Open mike 11/01/2016

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, January 11th, 2016 - 130 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

openmikeOpen 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 …

130 comments on “Open mike 11/01/2016 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. savenz 1
    11 January 2016 at 7:05 am

    http://www.salon.com/2016/01/09/oil_money_politics_and_evil_our_leading_middle_east_ally_is_the_worst_country_imaginable/

    “Oil, money, politics and evil: Our leading Middle East ally is the worst country imaginable
    America’s BFF relationship with the corrupt, vicious and oil-rich Saudi despots might be our worst mistake of all”

    “Trump was asked on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” this week how he would play the worsening standoff between Iran and Saudi Arabia. “I would back Saudi Arabia, but you know what? We’re a debtor nation. They’ve got nothing but money,” the Donald told Mika Brzezinski and her co-host, noted Saudi shill Joe Scarborough. “I wouldn’t back them for nothing. I would say: You’ve got to pay. We’re going to help you. You gotta pay. You gotta pay.”

  2. savenz 2
    11 January 2016 at 7:15 am

    USA waking up to how Charter schools are destroying their kids education…. pity the memo never got sent to our government, but I guess we are ‘an emerging market’ for the frauds, including privatising the school land and having the tax payer pay for it twice while transferring public land into private hands…

    http://www.salon.com/2016/01/09/were_onto_the_phony_education_reformers_charter_school_charlatans_and_faux_reformers_take_it_on_the_chin/

    • mpledger 2.1
      11 January 2016 at 9:04 am

      The article is a great read all around but one key paragraph that sets up my (second) largest objection to charter schools is this…
      “More recently, Florida press outlets reported the state has given about $70 million to charter schools that later closed and returned virtually none of the money to taxpayers. While the state is able to recover computers and other equipment these schools purchased with taxpayer money, the far more substantial costs for purchasing and improving property and making lease payments stays in private pockets after the schools close.”
      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

      This was well known problem way before charter schools opened in NZ and yet the exact same thing happened here with that school up north – the Dept of Ed is finding it impossible to get the money back that the school spent on farm land.

      My largest objection is that these schools close willy-nilly leaving kids in the lurch, often during the school year. Then, because of the effect it was having on kids to close schools underneath them the powers that be stop looking for signs that charter schools are performing badly.

      • savenz 2.1.1
        11 January 2016 at 9:35 am

        +1 mpledger

      • Smilin 2.1.2
        11 January 2016 at 3:08 pm

        Yeah well only the blind and stupid cant see or know what a cash cow looks like
        Sadly education isn’t what it used to be thanks to the odious faculty of economics what a crock of shit

    • repateet 2.2
      11 January 2016 at 12:20 pm

      The blogging world will be going crazy as the charter school PR machine via David Farrar and Whale Oil are into this story boots and all.

      Then again, maybe not. Some kid somewhere will walk out of a charter school with a smile on her face happy the school day is over and the ideologues will be scrambling over themselves for the best headline – “Astonishing achievement at school,” “Charter school scores sensationally” or whatever.

      David Farrar and Mrs Whale Oil will be too busy fervently reporting on that to worry about reality.

    • fisiani 2.3
      11 January 2016 at 7:22 pm

      What has that article to do with the excellent partnership schools in NZ?

  3. Sabine 3
    11 January 2016 at 8:47 am

    an interesting post from Digby about TransCanada suing the United States under NAFTA for $15 billion and why for 15$ billion and not 3$ billion

    http://digbysblog.blogspot.co.nz/2016/01/oh-but-poor-people-by-bloggersrus.html

    I especially like this part 🙂 – Luckily as we are assured by our Resident National Government supporters this can;t happen here cause it ain’t Nafta we are signing, its the TPPA that the National Government will sign on our ‘behalf’.

    Quote: AMYGOODMAN: Lori, can you explain why they’re asking $15 billion?

    LORI WALLACH:: So, this is a question a lot of folks asked me yesterday: “Well, wait a minute, this is supposed to”—everyone who’s read the newspaper. “This is a $3 billion pipeline. How the heck can they be asking for $15 billion from us taxpayers?” And the answer is, under the outrageous investor-state system, not only can a foreign corporation get all these special rights—go around our courts, go around our laws and demand compensation—but they don’t just get money for what they’ve spent on a project, they get to get compensated for expected future profits. Yep, they are calculating—and the brief goes through this—what they think they would have made in the future for the lifetime of the pipeline had it been allowed. And that’s what we taxpayers are supposed to give them, because we had a democratic decision of our government that their commercial project wasn’t in the national interest. That’s the $15 billion. Quote End.

    But then the question is, could this happen to us? Veolia (which is working in NZ) has started procedings against the Egypt Government last year when the Eqypt Government dared to raise the minimum wage.
    http://aftinet.org.au/cms/veolia-vs-egypt-workers-2014
    Quote: “The company is using the ISDS provisions in an investment treaty between France and Egypt.

    The case is still in progress, but is yet another example of the dangers of including investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) in trade agreements such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP)”. Quote End

    I am sure we will again be told that this can;t be happen here, cause we are special, and oh look over there an All Black and a flag and a US Preznit n stuff.

    and last a good read as to why a special court for foreign investors may have no place in trade agreements. I am sure our resident National Government Supporters have wisdom to share as to why foreign investors should be able to sue our Government be they National led or otherwise.
    http://touchstoneblog.org.uk/2013/11/special-courts-for-foreign-investors-have-no-place-in-trade-deals/
    and then this https://www.iisd.org/itn/2015/02/17/political-change-vs-legal-stability-problems-arising-from-the-application-of-investment-treaties-in-transitions-from-authoritarian-rule/

    and this is also a nice read for those that read 🙂 https://www.iisd.org/itn/2015/02/17/political-change-vs-legal-stability-problems-arising-from-the-application-of-investment-treaties-in-transitions-from-authoritarian-rule/

    other then that, its a lovely day so enjoy it 🙂

  4. Penny Bright 4
    11 January 2016 at 8:59 am

    Seen this?

    How effectively ‘censored’ has been THIS speech by US Presidential hopeful Sen. Bernie Saunders?

    http://www.nationofchange.org/news/2016/01/08/the-most-important-campaign-speech-bernie-on-the-banks/

    “Within the first 100 days of my administration, I will require the secretary of the Treasury Department to establish a ‘Too-Big-to Fail’ list of commercial banks, shadow banks and insurance companies whose failure would pose a catastrophic risk to the United States economy without a taxpayer bailout,” says Sanders.

    “Within one year, my administration will break these institutions up so that they no longer pose a grave threat to the economy as authorized under Section 121 of the Dodd-Frank Act.”

    “Greed is not good,” proclaimed Sanders, riffing on Gordon Gekko’s famous pronouncement in the movie “Wall Street,” just miles from that financial center.

    “In fact, the greed of Wall Street and corporate America is destroying the fabric of our nation. And here is a New Year’s Resolution that I will keep if elected president. If you do not end your greed, we will end it for you.”

    The bold speech addressed a topic that should be the main focus of debate, particularly during the race for the presidency.

    The 2008 financial crash caused a recession which is wiping out $6 to $36 trillion from America’s economy.

    Yet the talk received scant media coverage. It’s hard to attribute this to recent high-visibility events. Bernie is routinely blacked out of the media.

    Yet since colleges, Congress, liberal think tanks, the mainstream media, and both parties embrace financial donors, even while failing to investigate causes of the crash or working to prevent the next one, his message is all the more potent.

    …..”

    Penny Bright
    2016 Auckland Mayoral candidate.

  5. Wairua 5
    11 January 2016 at 9:31 am

    John Key is using his acquaintance with Obama to endnote his term in office with a view to a global role.

    Geopolitically, it makes some sense. We are in the Asia-Pacific and during WWII US Marines camped around Wellington and the Kapiti Coast after Pearl Harbour to defend against potential invasion because the NZ army was in the Middle East and Japanese intentions were unknown.

    We are still in the Pacific and our cognitive structures are still largely in the northern hemisphere. But this is not WWII, and Obama has competing priorities,

    As a Hawai’ian he probably has some interest in Aotearoa, but as US president his horizons are broader- Key has more to gain from a visit by his golfing buddie than does Obama. It is a long way to go .. for what ? I can’t see it. This is more about Obama playing Key than the other way around.

    As a school kid I stood on the street as LBJ walked past to lay a wreath at the Cenotaph. He had been one of the marines camped around Wellington during WWII and flew in after a trip to Vietnam. Obama does not have that motivation.

    Stranger things have happened. It would be interesting to see a powerful Black American confront Maoritanga in a challenge during a welcoming ceremony. TV networks would love it – but how many people watch TV these days ?

    John Key would inevitably make something of it – possibly call a snap election. Can you see the eyes light up among the ‘National’ party ?

  6. joe90 6
    11 January 2016 at 12:01 pm

    German has a made up word that suits – scheinselbständigkeit.

    Apploitation in a city of instaserfs

    How the “sharing economy” has turned San Francisco into a dystopia for the working class

    […]

    Oh, Canada! I’m writing you from Berkeley, California to warn you about this thing called “the sharing economy.” Since no one is really sharing anything, many of us prefer the term “the exploitation economy,” but due to its prevalence many in the Bay Area simply think of it as “the economy.” Whatever you want to call it, the basic idea is that customers can outsource all the work or chores they don’t want to do to somebody else in their area.

    You can be chauffeured around the city while somebody picks up and launders your dirty underwear. You can have groceries delivered to your door and your bathroom given that deep clean that you don’t have time to do yourself. The best part is you can do it all on your phone! Sharing economy companies promise their customers all the luxuries of the rich and famous—and they can do that by taking advantage of the system and, in some cases, bending or simply avoiding labour laws.

    https://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/monitor/apploitation-city-instaserfs

    previously on TS – the sharing economy

    • ropata 6.1
      11 January 2016 at 2:15 pm

      Apps that facilitate unlawful behaviour – breaking labour laws, untaxed cash jobs, unqualified taxi services – should simply be outlawed.

      But “we would like to see wages drop” says the moneyed elite.
      Now SFO is completely unaffordable for everyone else.

  7. greywarshark 7
    11 January 2016 at 12:03 pm

    A thought for the future. It could be that comments could be limited to 6 in the morning and 6 in afternoon/evening. There would be a counter – it would limit the promiscuous wasps that feed on the honey dew here (poetic and green as well!) and their mad desire to swamp the blog with their futile, malign comments. More than a dozen a day and they could keep good commenters away, and they bring a pall of bitchines and nonsense with them. It would limit the exponential growth of the site that doesn’t need numbers as it has proved itself as valued and a great success.
    edited

    • b waghorn 7.1
      11 January 2016 at 12:16 pm

      To troll or not to troll that is the question.
      One mans troll is another mans soothsayer.
      How do you choose who goes on this restricted counter,as the standard is at its best when the truly clever ones here get going.??

      • greywarshark 7.1.1
        11 January 2016 at 2:15 pm

        Well this way the individual would be working to put out their best points. It wouldn’t do to waste too many of the six for a half day on trading insults with trolls.

        The trolls could do what they always do and then they would be cut off after the sixth, They might manage to restrain themselves as well. The whole tone of the blog would rise a notch, and no-one would be stopped, though some might save some points and put them into one longer one. Now and then there is a really meaty thread. I don’t know about that. It could be that someone might appeal to the moderator of the day to start a post so that they could go off Open Mike and argue on another thread which would be under moderation.

    • alwyn 7.2
      11 January 2016 at 12:37 pm

      It would probably make people think a little bit more before putting in a comment, but would it apply universally?
      For example a commenter whose pseudonym happens to start with “grey” had 11 yesterday afternoon, following on from 5 in the morning. Would they be chopped of in their prime? The later ones were the most interesting.

      The only real problem I can see would be if someone’s comment drew a lot of reactions, or questions. It would prevent replies and rejoinder’s being possible in a timely manner. After 6 you would have to come back tomorrow.

      On the other hand there are commenters whose only contribution seems to be expressions such as “lies” or “you are a liar” who wouldn’t be missed.

    • weka 7.3
      11 January 2016 at 4:23 pm

      Humourous idea grey. I can’t imagine it ever being implemented, but it would be a very interesting experiment.

      Something we could do though, is to get a handful or two of us together who commit to not engaging in the macho/bitchy shit, and not feeding the trolls, and instead talk to each other with a focus on good communication, respect and constructive politics.

      Lately I’ve been feeling like the place is just a bitchfest between regulars, and I get sucked into that too easily. But I suspect the readership reflects something quite different (would love to see the stats on the Helen Kelly’s post from the other day).

      • greywarshark 7.3.1
        11 January 2016 at 4:39 pm

        weka
        Good ideas. I already give little attention to trolls and even the regulars I pick and choose who I read. There are some who never fail to write something that adds to my internal library, and some are humorous too. I do weaken sometimes and make disparaging remarks. Utterly futile of course. They have no shame, or objectivity. But I don’t see my idea as humorous, rather it would be practical. I have heard that some blogs do have a limit on individual comments.

        • lprent 7.3.1.1
          11 January 2016 at 5:55 pm

          I have heard that some blogs do have a limit on individual comments.

          I keep thinking about doing a rationing system. However I think that the current way that we limit meaningless waffling is so much more effective, and usually a pleasure to do as well.

      • lprent 7.3.2
        11 January 2016 at 6:27 pm

        But I suspect the readership reflects something quite different (would love to see the stats on the Helen Kelly’s post from the other day).

        I hope you like numbers…

        Quite different audiences to the comments. It is pretty easy to read, especially in a low month like over xmas (makes for an abnormal pattern, but one that highlights what happens).

        Click for a large display

        Compare the percentages / times against the averages at the top and against each other. You’ll notice the topics in the top ten have a particular type of focus.

        The main things to note are:

        * Unique page views are “Unique Pageviews is the number of sessions during which the specified page was viewed at least once. A unique pageview is counted for each page URL + page Title combination.”
        * Page views vs Unique Page views – which gives you an idea of how much thrashing there is by the same people on a page – mostly thrashing is caused by commenters.
        * Avg Time – are people actually reading the comments? Again, commenters tend to raise that
        * Entrances/exits direct to the page is a pretty good indicator about social media effects. High entrances/exits indicates a strong social media content, low commenters

        It is pretty easy to see the pages that the commenters are dominant on, and which pages have social media reading them.

        But it becomes clearer when I split into new vs returning

  8. seeker 8
    11 January 2016 at 12:07 pm

    @fisiani11.41am comment 5.1

    Honest John Fisiani????? Watch this 2013 3 min link and tell me you can still call key honest:

    PM John Key grilled on Fletcher’s GCSB appointment.
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/national/news/video.cfm?c_id=1503075&gal_cid=1503075&gallery_id=131968

    (I thought I had pushed the reply button to fisiani’s comment, but was so concentrating on posting a link for the first time on
    this irritating little machine that I realised I was way of course and could not get back.)

    • Puckish Rogue 8.1
      11 January 2016 at 12:19 pm

      I agree, he’ll only stay on until the 2017 election but unfortunately for the left in NZ he’ll stay on until the 2017 election 🙂

      • Paul 8.1.1
        11 January 2016 at 12:33 pm

        We have a choice.
        We can allow these rwnj trolls to derail these threads or we can ignore them.

        • seeker 8.1.1.1
          11 January 2016 at 12:45 pm

          Paul this is the first time I have been able to offer this link showing key lying to fisiani, and I really want fisiani to watch it and hopefully tell me what she/he thinks. So please don’t derail this thread and look at the clip yourself if poss.

        • Puckish Rogue 8.1.1.2
          11 January 2016 at 1:01 pm

          Reading the comments on this particular thread Paul you are the troll

          • seeker 8.1.1.2.1
            11 January 2016 at 1:16 pm

            First time I tend to agree with you Puckish Rogue @1.01pm. And I still haven’t heard fisiani’s response to the link I posted @ commemt 8. Perhaps you and alwyn could view the link and tell me if it backs up fisiani’s ‘honest john’ claim.

            I have given up on Paul on this thread, as I am sure he has missed the point.

            • Puckish Rogue 8.1.1.2.1.1
              11 January 2016 at 1:28 pm

              Ok so here goes.

              I think all politicians lie or they “misspeak” whatever you want to call it so in comparison to you or I yes John Key is a liar

              But that’s not comparing apples with apples so the question needs to be is how honest John Key is in comparison to the other leaders of NZ

              • Draco T Bastard …
                11 January 2016 at 2:31 pm

                Ah, but should politicians be allowed to lie or should they be held accountable and jailed when they do?

                And John Key isn’t ‘misspeaking’ but is outright lying as you well know.

                • Puckish Rogue …
                  11 January 2016 at 2:37 pm

                  Its trite but every three years we get to hold them to account, maybe not as well as some would like, and judge them for their sins (perceived and real)

                  • Draco T Bastard …
                    11 January 2016 at 6:53 pm

                    Its trite but every three years we get to hold them to account

                    No we don’t. We have a limited ability to not vote for them. I’d rather have a law that say, unequivocally, that an MP lying results in them going to jail. Same with fraud, rorting (Blinglish’s actions with his house), and corruption.

                    John Key should have been in jail before 2008 because of his actions regarding his Transrail shares.

                    • McFlock …
                      11 January 2016 at 7:19 pm

                      lol, I’d forgotten about hm “forgetting” about his tranzrail shares.

                      Then there’s his “blind” trust and the bottles of wine…

                    • Sacha …
                      11 January 2016 at 7:36 pm

                      “that an MP lying results in them going to jail”

                      Would be amazing, but given who makes our laws it seems vanishingly unlikely to ever happen. We need to somehow make character a strong part of how people decide on who represents us.

              • seeker …
                12 January 2016 at 10:35 am

                @PuckishR@1.28pm
                Thanks for having ‘a go’ . But of ‘all politicians” key is the worst or is it the best? But then who would want to be the best at lying, unless they couldn’t care a less, and I’m afraid john key is exactly this type of person ,as I tried to show in that clip.
                I tend to aim for the politicians who I think have the greatest integrity and substance when I vote regardless of which party. All National mps (and I have thought about them and observed them often in parliament) are sadly lacking in truth and most appear to be disingenuous poseurs and are all too often try to emulate their mendacious leader, in my opinion.

      • b waghorn 8.1.2
        11 January 2016 at 12:44 pm

        They let you out?
        I’d settle for key here till 2017 then a left government. It would be better than one of collins or bennet getting a stint in charge.

        • Puckish Rogue 8.1.2.1
          11 January 2016 at 12:57 pm

          Time off for good behaviour, I think Key will retire 4 elections not out and not bother going for a fifth

          I’m at a loss to think who’ll take over, I thought it might have been Collins but now I’m leaning towards Bennet

          • fisiani 8.1.2.1.1
            11 January 2016 at 1:19 pm

            I’ll give you an inside tip. The next leader and PM in 2026 will be Chris Bishop, the MP who has made Trevor Mallard a lame duck in the Hutt.

            • Puckish Rogue 8.1.2.1.1.1
              11 January 2016 at 1:31 pm

              Well that’s a big call, we’ll see how that plays out but he better win an electorate seat at some point because if you can’t convince an electorate to vote for you how can you expect a country?

              • Ad …
                11 January 2016 at 3:27 pm

                Bit of an own goal there.
                * Most of Labour
                * All of Greens
                * Most of NZFirst

                • alwyn …
                  11 January 2016 at 3:44 pm

                  I presume, given what you are saying about the three parties, you are talking about the percentage of the party MPs who are on the list.
                  In fact you should select out National, rather than Labour as being unable to win electorate seats.
                  15.6% of the Labour MPs are from the list.
                  A much higher 32.2% of the National ones are.

                • Puckish Rogue …
                  11 January 2016 at 3:50 pm

                  How is that an own goal?

                  On second reading I may not have written it as well as I could have, what I meant to say was if you want to lead the country and convince the country to vote for you then you should be able to win an electorate seat, by all means take a list seat later but wait until you’ve won a seat first

                  So the Greens aren’t capable of the running the country and Andrew Little won’t lead Labour to victory in 2017

                  • b waghorn …
                    11 January 2016 at 6:13 pm

                    I actually think the pm shouldn’t have or relinquish their seat on winning power. I can’t imagine a pm having much time for electorate issues.

      • Jones 8.1.3
        11 January 2016 at 1:47 pm

        I think the state of the global economy this year and how it impacts on NZ (and it will), will be the determiner of what John Key does. He’s a fair-weather politician and if the global economy plays out like I suspect it will over the next 12 months, there is a chance John Key will bail and leave the next election to someone else.

    • fisiani 8.2
      11 January 2016 at 12:28 pm

      Of course he is honest. He is the most trusted pm in our history.

      • Paul 8.2.1
        11 January 2016 at 12:32 pm

        dnftt

      • seeker 8.2.2
        11 January 2016 at 12:39 pm

        fisiani did you not see ‘honest john’ lying on the link I gave you on comment 8 @12.07pm.

        Honestly!

        • fisiani 8.2.2.1
          11 January 2016 at 1:21 pm

          Care to point out any lie by Honest John. I watched the clip. Never heard a lie. Do you actually understand what the word ‘lie’ means?

      • b waghorn 8.2.3
        11 January 2016 at 12:41 pm

        That’s a big call I hope you’ve got some links coming to prove it !

        • Puckish Rogue 8.2.3.1
          11 January 2016 at 1:02 pm

          I’d say John Key is as honest as any other political leader 🙂

          • McFlock 8.2.3.1.1
            11 January 2016 at 1:11 pm

            You would say that, because you’re only as honest as John Key.

            Which is not honest in the slightest.

            • Puckish Rogue 8.2.3.1.1.1
              11 January 2016 at 1:25 pm

              I’ll have you know I’m quite honest, probably why I couldn’t run for any for of political office 🙂

              • McFlock …
                11 January 2016 at 1:31 pm

                With honesty like yours, you could run for act or the nats. But most of the left wing parties demand that what their representatives say has at least some positive relationship with the truth.

                But arguing that every politician is a lying scumbag like dunnokeyo is part of the way you bastards get into government with the support of only a third of registered voters – if you convince a million opponents that the opposition are just as untrustworthy as the government , you alienate opposing voters from the entire system.

                It’s cynical, corrupt and morally bankrupt, but then that’s typical tory behaviour.

                • Puckish Rogue …
                  11 January 2016 at 1:34 pm

                  “But most of the left wing parties demand that what their representatives say has at least some positive relationship with the truth.”

                  Yeah naah

                  If I recall correctly it was the left pushing MMP yet its the right that’s won more

                  If Labour keep putting up leaders like Goff, Shearer, Cunliffe and Little instead of leaders like Clark and Lange then of course the right are going to keep on winning

                  • Lanthanide …
                    11 January 2016 at 1:40 pm

                    “If I recall correctly it was the left pushing MMP yet its the right that’s won more”

                    It is currently tied 3 to Labour, 3 to National.

                    • McFlock …
                      11 January 2016 at 1:50 pm

                      96, 2008, 2011, 2014 to the nats
                      99, 2002, 2005 to the leftish.

                    • alwyn …
                      11 January 2016 at 1:56 pm

                      Sorry Lanthanide but you are forgetting the first MMP election in 1996.
                      It is currently Nat-led 4 (96, 08, 11 and 14) to Lab-led 3 (99, 02 and 05)
                      Of course in reality New Zealand lost in 96 and 05. Anyone who lets Winston anywhere near power isn’t fit to be in office.

                    • Lanthanide …
                      11 January 2016 at 2:21 pm

                      Ah, I missed ’96.

                    • alwyn …
                      11 January 2016 at 6:03 pm

                      This is a reply to McFlock’s 2.35 post

                      I don’t plan to try and compile a complete list of Helen Clarke’s misleading statements.
                      In terms of whether a statement is a “lie” I tend to use the Chambers Dictionary definition which is “a false statement made with the intention of deceiving”. I think the three examples I have given for Helen Clark fall into that definition.

                      I had a look at Blip’s magnum opus. I have chosen a couple at random to see what he was about. I don’t think the ones I looked at fall into the category of lies.

                      The first was, number 17, that “New Zealand was one of the very few countries in the world that was settled peacefully”
                      What Key said was that ” In my view New Zealand was one of the very few countries in the world that were settled peacefully.” The words “In my view” make it clear that was only his opinion.
                      Even this blog distinguishes between saying something is your opinion, when no source is required and saying something is a fact when you must justify the claim.
                      Was that a lie? His view is arguably wrong but (in my view) you can’t say it was a lie.

                      The second was number 24 where Blip says Key was lying and he says the lie was “The Greens are responsible for the rise in income inequality within New Zealand”
                      This gives as justification a statement by Brent Edwards that the Greens were not in Government. That is, in fact, something I have pointed out on another post and have been roundly abused for saying so. Both te reo uptake and swordfish seemed to think, in the TPPA agreement post, that they should be considered as part of the 2002 Government.
                      However back to the point. What Key actually said was
                      “In the period between 1999 and 2005, if my memory serves me correctly, the then Labour Government did that with the support in various forms of the Green Party, and so I say to Russel Norman ‘yes, he should apologise to New Zealand for his failure in that time’.””
                      That doesn’t make any claim that the Green Party were part of the Government. It says they supported the Government which is clearly true. Again I can’t agree that his statement is a lie.

                      That is a very selective list. I really can’t be bothered looking at them all

                      I really don’t want to argue that Key never lies. He is a politician and nearly all politicians lie if the feel the need. They aren’t successful if they don’t. However Key is very smart and he may leave you THINKING he said something that he didn’t.
                      If one is going to attack him you have to be realistic and limit the use of the word “lie” to things that really qualify. Using it only as an abusive term for an opinion you disagree with is silly.

                      ps. Sorry for the length of this. I couldn’t see how to get my point across in less words.
                      Damn. I must have picked the wrong “reply” tag.

                    • swordfish …
                      11 January 2016 at 10:12 pm

                      @ alwyn

                      Your memory’s failing you a little, alwyn.

                      Could you link to where I’ve ever suggested the Greens were part of the 2002-05 Clark Govt ?

                      Also … Helen Clark, not Clarke

                    • alwyn …
                      11 January 2016 at 11:43 pm

                      You didn’t say that about the 2002 Government did you Swordfish? You really only said it about 1999-2002 (when it can be considered true) and 2005-2008 (not the case), when you said it was the situation although Jeanette denied it.
                      As for “Clarke” Gosh, everybody! Swordfish has noted that I put Clark in one place and Clarke in another.
                      He (she) can get a new job as a proof reader. Might do better than as a political commentator.
                      No doubt she (he) has never made a typing error in his (her) life.
                      Now do you have anything significant about what I did have to say?
                      Should I assume that if you can only point out a typo you can’t actually find anything wrong with the comments I have made?

                    • McFlock …
                      12 January 2016 at 12:41 pm

                      Alwyn, the issue is not that key never lies or that clark never lies.

                      The issue is that Key lies more often and worse than any other politician you care to mention.

                      You cherry-picked a couple of blip’s list items that might be debatable as to intent to mislead.
                      Well, what about blaming Labour for the limo trade-ups when it was his signature on the contract to upgrade? What about the tranzrail shares he forgot he owned? Giving away bottles of wine he pretends he doesn’t know he owns? Claiming to not remember how an old school friend became the only person interviewed for the GCSB job? The changing stories on how often he was in contact with slater? His reporting of his apology to the waitress being accepted with no problem, vs her account of his “apology”?

                      And that’s beyond his tendency to leave grieving people with the impression he made strong assurances to do “whatever it takes” or get their sons and husbands back, assurances he never follows through on. He says whatever is convenient at the time, and never has any intention to either follow through on commitments or ensure that his reporting of events bears any relationship to the truth.

                      Clark had the painting (didn’t key do that too?), the car trip, and Doone. You’re welcome to mention any others.

                  • McFlock …
                    11 January 2016 at 1:49 pm

                    Your comment says nothing to compare the well-documented lies of Key with any comments by any Labour party leaders past or present.

                    The worst one about Clark was a fecking charity painting. Key lied about how an old school tie got a phone call to be offered a job as head of a government department, and recent loser-actoid whyte plagiarised himself only the other day.

                    • alwyn …
                      11 January 2016 at 2:14 pm

                      That was a pretty trivial example by Helen.
                      The worst was the false stories she was passing on to the Herald about the then Police Commissioner Peter Doone. Quite why she wanted to get him out was never clear but she certainly set out to destroy him.
                      http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10122718
                      Other things that seemed odd about her actions were denying that she even realised that he motorcade was speeding when travelling to Christchurch, and trying to claim that it was Henare who attacked her mate Mallard instead of the real way round.

                      Incidentally you do seem to have a strange view of what is plagiarism. By your definition every single politician is guilty of it during a campaign when they give their standard speech.

                    • Puckish Rogue …
                      11 January 2016 at 2:15 pm

                      If you think Labour leaders haven’t lied (or misspoke or not told the whole story) then more fool you but my main point was that the leaders Labour have been putting up recently are unelectable and it must be especially galling when compared to former leaders of a not-too-distant past

                    • McFlock …
                      11 January 2016 at 2:35 pm

                      pr – I’ve not said Labour leaders are perfect. Simply that key is on a completely new level of lying compared to anyone Labour’s had as leader.

                      Alwyn – if you posted a full list of clark’s lies, I doubt it would be even a quarter the length of blip’s list, and a tenth as serious. I’d be interested in a genuine comparison. Many of key’s lies involve outright corruption, in my opinion.

                      I love that you can’t tell the difference between a political stump speech and offering cut&paste material to a publisher as a new work. Besides, even when they recycle “ad libs” they risk getting called out on it (e.g. McCain using the same joke about not being recognised at [insert local airport here] having at least a half dozen televised examples over the years being put into a montage by the Daily Show). The prepared speeches are understood to be taling points strung together, these days. If you say to a publication “I have written this opinion piece you can sell for money”, it should be original or at least acknowledged that it was published elsewhere. Interestingly, if it was published in the UK, does that mean that Whyte violated the copyright of the original publisher? Might do…

                    • Puckish Rogue …
                      11 January 2016 at 2:45 pm

                      McFlock – I suspect that part of the reason Keys lies are more well known then Clarks lies is that general internet use and blogging was certainly less widespread in Clarks time then it is today (I might be wrong about this of course)

                      So at the time Clark said a howler it was harder to look up and view it and then post about it whereas today its so much easier (which is a good thing I might add)

                      Sort of like how a politician used to be able to say one thing at an old persons home then another at uni then another at a business meeting

                    • McFlock …
                      11 January 2016 at 2:57 pm

                      well, that’s bollocks because a) people remembered what they had been promised; b) many people were part of multiple groups; and c)we had actual journalosts who went to all the events and compared barefaced lies.

                      Oh, and d) the internet existed before John key, kiwiblog has been going since 2003, well enough to cover Clark.

                      and e) what about all the labour leaders since clark, well into the internet era?

                    • Puckish Rogue …
                      11 January 2016 at 3:06 pm

                      well, that’s bollocks because a) people remembered what they had been promised;

                      – Sometimes but people also have sort memories at times

                      b) many people were part of multiple groups; and c)we had actual journalists who went to all the events and compared barefaced lies.

                      – I’m not convinced of journalists neutrality now or then, far too many family links or marriages

                      Oh, and d) the internet existed before John key, kiwiblog has been going since 2003, well enough to cover Clark.

                      – Yeah but I’m talking general public and before blogs started shaping the political landscape

                      and e) what about all the labour leaders since clark, well into the internet era?

                      – No one cares about them because they didn’t become the leader of the country

                    • McFlock …
                      11 January 2016 at 4:00 pm

                      hey, journos have always had bias, but there used to be more of them to do their job. And “changing the political landscape” is one thing, but I would have expected kiwiblog to obsessively track the litany of fibs that you think clark told – or at the very least, just made some up.

                      So according to you, all politicians tell outright lies, but people are too stupid or their memory is too mercurial for them to care. And nobody cares about second place. You really do have a shitty opinion of human beings – maybe if you stopped looking in the mirror your morale would improve.

                    • Puckish Rogue …
                      11 January 2016 at 4:14 pm

                      hey, journos have always had bias, but there used to be more of them to do their job. And “changing the political landscape” is one thing, but I would have expected kiwiblog to obsessively track the litany of fibs that you think clark told – or at the very least, just made some up.

                      – He hasn’t collated them so I can’t be arsed going through all of his old posts

                      So according to you, all politicians tell outright lies, but people are too stupid or their memory is too mercurial for them to care. And nobody cares about second place.

                      – Think how many times a party (National or Labour) has mentioned bottom lines yet somehow there always seems to be a back track or a flip flop or even just making promises they know they’ll never have to keep and yet we, the public, keep on electing them

                      You really do have a shitty opinion of human beings – maybe if you stopped looking in the mirror your morale would improve.

                      – Looking in the mirror with my shirt off always improves my morale

                    • McFlock …
                      11 January 2016 at 4:29 pm

                      Again, I’m not arguing that all politicians are perfect.

                      I’m saying that the quality and quantity of dunnokeyo’s lies are a new low. This isn’t just “flip-flop” accusations, but an organised and concerted abuse of process, from the OIA to the Speaker to the appointment of state services staff to outright lying to parliament to employing people like Ede in his office to slandering detained people and the opposition in one fell swoop.

                    • Expat …
                      12 January 2016 at 5:15 pm

                      McFlock

                      +1

                      Every time he opens his mouth(JK), there’s a lot of people who cringe, I personally find he insults peoples intelligence.

                • Draco T Bastard …
                  11 January 2016 at 2:35 pm

                  It’s cynical, corrupt and morally bankrupt, but then that’s typical tory behaviour.

                  QFT

      • reason 8.2.4
        11 January 2016 at 1:15 pm

        A Herald poll only showed about 10% of respondents believed what John key said….

        He’s popular among people who believe owning a house should earn you more money than working ………….. They will excuse any lies he tells.

        its called Bent key Syndrome

        [lprent: You should see what we call Flamers. Flamewar starters aren’t appreciated around here – read our policy.

        If you want to assert a fact like a Herald poll, then you should link to supporting article(s) or say exactly where to find it. To do otherwise means that everyone will assume that you just made it up. That includes moderators. If we think that you’re starting a flamewar deliberately or even inadvertently using unsubstantiated assertions of fact, then we’re liable to revoke your ability to comment here.

        This is your warning. ]

        • fisiani 8.2.4.1
          11 January 2016 at 1:22 pm

          care to link to that shonky poll……

        • seeker 8.2.4.2
          11 January 2016 at 1:25 pm

          @reason@1.15pm
          Please view the link I posted on commemt 8. It is the only clip I know where Key lies and is caught out by the reporters (not that they do much about it.)
          It backs everything you say and I wanted people like fisiani etc who state that key is honest to see the evidence that he is not honest for themselves.

        • reason 8.2.4.3
          11 January 2016 at 3:49 pm

          My apologies for not backing up with a link and I did do a quick search for the poll in question…. but after not finding it quickly I just posted up my memories of it which were …………

          The poll was a dodgy Herald readers one and it was in relation to the revelation that our GCSB was spying on our pacific Island neighbors.

          The skewered Herald poll gave readers three options to vote on regarding this spying on the pacific islands ……

          A) This is what spy agencies do and its ok
          B) I do not believe it
          C) Its outrageous

          The poll was skewered in relation to the options supporting or opposing the spying and even with the design bias that vote was fairly evenly split from memory.

          But with the ” I do not believe it” option ……………..

          John Key has consistently smeared Nicky Hager dating back from the Hollow Men National/Exclusive Brethren illegal electioneering that Key was involved with.

          Regarding the GCSB pacific Island spying revelation John Key said: …. ” Earlier, Prime Minister John Key urged New Zealanders to dismiss claims about spying on foreign allies, saying he can “guarantee” they will be wrong.” http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/66944644/Nicky-Hager-Kiwis-will-be-shocked-by-spy-claims

          “I’m not going to critique your stolen emails and misinformation,” he told reporters.
          “There’s a history of fizzers when it comes to Nicky Hager, Greenwald and Snowden. I’m sorry these guys get it wrong.” http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/66944644/Nicky-Hager-Kiwis-will-be-shocked-by-spy-claims

          So the “I do not believe it” option was for those who believed what John Key was saying at the time ………….. and they were about 10% from memory.

          I found it interesting at the time because even the people who approved the spying and who probably supported National clearly did not believe what Key was saying.

          • reason 8.2.4.3.1
            11 January 2016 at 10:16 pm

            The poll seems to have been taken down but I found a reference to it in the Herald: …..

            “An online unscientific Herald poll of up to 11,600 people showed more than 50 per cent of people said they were “fine with it”. Some 42 per cent replied to say they were “incensed – this is unacceptable”. Six per cent did not believe the claims were true.” http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11412551

            My memory was a little faulty and only 6% believed John Keys statements and position that Hagars claims were wrong and not to believe him.

            My false equivalence example showing the Heralds pro National bias in the poll questions was not exact either ……………. The two options the Herald gave readers to vote on if they believed Hagars information were: “fine with it” or”incensed – this is unacceptable”.

            An honest poll would have asked “it’s alright to do this” versus “its wrong to do this”, or “we should spy on them” versus ” we should not spy on them”.

            My conclusion is the only thing believable from that Herald Poll was that 6% believed John Key versus 96% believed Hager.

            If the opposition got it together they would wipe out National at election time …..just like they did in Northland.

            Also If Northland knowledge spreads nationally I can only see Keys popularity decline accelerating ……. Keys support and promotion of sabin in the months prior to his resignation from parliament seems quite extraordinary.

      • swordfish 8.2.5
        11 January 2016 at 9:51 pm

        @ fisi “Of course he (Key) is honest. He is the most trusted PM in our history.”

        3 News Reid Research/TNS Polls
        Honesty Ratings
        Key 41% (late 2013)
        Clark 61% (early 2003)

        (Note: I don’t have any post-2013 stats, but after the Dirty Politics scandal, I’d assume Key’s honesty ratings are relatively unlikely to have risen).

        Fairfax-Ipsos August 2013
        Leader Trust
        Fully believe John Key ? Yes 24%, No 59%

        3 News Reid Research July 2013
        52% believe Dotcom
        34% believe Key’s denials

        You were saying ???

        http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-10012016/#comment-1117021

    • Paul 8.3
      11 January 2016 at 12:35 pm

      We have a choice.
      We can allow these rwnj trolls to derail these threads or we can ignore them.

      [lprent: OpenMike was added into the posts because then moderators don’t have to monitor it for derailing and diversion. It also removed the necessity excuse for derailing and diversion in author written posts. ]

      • alwyn 8.3.1
        11 January 2016 at 12:41 pm

        Given that this is Open Mike and the purpose is given at the top as being
        “For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.”,
        it is difficult to see how anything can be classed as “derailing” the thread.
        You’ll just have to ignore it. That is also better for your blood pressure.

        • lprent 8.3.1.1
          11 January 2016 at 1:54 pm

          Open Mike … it is difficult to see how anything can be classed as “derailing” the thread.
          You’ll just have to ignore it. That is also better for your blood pressure.

          Sound advice.

      • seeker 8.3.2
        11 January 2016 at 1:32 pm

        Paul you have got the wrong end of the stick in this case and I think you may have wasted my huge effort to post visual evidence that what fisiami keeps saying about ‘john’s honesty’ is untrue. I had hoped to silence fisiani with the truth, backed by actual visual evidence, thus making it unnecessary to have to feed fisiani and like minded people again.

        Please have a look at the clip on comment 8… it’s a cracker.

    • seeker 8.4
      11 January 2016 at 2:33 pm

      @fisiani@1.21pm
      Thanks for watching the clip. Can’t believe you did not notice him saying first one thing then another then the other again. All said in a similar ‘thiis is the truth ‘ voice, even though he’d contradicted himself twice . Even he got lost and didn’t appear to know what ‘truth’ he was telling. I think, unless one is a little deluded, that this clip shows a man telling untruths, which leaves me not knowing which of his assertions were either true or untrue. I do not listen to him anymore like you, apparently.
      In my case it’s because I can’t bear to listen to lies, whereas in your case you can’t bear to see or hear the truth it seems.

      • fisiani 8.4.1
        11 January 2016 at 7:40 pm

        Ah I get it now. If Honest John says it might rain tomorrow and it turns out fine then thats what s called a lie. If he works all day long for NZ then some would call him liar for not putting in a 16 hour day or claiming bizarrely that he works for another country. How desperate and despairing.

        • seeker 8.4.1.1
          12 January 2016 at 7:29 pm

          “None so deaf as those that will not hear. None so blind as those that will not see.” Matthew Henry 1662-1714.

          ‘those that will not see’ even if it is stuck under their nose on a walking, talking video clip in 2016

  9. greywarshark 9
    11 January 2016 at 1:35 pm

    Looking at geonet and there seems to be a swarm (think thats the term) of quakes in the eastern and southern North Is. I counted 27 at about level 2 registered as unnoticeable, since midnight last night – Sunday. The last two are bigger registering light at 4.3 at 59km near Murupara, and 3.5 at 21km near Dannevirke, both in last half hour.

    • greywarshark 9.1
      11 January 2016 at 4:05 pm

      Well it doesn’t pay to quote geonet till the figures settle down. The Dannevirke shake is registered now as 1.8 not 3.5 – unnoticeable not light, and the one at Murupara is now noted as east of Rotorua at 4.6 at 142 km not 59 km, and is described weak.

      Since then there have been another three tiny quakes around middle NZ.

  10. Tautoko Mangō Mata 10
    11 January 2016 at 2:07 pm

    Joseph Stilglitz on the TPP:

    Those seeking closer economic integration have a special responsibility to be strong advocates of global governance reforms: if authority over domestic policies is ceded to supranational bodies, then the drafting, implementation, and enforcement of the rules and regulations has to be particularly sensitive to democratic concerns.

    http://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/jan/10/in-2016-better-trade-agreements-trans-pacific-partnership

  11. cogito 11
    11 January 2016 at 2:36 pm

    Loved this story in The Guardian:

    “Briton told horse penis remark ‘could have led to war’ between Kyrgyzstan and UK

    Michael McFeat, now deported from Kyrgyzstan, says police told him sausage comparison could have sparked conflict”

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/10/britons-horse-penis-remark-could-have-led-to-war-between-kyrgyzstan-and-uk

    As casus belli go it’s pretty original but at least the Kyrgyz have some pride, whereas in NZ we have been on the receiving end of a dick for s-e-v-e-n years and there are those who still haven’t had enough.

  12. joe90 12
    11 January 2016 at 2:58 pm

    heh, not terrorists cosplaying fantasists act out.

    The president in the story is never named, though it does mention people wanting to “cling to their God and guns” — a reference to a comment Obama made in 2008.

    Eventually in the book, a rogue Department of Homeland Security agent forces people at gunpoint to give up their firearms. When one man resists, an agent shoots him in the head.

    The heroes of the story refuse to surrender their guns, and consequently are able to kill the neighbors and government agents who come to take their supplies by force. The book goes into great detail about the protagonists’ arsenal, which includes an array of pistols, AR-15 rifles, and other guns — all of which are pivotal to their triumph.

    http://www.buzzfeed.com/jimdalrympleii/oregon-militia-members-post-apocalyptic-book-bears-striking#.diG7MdxlgP

      • Puckish Rogue 13.1.1
        11 January 2016 at 3:15 pm

        http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/06/cologne-attacks-mayor-women-keep-men-arms-length-germany

        If what the media are saying is true (that’s a big if) then Germany (and other European countries) have some major issues to sort out

        I’m inclined to keep the total of asylum seekers to 750 per year

        • cogito 13.1.1.1
          11 January 2016 at 3:24 pm

          There are so many issues here, involving both asylum seekers and other migrants. Better safe than sorry would be my line.

          • Puckish Rogue 13.1.1.1.1
            11 January 2016 at 3:37 pm

            We have enough problems with crime (especially sexual violence) that we don’t need to import more but as long as we stick to strict screening processes, keep it to 750 per year and provide on going support we should be able to avoid the mistakes of Europe

            • reason 13.1.1.1.1.1
              11 January 2016 at 4:12 pm

              We have disgraceful levels of violence and sexual crimes in New Zealand …… and a LARGE proportion is the result of Alcohol abuse …………

              No doubt this govt will dog whistle about potential refugee criminals.

              While roastbusters walk free ……… and it remains open slather for the booze pushers.

              It would be very very easy to lower New Zealand rates of sexual offending and violence ………………

              National chose not to do so…… and built a big expensive private prison instead ……

              • Puckish Rogue …
                11 January 2016 at 4:23 pm

                I’m sorry but by the reports coming through from Germany is that you have hundreds (in which case it might even be thousands if you believe most attacks aren’t reported) of women attacked and there are suggestions its coordinated (which I’d have thought is even more chilling) between different cities

                That is a completely different kettle of fish then what happens in NZ and if we can stop it from happening here by limiting the people doing it actually coming here then that is a good thing

                • reason …
                  11 January 2016 at 7:39 pm

                  Your definitely right about it being a different Kettle of fish ….. When it comes to our sexual and violence crimes the Government is complicit in our high rates……. and our world famous ‘Roastbusters’ did not even get prosecuted.

                  National might get the world thinking that we are like …….Muslims!!!, gasp, shock, horror.

                  I’m sure the German police will be looking to prosecute the criminals involved ………. also the fact that some of the woman victims involved may have been drinking or even using other drugs will not be held or used against them…… unlike here.

                  The number of family violence, child abuse , sexual violence and street attacks involving Alcohol would dwarf any scary Refugee/Muslim threat for New Zealand by a magnitude of thousands …….

                  Demonizing whole races or in this case refugees as rapists or criminals is usually done for political reasons.

                  Treat the offenders as criminals………… not the race.

        • Sabine 13.1.1.2
          11 January 2016 at 3:34 pm

          funny, it appears that on new years eve in NZ at a location near the or around “the Mount” a bunch of several hundreds drunk young man of various back grounds and religions attacked and harrased young females. I think there even was a bit of a brouhahah on FB and it made it into the news.
          http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/75607653/police-condemn-facebook-comments-on-mount-maunganui-new-years-eve-page

          You think that NZ may have a problem at hand?

          it also seems that these attacks have also happened in Austria, Switzerland and Helisnki.

          so maybe the world has an issue with people that think its ok to assault women.

          http://www.novinite.com/articles/172556/After+Germany+and+Austria,+Finland+Also+Reports+Assaults+on+Women+on+New+Year%E2%80%99s+Eve

          It might have been just sexually frustrated man letting go of a bit of steam, being boys n all that, and luckily no one had to bend over for a bit of soap.
          And yes, the Mayor of Koeln had only this to say after the assaults; Women need to learn how to protect themselves by keeping strangers at arms lenght.

          I think this attitude is mainly the problem the world.

          • Puckish Rogue 13.1.1.2.1
            11 January 2016 at 3:44 pm

            Fortunately it doesn’t appear to be in the same league (not that it excuses what happened of course) as what happened in Europe but in this instance we need to make sure that it doesn’t happen here

            “Women need to learn how to protect themselves by keeping strangers at arms length”

            – Men need to be taught to not assault, harass or rape women but…I can’t even comprehend the thought process that goes through a guys mind when they do that

            • Sabine 13.1.1.2.1.1
              11 January 2016 at 3:48 pm

              if it makes you feel better, it was said by a women.
              Bigotry is gender neutral.

            • maui 13.1.1.2.1.2
              11 January 2016 at 5:12 pm

              Men need to be taught to not assault, harass or rape women but..

              A little difficult when our so called male “heroes” in our culture treat women like objects/things. Case in point John Key and the harassment of a waitress, Chris Gayle treating a female interviewer like shit, and Roger Sutton. On the whole our culture has been relaxed about these incidents, even endorsing the behaviour and blaming the victim.

  14. Penny Bright 14
    11 January 2016 at 5:13 pm

    Or alternatively Lifeline. It always helps to talk. At Lifeline, we’re here to listen. Auckland 09 5222 999 or NZ 0800 543 354. Psychological and emotional distress caused by thread jackers – it’s not your fault. Don’t suffer – reach out for support now.

    JE SUIS ROSE HAMID!

    Good on her.

    “Hamid, and a few other protesters with her, also wore yellow Jewish stars of David marked “Muslim” to recall the forced identification markers under Nazi Germany.”
    _______________________________________________________

    Muslim woman thrown out of Trump rally (Al Jazeera)

    Rose Hamid says she went to the rally in silent protest to show Trump supporters what a Muslim looks like.

    09 Jan 2016 11:46 GMT | Politics, US & Canada, United States

    Trump has come under fire from the public and politicians for repeated comments made that allegedly stoke fear of Muslims [Reuters]

    A 56-year-old Muslim American woman was thrown out of a rally in support of Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump following a silent protest.

    Rose Hamid was forcibly removed by security guards from the hall in South Carolina on Friday, after standing up in the crowd while wearing a shirt saying: “Salam. I come in peace.”

    Hamid, and a few other protesters with her, also wore yellow Jewish stars of David marked “Muslim” to recall the forced identification markers under Nazi Germany.

    Video footage aired on CNN of the moment when Hamid was being escorted out, shows many Trump supporters shouting at her.

    Hamid, who works as a flight attendant, told CNN that some shouted questions at her such as “Do you have a bomb? Do you have a bomb?”

    But according to Hamid, her silent protest of the “hateful rhetoric” found in Trump’s camp is mainly an element existing within the “crowd mentality”, as opposed to personal beliefs held by most Republicans.

    “This demonstrates how when you start dehumanising the other it can turn people into very hateful, ugly people,” Hamid told CNN.

    “I have the sincere belief that if people get to know each other one-on-one, that they’ll stop being afraid of each other.”

    The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) has issued a press statement calling on Trump to offer a public apology for the action.

    “The image of a Muslim woman being abused and ejected from a political rally sends a chilling message to American Muslims and to all those who value our nation’s traditions of religious diversity and civic participation,” Nihad Awad, CAIR national executive director, said.

    Following the ejection of Hamid, Trump reportedly told the crowd of supporters at the campaign rally: “There is hatred against us that is unbelievable. It’s their hatred, it’s not our hatred.”

    Trump has come under fire from the public and politicians for repeated comments seen as planting fear of Muslims, including that they should carry specific identification cards and that mosques should be closed.
    ________________________________________________________

    Penny Bright
    2016 Auckland Mayoral candidate.

  16. sabine 16
    11 January 2016 at 5:26 pm

    hmmm so if i am an aspiring footy star i get to punch people in the had and its all good.
    sweet as bro. But hey, its ‘disapointing’ but as long as he wins games and the boys drink beer and cheer, its all good. 🙂

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/75763198/Hurricanes-boss-says-young-rugby-player-Teariki-Ben-Nicholas-assault-disappointing

  17. b waghorn 17
    11 January 2016 at 6:28 pm

    http://i.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/75747087/Helen-Kelly-wants-referendum-on-legalising-cannabis-at-the-next-election
    They have a pop poll running on this story. One of the options is winning by a country mile.!