Written By:
notices and features - Date published:
6:00 am, November 13th, 2024 - 58 comments
Categories: open mike -
Tags:
The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.
Leading conspiracist bankrupt Alex Jones, reportedly worth $270 million, has yet to be appointed Minister of Propaganda by Trump, so watch this space.
It would make sense for Musk to be top bidder. He could then relaunch the Infowars brand because the concept remains timely.
I am the first to call it.
Lefties are back.
Having Trump to blame for the worlds problems is super dooper.
The next five years we can blame National/NZF/Act for all the problems here.
We are back in our lefty comfort zone.
The evil rich White right wing is the "cause" of everyones problems
Only the diverse left can save the country.
2025 will see the relaunch of leftyism.
Again we can all wear our "LOVE" lefty cap with pride.
LOVE.
Let Our Vision Excite.
I can feel the vibe already.
Tino pai rawa atu.
Koina
Sarcasm?
satire
Slowly but surely, we are exposing the harm, the motives and attitudes of these three CoC parties and their monied backroom friends. Their objectives are not people and community based, so we are working together to remove them and build a people centered Government, not one the uses people like pawns on a chess board, and places money ahead of everything.
Re compo for state abuse.
I read recently (can't find it now) firm was fined 300$K for a death they were found responsible for.
Could be a starting point!!!!
Great Tiriti turnout in Dunedin yesterday-the video worth a look.
https://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/over-1000-attend-octagon-rally-toit%C5%AB-te-tiriti
👍
Does anyone have an idea why the tweets at the end of this post were deleted?
Monday: Hili dialogue – Why Evolution Is True
The original is down
https://x.com/IDF/status/1855587044421947706
While I had found that video easily enough the question was why twitter would have taken down an IDF post describing it, and the other about the Maccabi Tel Aviv riots in Amsterdam.
I was not aware of the other deletion. If that "two" were taken down, my guess would be, X was posing as being even handed.
But is there a way to find a reason given by twitter for how these posts violated whatever standards? Even if twitter is somehow being even handed why can't the IDF post that link anyway? The video is still up as you linked to it and its hardly controversial that Hamas has tortured Gazan's before.
Not with a link on X apparently.
I am sure Musk allows a semblance of process, good luck.
Heard on RNZ late news last night that an Israeli government minister had come out and said that Israel would now put into plans for annexation of Gaza? Or at least part of it. I think. Guess they were just in a holding pattern until Trump's election. A very cynical person would say it was never about the hostages.
I must say that I have yet to see this piece of news in the international press, and it’s not available on the RNZ website. Why it would pop up and then pop away suggests either a fleeting bit of misinformation, or a disclaimer by Israel, whether truth or not.
Proof of the pudding is in the eating. But the push to rid the north of Gaza of Palestinians suggests the statement reflects the longterm aims of the Israeli government when it started its campaign against Palestinian civilians.
Trump nominated Mike Huckabee as ambassador to Israel, so that's almost certainly going to happen.
Just saw last night's post from joe90 on this, with the link. I don't understand why the media has not picked up on this. I guess because it is one Minister floating the idea, so the government can sit back and hmmm, while having their intentions floated informally.
The Guardian has an opinion piece with all the background regarding the Minister's statement, which came out of Israeli media reports. Confirms a read-between-the lines analysis. It’s not official Israeli policy, yet, but “provide strong indications that this is where we are heading”, according to Ben Reiff, the writer.
Christian indoctrination has required physical discipline for plenty of centuries but at times the torture was milder in different places:
Church leaders absorb a sense of normalcy from tradition like anyone else. The cultic mass psychology they are immersed in is never apparent to them. Even apparently good people succumb to normalcy. What interests me is why the usual robotic apology incantation used here by the left & right in govt was viewed as insufficient.
Because Welby failed to follow up in 2013. “The Makin review has exposed the long-maintained conspiracy of silence about the heinous abuses of John Smyth. When I was informed in 2013 and told that police had been notified, I believed wrongly that an appropriate resolution would follow."
Welby had attended Smyth's evangelical camps in the 70s and 80s, and so was also linked to him personally.
Greens get it right: https://thespinoff.co.nz/the-bulletin/12-11-2024/a-national-apology-and-whats-left-unsaid
The speaker changed his mind after sufficient negative feedback, but required the stroppy journo to have a nursemaid:
Pointing out that Labour & National have been operating in collusion with evil-doers in the public service was felt to be uncool. Speak truth to power?? What temerity!
It's not collusion with evil-doers: the Ministers involved at the time must have either directly initiated the action to hamper cases before the courts; or have tacitly approved of officials' options regarding dirty tactics. Which makes the government of the time the evil-doers.
And which also explains Hipkins's defence of the Attorney-General over this issue. Policy is the driver of such decisions lower down, and policy is set, and is nominally overseen by the Minister.
So you're validating my point. Thanks. I get that collusion can be tacit rather than explicit – it normally is – so any of the activities you describe may involve the establishment offenders wriggling off the moral hook in their own minds.
I think it would be quite clear to any Minister with knowledge of the law what was going on. At the very least, the AG must regularly inform Ministers of critical public cases as part of their job.
I posted on this topic from the survivors' viewpoint a few days ago, where they are very keen to see her go. It gave me pause when I saw Hipkins's defense of her, which suggests more info than we have access to.
If the dirty tactics were going on while at the same time the Labour-initiated Commission was convening, then that's troubling. The Commission did list the below-par legal tactics of the Crown Law Office in their review.
Chewie on BHN on this topic last night made the comment that as soon as they knew the Commission was established, the rats, the real evil-doer officials, were busy shredding documents and making plans to hive off overseas.
Hipkins is making an important point of Ministerial responsibility: the buck stops there. The Public Service cannot be made scapegoats if they have been essentially forced to follow Ministerial decisions. Of course, the question becomes “how forced?”
Indeed. Well-framed, & I share your overview.
It's horrifically sounding like a 21st century, Aotearoa Nuremberg Defence.
Reading Aaron Smale's excellent work on this last night, I was getting madder and sadder.
Successive governments, from both sides of the aisle, decided to lie, obfuscate and retraumatise victims just because of money.
Snap!
Smale’s article in Newsroom today (https://newsroom.co.nz/2024/11/13/aaron-smale-an-apology-both-sincere-and-hollow/) reminded me strongly of Hannah Arendt’s banality of evil.
In the comments of one of Smale's articles, someone suggested a Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Public Service.
Because of the lens through which I view politics, that appealed to me.
Surely these people have mandate to serve the public's best interests. There must also be mechanisms when that is at odds with their political masters.
In my opinion, Jagose has failed any test of this. With that failing, Collins comes under scrutiny as well as previous Solicitor/Attorneys General.
And folk wonder where enthusiasm for Parliament occupation, Hikoi, Sov Cit. movement come from…
I’d be extremely hesitant about a Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Public Service as a whole.
By extreme goals you get moderate gains.
A Royal Commission is a nuclear option that must be used with utmost care and precision, or it will have devastating and long-lasting effects on Public Service. Coincidentally, some wouldn’t mind a scorched Earth outcome of PS.
What’s next, a RCoI into the Judiciary?
I'm not the only one that bemoans how Neo-liberalism fails the citizenry.
This latest shameful episode demonstrates the PTB view the balance sheet is more important than people's lives.
This has occured through several governments and with essentially the same mandarins doing the 'dirty work'.
Hipkins, understandably, has shown there is a lack of an appetite for people to be held accountable. No wonder, the public servants would know about these and plenty of other skeletons in the closet.
Once again I can see how Trump’s “drain the swamp” rhetoric gained so much traction.
The hidden issue is on-going abuse 1999-2018.
If they were hampering pre 1999 investigations in the 1980's and then 1990's (as the current SG is aware in her early career), this was SOP at state level (as well as in churches – the reason being reputation).
And one could conclude they would not be investigating and prosecuting perps still in these institutions in the 2000's – maybe removing them on the quiet, or if not – culpable for crimes that then continued.
Labour began the reform of MH care (post 2017) for a reason.
By start of 20th century Maori were down to just over 40,000 people left.
For their descendants the entire Treaty settlement process started several decades and about $3b later.
Imagine if proper settlement was made to New Zealand’s 200,000+ institutional abuse survivors and their descendants.
It would in some ways be far bigger than our Waitangi claims.
That's a scale of damage worth thinking about.
I'm not accepting the relativity.
The iwi settlements were related to article 2 as per lost land (not the number of people then, or since) and did not include claim to land lost to private ownership.
Also, there are around a million Maori now and settlement process is not yet completed.
There will be millions damaged in the generations to come.
The relativity is important to the $$, which is where this is about to go.
There's MoJ/Corrections 'miscarriage of justice' frameworks $$
There's Pike River $$. There's Leaky Homes $$. hristchurch property buyout $$$ There's ACC misadvnture $$. There's post-Gabrielle $$$. There's COVID $$$$$$$ per employee.
There's been a start at a framework for $$ already, but clearly the government are playing for time to Budget 2025.
The state won't be starting for scratch, and still no sign they won't stop resisting any sense of liability through the High Court.
The money is where this is going, and ignoring the relativities to Treaty claims may not feel nice but they're going to be made and made quickly.
The damage to Maori lives thing is on point (from loss of land. place and mana and consequence), but here only involves care institutions.
The disproportionate instances of harm (abuse) to Maori also includes policing practice (in the 20th C more so) and prison incarceration experience of Maori (lack of staff and the long periods in cells).
Smale's reporting of the apology is worth a read.
Jim Hubbard's cartoon in Stuff today (14th) says it all in a picture: can't find a link online (perhaps behind a paywall).
Titled, The political and state sector
managerialmenagerie lineup, and showing a crocodile shedding tears, an ostrich with its head in the sand and a brain-washed sheep.Ron Paul must be bouncing up & down with excitement:
Seems significant due to a looming warp away from neolib orthodoxy, toward libertarian ethos. If it happens, we'll see the right challenging Seymour's timidity as zealot.
I suspect Ron Paul might regard POTUS involvement in setting Fed policy as making it worse.
Yep, at least re Trump. Depends on advisor(s) too. Does raise the possibility of a principled non-establishment policy though, which is good for evolutionary change.
Young feller nominated as T's defence minister: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fox-news-host-pete-hegseth-serve-defense-secretary-under-trump
So he knows how to have a good time, & he's clever enough to get political supporters to fund his partying. Hedonic trumpism masterclass dude.
Cruelty is the point.
.
@aidnmclaughlin
During Trump's first term, Pete Hegseth clashed with Pentagon officials after convincing Trump to pardon Eddie Gallagher, the ex-Navy SEAL accused of murdering a teenaged prisoner in Afghanistan. Hegseth championed Gallagher and called him a "hero"
https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-listened-fox-host-pete-hegesth-over-his-secretary-defense-2019-11
https://x.com/aidnmclaughlin/status/1856491801089093731
Amazing. Luxon has just answered a question in the House by disowning Chris Finlayson. By extension, that means disowning Finlayson's Treaty settlements when National were last in government.
(As usual, Hipkins was too slow to pick up on it, and make it a headline. Always on auto pilot, which is why Luxon gets away with his howlers. Labour MPs know how to shout, which achieves nothing, but don't know how to listen and pounce).
I presume you mean when Luxon said "Well, I don't take responsibility for Chris Finlayson.".
Why on earth should he be held responsible for recent remarks by a former National MP who left Parliament before Luxon even became an MP? And how on earth can you turn this into him rejecting everything that Finlayson might have done when he was younger and perhaps more sensible. ie when he was in fact in the House.
But that's exactly the point. Luxon didn't have to say those things that you suggest (which would have embarrassed National and made a headline "PM rift with Key government").
He didn't, because nobody asked.
Luxon's answer opened him up to further questioning (as per House rules). Hipkins only needed to follow it up, and make Luxon squirm when he then responded "Look, what I would say to that member is that I totally support Treaty settlements and bluster bluster what I'm saying to you is I totally reject the Treaty principles bill and bluster bluster what I would say to you is Chris Finalyson is wrong and bluster bluster look, I don't support the bill that my government is introducing.
(etc).
We'll never know, because Labour gave Luxon the free pass, as usual.
Incorrect. Hipkins asked that exact question of the PM.
Incorrect.
Transcript here:
Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers – New Zealand Parliament
As I stated above, Hipkins had no follow-up to Luxon's open goal answer (and yes, in real time I was asking the Q myself, as anyone awake would). As the transcript makes clear, Hipkins didn't pick it up, he simply moved on to his next pre-scripted Q.
This is not an isolated example, which is why it's so frustrating. Luxon is a gift (worst PM at Q time in modern history). But Labour rarely take the freebies.
Sorry, but I seem to have misunderstood you. Are we talking about the following? If so, were you implying that Luxon could and should have given quite a different answer?
He still gets to own that he made a deal with ACT that has/will lead to
Heh! I got it, thanks – I was fixated on Luxon allegedly disowning Finlayson.
BTW, Christopher asking Christopher about Christopher.
CF, a former AG, who had a working relationship with a SG, no less.
And as TS Minister, a working knowledge of Treaty principles (1975)(1987) etc.
Some week. So many questions.
https://www.bbc.com/news/videos/ckkgrw3lwp1o
When playing with Beehive matches, it is important not to so close to fire that one loses ones wings, and/but equally important not to be owned.
Bernard Montgomery …
https://www.nam.ac.uk/explore/bernard-montgomery
A lot of this is relevant here.
https://open.substack.com/pub/robertreich/p/the-root-of-trumpism?r=aax0&utm_medium=ios
”Large corporations, CEOs, and billionaires have embraced global trade without giving blue-collar workers any means of coping with it.
They have turned Wall Street into a gambling casino without insuring the rest of America against the risk that those bets would turn bad.
They have allowed giant corporations to monopolize without giving workers the countervailing power to unionize.”
Both trump and sanders promised to "drain the swamp". The guy who won is the swamp and the scum and the bottom of the swamp at that. The 1%er wont do any draining, he will just talk about it and do what increases his 1%ism. Sanders was that chance
Just to show colonisation is not just a function of skin colour: Norway's government apologise to Sami for forced assimilation.
please fix your email address