Open mike 09/02/2016

123 comments on “Open mike 09/02/2016 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Pascals bookie 1

   9 February 2016 at 6:20 am

   As noted previously, the Assad regime are fuckwits, if you support them, this is what you support.

   http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/world/296042/mass-deaths-in-syrian-jails-amount-to-'extermination‘

   If you support this, and go on about US war crimes, you aren’t really opposed ot war crimes.

   I don’t think we should act in ways that make us complicit with US war crimes, and I don’t think we should act in ways that make us complicit with these war crimes either.
   • Paul 1.1

     9 February 2016 at 7:05 am

     Both sides in this horrible war are committing atrocities.
     I just hope this is not being released right now to give the Saudis a casus belli.
     150 000 troops are on alert.

     By the way on the issue of war crimes. In World War 2, the Germans committed unspeakable war crimes. And we also know that the Allies committed war crimes on civilians ( Dresden, the mass rapes in East Prussia by the Soviets) .
     Yet people wanted the Allies to prevail.
     It is possible to abhor the actions of the Syrian government , yet still hope for the defeat of ISIS.
     • Pascals bookie 1.1.1

       9 February 2016 at 8:50 am

       It’s not hard to find the stats on who has killed the most civilians though. And yes, ISIS sucks. Pointing that out doesn’t excuse Assad, or justify aiding him.

       Much of the support for Assad ignores and denies the nature of his regime, and even at times explicitly seeks to justify his crimes.

       From the beginning of the war the regime’s method has been , to quote various examples of pro Assad graffitti, ‘Either Assad or Syria burns’.

       One of his first actions was to release the worst most battle hardened jihadis from jail, and to execute thousands of less radical detainees. So even the fact that ISIS and AQ affiliates are so powerfull now is on Assad to some degree. (you can also track who he targets the most, and where; it all tells the same tail).
       • One Two 1.1.1.1

         9 February 2016 at 10:01 am

         I don’t think we should act in ways that make us complicit with US war crimes, and I don’t think we should act in ways that make us complicit with these war crimes either

         The correct response is to NEVER be involved in warfare, or invade foreign nations while talking with a forked tongue

         That is what the US/UK and the so called allies have been up to for decades in the ME

         Best to remain neutral in ones own mind, because it is a moral dilemma you can’t ever be on the correct side of, should you choose to take one
         • pete 1.1.1.1.1

           9 February 2016 at 10:37 am

           I think the millions of gypsies, Jews, negros and so on who perished in the Nazi death camps may well have a different point of view. Sometimes war is necessary.

           Perhaps if Germany had sent troops to Croatia, or the UN had taken a proactive role in Bosnia or Dafur, many millions would have been saved.

           And what countries have ever been neutral. Where did much of Switzerland’s wealth come from? Acting as banker to Nazi Germany and a receiver of loot from the camps. Sweden? No, they grew rich by supplying raw materials and minerals to Nazi Germany. Hardly neutral.
           • Pascals bookie 1.1.1.1.1.1

             9 February 2016 at 11:13 am

             WW2 is rarely a good analogy, but I agree with One Two’s point here. No one lied about entering WW2. The stakes were clear, laid out, with no flinching from the scale of what would be required to achieve success.

             Compare that to the horsehit we are being sold now. ‘OMG ISIS is as big a threat as the Nazis and we must respond with a token bullshit poorly defined response in which our allies are every bit as bad as our enemies, but don’t worry we will have few casualties and it won’t mean any tax hikes, and if you don’t support then omg get some guts’

             It’s just nonsense, and it won’t end well for anyone
             • Draco T Bastard …

               9 February 2016 at 11:25 am

               +1

               Indefinite war is great for the profits of arms manufacturers and bankers though.
               • pete …

                 9 February 2016 at 11:37 am

                 True it is obviously great for the arms manufacturers and scum like Halliburton, but indefinite war is extremely bad for most sectors of the economy. A strong and growing economy benefits banks. More, I would have thought, than a war based economy.
                 • Draco T Bastard …

                   9 February 2016 at 11:55 am

                   It was WWII that finally brought the world out of The Great Depression. IMO, TPTB are looking for the same effect from this continuous war that they’ve started.
             • pete …

               9 February 2016 at 11:33 am

               Hi Pascal. Ok, ignoring WW2, what about Malaya? A very effective outcome with huge local support. Korean War, with UN backing, had great success for the majority of the Korean peoples. The list of ‘just’ wars is long.

               I agree that the fight against Isis may not end well, and our allies (Saudi Arabia for example) are sure not an inspiration to join. But truly, ISIS is as great a threat as the Nazi, to the LOCAL people. I do not think we can just ignore that, any more than we should have ignored darfur, Rwanda and so on.

               The UN should be leading the way, but that is not likely to happen.
               • Pascals bookie …

                 9 February 2016 at 12:32 pm

                 Sure there are just wars, I’m not a pacifist. But citing something that worked isn’t justification of doing something that won’t work, or is awful.

                 To say that ISIS is “as great a threat as the Nazi, to the LOCAL people” hides as much as it reveals. (And again, I stipulate that ISIS suck, and are very bad, and so on and so forth.) Look at the death rates in Syria, who is doing the overwhelming lions share of the killing and sectarian cleansing. Assad is also a threat ‘on the scale of the Nazis to the local people’. It all depends on how you choose to define ‘the local people’, and who you magic away as somehow not counting as local people
                 • pete …

                   9 February 2016 at 12:51 pm

                   Hi pascal. Good points.
           • Naturesong 1.1.1.1.1.2

             9 February 2016 at 12:42 pm

             WWII should not be viewed without context.

             It really was WWI pt.2.

             And the seeds for that were sewn decades prior.
             • pete …

               9 February 2016 at 12:53 pm

               Not sure I would agree. Ww1 was the clash of empires: German, French, ottoman, Russian.

               Ww2 was primarily a clash of ideology: fascism and communism. And capitalism and democracy.
               • Naturesong …

                 9 February 2016 at 4:56 pm

                 USSR; sealed train 1917.
                 Conditions for rise of Nazi party; Treaty of Versailles 1919
   • aerobubble 1.2

     9 February 2016 at 10:27 am

     Who wins? Who’s winning? The Syrian people, no. Assad? No. Assad inherited the role from his father. Sure a gulag but a peaceful stable gulag, now look at it. Assad is the worst leader in history to remain leader. Should he win he loses,in the history books and on the ground, supremely weak lacking a population, shored up by Iran and Russia. Assad is a joke.

     Russia? They want a base in Syria, but can they afford it, why would we care that they have a base at the cost to Russia of subsidizing Assad.

     Iran? How exactly does Hezbollah look to middle east Muslim, as a group dedicated to protecting them or supporting the wholesale destruction of the Syrian peoples.

     Isil? So young westerners are going to join and build the califate, wtf, doing the work of anyone who for all intent hates muslims because thats what it looks like.

     Denmark? By seizing Syrian jewels they insure they get the poorest and most needy, while Germany gets the sizable block of Syrian society, lawyers, doctots etc. What’s to worry about, a desperate suddenly released from the gulag that was Syria, eager, moderate mulsims, its win win for EU. With the added bonus of outing stupid leaders and establishments in Poland Hungrey who cant see the opportunity or the message it sends of a return to the stale politics of pre-eu wall eastern gulag.

     Putin is an historical dwarf, riding the questionable 1% policy, that his family can’t be too rich, has he read the history of his own country.
   • Robert Glennie 1.3

     9 February 2016 at 11:37 am

     Both the U.S., the Russians and their respective clients have done bad stuff in Syria. Anyone who sees otherwise is not seeing the whole picture. Both nations are funding and arming factions that are not interested in protecting civilians

     But you will not see an American or Russian commander hauled before the United Nations to explain the actions of the forces they are responsible for. Too much distrust in the I.C.C.
2. Tautoko Mangō Mata 2

   9 February 2016 at 7:40 am

   The TPP National Assessment Analysis- in the National Herald today. I have supplied an obvious omission to the text.

   “1.1.3 Investment and Investor-State Dispute Settlement
   Joining TPP would benefit NZ Investors….”

   http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11586183

   but would be a huge risk for the rest of NZers who have had no input into the TPP prior to signing. i.e. The largest group of NZ stakeholders who were not invited to the negotiations or given access to the proposed text prior to signing.
   • Tautoko Mangō Mata 2.1

     9 February 2016 at 7:59 am

     and, for the info of our PM

     Feb 02, 2016
     Record Number of Investor-State Arbitrations Filed in 2015

     Geneva, 2 February 2016 – UNCTAD has updated its recently launched Investment Dispute Settlement Navigator. The ISDS Navigator is now up to date as of 1 January 2016.

     The update reveals that the number of investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS) cases filed in 2015 reached a record high of 70. Spain was by far the most frequent respondent in 2015, with 15 claims brought against it. The Russian Federation is second on this list with 7 cases.

     As of 1 January 2016, the total number of publicly known arbitrations against host countries pursuant to international investment agreements (IIAs) has reached nearly 700.

     http://investmentpolicyhub.unctad.org/News/Hub/Home/458#.VrjhmZNcwpc.twitter
     • pat 2.1.1

       9 February 2016 at 8:08 am

       so the growth of cases continues and TPPA still to add to that……but nothing to be concerned about eh…70 cases represents approx $560.000,000 of wasted public funds, regardless of outcome
3. The lost sheep 3

   9 February 2016 at 8:10 am

   Talking about perceptions of media bias, YouGov poll of 7 European countries finds that in 5 of them more people believe the Press has a left wing bias

   Britain and Finland are the only countries in which more people think the Press shows more Right than Left Wing bias, but even in those countries, almost twice as many people say that the Press either has ‘about the right balance’ or ‘shows a left wing bias’.

   https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/02/07/british-press-most-right-wing-europe/
   • Molly 3.1

     9 February 2016 at 8:17 am

     Polls without informed discussion beforehand, records prejudice or bias.

     One of their polls is about Beyonce… couldn’t really bother reading more.
     • The lost sheep 3.1.1

       9 February 2016 at 8:56 am

       You Gov is widely quoted here Molly. But I note that in the past you have often dismissed sources that contradict your beliefs.
       • pat 3.1.1.1

         9 February 2016 at 9:06 am

         whats your point …thats a survey of 7 european country’s press….curiously one of the 2 that are deemed to have a right wing bias is Britain, and it is generally the anglo countries that are accused of having a RW bias to their press…the results could be interpreted to support that view.
         • The lost sheep 3.1.1.1.1

           9 February 2016 at 9:32 am

           Even in Britain, belief in a right wing bias is a view held by no more than 26% of the population. Almost twice that % disagree there is a right wing bias.

           My point is that this survey suggests the theory of widespread right wing control of The Press oft quoted here is not a belief shared by the majority of people in those countries.

           Pure speculation, but if the same survey was conducted here, I’d venture the result would be similar to Finland.
           • Draco T Bastard 3.1.1.1.1.1

             9 February 2016 at 11:44 am

             My point is that this survey suggests the theory of widespread right wing control of The Press oft quoted here is not a belief shared by the majority of people in those countries.

             Peoples belief is not a truly valid measurement.
           • reason 3.1.1.1.1.2

             9 February 2016 at 12:36 pm

             The Herald , DomPost and TV3 should all come with the National party Logo on them ………………

             Never pay for them or watch TV3 ………….. I’ve talked 3 or 4 people into cancelling their subscriptions to the right wing rags…..

             TV3 seem to have cut their own throats by becoming the national party channel……………….. good job I say 🙂

             I now await the lostsheep to tell us the ‘taxpayers union’ is straight up too ..

             Which is why our impartial press use them ………………

             I think he’s using Baaaa Baaa Baad Faith :0
       • Molly 3.1.1.2

         9 February 2016 at 12:04 pm

         Never been a fan of polls that offer multiple choices without any kind of informed discussion or article beforehand. Wouldn’t use them myself for this reason.

         BTW, I went into a couple of the YouGov polls before posting to check out the source, and they were fairly trite and simplistic, then I was asked about Beyonce and lost all interest.

         I would rather some form of analysis that is based on dismantling media articles and programmes to get a true idea of bias – whether ‘left’ or ‘right.’
         • Muttonbird 3.1.1.2.1

           9 February 2016 at 12:13 pm

           I find it interesting the lost sheep would criticise a poster for dismissing sources that contradict their beliefs when his own prime minister regularly dismisses data and surveys which contradict his governments position saying that ‘you can always find another opinion’.

           Why indeed would a poster like the lost sheep suddenly hold all information sources at their word? It seems like the usual RWNJ method of confining debate to me. That is the allowing of lively debate within acceptable parameters, and the dismissing of any views outside those parameters.
   • Draco T Bastard 3.2

     9 February 2016 at 11:42 am

     Talking about perceptions of media bias, YouGov poll of 7 European countries finds that in 5 of them more people believe the Press has a left wing bias

     Which pretty much just confirms that perception is a really bad way of doing anything.

     What we really need is some software that can objectively measure the actual bias.
     • The lost sheep 3.2.1

       9 February 2016 at 2:07 pm

       Peoples belief is not a truly valid measurement.
       Not ‘truly’ valid agreed.
       But valid in the sense that they perceive it to true.
       And when people perceive something to be true, they tend not to change that belief unless presented with comprehensive proof they are wrong.
       (Consider how you react when i tell you your belief in a widespread RW bias is untrue).

       What we really need is some software that can objectively measure the actual bias.
       But if you believe it is true, surely you already have some credible evidence that proves so?
       I’d be particularly interested in seeing a linkage to the credible objective evidence that proves….
       1. There is a significant RW bias in the NZ media.
       2. There is a linkage between any such bias and peoples political preferences.
       • Draco T Bastard 3.2.1.1

         9 February 2016 at 2:38 pm

         And when people perceive something to be true, they tend not to change that belief unless presented with comprehensive proof they are wrong.

         Actually, research shows that people will hold on to the beliefs against the evidence – especially RWNJs:

         All of this matters, of course, because we still operate in politics and in media as if minds can be changed by the best honed arguments, the most compelling facts. And yet if our political opponents are simply perceiving the world differently, that idea starts to crumble. Out of the rubble just might arise a better way of acting in politics that leads to less dysfunction and less gridlock…thanks to science.

         (Consider how you react when i tell you your belief in a widespread RW bias is untrue).

         You didn’t provide any proof.

         But if you believe it is true, surely you already have some credible evidence that proves so?

         I’ve done my own but even I wouldn’t call that credible. It’s good enough for me. Unfortunately, there doesn’t appear to be any solid research into NZ MSM bias at any time and the shifting of the Overton Window over the last few decades would probably shift the perception of bias – This Harvard research actually has Fox News as only mildly right-wing FFS.

         All of this is why I called for software that could measure the bias objectively and in real time.
         • The lost sheep 3.2.1.1.1

           9 February 2016 at 3:38 pm

           There is no evidence then?
           Gee, I would have thought that if it was a real phenomena, and it was significantly distorting our democracy…someone would have been interested/concerned enough to quantify the effect. But no one has?

           Are you aware of the ‘hostile media effect’ and ‘confirmation bias’ Draco?
           IMO most of the ‘belief’ in RW bias I see here is due to them. Just like if you go to RW sites you will find the ‘belief’ the Media has a LW bias.
           https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostile_media_effect
           https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias
   • Expat 3.3

     9 February 2016 at 8:01 pm

     The lost sheep

     Most of the countries in the survey have a large number of media sources, far greater than that in NZ, this helps to balance and mitigate dominate media bias. This is the main issue in NZ, the Murdoch run media are all blatantly bias (doesn’t matter what country), hence the nature of the NZ Hearald.
     • Colonial Viper 3.3.1

       9 February 2016 at 8:13 pm

       a very similar corporate media hegemony runs through the whole western world.

       You have to tune into RT, Al Jazeera, Press TV, etc. to get a different point of view.
       • The lost sheep 3.3.1.1

         9 February 2016 at 9:00 pm

         Expat/ Viper,
         The point is that anyone CAN access the sources you quote, just as you do.
         So how can you claim that some people are restricted in their access?

         AND, there is no evidence that any such bias actually exists. See above. Please provide credible evidence to prove there is actually an issue here, outside of confirmation bias and hostile media effect?
         • Colonial Viper 3.3.1.1.1

           9 February 2016 at 10:01 pm

           The point is that anyone CAN access the sources you quote, just as you do.
           So how can you claim that some people are restricted in their access?

           Look, is this even an honest question from you? I can’t tell some times.

           Its much harder to access RT than it is to turn on the TV at 6pm. Part of this is that of habit and conditioning.

           AND, there is no evidence that any such bias actually exists.

           Look for it and you will see it everywhere.

           It is the things we are not told which give it away.
           • Expat 3.3.1.1.1.1

             9 February 2016 at 10:21 pm

             CV

             Not only is he lost, but deaf and blind as well.
           • The lost sheep 3.3.1.1.1.2

             10 February 2016 at 8:03 am

             Viper – Its much harder to access RT than it is to turn on the TV at 6pm. Part of this is that of habit and conditioning. Part of this is that of habit and conditioning.
             How is it harder to watch the news at a specific time? Both are extremely easy things to do.
             What ‘conditioning’? Evidence please.

             What you are missing is that everyone has exactly the same level of choice that YOU do, and like YOU everyone freely chooses what media outlets they do or don’t want to access.
             Do you actually have any evidence about what people do or don’t access, or are you just making an assumption about that?

             And do you have any actual ‘evidence’ to my questions in 3.2.1 above?
             Look for it and you will see it everywhere.
             That is ‘evidence’ of nothing. Except the fact that you honestly believe that everyone will see what you see. As the survey above suggests, they do not.
             • One Anonymous Bloke …

               10 February 2016 at 8:08 am

               Right, so you’re making fucktard assertions about choice again. I think your zombie arguments actually ate your brain.
               • The lost sheep …

                 10 February 2016 at 9:31 am

                 So you don’t have any evidence or a counter argument either OAB?
                 • One Anonymous Bloke …

                   10 February 2016 at 9:47 am

                   Yes, I have: that you are asserting that “choice” exists in some meaningful way, as opposed to being your rhetorical security blankie. You present no evidence for it, nor have you ever, in all the times you’ve been challenged on this specific point.

                   But you knew that, and decided that mendacity would serve you instead. As per normal.
                   • The lost sheep …

                     10 February 2016 at 12:11 pm

                     you are asserting that “choice” exists in some meaningful way

                     ‘Choice’ is the act of choosing between various possibilities, and absolutely I am asserting that NZ’ers can and do widely exercise choice in gathering information.

                     I am asserting that YOU have access to a wide range of possible sources of information, and that YOU do in fact make choices as to which of them you will or will not access.
                     Are you seriously suggesting you do not?

                     I further assert 98.8% of NZ Households have Internet access that provides an almost endless range of possibilities for individuals to choose from various sources, and that a very large % of NZ’ers do in fact do so.

                     Here is some ‘evidence’ to back that assertion…

                     http://www.aut.ac.nz/research/research-institutes/icdc/projects/world-internet-project
                   • One Anonymous Bloke …

                     10 February 2016 at 12:20 pm

                     And around and around and around you go. You have asserted it at least three times now, so it must be true.
                   • The lost sheep …

                     10 February 2016 at 12:39 pm

                     You accused me of providing no evidence, so I presented some.

                     Are you not going to address that evidence OAB?
                   • One Anonymous Bloke …

                     10 February 2016 at 3:02 pm

                     Yawn. I predicted your lies last year. Dishonesty is your only debating tactic.
                   • The lost sheep …

                     10 February 2016 at 3:22 pm

                     That’s a really pathetic attempt at evasion OAB.
                     Once again you are not willing to honestly address the perfectly reasonable evidence based discussion in hand.

                     I’ll just take it as read that my points above stand, and you have no answer to them.
                   • One Anonymous Bloke …

                     10 February 2016 at 5:50 pm

                     “Evasion”: nope: I attacked your assumptions head on.

                     The answers are contained in the discussion I linked to. You indicated your intention to ignore them then: I see no merit in schooling you again, because you’ll ignore substantive rebuttal and tell lies about my opinions.

                     Puddleglum destroyed your “choice” assertions last year. Get over it.
                 • One Anonymous Bloke …

                   10 February 2016 at 6:56 pm

                   Now the ‘choice’ argument lies bleeding in the gutter, what does it mean to have such a wide range of media available?

                   Does it simply help to entrench pre-existing beliefs, by providing instant gratification to the confirmation bias?

                   Does it impede contemplation, as Nicholas Carr argues?

                   Or does it simply provide material for sexual congress with porcine mammals? Let’s leave that up to Sheep, eh?
                   • The lost sheep …

                     10 February 2016 at 7:14 pm

                     “Evasion”: nope: I attacked your assumptions head on.
                     The answers are contained in the discussion I linked to…..
                     Ah, the Gish Gallop / Shotgun strategy.
                     This from someone who believes ‘you fuck pigs’ is a formal proposition.

                     Now the ‘choice’ argument lies bleeding in the gutter, what does it mean to have such a wide range of media available?
                     Honestly? After a refusing on multiple occasions to engage with my discussion, you ask me a question…..and expect a reply?

                     What would my reply be if I was following your standards? Oh that’s right, “you fuck pigs”?

                     But actually, not being you, I will make a reasoned reply….
                   • One Anonymous Bloke …

                     10 February 2016 at 7:26 pm

                     When an argument’s been rebutted, citing the rebuttal is the opposite of a Gish gallop.

                     A Gish gallop is a string of false statements delivered in a monologue so as to render substantive rebuttal impossible in the screen-time allotted.

                     Whereas I’m citing one substantive argument – Puddleglum’s – to point out that your assertions about choice are offered in predicted bad faith.

                     Oh, and I wasn’t asking you: this is a public forum. I have less than no interest in your reckons on the subject so long as you refrain from putting words in my mouth.
                   • One Anonymous Bloke …

                     10 February 2016 at 7:43 pm

                     your standards

                     Must you plagiarise my observations? I already pointed out the rhetorical mirror in your face.
                   • The lost sheep …

                     11 February 2016 at 8:55 am

                     Now the ‘choice’ argument lies bleeding in the gutter, what does it mean to have such a wide range of media available?

                     Lets deal with choice first.
                     Every human society asserts that individuals have it to some degree, and will therefore be held responsible for the consequences of choices they make. In itself this does rather contradict the ‘bleeding in the gutter’ idea, but lets go on.

                     There is a well formed consensus of the definition of ‘choice’. In common dictionary usage ‘the act of choosing between two or more possibilities’, but for the sake of this exercise lets add the slightly more rigorous clause philosophy often invokes,’where there is no constraint on the ability to choose between the possibilities’.

                     So lets look for evidence of ‘choice’ out there in the real world. Your place is probably as good as any to search.
                     How did you come to be reading this comment? Could that have occurred in a completely random manner, without you having made some deliberate selections among a range of possibilities?
                     Self evidently, at some stage you were not on TS. At that point you had a range of possibilities available as to how you could use the time before you: do some work, have a conversation with another person, do a crossword, watch animal porn, go to TS, etc, etc. TS was not the only option available to you, and there was no constraint that meant it was the only possibility you could choose.
                     You made a conscious ‘choice’ to come here.
                     Having made that choice, you were then presented with a large number of possible threads and comments which you could select to read. You did not get to this one by randomly stabbing at the keyboard did you? You had to select it from the multiple possibilities available to you without constraint.

                     You could not be on TS and at this comment unless you had made a serious of deliberate choices to be doing so, instead of the other possibilities you had no restraint in choosing.

                     And now you must make further choices between possibilities. Do you reply or not reply? There is no constraint to prevent you choosing either possibility. You cannot proceed with your day without making a choice on this (unless sitting immobile staring at the screen is the possibility you select).
                     If you have chosen to reply, how do you do so? Again, there are a range of possibilities; you could make a reasonable and informed direct answer to the points i have made, or you could deliberately evade making any direct reply.
                     I’m assuming you choose the latter, and then you have further choices to make from a range of possible devices: conflation, red herring, shotgun, you fuck pigs….
                     Make your choice OAB.

                     I’ll address the “what does it mean to have such a wide range of media available?” in open mike. Turns out there is quite a lot of hard data on that, and I’m sure those interested in the theory of media control will find it fascinating.
                   • One Anonymous Bloke …

                     11 February 2016 at 9:03 am

                     😆

                     None of that has the slightest bearing on Puddleglum’s argument. Not one word.

                     our ability to be autonomous agents is dependent upon ‘circumstances’ – not on our ‘free will’.

                     It’s just you asserting your beliefs over and over again. Have you forgotten that given my lack of a formal education, i [sic] will need to think it over closely.

                     Why have you gone for argumentum ad nauseam instead?
                   • The lost sheep …

                     11 February 2016 at 10:11 am

                     As predicted OAB, you have made the choice to be evasive, and the techniques you have chosen are the ones I was able to predict i.e. ‘the red herring’ and ‘conflation’.

                     Red Herring – We are not discussing ‘Puddleglum’, or continuing a discussion we had months ago that occurred in a completely different context.

                     Conflation – ‘Free Will’ and ‘Choice’ are not the same thing at all.

                     You came into the discussion when we were discussing ‘choice’ in a very specific context, and not ‘free will’.
                     You continued to argue in that context of ‘choice’, until I presented evidence that people were in fact exercising ‘choice’ in the specific context we were discussing.
                     In order to avoid addressing that evidence you then attempted to ‘shift the goalposts’ by sidetracking to a previous discussion about ‘choice’ that PG had himself (delightfully) conflated into a discussion about ‘free will’. (So what you are actually doing is using a double conflation as a red herring. Remarkable!)

                     So back to the question in hand, which is ‘choice’.
                     I have made a number of reasonable and entirely valid points regarding ‘choice’ above. I have given some very specific cases of ‘choice’ to illustrate my argument.
                     What possible reason would you have for not addressing my argument honestly and directly?
                   • One Anonymous Bloke …

                     11 February 2016 at 11:23 am

                     our ability to be autonomous agents is dependent upon ‘circumstances’ – not on our ‘free will’.

                     You honestly can’t see how that relates to the kind of ‘choices’ you’re asserting?

                     Puddleglum’s comments are relevant because you’re relying on the same assertions now as then.

                     CV also touched on it: ‘habit and conditioning’.

                     Your position depends upon you failing to understand this.
                   • The lost sheep …

                     11 February 2016 at 2:11 pm

                     ‘Free will’ is a question on which there is a very broad range of Philosophic opinion and no agreed consensus.
                     Therefore your assertion of a specific ‘relationship’ between ‘free will’ and ‘choice’ can only rest on one of the very many available theoretical assumptions. It cannot be ‘true’.

                     As far as I can tell, you subscribe to to some form of ‘hard determinism’, and therefore assert that choice is an illusion, even when it appears to be free.
                     I take it that you would assert that you have no choice but to reply to this comment. There is an actual constraint preventing you from not replying.
                     You will not choose the terms you reply in. You have no option but to reply in the one manner that is open to you.
                     You do not actually choose the flavour of your ice cream, you simply point out the one option available to you.

                     So in relation to the matter of media choice, you would say that when an individual opens up google, the apparent opportunity they have to access 1 billion websites is just an illusion. The sites they can access are constrained by ‘circumstance’. They have no free will to choose the one site available to them at that point.

                     There are a couple of major objections to the ‘hard determinist’ view obviously, but the principle one is the one I crudely point out above.
                     The vast majority of Humans would think that the idea you have no choice but to tell someone they fuck pigs is bollocks.

                     It is universally understood across all cultures that there are in fact notions such as Justice, Moral obligation, merit, and responsibility actually present in normally developed human beings.
                     Following from that, is the equally universal understanding that individuals really do assert choice over at least some of their acts, and they are in fact capable of a degree of self-determination.
                     From which follows the universal understanding that individuals will be held responsible for acts they were deemed to have choice over.

                     So in short. ‘No choice at all’ is a nonsense.
                     To some or less degree we have it, and research like the AUT research into internet usage gives us some very interesting information confirming the choices we make on our access to the media.
                   • One Anonymous Bloke …

                     11 February 2016 at 3:44 pm

                     It is universally understood across all cultures that there are in fact notions such as Justice, Moral obligation, merit, and responsibility actually present in normally developed human beings.

                     Oh, so whatever society deems useful is true? What are you going to say as the findings and conclusions of Neurolaw make their way into judges’ decisions?

                     Perhaps you should set up a “Wingnut Reckons” legalish campaign to hold back the tide 😆
         • Expat 3.3.1.1.2

           9 February 2016 at 10:18 pm

           The lost sheep

           “AND, there is no evidence that any such bias actually exists.”

           You really are a “Lost Sheep” if you haven’t read the Hearld, The Daily Telegraph, or any other Murdoch media publication including Fox news.
         • One Anonymous Bloke 3.3.1.1.3

           11 February 2016 at 11:51 am

           There is indeed evidence that bias exists: a plethora of academic studies identify and quantify it, to the extent, for example, of discussing public health strategies to ‘mitigate’ the impact of media racism. A great example of how media bias directly impacts on the available range of ‘choices’.

           This goes directly to Puddleglum’s observation that our ability to be autonomous agents is dependent upon ‘circumstances’ – not on our ‘free will’.

           I mentioned Carr already. And confirmation bias. And I have to see you come close to an attempt to fit Crosby Textor into your model.
           • The lost sheep 3.3.1.1.3.1

             11 February 2016 at 2:40 pm

             This is where determinism is really dangerous eh OAB?
             Because if you believe individuals are not free to choose to change, and that only ‘circumstance’ can determine how people act, then you believe the only way to produce change is to alter circumstance….
             And the implication then is that the alteration of circumstance must take priority over the individual that lacks free will.

             Think like that, and next thing you know, you are supporting the suppression of individuals In the name of the agency ‘changing circumstance’. In the best interests of the (mindless) people of course!

             BTW, did you decide whether you could bring yourself to say whether or not you support the authoritarian actions of the Venezuelan Socialists?
             • One Anonymous Bloke …

               11 February 2016 at 3:38 pm

               What have I told you about putting words in my mouth? You lack the imaginative capacity.

               To put it another way, your framing is self-serving and useless, and your hostility makes explaining things to you tiresome and unrewarding.
             • One Anonymous Bloke …

               11 February 2016 at 3:50 pm

               if you believe individuals are not free to choose to change,

               That’s so bad it’s not even wrong. You can’t conceive of any other ways change might occur other than by free-will fairy dust or authoritarian coercion?

               I’m glad I don’t think like you.
4. Undecided 4

   9 February 2016 at 8:16 am

   http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/76665812/Shane-Jones-throws-weight-behind-shifting-Government-welcome-to-Waitangi-away-from-Ti-Tii-marae

   As I understand it the Treaty was signed in many different marae around NZ so I don’t see any problem with moving the welcome but then my understanding is quite limited

   Is there any problem with moving it?
   • Chooky 4.1

     9 February 2016 at 8:39 am

     “Is there any problem with moving it?”…you mean rather than getting rid of the inconvenience altogether?

     Yes it would suit gutless Disneyland jonkey Gollum nact who cant face up to open public debate on the TPPA at Waitangi

     (…instead his minions …eg. Shane Jones et al are thrown up to advocate dismantling Waitangi)

     While I am at it …why doesnt the Maori Party stop being Joneky’s support party?…they are a disgrace!

     Also the coverage of Waitangi Day on Waitangi Day on RNZ was a disgrace…much of it was NOT about Waitangi Day at all…it was interviews with a motley lot of delinquent foreign soccer players ( one of whom kidnapped a penguin and kept it in his bath!)

     … and then the RNZ radio host started talking about comparing the prices of sundry pathetic commodities internationally…(at that point I turned off my car radio in disgust at the triteness and bilge)

     …From RNZ I was looking for interviews with people like Ranganui Walker and Claudia Orange about the significance of Waitangi and the Treaty as New Zealand’s founding historical document.

     (in other words a bit of gravitas, history and inspiration instead of a commercial trite consumer Disneyland farce…thanks for nothing RNZ)

     http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/waitangiday

     btw…Morriessey where are you?!
     • Undecided 4.1.1

       9 February 2016 at 8:49 am

       I was thinking more long the lines of legal issues or something, so theres no reason the welcome can’t be moved.

       Since the Treaty was signed in different marae (not sure if it was ratified in Waitangi, maybe someone with more knowledge can confirm) maybe Waitangi Day could be held at the other marae where it was signed?
       • marty mars 4.1.1.1

         9 February 2016 at 9:45 am

         I don’t think it could be moved, not without upsetting mana.
         • Undecided 4.1.1.1.1

           9 February 2016 at 10:00 am

           That’s a shame, as someone that lives in the South Island it seems not quite real (not sure how to put it) to me

           Having it one year at a South Island marae or other North Island maraes might help more people connect it with maybe and see it less as a Northland thing and more of a NZ thing
           • weka 4.1.1.1.1.1

             9 February 2016 at 10:38 am

             Myself I don’t think Waitangi Day should be messed with when things are complex and heated as they are. Better to work through the issues rather than trying to avoid them.

             But I get what you mean about the SI thing. I too feel quite removed from Waitangi. There is no reason why South Islanders couldn’t work on commemorating the partnership in our own way separate from Waitangi Day 😉 Perhaps each region has a date when the Treaty was signed there that could be significant.
             • Undecided …

               9 February 2016 at 10:52 am

               I would like that and I’m sure others would as well, mind you I did a quick search on google and its not easy to find the exact dates when the treaty was signed or when it was settled

               Of course that might just be me
             • Pasupial …

               9 February 2016 at 11:53 am

               The Waitangi signing is the most important, because that was the first signing. But also because it was there signed by:

               …a number of chiefs who had already signed the 1835 Declaration of Independence, in which 52 chiefs, mainly from Northland, had declared their sovereignty over New Zealand.

               http://www.teara.govt.nz/en/treaty-of-waitangi/page-1

               About 50 meetings were held from February to September 1840 to discuss and sign the copies, and a further 500 signatures were added to the treaty. A number of chiefs and some tribal groups refused to sign, including Pōtatau Te Wherowhero (Waikato iwi), Tuhoe, Te Arawa and Ngāti Tuwharetoa and possibly Moka ‘Kainga-mataa’. Some were not given the opportunity to sign.[34] A number of non-signatory Waikato and Central North Island chiefs would later form a kind of confederacy with an elected monarch called the Kingitanga. (The Kingitanga Movement would later form a primary anti-government force in the New Zealand Wars.)

               Nonetheless, on 21 May 1840, Lieutenant-Governor Hobson proclaimed sovereignty over the whole country, (the North Island by Treaty and the South Island by discovery) and New Zealand was constituted as a colony separate from New South Wales on 16 November 1840.

               https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Waitangi

               There is a series; “Lost in Translation”, hosted by Mike King I saw on Māori TV which covers this process. That; “South Island by discovery” rankles because the treaty was in fact signed Waipounamu Kai Tahu:

               Each year the Ngāi Tahu Treaty Festival alternates between the three locations where Ngāi Tahu signed the Treaty: Te Rau Aroha Marae at Awarua (Bluff) [2015]; Ōtākou Marae, near Dunedin [2014]; and Ōnuku Marae on Banks Peninsula [2016].

               http://ngaitahu.iwi.nz/ngai-tahu-treaty-festival-at-onuku-marae/
               • Chooky …

                 9 February 2016 at 12:31 pm

                 +100 Thanks Parsupial

                 Every year the South Island Maori and Pakeha along with other tribes around NZ celebrate the Treaty of Waitangi in their own way and in their own local areas.(I thought this was common knowledge in the South Island)

                 This should not mitigate against the major historical annual event and celebrations at Waitangi.

                 “Treaty of Waitangi Signings in the South Island

                 The Treaty of Waitangi was signed in Waitangi on 6 February 1840. Signings in the South Island took place in May and June of that year.

                 Ōnuku signing

                 On 30 May 1840, two Ngāi Tahu chiefs, Iwikau and John Love (Hone Tikao), signed the Treaty of Waitangi at Ōnuku on Akaroa Harbour. The Akaroa area plays a significant role in Treaty history, as it was European involvement in an 1830 raid on the area by Te Rauparaha that led to British intervention and eventually the development of the Treaty…

                 http://my.christchurchcitylibraries.com/treaty-of-waitangi-signings-in-the-south-island/

                 http://bwb.co.nz/books/the-treaty-of-waitangi

                 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claudia_Orange

                 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waitangi_Day

                 …”The Treaty of Waitangi was signed on 6 February 1840, in a marquee in the grounds of James Busby’s house (now known as the Treaty house) at Waitangi in the Bay of Islands. The Treaty made New Zealand a part of the British Empire, guaranteed Māori rights to their land and gave Māori the rights of British subjects. There are differences between the English version and the Māori translation of the Treaty, and since 1840 this has led to debate over exactly what was agreed to at Waitangi. Māori have generally seen the Treaty as a sacred pact, while for many years Pākehā (the Māori word for New Zealanders of predominantly European ancestry) ignored it. By the early twentieth century, however, some Pākehā were beginning to see the Treaty as their nation’s founding document and a symbol of British humanitarianism. Unlike Māori, Pākehā have generally not seen the Treaty as a document with binding power over the country and its inhabitants. In 1877 Chief Justice James Prendergast declared it to be a ‘legal nullity’, a position it held until the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975, when it regained significant legal standing.”…
                 • Undecided …

                   9 February 2016 at 12:49 pm

                   Well speaking as someone from the South Island I think it’d be a good idea to celebrate it at least once at Akaroa because then I could go to it and see what its all about
                   • weka …

                     9 February 2016 at 12:57 pm

                     Can you go to the existing one at Akaroa?
                   • marty mars …

                     9 February 2016 at 1:14 pm

                     There are some awesome celebrations down there – seriously great. I’m south through and through and it gets done down here. Good comments above give nice detail – thanks.

                     http://www.akaroa.com/waitangi-day-commemorations-okains-bay
                   • Undecided …

                     9 February 2016 at 1:17 pm

                     To be fair I didn’t know Akaroa held one but it would still seem like the minor celebration (might be a little of the little brother syndrome creeping in)

                     Still good to attend though, I’ll have to keep an eye out for it next time
                   • Pasupial …

                     9 February 2016 at 1:51 pm

                     Undecided

                     Perhaps it wasn’t as well publicised up there, in Dunedin in 2014 it was certainly well known (ODT articles, mayor’s attendance etc). You’ll have to wait another 3 years for that, as you’ve just missed your chance this time (from above link):

                     Ōnuku Rūnanga is hosting the 2016 Ngāi Tahu Treaty Festival at Ōnuku Marae, Akaroa on February 6… Those travelling to the Waitangi Day celebrations are asked to meet at Akaroa Area Primary School, 141 Rue Jolie, Akaroa, where buses will shuttle them to and from the marae.

                     I spent the weekend with whānau, so missed this (though there was a historical walking lecture that I had been considering), but apparently in Dunedin:

                     The council had decided to “step up” and organise events to celebrate Waitangi Day on the two years out of three the Ngai Tahu celebrations were not held at Otakou Marae.

                     http://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/372482/historic-flags-mark-waitangi-day

                     [edit; Didn’t see the replies to your 12:49 comment, should have refreshed before typing. Guess there’s not much hope of getting the Christchurch council to have off-year Waitangi events with how strapped for cash they are with ongoing earthquake expenses]
                   • Undecided …

                     9 February 2016 at 2:18 pm

                     Thanks for that
   • aerobubble 4.2

     9 February 2016 at 10:41 am

     Its a great litmus test. Seeing Key choke on being told he would be shepharded into a white tent off to the side for secret talks where Maori can controlled the message. Just like they’ve been treated. The tppa is a joke, a last century agreement by global corp who have too much money and little sense, as capitalism and communism both target dinosaurs like them. How does NZ lose by leaving, its almost a free trader anyway, will contintue to be, it will leave the other parties choking to explain the the free trade agreement needs to include all these restrictions on free trade for global dinosaurs corperations.
     • Draco T Bastard 4.2.1

       9 February 2016 at 11:46 am

       +1
     • Chooky 4.2.2

       9 February 2016 at 12:42 pm

       +100…if anyone is Mickey Mouse and in Disneyland it is jonkey
     • Chooky 4.2.3

       9 February 2016 at 1:09 pm

       This is good on the TPPA from Wayne Hope

       ‘Flagging the TPPA’

       http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2016/02/09/must-read-flagging-the-tppa/

       “In the middle of the anti-TPPA march down Queen street was a stooped pakeha woman carrying the New Zealand flag. A few paces in front, groups of Maori marched under the Tino rangitiratanga ensign. These domestically opposed symbols of national identity were,for the moment, standing together against a common threat – the transnational corporation….

       The government`s scornful reaction to this course of events reveals the inherent weakness of their position. John Key, Stephen Joyce, Todd McClay and fellow protagonists are,effectively, standing on behalf of transnational capitalism and its inter-state machinery against our legal and political sovereignty.

       Where then does this leave the Labour party leadership?
       This is the central question arising from last Thursday`s historic march.

       Will they support the national ensigns of Maori and Pakeha nationhood against the TPPA? Or will they, ultimately, lend weight to the Trojan horse of transnational capitalism?”
       • Draco T Bastard 4.2.3.1

         9 February 2016 at 2:43 pm

         Labour will lend weight to the Trojan horse of transnational capitalism.

         Labour has always been a capitalist supporting party. What we need are parties that will start the long overdue removal of capitalism.
5. Macro 5

   9 February 2016 at 8:20 am

   If ever Peter Dutton shows his face in NZ he should be arrested and charged with crimes against humanity.
6. pat 6

   9 February 2016 at 8:23 am

   http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport/audio/201788498/john-key-on-his-watangi-day-no-show

   floundering
   • Jenny Kirk 6.1

     9 February 2016 at 8:31 am

     Key sounds really tired in that audio.

     And he knows darn well, or should know, that there is always a lot of loud arguing/ discussion/ disagreement / agreement on marae but no way would Maori allow “violent riots” to break out inside their wharenui. He’s just hyping up the ante.
   • cogito 6.2

     9 February 2016 at 9:00 am

     Hope opposition parties give Key absolute raging hell in parliament today.
     • Skinny 6.2.1

       9 February 2016 at 9:26 am

       +1
       Yes and I hope John Key is taken to task over this;

       Listening to an interview with PM John Key this morning where he says “that some opponents of the TPPA have been misleading the public.”

       I find this quite an incredible thing to say when one of his own, Whangarei electorate MP Shane Reti was either mislead himself by his own Masters or was misleading the public on their behalf?

       http://m.nzherald.co.nz/northern-advocate/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503450&objectid=11503021
       • Skinny 6.2.1.1

         9 February 2016 at 10:06 am

         Ok before someone pulls me up the exact quote on RNZ this morning was

         “and you’ve got some people who have been misled.”

         I guess you could include mislead by one of his own MPs if you were putting what Key said in a fair context 🙂

         The full paragraph;

         “You’ve got a group of people who are just opposed to free trade, you’ve got a whole bunch of people who, in my view, are just protesting the government, and you’ve got some people who have been misled.”

         *However I have heard Key blaming opponents of the TPPA for misleading the public, just can not be bothered finding a link.
7. The Chairman 7

   9 February 2016 at 9:21 am

   Māori group urges bigger tobacco tax rise

   The service has made a submission to the finance and expenditure select committee urging further tax increases at a rate of 20 percent.

   While there were concerns the strategy (the annual 10 % tobacco tax increase) took the biggest toll on already vulnerable whanau, Ms Martin-Hawke said the alternative was worse.

   “Carrying on smoking ends up being more of a burden economically than the tax increases imposed initially on our whanau.”

   http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/te-manu-korihi/296054/maori-group-urges-bigger-tobacco-tax-rise

   A concern being overlooked here is if people don’t give up, they’ll be hit with a double whammy. Moreover, more may turn to crime to support their habit.

   http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/64718489/Retailers-fear-violence-over-cigarettes

   Thoughts?
   • vto 7.1

     9 February 2016 at 5:23 pm

     Thoughts?

     Putting up the price only affects the poor. Why do you advocate such a manner of turning off smoking? It is simply wrong for that reason.

     Better to simply ban it. Or limit daily purchases.

     Further thought?

     Stop picking on smokers. Beer, wine and spirits should also undergo a 20% price rise each and every year too.

     Thoughts? Bullshit and politicians lead to no credibility.

     Leave people alone.
     • The Chairman 7.1.1

       10 February 2016 at 11:15 am

       “Putting up the price only affects the poor. Why do you advocate such a manner of turning off smoking?”

       I’m not advocating for it.

       It’s the National Maori Tobacco Control Service that is urging the government to keep increasing the cost of tobacco.
   • weston 7.2

     9 February 2016 at 6:53 pm

     ever increasing the price of tobacco seems pretty stupid stratagy to me , its just going to force people to grow their own and if that is made illegal then the police will have yet another substance to look for and the black market sales of tobacco will increase as will the price in proportion to the risk .
     i am not up to date with the latest stats but the tax take on tobacco must be considerable already far more for example than the cost of treating smoking related illnesses .i think it would be an act of insanity to further increase smokers taxes and as for a smoke free nz by 2025 just a pipedream inmo
     • vto 7.2.1

       9 February 2016 at 7:04 pm

       Know stacks growing their own baccie already.

       And they wont be going back to buying.
8. Michael 8

   9 February 2016 at 9:47 am

   Is anybody like me, no longer able to access this site via a desktop and only by mobile device? Any help with this?
   • weka 8.1

     9 February 2016 at 10:41 am

     I’m on a desktop and can access this morning. Have you tried restarting your browser, different browser, dumping cookies etc?
   • satty 8.2

     9 February 2016 at 1:03 pm

     Check the address.
     If it’s http://www.thestandard.org.nz remove the leading www. and try again.
9. Skinny 9

   9 February 2016 at 10:47 am

   I bet Hooton has a spring in his step as he wanders into the RNZ studio this morning. Back on the payroll.

   By now he will have been contacted by the snake oil department of the NZ National party, after they suffered a mauling over the TPPA. The final straw being the booing of John Key at the footy. Waiting for a stinging attack by him directed at Little and Labour.
   • Skinny 9.1

     9 February 2016 at 11:39 am

     Hooton your rants about Tiewhai Harawira, then Sue Bradford’s sit down street protest, and reffering to every protester interviewed by Campbell at the Auckland TPPPA protest was ignored by the Nine to Noon host as churlish. Same as saying Labour and THE Green’s leaders wouldn’t pull out of the TPPA.

     I wouldn’t pay a cent for that bottle of snake oil you just peddled. Anyway by now you would have recieved a call from selfie stick Joyce admonishing your poor performance. My advice is go for a long run around no tree hill and regroup with something alot better than that crap you span this morning.
10. greywarshark 10

    9 February 2016 at 11:03 am

    I don’t think this is the way to affordable housing for the future. But it looks a fun space, and could be used as a training area for getting oriented to starting a new colony on Mars. Enjoy.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPMmxcWQvjQ
11. Draco T Bastard 11

    9 February 2016 at 11:16 am

    The act of designating deviance is one of power.

    And it tends to be the MSM and the ones that they favour that defines deviance. That’s why people who care for the environment get classed as radicals while those who destroy it get classed as saviours.
12. Robert Glennie 12

    9 February 2016 at 11:31 am

    I hear some big changes are coming for employment law. The major legislative change passed its first reading in Parliament last year.

    http://willnewzealandberight.com/2016/02/09/employment-law-changes-coming-but-will-businesses-be-ready/

    Has the Government proposed the right changes or has it botched employment law?
    • aerobubble 12.1

      9 February 2016 at 2:07 pm

      Foreshore is being inundated, mosquitoes are bring disease, climate change was a decision, thirty years ago we voted in govts that did away with regulation and who released global finance upon us due to predictable huge flows of cheap high density middle east fuel. The same people who bash govt are in govt, the same people who want profits at any cost aren’t about to worry that companies make less money, it has never stopped them in the past running bad regulations into law.

      Brownlee knows that job uncertainty is part of the future economy yet quite perplexingly declares that student should be unfront taxed to investing in their education,education that may well be useless in the future.

      So let’s be straight govt has been failing, is failing, and will continue to fail until we have some moments of clarity, some blood on the metaphorical floor, talk of nooses and old nags being put down. Neo-lib was a giant scam, involving a basic sell out of the democratic process, a giant distraction, distortion and dismissal of real concerns.
13. Penny Bright 13

    9 February 2016 at 11:38 am

    Know about this meeting tonight Aucklanders?

    http://www.remueraheritage.org.nz/news-and-events/public-meeting-on-rezoning

    2016 PUBLIC MEETING ON UNITARY PLAN REZONING

    09-Feb-2016

    Last month Auckland Council announced dramatic revisions to home zoning maps with no public consultation. Thousands of properties are affected.

    Property owners have no formal right of reply – is this fair?

    Join local residents groups to find out how your property is affected and what you can do to have your say.

    9th Feb at 6pm at ASB Main Stadium

    237 Kohimarama Rd, Kohimarama.

    Guest speaker will be Richard Burton of Auckland 2040

    – See more at: http://www.remueraheritage.org.nz/news-and-events/public-meeting-on-rezoning#sthash.V9RbLnO5.dpuf
    ________________________________________________

    Penny Bright
    2016 Auckland Mayoral candidate.
14. Tautoko Mangō Mata 14

    9 February 2016 at 11:45 am

    “Consultation” and what passes as such by this Govt.

    Prue Kapua of the Māori Women’s Welfare League nails it:
    The league had three hui that, rather than consultation, consisted of officials giving PowerPoint presentations, Ms Kapua said.
    “The TPK [Te Puni Kokiri] or the government think that’s consultation, they need to go back and read a whole lot of cases about what constitutes consultation, and that’s been the criticism. You know these presentation hui are a nonsense.”
    Ms Kapua said officials had interpreted feedback to suit their agenda: to hurry the Te Ture Whenua Māori Bill through, and to make money from commercialising Māori land when not all tāngata whenua wanted that.
    “The tribunal report is clear in terms of you can’t just have a situation where you set up meetings, you people the meeting with a mixture of officials and advisory group people who’ve been appointed by the

    “The league had three hui that, rather than consultation, consisted of officials giving PowerPoint presentations, Ms Kapua said.
    “The TPK [Te Puni Kokiri] or the government think that’s consultation, they need to go back and read a whole lot of cases about what constitutes consultation, and that’s been the criticism. You know these presentation hui are a nonsense.”

    “The tribunal report is clear in terms of you can’t just have a situation where you set up meetings, you people the meeting with a mixture of officials and advisory group people who’ve been appointed by the minister, and they sit there and they do a PowerPoint display about what position they’re up to and call that ‘consultation’.
    “So for them to think there that isn’t opposition and there isn’t concern – they’re just playing a game of ostriches, they’ve just got their heads in the sand.”

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/296039/consultation-on-maori-land-law-'nonsense‘

    Go Prue!
15. reason 15

    9 February 2016 at 12:48 pm

    Quote of the year so far …………..

    “I think it’s a shame that it takes a hard-working nurse throwing a dildo at a politician to open up this debate.”

    And it may only be a rumor….. so far ……. but I have heard the GCSB is now monitoring people who buy sex toys as potential terrorists …………..

    My inside informant ‘Deep-Throat’ coughed that one up ……………

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11586195
    • Rodel 15.1

      9 February 2016 at 5:40 pm

      Interesting photo in the Herald but which one is the dildo and which one is the real …?

      Heard someone on Jim Mora’s show referring to a certain ‘Dildo Baggins.. Who could that be?
      That aside I don’t condone throwing things at politicians or anyone.
16. savenz 16

    9 February 2016 at 1:01 pm

    Where Key belongs – go Iceland!!!

    “Iceland has sentenced its 26th banker to jail for causing the 2008 financial collapse.

    After the 2008 crisis, Iceland sentenced 26 bankers to a combined 74 years in prison. Charges ranged from breach of fiduciary duties to embezzlement and market manipulation. Most of those convicted have been sentenced to prison for two to five years, but their Supreme Court is hearing arguments to consider increasing sentences beyond the six year maximum.

    Iceland had one of the world’s most thriving economies before the 2008 financial collapse, but it was also among the countries that were severely affected by the downturn. Instead of rewarding sham banking procedures with bailout money, the country took a different path. Banks were let to fail and social programs were kept intact. Most importantly, Iceland sent fraudulent bankers to jail.

    When the country’s leading banks collapsed, defaults totalled US$114 billion. The parliament passed emergency legislation in October 2008 to take over the major banks’ domestic operations and refused to take over foreign assets or obligations.

    According to the International Monetary Fund, “Iceland has rebounded after the 2008/9 crisis and will soon surpass pre-crisis output levels with strong performance in tourism and fisheries. Debt ratios are on a downward path and balance sheets have broadly been restored. The financial sector is back on track though with some important items remaining on the docket.”

    http://www.australiannationalreview.com/iceland-sentences-26-top-bankers-prison/
    • joe90 16.1

      9 February 2016 at 1:22 pm

      The Pirate Party’s Birgitta Jonsdottir could be the next prime minister too.

      She has never been mild, but her solitude radicalizes her. “I want to be the mosquito in the tent,” she says, “so they cannot get any sleep.” Stubbornly, Birgitta follows the Pirate Party guidelines: horizontal leadership, power rotation, liquid democracy. She votes in Parliament according to the majority will collected on the Píratar web platform. Birgitta is a captain with no title or privileges. Yet she leads.

      With only three parliamentarians, Pirates have surged into first place for the next legislative elections. (With 38 percent of voter intention, they are ahead of both traditional parties combined.) “People are really fed up,” she comments. Birgitta could become prime minister. She rolls her big eyes and says, “That is my worst nightmare.”

      https://backchannel.com/lisbeth-salander-s-real-life-twin-may-be-iceland-s-next-prime-minister-be314284fca4#.tm6i9jym8
17. ianmac 17

    9 February 2016 at 2:34 pm

    In the House Key gave his “Prime Ministers Statement.”
    Andrew giving his reply. Succinct. Full of future intent.
    The Greens are pleased that Aucklanders didn’t have to pay $4,000 for the PM’s speech.
    http://www.parliament.nz/en-nz/about-parliament/see-hear/ptv
    • cogito 17.1

      9 February 2016 at 4:30 pm

      Good speeches by Andrew Little and James Shaw…. and also by Winston (but I didn’t hear all of it).

      Key was arrogant, conceited and odious.
      • mickysavage 17.1.1

        9 February 2016 at 9:24 pm

        Yep Key’s speech was nothing but an attack on Labour. FFS he is the PM and has been there for nearly 8 years. Clearly there is no plan …
18. Morrissey 18

    9 February 2016 at 5:01 pm

    Another dreadful Panel today. Even the presence of the thoughtful
    Finlay Macdonald cannot compensate for Ella Henry and Jim Mora.
    The Panel, RNZ National, Tuesday 9 February 2016
    Jim Mora, Ella Henry, Flnlay Macdonald, Zara Potts

    Incredibly, this show is still declining in quality. Here are the “highlights”….

    JIM MORA: It’s eleven minutes to four, and Zara Potts with What the Woooorld’s Talking About.

    ZARA POTTS: First up is the very strong reaction to the performance by Beyoncé in the Super Bowl half-time show. By the way, the Super Bowl is getting very big in New Zealand, strangely.

    MORA: Yeah it is.

    ZARA POTTS: Former New York City mayor Rudolph Giuliani is angry at the way she referenced the Black Lives Matter movement during her performance, which featured dancers dressed in black berets, like the Black Panthers, and the dancers formed an “X” shape on the field.

    JESSE MULLIGAN: I must say, I didn’t even pick up on those references.

    MORA: Me neither.

    ZARA POTTS: He says it was an “outrageous attack on police officers.”

    ELLA HENRY: At least she didn’t sing “I Shot the Sheriff.”

    ALL: Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!

    ZARA POTTS: It was certainly the most political Super Bowl performance ever.

    ………………….

    ZARA POTTS: There’s new research out on why we sigh. So why do we sigh? To stretch our lungs, apparently. It’s a mini workout. We yawn to stretch the alveoli in our lungs. Twelve times an hour we do it.

    MORA: REALLY? I don’t think I sigh twelve times an hour. [1]

    ………………….

    ELLA HENRY: I go to Game of Thrones dinner parties.

    JIM MORA: Do you?

    ELLA HENRY: Yeeeeeesss…. [2]

    ………………………………

    Later, after the 4:30 news, during the Soapbox segment….

    ELLA HENRY: There seems to be an increase in the ferocity of mosquitos in the north.

    JIM MORA: So the mosquitos are more numerous and ferocious in the north. And you’re bearing the scars.

    ad absurdum…..

    [1] http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-11082011/#comment-363107
    http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-21102013/#comment-714288

    [2] http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-04062013/#comment-643309
    • Chooky 18.1

      9 February 2016 at 5:18 pm

      Morrissey you are back!….Good!
      • Paul 18.1.1

        9 February 2016 at 6:51 pm

        Welcome back!
        Really enjoy your humorous takes on the dire Panel.
19. fender 19

    9 February 2016 at 5:48 pm

    Gareth Morgan should just donate some money or STFU.

    Just heard him tell RNZ he’ll stump up with the difference so long as he can “use it for 10 or 15 years or whatever”.

    And here he says “…once my family has finished enjoying it”.

    Too many rich pricks think they can take over anything and everything don’t they.

    It’s this if you’re wondering what I’m on about.
    • b waghorn 19.1

      9 February 2016 at 8:30 pm

      Absolutely the clowns got more money than god but he wants givalittle punters to subsidize his beach get away. What a dick
    • Whispering Kate 19.2

      9 February 2016 at 8:50 pm

      John Campbell tonight looked like he wasn’t amused with the open ended “when my family doesn’t want to use it anymore” – what a bribe that was – let the Give A Little page do its thing and hope the Government will stump up with the rest – but I wouldn’t hold my breath.
    • Hami Shearlie 19.3

      9 February 2016 at 10:49 pm

      I think Morgan may just have cancelled out any goodwill he has gained from donating money to causes here in the past. It’s always HIS way, we must do what HE says is the right thing – Really? He’s only got money now because he’s Sam Morgan’s father – no other reason – he’s no better and no smarter than any other man in the street! He’s aquired an ego that is rather larger than the average man’s though! How generous to donate the land AFTER he and his family have enjoyed it for a rather long time, using it while the erosion is minimal, then donating it when it has almost disappeared! And I bet he wouldn’t be able to see what is wrong with this picture – he has lost touch with how ordinary kiwis think! Vast amounts of money can do that to a person!
20. Boringoldfart 20

    9 February 2016 at 8:27 pm

    Assange? Hmmmmm.

    https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/02/why-the-assange-allegation-is-a-stitch-up
    • marty mars 20.1

      9 February 2016 at 8:35 pm

      quite a funny name you picked there Borin
21. Paul 21

    9 February 2016 at 8:32 pm

    ‘Panic situation’: Asian stocks tumble amid fears of new global recession

    http://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/feb/09/panic-situation-as-asian-stocks-tumble-amid-fears-of-new-global-recession

    Keep Calm and Carry On
    http://thestandard.org.nz/keep-calm-and-carry-on/
    • Paul 21.1

      9 February 2016 at 8:33 pm

      The crash is on its way.

      http://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2016/feb/09/market-turmoil-nikkei-plunges-european-stocks-germany-ftse-live

      Deutsche Bank is shaking to its foundations – is a new banking crisis around the corner?
      http://secularinvestor.com/deutsche-bank-shaking-foundations-new-banking-crisis-around-corner/13242/

      Lending to emerging markets comes to a halt
      http://www.cnbc.com/2016/02/07/lending-to-emerging-markets-comes-to-a-halt.html

      What the Heck is Going On in the Stock Market?
      http://wolfstreet.com/2016/02/07/what-the-heck-is-going-on-with-stocks/

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS