Open mike 11/04/2025

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, April 11th, 2025 - 33 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 …

33 comments on “Open mike 11/04/2025 ”

  1. PsyclingLeft.Always 1

    Things are pretty bad under NAct1…but there are always beacons..

    Quarrying company J Swap denied Supreme Court appeal to mine on QEII covenant land

    I have followed this (and of course many others) these particular creeps bought the land knowing

    The company bought the property with the covenant in place on the high value conservation land. Once a QEII covenant is approved, land cannot be developed, even if ownership changes.

    Of course they gambled that slime Shane Jones and his fast track would destroy any covenants.

    Super Supreme court..to the rescue !

    The company lost a High Court case as well as an appeal of that decision. It then applied to the Supreme Court seeking leave to appeal the Court of Appeal court's decision. A judgment released 8 April dismissed J Swap's application and awarded $2500 in costs to the QEII Trust.

    The J Swap creeps maybe gonna try again ? The Fight will go on…

    The 42 hectares is the most challenged covenant the trust administers.

    J Swap had brought four cases against the trust, and been unsuccessful each time. It also tried to get special legislation written to gain access to quarry the land through a Treaty of Waitangi land swap deal. A bid to be included in the Fast-track Approvals Act was also unsuccessful.

    Coup was not convinced the latest Supreme Court dismissal will end the company's efforts to quarry the protected land.

    "They can still ask again to have the covenant removed, that may be their next move. Or there might be some legal pathway that we haven't thought of or imagined yet. I guess we are prepared for this not to be the end."

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/in-depth/557758/quarrying-company-j-swap-denied-supreme-court-appeal-to-mine-on-qeii-covenant-land

    Years ago, I found out what a Stand Up Guy is. Bro in the following link meets that and more…Respect ! Reading the story you can feel the depth of what it means to him and us . If you have any sense of Value that is…

    Rocky road: The rock in the hill a quarry really, really wants to get out

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/in-depth/528717/rocky-road-the-rock-in-the-hill-a-quarry-really-really-wants-to-get-out

  2. Bearded Git 2

    Thanks psych….QE2 covenants should be sacrosanct.

    Cheered me up at breakfast.

    • weka 3.1

      what's wrong with it?

      • joe90 3.1.1

        They want to stop ideas.

        • weka 3.1.1.1

          illegal ones. I mean it's stupid ad, and particularly concerning in the current US climate. But NZ banned the Chch shooter's manifesto in part because he was trying to influence people's ideas on the mass murder of Muslims.

          • joe90 3.1.1.1.1

            illegal ones.

            Really? And which ideas do you think should be banned?

            • weka 3.1.1.1.1.1

              I just gave you an example joe.

              • weka

                I mean, there are some ideas that are a serious threat to society (eg the manifesto). The problem the US has is that it's heading towards authoritarianism and is already using people's ideas against them. The left's problem is that it thinks no ideas should be suppressed, except when it does, and those are the ones it doesn't like. We're all in deep shit here.

              • joe90

                His manifesto wasn't an idea, it was propaganda for bad ideas.

                His propaganda was banned. A quick squiz at any of the numerous local anti-Islam SM accounts will show his bad ideas to be alive and well in NZ.

                • weka

                  they said ideas in the ad. "propaganda for bad ideas" wouldn't fit in the meme. Plus it's not understandable without context.

                  A quick squiz at any of the numerous local anti-Islam SM accounts will show his bad ideas to be alive and well in NZ.

                  Are you suggesting they didn't need to ban it?

                  • joe90

                    Are you suggesting they didn't need to ban it?

                    I'm suggesting that you can't ban ideas and that even if you could, which ideas should be banned?

                    • AB

                      You can't ban ideas – they are in people's heads. You could ban the transmission of ideas through writing or speech, but everyone acknowledges that this can be a dangerous slippery slope. You can, and probably should, ban explicit or even implicit calls to action which are based in ideas and which would be materially harmful to other people in a way that infringes some standard of human rights (e.g. not feeling insulted might not be deemed to be a human right, but the right to life usually is.)

                    • weka []

                      case in the UK of a woman who tweeted during community riots over immigration after a man stabbed children in a dance class and was mistakenly identified as an immigrant. She tweeted that the rioters should set the apartment block with the immigrants in it on fire. She was sent to prison for that for 2.5 years. Afaik it was a single tweet, but she had 10,000 followers and her husband was a local councillor. The tweet had 300,000 views.

                      The judge was of the view that it was incitement to violence. But what if she had just rage tweeted in the moment and didn’t really intend for people set immigrants on fire? Is it the intention or the idea that is the problem?

                      I tend to put it in the fuck around and find out category (people need to take social media use seriously). But the question of where the line is on what ideas to control lies with the state.

                      https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/uk-news/mum-who-tweeted-set-fire-31364618

                      https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cp3wkzgpjxvo

                    • weka []

                      otoh, people in the UK have been arrested and/or questioned under non-crime hate procedures for tweeting rudely or offensively about transgenderism or trans people. This is almost certainly the result of police capture by lobbyists. It seems to have lessened now, after the previous Tory Justice (?) minister got involved. But I’m willing to bet lots of the liberals objecting to the stupid (and possibly dangerous) ICE ad wouldn’t speak up for the people in the UK who were arrested or interviewed.

                    • weka []

                      Harry Miller took the police to court over non-crime “hate incidents”. His tweets were ruled lawful, and the judge went on to say,

                      Announcing the court’s decision, Mr Justice Julian Knowles said: “The claimant’s tweets were lawful and that there was not the slightest risk that he would commit a criminal offence by continuing to tweet.

                      “I find the combination of the police visiting the claimant’s place of work, and their subsequent statements in relation to the possibility of prosecution were a disproportionate interference with the claimant’s right to freedom of expression because of their potential chilling effect.”

                      The judge added that the effect of the police turning up at Mr Miller’s place of work “because of his political opinions must not be underestimated”.

                      He continued: “To do so would be to undervalue a cardinal democratic freedom. In this country, we have never had a Cheka, a Gestapo or a Stasi. We have never lived in an Orwellian society.”

                      https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/transgender-hate-crimes-harry-miller-court/

                    • weka

                      I'm suggesting that you can't ban ideas and that even if you could, which ideas should be banned?

                      that doesn't answer my question. I think the manifesto was rightly banned. One of the ways to stop fascism is to prevent the normalising of abhorrent ideas eg kill muslims. So even though there are people in NZ who still believe that and want it acted upon, they are having to talk in private/secrecy rather than in the town square where they can radicalise people.

                      Completely agree about how to know which ideas to ban. For instance, I think KJK should have been allowed to run a LWS event in Auckland, so that NZ women could speak their ideas. Then the ideas themselves could be understood, analysed, critiqued, and addressed. Instead, the MSM and liberals said it was akin to Nazism and the mob stopped it. I'm not sure how that is an improvement on ICE.

                  • Macro

                    Meanwhile – here is a kiwi author who isn't going to the US because of …

                    Ideas

                    https://www.rnz.co.nz/life/books/why-bestselling-korean-nz-author-graci-kim-had-to-cancel-us-tour

                    • weka

                      Yep. Although I would say she’s not going because it’s not safe under the current descent into authoritarianism. Honestly, I think anyone travelling to the US is taking a risk unless they are very wealthy and/or connected (I don’t think they,administration is ready yet to go after high profile people or those with big wealth for lawyers).

                      I feel for those librarians and teachers. Incredibly difficult situation to be in. It’s not going to get better if people don’t act

          • Incognito 3.1.1.1.2

            I think there are two possible interpretations regarding ‘ideas’.

            The first one is that they want to stop the influx of morally objectionable ‘ideas’, i.e., opinions & views that the High Priests of the Supreme Upper Cult of Trump object to.

            The second one is that they want to stop the efflux of useable ‘ideas’, i.e., knowledge that might have strategic value, e.g., commercial (IP), military, et cetera. NB ideas per se cannot be patented!

            What they mean exactly by ‘ideas’ and ‘illegally’ is unclear, of course – the aim is to paralyse and instil fear of punishment.

            The whole thing is textbook fascism.

            • weka 3.1.1.1.2.1

              third option. It was a brain fart from someone who didn't think it through or was overly stressed (hence the removal). I'm curious to know if ICE pre-2017 inauguration, had the duty to stop 'illegal ideas', or it was the purview of another department. eg the Chch shooter manifesto.

              • Incognito

                An ignorant fascist is still [a] fascist – rarely do they operate on their own in a vacuum and I think these ‘slips’ are an indication of the culture they operate in.

                The shooter’s manifesto is unambiguous because it’s officially banned (censored).

                I can’t answer your questions re. the US.

                • weka

                  There's no way to know what the intent of that ad was. But we can use it to look at the problems around censoring ideas, and concepts of freedom of expression.

                  Is the problem with the ad relying on the current state of the US? Or is it a problem in principle (as joe seems to be arguing)?

                • weka

                  The shooter’s manifesto is unambiguous because it’s officially banned (censored).

                  I would really hope that NZ border control would have, for example, at any time acted on the importation of hard copies of the manifesto (pre or post massacre), without waiting for a court decision.

            • AB 3.1.1.1.2.2

              Yep. Most likely ideas – or more accurately, any form of expression of ideas- that the Trumpists don't like. For example the idea of an Israeli withdrawal to its pre-1967 borders. This allows you to deport people on student visas on campuses in pro-Palestinian protests, which they have already done.

              It's always the expression of the ideas which is illegal, not the ideas themselves. Because there is no way of knowing what ideas a person has in their head. Though you can use techniques like interrogation, torture and psychometric tests to get people to unwillingly or unwittingly express the ideas you are hoping to persecute them for.

              • Incognito

                Because there is no way of knowing what ideas a person has in their head.

                True, but there are (more subtle) ways to fail people based on good or bad (or desirable and less desirable) character, e.g., previous convictions, memberships, ‘friends’ they associate with, patches & flags (and other symbolism), et cetera.

                Where exactly one places the slider is a mark of character in its own and this doesn’t necessarily represent the character of the people (if we’re referring to a nation).

              • Macro

                Don't think about trying to enter the US these days if you have ever posted anything contrary to MAGA "doctrine".

                https://www.theguardian.com/music/2025/apr/02/neil-young-fears-us-ban-donald-trump-criticism

  3. Patricia Bremner 4

    I thought Seymour was a trifle odd….. but in his speech to the House, "the Treaty is a binary cult'?

    Good grief.!!

    Where does he get this rubbish? He is unsuitable to be Deputy Prime Minister.!!imo.

    • tc 4.1

      Comprehensively not suited for the Deputy PM role as he has already demonstrated.

      That's on national who were so desperate to gain power they agreed to an 8% party having such power knowing what a dangerous idiot he is with zero respect for due process or the existing laws.

      Reap what you sow hollowmen.

    • weka 4.2

      it's a dog whistle to the hate the left mob, esp online. Calling something a cult is shorthand for saying they're deluded and dangerous. It's used a lot online, on the FR, and by the left. Sometimes they're right, but without looking at the speech this sounds like more racist rhetoric from him. All those pro-treaty Pākehā being sucked in by radical Māori or sometime. Of course he could just be massively triggered by losing so badly 😆

      There is another theory though. It's that this Bill was simply prep for the 2026 election, the more he can build a racist resentment in NZ, the better ACT will do on election day.

  4. joe90 5

    Wonder if Trump, Noem, Bondi and co will defy the court?

    CNN —

    The Supreme Court on Thursday required President Donald Trump’s administration to “facilitate” the return of a Maryland man mistakenly deported to El Salvador but stopped short of requiring the government to return him to the United States.

    The high court said that the administration must try to return Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran national who was deported on March 15. It said part of the lower court’s order requiring the government to “effectuate” his return was unclear and needed further review.

    https://edition.cnn.com/2025/04/10/politics/supreme-court-abrego-garcia/index.html

Leave a Comment