Open Mike 06/01/2018

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, January 6th, 2018 - 219 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

Open mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose. The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step up to the mike …

219 comments on “Open Mike 06/01/2018”

  1. Sanctuary 1

    For your breakfast viewing pleasure. Make sure you have a full pot of tea for your schadenfreude. 🙂

    • James 1.1

      I’ve always been fascinated by the lefts ability to schadenfreude.

      It is one of the more distasteful aspects of (some) lefties in all. All “caring” until it’s someone they do not like – then they get great pleasure from it.

      There have been studies linking it to envy – and that does not surprise me at all. As I have personally found a lot of the left envious. Jealous and bitter of the success of others.

      Study link schadenfreude Wikipedia

      • Incognito 1.1.1

        I recognise irony when I see it and this one was particularly easy to spot.

        BTW, link is not working.

      • North 1.1.2

        What? Churlish James muttering defensively about “schaudenfreude”? James and ilk express that sentiment in relation to the ‘culpable poor’ on a daily basis. That’s basically why the big fat kick-ass BBQ is here at all.

        • James 1.1.2.1

          See there you go again with the BBQ.

          I’m sorry if you don’t have friends and or family that can or want to participate in this great kiwi tradition- but that’s your loss not mine.

          I love to BBQ – we do it a lot. It’s partly because we love the food (who dosnt like a nice bloody steak?) – but mainly because it’s fun to surrounded yourself with fantastic friends and family.

          You should try it – it will give you a brighter outlook on life.

          • fender 1.1.2.1.1

            You should have more brighter future bbq’s, anything to keep you from making a fool of yourself on TS.

      • Gabby 1.1.3

        I know jimbo, why can’t they just gloat and chuckle smugly like normal decent folk?

        • james 1.1.3.1

          Gee Gabs, from the sound of it – you are hanging around with the wrong type of people.

      • Sanctuary 1.1.4

        “…I’ve always been fascinated by the lefts ability to schadenfreude…”

        That’s because it involves having an imagination, empathy and an entire array of higher order thinking of which you are bereft. I guess it must like looking through a window into a world where you’ll never be able to play.

      • joe90 1.1.5

        There have been studies linking it to envy –

        Schadenfreude has zip to do with envy, Jimmy, and everything to do with the deep, deep satisfaction of seeing someone shooting themselves with one of their very own carefully crafted balls of shit.

        Now, revel in your fellow right-wingers schadenfreude, it’s fucking delicious.

        "Alexa, order all the popcorn." https://t.co/HG4GsL1PuV— Rick Wilson (@TheRickWilson) January 5, 2018

        Steve Bannon’s spectacular fall from grace in Trump World is a big, salty, delicious bowl of schadenfreude from the political gods in celebration of the new year.

        […]

        Now, like two rats in a bag, Trump and Bannon are tearing at one another in a delicious public spat that has every possible bit of drama, except Bannon drunkenly bellowing for a round of fisticuffs with all comers and Trump offering to compare the length of their relative manhoods on live television. They deserve one another in so many ways

        https://amp.thedailybeast.com/bannon-banished-for-telling-truths-about-trump-as-maga-monsters-turn-on-each-other

      • In Vino 1.1.6

        And I am bemused by James’s ability to demolition the English language.
        Schadenfreude is strictly a noun, James – both in the original German, and in English.
        To show you how silly it sounds, I have just misused ‘demolition’ the same way you misused schadenfreude. It seems that some righties need the obvious explained to them…

        • james 1.1.6.1

          if you bemused by my use of the engligh language – you must love Eco Maoris.

          • SpaceMonkey 1.1.6.1.1

            Eco Maori speaks from the heart.

          • Reality 1.1.6.1.2

            For one who is so sure of his utter perfection in every way, how about thinking whether you should have written “If you ARE so bemused by my use of the E(cap)nglish language…”

      • Grafton Gully 1.1.7

        I think you’ll find it’s “bitter at” not “bitter of”.

  2. North 2

    I know I’m not meant to put this out there but this guy was at the fellowship last night.

  3. Ed 3

    Still haven’t found any reports in the corporate media about the massive storm that hit the country written in the context of climate change…..

    But I found this.

    ‘Living on the Edge: What climate change means for Taranaki ’

    The climate change debate has hogged headlines recently but its influence on humanity is undeniable. In the first of a six-part series called Living on the Edge, reporter Deena Coster takes a deeper look at what it means for Taranaki.

    The rough and rugged Taranaki coastline will be unrecognisable in 100 years’ time.

    Houses once dotted along the coast will be lost, as coastal erosion and rising sea levels steal away the very land they rest on………..’

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/98838911/living-on-the-edge-what-climate-change-means-for-taranaki

    Encouraging to see the topic being discussed properly in parts of the media.
    The whole article is worth reading.

    • Ed 3.1

      More thoughtful analysis here….

      ‘From drought scare to deluge despair: The science of the storm.’

      ‘ After a period of calm, dry weather for much of the country, in which century old records for dryness were toppled, the furious storm from the north seemed to come out of the blue.
      What may at first seem like atmospheric whiplash was actually a case of cause and effect – and may be a taste of things to come…..’

      ‘With rising sea-levels, as expected under a warming climate, storm surges will get higher and reach further inland – issues already evident in pockets around the country, where homes and infrastructure have been damaged.’

      Again, read the whole article.

      https://i.stuff.co.nz/national/100344401/from-drought-scare-to-deluge-despair-the-science-of-the-storm

      • cleangreen 3.1.1

        Hi Ed;

        Thanks for raising the “Climate change” issue it was urgently needed to address our worsening climate of severe weather now reaching us all.

        As PM Jacinda Ardern said clearly and correctly;-

        “Climate change is truly the nuclear issue of our generation’s time”.

        But it is so sad that even with the truly ‘extreme’ weather events we all experienced over the last few days, was not responded to properly by all the media!!!!

        All the media could do was to “minimalise’ most of the event, and worsening weather events we are now experiencing now.

        Question is to all the ‘climate change deniers’ & naysayers is;

        “How much is enough to wake them up” ????

        Will it need to take many lives lost?

        Will it take a dramatic loss of their own food chain so they starve?

        Will it take a loss of all forms of transport?

        Will it take a loss of our coastal regions up to 50kms inland before they will actually finally put up their hands in surrender to ‘mother nature’ and plead for forgiveness for their folly???????

        We certainly hope they will finally wake up now and join us to begin reducing climate change emissions and begin rebuilding secure future.

        Lets do this!!!!!!!

        • Ed 3.1.1.1

          Stuff/Fairfax have had an epiphany.
          There’s even a climate change quiz.
          Get people to do it.
          These operations work on click bait and it would be good for them to see people are interested in climate change.

          https://i.stuff.co.nz/environment/climate-news/100104523/how-much-do-you-know-about-climate-change-test-your-knowledge-here

        • savenz 3.1.1.2

          “As PM Jacinda Ardern said clearly and correctly;-

          “Climate change is truly the nuclear issue of our generation’s time”.”

          Yep, but can’t see much action on this from Labour in the RMA and in TPPA (whoever version) or any future planning. Climate change is ignored (apart from various taxation schemes) and not actually looked at what’s gonna happen when parts of the world get uninhabitable in particular those that have huge populations (India looking to get to 50 degree temperature in some places), massive pollution in China or islands that will become are under water and all around the world in particular the west, houses destroyed on mass by flooding and storms. Agricultural land in drought and housing and people galore, but less land in agricultural production or even owed locally by the the country but by offshore individuals and corporations whose aim is profit not social conscience. Or maybe wars start breaking out to control dwindling resources. Japan is obsessed already with doing it’s own thing on fisheries and not cooperating in local efforts to have ecological sanctuaries to keep the fish stocks and biodiversity going. Our fisheries control is laughable in this country and it seems NZ are only too happy to turn a blind eye to slave labour to catch and process it as well as overfishing.

          Wilson’s car parking for example in Australia show enormous “costs” leading to small profits on eye watering charges and a very small tax take for Australia. Who knew that you were helping the profits of Hong Kong billionaires when you parked at the local hospital. Clearly this type of carry on is going to get worse and worse – National even wanted to sell off the state houses to the Chinese or Australian corporations. China owns 50% of silver fern farms and Fonterra seems more focused on the 8 million salary of it’s executive than any sort of forward planning in any area from innovation to pollution control. I’m sure big business would love to sell Fonterra off into shares on the sharemarket, but for the moment making do with just selling off the daily farms themselves which will eventually change the control more offshore.

          Cheese costs more than the average wage after taxes already in this country, bottled water costs more than soft drink. Not looking good for local Kiwis future, if things start going bad around the world and we find we don’t actually own much of our land and assets anymore and other’s are making the profits from NZ produce, water and housing booms (aka James Hardie types) while the Kiwi taxpayers are paying for the infrastructure and disaster costs but have little export income anymore so can’t afford social welfare. With enough of a change in demographics we might start getting a society that doesn’t believe in ‘wasting money” on social welfare anymore and privatise and plunder everything for a business opportunity.

    • Still haven’t found any reports in the corporate media about the massive storm that hit the country written in the context of climate change…..

      That could be because sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, and weather is just weather. Here’s NIWA on the effects of La Niña weather on New Zealand.

      La Niña events have different impacts on New Zealand’s climate. More north–easterly winds are characteristic, which tend to bring moist, rainy conditions to the north–east of the North Island, and reduced rainfall to the south and south–west of the South Island.

      Warmer than normal temperatures typically occur over much of the country during La Niña, although there are regional and seasonal exceptions.

      So, it’s been a lot warmer than usual and the north-east is copping it from storms – classic La Niña weather. If journalists aren’t rushing to blame local weather conditions on climate change, good on them.

      • One Two 3.2.1

        Yes, Milt

        Sometime it’s just weather conditions..

        The ad nauseum of ‘climate change’ does not add positive value

        • Ed 3.2.1.1

          This is climate change, not weather.
          Some of you will only wake up to it when the flood is at your own doorstep.
          And the world can’t wait for you.

          ‘Those warm, dry, and settled conditions contributed to an unusual phenomena: a marine heat wave, in which sea temperatures around New Zealand were about 2 degrees Celsius warmer than average.

          Off the west coast, in the Tasman Sea, temperatures were as much as 6C above normal – at the time, it was the largest sea temperature anomaly in the world.’

          • dv 3.2.1.1.1

            Insurance companies are responding to CC

            https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/property/98797867/insurers-warn-climate-change-will-hit-policy-prices-and-make-some-properties-uninsurable

            Insurers warn climate change will hit policy prices and make some properties uninsurable

            Bryce Davies, general manager corporate relations for insurance giant IAG, says the shift towards evaluating properties for their individual climate-change risk has already began, meaning homeowners with properties in flood plains and beachfronts could expect increases.

            Ans in stuff today
            How climate change could send your insurance costs soaring
            Climate change is not only set to transform our environment, it’s also likely to cause insurance costs to skyrocket.

            The Insurance Council of New Zealand has warned that our country is one of the most vulnerable to the impact of natural disasters for an economy of our size.

            Council chief executive Tim Grafton says New Zealand can expect to face, on average, annual costs of $1.6 billion (just under 1 per cent of its GDP) from natural disasters, based on data going back to 1900

            • Ed 3.2.1.1.1.1

              Organisations with money in the situation clearly realise climate change is happening fast. Exxon Mobil knew about CC in the 70s ( and hid their findings as it would impact their profits)
              But to some misguided fellows, like Trump and PM, it’s just weather.
              Humankind and other species on this planet can’t wait for such dilettantes and deniers.

              • joe90

                In 1959 Edward Teller warned the industry about the consequences of burning fossil fuel.

                The pricks have known for sixty years.

                It was a typical November day in New York City. The year: 1959. Robert Dunlop, 50 years old and photographed later as clean-shaven, hair carefully parted, his earnest face donning horn-rimmed glasses, passed under the Ionian columns of Columbia University’s iconic Low Library. He was a guest of honor for a grand occasion: the centennial of the American oil industry.
                […]
                Four others joined Dunlop at the podium that day, one of whom had made the journey from California – and Hungary before that. The nuclear weapons physicist Edward Teller had, by 1959, become ostracized by the scientific community for betraying his colleague J. Robert Oppenheimer, but he retained the embrace of industry and government. Teller’s task that November fourth was to address the crowd on “energy patterns of the future,” and his words carried an unexpected warning:

                Ladies and gentlemen, I am to talk to you about energy in the future. I will start by telling you why I believe that the energy resources of the past must be supplemented. First of all, these energy resources will run short as we use more and more of the fossil fuels. But I would […] like to mention another reason why we probably have to look for additional fuel supplies. And this, strangely, is the question of contaminating the atmosphere. [….] Whenever you burn conventional fuel, you create carbon dioxide. [….] The carbon dioxide is invisible, it is transparent, you can’t smell it, it is not dangerous to health, so why should one worry about it?
                Carbon dioxide has a strange property. It transmits visible light but it absorbs the infrared radiation which is emitted from the earth. Its presence in the atmosphere causes a greenhouse effect [….] It has been calculated that a temperature rise corresponding to a 10 per cent increase in carbon dioxide will be sufficient to melt the icecap and submerge New York. All the coastal cities would be covered, and since a considerable percentage of the human race lives in coastal regions, I think that this chemical contamination is more serious than most people tend to believe.


                https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2018/jan/01/on-its-hundredth-birthday-in-1959-edward-teller-warned-the-oil-industry-about-global-warming

                https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-02-01-2018/#comment-1431881

            • One Two 3.2.1.1.1.2

              Insurance companies as part of the financial industry have underwritten some primary causes of planetary pollution and destruction since, day one…and will continue to do so…

              The ‘institutions have profited heavily playing a part in creating the circumstances, and they will attempt to continue the plunder…

            • Macro 3.2.1.1.1.3

              Swiss Re and out major players in the Global Insurance industry have been warning of the financial effects of Climate Change for years. In 2010 Swiss RE wrote this:

              Adaptation through adequate sea defences and the management of the residual risk is essential. While the insurance industry is an important contributor to the absorption of volatile risk, it cannot address the challenges of climate change alone: To tackle this, a public-private partnership will be indispensable. Beyond traditional insurance, Swiss Re can contribute through alternative forms of risk transfer to absorb highly volatile losses.

              My bold
              http://www.swissre.com/rethinking/the_effects_of_climate_change.html
              Their assessments were based on the IPPC projections then of a 0.37m rise in sea level. The fact that those projections have now increased by around a factor of 10, exacerbates the problem dramatically.

          • Psycho Milt 3.2.1.1.2

            This is climate change, not weather.

            Weather is weather. You’re wanting journalists to report storms as climate change, something which would only encourage people with functioning cognitive faculties to ridicule the journalists, and worse, might encourage people to believe climate change is bullshit. Worse yet, it encourages other people to mistake weather for climate, resulting in even more imbecilic “Frosty again – so much for global warming!” comments by right-wingers.

            By all means expect news reports to mention that storms can be expected to increase in frequency and severity due to climate change, but an individual storm remains just a storm.

            • Ed 3.2.1.1.2.1

              Yes I am expecting journalists to use context for a story.
              That’s a basic of the job.

              Reporting Brexit without the context of the deindustrialisation of parts of the UK makes no sense.
              Reporting Trump without the context of the deindustrialisation of parts of the US makes no sense.
              Reporting the war in Syria without the context of climate change and the desertification of parts of Syria makes no sense.
              Reporting the changing weather patterns in New Zealand without the context of climate change makes no sense.
              Reporting the events in Gaza without the context of 1917, 1948, 1967 and other key historical dates makes no sense.

              Context is everything.

              • red-blooded

                To be fair, the main Stuff article about the recent storms does put it in the context of climate change: “With rising sea-levels, as expected under a warming climate, storm surges will get higher and reach further inland – issues already evident in pockets around the country, where homes and infrastructure have been damaged.”

              • Context is everything.

                It sure is. And the context of a weather event is weather patterns – La Niña, for instance. Storms have been causing floods in New Zealand since before there were humans here – linking any individual storm to climate change would be as stupid as claiming global warming doesn’t exist because there was an early snowfall.

                • Ed

                  Ok – we shall agree to disagree.
                  And let’s use more polite language.
                  There is no need for aggressive words.

                  • That’s pretty funny from someone who’s had a moderator warning today for accusing a commenter of having a “psychopathic mentality”…

                    • Ed

                      I have heeded the advice.

                    • greywarshark

                      Is saying someone is stupid the same, as might be stupid, or showing stupid tendencies or ideas, better, worse or just different than saying someone has a psychopathic mentality? And is that the same as saying someone is a psychopath? And can hard critical words never be used against anyone here? Questions that run through my head but then I am borderline crazy these days.

                • That’s a removal of context.

            • Draco T Bastard 3.2.1.1.2.2

              Well, to be accurate they should be reporting storms in relation to climate change and how one affects the other. They shouldn’t be ignoring it just because it’s weather.

            • Macro 3.2.1.1.2.3

              Actually Psycho attribution of Climate Change to Extreme weather events is a developing science. The 2003 European Heatwave that had a not insignificant effect on the Syrian situation, has been assessed for instance to have been more likely to have occurred as a result of AGW.
              https://www.nature.com/articles/nature03089
              However,

              According to last year’s National Academy of Sciences report, “An indication of the developing interest in event attribution is highlighted by the fact that in 4 years (2012-2015), the number of papers increased from 6 to 32.”

              https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/scientists-can-now-blame-individual-natural-disasters-on-climate-change/
              As you say – you just can’t look at an extreme weather event and say “that’s climate change” but what is becoming more possible with improving climate modelling is to say the AGW has contributed significantly to the possibility of that event occurring.
              Furthermore take for instance the major damage done to my favourite piece of roadway, the coastal road north from Thames over the weekend. (it truly is a delight to pass along especially at christmas with the pohutakawas all in full bloom and the sea and little bays alongside).
              https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/100346389/evacuation-warnings-and-rocks-on-the-road-in-firth-of-thames
              But this road SH25 is under severe threat from rising sea levels, the direct result of AGW. With a king tide and storm surge the destruction caused is inevitable. I’m not sure just how this vital link to the Peninsula will be maintained into the future.

                • Macro

                  Yes I’m well aware of the work of both Denis and Thomas (referred to in the first link). I too have submitted to the TCDC on the matter wrt to the district plan, and my daughter is a Community Board member so we are all on to the problem.
                  The developers however are only concerned in making a quick buck and will find any piece of nonsense to hide behind. This piece of nonsense from Gloria Humphries is typical:

                  Asked about its sea level planning, Hopper Developments sent Newsroom an email pointing to an engineering design feature of the project’s canal walls, which “allow for overflow on certain spring tides”.

                  “Interestingly some of our walls at Pauanui [the first of Hopper Development’s two coastal canal projects] were constructed 25 years ago and anecdotal evidence would suggest that the sea level rise (if any) is closer to the 1.6mm pa rate rather than the rates many are citing in the media at present.”

                  Gloria Humphries recently wrote a letter to the editor of the Hauraki Herald, published on November 17, in which she put forward a case against sea level rise. “I’m just a lay person without the appropriate background to challenge the so called experts, but I consider myself to be widely read on all points of view, and have come to the conclusion that ‘man-made’ global warming is the biggest con that has been foisted on mankind in modern times for reasons that have very little to do with our climate …” she wrote.

                  The 1.6mm pa SLR she refers to above is the long term average over the past century. ie there has been around 17cm of SLR over the past 100 years. This, of course, completely ignores the increasing rate of SLR from melting ice shelves, that has been increasingly rapid over the past couple of decades. But if she can get away with it, and sell off a few more properties, and pass the buck on to Council – well who cares?

                  • Ed

                    TCDC will need a lot of government money.

                    • Macro

                      SH 25 being a State Highway is of course maintained by Govt. – Just how and what the level of funding will be or what the long term solution is has yet to be determined. But SH 25 is repeatedly closed due to slips and subsidence. Even though it is a very attractive piece of NZ – I wouldn’t consider living up the coast – my doc lives up that way and on one occasion the slip was in place for days. He would ride his bike to the slip, clamber over the rocks, and then pick up his car to drive the rest of the way into work each day. This is becoming a regular occurrence for those people living up that way.
                      As for the fate of the sea side residences – this is a problem over the whole of NZ but TCDC is unique in that it has one of the longest coastlines of any regional council in the country and only around 30,000 rate payers. It is also unique in that in 1931 during the Depression and the closure of the gold mines Thames, which had borrowed heavily for a number of large projects, was unable to pay its way with a high unemployment and rate payers now unable to pay their bills. The incoming Mayor went to the govt and the town was promptly placed in Administration and remained so until 1947. You can still se the results of this in the rather sad civil works – monsoon drains rather than modern guttering etc – around the town even to this day.

                    • Ed

                      Thank you for sharing your detailed historical knowledge of the area.
                      Why in your opinion we’re all those developments on the waterways permitted?
                      Corruption?
                      Naivety?
                      Ignorance?
                      Slackness?
                      Or something else?

                    • Macro

                      Like all councils TCDC tends to be the governance of the privileged for the privileged. The past Mayor’s family is in the civil construction business – so naturally is generally supportive of “development” in all its forms. The geology of the area is also not conducive to large urban areas, being in essence a string of extinct volcanos. There is constant pressure from the three major cities Auckland Hamilton and Tauranga – all within 2 hours drive from Coromandel for further development as people retire, and wish to move to be by the sea. So if a developer proposes a new subdivision – it will be looked at favourably. Having said that the fact is that these developments were reviewed under the guidelines of what was then the available knowledge of projected SLR. The T & T report referred to the IPPC report and the Whitianga development as you see was constructed with that scenario in mind.
                      However, it was always understood that the IPPC is conservative in its assessments as it is an international body and the report has to be agreed by a large variety of people and nations.
                      The sad fact however is that the last government (ie Nick Smith) sat on the latest SLR assessment and these were not made public or given any credence until James Shaw released them on taking office. Had these figures been available at the time it is probable that the developments would not have been given the green light.

                    • Ed

                      Very interesting macro. Thank you for sharing your detailed knowledge of the subject.

        • Ed 3.2.1.2

          The ‘ad nauseam’ Of climate change.
          Do you think like that dinosaur David Bellamy?

          https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3eOFYAg_DPw

          • One Two 3.2.1.2.1

            ED, your thinking appears lacks depth

            Paul had a similar approach

            Perhaps you know eachother…

            • Ed 3.2.1.2.1.1

              Another troll like James .
              I suspected so after your climate denial.
              I shall be exiting the conversation.
              There is nothing to be gained from encouraging the nonsense you lot spout.
              Are you all one and the same?

              • One Two

                Ed, if that is the level of your thinking and the tactics you continue to employ, it is no surprise that Paul was banned….

                The posts you put up about various and many subjects, lack fundamental awareness and thought when you upload them…

                Does that mean that you are ‘wrong’ in what you upload….maybe/maybe not….but the tactics are not going to attract people to take your links and then perhaps do some further reading of their own into [subject]

                1. Post links with statements in absolutes [financial crash coming et al]
                2. When another commentator questions/queries, refutes or proposes another angle….
                3. Accuse the commentator of tr*lling…

                In no way are such tactics likely to encourage others to read further …

                Surely that is why you post comments with links here…..to encourage others to investigate further and thus having greater numbers of people becoming engaged?

                If the above is not why you post the subject links, then I would suggest taking some time to assess internally, why it is you are doing so….

                Have a good day

            • James 3.2.1.2.1.2

              Didn’t Paul have an ideological eating disorder also.

        • patricia bremner 3.2.1.3

          The ad nauseum holier than thou trolling about climate change is a pain.

      • Anne 3.2.2

        All true PM but C.C. is exacerbating their normal effects.

      • Antoine 3.2.3

        > That could be because sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, and weather is just weather.

        Where were you when I was trying to argue this the other day?! I got soundly rubbished by everyone here

        A.

      • One Anonymous Bloke 3.2.4

        100% of the weather is affected by climate change. 100% of the weather occurs on a planet which has warmer oceans and surface temperatures and more water vapour in the atmosphere and therefore, more energy.

        The degree to which this affects individual weather events is asking the wrong question. It’s of academic interest only. From a practical perspective resilience and planning are far more important than attribution.

    • beatie 3.3

      This is what is happening in my part of the country.

      https://www.odt.co.nz/regions/west-coast/erosion-exposes-old-greymouth-rubbish-dump

      I walk my dog most days on this beach and the situation is worsening by the day. The council dumped a few loads of rock, but the huge seas and recent king tide have swept over and around the rocks. A proper sea wall is needed but the Grey District Council apparently can’t afford it.

      At the moment layers of barely composed rubbish is visible complete with black rubbish sacks. Apparently there’s all sorts of toxic goodies in there including radioactive waste from the local hospital.

  4. eco maori 4

    There you go I told you all that all our internet devices could be hacked.
    But it is not just the internet devices it is all the smart devices in OUR world.
    Some good intelligent person alerts US to the back door Entrance into our passwords on these chips and the chip manufacturers put a sticky tape cover of a lie on this subject and say O we new about this a while ago we are finding a patch we just did not want to ALARM the public . What a load of bullshit these back door entrances are not a design flaw they have been forced to put these BDE into our chips so the Governments of the west can control us most likely the USA FBI CIA . Why do you think China has invested billions in to making there own chips and a laser beam communication satellite so they have safe secure COMS . I no all my coms are hacked my childrens com to . The neo liberal 1% want total control they have been deliberately suppressing our Ladys Mana to over the centuries because they know they will get there asses kicked by OUR strong intelligent humane caring LADYS . There is a doco on wonderwoman DC comics started this comic to lift our ladys mana at the time the 1% were ok with that because they wanted to motivate our ladys to go to work and what was the work well making crap for the world wars and when the war was over they stopped using her to lift ladys mana and got wander woman to act like a dutiful submissive house wife .
    These wankers like interfering in every aspect of OUR lives and don t want to cede power they don t give a shit that they are stuffing up our WORLDS SOCIETY and motherearth and all her wonderfull beings . ECO Maori knows that US the 99% will put a stop to this way of life of shitting in ones own back yard and we will create a beautiful caring equal world society for all whom are on Papatuanuku.
    Ka kite ano

    • James 4.1

      It’s not ALL devices. It’s intel based ones. AMD chips are just fine.

    • Incognito 4.2

      Don’t worry about your device(s) getting hacked. Instead, be more concerned about your brain being manipulated & changed by and through those devices. The content, delivery, and interaction/consumption of ‘information’ through those devices are having major impact on us and (our) society. What happens when you ‘lose’ (control of) your smart phone is nothing compared to when you ‘lose’ (control of) your mind – they seem to go hand-in-hand and maybe that’s not coincidental either …

      • One Two 4.2.1

        That is some of the more salient points, Incognito…

        The lack of awareness about the impacts of technology related mental health, is increasingly well documented, but not widely understood at the ‘consumer end’…

        • greywarshark 4.2.1.1

          The way that the one-way is being pushed on us is amazing. Everyone is brainwashed about wonderful technology, you need to be immersed in it up to your nose to get anywhere, a job, connect with anybody. Kids are learning to type rather than write. Why not, it is so much easier to interface with machines and soon some people will have chips put in so their brains can connect directly with the communications port – cut out the middleman.

          I wanted to speak to someone, phoned up and went through the numbers game, then got message that it was so easy to go on-line, this while I was on the phone already. Finally I did get service without waiting too long but the process of ‘disruption’ embedded in business practice now means that nothing you value now can be guaranteed to remain available, all must be subject to eternal, infernal change and churn.

          Be nice to the people at call centres, they may be replaced with machines, as we all may be until some sort of saturation point is reached.

          A recent contact did not want to accept my landline number though there was no particular reason not to, and I have an answerphone attached.

          My choices are being taken away, yet this was part of the mantra of free markets, neo lib economics etc. I don’t believe any of the upbeat future-is-great drum-beaters any more. They are either stool pigeons, or specialise in living in the ‘now’, or are too young to be trusted to understand or be interested in the context of what they are speiling.

  5. cleangreen 5

    Johan;

    Thanks for correcting that fake statement made by a troll saying ‘AMD chips are just fine.’

    We have enough mis-information around now without more fake statements made to fool us all to believe some systems are safe or ‘fine’.

    We all need to be given free upgades for them to block these flaws and rid ‘stealing of our sensitive data, including passwords and banking information’.

    If the manufacturer caused these flaws in these IC chips then they must pay to fix them too. “consumers have rights too.”

    Like automobile ‘recalls’ we should have the same rights to repairs.

    Same applies with whoever caused our destructive “climate change” it is the companies who marketed the products who must be held responsible for the repair of our climate again too.

  6. Andre 6

    Someone got analytical about the timing and relationship between Fox and Friends and the terracotta turdface eruptions on twitter. And yep, he’s basically just live-tweeting F&F.

    https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/01/05/trump-media-feedback-loop-216248

  7. Ed 7

    A Sugar tax is well overdue here.
    We should not follow the UK – instead we should tax sugar at the cost it has to our society and it’s health. Tax at $5 per litre and make sugary drinks expensive items.
    And stop all advertising.
    And limit points of sale.

    Here is the timid approach of the UK.

    ‘Coca-Cola to sell smaller bottles at higher prices in response to sugar tax.

    ‘…..The sugar tax – designed to help combat child obesity – was announced by then chancellor George Osborne in 2016 and he gave drinks-makers time to change their recipes if they wished to escape the levy. From April soft drinks manufacturers will be taxed at 18p per litre on drinks containing 5g of sugar or more per 100ml, or 24p per litre if the drink has 8g of sugar or more per 100ml. The tax will apply to one in five drinks sold in the UK…….’

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jan/05/coca-cola-to-sell-smaller-bottles-at-higher-prices-in-response-to-sugar-tax

    • funstigator 7.1

      Yeah, and we should have a special car tax for those cars that in the wrong hands kill the users. Or a sun tax cos melanoma. Or an internet tax because some people write silly things on blogs.
      Or we could start banning people who can’t sensibly and safely use the products that the vast majority have no problems with.

      • greywarshark 7.1.1

        That sounds fun
        Let’s start with you.

      • Craig H 7.1.2

        We already have petrol taxes to cover the roading and other infrastructure, and ACC levies on registration and fuel to cover the health and income costs of accidents.

    • Stunned mullet 7.2

      A fat tax is well overdue here.
      We should not follow the UK – instead we should tax fat pricks at the cost they have to our society and vote health. Tax at $5 per kilo over normal bodyweight as determined by the Ministry of body normality

      Alternatively we can just burn the witches !

    • fender 7.3

      How about updated food standards preventing manufacturers from selling all this sugar-filled crap.

    • Ed 7.4

      The critics of a sugar tax speak like true believers of the neoliberal cult.
      You sound like John Galt.

      • Stuart Munro 7.4.1

        Pigovian taxes are neoliberal. Regulate sugar maximums, don’t tax content.

        • Ed 7.4.1.1

          Probably best just to make the products illegal.

          • Stuart Munro 7.4.1.1.1

            Well Coke with what, nine teaspoons of sugar per 330ml, sure. Three or four not so much. Regulate a steadily decreasing maximum and neither manufacturer nor customer is penalized.

          • greywarshark 7.4.1.1.2

            Ed that sounds like what a troll would come up with. Illegal causes more problems and creates black markets etc. if there is some demand for the product then it encourages people on the make to encourage others to use more. Instead of discouraging. This is already known. A facetious comment on your part, but it’s the first thought to the minds of the brainless.

            • Ed 7.4.1.1.2.1

              Yes that was tongue in cheek.

              I recommend we approach sugar and alcohol the same way we tackled tobacco.
              Gradual and significant price increases.
              Stop advertising.
              Make health campaigns to explain bad health outcomes.
              Limit places it can be sold.
              Make it lose its glamour.
              Programmes at school to edit the young.
              Alcohol free and sugar free places.

              In 20-30 years, Coca Cola and Heineken would be on the run, like Philip Morris are now.

              • Antoine

                Only works if it is a bipartisan initiative, I cannot see the political will on either side of the House at the moment

                A.

    • eco maori 7.5

      +100000 Ed sugar is limiting us poor people life span to the low 60

      • BM 7.5.1

        Nah , that’s your stupidity and mental weakness.

        [I think you’ve been warned about this before. The only reason you’re not getting a ban is I don’t have time to look, but if I see you doing that shit again I will ban you.

        Seeing your comment to Paul below as well, I suggest having a think about how you want to be here too, because the whole nasty shit coming from you since the election is getting tedious. Your history of contributions here will only get you so far if moderators have to keep putting time into this. – weka]

      • Ed 7.5.2

        Please ignore bm and his psychopathic mentality.
        They are part of the ME world, not the WE society.

        [I really don’t want to have to be moderating today, so please tone down the abuse and the mental health slurs (they harm everyone) – weka]

    • alwyn 7.6

      “we should tax sugar at the cost it has to our society and it’s health. Tax at $5 per litre and make sugary drinks expensive items”.
      I trust you can provide a link to some analysis that the cost is $5.00/litre?
      It does seem such a suspiciously round number doesn’t it?
      Exactly $5.00/litre. I’m sure you didn’t just pull it out of thin air.
      You remind me of when then Mayor Ken Livingston brought in a Congestion Charge in London. He claimed that it was merely to cover the costs that traffic congestion was causing. It just happened to be five pounds a time.
      Pure coincidence of course that it was such a round figure.

      Now, where do you get $5.00/litre as being the cost to society of sugary drinks?

      • Ed 7.6.1

        Cigarettes now cost $30 a pack. The tax on them must be over $20 a pack.

        My $5 is an arbitrary number to deter the purchase of debilitating sugary drinks and mitigate their devastating impact on people, society and the country.

        It could just as easily be $10 tax per litre .

        Personally, I’d copy some South American countries and boot companies like Coca-Cola and McDonalds out of the country.

        • Psycho Milt 7.6.1.1

          Cigarettes now cost $30 a pack. The tax on them must be over $20 a pack.

          Yep. The government’s raised taxes on cigarettes so high that they’ve created a black market for them and people are robbing dairies to supply that black market. Three cheers for good governance!

          Given the above, I’m surprised that anyone thinks it would be a great idea to do something similar for sugar. Public health activists are a very unusual breed.

          • greywarshark 7.6.1.1.1

            They are paid to be single-minded when you need to be triple-minded to get around the combination of sugar carving, advertising promotion and profit.
            There is no care of humanity in business. If you want to buy they rarely twist your arm, they just play on your mind starting with tv ads when you are a baby, and if you buy good, and if you get sick, then they will charge you for some treatment that will get you on your feet and buying again. And we buy into this sweet and vicious circle.

          • Draco T Bastard 7.6.1.1.2

            Given the above, I’m surprised that anyone thinks it would be a great idea to do something similar for sugar.

            There’s a range to where taxes work. Beyond that you need other methods.

        • alwyn 7.6.1.2

          I don’t have the slightest problem with the statement about it being an arbitrary figure that is simply intended to make the drinks expensive.
          What I object to is the oft-used claim that some level of tax is, in your own words, “tax sugar at the cost it has to our society and it’s health”.

          It is done far to often when there is no actual justification for the setting of the tax at a particular level. If people would simply say that they want to make something expensive they are being honest. When they claim that it is to meet the costs of the vice they are not.

          As far as smoking goes smokers are probably the only group who pay enough for their vice to pay for the health treatment they incur. When you include the fact that they are likely to collect superannuation for fewer years they may actually be doing the taxpayer a favour.
          The tax collected is about $2 billion per year. That is a pretty good chunk of the Health budget. As long ago as 2012 Treasury said that smokers do pay for their costs.
          http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10809145

          I don’t mind these taxes being charged. It helped persuade me to give up smoking cigars, a habit I greatly enjoyed. I just object to the idea of increasing the taxes because “you cost us taxpayers money”

          • Ed 7.6.1.2.1

            Obesity and tooth decay cost society a lot of money.

            • alwyn 7.6.1.2.1.1

              Perhaps they do Ed, but you are missing the point.

              If you are going to tax the sales of Sugary drinks in order to recover the costs to Society from consuming the drinks then you have to work out, at least to a reasonable approximation, what that cost is. Then you can charge a tax that will recover that amount.

              If you are going to apply a punitive tax in order to discourage people consuming those items then you should have the courage of your convictions. Say that is what you are doing. Don’t pretend it is only to save the poor taxpayer from having to pay.

              You appear to be following the punitive approach. Well admit it.

              • Ed

                I would do it for both reasons.
                That’s why I put out a large arbitrary number.

              • One Anonymous Bloke

                It’s the right wing way: get tough.

              • You appear to be following the punitive approach. Well admit it.

                Fine by me.

                The whole point of high taxation for cigarettes and other bad for you stuff is to stop people from using them.

                The cost of both their medical costs and the premature death is far too high. The amount cannot be accurately measured in monetary terms as a lot of it is emotional which causes a lot of flow on effects.

                • McFlock

                  Oh, suck my balls. My odds of premature death are my business. You’re just as bad as Ed railing about a vegan lifestyle, which might make me live longer and it’ll sure as shit feel like it.

                  I’ll go to hell in my own damned way, thankyou very much. If there were mandatory workplace air quality standards rather than arbitrary bans on stinky things, I wouldn’t take anyone with me, either.

                  • If there were mandatory workplace air quality standards rather than arbitrary bans on stinky things,

                    You do realise that you’re whinging about the same thing don’t you?

                    • McFlock

                      No, they’re not the same thing.

                      Because tobacco smoke isn’t the only bad thing in the air. And decent ventilation and filtration to address those other things would make most bans unnecessary.

                    • No. It doesn’t work that way.

                      Most other pollutants are external while smoking indoors is internal. Thus it will affect those inside disproportionately.

                    • McFlock

                      Well, yes it does work that way. Because air from outside comes inside, glycol smoke machines in gigs have their own issues, and packing a few hundred people into a nightclub with barely adequate ventilation becomes a nightmare of mutual-contamination. I have literally had ceiling condensate drip on me.

                      But the classic example is aircraft – recirculate the air as much as possible for a random collection of dozens or hundreds of people, and keep them exposed for hours.

          • Psycho Milt 7.6.1.2.2

            I recall a Washington Post article from years ago saying a Dutch study found smokers actually end up costing the health system less than non-smokers, because they tend to die of things that kill you quickly (eg heart attacks, lung cancer) rather than spending decades deteriorating in old age with successive expensive health issues. If our primary concern were costs to health system, we should subsidise smoking instead of penalising it.

            • One Anonymous Bloke 7.6.1.2.2.1

              One study? Gosh.

              • Incognito

                Where there’s one, there are usually more …

                http://www.justfacts.com/healthcare.asp#spending-preventative

                  • Well, good, because no public health departments of publicly-funded universities would fund research that might return such politically-unsatisfactory results.

                  • McFlock

                    Yeah, but the numbers still add up.

                  • Incognito

                    @ One Anonymous Bloke 6 January 2018 at 8:18 pm:

                    Scepticism is healthy in science; suspicion is not.

                    This Dutch study published in 2008 is freely available/accessible (Open Access) and was funded by the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports:

                    Lifetime Medical Costs of Obesity: Prevention No Cure for Increasing Health Expenditure

                    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0050029

                    Conclusions: Although effective obesity prevention leads to a decrease in costs of obesity-related diseases, this decrease is offset by cost increases due to diseases unrelated to obesity in life-years gained. Obesity prevention may be an important and cost-effective way of improving public health, but it is not a cure for increasing health expenditures.

                    Another study (two authors in common with above study) published in 2014 is also freely available/accessible (Open Access):

                    Disease Prevention: Saving Lives or Reducing Health Care Costs?

                    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0104469

                    [NB The contributions of author Pieter van Baal were supported by the Network for Studies on Pensions, Aging and Retirement (NETSPAR http://www.netspar.nl) as part of the project “Rising life expectancy: causes and consequences in the Netherlands”. NETSPAR is a think tank and knowledge network established in 2005. The Foundation’s activities are pursued through the Netspar Center, an operational unit of Tilburg University.]

                    Conclusions: The stronger the negative impact of a disease on longevity, the higher health care costs would be after elimination. Successful treatment of fatal diseases leaves less room for longevity gains due to effective prevention but more room for health care savings.

                    The third study (different authors altogether) published in 1998 is also freely available/accessible and was funded by the Ministry of Health, Welfare, and Cultural Affairs, the Netherlands:

                    Preventing fatal diseases increases healthcare costs: cause elimination life table approach

                    https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.316.7124.26

                    Conclusions: The aim of prevention is to spare people from avoidable misery and death not to save money on the healthcare system. In countries with low mortality, elimination of fatal diseases by successful prevention increases healthcare spending because of the medical expenses during added life years.

                    You’ll notice that neither study focused solely on smoking and they, in fact, covered a very wide range of life-threatening diseases.

                    There have been plenty more studies published and I reject any suggestion that they all were biased through ‘inducements’ from ‘invested interests’.

              • alwyn

                I’ve seen quite a lot of them over the years.
                Usually done by University economists who smoke.
                They get sick of the other academics who complain that the smokers are being supported by their wowser compatriots.
                It is quite easy to justify the claim that smokers pay in full for their habit.
                They never get published of course. It would be fatal for your professional reputational to publish such a thing. Rather like questioning any of the left wing shibboleths. The same thing was true in 1930s Germany when you were sacked for claiming that “Jewish” Physics, ie Relativity and Quantum Theory were correct.

            • alwyn 7.6.1.2.2.2

              I wish they would start a subsidy scheme..
              Oh to be able to afford the occasional Romeo y Julieta Churchill again.
              A 7 inch Cuban cigar with a 47 ring size. Bliss for an hour.

              As Rudyard Kipling is reputed to have said.
              “A woman is only a woman, but a good cigar is a smoke”.
              I’ll bet he never said it in his wife’s hearing though.

            • Craig H 7.6.1.2.2.3

              In New Zealand with a superannuation that’s not means or asset tested, that’s particularly true as every year early that someone dies from smoking-related causes is a significant saving in super that doesn’t have to be paid.

              However, personally I’d rather people didn’t smoke and lived longer, so I’m OK with trying to convince people to stop smoking.

              • McFlock

                If it were just “trying to convince”, I’m okay with “telling to piss off”. Extortion and ostracism are a bit much, though.

                • Yep. There’s “trying to convince,” and there’s “let’s tax these things so much that fuckwits find it worth bashing a shop assistant to get them.”

                  My university’s currently trying to implement an extortion/ostracism plan for making the entire campus smoke-free, in which we managers are supposedly going to accost and note down identifying details of non-compliant smokers – “supposedly” because, well, like fuck that’s going to happen. My favourite part of the proceedings was when the public-health academics got into a scrap with the OSH people over whether designated smoking booths should be open or not – if they’re open, the deadly toxic fumes might be breathed in by innocent victims, but if they’re enclosed, that’s a breach of OSH regulations re smoking in an enclosed area in a workplace. Ah, good times…

                  • McFlock

                    Every so often I pull out the line that complete exclusion is discrimination on the grounds of having a medical condition, specifically addiction. If there’s nowhere for you to smoke, there’s nowhere for you to treat your addiction, therefore the place is not accessible to you because of your condition. Like stairs with no wheelchair access.

                    That’s why the ostracism is needed – so nobody looks at it logically.

          • Draco T Bastard 7.6.1.2.3

            It helped persuade me to give up smoking cigars, a habit I greatly enjoyed.

            Why did you enjoy it?

            • McFlock 7.6.1.2.3.1

              why does one enjoy a fine meal?

              • It’s actually a serious question – from an ex-smoker.

                Someone who once would have sat down and ‘enjoyed’ a cigar.

                I haven’t smoked for nearly 20 years and I actually gave up more than 20 years ago.

                • McFlock

                  And that was a serious answer.

                  I mean, you can break down the appeal into things like the ritual, the diverse aromas, the variation between aroma and flavour, the art of storing and preparation, the breath control, and the generally calming and almost meditative practise, but (like poetry criticism and frog dissection) the experience is in the whole, not the sum of the parts.

                  It’s either something you go for, or something you don’t. Again, like poetry or frog dissection.

                  • …but (like poetry criticism and frog dissection) the experience is in the whole, not the sum of the parts.

                    No, actually, it’s not.

                    This is what i mean by ‘ex-smoker’. It means that I’ve analysed the whole and realised that there was no attraction.

                    • McFlock

                      You smoked cigars?

                      Well, each to their own. I’m sure there are some musical pieces you think are awesome that I wouldn’t see the appeal of.

                    • alwyn

                      I have only just noticed this line of comments and this question.
                      I guess on this one I have to go along with McFlock.
                      It is the whole experience. I suppose the most pleasant part is sitting outside on a fine evening taking the occasional puff on the cigar and watching the smoke gently rise. Pure peace.
                      I really isn’t something that is subject to “analysis”

                      Perhaps Oscar Wilde put it best though
                      “If I have to explain, you wouldn’t understand”.

                      I never thought a simple comment about a cigar would have caused so many comments though.

  8. Rosemary McDonald 9

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11970041

    John Roughan takes his shit with a ‘healthy’ dose of salt.

    This is very possibly a piss take…I’m hoping…

    “We are probably going to need bags of the stuff over the next few years. We are still enjoying good times economically and long may they last, but human society has to have something to worry about, or at least talk about, and in good times these days we fret about the environment. We had an election last year in which we were urged to worry that it was no longer safe to swim in rivers.

    Be honest, do you want to swim in a river? “

    • Ed 9.1

      Roughan.
      Hosking.
      Garner.
      Soper.
      Richardson
      Smith
      Williams

      Pale
      Male
      Stale

    • Takapuna is a long beach, the suspected effluent was entering the water between the flags. So move the flags well away…

      This is obviously the type of person who will get caught in the rip just off the beach and need to be rescued because he’s not swimming between the flags. The type of person who doesn’t understand that the flags are placed where swimming is safest. That moving the flags will make swimming less safe both for the swimmers and the lifeguards.

      What on earth has happened to common sense?

      Good question? Why doesn’t he have any?

      Whatever happened to “she’ll be right”?

      It was never right and has caused major problems. Please keep up to date with the real world.

      Takapuna’s discharge turned out not to be sewage, just filthy road water after the rain. But before that became known on Tuesday, when the don’t swim signs were still on the beach, some people were reported to be in the water regardless. I salute them, I cheer them.

      That’s because you and them are really bloody stupid. Please note that if any of them had ended up in the hospital it would have been on our dime paying for their stupidity and then you would have been complaining about that.

      “Swimmable” was just a water quality measure of course, probably an excessive one for rivers such as the Waikato from a practical point of view but politically it worked.

      One that would have ensured that the river would die. And we actually do need the environment to be healthy else we die as well.

      We’re not separate from the environment but a part of it and we need it to live.

      Why have we let joyless puritans dominate public thinking on so many subjects these days.

      There’s a lot more joy provided by protecting the environment so that we can all survive than by trashing it to make a few rich and killing us all off.

      In Tuesday’s sunshine, when the news from Takapuna was in the paper, just about all the beaches were red-flagged. On Wednesday just about all of them had a nice green tick.

      Oh god, he even thinks that things stay the same all the bloody time. What a fucken moron.

  9. joe90 10

    Someone’s leaking details about the Downer – Papadopoulos meeting.

    What followed was the now infamous May 2016 conversation over many glasses of wine at the swanky Kensington Wine Rooms, during which the 28-year-old Papadopoulos spilled to Downer that he knew of a Russian dirt file on the rival Clinton campaign consisting of thousands of hacked emails.

    That night was a key moment that helped spark the FBI probe – since taken over by respected former FBI director Robert Mueller as a special counsel – into possible Trump campaign collusion with the Kremlin, including its hacking of the Democratic National Committee.

    http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/romantic-encounter-set-off-australias-role-in-triggering-donald-trump-investigation-20180105-h0e34r.html?

    • Bill 10.1

      Maybe someone should speak with Mifsud (the London based professor who apparently doesn’t speak Russian, but who has claimed to have contact with Putin and what-not.) and who the Austalian guy says Papadopoulos said told him there was a tranch of emails held by the Russian government.

      Hmm.

      Mifsud told the Telegraph that he knew nothing about emails containing “dirt” on Clinton, calling the allegations upsetting

      https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/professor-named-in-russia-disclosures-says-he-has-clean-conscious/2017/10/31/41a7a08e-be3b-11e7-959c-fe2b598d8c00_story.html?utm_term=.1aebcb8d9213

      • joe90 10.1.1

        I guess we’ll have to wait until Downer’s referred to the DOJ for making false statements to find out whether or not there’s fire.
        /

        .@SenWhitehouse: “I cannot understand why it would be necessary for members of Congress to make a criminal referral to the FBI concerning information we know the FBI already has." https://t.co/6Bl8xyhaER— Natasha Bertrand (@NatashaBertrand) January 5, 2018

        Republican Sens. Chuck Grassley and Lindsey Graham on Friday issued a criminal referral to the Justice Department, urging it to examine whether the former British spy Christopher Steele made false statements to the FBI “about the distribution of claims” contained in a dossier he wrote about alleged ties between the Trump campaign and Russia.

        https://www.businessinsider.com.au/dossier-author-chris-steele-referred-to-doj-by-grassley-and-graham-2018-1?r=US&IR=T

        • Bill 10.1.1.1

          That doesn’t follow joe90.

          Downer’s statement can be honest enough, but simply not reflect reality.

          • joe90 10.1.1.1.1

            The Fusion GPS op-ed earlier this week called for the release of the transcripts of their committee testimony. Grassley and Graham are shit scared of what might be revealed so they’ve come up with a reason to hold up any release – Steele and his report are subject to an investigation.

            So, *cough*, any move to shut down the Downer story says they’re shit scared of any further information that may come to light.

          • One Anonymous Bloke 10.1.1.1.2

            So can Assange and Murray’s. Neither of them know where the hacked/leaked email’s they were provided with came from. Murray can only repeat what he was told by the intermediary.

            That doesn’t stop people from treating their hearsay as evidence.

            This “key moment that helped spark” the FBI investigation. From the description it was one of the factors involved – it “helped”.

            These days of course, we can take Jared Kushner’s word for it that he thought he was going to collude with Moscow to get the emails.

            • Bill 10.1.1.1.2.1

              I thought Assange stated the wikileaks release got passed to them by a “Washington insider” (or some such) but wouldn’t reveal the source. And Murray said something similar, no?

              In other words, they say they know who provided the info.

              I guess it’s possible that the Russian government (or an agency of) had emails that they obtained via the net and decided to put them on some hardware that they gave to someone else, who then passed said hardware and the info it held on to Wikileaks.

              I’d have thought there were more direct and less fraught ways to get info up through Wikileaks mind. But hey…

              • One Anonymous Bloke

                Murray said what the intermediary told him and Assange acted as Murray’s stenographer.

                Murray said he retrieved the package from a source during a clandestine meeting in a wooded area near American University, in northwest D.C. He said the individual he met with was not the original person who obtained the information, but an intermediary.

                And it’s what Kushner and the other Trump grunts thought that matters anyway. It wasn’t Assange offering to collude with them.

                …these are not very bright guys, and things got out of hand.

                Mark Felt.

      • francesca 10.1.2

        yeah and I wonder why Papadopolous wasn’t hauled in then and there for a thorough questioning. The Trump dossier has become such a liability that it cant be what prompted the FBI to surveil the Trump campaign. Now it has to be some earlier bullshit trigger

    • adam 10.2

      I have some real problems with this – leaving aside how much of a creep Downer is.

      Drunken conversations are generally full of overblown bs and bluster at the best of times. To have a Yank boast when they are drunk is somthing I’ve encountered many a time in my work and socially. To much hot air, and no substance. This looks like it may all turn to custard and everyone will walk free, again.

      That said, if the right wing wanna stab each other in the back, who am I to stop them.

  10. Ed 12

    Clean green New Zealand. What a joke.

    We’re kidding ourselves and the world is rapidly working that out.
    We’re a selfish, squalid, polluting and corrupt nation that has succumbed to the worst extremes of neoliberalism and suffer from its worst outcomes.

    ‘China is refusing to take the world’s rubbish any longer, including New Zealand plastic. This move once again casts doubts on New Zealand’s claim to be a clean and green country. It also highlights the fact that recycling isn’t always a sign of ecological virtue……’

    ‘…..New Zealand’s “100 per cent pure” reputation takes another knock when we realise we are using other countries to dump our rubbish. But it also raises doubts about our own integrity as “green” householders. In fact, recycling seems even to have encouraged us to become more wasteful consumers than before…….’

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/opinion/100357268/chinas-refusal-to-take-our-rubbish-should-make-us-greener

    • Jimmy Ramaka 12.1

      We also use 95% of the world’s 1080 supposedly ?

      • Andre 12.1.1

        We’re about the only place in the world where 1080 is a useful poison for wide-spread pest control.

        Pretty much every where else in the world has ground-feeding native mammals they want to protect. New Zealand doesn’t. So the fact that 1080 is particularly effective on mammals and can be easily laid in baits on the ground means it has a low risk of killing species we want to protect here, so we use a lot. Almost all other places in the world, the risk of killing ground-feeding mammal species they want to protect is too high for them to use 1080.

    • Jimmy Ramaka 12.2

      The oligarchs the likes of Fletchers, Fay Richwhite, Alan Gibbs etc etc have done particularly well here in NZ since the introduction of neoliberalism in the 1980’s, according to Roger Douglas neoliberalism was going to be the best thing for New Zealand since the invention of sliced bread ?

      Did we get suckered or did we not ?

      MSM still keep telling us how well we are doing as a country ?

  11. eco maori 13

    The sandflys are that scared of eco maori they are around were ever I go they think that they are going to break ecos wairua but no they are just adding to my mana ka pai sandflys you will never break ecos wairua Ana to kai .
    I say that all the photos of shonky key on Ngati Porou web site should be deleted he was just stealing OUR mana. Kia kaha

  12. Ed 14

    Let’s learn from Iceland.

    ‘Iceland has long been deemed the best place in the world to be a woman. For the past nine years, the country has topped the World Economic Forum’s gender equality index.

    In Iceland men get at least three months’ paternity leave, and 90% of them take it. This gives them time to become comfortable with child-rearing, encouraging them to share the workload with their partners. Women in Iceland are highly educated, a high percentage hold managerial positions and they don’t give up their careers to have children: they do both – like the country’s new prime minister. At the end of 2017 Iceland got its second female prime minister, a 41-year-old with three young sons.

    Many in Iceland see the women’s strike of 1975 as a defining moment in the gender equality struggle. On the “women’s day off”, as it’s known, 90% of women stopped work and refused to do any household chores. Schools and nurseries were closed. Many shops, factories and theatres had to close their doors. Fathers were left with no choice but to bring their kids to work, stocking up on sweets and colouring pencils to keep them occupied. On the radio, children could be heard playing in the background while the newsreaders read the news. After work, the children needed to be fed and the whole thing ended up as the day the men of Iceland ran out of sausages…..’

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jan/05/iceland-female-women-equal-pay-gender-equality

  13. eco maori 15

    I find it intriguing that things that eco is interested in can no longer be found on the net
    the first was that website dedicated to the corruption on NZ police after I told IPCA about it next was the photo of Waiomatatini marae Porourangi showing the white tekoteko on the marae 2 days ago the photo came up on the first search google photos not now and the books that Colonel William Porter one in particle is East Coast Maori myths and legends ???? why are they hiding this book what are the sandflys scared of it well eco knows you will have to find William Porters book to find out the one I found was on a Australian website. Ka kite ano

  14. Ed 16

    The colour revolution in Iran fizzes

    The “colour revolution” in Iran disappeared from headlines with a massive pro-government demonstration

    http://robinwestenra.blogspot.co.nz/2018/01/iran-europe-rejects-u_6.html?m=1

  15. Andre 17

    How Wolff got access: a bit of sucking up and a few friendly pieces early on. So it seems no Trumpies ever thought to check out any of his earlier work before letting him into the adult daycare playroom.

    https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/01/04/donald-trump-michael-wolff-book-216245

  16. Ed 18

    If you watch one film this year, watch this one.

    Save the animals.
    Save the planet.
    Save yourself.

  17. Union city greens 19

    Good to see you back @OAB

  18. joe90 20

    Just when you think these pricks couldn’t go any lower.

    Alex Jones is selling a pro-Trump children’s book that promotes white nationalist imagery and teaches kids that sexually assaulting women isn’t a big deal https://t.co/CY4TU2Zwm6 via @timothywjohnson pic.twitter.com/stjqtsgMD4— Leanne Naramore (@LeanneNaramore) January 4, 2018

    “Thump found friends in strange places and in all shapes and sizes. Such as the frogs that croaked ‘KEK!’ They were full of surprises!”

    […]

    “Thump was caught talking of grabbing all things pusillanimous. Protesters even made pink hats: their ire was unanimous.”

    https://www.mediamatters.org/blog/2018/01/04/alex-jones-hawking-pro-trump-children-s-book-indoctrinates-them-white-nationalism/218970

  19. eco maori 21

    I think giving the sandflys the pukana and letting everyone know the truth about the way they think and operate is nothing compared to what they are saying about me I know what they are saying and the tactics they are using on me would break most people so I think my intimidation is justified by there actions they best get a mirror .
    Ana to kai

    • eco maori 21.1

      I can already see the sandflys next lines of malicious attacks to my character .
      I will stop referring to eco as a second being as this is there next line of attack that they will try and lock me up on false charges.
      I can see the line they are taking with the words there trolls on this site are trying to use against me .The difference here is a lot of good people know that what I write about ie the harassment the intimerdation the suppression the damage to my character these sandflys are trying to do are true. If they try and lock me up with there false charges everyone will be very upset .I am happy that I have thestandard website to defend my good character with PS they really don t like a MAORI with Mana do they .
      Ka kite ano

Recent Comments

Recent Posts