877229

          They were paid liars, no doubt prompted by detectives who thought they had to get their man by any means possible. This case screams for a Royal Commission.

          • alwyn 5.2.1.1.1
            4 March 2015 at 8:04 pm

            Thank you.
            Jesus!
            I could happily accept payments of expenses, or accommodation if you had to travel to attend the trial, but nothing like those sums.
            I wasn’t living in New Zealand at the time and I had never really known anything about it until I heard about it going to the Privy Council.

            • Murray Rawshark 5.2.1.1.1.1
              4 March 2015 at 8:54 pm

              The police spend a lot of money on informants. I have quite a few problems with it. They lie, they blame their own crimes on others, and they entrap people. Particularly in the case of cellmate informants, it is an extremely unreliable practice.

    • infused 5.3
      4 March 2015 at 11:41 am

      Removing the Privy Council was such a retarded thing to do. It needs to be replaced.

    • rawshark-yeshe 5.4
      4 March 2015 at 12:06 pm

      Great news indeed and may he enjoy a life after all.

      The other forgotten one, incarcerated due to police malevolence (imho) is Scott Watson. He must be due out in a year or two anyway .. but what a travesty his prosecution was. So many experienced marine witnesses completely ignored by police and never even questioned. Free Scott Watson please while his loyal father is still alive to see it happen.

      • Murray Rawshark 5.4.1
        4 March 2015 at 6:12 pm

        Tautoko. I strongly believe he was set up. The right guy, in the wrong place at the wrong time.

    • millsy 5.5
      4 March 2015 at 12:54 pm

      Someone who probably deserves to have his convictions over turned.

      Unfortunately he was not a middle class carpenter/wine connesur nor a nerdy classics major so his case was under the radar.

  6. Coffee Connoisseur 6
    4 March 2015 at 7:38 am

    Dear Gen Y…. Imagine

    Remember back when you were at school. Remember the warm summer days? the long break you had over Christmas and the fun you had with your friends? Remember the other school holidays you got to have each year. Then there was the 15 min break you got each day at school, one in the morning and one in the afternoon when you’d hang out with friends or play four square. Then on top of that there was the hour lunch break every day.
    Remember starting at 9 and finishing at 3pm or 3:30 and going to a friends house after school before having to head home for dinner?
    All that extra free time that we had.

    We could have that again….as adults

    All we have to do is use the existing technology to automate as many jobs as we can…..

    Imagine having a TV. Imagine keeping the remote control locked away in a drawer, never using it and getting up to change the channel every time you wanted to watch something different instead of using the remote. Would you continue to get up and change the channel each time?
    Or would you unlock the drawer and get the remote control……

    We have the technology to automate over 60% of the roles in society and we have the key to unlock the drawer….

    • Coffee Connoisseur 6.1
      4 March 2015 at 7:56 am

      Imagine unlocking it……

    • Draco T Bastard 6.2
      4 March 2015 at 8:06 am

      I doubt it’s Gen Y that are standing in the way of that happening. From what I can make out, it’s the Baby Boomers and the Gen Xers. Just look at the people on here who complain about supermarkets introducing self-service machines.

      • Coffee Connoisseur 6.2.1
        4 March 2015 at 8:23 am

        Its not (Gen Y standing in the way), but that is why I direct posts on this topic to Gen Y. They get it.
        Our generation and the baby boomers are simply unable to think beyond the bounds of the current system even in the face of logic and common sense (present company excluded, of course). They have been too conditioned.
        I’ve talked to many Gen Yers about this sort of thing, it’s fantastic to see their face light up. They get it instantly and it is wonderful to see.
        Many of them already see the sheer stupidity of Man working for The System instead of The System working for Man in this day and age given the technology we have available today.

        • Draco T Bastard 6.2.1.1
          4 March 2015 at 9:03 am

          Its not (Gen Y standing in the way), but that is why I direct posts on this topic to Gen Y. They get it.

          And there’s less of them than Baby Boomers which is why it’s the Baby Boomers and Gen Xers that need to be persuaded.

          • Stephanie Rodgers 6.2.1.1.1
            4 March 2015 at 9:23 am

            Gen Y is also rarely in the positions of power which can make a real difference.

            • Coffee Connoisseur 6.2.1.1.1.1
              4 March 2015 at 10:06 am

              At the moment, but as time moves on they will be. The baby boomers will pass on as will my generation.

              Putting the concepts out now gives them the time to digest them and understand that these ideas are based on logic and common sense. That they provide an alternative future for their children and grandchildren than the future they face now.
              It gives them the time to start thinking about how to do it when their time comes.
              The concepts are ones that they are far more comfortable with than my generation or the Babyboomers.
              Gen Y grew up in a largely automated world where much of the things that they needed/ wanted were far more accessible and often at their fingertips. They don’t need to make the mental leaps to get there that earlier generations need to

              We are much further down the track than I suspect many people realise and in many ways a transition to a much more egalitarian and automated society although would definitely have its challenges, it could be much easier than what most think that it would be.

              • Colonial Rawshark …
                4 March 2015 at 1:21 pm

                Gen Y grew up in a largely automated world where much of the things that they needed/ wanted were far more accessible and often at their fingertips. They don’t need to make the mental leaps to get there that earlier generations need to

                The problem is a real lack of historical and political awareness. They don’t necessarily understand how much has been gained, and how hard it was fought for, and how the oligarchy is clawing it back every day.

          • Coffee Connoisseur 6.2.1.1.2
            4 March 2015 at 1:16 pm

            That is a much much harder ask. Almost impossible with Baby Boomers unless they have moved into retirement, are concerned about working for the rest of their lives and living on a pension. Even then thats years of social conditioning from their time that would need to be overcome.
            Gen X a bit easier, we at least have seen the introduction to technology into our lives and the difference it has made both good and bad. Our generation was arguably the luckiest. We had the best of both worlds.

    • Ovid 6.3
      4 March 2015 at 8:44 am

      We’re already seeing this in supermarkets. Where there were a dozen checkout lanes, now there are banks of self-checkout machines overseen by just one worker. Automation is coming. Everywhere. Already there are general-purpose robots that can learn new tasks (unlike the task-specific factory robots of old) and cost about the same to buy as the average worker’s annual salary. But they only cost a few cents per hour to run, and they don’t take breaks, have holidays or get tired. They’re still developing, but think of how good they’ll be in 10 years or so.

      We have no idea how economies will adapt to this kind of automation in the coming decades. This isn’t buggy whip makers being replaced by the car industry, or the coming of factory-made cloth. A new industrial revolution is coming and regardless of how things take shape, there’s going to be a lot of pain before the smoke clears.

      • Colonial Rawshark 6.3.1
        4 March 2015 at 9:27 am

        The answer is for us to create a society where people can live, love, contribute, create and be creative when they are freed from their minimum wage checkout jobs. In other words, to be human and spontaneous again instead of doing jobs that a machine can do.

      • aerobubble 6.3.2
        4 March 2015 at 1:19 pm

        Automation should do away with supermarkets then too. Along with any mass monopoly, if a free market existed. The corner store would be king, the drop off point, the netwok hub, from services from deliver to hosting data doggles. But the technology is still in its infancy, the market is plagued by a few massive corporates just like at the start of the industrial revolution, lockstep against stuff like standardisation of weights and measures. This can be seen in the utter lack of intellectual rigior for foundational computer science, modern CS is the worst kind of engineering possible.

    • Gosman 6.4
      4 March 2015 at 11:09 am

      I’m not sure you have articulated a vision that wouldn’t cause massive amounts of social dislocation. Our current economic paradigm has a strong connection between income and work. Automating over 50% of the jobs in the world would be a problem unless the level of economic activity increases and/or mechanisms are put in pace to ensure people being replaced have new means to access income.

      • McFlock 6.4.1
        4 March 2015 at 11:31 am

        lol I think you just opened to door to a UBI debate.

        Any change in society results in social dislocation. The objective is to mitigate the dislocation and, if possible and equitable, manage the pace of change to minimise dislocation.

        • Coffee Connoisseur 6.4.1.1
          4 March 2015 at 1:51 pm

          UBI is possibly one option as part of a transition path. There are likely to be others.
          If a UBI were introduced at a level where you could still meet all of your needs and wants and you got to work ‘school hours’ would that be a viable option for you? If not what would?

        • gsays 6.4.1.2
          4 March 2015 at 6:44 pm

          hi mc flock you stole the words out of my mouth albeit 7 hours before they occured to me.

          there you go labour strategists; a ubi as an election plank.
          come ian lees galloway, i saw you at the recent guy standing korero in wellys.

      • Coffee Connoisseur 6.4.2
        4 March 2015 at 11:47 am

        Great. and that is exactly what needs to happen.
        People should understand the possibilities of such a system and how life could be vastly better than what we have right now in todays society.

        Then (exactly as you have just done) start to identify the issues that would need to be overcome and start thinking about the ways to overcome them that would enable society to embark on such a transition should it choose to.

        ‘i’Automating over 50% of the jobs in the world would be a problem unless the level of economic activity increases and/or mechanisms are put in pace to ensure people being replaced have new means to access income.’/i’

        This is in my view the hardest part. Identifying the possibilities on how to overcome or manage this challenge is a critical step and certainly not an insurmountable one.

        Once this part is done, large parts of what would be required already exist and are in use by large sections of the world population already.

      • infused 6.4.3
        4 March 2015 at 12:06 pm

        I actually did a study on this way back in 2000 when doing a comp sci degree. It’s a huge problem and there was no real outcome. There still isn’t any good solution to this issue.

        What we came to though, was that the work force is going to be made up of small, highly skilled teams in different areas.

        The 20/30 hour week was mean’t to solve some of this, but I doubt it would.

        • Coffee Connoisseur 6.4.3.1
          4 March 2015 at 1:43 pm

          ‘i’I actually did a study on this way back in 2000 when doing a comp sci degree. It’s a huge problem and there was no real outcome. There still isn’t any good solution to this issue.’/i’

          I’m very happy that they got you to do that exercise, but the technology at the time even as recently as 2000 was not at the level it is today.
          Todays technology makes it much more achievable and easily so.
          It will become a huge problem if we simply sit back and do nothing.
          There are solutions. It is a system. Subject it to Systems Analysis and you will be able to identify the true requirements and from there solutions.
          What parts did you get stuck on?
          When you said there was no real outcome what was the original problem you were trying to resolve or what was the stated intent of the exercise?

          ‘i’What we came to though, was that the workforce is going to be made up of small, highly skilled teams in different areas.’/i’

          It seems to me you were on the right track though as this is a likely scenario for a highly automated system. If you remove the Profit Motive then society can be geared toward continual improvement with resources available to science and technology to work on ways to advance and improve society.

      • Draco T Bastard 6.4.4
        4 March 2015 at 12:15 pm

        The automation and the social dislocation is coming whether we want it to or not (and, IMO, we should want it to) and so we need to discuss what we’re going to do about it. One thing that’s obvious to me is that the rich will find it increasingly difficult to bludge off the rest of us and so will look to keep things the way they are despite being part of the push for more automation so that taxes can be lowered for the rich.

    • Rosie 6.5
      4 March 2015 at 11:43 am

      Hi Coffee C.

      As much as I agree with some to most the content of these posts you have been directing at Gen Y’ers however I find them kind of………..patronising.

      As you say yourself, Gen Yer’s get stuff. Of course they do. Young people have active minds and are good at holding a mirror up the generation before them.

      So, do they want people telling them what to do and what to think? Do they want to be moulded into a pattern of the older generation’s world view? I doubt it.

      Along time ago when I was young I rebelled like mad at older people telling me what to do and think. I don’t think young people are any less inclined to follow instructions simply because they belong to an age group. If we, as the older generation (Gen X for me) continue to tell young people what to do we are still treating them as children, as they if they not maturing, as if they don’t have their own developing identity, with the forming of their own world view at part of that identity.

      Give them a break and trust in their vision. Don’t forget we need to lead by example only. At the moment we sucking hugely at that and I think they know that.

      • Coffee Connoisseur 6.5.1
        4 March 2015 at 12:57 pm

        Hi Rosie

        Could you let me know what you felt is patronising? Genuinely interested.

        I am simply putting into words what many of them are already discussing.

        ‘i’So, do they want people telling them what to do and what to think? Do they want to be moulded into a pattern of the older generation’s worldview? I doubt it.’/i’

        No they don’t. But they are already…

        Gen Y is this they, are that, they are lazy, They are unreliable, they need to get a job, they shouldn’t think that owning a house is a right! They want everything now, They aren’t prepared to work for anything.

        ‘i’Give them a break and trust in their vision. Don’t forget we need to lead by example only. At the moment we sucking hugely at that and I think they know that.’/i’

        I have unfortunately heard some start to say perhaps our ideas are young and naive. Perhaps we need some life experience, perhaps we just need to get a career as previous generations are saying.

        The simple truth of the matter is that they think differently, They grew up with technology, They are used to having things now. This is simply what they grew up with. They need to know that there is nothing wrong with the way they think. They need to know that it is ok to ignore those who say there is.
        I do trust in their vision. It is my vision too. They need to know that they are on the right path in the face of many telling them they are not.
        Leading by example (and not sucking) still starts with a conversation.

        I am saying what I say for a number of reasons.
        First and foremost I am saying it to get people to think about what is possible, to think outside of the box, outside of the current system, to push the boundaries, to get people to look at better ways of doing things.

        I want them to know that their thinking is good, it’s beyond good, it’s exciting, It’s logical, its common sense.
        I want them to know that generations before them have all changed the system to suit their needs and that they should be no different.

        There are powerful vested interests in this world that need to be overcome to make this a reality and as a result the earlier the conversations start, the better.

        I talk about it on here in the hope that it will piss off some Gen Xers who will go, what the hell is this guy on about talking to Gen Y! I’m Gen X and I get it!
        Afterall Gen Xers are having kids now perhaps if they do understand things like this, as an alternative to the world and a better world than the one we have now, then perhaps they will have conversations with their children about the role that automation can play in a better world for their future.

        Perhaps those Gen Xers who do get it will go into parliament and start having these conversations.
        Perhaps by the time Gen Y gets there some of the work will have been started and they will simply build upon it having had 20 or so years to think about the challenges and ways to overcome them.
        I talk about it now so that when people start to seriously consider the alternative and start discussions on how to do it then perhaps I can help them many of the answers that they are going to be looking for.

        • Colonial Rawshark 6.5.1.1
          4 March 2015 at 1:11 pm

          Modern civilisation is declining rapidly at this stage and we are in the last 20 years or so of routine mass fossil fuel availability. After that, all bets are off. Gen Y has got some very hard work to do at that stage. The Boomers have dropped the ball and X is actively participating in pretend and extend.

          • Rosie 6.5.1.1.1
            4 March 2015 at 1:55 pm

            I’m Gen X and I’m not participating in pretend and extend………..

            By the time the shit hits the fan, the Boomers will dead, the Xer’s will be struggling with the despair of a lack of elder care and alienation from what they knew (already struggling with alienation from a fraying society as it is in my case), the Y’s will be burdened with debt and the Zero’s will be starring bleakness in the face.

            All of the above seems to be clicking into new cogs already so it’s up to everyone, to say STOP. Boots on the ground people, peace boots that is not, war boots.

            • Colonial Rawshark 6.5.1.1.1.1
              4 March 2015 at 5:23 pm

              Definitely hearing ya…

              dissent and non-violent resistance

              time to remember that democracy is about people doing things for themselves, not about Wellington

              • gsays …
                4 March 2015 at 7:13 pm

                ok colonial, i am with you re resistance but as i have said before, the non violent part has to be negotiable on a case by case basis.

                • Colonial Rawshark …
                  4 March 2015 at 8:08 pm

                  To be clear, I’m not a pacifist; by the time it gets that bad that violence and destruction of property is warranted, there aren’t going to be any winners on any side.

                  At this time, we need to build mass movements which draw in the mainstream and the middle classes. To get there it will need to be non-violent and (reasonably) polite while being straight up.

                  • Rosie …
                    4 March 2015 at 8:31 pm

                    Good convo CR and G.

                    As reluctant and wary as I am about the need for any aggro, I probably wouldn’t condemn it if served a highly productive purpose. And looking at history it’s not always the dissenters that cause the trouble to start with. NZ examples: 1913 waterfront strike and the anti Springbok tour movement

                  • gsays …
                    4 March 2015 at 9:19 pm

                    i am a recently converted from being pacifist. to be fair that position is evolving.
                    also this is thoeretical at the moment.
                    i would like to think that if the situation were to emerge, i am prepared to visit violence on someone or, more likely, something to defend a position or person.

                    i am right with you re encouraging the middle class with politeness and i would like to think straight up is my middle name.

                    i also think in the times ahead there will be big changes forced on the haves and classically the haves have not given things up without a struggle.

        • Rosie 6.5.1.2
          4 March 2015 at 1:45 pm

          OK CC.

          I’d have to trawl through all your posts that you’ve written that are specifically addressed to the Gen Yers, to be able give examples of what I find patronising.

          I know, that what has struck me has been your passing on of your ideas to them, and suggesting they take up your ideas. That I find patronising. I don’t think you intend to be, and it’s not written in an authoritarian tone. But what I read is someone talking down to a younger generation who are viewed as clueless and need a “guiding hand”.

          which is why I don’t understand this statement:

          “I want them to know that their thinking is good, it’s beyond good, it’s exciting, It’s logical, its common sense.
          I want them to know that generations before them have all changed the system to suit their needs and that they should be no different.”

          If you acknowledge their way of thinking as a good thing then why spend time telling how you see things and why they need to build on your ideas?

          And isn’t

          “First and foremost I am saying it to get people to think about what is possible, to think outside of the box, outside of the current system, to push the boundaries, to get people to look at better ways of doing things.”

          what folks do on this site anyway so why address it to an age group? And are you even hitting your target audience of Gen Yer’s? I’m not sure, I haven’t read Lynn’s post on the demographics of this site, so am not sure how many Gen Y’s and in fact Zero’s are visiting.

          • Coffee Connoisseur 6.5.1.2.1
            4 March 2015 at 4:52 pm

            “If you acknowledge their way of thinking as a good thing then why spend time telling how you see things and why they need to build on your ideas?”

            In my view, they know what needs to be done.
            Many talk about how stupid it is that Man works for The System when it should be the other way around. When you say this to them, they light up, almost with a sense of excitement yet disbelief that someone my age is saying it.
            But they don’t necessarily know how to do it.

            “what folks do on this site anyway so why address it to an age group? ”

            The short answer is that Gen Y is the one most likely to change the system towards this sort of thing if they can figure out how.
            It makes it easy to search on for future reference too.
            It makes people think.

            A number of reasons…. I’ve been posting this sort of stuff on here for a few years most of it simply ignored outright. In fact surprisingly I had more engagement on Whaleoil. But then the Standard is a more intelligent crowd and in many ways seem to be more set in their ideas on what needs to be done too.
            The first posts, I can see how they could be interpreted as condecending and I was afraid of that, but the information was important to get out because it dealt with the Systems Analysis and the premise for the entire system, by putting out the questions Who is the system for? and What is its purpose?
            Me then also answering of those questions could be interpreted as being condescending.
            That wasn’t the intention.
            The intention was to just get reasonable answers out there without too much debate and to essentially set the scene (and set up the ability for people to be able to destroy right wing capitalist arguments on this topic down the track).
            It was a valuable exercise for me and I learnt a lot from it especially around how to communicate with an audience on the left on this topic vs an audience on the right.
            The guys also gave me a very valuable piece of information around using wellbeing instead of happiness.

            ‘i’If you acknowledge their way of thinking as a good thing then why spend time telling how you see things and why they need to build on your ideas?’/i’

            They understand what is required at a high level. I am not sure they understand that what they want to do is backed up with logic reason and Systems Analysis.
            It is not all of Gen Y either I suspect.
            I am also not convinced they know how to do it either.
            I have had years working on all manner of systems across a number of different sectors so I can help them determine what is required and identifying potential solutions that already exist in society today.

            Having said all this, If there’s enough Gen Xers or even Baby Boomers on here that want to do this then even better.

            I don’t want this to be about me telling others how and what to do. I want others to see the stupidity of what we do now and start to think of how we can change that. How we can migrate to an automated world where we have more free time not less and how we can work towards the type of system Gen Y are talking about when the say the system should work for us and not the other way around. What it would need to have, what already exists by way of solutions to fulfil peoples needs and wants. How we can rearrange the deck chairs in some cases so that it serves our purposes better and what steps would be required for such transition.
            It will sound bigger than Ben Hur but it isn’t. It is very doable. especially with the minds that frequent The Standard.

            • Rosie 6.5.1.2.1.1
              4 March 2015 at 8:21 pm

              Ok Thanks CC for the response.

              It s quite possible that you hit a trigger with me because I feel strongly that no one person or group should be “talked at” and told how they have to improve things and I saw you doing that. You acknowledge above that your initial posts could be viewed as condescending. I guess we can agree on that and leave it there.

              I’m not opposed to your ideas of system change at all, of turning the man working- for- the- system on it’s head. I also believe theres a massive amount of basics to get through first before we can contemplate those higher ideals.

              I’m also fed up with talking and when health allows I get involved in action. Even on a local level, I spend approximately 12 hours a week dealing with and working through issues on the development where I live. I’d rather DO than chat, and whilst being extremely wary of making suggestions as to what folks should think about doing given my rant, I’d like to see more action, widespread and democratic.

              We have suffered so much damage to our society and we need to repair that and heal and regain strength before we can consider a new future. Just my shopgirl thoughts.

              • Coffee Connoisseur …
                5 March 2015 at 7:23 am

                That’s a big part of the problem Rosie, those doing the damage to Society do it because of the fact that they are simply rolling out R wing policy that redistributes wealth from the working class to the shareholder class.
                The Systems Analysis if completed utterly destroys R wing policy.
                I agree that more needs to happen on the ground but if we don’t do this (which starts with understanding the system we should have for everyone and why) you are going to be fighting more and more of those battles on the ground and chances are you will still lose.

                Right now, you are fighting R wing policy with a tax and redistribute wealth method. People are struggling. You know this. But many who you want to tax more are also struggling. They are simply broke on a different level.

                If you want to win the battle and make the world a better place to live then you need to revisit the reason for the entire system and therein lies your answers.

                The thing is that in a way the Systems Analysis pretty much proves Left wing ideals.

                The thing with Systems Analysis is that with the same set of information you get the same repeatable outcome every single time.
                This means that in order to destroy the outcome you have to change what will become agreed inputs and you will need a logical and common sense reason for doing so.
                The reason that this is so important is that for the Right to do this (to provide justification for the current system) they have to argue that the system is Not for everyone, they have to argue that it is not even a system for human beings and that is a ridiculous notion to try and sell to Joe public.
                Doing this will give you the change on the ground with people that will then result in changes at the top in the political sphere. At that point many of the problems on the ground will be dealt with and will dissappear. There is no justification for continuing poverty after this exercise.

                The problem is I can’t just dictate a new system to you. A system for everyone needs input from everyone in a sense.
                The thing I am struggling with is how to fast forward everyone through 20 years of systems analysis to step you through doing it for our current system.
                Consider that in this day and age. when the Public or Private Sector want to fix a broken system, hire people who then use Systems Analysis to do it.
                It makes it impossible for them to destroy your reasoning and methodology.

      • Coffee Connoisseur 6.5.2
        5 March 2015 at 7:37 am

        To put it more succintly Rosie

        By working on the ground you are treating the symptoms and they do need to be treated.
        What we are doing on here with the Systems Analysis is treating the root cause of the problems…

    • Murray Rawshark 6.6
      4 March 2015 at 6:18 pm

      I prefer to think in terms of class and can’t even be bothered finding out who Gen Y are. I think all this generation stuff is a trick of Hollywood marketing, designed to separate us and turn us away from our allies.

      • One Anonymous Bloke 6.6.1
        4 March 2015 at 6:25 pm

        Plus one with bells on. Marketing is bullshit, by definition: good work sells itself.

      • Rosie 6.6.2
        4 March 2015 at 8:25 pm

        Ditto Muzz.

        Targetting generations is a bit divisive to my mind when a class group spans many generations

        • Coffee Connoisseur 6.6.2.1
          5 March 2015 at 7:40 am

          thats fine but thus far I have had no indication from anyone that you are remotely interested in this stuff. Ergo I started addressing the messages to Gen Y.

          although I do accept that this was likely to have been due to the way the message was delivered prior.

          I do think the Gen Y thing does help identify what is being discussed now though. The reason I say this is that I am thinking about doing some modelling and putting some diagrams forward for you guys to consider and give feedback on. I did think it was a little early to do that but perhaps it isn’t.

  7. Draco T Bastard 7
    4 March 2015 at 7:54 am

    Watch how the measles outbreak spreads when kids get vaccinated – and when they don’t

    Experts recommend that 92-95% of Americans [any population really] be vaccinated against measles to protect everyone in the community, especially those who can’t get the shot: babies under one year old, people born before the measles vaccine was introduced in 1963 and have never had measles themselves, and immunocompromised kids and adults like Rhett Krawitt, a young boy who recently went through chemotherapy.

    Is it time to bring in compulsory vaccination? Certainly looks that way as more and more people succumb to the misinformation out there about vaccinations.

    • Coffee Connoisseur 7.1
      4 March 2015 at 8:12 am

      Given that the Vaccine courts in the states have ordered payouts of more than a billion dollars in claims. Then no it shouldn’t be made compulsory. Just in the same way that compulsory medication of any kind imposed by the state should be rejected. It is a very dangerous path to head down.

      If your child was killed or brain damaged by vaccines and that was your choice fine.
      But if you have a perfectly healthy child and compulsory vaccination is introduced and your child has an adverse reaction and dies or is severely brain damaged as a result you get what an oops sorry?

      I used to administer vaccines. We were trained in what to do should an adverse reaction occur. It can be very scary stuff depending on the severity of the reaction.

      If there was a problem and measles was on the increase and heading toward epidemic proportions then thats a different story.

      The freedom of choice around medications you do put or don’t put in your body is an important part of a free society. It is a slippery slope to head down and risks opening the door to compulsory medication of far more than just vaccines.
      Alarmist? Perhaps but it is not the government of today we should worry about when enacting laws, it is future governments and how they might interpret laws to meet their own agenda.

      • Picard101 7.1.1
        4 March 2015 at 8:18 am

        There are already a number of laws around what we can, can’t and must do for kids. Given the massive amount of scientific backing vaccines have behind them, and that the links to this disorder and that damage have repeatedly been debunked, there is a very strong case for compulsory inoculation.

        • Colonial Rawshark 7.1.1.1
          4 March 2015 at 8:27 am

          You’re just repeating a mantra without thinking. Vaccinations are of all different types and risk/benefit value. Why would you try and lump all vaccinations developed many years apart, some with far better track records than others, in all together as one big undifferentiated mass?

          Utterly unscientific.

          Consider this incident in the UK where health authorities lied to parents, lied to doctors, introduced a mass vaccination programme they knew had proven risks, and then delayed as large numbers of children got sick and risked brain damage and death.

          http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1544592/Vaccine-officials-knew-about-MMR-risks.html

          • TheContrarian 7.1.1.1.1
            4 March 2015 at 11:46 am

            “Utterly unscientific.”

            Tell me again about how scientific homeopathy is

        • Coffee Connoisseur 7.1.1.2
          4 March 2015 at 8:31 am

          No one is disputing the scientific backing and no one is talking about Autism.
          The point is adverse reactions do occur and can be debilitating even life threatening.
          http://www.charlotteobserver.com/living/health-family/article11620775.html
          perhaps try understanding both sides of the argument and imagine being the parents of one of these children.

          • Picard101 7.1.1.2.1
            4 March 2015 at 9:30 pm

            Imagine being the parent of a child infected by another kid whose parents chose not to immunise.

            Imagine being a parent living in the modern age and allowing your child to get polio or some other equally fun disease.

            I think science has proven that the risk is not as great as some would have us believe.

            So how about this then, vaccination remains a choice, but if your child gets ill because you did not vaccinate them, you are charged with child abuse and lose your kids.

      • Draco T Bastard 7.1.2
        4 March 2015 at 8:57 am

        Given that the Vaccine courts in the states have ordered payouts of more than a billion dollars in claims.

        [citation needed]

        But if you have a perfectly healthy child and compulsory vaccination is introduced and your child has an adverse reaction and dies or is severely brain damaged as a result you get what an oops sorry?

        What if your non-vaccinated child causes another child, who is vaccinated, to get the disease and die from it? What do the parents get? An oops sorry?

        Yes, there are risks involved but the risks of vaccination are far less than the risks of non vaccination.

        I used to administer vaccines. We were trained in what to do should an adverse reaction occur. It can be very scary stuff depending on the severity of the reaction.

        Yep, it would be but how many did you see and what is the actual proportion of adverse reactions?

        If there was a problem and measles was on the increase and heading toward epidemic proportions then thats a different story.

        That is actually what’s happening as more and more people don’t vaccinate their children.

        • Colonial Rawshark 7.1.2.1
          4 March 2015 at 9:10 am

          Yes, there are risks involved but the risks of vaccination are far less than the risks of non vaccination.

          Cop out. Do not forcibly inject immune system altering chemicals into kids unless those chemicals are shown to improve survival rate or life expectancy to a material degree. And I don’t mean by just 0.01% either.

          That is actually what’s happening as more and more people don’t vaccinate their children.

          Sounds like the people are voting with their feet.

          • Draco T Bastard 7.1.2.1.1
            4 March 2015 at 9:37 am

            Do not forcibly inject immune system altering chemicals

            As I’ve told you before vaccinations do not alter the immune system.

            unless those chemicals are shown to improve survival rate or life expectancy to a material degree.

            That’s already been proven.

            Sounds like the people are voting with their feet.

            Due to becoming misinformed by the anti-vaccine crowd.

            • weka 7.1.2.1.1.1
              4 March 2015 at 9:43 am

              “Due to becoming misinformed by the anti-vaccine crowd.”

              How many people were choosing to not vaccinate before the advent of the anti-vaxxers?

              I’m old enough to know directly why people weren’t vaccinating preMMR. I was around those parents as part of my natural circles of friends and family, and I was also in contact professionally. Most of the pro-vax arguments I see here are hugely ignorant of the reasons why people have chosen historically to not vaccinate.

              • Draco T Bastard …
                4 March 2015 at 10:07 am

                Anecdotes != information/Knowledge

                That’s the problem with all of the reasons the anti-vaxxers use – none of them stand up to science.

                • weka …
                  4 March 2015 at 12:02 pm

                  I’ll take it then that the answer to my question is that you don’t know and that your views on why people don’t vaccinate are ill informed.

                  And that you prefer self-serving and irrational sloganeering (anecdote = scientifically illiterate!) to real debate.

                  Honest to god, if you don’t understand the very real and important place that anecdote plays in medicine and health care you should just stfu.

                  • Draco T Bastard …
                    4 March 2015 at 12:23 pm

                    I’ll take it then that the answer to my question is that you don’t know and that your views on why people don’t vaccinate are ill informed.

                    Actually, that’s something you brought up before me so why don’t you provide the answers? After all, you’re the one spouting bullshit about it.

                    And that you prefer self-serving and irrational sloganeering (anecdote = scientifically illiterate!) to real debate.

                    That was perfectly rational and correct. The problem is you and your irrationality.

                    • weka …
                      4 March 2015 at 12:26 pm

                      ah ok, so you don’t understand the role of anecdotes in medicine and health care either. That explains a few things.

                      “Actually, that’s something you brought up before me so why don’t you provide the answers?”

                      Nope, you’re the one who said “Due to becoming misinformed by the anti-vaccine crowd.” and it was in reply to CV.

                    • Draco T Bastard …
                      4 March 2015 at 1:04 pm

                      Nope, you’re the one who said “Due to becoming misinformed by the anti-vaccine crowd.” and it was in reply to CV.

                      Yep I did and that is what has been happening from the very beginning of vaccinations:

                      Some objectors, including the local clergy, believed that the vaccine was “unchristian” because it came from an animal.[3] For other anti-vaccinators, their discontent with the smallpox vaccine reflected their general distrust in medicine and in Jenner’s ideas about disease spread. Suspicious of the vaccine’s efficacy, some skeptics alleged that smallpox resulted from decaying matter in the atmosphere.[4] Lastly, many people objected to vaccination because they believed it violated their personal liberty, a tension that worsened as the government developed mandatory vaccine policies. [3]

                      There was no ‘before anti-vaxxers’ as they’ve been around since the very beginning and they’ve been misinformed and spreading that misinformation the entire time.

                      And anecdotes have no use in medicine.

                    • Colonial Rawshark …
                      4 March 2015 at 1:18 pm

                      And anecdotes have no use in medicine.

                      And this is another utterly anti-science comment.

                    • Pasupial …
                      4 March 2015 at 1:23 pm

                      CR

                      Anti-science. “You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means”.

                    • weka …
                      4 March 2015 at 1:32 pm

                      @Draco, so you don’t know about the pre-MMR issue reasons that people chose to not vaccinate and have to go look up something on the internets. That’s fine, I just think you should be more honest about the limits of your knowledge rather than trying to avoid honesty by undermining my knowledge base by suggesting that my 30 years of experience is not scientific (when I never claimed it was, duh).

                      ‘Anti-vaxxer’ is a pretty modern term. We can have a semantic argument about this if you really want, but I think I was clear in my comment that a lot of the pro-vaxxer debate revolves around more modern issues like the MMR/autism one and what has happened subsequently, and that this leads to a large misunderstanding about the full range of reasons why people don’t vaccinate.

                      Of course with you it doesn’t matter, because you are convinced that everyone is wrong who doesn’t follow your beliefs in medicine (including many actual practicing GPs btw, but wtf would they know and they should be forced to change too).

                • Pasupial …
                  4 March 2015 at 12:19 pm

                  DTB

                  The science of anti-vaccination is actually a fascinating topic of itself [link is to a 9 minute SciShow episode]:

                  [5:57] Parents report that they will feel worse if they take an action and it harms their child, than if they don’t act and the child is harmed by a failure to act. This perception of potential regret can be so strong that even bringing up the choice of acting vs nonacting seems to be counterproductive… Potentially harmful inacation can seem moral than potentially harmful action…

                  [7:11] We are terrible at; what psychologists call, risk perception. Given the merest sliver of a possibility that a vaccine will cause developmental disorders, parents are now weighing a disease they have seen; autism, against diseases they have never seen. Since the 1970s measles has been pretty much unheard of. The Measles doesn’t scare people my age for the same reason that a giant maneating squirrel doesn’t scare us – we’ve never seen it… The success of vaccines is one of the reasons that people are less like to vaccinate their children

                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rzxr9FeZf1g

                  Being able to do the maths, I have made certain to have both of my own children vaccinated. But simply telling anti-vaxxers that they are in error is likely to be counterproductive – they have to work it out for themselves for it to stick.

              • McFlock …
                4 March 2015 at 11:33 am

                OK, pre-Wakefield/McCarthy, what were the reasons people chose not to vaccinate?

                • weka …
                  4 March 2015 at 12:07 pm

                  You know, if I thought there were 3 pro-vaccination people in this conversation who were genuinely interested and open to reasonable dialogue, I’d answer that. But looking at what TC and TRP have just said below, I think it would be a complete waste of time.

                  • McFlock …
                    4 March 2015 at 12:17 pm

                    Well then, I’ll just stick with my current rule of thumb that anyone not vaccinating for reasons other than known issues like allergies or immune system problems is probably being an idiot.

                    • marty mars …
                      4 March 2015 at 12:26 pm

                      I’m pretty sure you were in the ‘take the kids off them and put the parents in jail for child abuse’ camp rather than the ‘probably being an idiot’ camp.

                    • McFlock …
                      4 March 2015 at 12:29 pm

                      The two camps can overlap.
                      Especially if the idiocy leads to severe injury or death of the child.

                    • weka …
                      4 March 2015 at 12:31 pm

                      “Well then, I’ll just stick with my current rule of thumb that anyone not vaccinating for reasons other than known issues like allergies or immune system problems is probably being an idiot.”

                      Yes, which makes you largely ignorant and unwilling to take responsibility for how your ignorance impacts on conversations like this.

                      I’ll just note that there has been almost no response to the ethical issues I have raised in this discussion. That speaks hugely as to where the pro-vax position stands. Vaccinate and be damned.

                    • McFlock …
                      4 March 2015 at 3:33 pm

                      Well, maybe if you actually raised specific issues rather than fascism, fear of the nats, and falsely equating contra-indicated kids with the wilfully-unprotected kids of freeloaders or the misinformed, people would take more time to listen.

                      Most of your comments in this thread have been accusing others of ignorance or other bad-faith arguments against the person rather than on the issue, in addition to using it as an excuse to avoid a specific request for you to state what you complain people of ignoring.

            • Colonial Rawshark 7.1.2.1.1.2
              4 March 2015 at 1:13 pm

              As I’ve told you before vaccinations do not alter the immune system.

              Of course they alter the immune system. They wouldn’t have any immunological effect otherwise.

          • TheContrarian 7.1.2.1.2
            4 March 2015 at 10:06 am

            “Sounds like the people are voting with their feet.”

            And putting more and more people at risk as previously eradicated diseases make comebacks.

            If find CV’s anti-science extremely disturbing – in particular his anti-vaxx/pro homeopathy stance. And to think he ran for Labour.

            • te reo putake 7.1.2.1.2.1
              4 March 2015 at 11:00 am

              Yes, TC. But let’s not worry about the failed candidates, eh. We have enough problems with the successful ones!

              • weka …
                4 March 2015 at 12:05 pm

                wft? Using that as a way to undermine him as a person and Labour member is fucked up, nasty, and a really good example of why the pro-vaxxer debate is not progressive and needs to rely on fascism.

                ‘Failed’ candidates are important. I’m extremely grateful to Tat for the work he has done for Labour.

                • Ergo Robertina …
                  4 March 2015 at 12:11 pm

                  +1

                • te reo putake …
                  4 March 2015 at 12:11 pm

                  I’m grateful for the work Tat did as a candidate too. Now that I know his views better, I’m equally grateful he won’t be doing it again 😉

                  • weka …
                    4 March 2015 at 12:27 pm

                    That’s fine trp, but why using that kind of nasty, RL slurring shit in a conversation like this?

                    • te reo putake …
                      4 March 2015 at 12:40 pm

                      Weka, it’s one word. It’s accurate. It’s not RL slurring shit, whatever that is. And given that you freely throw the word fascism around when your position is challenged, you’re probably not in a position to parse my language choices.

                    • Colonial Rawshark …
                      4 March 2015 at 1:16 pm

                      Cheers Weka 🙂

                      TRP: as I’ve said before, and I know others have said it to you, you’re a real prick.

                    • weka …
                      4 March 2015 at 1:17 pm

                      I’m not throwing the word fascism around, and it’s strange that you would said that I am and that I am doing when my position is challenged. I’ve used the term a couple of times in very specific circumstances in this conversation (and rarely at all outside of this conversation). Interesting that you haven’t bothered to check out what I mean but are making assumptions about it instead.

                      It wasn’t one word, so much as your response to TC on top of what they said. It looked like a direct undermining of a person in RL which is a pretty shitty thing to do in a conversation like this.

                    • te reo putake …
                      4 March 2015 at 1:25 pm

                      weka, you’ve thrown the word around glibly all morning. Too late to pretend otherwise.

                      On the other hand, CV, good choice of words! Your position on vaccination makes it clear you’re pretty opposed to pricks of any kind, 🙂

                    • weka …
                      4 March 2015 at 1:41 pm

                      “weka, you’ve thrown the word around glibly all morning. Too late to pretend otherwise.”

                      Ah, the classic underming the other commenter instead of responding to the substance of their critique. Nice attempt at diversion there trp. You joined in some RL smearing and don’t like being called on it.

                      I’ve used the word fascism exactly 3 times today and each time it’s been in response to very specific actions by 3 commenters. Hardly throwing around glibly.

                    • te reo putake …
                      4 March 2015 at 1:47 pm

                      Your (mis)use of it is the very definition of glib, weka!

                      Ps:

                      “I’m not throwing the word fascism around, and it’s strange that you would said that I am and that I am doing when my position is challenged” 1.17

                      “I’ve used the word fascism exactly 3 times today and each time it’s been in response to very specific actions by 3 commenters.” 1.41

                    • weka …
                      4 March 2015 at 1:49 pm

                      How does using a word 3 times, carefully, in a very long conversation fit the defintion of throwing around or glib?

                      I haven’t misused the word. We can debate that of course, but to do so would require you to actually engage the issues.

                      Again, nice diversion.

                    • Colonial Rawshark …
                      4 March 2015 at 3:59 pm

                      On the other hand, CV, good choice of words! Your position on vaccination makes it clear you’re pretty opposed to pricks of any kind, 🙂

                      Acupuncture mate, acupuncture.

                      Vaccinations are very useful in certain circumstances too.

                  • marty mars …
                    4 March 2015 at 12:30 pm

                    I’m sure a lot of labour people think like him – bored church and all that – unless they’ve been purged of course.

      • Molly 7.1.3
        4 March 2015 at 9:03 am

        Payout in the US has passed $3 billion, and that money is paid by the state, not the pharma companies.

        Recently read a book where the editor of the BMJ was stated to have said in court that the BMJ was a marketing arm of the pharmaceutical companies. Just tried to google that statement and came up with this article Medical Journals Are an Extension of the Marketing Arm of Pharmaceutical Companies.

        If you acknowledge that some of these actions are occurring, then you also can’t rely on the comfortable belief that all medications go through a stringent process that is verified by scientific peer review and based on the public good.

        • Draco T Bastard 7.1.3.1
          4 March 2015 at 9:41 am

          If you acknowledge that some of these actions are occurring, then you also can’t rely on the comfortable belief that all medications go through a stringent process that is verified by scientific peer review and based on the public good.

          I’ll agree that the process that clears medications for use needs to be greatly improved. As it is it’s pretty much private firms telling us that they’re good with those private firms needing them to be passed so as to make a profit.

          But that still isn’t an argument to stop or against compulsory vaccination.

          • Colonial Rawshark 7.1.3.1.1
            4 March 2015 at 9:46 am

            So you admit that the knowledge base is compromised and needs major improvements, and that big money changes the way things are done, but you are saying push on anyway regardless. That’ll convince a lot of parents, I’m sure.

            • Draco T Bastard 7.1.3.1.1.1
              4 March 2015 at 10:04 am

              I’m saying that, despite the fact that Big Pharma do get bad drugs passed,

              1. The science is still on the side of the vaccines
              2. That when a bad medicine is detected it’s removed fast

              • Colonial Rawshark …
                4 March 2015 at 10:21 am

                2. That when a bad medicine is detected it’s removed fast

                Not fast enough to prevent 30,000 to 60,000 deaths in the USA from Vioxx from the 5 years it was on the market before it was pulled, and likely double that number of fatalities when you take into account the global deaths from the drug.

                That’s 21st century medicine for you.

                I don’t think you truly understand the magnitude of the potential death toll from this system.

                • Draco T Bastard …
                  4 March 2015 at 10:28 am

                  I don’t think you understand the death toll of preventing medicines from being researched and developed which is what would happen if we followed your prescription.

                • TheContrarian …
                  4 March 2015 at 11:48 am

                  I wasn’t aware Vioxx was a vaccine

          • weka 7.1.3.1.2
            4 March 2015 at 9:48 am

            Actually it is. The problems with peer review and the unethics within medicine, including but not limited to corporate control, are so huge now that it’s a bloody good reason to not argue for compulsory vaccination all on its own (but don’t worry, there are plenty of other reasons as well). Pushing compulsory vaccination via a system that is now inherently corrupt is either in denial of how bad that system is, or suggests a kind of ‘let’s take the risk because it suits our purposes’ approach. Which is exactly what the anti-vax people get slammed for.

        • McFlock 7.1.3.2
          4 March 2015 at 12:04 pm

          $3bil sounds so much more impressive than 160 claims a year over 25 years. Out of all the vaccinations given in the US each year.

          Average payout to petitioners: $732k.

          I suspect that probably corresponds to the rate of contra-indicated vaccinations, e.g. severe allergies.

          • Molly 7.1.3.2.1
            4 March 2015 at 1:08 pm

            I already posted the link before and mentioned the average payout, as had The Murphey in a discussion a couple of weeks ago, so was not looking to analyse again, just providing a link for Coffee Connisseur above. Don’t want to waste time repeating myself for those who don’t bother addressing the issues, but here I am.

            Since the anti-anti vaccinations rhetoric is so strong – I find myself pulled in.

            And interesting reading the amount of comments that take a bullying and hectoring tone, without addressing any of the concerns – big or small – that are put forward.

      • weka 7.1.4
        4 March 2015 at 9:40 am

        CC, thanks for your very thoughtful comment.

        Given that the Vaccine courts in the states have ordered payouts of more than a billion dollars in claims. Then no it shouldn’t be made compulsory. Just in the same way that compulsory medication of any kind imposed by the state should be rejected. It is a very dangerous path to head down.

        /snip

        The freedom of choice around medications you do put or don’t put in your body is an important part of a free society. It is a slippery slope to head down and risks opening the door to compulsory medication of far more than just vaccines.
        Alarmist? Perhaps but it is not the government of today we should worry about when enacting laws, it is future governments and how they might interpret laws to meet their own agenda.

        Yes, and I’m actually worried about the govt of the day. NACT already target beneficiaries as a separate class, including punishing them when they don’t do what the state wants. Most of NZ is largely unaware of how proto-fascist this is.

        I’m on Invalid’s Benefit and when I first went on I signed a form that stated something like how if I refused medical treatment I could be refused my benefit. I don’t know if that would stand up in law, but I do know that most people ill enough to qualify for IB couldn’t take that on anyway. When I look at the way beneficiaries are being treated now, I know that the only reason I am relatively ok is because they simply haven’t gotten to my cohort yet.

        I also have a background in patient rights and have seen some of the worst, at the coal face problems that happen within medicine. The pro-vax lobby seems to be willfully denying this aspect of the debate.

        Anyone on the left talking about compulsory medical treatment needs to taihoa and look at the huge range of ethics involved beyond the pro-vax lobby position. They also need to stop and listen to the huge range of experiences outside of their own thought processes.

    • Colonial Rawshark 7.2
      4 March 2015 at 8:21 am

      Is it time to bring in compulsory vaccination? Certainly looks that way as more and more people succumb to the misinformation out there about vaccinations.

      Yeah lefties keen to obliterate a patients right to choose, keen to obliterate the concept of informed consent, keen to forget all the tragic lessons learnt from An Unfortunate Experiment and dozens of other medical incidents.

      Just look at the USA where heavy sanctions are brought against parents and children who do not accept the 20 or 30 jabs that big pharma have pushed on to the US tax payer healthcare bill.

      If you do not participate in their corporate money making, you will do so via a court of law, via threat of prison, you will be punished.

      • Michael 7.2.1
        4 March 2015 at 8:51 am

        Measles had been eradicated in the US around 2000. Recently, in some wealthy communities, parents decided to not vaccinate their kids for ‘spiritual reasons’. For herd immunity to occur, 90% of the population has to be vaccinated. In those wealthy communities where parents didn’t vaccinate, they lost herd immunity and measles was re-introduced to America for the first time in years. Granted, some vaccines might be seen as unnecessary but it is really quite naive to say something like a measles vaccine is just participating in ‘corporate money making’.

        There should be a list of vaccines that every child has to get – the essentials, you know, really nasty diseases that we don’t want to see come back. This should be compulsory for a child to enter school. That way if the parents are really and truly concerned, they can homeschool their children. But the vast majority of children will go to school and therefore herd immunity will be maintained.

        • Colonial Rawshark 7.2.1.1
          4 March 2015 at 9:01 am

          But how nasty is nasty? What’s the expected incidence of death or permanent disability due to measles amongst an affluent population with good nutrition but which has only 85% vaccination coverage? 1 in 500,000?

          This should be compulsory for a child to enter school. That way if the parents are really and truly concerned, they can homeschool their children.

          If you are suggesting that serious resources be given to parents to do this, it would be worth looking at.

        • weka 7.2.1.2
          4 March 2015 at 9:06 am

          “Measles had been eradicated in the US around 2000. Recently, in some wealthy communities, parents decided to not vaccinate their kids for ‘spiritual reasons’.”

          Complete and utter misrepresentation of reality, and most likely based on huge ignorance of why people don’t vaccinate. There have always been people making informed choices to not vaccinate their kids, and this predates the whole MMR/autism thing. Get that, it’s PREDATES it. Anti-vaxxers do some daft shit, but comments like yours are up their with the worst of the debate.

          I’ve followed quite a few (not all) of the vaccine debates in ts and I’ve yet to see the pro-vaccination commenters demonstrate that they know shit about the wide range of reasons that people don’t vacciate, let alone engage in rational discussion about it. I’d say that’s a fairly good mirror of the debate online internationally, except the fascist tendancies are stronger in other places. The ignorance isn’t, nor is the hypocricy of people using science to back up arguments in non-rational ways (i.e. to support their belief systems).

          Watch now how many people make incorrect assumptions about me and what I think because of their own ignorance and prejudices.

          • Colonial Rawshark 7.2.1.2.1
            4 March 2015 at 9:15 am

            If you vaccinate your kids, it is a symbol proving that you are a good moral parent. If you don’t vaccinate your kids, it is a symbol proving that you are a bad, immoral parent.

          • Draco T Bastard 7.2.1.2.2
            4 March 2015 at 9:58 am

            I’ve followed quite a few (not all) of the vaccine debates in ts and I’ve yet to see the pro-vaccination commenters demonstrate that they know shit about the wide range of reasons that people don’t vacciate, let alone engage in rational discussion about it.

            They can have as many reasons as they like but that doesn’t make those reasons anything less than pure BS.

            • Coffee Connoisseur 7.2.1.2.2.1
              4 March 2015 at 10:56 am

              Well here’s my pure BS and don’t worry at this point myself and my wife have made the decision not to bring kids into this world. Not the way it is now.

              I know from my medical background that adverse reactions to vaccines that although the risk is low are a very real risk that can have catastrophic impacts.
              I have worked in an industry where I have had the role of identifying risk and impact of risk should it happen.
              A young woman I now had an adverse reaction to the flu shot and nearly died.
              My neighbours son is Autistic. They say the signs appeared mere weeks after receiving the MMR vaccine and before that he was perfectly healthy. They themselves are convinced that his condition was caused by his vaccinations.

              Close friends have a son who has just this year having seizures the first about a week after receiving a vaccine that I am told has been known to be linked to seizures.
              I put down a much-loved dog last year that had suffered seizures all its life. Its scary every single time. I would not wish this on anyone.

              I know that Allopathy as a general rule only targets the treatment of symptoms and prefers to manage medical conditions rather than identifying the root cause of the problem and fining a way to fix it once and for all.
              Pharmaceuticals make billion dollar profits every year for this way of thinking.

              I know that if a treatment cannot be synthesised and patented it will be dropped and kept quiet regardless of whether it might have major benefit when used in the right dose for treating ailments. In extreme cases they have been made illegal.

              I know that millions of people die or have adverse reactions every year from ‘safe’ pharmaceutical drugs.

              I believe that Pharmaceutical companies are not in hiding the results of scientific studies that do not support their position in order to protect their billion dollar profits.

              I have lost faith in the uncompromised independence of science and believe that it has instead been subverted by vested corporate interests.

              I know that the US Government has set up a vaccine court specifically to deal with vaccines. One of the reasons I have read is that it was set up to protect vaccine companies from litigation from those who have been harmed by vaccines and without it it wouldn’t be financially viable for the companies who make the vaccines to continue to do so in the face of legal action they would otherwise likely be subject to.
              (consider that another way to interpret that is that adverse reactions from vaccines are detrimental enough and occur frequently enough to put vaccine companies out of business for good).

              This vaccine court has paid out billions in compensation already.

              It was set up by George Bush Jnr – That should be an alarm bell if ever I saw one.

              Through my own experiences, I no longer trust the system to do the right thing. It is more about circling the waggons and covering peoples butts.

              I have studied human anatomy and physiology in depth earlier in my career. I understand how the immune system works and believe it defies logic and common sense to have what I consider to be an overly aggressive vaccination regime and to force that onto a young and growing immune system. My personal believe is that this alone increases the risk to the child of having an adverse reaction.

              Then I take all of this information and consider risk and impact.
              The risk is low. I accept that. The impact is high to catastrophic and I don’t accept that.
              If I didn’t vaccinate. The risk is lower than vaccinating (different risk at that point) The impact ranges from low to catastrophic.
              Ergo no to vaccinations.

              • northshoredoc …
                4 March 2015 at 11:28 am

                Hmmmm ….you and your wife don’t plan to have children but you felt the need to come on to this forum to spout a plethora of anecdotes to support your views against vaccination.

                • Ergo Robertina …
                  4 March 2015 at 11:55 am

                  CC has a medical background, and a reflective and sincere style of commenting. That they mentioned their choice not to have children doesn’t invalidate their comments on this topic at all.
                  It’s actually a nice change to have someone on TS with a mainstream medical or science background who isn’t a sneer merchant.

                • Coffee Connoisseur …
                  4 March 2015 at 5:00 pm

                  We were thinking of having children for many years. The thinking around vaccines which was also the end result of a number of years is posted above. We decided not to have kids about two weeks ago.
                  I’ll take it from your post that me being upfront about our decision not to have kids was the only part of the thinking I outlined above that you could attack….
                  As a Doctor if that’s what you are I would have expected better. But then in hindsight perhaps not and perhaps that’s why people are looking for alternatives to allopathy in ever increasing numbers.

              • TheContrarian …
                4 March 2015 at 11:50 am

                “My neighbours son is Autistic. They say the signs appeared mere weeks after receiving the MMR vaccine and before that he was perfectly healthy. They themselves are convinced that his condition was caused by his vaccinations. ”

                Given vaccines don’t cause autism I’m not sure why they’d be convinced

                • DoublePlusGood …
                  4 March 2015 at 1:14 pm

                  Post hoc, ergo propter hoc fallacies are seductive to people while actual evidence is far too much hard work.

                • Molly …
                  4 March 2015 at 1:14 pm

                  “Given vaccines don’t cause autism I’m not sure why they’d be convinced”

                  Seems like the Italian legal system disagrees with your blanket statement:
                  U.S. Media Blackout: Italian Courts Rule Vaccines Cause Autism

                  • northshoredoc …
                    4 March 2015 at 1:20 pm

                    Give me strength !

                    “Italian courts, provincial or otherwise, are not known for basing their rulings in science. They are, after all, part of the system that led to a manslaughter conviction of six scientists for not predicting the 2009 L’Aquila earthquake, disregarding completely the obvious fact that such predictions are not, in fact, scientifically possible. In a similar way, the Italian court that made the MMR-autism ruling–the centerpiece of this latest “courts confirm” tripe–ignored completely the science made available to it and focused almost solely on the retracted Wakefield paper and a physician with a COI in making its decision. A decision that is, by the way, under appeal.”

                    http://www.forbes.com/sites/emilywillingham/2013/08/09/court-rulings-dont-confirm-autism-vaccine-link/

                    Yes I know it’s Forbes magazine but you chose global research to link to !

                    • Molly …
                      4 March 2015 at 1:52 pm

                      Thanks. Have had a look and see that her initial reasoning is based on the Wakefield case, not on any alternative comprehensive collection of data and analysis.

                      (Dr Andrew Wakefield is going to be the gift that goes on giving regarding eliminating any adverse effects on the Aspergers syndrome to vaccinations.)

                      Had a brief look at the Omnibus Autism proceedings which give judges a three week period to determine ” The evidentiary hearings in the three “ test cases” for the second theory of causation – whether thimerosal-containing vaccines alone can cause autism – were conducted over three weeks in May and July of 2008 in Washington, DC.”

                      I don’t discount this article completely, but it just goes onto the side of research I would be looking into – if this was still my priority.

                    • Molly …
                      5 March 2015 at 9:03 am

                      Realised that you were not part of the conversation the other day, so you were probably not aware I had linked to the GlaxoSmithKline document that had been tabled at the hearing and used as evidence.

                      (The first check I did when seeing the article, was to determine whether there were any direct from source accompanying files).

                • Coffee Connoisseur …
                  4 March 2015 at 5:10 pm

                  Because its there son that it happened to and its a very emotional issue. Because the only thing that changed between being completely normal and healthy boy was getting a vaccine.
                  But perhaps you should talk to them and tell them something like correltion does not equal causation. I’m sure that will set them straight. I’m sure that will probably fix their autistic son too.
                  Hang on which planet are we on again?

                  Do some research on how the medical establishment treats anyone who comes out with a cure for cancer. Logic would dictate that they would take such a claim and test the method scientifically wouldn’t you think?

              • McFlock …
                4 March 2015 at 12:10 pm

                If the vaccine court was set up by George the lesser, why does Molly’s link have data going back to the 80s?

                • Molly …
                  4 March 2015 at 1:20 pm

                  Interesting – your comment makes both the person you are responding to and my link sound suspect.

                  I provided a link to the US government site for U.S. Department of Health and Human Services – Health Resources and Services Administration. For information purposes.

                  By referring to it purely “Molly’s link” I suspect you are showing some very passive aggression.

                  • McFlock …
                    4 March 2015 at 3:23 pm

                    That was not my intention, I phrased it clumsily.

                    To be explicit, for the first fiscal year to be reported on being 1988, it was neither bush snr or jnr who started the system, so I have serious suspicions about CC’s accuracy.

                    • Molly …
                      4 March 2015 at 6:24 pm

                      OK.

                      As for the other, from a purely outside perspective, I guess CC was referrring to the legislative changes that affected the vaccine court when George Bush was president.

                      IIRC there were concerns about the changes leading to a lack of transparency, and requiring – once again – non disclosure agreements before awards were given. Along with threats of legal court cases if these conditions were not met.

                      (My recall is not the best, but there were grave concerns expressed at the time, and I think these changes – and others – went through.)

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      4 March 2015 at 6:28 pm

                      I’m picking the vaccine court considers evidence.

                      The irony of this might be lost on some of the plaintiffs.

                    • Molly …
                      4 March 2015 at 8:59 pm

                      OAB – the vaccine court is not a legal court, and is out of the legal system. I don’t know what standard or requirement they have for evidential process. You could probably find out if you are interested.

                      There are specific legislative exceptions and requirements for this “court” that is not really a “court” more of a process.

                    • Molly …
                      5 March 2015 at 9:14 am

                      Not really for you McFlock. For OAB above – don’t know if this is the right way to reply.

                      As mentioned above to northshoredoc, the first thing I did was look for accompanying details. I have previously linked to the GlaxoSmithKline document that was used as evidence at this hearing.

                      To be clear, I am not stating that vaccines cause autism. I just thought it was interesting that an Italian court awarded damages despite the overwhelming sense that scientific consensus is that this is not true.

                      IIRC, and to be honest, don’t want to have to go all the way back there and re-research. Wakefield’s initial study was on the link between gastro disorders and those on the Asperger’s spectrum. This was published and peer reviewed. (Later retracted because of concern over the ethics of later studies – not the findings – which were not actually on vaccinations at all).

                      A second study a couple of years later looked at the higher incidence of gastro disorders and vaccination. Can’t remember when this was done. To be honest, this all happened after my requirement to know more – so didn’t follow this as closely as I would have a few years previously.

                    • McFlock …
                      5 March 2015 at 12:32 pm

                      If CC was referring to legislative changes by GHWBush when they said that “It was set up by George Bush Jnr”, then I think my doubts as to CC’s reliability still stand.

              • Draco T Bastard …
                4 March 2015 at 12:46 pm

                I know from my medical background that adverse reactions to vaccines that although the risk is low are a very real risk that can have catastrophic impacts.

                Yep, they can – on one person whereas not vaccinating can have adverse affects upon the entirety of society. This is one of those times where the needs of the many outweigh the desires of the few.

                My neighbours son is Autistic. They say the signs appeared mere weeks after receiving the MMR vaccine and before that he was perfectly healthy. They themselves are convinced that his condition was caused by his vaccinations.

                The MMR vaccine is generally administered to children around the age of one year, with a second dose before starting school (i.e. age 4/5).

                Autism is a neurodevelopmental disorder characterized by impaired social interaction, verbal and non-verbal communication, and restricted and repetitive behavior. Parents usually notice signs in the first two years of their child’s life.

                Basically, the parents were about to find out that their child was autistic but because they hadn’t done so before the vaccination they decided to blame the vaccine and that was probably spurred from reading anti-science BS on the internet.

                I have studied human anatomy and physiology in depth earlier in my career. I understand how the immune system works and believe it defies logic and common sense to have what I consider to be an overly aggressive vaccination regime and to force that onto a young and growing immune system. My personal believe is that this alone increases the risk to the child of having an adverse reaction.

                Great, so you’ve got published and peer-reviewed research to prove that? If not then it’s just your personal opinion.

                • Molly …
                  5 March 2015 at 9:26 am

                  Hi Draco,

                  You would have to ask yourself – what researcher who wants a long term career would go anywhere near this topic?

                  Even a statistician looking at the trials and raw data would not be welcomed if he did so and then found that there were gaps in the trial designs or possible research topics that would be useful.

                  I did briefly help a friend with respite care for her FASD child. To do that, I immersed myself in books and websites about the syndrome so that I could be useful rather than harmful.

                  There are definite links between diagnostic FASD traits and Asperger’s spectrum. With FASD, it is definitely related to changes in brain chemistry and development due to alcohol consumption. Research into environmental factors regarding Aspergers might identify triggers, that for some already vulnerable children, takes them over the edge.

                  Anecdote I know. One of my sons is mildly aspergers. But some of those diagnostic traits he has, I possessed as a child – and still do. So perhaps genetic component. When pregnant with him, we were living on the side of a very busy Auckland highway – hate to think how many airborne pollutants I inhaled and passed on during his development, but the heavy metal component was fairly high. So possible that that also contributed. Finally, when he was six months old we did get vaccinated for the childhood diseases – and he stopped vocalisation immediately and didn’t start again till he was close to a year old.

                  This is anecdotal, but not intended to be used to help someone else make a decision. But I make decisions for my particular child on whatever research and information I can get my hands on – and the personal observation of my child and how he is reacting.

          • crashcart 7.2.1.2.3
            4 March 2015 at 10:20 am

            People can have all the reasons they want. There are certainly very good medicle grounds for not vaccintaing. Would you agree that if a child who could not get vaccinated caught Measles from a child whos parents didn’t want him to get Autisim then they would have grounds to be pretty angry?

            This is the issue. If you have a good reason to not vaccinate then all power to you. If you don’t then you are putting those children who can’t be vaccinated at risk.

            The question of compulsery vaccinations is hard. I hate to force it. However if we wish to protect those who can’t be vaccinated then the only other option would be to force parents who choose not to vaccinate to disclose it to their schools. This could lead to a child unfairly being discriminated aginst in their education based upon their parents choices.

            If a vaccine has been proven to be both effective and safe and to address a disease that presents serious public health concerns then I think it is reasonable that it be made compulsery for those who can receive it.

            • Coffee Connoisseur 7.2.1.2.3.1
              4 March 2015 at 11:03 am

              ‘i’Would you agree that if a child who could not get vaccinated caught Measles from a child whos parents didn’t want him to get Autism then they would have grounds to be pretty angry?’/i’

              I was vaccinated as a child, I still got measles. I probably gave it to others…

              Or to suit your argument are you simply going to take the stance that if a kid gets measles, it must have come from an unvaccinated child somewhere at some point, to give the parents somewhere to direct their rage at?

              • crashcart …
                4 March 2015 at 11:21 am

                NIce way to avoid answering a compeltely legitimate question. Yes it is not a 100% immunity. That is just one more reason to ensure as many children as possile have the immunity. Of course we should base social health care decisions on the fact that ” I was vaccinated as a child, I still got measles. I probably gave it to others…” as opposed to scientific research that shows the herd immunity helps to account for those who do not gain full immunity from vaccination.

                My example is exactly what is happening in the states. Children who can’t be vaccinated for good reason are being put a risk of infection due to people choosing to not vaccinte based upon false information. Usually these children are more suseptable to illness and at a far greater risk of more serious complications due to an ilness. That is the reason they can’t be vaccinated. Hence thespread of measles throuh middle class communities in America.

                My stance is that reducing the chances of children needlessly dieing is a good thing. Would you rather I be given the ability to seperate my children from those who are not vaccinated or would you rather all children have the saem access to school and oppertunities no matter how stupid their pearents are?

                • Coffee Connoisseur …
                  5 March 2015 at 12:03 pm

                  To answer your strawman, if the child were to die as a result yes. But in your scenario the unvaccinated child would have to have been the only child to get measles before the child who got vaccnated was.

                  In kind if compulsory vaccinations are brought in and a parent does not want their child vaccinated but is forced to by the state and the child has an adverse reaction that severely brain damages them or kills them, do you think the parent not wanting to vaccinate has the right to be angry?

                  The point is people need to do their own research into the topic and make up their own mind on the matter. It really is that simple.

            • weka 7.2.1.2.3.2
              4 March 2015 at 12:46 pm

              Hi crashcart,

              “People can have all the reasons they want. There are certainly very good medicle grounds for not vaccintaing.”

              Are you suggesting that all parental choice be removed and that health care decisions for children be handed over to medical people? That all health care is medical, there are no other issues that are important?

              “Would you agree that if a child who could not get vaccinated caught Measles from a child whos parents didn’t want him to get Autisim then they would have grounds to be pretty angry?”

              That would really depend on many things. What if the parents had been told their child was safe because 95% of the population is vaccinated? Or that they didn’t need to take any precautions? Or they’d been told that there is no way to manage measles in a child so they haven’t developped skills in that area?

              Likewise, do you accept that the parents of children who have adverse reactions to vaccines have a right to be very angry?

              And if it’s the can’t be vaccinated child that undermines herd immunity, why is their child not being isolated?

              Myself, if I had a child and chose not to vaccinate, and there was another unvaccinated child in the same school who was vulnerable, then wouldn’t the solution be to get the families and school together and look at the best way to protect everyone?

              “If a vaccine has been proven to be both effective and safe and to address a disease that presents serious public health concerns then I think it is reasonable that it be made compulsery for those who can receive it.”

              Despite the ethical issues this raises?

              • One Anonymous Bloke …
                4 March 2015 at 2:05 pm

                All the ethical issues?

                Or just those that sit on the anti-vax side of the argument, where the irrational fears of parents are given equal weight to the genuine dangers described by Crashcart.

                Are you going to argue that the science isn’t settled too?

                • The Murphey …
                  4 March 2015 at 3:55 pm

                  ‘The science ‘ can’t possibly be settled when it is in a state of human negotiated and perpetual change

                  We had this discussion regarding peer review a couple of weeks back and I won’t go into it with you again

      • Draco T Bastard 7.2.2
        4 March 2015 at 8:59 am

        Just look at the USA where heavy sanctions are brought against parents and children who do not accept the 20 or 30 jabs that big pharma have pushed on to the US tax payer healthcare bill.

        That’s an argument to remove vaccines from the private sphere and to have government do them as a general tax funded government service and not an argument to drop vaccines.

        • Colonial Rawshark 7.2.2.1
          4 March 2015 at 9:02 am

          Well when that proposal has a realistic chance of getting through, and taking out private big money interests from the equation, let me know.

          • Draco T Bastard 7.2.2.1.1
            4 March 2015 at 10:02 am

            Sounds like you’d prefer to have the argument that it’s all about profit than remove the profit motive.

        • Coffee Connoisseur 7.2.2.2
          4 March 2015 at 11:12 am

          I do think that this is the crux of the issue.
          Take it away from big pharma.
          Get the vaccines independently scientifically retested.
          Make the results available to the public.
          Be open about the risks and find ways to further reduce them.
          Allow parents to make an informed decision and I think you will eliminate many of the issues those who choose not to vaccinate, have.

    • weka 7.3
      4 March 2015 at 9:00 am

      “Is it time to bring in compulsory vaccination?”

      Only if you want to practice fascism.

      • Molly 7.3.1
        4 March 2015 at 9:04 am

        +1

      • Colonial Rawshark 7.3.2
        4 March 2015 at 9:05 am

        Apparently there are always solid justifications for fascism, weka. Risk of death by disease, risk of death by terrorists and extremists. All these things require our fear, and require that we lock down our society even harder, with compulsion and force if need be. Apparently.

        • Pasupial 7.3.2.1
          4 March 2015 at 12:28 pm

          Hmmm; fascism. “You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means”.

          • Colonial Rawshark 7.3.2.1.1
            4 March 2015 at 8:22 pm

            I agree that one step towards fascism does not a fascist system make. But the state taking charge of your body against your will – is a pretty big step.

            • The Murphey 7.3.2.1.1.1
              4 March 2015 at 11:31 pm

              Taking the right to choose what one allows to be administered into their own physical body would be the ultimate step

              If it comes to this it will be all over

      • Michael 7.3.3
        4 March 2015 at 9:11 am

        It’s no different than mandating that you can’t smoke cigarettes in a private restaurant or bar, or on a plane. There is a significant risk to public health if someone smokes cigarettes in a public place because of secondhand smoke. If it is in the interest of public health or well-being it is not fascist — individual rights are not absolute, and stop where other’s begin.

        The parent’s right to choose whether their child is vaccinated is secondary to a child’s right to life, for example.

        I wouldn’t go for full-on compulsion where people are prosecuted or fined for not vaccinating their children, but I would make it so a child has to be vaccinated to attend school. That way it’s not forcing people but it’s basically ensuring every child is vaccinated that will be around other kids, since homeschooled children won’t be required to.

        • Colonial Rawshark 7.3.3.1
          4 March 2015 at 9:22 am

          It’s no different than mandating that you can’t smoke cigarettes in a private restaurant or bar, or on a plane.

          In fact, it’s totally different in terms of risks and benefits. Second hand smoke probably caused 100-200 deaths a year in NZ at its peak, due mainly to increases in lung and heart disease. Increase NZ vaccination rates by force won’t have a tiny fraction of that level of benefit – and will generate push back against the system.

          • McFlock 7.3.3.1.1
            4 March 2015 at 12:14 pm

            What a load of shit.
            Between all the diseases on the vaccine shedule and the extremely strong association between SUDI and smoking+unsafe sleep (and every other factor you ignored), the comparison you just pulled out of your arse is worthless, “doctor”.

          • DoublePlusGood 7.3.3.1.2
            4 March 2015 at 1:17 pm

            This is different from the number of deaths and serious morbidity saved by vaccines for illnesses such as polio and diphtheria how exactly?

            • KJT 7.3.3.1.2.1
              4 March 2015 at 8:00 pm

              And measles, HPV, mumps, rubella etc.

              By the way, I had mumps, and measles as kid, I still remember. And the deformed and handicapped kids from their mothers rubella.

              I will take the vaccinations thanks.

              My mother has permanent hip problems, from Polio.

              One thing we have done right is reduced the rate of these diseases.
              Polio is almost unheard of now.

              I am thankful vaccinations have saved my kids from the risks of whooping cough, mumps and other serious illnesses.

              Anti-vaccers are delaying the time when we can eradicate more diseases.

              • Colonial Rawshark …
                4 March 2015 at 8:12 pm

                Good points. Your perspective from another generation is crucial.

                But you should know, vaccination has not eradicated a major disease for a few decades because pathogens are smarter than vaccinations.

                • DoublePlusGood …
                  4 March 2015 at 8:33 pm

                  Well, we could have gotten rid of polio by now, were it not for religious fanatasism in northern Nigeria.

                • KJT …
                  4 March 2015 at 8:36 pm

                  How many kids do you see with mumps, or it’s complications nowadays?

                  What about tuberculosis? Mostly eradicated in New Zealand, but now returning as we get migrants from unvaccinated populations.

        • weka 7.3.3.2
          4 March 2015 at 9:25 am

          “It’s no different than mandating that you can’t smoke cigarettes in a private restaurant or bar, or on a plane.”

          It is different. I’m not going to explain how until you realise that homeschooled and schooled kids still have significant contact and thus segregating kids won’t ensure herd immunity in the way you are suggesting. Your suggestion is so, sorry, stupid, that I can’t actually get past it until it’s addressed. Take a step back and consider that your beliefs might be impairing your rationality.

          Let me ask you this, how much time have you spent around homeschooled kids and their families?

          • Pasupial 7.3.3.2.1
            4 March 2015 at 12:51 pm

            Weka

            You claim the analogy is flawed because; “homeschooled and schooled kids still have significant contact”. But surely even; “mandating that you can’t smoke cigarettes in a private restaurant or bar, or on a plane”, still exposes nonsmokers to toxic fumes; on the streets, and especially; around the entrances to nonsmoking venues. It seems that the analogy is entirely apt.

            I think a better example would be that; driving a potentially lethal motor vehicle on a public road is limited to those who have demonstrated the competence to do so (though they are still free to endanger themselves and others on their private property). Similarly; attendance at a public school should be limited to those who have demonstrated competence in attending to potentially lethal matters of public health, such as vaccinations (but also say – a quarantine period for children recently exposed to ebola) .

            I think it was SR (too many comments to sift for the quote) who pointed out that some children can not be vaccinated (and are so at extreme risk fro the nonvaccinated). They having done all they can, should still be able to attend a public school; as they will have a medical doctor’s affirmation that this is the case. It is only those with parents who are more concerned with their own feelings than other children’s health who I suggest should be left free to go to hell in their own way.

      • Tracey 7.3.4
        4 March 2015 at 11:15 am

        The State has just made a child ward of the Court cos his dad didn’t want him to take a certain medicinal regime… is that Facism?

        • weka 7.3.4.1
          4 March 2015 at 11:56 am

          I would need to look at the specific case Tracey, but while taking part in this conversation I have been thinking of such case. It’s the very edge of medical ethics, a very tricky issue, and it’s rare, not something being routinely applied to whole populations. It’s also usually about an individual ill child’s wellbeing, not a individual healthy child’s.

        • Ergo Robertina 7.3.4.2
          4 March 2015 at 12:32 pm

          Tracey – it’s not clear what point you’re trying to make as there’s such a clear and obvious line between a population preventive measure and medicine for a life-threatening illness.
          Are you suggesting it might be valid for the state to make unvaccinated children wards of the court?

          • northshoredoc 7.3.4.2.1
            4 March 2015 at 12:39 pm

            “A severe blow to the autism-MMR hypothesis was dealt in a 2004 article in the Sunday Times. It stated that up to five of the patients in Wakefield’s original study were involved in a lawsuit against vaccine manufacturers prior to their participation in the study. As well, it was stated that Wakefield received up to 55,000 British pounds to assist their case by finding evidence linking autism with the MMR vaccine.”

            How the case against the MMR vaccine was fixed

            BMJ 2011; 342 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c5347

            • The Murphey 7.3.4.2.1.1
              4 March 2015 at 1:43 pm

              Q. Why are you pushing the Wakefield angle repeatedly ?

              Q. Is that the extent of your ‘whistleblower data set ?

              • One Anonymous Bloke …
                4 March 2015 at 1:53 pm

                It’s going to come up every time the autism canard comes up.

                Just as when some wingnut says the minimum wage causes unemployment, the evidence against that will come up.

                That’s what happens when you employ the Bellman fallacy.

        • Molly 7.3.4.3
          4 March 2015 at 6:40 pm

          The question is too simple without knowing more.

          If I was the parent of that child, to start I would want to know the following from the doctors about the prescribed method of treatment:
          1. What is the progress of this disease – and how is this affected by the age of my child?
          2. Is this treatment a modified adult regime, or has it been specifically tested for children of his/her age?
          3. What are the expected outcomes for this treatment, and the probabilities of a complete or near-complete recovery. What are the other possible outcomes and what is their likelihood?
          4. What kind of quality of life will my child have while undergoing this regime you have prescribed. Are there any other options that will reduce the negative impacts on his quality of life, while still providing the medical assistance this regime can give?

          None of this information is included in your question.

          Also, there has to be the issue of whether the child has a close and loving relationship with that parent, and whether this action will have such a detrimental effect on their well-being that it outweighs any benefit from enforced medical procedures.

          No parent – partner – child – or loved one, wants to be in the position of having to assess the possibilities of recovery against invasive and sometimes harrowing treatments, and determine whether a shorter time frame with a better quality of life is preferable.

          There is no one answer.

      • tricledrown 7.3.5
        4 March 2015 at 11:50 am

        Weka so compulsory taxes,education,law obiding,road rules,wages,blah blah.
        Bird brained argument.
        Fascist though manipulation.

        • weka 7.3.5.1
          4 March 2015 at 11:54 am

          If you can’t tell the difference between being forced to take medication and being forced to pay taxes then there is probably no point in talking further. I’m guessing you are largely unaware of the politics of patients rights too.

      • thatguynz 7.3.6
        4 March 2015 at 12:24 pm

        +1. Fuck that. I honestly can’t even believe we’re actually having this debate. Freedom of choice is a right – deal with it.

        • One Anonymous Bloke 7.3.6.1
          4 March 2015 at 2:09 pm

          Freedom to choose a Charter school, for example. Freedom to choose a zero-hour contract. Freedom to choose to be born in a low-income household.

          Yay for choice and freedom. Apple pie, Mom, freedom! And choice!

          🙄

          • Ergo Robertina 7.3.6.1.1
            4 March 2015 at 2:26 pm

            You need to learn the difference between negative and positive freedoms before you can adequately address thatguynz’s point.

            • One Anonymous Bloke 7.3.6.1.1.1
              4 March 2015 at 3:11 pm

              We’re discussing the choice to put third parties at greater risk of illness and death. Yay for freedom.

            • One Anonymous Bloke 7.3.6.1.1.2
              4 March 2015 at 3:14 pm

              PS: compulsory vaccination is opposed by the health profession because it compromises the doctor/patient relationship and evidence (yes, that boring stuff again) shows it would reduce the immunisation rate.

              Still that would be good for Big Pharma, eh – imagine how much more money they could make from full-blown epidemics. No, wait…

              • Colonial Rawshark …
                4 March 2015 at 3:18 pm

                PS: compulsory vaccination is opposed by the health profession because it compromises the Doctor patient relationship and evidence (yes, that boring stuff again) shows it would reduce the immunisation rate.

                Thanks for declaring the position against compulsory vaccination as the scientific and evidence based one.

                You waited a while though.

                • One Anonymous Bloke …
                  4 March 2015 at 3:25 pm

                  Oh, so Big Pharma and the medical profession are trustworthy now are they? Good to know.

                  I guess that falls into the category of “Big Karma”.

                  • Colonial Rawshark …
                    4 March 2015 at 3:40 pm

                    I’m an evidence based operator OAB. But I’m also smart enough to know that people should have the agency to decide what the evidence means for their own decision making, within their own values system and their own priorities. You haven’t thought that far ahead yet, but you should.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      4 March 2015 at 3:46 pm

                      People should have the agency to own a Lamborghini and a rainbow unicorn kitten too.

                      Next time you want a bridge built, I’m your man. Payment in advance.

              • Ergo Robertina …
                4 March 2015 at 3:45 pm

                ”PS: compulsory vaccination is opposed by the health profession because it compromises the doctor/patient relationship and evidence (yes, that boring stuff again) shows it would reduce the immunisation rate.”

                Which begs the question of why you go into bully boy mode each time this topic’s raised, since you’ve admitted coercion doesn’t work.
                Safe to say hysterical derision and abuse are also a tad counter-productive to your cause.
                Like CV says, thanks for finally acknowledging the evidence.

                • One Anonymous Bloke …
                  4 March 2015 at 3:53 pm

                  Bully boy mode.

                  Cite the comment from today’s discourse you’re referring to please. Then compare it to the endless false allegations against everyone from Jimmy Kimmel to the entire medical profession, and see if you know something about the meaning of bullying as a result.

                  I note you had no answer to my 7.3.6.1.1.1. Still mulling it over, eh?

                  • Ergo Robertina …
                    4 March 2015 at 4:14 pm

                    OAB, I’m not ”mulling” over your deliberately obtuse response to which you drew attention above.
                    You demonstrated a second time you don’t know or care about the difference between negative and positive freedoms, and I’d rather not waste more time on it.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      4 March 2015 at 4:25 pm

                      How “positive” is it to put increased risk of death or injury upon others?

                      My argument is that “freedom of choice” is a philosophically right wing veil for bad choices: a cypher that is suspect wherever and whenever it arises.

                      Would you like to avoid that too?

                    • Ergo Robertina …
                      4 March 2015 at 4:34 pm

                      Nope – objecting to vaccine is a negative not a positive freedom. Perfectly valid to argue in its favour, of course, but important to understand the logical difference in the nature of choice in respect of compulsory vaccines compared with taxpayer-funded charter schools, or giving business the freedom to exploit workers through zero hours contracts.

                  • Ergo Robertina …
                    4 March 2015 at 4:19 pm

                    And as for bully boy mode. Are you seriously suggesting you don’t engage that?

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      4 March 2015 at 4:27 pm

                      I’m asking when I engaged it today. Bullying comes in many shapes and sizes. Deflecting from my argument by citing previous behaviour is what?

                    • The lost sheep …
                      4 March 2015 at 5:15 pm

                      “I’m asking when I engaged it today.”

                      Gee OAB, I don’t think you have!
                      Must be a hell strain. How long do you think you can keep it up?

      • Murray Rawshark 7.3.7
        4 March 2015 at 6:59 pm

        Does treating drinking water count as fascism too? Making seatbelts compulsory in cars?

        Many years ago, New York was famous for its oysters. There were oyster carts and oyster bars all over the place. Eventually health inspections were imposed on these establishments and the rate of food poisoning went right down. But some idiot libertarian took the council to court and got the inspections overturned because they interfered with the consumers’ right to buy bad oysters, and the sellers right to sell. Apparently the market would sort it all out.

        Public health laws may be harsh and misguided, but they are not fascism.

        • Ergo Robertina 7.3.7.1
          4 March 2015 at 7:30 pm

          Wrong, Murray; the right to clean drinking water is more in sync with the right to reject medical treatments. Just think of the fluoride debate.
          Remember – this is an argument about compulsion, not vaccines per se.
          Even OAB says compulsory vaccination would not have the desired effect, so why would proponents even entertain the idea?

          • Murray Rawshark 7.3.7.1.1
            4 March 2015 at 8:49 pm

            I’m saying that compulsion to vaccinate is not fascism. Since I’m wrong, do I take it that you think it is? I don’t have a view on compulsory vaccination, but I’m fairly sure it’s not fascism.

            • Ergo Robertina 7.3.7.1.1.1
              4 March 2015 at 9:32 pm

              Yep, I believe compulsory vaccination is a fascist ideal.
              But it was your false equivalence with clean drinking water that I specifically identified as wrong-headed.
              Reactionary lefties on this thread are insisting personal choice arguments automatically constitute crazy libertarian antisocial actions, which is also wrong-headed.

    • Michael 7.4
      4 March 2015 at 9:05 am

      I think that some of the anti-vaccine sentiment the Left has is just as bad as the Right’s climate change denial. The Left is meant to be pro-science, not anti-science! Vaccines are safe, and necessary. Saying vaccines are harmful is just as bad as saying climate change isn’t caused by humans. The vast, vast majority of doctors say vaccines are extremely safe and necessary, just as 97% of scientists agree that climate change is real and man-made.

      We definitely need to ensure that we do not lose herd immunity and that could require some degree of coercion. I think that requiring people to vaccinate their kids is fair, as it’s within the interest of public health.

      http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/02/vaccine-map-exemption-bills Many US states are currently bringing in mandatory vaccination bills.

      • weka 7.4.1
        4 March 2015 at 9:09 am

        “Saying vaccines are harmful is just as bad as saying climate change isn’t caused by humans.”

        No, it’s really really not. And until pro-vaccination people stop and start listening to why it’s not, these debates will just keep polarising.

      • weka 7.4.2
        4 March 2015 at 9:11 am

        “We definitely need to ensure that we do not lose herd immunity and that could require some degree of coercion. I think that requiring people to vaccinate their kids is fair, as it’s within the interest of public health.”

        Do you believe that the state should force people to change to prevent run away climate change?

        If you bring in compulsory vaccination, how would you enforce it?

        • Michael 7.4.2.1
          4 March 2015 at 9:15 am

          As I said before, I would make it a condition for a child to be vaccinated for them to enter school.

          That way children are only required to be vaccinated when they’ll be in contact with other children at school. Parents can homeschool their kids if they really are opposed to vaccination. I think that balances freedom of choice and the right to life. It allows parents to make the choice while protecting the children the child would interact with if they go to school.

          Read this if you are still opposed to vaccines, and why the rumour about vaccines causing autism is unfounded:

          http://imgur.com/gallery/ybBUJ

          Vaccines are necessary and have been one of the most amazing achievements by humankind and science in the past centuries.

          • weka 7.4.2.1.1
            4 March 2015 at 9:21 am

            Right, so you’re not going to force doctors to vaccinate kids against their parent’s wishes, you’re just going to ghettoise the kids and their families.

            You think homeschooled kids don’t interact with schooled kids? Sorry mate, but your reasoning is incredibly flawed and typical of many of the pro-vaccination arguments.

            I don’t care that much about the autism/MMR debate, it’s pretty irrelevant to what I think about vaccination. Maybe you should read my comments more carefully.

            • tricledrown 7.4.2.1.1.1
              4 March 2015 at 12:41 pm

              If they contract any of these diseases they should not get free medical treatment or be able to attend public schools.
              Charter schools fine.
              But compulsory vaccination doesn’t exist.

              • weka …
                4 March 2015 at 12:53 pm

                That doesn’t have anything to do with what I just said, but hey ho.

                “If they contract any of these diseases they should not get free medical treatment or be able to attend public schools.”

                Exclude all kids from public schools who have influenza then? And make it impossible for low income families to access health care, that will really help public health initiatives around child health. Good luck with those strategies.

                (like I said, fascism and stupidity based on ideology not rationality).

                “But compulsory vaccination doesn’t exist.”

                Please pay attention, this conversation is about whether compulsory vaccination is good/useful.

              • Molly …
                4 March 2015 at 12:54 pm

                “If they contract any of these diseases they should not get free medical treatment or be able to attend public schools.”
                I’m cringing as I read this statement. This is the antithesis of informed consent.

            • McFlock 7.4.2.1.1.2
              4 March 2015 at 5:32 pm

              You think homeschooled kids don’t interact with schooled kids?

              Not nearly as much as school kids interact with each other, I would have thought.

              Reduced contact = reduced opportunity for transmission. No solution is perfect be it vaccination, quarantine, or space suits.

          • Molly 7.4.2.1.2
            4 March 2015 at 9:22 am

            Michael – given I spent a few months when I had my first child, reading every book I could get my hands on – both pro and anti vaccination, and then spent some time looking up random references to scientific studies to gauge the integrity of the books, I find your link lacking in substance.

            You have little idea about why people don’t vaccinate, and given the vast amount of resources spent to promote vaccination programmes – I have some idea why you probably do.

            • Michael 7.4.2.1.2.1
              4 March 2015 at 9:26 am

              Could you tell me some of the reasons why you are opposed to vaccination?

              • Colonial Rawshark …
                4 March 2015 at 9:30 am

                opposed to compulsory vaccination

                FIFY

                • Tracey …
                  4 March 2015 at 11:17 am

                  I’m opposed to families living in garages… imo, that is a far more dangerous (to health and other aspects of a child’s life) than compulsory vaccination.

                  • weka …
                    4 March 2015 at 11:57 am

                    Are you saying that you know what is best for other people’s children?

                    • DoublePlusGood …
                      4 March 2015 at 1:25 pm

                      That’s such a strawman. We have myriad occasions where we implement policy that is because officials know what is best for other people’s children. The existence of an education curriculum for one.

                    • weka …
                      4 March 2015 at 1:56 pm

                      Tracey isn’t ‘we’. I think you have misunderstood why I asked her that.

                      btw, ‘We’ also implement stupid shit public good policy too, like cannabis laws, or telling people to eat low fat diets, or allowing the economy to be run to support business and create poverty. etc etc.

                    • Tracey …
                      4 March 2015 at 6:45 pm

                      nope i am saying i think the round the houses on compulsory vaccinations wastes alot of energy when children are living in garages which will have more negative health consequences for far more children than the vaccinate or not vaccinate children.

                  • Molly …
                    4 March 2015 at 12:08 pm

                    Why it is one or the other?

                    • Tracey …
                      4 March 2015 at 6:47 pm

                      it isnt i just think forcing a small number to vaccinate their children is a drop in the ocean compared to the numbers living in substandard accommodation which has far far reaching consequences.

                      to be clear i dont agree with forced vaccination but we live in a country where budget means we constantly have to choose one over the other.

                      i would not bother with compulsive vaccinations and focus on healthy homes.

                    • Molly …
                      4 March 2015 at 8:52 pm

                      OK.

                      Agree with you on that. Our current situation with providing affordable, healthy housing is deplorable.

                      Add to that the constant threat of litigation for those who try to help out family members and friends by providing them a roof – and the planning regulations that don’t recognise the reality of some housing situations and we have a problem that is not going to be solved by more of the same.

              • Molly …
                4 March 2015 at 12:07 pm

                A myriad of reasons.

                Some to do with the fact that when I did follow the references in the back of pro and anti vaccination books, the anti vaccination ones seemed to be more accurate, and transparent.

                Looking up authors often showed a pecuniary interest of pro-vaccinators, while anti-vaccinators did it despite virulent and hateful responses.

                My personal experience with GP practices trying to get children vaccinated while they were already sick – with no consideration of an already compromised immune system. Deaths occurring during clinical trials are often excused as – patient had a cold – and yet the front line continues this push. Stupidly aiming for only one goal – increased vaccination numbers rather than improved health.

                There also needs to be improved information regarding benefits and adverse effects. I was not impressed to see the Meningitis vaccine promoted to children by children television presenters, without the accompanying information that the vaccine protected against a form of Meningitis that was prevalent in North America. It did not protect against the strain that was occurring in 90% of the cases in NZ.

                Along with the $160 million Gardasil programme, the supposed benefits are dubious, and are more than offset by the false sense of security those receiving those vaccines may have. Eg. how many don’t consider the possibility of meningitis when sick and fatally delay treatment, or think they are protected against cervical cancer and avoid pap smears?

                A transparent and comprehensive adverse reactions to medication register would be a start. But my own experience with a child that reverted to non-vocal development after vaccination for six months, shows that it is unlikely to have a true representation of possible adverse effects. I don’t like using anecdotal evidence, but I do know an Australian person quite well, who has a first cousin looked after in an institute. Severe reaction to vaccinations, which resulted in permanent disability and the parents were told that the state would provide care only if they signed a non-disclosure agreement.

                We need to understand that medical journals are funded by advertisements and multiple printings of articles – by pharmaceutical companies. There is a degree of influence in those publications that is not admitted to by many, but as the links shows editors of those same journals have quite unashamedly done so.

                The article I linked to above also shows how clinical trials can be set up to produce a favourable outcome regardless.

                For these reasons – compulsory vaccinations are one step too far.

                • tricledrown …
                  4 March 2015 at 12:25 pm

                  Compulsory Vaccination is not the law.
                  If they had one for scare mongering idiots that would be good.
                  Vaccines have wiped out huge numbers of debilitating diseases.
                  The risk around vaccines is miniscule compared to the damage not having high rates.
                  Our health system would be overloaded 100 of 1,000’s would die even more deformed deaf and brain damaged people would have miserable lives.

                  • Molly …
                    4 March 2015 at 12:37 pm

                    tricledrown – my response was to Micheal’s request for my personal reasoning. I’m well past the time where I have to make this decision for my children’s vaccination programmes, but do remember that I did not take the decision lightly to delay vaccinations – and avoid some completely. Gardasil for my daughter being one example.

                    IIRC – my local MP, Dr Paul Hutchinson was considering drafting a requirement for all beneficiaries to have followed the vaccination schedule for children in their care, else their benefits would be sanctioned. It didn’t go ahead, but the idea was floated a couple of times by Paula Bennett.

                    Will you at least comment on some of the reasoning given above?
                    Your comment sounds like copy for a new vaccination programme.

                  • Colonial Rawshark …
                    4 March 2015 at 3:33 pm

                    Vaccines have wiped out huge numbers of debilitating diseases.

                    Really? Huge numbers of diseases wiped out by vaccinations? Please name the diseases you are thinking of from, say the last 25 years. Which diseases since 1990 have indeed been wiped out by modern vaccinations?

                    • KJT …
                      4 March 2015 at 6:52 pm

                      They would have been if it hadn’t been for anti-science faith healers and other anti-vac idiots.

                    • northshoredoc …
                      4 March 2015 at 7:45 pm

                      For goodness sake stop acting the knowledgeable pendant.

                      The incidence of a number of vaccine preventable diseases have declined substantively since the introduction of vaccination.

                    • Paul …
                      4 March 2015 at 8:48 pm

                      Agree CR

                • weka …
                  4 March 2015 at 12:35 pm

                  Thanks Molly, another thoughtful comment.

                  tricledown, this whole conversation was started today because Draco suggested that forced vaccination was necessary and good.

    • weka 7.5
      4 March 2015 at 9:17 am

      “Experts recommend that 92-95% of Americans [any population really] be vaccinated against measles to protect everyone in the community”

      Just pulled one figure off the internet, which says that 4% of respondents in a survey say they don’t vaccinate at all. If that’s true, there’s no need for compulsory vaccination, the MoH can focus on the people that want to vaccinate but don’t or can’t. When we have equity around health care access, then we can look and see if the small % of people who don’t vaccinate are indeed a problem. But according to your own comment, we don’t need 100%, so why the need for state coersion?

      Gobsmacking to seeing some on the left arguing for fascist health care over socialised health care.

      http://sciblogs.co.nz/code-for-life/2013/04/17/vaccination-rates-in-nz-and-what-do-those-that-delay-infant-immunisation-think/

      • Draco T Bastard 7.5.1
        4 March 2015 at 10:23 am

        But according to your own comment, we don’t need 100%, so why the need for state coersion?

        Because the idiotic, anti-science anti-vaxxers are making a difference to the numbers of people who vaccinate dropping the number below that 95% needed.

        Gobsmacking to seeing some on the left arguing for fascist health care over socialised health care.

        And I’m gobsmacked that so many on the left are so anti-science.

        • Colonial Rawshark 7.5.1.1
          4 March 2015 at 10:29 am

          Sorry mate, you are the one who thinks that all the correct conclusions have already been reached and there is nothing more to debate therefore you are the one being “anti-science”.

          • tricledrown 7.5.1.1.1
            4 March 2015 at 11:35 am

            Coronial Rawsack.
            Maybe we should give the placebo injections.
            Or Duck water Quackery.
            Flim Flam snake oil faith healers.
            Are better than science.
            We are a developed country.
            Shamanism has gone.
            I would trust the BMJ over any of you and your fearmongering shamanism.

            • Molly 7.5.1.1.1.1
              4 March 2015 at 11:45 am

              One of the BMJ editors in a court case stated unasked that journals are a marketing arm of the pharmaceutical industry. You have faith that there is no influence of those reports. I don’t.

              • Molly …
                4 March 2015 at 12:27 pm

                Sorry, unable to link. Reference was in a book called Science for Sale – by ex EPA microbiologist, David Lewis.

                Interesting that one of the two negative comments is by the non-scientist – Brian Deer, who has broken the story on Dr Wakefield and provided a complaint regarding another issue that was a word-for-word match to a preliminary document that had been drawn up by an industry representative two years previous.

                You will have to read the book to find out more. I didn’t agree with everything the author concluded, but he provided a lot of checkable references and the related behaviour of some industry members and – unfortunately – government watchdogs – are beyond defence.

              • tricledrown …
                4 March 2015 at 12:30 pm

                BS Molly The BMJ is just as good at looking at any research weather it be big pharma saying their are no side effects or some religious nut job doing research on MMR saying it causes Autism.

                • Molly …
                  4 March 2015 at 12:46 pm

                  tricledrown, you are asking me to recall research that I did years (18+) ago primarily because I was responsible for the health and wellbeing of my children and wanted to understand the effects – both positive and negative, of any drugs that were introduced to their developing bodies.

                  At present I’m more interested in finding sustainable solutions for housing, community and the environment than revisiting that period so that I can provide links as comments on this site.

                  How much time have you put into looking at the influence of pharmaceutical companies on:
                  – the design and scope of clinical trials,
                  – the release of timely information to media outlets regarding future epidemics and pandemics,
                  – the article in the link above that shows that clinical journals are not truly independent,

                  Are you absolutely confident that – in this particular area of vaccinations – all science is pure and not influenced by the vast amounts of money available to those that produce them?

              • KJT …
                4 March 2015 at 6:54 pm

                Vaccinations were proven to be effective long before “big pharma” existed.

                • Colonial Rawshark …
                  4 March 2015 at 10:45 pm

                  I hold you in the greatest esteem, KJT, and on this topic particularly because you have seen the horrors of infectious disease yourself in a way that a Gen X’er like myself born in the 70’s or 80’s will not have.

                  However I do believe a very simple principle – not all vaccinations are the same, not all vaccinations are as good as others, and each vaccination has to be judged on its own merits for the situation.

          • DoublePlusGood 7.5.1.1.2
            4 March 2015 at 1:36 pm

            “all the correct conclusions have already been reached”
            I see that sentence quite a bit, most commonly when pseudoscientists and quacks are attacking scientists who have debunked their profession or fakery. The argument seems to be that because the scientists haven’t got exhaustive evidence on every aspect of a pseudoscience, they therefore cannot critique that pseudoscience.
            This is incorrect because it is deliberately ignoring that the scientists can make perfectly valid criticism of something on the evidence that there is available. Current knowledge in epidemiology is perfectly sufficient to criticise anti-vaccination arguments, for instance. Scientists can also make perfectly valid criticism of claims that resort to magical thinking or that cannot possibly be correct – the archetypal example of the latter being that homeopathy cannot possibly work in the manner claimed (it’s also an example of the former, where the homeopaths are using arguments like “water has memory”)

            • Colonial Rawshark 7.5.1.1.2.1
              4 March 2015 at 2:49 pm

              Quite happy for scientists to make their critiques, and also be held up to criticism themselves, I’ve never said otherwise.

        • Tracey 7.5.1.2
          4 March 2015 at 11:19 am

          Do you trust the state to use a compulsory mandate for the good of all the children and society? More, than say, you trust the same mechanism to alleviate poverty and achieve equity for workers?

          • Colonial Rawshark 7.5.1.2.1
            4 March 2015 at 2:51 pm

            More to the point – do we trust the state to override the principles of liberal democracy and the civil rights of people in order to punish and sanction individuals, families and communities who do not conform to the norms of the day.

            • KJT 7.5.1.2.1.1
              4 March 2015 at 8:45 pm

              We do that every time we issue a speeding ticket.

              The only reason I oppose compulsory vaccinations for those that we know, work, is that the “evidence” shows that compulsion is counter productive.

              Lets hope those who ignore evidence, when it does not suit their narrative, are removed from the gene pool by their own stupidity.

              Unfortunately it effects others. such as young babies before they can be vaccinated, those with immune system problems, and the anti -vaccers kids. Whooping cough is so nice to have.

        • weka 7.5.1.3
          4 March 2015 at 12:12 pm

          “And I’m gobsmacked that so many on the left are so anti-science.”

          I am too, but I’m not anti-science myself. Can you tell the difference between not accepting science as god/being critical of science, and being anti-science?

          “Because the idiotic, anti-science anti-vaxxers are making a difference to the numbers of people who vaccinate dropping the number below that 95% needed.”

          But if that’s not true in NZ why the need for coercion?

          • DoublePlusGood 7.5.1.3.1
            4 March 2015 at 1:38 pm

            The difference generally occurs when people ignore scientific evidence in favour of their own personal biases, particularly when they seek out information that suits their own biases, present that as fact, and discount evidence that suits their own biases.

            • weka 7.5.1.3.1.1
              4 March 2015 at 1:54 pm

              yes, and that happens on all sides of this debate.

              • One Anonymous Bloke …
                4 March 2015 at 2:14 pm

                Just like the two sides of the Climate Change debate, eh.

                • Colonial Rawshark …
                  4 March 2015 at 2:19 pm

                  Go tell it to the third of medical doctors and the half of nurses who refuse to take up free flu vaccinations even after their employers push them to take it up.

                  • One Anonymous Bloke …
                    4 March 2015 at 2:32 pm

                    I’m sure they all refuse to vaccinate their children too 🙄

                    That’s what we’re discussing, eh. Nice red herring though.

                    I’m drawing an analogy between the academic ‘debate’ about Climatology, and the academic ‘debate’ about childhood vaccination, to whit: neither can accurately be described as a debate: the areas of uncertainty are somewhere else, and that is where the original work is being done.

                    Sure, Willie Soon and Richard Christie still try and get published from time to time, and no-one pays any attention outside of the Heartland Institute and the WSJ.

                    Mr. Andrew Wakefield doesn’t get published anymore.

                    • Colonial Rawshark …
                      4 March 2015 at 2:42 pm

                      I’m sure they all refuse to vaccinate their children too 🙄

                      That’s what we’re discussing, eh. Nice red herring though.

                      You don’t like inconvenient facts, is that it? You’d prefer to compartmentalise the discussion? Do you feel that the flu vaccination should be considered separately to other types of vaccinations? That vaccinations for adults should be considered independently to vaccinations for children?

                      Well, that’s exactly what I have been arguing for – that each vaccination should be considered separately on its own merits for the situation at hand.

                      Far from being a “red herring” you’ve just confirmed for the principles I was trying to communicate.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      4 March 2015 at 2:52 pm

                      We’ve been through this, I’m drawing an analogy between the ‘debate’ on Climate change and the ‘debate’ about vaccines.

                      Not to mention that I am actually trying to discuss this with Weka.

                    • Chooky …
                      4 March 2015 at 2:57 pm

                      @OAB…re .”Mr. Andrew Wakefield doesn’t get published anymore.”

                      …really?…maybe you are looking in the wrong places….the controversy has not gone away despite some wanting to shut this brave medical specialist up

                      http://www.ageofautism.com/dr-andrew-wakefield/

                    • Chooky …
                      4 March 2015 at 2:59 pm

                      I know for a fact that some doctors don’t vaccinate their children for everything ….and some advise their patients not to as well

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      4 March 2015 at 3:04 pm

                      In this case, Chooky, ‘published’ is shorthand for “accepted for publication in a peer-reviewed medical journal”.

                      I can quite comfortably state that Mr. Andrew Wakefield is a fraud, and there is no risk that The Standard or anyone associated with it will risk defamation action by allowing my comment to stand.

                      None.

                      I know for a fact that Dr. Willie Soon says “it’s the sun”. And your point is?

                    • te reo putake …
                      4 March 2015 at 3:08 pm

                      I guess OAB meant published in credible places such as the Lancet. Sure, Wakefield probably gets his name published in his local telephone directory, and that’s reasonably credible in that context, but that doesn’t alter his status amongst medical professionals.

                    • Chooky …
                      4 March 2015 at 4:37 pm

                      Re – “prestigious medical journals”…where Wakefield is not published

                      Dr Marcia Angell was fired from her long-held job as executive editor of the once prestigious New England Journal of Medicine because of an editorial that she wrote criticizing the pharmaceutical industry, criticisms that she elaborated on in her book, “The Truth About the Drug Companies: How They Deceive Us and What to Do About It”.

                      ” It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.”…

                      “Six years ago, John Ioannidis, a professor of epidemiology at the University of Ioannina School of Medicine in Greece, found that nearly half of published articles in scientific journals contained findings that were false, in the sense that independent researchers couldn’t replicate them. The problem is particularly widespread in medical research, where peer-reviewed articles in medical journals can be crucial in influencing multimillion- and sometimes multibillion-dollar spending decisions. It would be surprising if conflicts of interest did not sometimes compromise editorial neutrality, and in the case of medical research, the sources of bias are obvious. Most medical journals receive half or more of their income from pharmaceutical company advertising and reprint orders, and dozens of others[journals] are owned by companies like Wolters Kluwer, a medical publisher that also provides marketing services to the pharmaceutical industry.” — Helen Epstein, author of “Flu Warning: Beware the Drug Companies”

                      http://www.globalresearch.ca/beware-the-drug-companies-how-the-deceive-us-criticizing-big-pharma/5431517

                    • KJT …
                      4 March 2015 at 8:54 pm

                      The flu vaccinations, (as “Big Pharma” seems OK to tell us by the way, despite the effect on profits), are not always useful because we do not know in advance which flu mutation is likely to arrive on our shores.
                      The vaccinations immunise against the most likely ones.

                      Still a good idea for those in poor health who are likely to be made seriously ill by flu.

                  • northshoredoc …
                    4 March 2015 at 7:48 pm

                    The influenza virus and vaccination against it is certainly a different case from for example MMR for Measles, Mumps and Rubella.

                    I would suggest if the an influenza vaccine could be developed that provided the same/similar protection as MMR with a similar vaccination schedule then you would have hugely increased uptake.

      • Stephanie Rodgers 7.6.1
        4 March 2015 at 11:07 am

        I quite like this one too:
        http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2015/02/open-letter-parent-unvaccinated-child-measles-exposure

        To be honest, it annoys me to see people saying “you don’t understand why people choose not to vaccinate”. A very good friend of mine doesn’t vaccinate – because like the author of that letter, her child has immune issues. And she’s the staunchest pro-vaccination person around because other people’s non-vaccination could kill her child.

        There are many valid reasons not to vaccinate, and many incredibly valid reasons to question medical authority. But those are not why measles has returned to the US.

        • weka 7.6.1.1
          4 March 2015 at 12:16 pm

          You’re conflating things there Stephanie. My critique above of conversations like this has nothing to do with the rate of measles. It is that too many pro-vax people are unaware that choosing not to vaccinate predates the MMR/autism debate yet they continue to lump all people who choose not to vaccinate into the same pool of ‘stupid’ people.

          That kind of approach will never lead to understanding or change, hence the need to resort to forcing people. Then we can start forcing medical interventions on other people for the good of the herd. Like what they should eat or feed their kids for instance.

          • DoublePlusGood 7.6.1.1.1
            4 March 2015 at 1:39 pm

            I think we’ve gone way past that already, with folate showing up in bread, for instance.

          • Stephanie Rodgers 7.6.1.1.2
            4 March 2015 at 1:40 pm

            Well to be honest, weka, you’ve made some pretty big generalisations on this thread too (“And until pro-vaccination people stop and start listening…”) as well as throwing around the word “fascist”.

            That approach doesn’t exactly lend itself to understanding or change either, especially when, to be blunt, we’re talking about a present, very real situation where sick kids’ lives are being endangered due to antiscientific scaremongering (to be clear: perpetuated by the extremist anti-vaxxer lobby who rely on discredited shit like the Wakefield paper.)

            • weka 7.6.1.1.2.1
              4 March 2015 at 1:47 pm

              Again, that’s conflating things.

              I’ve used the term fascism 3 times, and in very specific comments. I notice that no-one has asked me what I meant. That’s fine, but I’m not throwing the word around, it was chosen carefully in response to specific things I saw.

              “And until pro-vaccination people stop and start listening…”

              You’ve just taken part of my sentence completely out of context and misrepresented it, so not really sure how I can respond to that to be honest.

              You said you were annoyed to see people saying that some people don’t understand why some people choose not to vaccinate. Given that I’m the one running that line here it seems reasonable to think that the following of what you wrote was related. Maybe it wasn’t, fair enough.

              • DoublePlusGood …
                4 March 2015 at 2:03 pm

                We just assumed when you used ‘fascist’ that you meant that a dictatorship was going to form that was going to mass mobilise the population for war on Antivax, start a cult of personality around a scientist dictator hero…

            • weka 7.6.1.1.2.2
              4 March 2015 at 1:53 pm

              “That approach doesn’t exactly lend itself to understanding or change either,”

              Perhaps not, but I rarely use the term fascism, whereas the behaviour I was commenting on as not lending itself to change is very common.

      • The Murphey 7.6.2
        4 March 2015 at 2:06 pm

        Jimmy Kimmel show pimps for the vaccine industry

        The level reached here is transparently exposing the desperation of the pharmaceutical industry

        • One Anonymous Bloke 7.6.2.1
          4 March 2015 at 2:11 pm

          Jimmy Kimmel doesn’t work for Big Pharma – he’s on retainer to the HAARP Cabal.

          • The Murphey 7.6.2.1.1
            4 March 2015 at 2:18 pm

            As I have suggested to you previously

            Stop stalking my comments and exposing your lack of suitability for a discussion of this nature

            • One Anonymous Bloke 7.6.2.1.1.1
              4 March 2015 at 2:20 pm

              When you stop giving me opportunities to lampoon your comments, champ.

              • The Murphey …
                4 March 2015 at 4:09 pm

                Your comments tone and language are a wonderful helper for exposing the numerous problems in the approach of the self righteous

                Keep it up ‘ champ’

                • One Anonymous Bloke …
                  4 March 2015 at 4:39 pm

                  Once upon a time, there was an evil borg called Big Pharma. They did all sorts of nasty things, and the chief among these was making money.

                  One day, Big Pharma got a phone call.

                  “Good morning and welcome to Big Pharma, how can I drug you?”

                  “Good morning, my name is Big Karma. I represent an evil Buddhist conspiracy, and I have a proposal.”

                  “I’m listening.”

                  “We at Big Karma want you to stop distributing vaccines.”

                  “I’m listening.”

                  “We think that the resulting epidemics will increase your profits ten-to-a-hundred-fold.”

                  “What do you get out of it?”

                  “We turn grief into disciples.”

                  “What do you need?”

                  • Colonial Rawshark …
                    4 March 2015 at 5:43 pm

                    “We think that the resulting epidemics will increase your profits ten-to-a-hundred-fold.”

                    That’s silly. Chronic inflammatory and auto-immune related illnesses which require daily medication for the rest of a persons life is how big pharma makes real money. Much more reliable for delivering the reliable quarterly numbers that investors want than unpredictable flash in the pan epidemics which are here and gone before any new patented drugs can be marketed.

                    • Ergo Robertina …
                      4 March 2015 at 5:58 pm

                      Flash in the pan epidemics can be OK though from an industry point of view as it allows them to pull off Tamiflu-style heists worth billions.

                    • Colonial Rawshark …
                      4 March 2015 at 6:00 pm

                      That was a robbery…all that tax payers money quite literally incinerated on fuck all evidence of safety and effectiveness…

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      4 March 2015 at 6:12 pm

                      I’m picking Big Karma has an ulterior motive. What next for the evil Buddhist conspiracy? And what will Buzz Aldrin think?

                      Stay tuned folks.

            • The lost sheep 7.6.2.1.1.2
              4 March 2015 at 4:48 pm

              OAB is not stalking Murphey, HE is just everywhere.

              • The Murphey …
                4 March 2015 at 4:59 pm

                Everywhere accessible by keyboard

                • One Anonymous Bloke …
                  4 March 2015 at 5:01 pm

                  Not to mention inside your head 😈

                  • The Murphey …
                    4 March 2015 at 5:10 pm

                    Q. How would you stalking my comments on an anonymous forum get inside my head ?

                    I have no interest in your perspectives

                    Pro-jec-tion

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      4 March 2015 at 6:14 pm

                      You put your big toe in, you pull your big toe out,
                      Do the big conspiracy and shake it all about…

    • northshoredoc 7.7
      4 March 2015 at 11:36 am

      I don’t support compulsory vaccination. I do support making sure public health nurses and primary care providers make sure that all mums and toddlers are informed and have easy and free access to those vaccinations that are scheduled.

      For those like myself who are fed up with the likes of CV peddling his medical/corporation conspiracies and half truths regarding and misinformation sadly there have been a number of analyses performed that suggest that the more scientific facts one presents to someone who is anti vaccination the more defiantly anti vaccination they become.

      In relation to Weka’s comments the majority of non vaccinated persons in NZ are not anti vaccination, hence my early comment regarding access issues.

      I find it interesting that the debate always tends to centre around MMR which is one of the most effective vaccines and prevents some of the nastier viral illnesses reappearing in the kind of numbers that were experience prior to this vaccine being available. it is also the vaccine where the scurrilous Dr Wakefield falsified results for his own pecuniary advantage.

      • Molly 7.7.1
        4 March 2015 at 11:46 am

        Link to the falsified results – it is an interesting daisy chain of events.

      • weka 7.7.2
        4 March 2015 at 12:23 pm

        nsd, I think largely these conversations about are about world views, not about real solutions to child health.

        I haven’t looked for the figures, but I would hazard a guess that the real problem here (in NZ at least) is from uninformed non-vaccinators, not the people that traditionally intentionally choose via informed consent processes (I think the latter is still a pretty small group). I also think that relying solely on vaccination to solve infectious disease is hugely problematic (for a number of reasons), and would prefer to see these discussions include an understanding of how poverty, diet, overcrowding etc play a role in child health.

        So I would be more impressed with these conversations if I saw lefties talking about the need for the govt to fund better access to child health care, including vaccinations, and poverty reduction, than them having long drawn out debates where they get to call everyone who disagrees with them scientifically illiterate and where there is no room for any kind of reasonable discussion about things that don’t fit the beliefs of some.

        I know you and McFlock had a discussion about the coercion aspects a while back, but I don’t know if anyone was taking much notice.

        • Molly 7.7.2.1
          4 March 2015 at 12:29 pm

          +1

        • northshoredoc 7.7.2.2
          4 March 2015 at 12:51 pm

          Weka – immunisation schedules are very much a real world solution to child health.

          Certainly poverty, diet and overcrowding play very important roles in child health and should n’t be downplayed i don’t think anyone would argue that point.

          However I find it bewildering that we still have those that argue against vaccinating children against diseases such as Measles wherein the vaccine is very effective and the virus is unselective in whether one is living in a decline 1 or 10 population.

          • weka 7.7.2.2.1
            4 March 2015 at 12:59 pm

            Do you think that health status of the child (including but not limited to standard of living) has any effect on whether measles becomes complicated in that child or not?

            “Weka – immunisation schedules are very much a real world solution to child health.”

            Of course, but that has nothing to do with what I just said.

            “Certainly poverty, diet and overcrowding play very important roles in child health and should n’t be downplayed i don’t think anyone would argue that point.”

            I think there are people in this discussion who would be largely unaware of the connections between improvements in public health and increased standard of living, or how important they are. And there are also those who appear to think that health = medical and that non-medical aspects of health are irrelevant or non-existent.

            But I still don’t see many people saying we need to get vaccinations to people who can’t access them (and looking at the politics of that), and prefer instead to blame anti-vaxxers and then have ideological arguments about compulsory vaccination. Just saying that’s where the priorities are, which is why I think this is ideological not real world solution focussed.

            • northshoredoc 7.7.2.2.1.1
              4 March 2015 at 1:11 pm

              “Do you think that health status of the child (including but not limited to standard of living) has any effect on whether measles becomes complicated in that child or not?”

              As a rule of thumb.. complication rates are increased by immune deficiency disorders, malnutrition, vitamin A deficiency, intense exposures to measles, and lack of previous measles vaccination. Case-fatality/morbidity rates have decreased with improvements in socioeconomic status in many countries but remain high in developing countries.

              For a person who is immune suppressed (we now have many of these in our communities, post transplant, undergoing chemotherapy etc etc) who contracts measles their is a very high risk of sever complications and death.

              • weka …
                4 March 2015 at 1:13 pm

                thanks, that’s very helpful. What is intense exposure to measles?

                • northshoredoc …
                  4 March 2015 at 1:15 pm

                  Same place of residence usually.

                  • weka …
                    4 March 2015 at 1:21 pm

                    Just trying to understand how that would affect the complication rate (beyond closer exposure = more likely to contract in the first place). Is that more virulence with closer contact/repeated exposure?

              • Murray Rawshark …
                4 March 2015 at 7:59 pm

                “For a person who is immune suppressed (we now have many of these in our communities, post transplant, undergoing chemotherapy etc etc) who contracts measles their is a very high risk of sever complications and death.”

                That’d be me. In the 60s I went to school with some of the last victims of polio. Thank god for Jonas Salk, and for tetanus shots. It really worries me that my health is increasingly put at risk because an increasing number of people are making bad decisions, often based on scaremongering or internet garbage. I want the freedom to make my own bad decisions!!

                • The Murphey …
                  4 March 2015 at 11:50 pm

                  http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2000/02/the-virus-and-the-vaccine/377999/?single_page=true

                  A simian virus known as SV40 has been associated with a number of rare human cancers. This same virus contaminated the polio vaccine administered to 98 million Americans from 1955 to 1963. Federal health officials see little reason for concern. A growing cadre of medical researchers disagree

                  • Colonial Rawshark …
                    4 March 2015 at 11:52 pm

                    Plunge and pray

                    • The Murphey …
                      5 March 2015 at 12:01 am

                      Which is why the focus on any possible links to autism is to deflect from the runaway and increasing rates of cancer and other disease

                      Don’t forget three cheers for Jonas Salk

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      5 March 2015 at 8:22 am

                      The cancer rate is expected to increase with life expectancy.

                      Ignore this and cling to your personal beliefs.

                    • miravox …
                      5 March 2015 at 8:43 am

                      “Which is why the focus on any possible links to autism is to deflect from the runaway and increasing rates of cancer and other disease”

                      The link with autism is an anit-vacc stance. You cannot have it both ways – proponents of vaccinations have challenged Andrew Wakefield’s autism claims, not deflected from anything toward this focus. I’m sure they’ll challenge concerns about cancer & vaccination links as they arise, and I’ll watch with interest.

                      And yes, three cheers for Salk… ending polio misery for millions.

                    • northshoredoc …
                      5 March 2015 at 8:56 am

                      “Which is why the focus on any possible links to autism is to deflect from the runaway and increasing rates of cancer and other disease”

                      What complete tosh.

                  • Murray Rawshark …
                    5 March 2015 at 12:47 am

                    Not Jonas Salk’s fault.

                    • The Murphey …
                      5 March 2015 at 10:04 am

                      Q. Where would you see the responsibility existing Murray ?

                    • Murray Rawshark …
                      6 March 2015 at 12:35 pm

                      I don’t have a clue, and it’s not my responsibility to know, so I’m not going to make stuff up. To say Salk is responsible is like saying Marconi is responsible for O’Bomber’s drone murders because he invented radio communication. (Except that you probably think Tesla did.)

          • Colonial Rawshark 7.7.2.2.2
            4 March 2015 at 2:59 pm

            However I find it bewildering that we still have those that argue against vaccinating children against diseases such as Measles wherein the vaccine is very effective and the virus is unselective in whether one is living in a decline 1 or 10 population.

            How do you get the measles vaccination these days? I thought it had been phased out some years ago. Or is it available at extra cost?

    • The Murphey 7.8
      4 March 2015 at 12:13 pm

      Q. Have you not been reading the links I have posted in open mike as recently as yesterday ?

      • Draco T Bastard 7.8.1
        4 March 2015 at 12:16 pm

        Q. Why would you expect me to see all links?

        • The Murphey 7.8.1.1
          4 March 2015 at 2:34 pm

          You’re welcome to read what you like Draco the links I have posted should create pause for thought especially to those with fantasies about forced vaccination

          Many comments today have put reasoned and articulated information with qualifiers as to caution against compulsion and in fact to outright mistrust the distortion created around the ‘science of the vaccines industry’

          Not a single commentator has offered reasoned or rational response by way of counter against the ‘informed consenters’

          Clichés insult’s diversion conflation are all visible signs of flawed arguments

          You favour ‘science’ but you exhibit fundamentally flawed bias about what that means in relation to this subject matter

          • Draco T Bastard 7.8.1.1.1
            4 March 2015 at 9:49 pm

            Wow, you’re reading something completely different from what I’m reading. Are you on Planet Key?

      • One Anonymous Bloke 7.8.2
        4 March 2015 at 12:59 pm

        All The Murphey’s links prove is that The Murphey cherry picks links that bolster The Murphey’s pre-existing opinions.

  8. Skinny 8
    4 March 2015 at 8:51 am

    The final cut of the wannabe’s. Good to see ACT’s Grief man Robin Grieve and Focus have a rural candidate, since Joyce tipped a bucket of cow shit over the head of the local Nat farmer, instead choosing one of former MP, and now Mayor John Carters patsty’s.

    Northland by-election candidates:

    Adrian Paul Bonner – Independent

    Joe Carr – Focus New Zealand

    Robin Grieve – ACT

    Maki Herbert – Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party

    Adam Holland – Independent

    Mark Osborne – National

    Rob Painting – Climate Party

    Winston Peters – NZ First

    Reuben Taipari Porter – Mana

    Willow-Jean Prime – Labour

    Bruce Rogan – Independent

    • Karen 8.1
      4 March 2015 at 9:32 am

      Do you know how closely linked Osborne was to Sabin? I know they live in the same bit of Northland, but wondered how involved Osborne was with support for Sabin’s re-selection last time.

      • Skinny 8.1.1
        4 March 2015 at 10:19 am

        Osbourne’s selection came as a surprise to many party members in Northland, however an organised group of Teamster’s can manipulate the vote in their favour, usually by stacking the deck with the required numbers.

        Mad dog Prebble was a classic and proved very hard to remove as a candidate, outsmarting his opponents election after election, it took a mate of mine and Mc Carten to finally move him on. Slater was exposed in Hagers book for supposedly manipulating candidate selections by propaganda and tricks, including blogging then installing preferred rightwingers of their choice.

        So by this shock result it does show the electorate power base of National Northland remains centred around the ‘Sabin crew’ a smart wannabe MP would stay very close with the incumbent, voting and canvassing for them, wait their time and be rewarded when a sudden personal reason leaves a vacancy. Quite often real players sit behind the scene and pull the strings of their chosen puppet MP.

        • The lone Haranguer 8.1.1.1
          4 March 2015 at 12:14 pm

          I would doubt that the “little guys” involved on candidate selection, would necessarily know anything about Sabins alleged crimes at the time he was reselected as the Nat candidate. Head office may have known but its unlikely they would be saying much.

          As for how to sort out the selection issues, even Labour cant get rid of its electoral deadwood, and most elections, Winston brings in at least one complete donkey.

          Perhaps the simple truth is that, across all the parties, there arent that many fish worth having in he fishbowl.

        • Lindsey 8.1.1.2
          4 March 2015 at 12:40 pm

          Prebble was “moved on” by the good voters of Auckland Central who decided that Sandra Lee was more “Labour” than he was, and by the fact that he has pissed off all the good Labour volunteer workers in his electorate to the stage where he had practically no-one left to do all the necessary organising, leafleting, canvassing etc.
          Prebble’s idea of canvassing was to vist the local Dairy, leave few pamphlets and talk up large to the dairy owner that he had been out all morning doorknocking in the area in the hope that the dairy owner would pass that on to customers.

          Most of his activists had moved to neighbouring electorates. When I chaired the Kingsland branch of the Labour Party, of the 106 members, 64 of them were political refugees from Auckland Central. I remember the Election night TV report when he lost – panned round the Trades Hall supper room and there was almost no-one there.

          We had 300 workers for Judith Tizard on the next election day.

        • Murray Rawshark 8.1.1.3
          4 March 2015 at 8:12 pm

          From memory, a lot more than two people were involved in getting rid of Prebble from Auckland Central. He was still the losing candidate to Sandra Lee in 1993.

  9. adam 9
    4 March 2015 at 9:39 am

    Has anyone seen the video of the cop shooting the homeless man in LA today?

    If so, did you find it disturbing?

    • Colonial Rawshark 9.1
      4 March 2015 at 9:50 am

      I avoided watching it. Watching a mentally disturbed 17 year old girl being shot multiple times by cops in the lobby of a US police station was bad enough.

      • crashcart 9.1.1
        4 March 2015 at 10:28 am

        Just as distrubinig is the regularity with which these vidoes are coming out. I don’t think it represents an increase in the number of police killings are happening but more an increase in the number of recording devices availble to the general public. I have contemplated stopping watchign TYT because it seems every week there is a new video of someone who has fallen to the bottom of society getting killed by the cops in teh US. It needs to be shown and exposed but t is rightfully hard to see.

  10. Chooky 10
    4 March 2015 at 9:45 am

    Long overdue in my opinion…Israel should be called to account for crimes against humanity

    ‘ICC opens inquiry into possible war crimes in Palestinian territories’

    The International Criminal Court in the Hague has opened a “preliminary examination” of possible war crimes conducted on Palestinian territory during the last year’s military conflict with Israel in Gaza…

    Although the court may address fundamental issues, such as Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories following the 1967 war, the examination is likely to home on in on specific violations during the IDF incursion into Gaza last summer, in which more than 2,000 Palestinians, and 60 Israelis died.

    http://rt.com/news/223435-icc-palestine-open-crime/

  11. Philip Ferguson 11
    4 March 2015 at 10:59 am

    Money couldn’t buy them love – the sad story of the InternetMana fiasco

    Although the sections of the left that supported Mana and the InternetMana attempted rort of the electoral system tried to make out that Hone Harawira was the underdog in Te Tai Tokerau because Labour, National and NZ First ganged up together to make sure he lost the seat, this doesn’t quite square with the fact that he was the best-funded of any candidate in any seat in the general election. Pirate capitalist Kim Dotcom and the Internet Party lavished $105,000on him to ensure he retained the Te Tai Tokerau seat. Kelvin Davis, the successful Labour candidate received only $9,000 in donations. Moroever, Harawira spent over $4,000 on radio and TV advertising, while Davis spent nothing. Indeed, in every form of publicity, the Harawira campaign substantially outspent Davis. . .

    full at: https://rdln.wordpress.com/2015/03/03/money-cant-buy-you-love-the-sad-story-of-internetmana/

    • te reo putake 11.1
      4 March 2015 at 11:17 am

      Yet another great blog, Philip! Whining about Labour and others ganging up on Hone can’t disguise the fundamental failure of the mana/dotcom alliance, which was internal, not external.

      • Tracey 11.1.1
        4 March 2015 at 11:25 am

        and media-national related…

        notwithstanding Labour does still show some apparent naivety regarding targetted seats and outcomes of certain permutations.

        IF it is about a principle, then be bloody clear and make sure you stay principled on EVERYTHING.

      • marty mars 11.1.2
        4 March 2015 at 11:50 am

        The reason the new cannot be born in New Zealand is the political retreat and disengagement of the working class, a product of defeats and lowered horizons inflicted in no small measure by the Labour Party. This too is an outfit in which many of the far left entertain what can, in the second decade of the twenty-first century and almost 100 years of Labour, only be described as pathetic illusions.

        I agree with that to a point – what about you TRP?

        Saying that, “Nothing really has been learnt from the fiasco by most of the far-left elements involved. Their interminable search for shortcuts continues, along with the illusions in Maori nationalism and top-down political projects.” doesn’t show much understanding of Mana imo – where it came from, the kaupapa and continued bottom up approach.

        IMP was never top down imo – it was a vehicle to engage non-voters and it didn’t work.

        • te reo putake 11.1.2.1
          4 March 2015 at 12:02 pm

          I agree, like you, to a point. Redline is arguing from a Marxist perspective, so any social democratic party is seen as only offering an illusion. The NZLP is still central to anything the left hopes to do in NZ and isn’t going away, so working within it to move to the left is still a valid option IMO.

          • Chooky 11.1.2.1.1
            4 March 2015 at 12:58 pm

            …any genuine Marxist perspective would have quite a lot to say about this Labour Party

        • Chooky 11.1.2.2
          4 March 2015 at 12:56 pm

          re – “IMP was never top down imo – it was a vehicle to engage non-voters and it didn’t work”.

          …my son …a computer gaming geek was pro Internet/Mana …but because he was on a tractor all day listening to commercial radio and the likes of Sean Plunkett he came out very anti Dotcom and didn’t vote Internet /Mana….the right wing media have a lot to answer for ….I only hope a book is written dissecting it

          • gsays 11.1.2.2.1
            4 March 2015 at 8:43 pm

            hi chooky, i am duty bound to say the right wing media are only doing what right wing media will do.
            the one who has to answer, (like my brother who works in an abbatoir) is your son/my brother for dialling in that station and staying tuned.

            a healthy diet of tele will not help either.

            • Chooky 11.1.2.2.1.1
              4 March 2015 at 11:34 pm

              agreed but teenagers do what they want in my experience…and dialing into crap commercial radio stations and listening to right wing wankers like Plunkett is the least of a parents worries…however at least Dotcom and Internet /Mana got him to vote …he was going to be a nonvoter until they came along

    • Chooky 11.2
      4 March 2015 at 11:58 am

      well you are in good right wing company there Philip Ferguson…Nacts and the right wing of the Labour Party would agree with you ..and of course David Cohen (you know the right wing journalist guy that Little takes paid advice from)…..it was that bloody Hone Harawira to blame again ( elements of racism here?.. and fear of a real working class party?)…..not a concerted undermining by the right wing of the Labour Party and the Nacts to make sure he was defeated

      personally I and many others believe that it was the likes of the right wing journalists like Sean Plunkett , Slater et al , and their unrelenting attacks on Dotcom that did Harawira, Laila Harre and Int/Mana in ( anti Dotcom media propaganda by right wing pro Nact journalists) ….and of course John Key Nactional also received a lot of money…but lets not think about this double standard

      http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2015/03/03/nationals-election-finance-loophole-highlights-double-standards/

    • Chooky 11.3
      4 March 2015 at 1:45 pm

      So while the pseudo so- called Left buy into the right wing agenda ….and pathetically bleat on about Dotcom and his smallish financial support of the Internet/Mana Party….. and as a bonus scapegoat naughty Hone Harawira…money cant buy love nor votes etc….why not focus on the real villains?…this is what the REAL Left should do….

      ‘Loophole: National Party donors stay secret’

      “An analysis of electoral finance declarations shows more than 80 per cent of donations to National Party candidates were channelled through party headquarters in a loophole described as akin to legal “laundering”.

      National’s heavy reliance on funding candidates with donations from the party – shown in a Herald study to account for more than $1m out of $1.2m raised by their candidates for the 2014 general election – was a “striking use of electoral law that appears to be laundering the money”, said Otago University political science lecturer Bryce Edwards.”

      http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11409374

      • gsays 11.3.1
        4 March 2015 at 8:50 pm

        hey chooky, without appearing like a dog with a bone… arent a lot of these pseudo lefties part of that contemptable group of working class folk that pour scorn on folk poorer than themselves for some reason?

        for example that story you have no doubt heard of the electrical contractor who shows up at a house to cut the power to find a swag of empty beer bottles, the person smokes, and, get this, the kicker, they have sky!!
        i would humbly suggest they are not part of the left but are just wannabes who seem to think if there are folk poorer/worse off than them, then they are doing ok.

        • Chooky 11.3.1.1
          4 March 2015 at 11:41 pm

          i dont think the people you describe as Lefties are though…they are just working class zombies ….it takes thinking or brains to be a Leftie….and a pseudo Leftie is something else again …look up the definition of “pseudo”

          ….agree there are lots of working class who have bought into the myth of Nact working for them …or being a part of the winning team…just because it is perceived as having more money and success and therefore validity…the right wing media gives this impression…

          • gsays 11.3.1.1.1
            4 March 2015 at 11:51 pm

            without looking it up i take pseudo to mean false.
            examples would be ms pagani, mr cosgrove, goff, ms king etc
            in respect to the zombies, i took a very rare trip to the city (palmy) and left kinda dismayed and overwhelmed with the impression that it had been taken over by zombies.

            • Chooky 11.3.1.1.1.1
              5 March 2015 at 9:19 am

              lol …about Palmy…i know for a fact there are zombies there…my nephew is one of them..

              It irritates me when people adopt the right wing agenda and spinner arguments and rehash them as Left wing ….and shoot their Left politician mates/political parties down…with “pseudo” Left arguments

              Pseudo meanings:
              “his lyrics sound like pseudo intellectual rubbish”
              synonyms: bogus, sham, phoney, imitation, artificial, mock, ersatz, quasi-, fake, feigned, pretended, false, faux, spurious, counterfeit, fraudulent, deceptive, misleading, assumed, contrived, affected, insincere;

    • Murray Rawshark 11.4
      4 March 2015 at 8:32 pm

      “Laila Harre was paid $66,000 when the InternetMana presidency was outsourced; she served about six months in the job. A nice little earner.”

      Not anywhere near as nice as what Jenny Shipley gets from all of us. Or many others.
      IMP was a failed attempt to do something, and some of us saw it as doomed from the start. But I don’t write Mana off as being top down and looking for shortcuts. I get involved on the ground as much as I can and keep looking for something that works.

      Hone was up against the old power sharing clique. There’s no doubt of that, and money didn’t help him. I hope the lesson has been learned.

      • Chooky 11.4.1
        5 March 2015 at 12:01 am

        what lesson?….the lesson was the media were hopelessly right wing and biased and attacked Dotcom and Hone and Mana/Int all the way…why?…because they were perceived of as being a real working class party which was a REAL threat !

        ….”and money didnt help him”….sounds like hair- shirt Calvinism to me…or puritanism…. or pretentious ultra -Leftism…. ( or shouldnt a Maori working class party have money?)

        ….of course Dotcom’s money helped raise the profile of a working class Mana Party as did the Internet Party …this is what the Nacts hated …and this is a Nact argument….that Dotcom’s money was dirty money ….bullshit!…..certainly no dirtier than the laundered money the Nacts got much more of

        ….face it …..we live in a media society …money helps raise media profiles

        …you also seem to begrudge Laila Harre getting paid well… why?….shouldnt talented women ( in this case a lawyer, experienced politician and trade unionist) be paid well?

        • Murray Rawshark 11.4.1.1
          5 March 2015 at 12:55 am

          I have no idea what you are reading. You’re not replying to anything I said.

          Dotcom’s money was damaging to Mana. Nah, bugger it. You’ve distorted so badly what I said that you’re not worth replying to.

  12. tricledrown 12
    4 March 2015 at 12:54 pm

    Chooky you missed the point Money can’t buy votes for the left.
    Organization,having a grass roots organization thats in touch with those who fail to vote.
    The mentality of those who don’t vote is it only encourages them bastards ie politicians.
    Then most of the non voters are poor disenfranchised.
    Dotcom was pissing in John Banks back pocket.
    Then Hone Harawiras.
    Then Dotcoms fascist FJK salutes in ChCh.
    Racist naivity.
    They were the architects of thier own down fall no one else!
    Chooky no need for the pathetic excuses!

    • Chooky 12.1
      4 March 2015 at 1:05 pm

      …the right wing had the media sewn up….and those that don’t vote listen to the media

      QED

      ( and quite frankly I think you fail to see the wider international fight that Dotcom is involved with against corporate control of the internet and copyright..it goes right over your head…however it does affect democratic freedoms and individual rights…and should be of huge concern to Left parties….but of course Labour is not one of those…Labour is the handmaiden to Nactional)

      “The right wing narrative last election was that the evil Bond villain Kim Dotcom was using money to influence NZ Politics despite Kim being illegally spied upon, despite Kim being set up by NZ for American Corporate Hollywood interests, and despite 70 armed paramilitary Police with guns kicking down his door, terrorising his family and bashing him so that he identified with MANA more than any other political party.
      The strength of this false narrative was backed up by Labour, Maori Party, NZ First and John Key when they all ganged up on Hone and cost him his seat in Te Tai Tokerau. When Kelvin Davis’ biggest cheerleaders were Slater, Farrar, Winston Peters and John Key, you know something is terribly wrong….”

      http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2015/03/03/nationals-election-finance-loophole-highlights-double-standards/

  13. Beatie 13
    4 March 2015 at 1:21 pm

    Excellent documentary from Global Research ‘Welcome to Nulandistan: Propaganda and the Crisis in the Ukraine’
    The US inflicting ‘democracy ‘n peace’…again.

  14. marty mars 14
    4 March 2015 at 5:08 pm

    the smirking smear is lying again…

    Today Key went on the attack, giving “very strong advice” for New Zealanders not to believe Hager, whose Dirty Politics book was a major theme of the September election.

    That book alleged that National used a strategy of making Key the friendly face of the government while using right-wing blogs, most notably Whale Oil, to attack opponents. It was based on correspondence hacked from Whale Oil blogger Cameron Slater’s computers.

    Key claimed the material in Dirty Politics was wrong, and the same would be the case this time.

    “Last time he came out with all this stuff, he was categorically wrong, he’ll be wrong this time as well, because information changes, we review things all the time, different actions are taken,” Key said this afternoon.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/66944644/john-key-says-ignore-spying-claims

    • Nick 14.1
      4 March 2015 at 5:21 pm

      The school of spin invented by Goering and Goebbels, tell a lie often enough and people will believe it. Key is the true inheritor of that in our country. Unfortunately the spin works, the sheeple will graze on the Shonksters words.

      • Colonial Rawshark 14.1.1
        4 March 2015 at 5:34 pm

        Well actually it was invented by Edward Bernays with help from his uncle, Sigmund Freud. Bernay’s ideas were used to swing a then pacifist US citizenry in behind to support WWI via demonisation of the “Huns.”

        Goebbels took many of his ideas straight out of Bernay’s 1928 book entitled “Propaganda.”

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

        • The Murphey 14.1.1.1
          5 March 2015 at 12:10 am

          I’m surprised how few people are aware of this

        • Chooky 14.1.1.2
          5 March 2015 at 12:13 am

          thanks for that CR…I learn something new from you every day

          • Colonial Rawshark 14.1.1.2.1
            5 March 2015 at 12:43 am

            🙂

            Walter Lippman was another key figure. Again involved in the strategy to “manufacture consent” and get Americans backing WWI.

            They got many previously pacifist socialists and academics to back a ‘just war’ against Germany.

    • b waghorn 14.2
      4 March 2015 at 5:24 pm

      You’re much nicer than me Marty I just read that article key the fucking scum bag lying in advance . when has he ever proved Hager wrong ?

    • Tracey 14.3
      4 March 2015 at 5:31 pm

      of course the journalist writing the article, asked him to name all the wrong claims and then asked Hager to answer the specific parts of his book which are wrong… you know as though he/she were a real journalist.

      • b waghorn 14.3.1
        4 March 2015 at 5:38 pm

        They do love to give the toad a free pass alright , they never put the comments on when they are doing keys bidding either.

        • Tracey 14.3.1.1
          4 March 2015 at 5:52 pm

          how does key know what Hager is going to do? Interesting they feel the need to pre-empt Thursday, you know, with it all being a bunch of alleged bollocks.

          • b waghorn 14.3.1.1.1
            4 March 2015 at 5:56 pm

            They say the best defence is offence.
            I’m picking keys worried the mask is slipping and his after politics career options a crumbling before his eyes.

          • Colonial Rawshark 14.3.1.1.2
            4 March 2015 at 5:59 pm

            how does key know what Hager is going to do?

            Hager will likely be a Cast Iron target, and every PC and device of every NZ Herald journalist and editor will likely be compromised, with the most important personalities on watch lists.

            • marty mars 14.3.1.1.2.1
              4 March 2015 at 6:03 pm

              or

              “New Zealand’s role in the spying network led by the United States will be revealed on Thursday morning, as a highly anticipated selection of leaked documents is set to be published online.”

              from the link

              do you think you may be ‘living’ this stuff a bit deeply cv

              • Colonial Rawshark …
                4 March 2015 at 6:10 pm

                Pretty sure I’ve got it about right on this. The FVEY group is the most powerful intelligence and surveillance network on the planet by a long long way.

      • Karen 14.3.2
        4 March 2015 at 7:30 pm

        That annoyed so much last year when Key kept saying the allegations in “Dirty Politics” had been proved to be wrong and there was not a single journalist who challenged him on this. Not one.

        Key was allowed to repeat this statement over and over and it obviously worked for him. Drives me crazy.

    • Paul 14.4
      4 March 2015 at 5:43 pm

      It’s OK
      John says so.

      “Prime Minister John Key is urging New Zealanders to dismiss imminent claims about spying on foreign allies, saying he can “guarantee” they will be wrong.”

      Wonder how many muppets still believe in the cult of Key.

      http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/66944644/john-key-says-discount-spying-claims

    • Murray Rawshark 14.5
      4 March 2015 at 8:42 pm

      How convenient for the power sharers that Metiria isn’t on the intelligence committee. Could be some interesting discussions coming up.

  16. Colonial Rawshark 16
    4 March 2015 at 5:29 pm

    Allopathy…now that’s a word I haven’t really seen used since Chiropractic school.

  17. joe90 17
    4 March 2015 at 6:11 pm

    Leaving the bastion of Freedom and Liberty that Russia is?

    https://news.yahoo.com/edward-snowden-ready-return-states-144245040.html

  18. Shane Le Brun 18
    4 March 2015 at 6:40 pm

    A horrific example of extreme Pediatric Epilepsy treatment, preferable to Medicinal Cannabis.

    http://yournz.org/2015/03/04/medicinal-cannabis-its-not-brain-surgery/

    Alternate Address
    https://mmj4chronicpain.wordpress.com/2015/03/04/medicinal-cannabis-its-not-brain-surgery/

  19. Rodel 19
    4 March 2015 at 7:45 pm

    I am about to march against TPPA.
    I think I know and I don’t like , what Key, ACT and the Nats think about TPP.
    I know the Maori party just follow their puppet masters and agree with key.
    I think the Greens are critical of it.
    Winston doesn’t like it because his opposition to it will bring him votes.

    I know Noam Chomsky’s views on it -bad and designed mainly to exclude China’s Pacific influence and increase the profit and political influence of multi-nationals.

    Maybe I have been remiss in not listening but I have heard little of what New Zealand’s Labour and the left in general -Little-Goff- Turia & co.think about it.

    Could someone tell me please what is the view of Labour in particular? and have they come out with any clear policy statements that I can cite to critics?

    • Paul 19.1
      4 March 2015 at 8:52 pm

      They quietly support it, I believe.

    • Clemgeopin 19.2
      4 March 2015 at 10:00 pm

      I think that Labour’s position is that the terms of TPPA should be revealed in the open for people to understand and discuss the issues involved. The government has been secretive and agreeing to stuff that we know NOTHING about, apart from rumours and some leaked material. At the same time, I believe the corporates and big business have been kept in the loop by this dodgy government!

      I am opposing TPPA for the reasons I have stated above, because how can anyone SUPPORT something when we don’t even KNOW what this stupid pro-wealthy, pro- corporate, pro-USA lapdog of a PM and an untrustworthy National government is really doing BEHIND our backs secretly? I don’t trust them at all. I think TPPA will advantage the big countries and weaken us, our democracy, independence in various ways over time.

      I don’t believe that these big nations and the super wealthy corporations will be doing things in the interests of the smaller countries or the common people.

      What is your opinion?

  20. Clemgeopin 20
    4 March 2015 at 8:57 pm

    CONSERVATIVE PARTY RUCTION RUMOURS TODAY:

    (Please ignore if this has already been posted. I had a quick perusal and didn’t notice)

    Conservative Party leader Colin Craig has dismissed rumours of a leadership challenge and the expulsion of a party member (Board member, Larry Baldock ) as “a storm in a teacup”.

    Mr Craig confirmed that his party was taking “disciplinary action” against board member Larry Baldock, but said he did not expect it to result in expulsion.

    [Will be good to hear any comments and the truth from any insiders that visit here]

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11411781