Open Mike 14/02/2019

Written By: - Date published: 7:00 am, February 14th, 2019 - 176 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 …

176 comments on “Open Mike 14/02/2019”

  1. Ad 1

    My bet is President Trump will agree the budget on Friday, take the $1.375b in funding for 55 miles of border barriers, forget about any State of Emergency moves, and declare victory.

    Enough of his hard core base will buy it, and the disgruntled remainder won’t have anywhere else to go in the Primaries anyway.

    Win.

  2. Observer Tokoroa 2

    Hi CLEANGREEN

    Pretty grim stuff when a 10,240 Signature Petition made to National MP Anne Tolley went missing.

    No one in New Zealand expects National to get anything right. They are not competent. But to biff 10, 000 plus people out of National sight and mind is more than awesome.

    David Bennett chair of the Select Committee with Reference to Transport, said the missing Petition had nothing to do with him. And shut his Office door.

    Labour has indicated that along with E-Vehicles, Rail Transport is a goal they will seek to achieve. Trucks have an appalling safety record on NZ Roads.

    I am inclined to think that a number of Parties in Gisborne have interests in trucking and are determined to hang on to the Monsters that are by any measure a modern Deadly Dinosaur.

    • Ed1 2.1

      Reference? (I suspect this is not “fake news”, but I haven;t seen the story elsewhere . . .)

      • Ed1 2.1.1

        Just had a bit of a search – the only article I found that possibly fits is from 2010! While it may be evidence of a continued pattern of National not listening, in the context of the issue the post from Observer Tokoroa appears to be at best misplaced . . .

        • Observer Tokoroa 2.1.1.1

          Thankyou for your research. I would be embarrassed if this is a misplaced item.

          I will ask that it be removed until I am totally sure.

          Many Thanks.

    • Observer Tokoroa 2.2

      Please remove item 2.2

  3. Ad 3

    Famed director Zhang Yimou gets his film set around an escapee from a Chinese western desert labour camp pulled from viewing at the Berlin Film Festival, at the last minute.

    https://www.theage.com.au/world/asia/famous-chinese-film-director-s-desert-labour-camp-movie-pulled-20190214-p50xmn.html

    Chinese fascism, not coming to a cinema near you.

    And nothing we buy or sell from China is free.

  4. esoteric pineapples 4

    I had been joking that Britain will have to start the British Empire again, once they leave Europe. Turns out it isn’t a joke at all. In reality, what will happen is that Britain will become even more a part of the United States:

    • greywarshark 4.1

      I think you are right esoteric pineapples.
      According to the satirists Britain lost its marbles last century. That was covered in How to Win an Election or not Lose by Much.

      Some ancient politician has been getting documents from the USA about detergents for some reason. They arrive on his desk marked Confidential – Nuclear Deterrents.

      He doesn’t know what they’re all about – just some bumf. But he knows the Russian Ambassador collects stamps and he gives them to him for his collection.

      How to Win an Election (1964)
      In 1964, Milligan, Secombe and Sellers lent their voices to a comedy LP, How to Win an Election (or Not Lose by Much), which was written by Leslie Bricusse. It was not exactly a Goons reunion because Sellers was in Hollywood and had to record his lines separately. The album was reissued on CD in 1997.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Goon_Show#Records

      https://www.discogs.com/Harry-Secombe-Peter-Sellers-and-Spike-Milligan-How-To-Win-An-Election-Or-Not-Lose-By-Much/master/154763

    • CHCoff 4.2

      The bigger picture may be that Brexit is a ‘get out of jail’ project of extremist right wing european interests that have had to ‘suffer’ europe being governed more like modern developing technological democracies in approach to their societies since the war, a problem perhaps not so prevalent with England’s uppercrust political class that is being used to provide the ticket?

      Dumpty Doo!

  5. esoteric pineapples 5

    Excellent interview with Chris Christie:

    • Adrian Thornton 5.1

      Thanks for that, it was a good interview, Christie, like so many of his ilk can talk shit while looking you straight in the eye…planned parenthood as powerful and as influential in US politics as the NRA, wtf…I will give him his dues though, at least he is a charismatic lair.

  6. Adrian Thornton 6

    Media lens does another great job on exposing the total hypocrisy of The Guardian in this piece…

    Dump The Guardian
    http://medialens.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=894:dump-the-guardian&catid=57:alerts-2019&Itemid=252

    “It is ironic, but entirely apt, that the Guardian’s obituary noted that Hardy wrote a column for the paper between 1996 and 2001, but neglected to mention that he was dropped for being too left-wing”

    Yep the Guardian the centers most diligent and effective guard dog, always willing and ready to take down any threat to the status quo.

  7. Sanctuary 7

    I see that over on the sewer that Farrar is signalling that National may again be looking at holding the country to ransom and to their tantrum at losing the last election by again attacking the select committee process in a partisan political manner.

    Basically, as a result of their botched underfunded census (run of course by the minister of fuckups himself, Nick Smith) there is potentially a problem with data that will be used to set the boundaries for the next election.

    National’s response is to arrogantly demand the election be fought on the current boundaries, or else.

    – to quote Farrar –

    “…If the Government refuses to see sense on this, National can prevent the Representation Commission from functioning. The Commission is only quorate so long as both the Government and Opposition nominated members are present. If the opposition nominee refused to attend, then the Commission could not legally make any decisions…”

    One can only assume that National think demographic shifts over the past decade are unfavourable to them, and this is a crude attempt to emulate US Republican style voter suppression to game democracy for partisan purposes.

    This Republican style partisan politicising of the processes of the parliament appears to be a tactic the National party has hit upon as part of their “not our job to help you govern” tantrum and looks like part of wider campaign to undermine the legitimacy of the outcome of the last election.

    It is a crazy stratgey that no doubt the public (who have little patience for politicians who won’t do their job for political reasons) will punish them heavily for. It speaks to an entitled National party that still thinks it’s right to govern was “stolen” at the last election, that arrogantly refuses to give up it’s ten year old and stale policies and instead seeks to get re-elected by underming democracy and trying to start divisive culture wars.

    • AB 7.1

      Agree totally with your reading of the Nat psyche – but fortunately MMP is reasonably immune to being gamed by the gerrymandering of electorate boundaries. The party vote being aggregated across the whole country sees to that.
      The Republicans do a far more vicious thing obviously, which is suppressing turnout of poor people.

    • veutoviper 7.2

      Thanks for posting this, Sanctuary.

      I also saw that Farrar post and thought “what the hell? These idiots have completely lost the plot as to why MPs are elected to Parliament etc.” OTOH yesterday’s actions using this strategy to a large extent seem to have backfired on them in terms of public reaction. I also noted on KB that someone said that Barry Soper had said that Colmar Brunton is currently polling. Cannot find anything on this but if true, yesterday’s game playing may just show up in this poll results. Time will tell.

      But there is something I want to correct. (Not meant as criticism of you – rather I want to direct that at where it is due in terms of National Ministers.) You say in your second paragraph:

      “Basically, as a result of their botched underfunded census (run of course by the minister of fuckups himself, Nick Smith) …”

      Much as I have no time for Smith, he was not involved as a Minister in the work leading to the March 2018 Census.

      In Open Mike 8 January 2019 I called bullshit on a claim by Alwyn at 7 that James Shaw was to blame for the problems with the 6 March 2018 Census held just 132 days (4 and a half months) after Shaw became Minister of Statistics on 26 Oct 2018. By that time all policies, processes, procedures had been well set in concrete leaving Shaw with very little if any ability to change anything – by no less than five National Ministers, none of them Nick Smith.

      In my reply at 7.1.1.1 on OM 8 Jan 2019 (won’t attempt to link due to problems with those currently), I summarised the whole process for the 2018 Census which began immediately after the 2013 Census had taken place and the National Ministers of Statistics involved.

      In summary the latter were:
      — Maurice Williamson 2013 – May 2014 (c. 14 months)
      — Nicky Wagner, May 2014 – Oct 2014 (c. 6 months)
      — Craig Foss, Oct 2014 – Nov 2016 (c. 26 months)
      — Mark Mitchell, 01 Dec 2016 – 24 April 2017 (c. 5 months)
      — Scott Simpson, 24 April 2017 – 26 Oct 2017 (c. 6 months)

      So Craig Foss was the National Minister responsible for longest time (2+ years) , followed by Mitchell and Simpson for a matter of five and six months respectively in the latter stages of the 2018 Census processes, procedures etc being finalised, before Shaw became Minister on 26 Oct 2017.

      • Muttonbird 7.2.1

        Lol. NZ Stats would probably have trouble counting the number of ministers they had under the last government.

        Key was very fond of shuffling people around, often into portfolios they had no experience in. In fact the turnover meant that none of them ever got a good handle on what they were doing I expect. And that is now showing in the shambles which is most of the public service currently.

        As for alwyn, untruths are beginning to become his specialty.

        • alwyn 7.2.1.1

          You seem to forget your own record in these matters.
          Don’t you remember calling me a liar because I pointed out that the houses Kiwibuild couldn’t sell in Wanaka were far more expensive than Kiwibuild houses were going to be, at least according to the way the Labour Party described them
          Thus they had to be handed over to a local Real estate Agent to try and move them, rather than the qualified Kiwibuild registered people in the Wanaka area.
          You claimed that 3 bedroom houses were always going to be priced at $650,000.
          I said you were talking rubbish and provided evidence that the promised price was less than $500,000. I was far to polite to label you a liar, even though that was clearly what you are. You aren’t related to another bird brain who used to comment here are you?
          She was equally fond of throwing round the liar canard when she was shown to be wrong. Why don’t you just learn that your memory is faulty when it comes to anything related to the activities of your idiot mates in the Government

          • Muttonbird 7.2.1.1.1

            No. I called you a liar for stating the Wanaka houses were now, “on the open market”.

            It is very telling you have been unable to repeat those words in subsequent exchanges. Indeed you have written a whole paragraph just now skirting around them as if you are ashamed of them. You literally can’t repeat what you said because you know it is false.

            alwyn, I encourage you to own your mistake. It will do you no end of good.

            VV has reminded you of another lie. As I have said this is becoming a worrying pattern from you and a pattern reflective of the the opposition strategy to spread fake news.

            • alwyn 7.2.1.1.1.1

              Keep the faith comrade. It certainly shows enormous dedication to keep faith in the total incompetence of Labour’s Phil Twyford.

              As you will remember even Stuff, in spite of the left wing bias of their “journalists”(?) published an article under the headline
              “Six Wanaka KiwiBuild houses on open market”.
              For once they were right. The article did publish Phil’s waffle about how they had to meet the same criteria as anyone else but they refused to give any information about who had bought any of the Wanaka houses on the grounds that they had to protect the buyers privacy.

              • Muttonbird

                Umm. So you are using as your defence the sub-ed’s headline from a website which you are dismissive of and claim is left wing?

                You still can’t bring yourself to say you were wrong? And still can’t bring yourself to utter those words, “on the open market”.

                It’s such a massive backtrack that when repeatedly pressed you can’t even do something as simple as repeat your original assertion.

                😂

                • alwyn

                  Give up.
                  Repeating your ridiculous claims just makes you look even sillier.
                  It is a shame that you are so delusional about your water melon hero.

                  • Muttonbird

                    “Six Wanaka houses are now on the open market”.

                    Just say it, or retract and apologise.

                    • alwyn

                      What do you think are they going to do with the 10 houses that Kiwibuild has somehow come to own in Te Kauwhata?
                      The ballot was opened for interested people in late October last year.
                      Enormous interest from the public apparently. There was a grand total of ZERO people interested enough to go into the non-binding ballot for the properties.
                      ZERO. Nobody at all had the slightest interest in purchasing even one of them. That was after they had added an offer of $5,000 of appliances to the deal.
                      How long can they go before they exceed the original $2 billion that was supposed to be a fund to buy properties and then be replenished from sales?
                      They are going to need an awful lot more money if they are going to continue with Twitford’s money burning scheme aren’t they?
                      The trouble is it is our money, not that of the useless Government Ministers.

      • alwyn 7.2.2

        Reply to V.V
        You seem to find it hard to see why I regard Shaw is having failed in he duties as a Minister of Statistics.
        He is at fault both before and after the Census was actually attempted.

        Before he appears to have shown little or no interest in the only significant activity involving his only significant Department.
        He wasn’t even present in New Zealand on Census day. He was on a jaunt around the Pacific.
        From what little I have bothered to read since the election it appears the major problems were caused by 2 things. The first was not having enough copies of the forms for people who didn’t, or didn’t want to, fill things in on line. The other major problem was that there no staff available to follow up the non receipt of data in the period immediately after the Census. They doomed any chance of getting adequate coverage.
        If I had been the Minister I would have asked, as my first action, what the Department planned to do about these two situations. Any competent minister should have assumed that things can go wrong and have enquired about the contingency planning. James Shaw doesn’t seem to have shown any interest at all.

        If he had, are you seriously claiming that printing a load of Census documents and arranging the hiring of people to do the follow up collection of date couldn’t be arranged in the four and a half months after he assumed office and the Census day. Do you really expect us to believe that those things were set in stone?
        Balderdash. He just didn’t ask and so he failed in his duty.

        His other failings occurred after Census day. Shaw spent his time, as far as he showed any interest in the subject at all, in burying his head in the sand. Only now, after nearly a year, is the Department admitting, grudgingly, that they can’t produce valid numbers.
        Why didn’t Shaw, about the end of May, show some courage, say that the Census was a failure and call for a new attempt in 2021? Why, instead, were any comments he made since then were claims that everything was fine and that all the information required be obtained from other sources?
        He was lying.
        If even I could see that they were never going to get accurate results why couldn’t he see it? He didn’t have to rely on the Department to admit they had stuffed up. He should, if even barely comatose, have seen that and done something about it.

        Instead he has done absolutely nothing. He has failed and should quit.

        • Incognito 7.2.2.1

          Why didn’t Shaw, about the end of May, show some courage, say that the Census was a failure and call for a new attempt in 2021?

          The Census was held in March so in May the picture would have been far from complete.

          He [Shaw] said it was not possible for a new census to be readied by 2021.

          “It takes about four years to create a census. Which is why all of the key decisions about the last census were made several years before it happened. And as far as we know we don’t need to do it.”

          He [Shaw] would not comment on his confidence in the data until he had seen the results of an external review which was being conducted on the census.

          https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/110559481/national-say-2020-election-data-based-on-guesswork

          Instead he has done absolutely nothing. He has failed and should quit.

          Really, Alwyn, “absolutely nothing”? That’s quite a statement there that must be inaccurate – oh dear!

          Indeed, it is possible, but unlikely, that Census 2018 will not be good enough but it is still (!) too early to tell. Even when that happens it won’t be a total failure of Census 2018 as there still is plenty of very useful and important information gathered and analysed. Whether the responsible Minister (Shaw) will then have to resign remains to be seen.

          • alwyn 7.2.2.1.1

            It’s too soon to know whether its crap or not, according to you. Of at least it is the view expressed by Shaw, the responsible Minister.

            Rubbish, it has been obvious for the last nine months at least. Experts, who are not just trying to protect their jobs have said so for ages.

            But you are quite happy to stand there pissing into the wind and uttering rubbish like
            “Indeed, it is possible, but unlikely, that Census 2018 will not be good enough but it is still (!) too early to tell”.

            It is easy to see it was a total failure.

            By the way did you see the Government Statistician’s statement that they were going to fill out the Statistics using information from the IRD? I thought that the IRD material was supposed to be confidential. For them to use the info for people who didn’t return Census data they are going to have to provide names and incomes from IRD to Stats.
            “Statistics NZ said that in some cases it will need to draw on “information from the 2013 Census and administrative data to populate missing variables”. Among the “administrative data” sources used for imputation are the Department of Internal Affairs, MBIE, the Department of Labour, the Ministry of Education and Inland Revenue.”

            Hold a proper bloody Census.
            And put into the Ministers’ job someone competent.

            • Incognito 7.2.2.1.1.1

              It is easy to see it was a total failure.

              Nothing is “easy to see” with something as complex as the Census. No, it hasn’t been a total failure and it won’t be. You really have to be careful with the use of those adjectives; do you still stand by your ridiculous statement that he [Shaw] “has done absolutely nothing” [my bold]?

              Hold a proper bloody Census.

              Next one is likely to be in 2023.

              And put into the Ministers’ job someone competent.

              You’ve been demanding Shaw (and Twyford) stepping down based on your extremely limited knowledge of the facts and your obvious bias. You won’t admit it though as you’ve shown here over and over again.

              • alwyn

                Thank you for giving me a good laugh to end the evening.
                It is very easy to see that Shaw was completely out of his depth in the minor role of Minister of Statistics. Sorry Jimmy but it’s time to go.
                As Trump would have put it before he, like Shaw, was put into a job that was far beyond his ability. “You’re fired”.
                New Zealand deserves better.

  8. Peter 8

    Sometimes a day starts of brilliantly with a bloody good belly laugh. It’s great when you know the chuckles will continue through the day as the funniness come back to you.

    Herald today, “Mike Hosking: Seize the day Simon Bridges, get rid of your enemies.”
    Photo of smiling Judith Collins. Right, I’m up for this. Who else will be named? Hints about the phantom caucus leaker? Mark Mitchell getting an honourable mention?

    Let Mike tell us: “I am not the first person to have observed the political year has gotten off to a splendid start for the leader of the Opposition, notwithstanding the MediaWorks poll which (if it proves more than a rogue result) might dent proceedings slightly…

    You’ll be amazed to reminisce by December this year, if this current government keeps going the way it is, just how polished and professional and ready for office Bridges looks.”

    What? Is this Mike waving goodbye? Is he heading off for a sojourn up some ex-prosecutorial orifice?

    No, well maybe not yet, for now he’s going to tell us about the enemies Simon has to get rid of. (No doubt to make more comfortable the environment in which he is soon to be ensconced.)

    The enemies? Judith? Mark? Amy? Chris?

    No, it’s the Biggies – Jami-Lee Ross and Winston.

    When the laughing’s over I’m heading to the TAB to see what odds I can get on the ones plunging the proverbial in are not Ross or Peters but much, much closer to home.

    The other certainty is that Hoskings will quickly find another slimy abode after giving us the forlorn farewell notes about Simon never really looking the part yet having potential which sadly hadn’t the chance to be realised.

  9. esoteric pineapples 9

    Good to see the government is going to take the knife to the plethora of polytechs that are bleeding millions every year. No one has yet, pointed out that cause of all this the neo-liberal monetarist competitive policies that were applied to all sectors of New Zealand society from education to electricity from the 1980s onwards. Instead of the situation where you had enough polytechnics and universities to serve the needs of a small country, suddenly you had all these polytechnics springing up, offering the same courses as each other and competing with each other for students so that they could get government funding. Suddenly every polytechnic had a media studies course or art/craft course, often poorly taught, and whose qualifications did not have the same respect as the small number of media and art courses that existed before. And the end of the courses, students had huge debts for qualifications of dubious value. And sadly, the CIT in Upper Hutt which taught specialist subjects with limited student numbers depending on what the market required was closed down.

    • Oh, noes, bigots get called out and totalitarian fake lefties get their knickers in a twist about it. In other news, climate change still thing; not likely to affect middle class uni lecturers with busts of Lenin in their offices any time soon.

      • greywarshark 10.1.1

        Mild and reasonable calls by women for women’s rights – what was wrong with that? We know there are implacable people looking for excuses to forbid things – which seems to make them feel secure and happy inside. Unfortunately their need for that feeling seems to drive them down to deep scared childhood levels where they are afraid of the shadows of leaves rustling on the window at night. Eek scary boogie mans/womans etc.

        • te reo putake 10.1.1.1

          I don’t see rejecting and isolating vulnerable people as being either mild or reasonable, greywarshark. Women are women, no matter how much some conservatives want to narrow it down to suit their own feelings (or prejudices, in the case of the bourgies at Redline).

          • greywarshark 10.1.1.1.1

            I don’t know what you are on about trp and wonder if you do either sometimes.

            • te reo putake 10.1.1.1.1.1

              Ok, I’ll take this comment on face value.

              The posters that Phantom Billstickers are taking down are from an anti-trans women group. Phantom are apparently saying that they didn’t realise what the posters were about, which is fair enough, because they are designed to be a dogwhistle.

              Trying to isolate and diminish trans women is something I find reprehensible, and I have posted on this previously.

              Redline have aligned themselves with those standing against the rights of trans women and also endorsed racism when it is in support of the anti-trans women position, so they’re not exactly top of my pops. They’re pompous middle class tossers, desperate for relevancy, in my humble opinion.

              Redline think they’re Wolfie Smith, but really they’re Rick from the Young Ones. Either way they’re a joke to me.

              I hope this clears it up a bit?

              • veutoviper

                TRP, in principle I agree with your stance on this (and had no problem understanding what you were saying).

                However, as a woman, in practical terms I am actually rather stuck on the fence. as while fully supporting in principle the rights of trans people to be recognised in relation to their choice of gender, I also understand the reservations some women may have in regard to what they consider as safe places such as women’s loos, changing rooms etc.

                To me it is not a black and white issue and there are different aspects that may need to be considered differently. For example, I certainly agree with self-ID on birth certificates, passports etc; but it is the ‘safe places’ where I have some reservations having myself been sexually attacked in one such place (a women’s toilet) as a young teenager. Obviously my attacker was not a trans person but the ability for any full male (as opposed to trans people themselves) to just walk into such safe places IMO could put both women and trans people who identify as female at risk and removes the perception at least that they are safe places.

                PS – In relation to Phantom, I would have thought it was a case of their right to decide they don’t want to be involved rather than a case of “censorship” per se.

                • Thanks, vv. I know this is a nuanced and somewhat tricky issue, but my gut feeling is that this will be like every other social advance eventually. After a while it’ll just be a non-issue like marriage equality, spelling Whangarei and Whanganui respectfully and not assaulting children who share our homes. In time, we move on.

                  Re: the toilets, I’ve stood outside public conveniences a few times a ‘silent protector’ of girlfriends, kids etc. That innate worry isn’t directly part of my world, but I do think I understand it. And, now that i think about it, I have been assaulted in a toilet. An elbow to the chops in a Panmure boozer many years ago. So I guess they’re not inherently safe places, even when you’re a fit, strong young man.

                  However, from a practical point of view, things are changing. I was in a brand new public service building yesterday and there was one immaculate unisex facility with a set of cubicles. It was a first for me, but it didn’t feel weird or off putting in any way.

                  • McFlock

                    Personally I think that the realistic solution is to ditch gender-specific toilets anyway. Signs on doors do not make them safe spaces. Having normal people around to make the predator displace does.

                    The biggest issue in venue security related to plumbing is the shortage of women’s toilets. Shortening the queue by opening up the men’s cubicles to women is not uncommon in some venues, and the only problem I ever encountered with that is whether the urinals are private.

                  • veutoviper

                    All good points, trp.

                    But some people take longer to adjust, some never. In terms of pubic toilets etc, there are subtle differences for men and women – to be blunt, as a woman sitting on a toilet with your panties, tights etc around your ankles hindering your ability to run in an instance is a quite vulnerable position to be in! LOL – too much detail!

                    Re unisex toilet facilities, funnily enough, I actually feel much more comfortable in those when they have obviously been planned for safety etc than in the older style gender specific facilities. Plenty of unisex ones here in Wellington and the newer public ones in the suburbs etc are all in well-light areas with a lot of car and foot traffic, with very strong doors, secure locks, high skylight windows etc.

                    Perhaps that is the way to go, but again I expect there is and will still be some opposition to the removal of gender specific facilities.

                    Now seen McFlock’s response and we three at least seem to be on the same wavelength!

                  • Do you want to mansplain to your female readers why vagina is the correct term, while you’re at it?

      • Shadrach 10.1.2

        People you disagree with advocate their position and you label them bigots. How very totalitarian of you.

        • te reo putake 10.1.2.1

          As Bob Marley said, who the cap fit, let them wear it. I got to read a ton of abuse toward trans women and those who support them in a variety of forums when I was writing about this subject a few months ago. I was racially abused myself by a prominent transphobe at the time. So, yeah, I’m gonna stick with bigots.

          Regarding ‘totalitarian’, all I can say is well played, Shadrach. I nicked that from Redline and used it, tongue in cheek, back at them. It’s part of their currently favoured term of abuse for lefties who support trans women. So, now you’re returning serve with it as well and you managed get a laugh out of me when I read it. Nice work, comrade, shout yourself a chocolate fish 😉

          • Shadrach 10.1.2.1.1

            It is possible to empathise with trans people and hold the views of expressed by some feminists about bathrooms. It’s sad you seem intolerant to those views, even more so considering you have suffered abuse yourself.

            • McFlock 10.1.2.1.1.1

              Regardless of whether that is actually possible, the group that got their postering contract cancelled refuse to attempt the first part of your claim.

              • Shadrach

                How do you know? Empathy doesn’t always mean agreement. Deplatforming because of a difference of opinion is unacceptable.

                But we’ve been here before, haven’t we.

                • McFlock

                  How do you know?

                  Because they haven’t shown any.

                  Empathy doesn’t always mean agreement.

                  I never said it was. That group of bigots simply haven’t expressed any empathy with trans people, making your comment redundant.

                  Deplatforming because of a difference of opinion is unacceptable.

                  But deplatforming bigots is essential for a healthy society. Otherwise you end up with children being kidnapped by the government and dying in custody being murdered through negligence.

                  • Shadrach

                    “But deplatforming bigots is essential for a healthy society. ”
                    Yes, the Nazi’s used a similar argument against the Jews. They defined what was good for society and killed anyone who disagreed. I realise you place no value on free speech, unless you agree with it.

                    “Because they haven’t shown any.”
                    How do you know?

                    • McFlock

                      Feel free to point out instances of their overflowing empathy if I’ve missed any.

                      Funny you pulling a godwin, what with the Nazis being famous for tolerating the trans community. But then hate speech isn’t free speech, anyway. It always ends up costing lives.

                    • Shadrach

                      Nothing this group have said is hate speech. Deplatforming opinions because you don’t agree with them is a sure sign of the insecurity of an argument. It is also inconsistent with a liberal democratic society.

                      PS I note the way you deflected the point I made from Jewish people to the trans community. My point was not how the Nazi’s treated the trans community, but how they treated the Jews. A bit tone deaf, McFlock?

                    • McFlock

                      Focus. Your comment about empathy for trans people and trans-exclusionary views being compatible is unrelated to the discussion because this group has neither expressed nor indicated any empathy for trans people whatsoever.

                      Your participation is just a pointless distraction with no relevance to the matter at hand. Again.

                    • Shadrach

                      “Your comment about empathy for trans people and trans-exclusionary views being compatible…”
                      Focus. The views expressed by this group are not trans exclusionary. That is just emotive rhetoric to justify your agreement with deplatforming opinion you disagree with.

                      “…is unrelated to the discussion because this group has neither expressed nor indicated any empathy for trans people whatsoever.”
                      Says you. But you don’t really know, do you? In fact given that you want to deplatform their opinions, how can you know what they think?

                      .

                    • McFlock

                      The views expressed by this group are not trans exclusionary.

                      The crux of your time-wastage being that the views expressed by this group are not at all empathetic, so you trying to launch into a discussion about whether bureaucratic barriers count as trans exclusionary is simply beside your initial irrelevant point.

                      Says you. But you don’t really know, do you?

                      If genuine empathy was buried amongst their press releases, feel free to point it out. I’m merely pointing out the absence.

                    • Shadrach

                      “The crux of your…”
                      The crux of my argument is that in a liberal democracy we should encourage robust discussion. We should not deplatform people simply because we don’t like what they say. Or how they look. Or what God they worship.

                      “If genuine empathy was buried amongst their press releases, feel free to point it out. I’m merely pointing out the absence.”

                      Here’s the groups website https://speakupforwomen.nz/. They don’t seem like dangerous subversives to me. Here’s one quote:

                      “We support respectful, evidence-based dialogue and freedom of speech. We support the rights of transgender people to live their lives free from violence and discrimination. Rights do not exist in isolation and a fair society balances the rights of all.”

                      And another:

                      “We recognise and respect the right of transgender (and intersex and “gender diverse”) people to live in their chosen identity, and we understand why having a birth certificate consistent with that identity is important to them. We understand why many transgender people are frustrated by the current Family Court declaration process and the need for medical assessment and treatment. But we consider there are rights and interests of other people that must also be taken into account. The Government has not taken these rights and interests into account.”

                      Plenty of empathy for trans people. And all you had to do was get off your arse and look.

                    • McFlock

                      that ain’t empathy.
                      you are still being irrelevant.

                    • Shadrach

                      Yes you are confused. Empathy doesn’t mean always agreeing with someone. And you are still supporting attacks on free speech.

                    • arkie

                      Bow Down Shadrach. Bow down you old circus horse.

                    • McFlock

                      Oh, I forgot that you don’t actually understand what “empathy” means.

                      A clue is that it’s distinct from “patronising bullshit thoroughly overshadowed by everything else they publish”.

                      If you want a good example of a deafening silence where “empathy” would be displayed, read the press release where they bleat about trans women in sport. They mention two individuals by name. The bleaters give zero indication of empathy for the perspectives, passions, and beliefs of those two individuals, or even trans women athletes in general. It’s not about agreement or otherwise – trans women are simply outlined as a problem and a threat, not as people.

                      A couple of vague claims to “support” and “recognise” don’t mean anything when they don’t actually follow through. In fact those claims only need to be made when your “support” and “recognition” aren’t shown by any of your other words or deeds.

                    • Shadrach

                      I know exactly what empathy means.

                      The difference between us, McFlock, is that you will tolerate a section of society being deplatformed to appease another. You will tolerate one groups freedoms being removed to appease another. And worse, there is no rational basis for your views, because your favour rests on whomever you consider protected. Oh the irony that you actually have significant numbers of the LGBTQ+ community disagree with you.

                    • McFlock

                      Keep deflecting all you want – if you know what empathy means, point out the empathy for the people named in the press release about transwomen in sport.

                    • Shadrach

                      “point out the empathy for the people named in the press release about transwomen in sport.”

                      Oh it’s about ‘sport’ now. Good sidestep.

                    • McFlock

                      No dude, it’s about a press release that should have contained some empathy, but didn’t.

                      They can claim to “support” or “recognise” people all they want, but when they have an opportunity to empathise with individuals they name in communication they control, there is no empathy.

                    • Shadrach

                      “No dude, it’s about a press release that should have contained some empathy, but didn’t.”

                      No, it’s about you being slippery. And not for the first time. But it’s hardly surprising. When you try to argue that hate speech extends to protecting women’s spaces from men, then you are in a very irrational place.

                    • McFlock

                      But that hasn’t been our discussion at all.

                      You said that it was possible to empathise with trans people and hold some of the views held by some feminists.

                      I said that the ones who had their poster banned didn’t empathise with trans women.

                      You presented a couple of links where the poster-cancelled feminists claimed to “support” and “recognise” the struggles of trans women (not the same as empathy, but whatevs).

                      I pointed out that in their news release where they had a clear opportunity (even an obligation) to empathise with the individuals they named and with trans women in general, not one expression of empathy or consideration was made. That neglect speaks louder than their patronising and vacuous platitudes.

                      You’ve deflected, distracted, and outright goaded in this discussion. But you haven’t shown a single instance where this group has shown genuine empathy for trans women.

                    • Shadrach

                      “But that hasn’t been our discussion at all.”
                      Your second post in this conversation included this “But deplatforming bigots is essential for a healthy society.” So yeah, you introduced the free speech issue.

                      “I pointed out that in their news release where they had a clear opportunity (even an obligation) to empathise with the individuals they named and with trans women in general, not one expression of empathy or consideration was made.”

                      Ah, no. Here is exacty what you asked:
                      “Feel free to point out instances of their overflowing empathy if I’ve missed any.”

                      You didn’t ask about ‘their news release’.

                      And when I gave you very clear examples, you said this:
                      “point out the empathy for the people named in the press release about transwomen in sport.”

                      So you knew I had you, and so you tried to deflect. Very naughty of you, because that’s twice in one conversation you’ve been slippery.

                      You are an advocate for restricting free speech. It is a clear indication of how porous your case is that you find yourself on the opposite side of a number of trans people. Perhaps you’re just trying too hard?

                    • McFlock

                      You might want to reread the thread to find out who introduced what.

                      when I gave you very clear examples

                      No, you linked to two instances where they claimed to support, recognise or understand their own caricatures of the concerns of transgender people.

                      When actually given the opportunity to show empathy, however, they do not. By their deeds they are known.

                      If it is indeed “possible to empathise with trans people and hold the views of expressed by some feminists about bathrooms”, this particular group of “feminists” are not empathising with trans people.

                      So your contribution is still irrelevant.

                    • Shadrach

                      “You might want to reread the thread to find out who introduced what.”
                      You said “But deplatforming bigots is essential for a healthy society”.

                      Open Mike 14/02/2019


                      Your second comment. Own it.

                      Subsequently I caught you out in two naughty pieces of deceit. That’s something in such a short time, even for you.

                      “No, you linked to two instances where they claimed to support, recognise or understand their own caricatures of the concerns of transgender people.”
                      https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/empathy
                      “Empathy is the experience of understanding another person’s thoughts, feelings, and condition from his or her point of view, rather than from one’s own.”
                      Empathy is what this group have shown. Appeasement, well no. They are trying to engage in debate. You want to shut that down. The irony is you participate in a free and open debate to push your views that others should not be able to engage in a free and open debate.

                      “…their own caricatures…”
                      Post where they illustrate these ‘caricatures’. And remember, some of the support is coming from the trans community.

                    • Shadrach

                      Oh McFlock, I can’t resist. From the same link as above:

                      “Too much empathy interferes with rational decision-making, causing us to lead with our hearts rather than by our heads, losing the broader picture or long-term consequences of overly empathic behavior.”

                      Well you’ve certainly got something interfering with your ‘rational decision making’.

                    • McFlock

                      Your second comment. Own it.

                      The comment between my first and second comments. Own that.

                      As for empathy, claiming to understand is not the same as actually understanding someone else’s point of view.

                      When they actually discuss an issue where trans participants’ points of view are relevant, where was that “understanding” demonstrated? Nowhere.

                    • Shadrach

                      “The comment between my first and second comments. Own that.”
                      Which related to the ‘how do you know’? Own it.

                      “As for empathy, claiming to understand is not the same as actually understanding someone else’s point of view.”
                      Oh so you’re a mind reader now? You are prepared to declare a persons opinion as not being conducive to a healthy society on the basis of your psychic ability?

                      “When they actually discuss an issue where trans participants’ points of view are relevant, where was that “understanding” demonstrated? Nowhere.”
                      Because they are not a trans activist movement. Read their bio. Are they anti-Semitic because they don’t actually discuss an issue where Jewish participants’ points of view are relevant?
                      Are they racist because they don’t actually discuss an issue where Maori participants’ points of view are relevant?

                      As usual, you’re running down a dead end road and know it. And now want to withhold a platform from an organisation because they fail to pander to your demands around one group of people.
                      Pathetic. But at least you’re consistent.

                      Enjoying the freedom to express your opinion?

                    • Shadrach

                      “Overseas, similar silencing tactics have been used by trans activists seeking to shut down the voices of women they disagree with. It is part of a concerning culture of no-platforming and bullying private companies with threats of lost business and media attacks.”
                      https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2019/02/13/a-blow-to-free-speech-as-womens-rights-campaign-censored-speak-up-for-women/

                    • McFlock

                      Oh so you’re a mind reader now?

                      Nope. I merely judge them by whether their words match their other words. Their communications concerning trans people do not match their claims to understand or support trans people. Hence your comment was irrelevant.

                      “When they actually discuss an issue where trans participants’ points of view are relevant, where was that “understanding” demonstrated? Nowhere.”
                      Because they are not a trans activist movement.

                      You don’t have to agree with someone to empathise with them. In their releases where they deal explicitly with trans athletes as individuals and as a group, this crowd expressed no empathy for the individuals or the group. Not even a clayton’s empathy like you linked to earlier (you know what they say about everything mentioned before a “but”).

                    • Shadrach

                      “You don’t have to agree with someone to empathise with them. “
                      Exactly. And you don’t have to deplatform people you disagree with. You have a history of arguing against free speech. What is worse here is that your advocating limiting a groups free speech on the basis of your subjective and erroneous understanding of hate speech, and an attempt at mind reading. Have you even seen the poster?

                    • McFlock

                      I advocated that bigots be deplatformed, which has nothing to do with a mere difference of opinion. I agree that a lack of empathy is essential to be a bigot, but to actually be a bigot is a step additional to not having any empathy for a particular group.

                      Your comment about empathy and beliefs was irrelevant, because this group haven’t expressed any empathy for the people about whom they are advocating policy. Whether that makes them “bigots” is a different matter. They might just be repulsive people with whom nobody is compelled to do business.

                    • Shadrach

                      “I advocated that bigots be deplatformed, which has nothing to do with a mere difference of opinion. “

                      Calling someone a bigot is narrow minded and lazy. More so when you do so simply because you disagree with them and want to deplatform them. You even go to the extent of pretending to know the minds of the group in order to declare them bigots. In a sense you are displaying bigotry. Funny that.

                    • Shadrach

                      “…because this group haven’t expressed any empathy for the people about whom they are advocating policy. ”

                      That really is a stupid comment. Notwithstanding that it is factually incorrect, it is not a prerequisite of advocating policy for any group that one has empathy for that group. For you to argue otherwise shows how deep the hole is you have dug for yourself.

                    • McFlock

                      Firstly, I haven’t called this group bigots. I wouldn’t be surprised if they are indeed bigots, but we haven’t got that far yet. You still haven’t figured out empathy, yet.

                      Secondly, calling a bigot a bigot isn’t lazy, it’s simply telling the truth.

                      Thirdly:

                      Notwithstanding that it is factually incorrect, it is not a prerequisite of advocating policy for any group that one has empathy for that group.

                      If this group have any empathy, they would shown done it in their press release that argued two named individuals should be denied their dream of competing at a global level.

                      And yes, if you are advocating a policy be imposed on any group of people, you might find it useful to genuinely empathise with the position that group is in.

                    • Shadrach

                      Firstly, I haven’t called this group bigots.
                      Yes you have.
                      “That group of bigots simply haven’t expressed any empathy with trans people, making your comment redundant.” https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-14-02-2019/#comment-1583274. What ‘group of bigots were you referring to, McFlock?

                      “Secondly, calling a bigot a bigot isn’t lazy, it’s simply telling the truth.”
                      No, it’s lazy. It’s labelling simply to avoid actually addressing the issues that group are raising. It is increasingly a tool of the left particularly to shut down debate on issues they don’t want exposed to sunlight.

                      “If this group have any empathy, they would shown done it in their press release that argued two named individuals should be denied their dream of competing at a global level.”
                      Why? You seem to demand they express empathy in every single press release. They are under no such obligation.

                      “And yes, if you are advocating a policy be imposed on any group of people, you might find it useful to genuinely empathise with the position that group is in.”
                      “Too much empathy interferes with rational decision-making, causing us to lead with our hearts rather than by our heads, losing the broader picture or long-term consequences of overly empathic behavior.” https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/empathy

                      Still advocating to deplatform other peoples opinions, aren’t you?

                    • McFlock

                      replied to wrong comment. Continued here

                  • greywarshark

                    McFlock
                    You deserve a medal for toil without reward or expectation of understanding.

                    • McFlock

                      Personal development exercise 🙂

                      I’m trying a different technique this time – really pinning down one point rather than getting distracted by the myriad trivial untruths, insults, and distractions they thow in. If they were good faith participants, we could discuss several points at a time, but with this one it just leads to a “sorcerer’s apprentice” situation with urine instead of water.

                      A couple of the other tory swine do actually put up interesting links and broaden my horizons, even if the discussions go nowhere. With this one it’s just down to the art of trying to nail them down on one point as they wriggle and squirm and slap around. I find it helps me improve my focus in other discussions that can actually be productive and find a resolution.

                    • greywarshark

                      Like your colourful analogy – a delicate yellow shade comes to mind. I too have learned never to bring up little bolt-holes that commenters can vanish down. They must be kept to the primrose path; that has yellow flowers – may be of some importance? But it is easy to spook the questing mind. Always carry a net with a small mesh.

                  • McFlock

                    yes you have

                    Fair call. I got ahead of the discussion, there. However, they still haven’t demonstrated empathy for trans people.

                    “If this group have any empathy, they would shown done it in their press release that argued two named individuals should be denied their dream of competing at a global level.”
                    Why? You seem to demand they express empathy in every single press release. They are under no such obligation.

                    Of course it’s not an obligation. Empathy is a human characteristic, not a moral code. This is the bit you don’t understand. Empathy is as much a choice or obligation as height, A tall person doesn’t choose to see over walls, or reach high shelves nor are they oliged to. It’s just a feature of their existence as human beings.

                    In the same way, someone advocating that people they empathise with should be denied a dream or a passion or treatment simply expresses empathy, an understanding of what the situation means to someone else.

                    This group expressed none of that. They simply didn’t see what was over the wall.

                    • Shadrach

                      This group are advocating FOR something. They are advocating for the rights of women and girls to be safe. Now you have every right to disagree with them, and to argue your case. But you do not have the right to deplatform them. Whether or not you empathise with their argument or with them as a group.

                    • McFlock

                      Whatever you believe they are advocating for, if they had any empathy for trans women they would have shown it in their press release on that well-known womens’ safety issue of trans women in sport.

                      They didn’t. They show no evidence of empathy for trans people. so your comment at 10.1.2.1.1 is still irrelevant.

                    • Shadrach

                      So that comment was:

                      “It is possible to empathise with trans people and hold the views of expressed by some feminists about bathrooms. It’s sad you seem intolerant to those views, even more so considering you have suffered abuse yourself.”

                      The problem with your argument, and it’s a big problem, is that you fail to identify empathy that doesn’t look like you think it should look. Empathy to you is not understanding the feelings of others, it is compliance with anything that makes that other group feel better. That is not empathy, it is appeasement. When two groups conflict, we should hear both sides. When someone wants to deplatform one groups ideas, most thinking people’s antennae spots a bully afraid of a counter opinion.

                    • McFlock

                      In their press release dealing with trans people as a group and named individuals in sporting competition, where did the postering group show any understanding of the feelings of that group or the two individuals they named?

                      Because an empathetic person writing that release would have realised that maybe those two people or the group might have felt attacked by that release, and therefore added some expression of understanding. There are valid concerns and considerations on both sides of that discussion, but the postering group merely used the discussion as a tool to complain about self-identification. They have less empathy for trans women in sport than a carpenter does for their hammer.

                      It might be possible to hold and express their views with empathy. They do not. Your comment is still irrelevant.

                    • Shadrach

                      “In their press release dealing with trans people as a group and named individuals in sporting competition, where did the postering group show any understanding of the feelings of that group or the two individuals they named?”
                      You see you’re at it again. You expect every press release form this group to contain empathy, which is a nonsense position.

                      “Because an empathetic person writing that release would have realised that maybe those two people or the group might have felt attacked by that release…”
                      Why? Are you suggesting that trans people are an homogenous group, all with the same propensity to take offence? You would be very wrong.

                      “…and therefore added some expression of understanding.”
                      They did. It’s right there on their website. But understanding someone else’s point of view doesn’t mean having to agree with it. This is the part you don’t understand.

                      “…but the postering group…”
                      Oh so having advocated to deplatform the group you happen to disagree with, you now say they are ‘posturing’. That’s particularly hypocritical coming from someone calling for the removal of the rights of one group in favour of another.

                      “…merely used the discussion as a tool to complain about self-identification.”
                      Ah, yes, that is the issue they are raising. You don’t like that, but your efforts to defend your support of deplatforming counter opinion are becoming increasingly pathetic.

                      “It might be possible to hold and express their views with empathy. They do not.”
                      They do. I have posted comments that demonstrate that. But even if you could bring yourself to acknowledge what is right in front of you, you would still want the group deplatformed, because you just generally don’t like free speech. We’ve been here before.

                    • McFlock

                      You expect every press release form this group to contain empathy, which is a nonsense position.

                      Just every one that paints named individuals as some sort of problem to be solved. Not because it’s a checkbox item, simply because if someone empathises with someone else, they express it when discussing those other people.

                      It’s like holding a door open for someone as you walk through. If someone’s a couple of feet behind you, you just hold your arm out a little bit longer, not even as a real decision. It’s just what comes naturally.

                      When the posterers write releases about trans people in general and specific individuals, there’s no empathy. You pointed out a couple of claims to it, but it doesn’t follow through in their actions. They’re someone who says in a job interview “I’m very considerate”, when they let the door slam in someone’s face as they walked in the building. They fail to demonstrate the quality they claim to have.

                      It’s a concept you have difficulty understanding, but it’s what makes your contributions irrelevant.

                      btw, learn the fucking difference between “postering” and “posturing”

                    • Shadrach

                      “Just every one that paints named individuals as some sort of problem to be solved.”
                      They have no such obligation. That is simply a fake requirement you are demanding only because you want to justify deplatforming them. Meanwhile, enjoy your freedom to use this platform to freely express your opinion about that group without empathy for them.

                    • McFlock

                      Dude, it’s not an obligation. It’s just what people do naturally, if they have empathy. Like breathing. You don’t think about breathing. Breathing isn’t an obligation. But we all do it constantly, automatically, unconsciously, every day until we stop being alive. It really is like that with empathy.

                      Surely you love someone – do you regard empathising with them as a conscious choice that you are not obliged to make? Or is it just something you do?

                    • Shadrach

                      “…it’s not an obligation”
                      You are making it an obligation. You are effectively saying, based on your narrow understanding of what this group have said and your self proclaimed understanding of empathy, that this group have shown no empathy towards trans people. That is your opinion, and you have every right to it. But what you then do is to argue the group are bigots and should be deplatformed. That is a curtailment of free speech, and is what I’m calling you on.

                      I don’t judge whether or not someone else’s empathy satisfies my criteria. And I don’t seek to deplatform someone’s opinion just because I may not like what they have to say. Try listening to what Speak Up for Women have to say. It will broaden your horizons. Advocating removing posters that have the words “Fairness, Consultation, Women’s rights” won’t.

                    • McFlock

                      You are making it an obligation.

                      .
                      Nope.
                      I’m just pointing out that they have no empathy for trans people, so your claim “It is possible to empathise with trans people and hold the views of expressed by some feminists about bathrooms” is irrelevant to any conversation about this group.

                      If they had empathy, they would have expressed it naturally and in an unforced way, explicitly or implicitly, whenever discussing trans people. Because that’s what people do. They didn’t, so they don’t, so your comment wasn’t relevant.

                    • Shadrach

                      “I’m just pointing out that they have no empathy for trans people…”
                      Which is your personal take, and is contradicted by their own statements.

                      “, so your claim “It is possible to empathise with trans people and hold the views of expressed by some feminists about bathrooms” is irrelevant to any conversation about this group.”
                      It is entirely relevant, because whether or not they show empathy is no reason to deplatform free speech.

                    • McFlock

                      It is entirely relevant, because whether or not they show empathy is no reason to deplatform free speech.

                      If the existence or absence of empathy is no basis for deplatforming, then bringing up empathy in a debate about deplatforming for some other reason is an irrelevant contribution to that debate.

                    • Shadrach

                      “If the existence or absence of empathy is no basis for deplatforming, then bringing up empathy in a debate about deplatforming for some other reason is an irrelevant contribution to that debate.”

                      You should address that to TRP – that’s where that part of the conversation began (https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-14-02-2019/#comment-1583242).

                      My initial contribution to the discussion was about someone labelling the group ‘bigot’s in order to shut them down. (https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-14-02-2019/#comment-1583232). How apt, considering your position is to do just that.

                    • McFlock

                      TRP mentioned deplatfroming because the posterers lacked empathy? Are you seeing empathy in places it doesn’t exist again?

                    • Shadrach

                      “TRP mentioned deplatfroming because the posterers lacked empathy? Are you seeing empathy in places it doesn’t exist again?”

                      You claimed I raised the issue of empathy. I didn’t. You were wrong. Again. But that is a freedom you enjoy here.

                    • McFlock

                      Where in that comment does TRP mention anything close to whether the posterers have or lack empathy? Please quote the sentence.

                    • Shadrach

                      “Where in that comment does TRP mention anything close to whether the posterers have or lack empathy?“

                      His first paragraph, where the clue is in this “As Bob Marley said, who the cap fit, let them wear it”. The rest of the paragraph read…

                      “ I got to read a ton of abuse toward trans women and those who support them in a variety of forums when I was writing about this subject a few months ago. I was racially abused myself by a prominent transphobe at the time. So, yeah, I’m gonna stick with bigots.“

                    • McFlock

                      That’s calling them bigots, and describing TRP’s personal history.

                      Where did TRP bring up empathy?

                    • Shadrach

                      “Where did TRP bring up empathy?”

                      Lack of empathy. Not empathy. It’s right there in the comment “As Bob Marley said, who the cap fit, let them wear it”, and confirmed by the rest of the comment. If it’s taken you this long to figure that out, what the hell have you been banging on about?

                    • McFlock

                      So saying that if the label “bigot” suits bigots they should deal with it is somehow a reference to bigots having a lack of empathy?

                      Pretty thin, but if it was then how is saying that empathy can exist alongside some beliefs an argument that a particular group with those beliefs are bigots? TRP gave a list of why this specific crowd are bigots, and you go oh but people in general can hold some of those beliefs while showing empathy.

                      So my response to that is that even if it were possible, it doesn’t apply to this group, so your introduction of empathy into the conversation was an irrelevant distraction.

                    • Shadrach

                      “So saying that if the label “bigot” suits bigots they should deal with it is somehow a reference to bigots having a lack of empathy?”
                      Read on. Together, the comments are fairly clear.

                      “… but if it was then how is saying that empathy can exist alongside some beliefs an argument that a particular group with those beliefs are bigots?”
                      It is an argument that perhaps they AREN’T bigots. “It is possible to empathise with trans people and hold the views of expressed by some feminists about bathrooms”.

                      “TRP gave a list of why this specific crowd are bigots…”
                      No, he gave a list of why he THOUGHT they were bigots.

                      “So my response to that is that even if it were possible, it doesn’t apply to this group, so your introduction of empathy into the conversation was an irrelevant distraction.”
                      And my response is, so what? We define bigotry differently. The difference is that I’m not trying to deprive anyone of an opportunity to voice their opinion. You are.

                    • McFlock

                      It is an argument that perhaps they AREN’T bigots.

                      No it’s not. If you’d said “these people express genuine empathy for trans women, bigots don’t have empathy for their targets, therefore this crowd aren’t bigoted against trans women”, you’d have made an argument. One that falls down at the first hurdle, but still an argument.

                      All you did was make an irrelevant statement.

                    • Shadrach

                      “No it’s not.”
                      Yes, it is. It is AN argument. That it is possible “to empathise with trans people”…”AND hold the views of expressed by some feminists about bathrooms”. That the idea of disagreeing with someone is not mutually exclusive to empathising with them, and nor does it make them a bigot.

                      It is unlikely you’d understand, because your solution is not to empathise with the group but rather to de-platform an opportunity for them to articulate their views. And simply because they didn’t follow your Orwellian insistence on wording things precisely the way you dictate.

                    • McFlock

                      It’s simply a statement that it is possible “to empathise with trans people”…”AND hold the views of expressed by some feminists about bathrooms”. That is not an argument that a particular group of people is not bigoted.

                      Firstly, it’s an unsupported assertion. An argument is more than just an assertion.

                      Secondly, to make your assertion relevant to the preceding comment, you need to add about three arguments: that bigotry excludes empathy, that this group expresses empathy, and that this group has opinions on bathrooms. Basically, applying the general assertion of possibility that you made, and applying it to the specific case at hand.

                      But then, adding all that means that it is no longer your original comment about empathy, which was irrelevant because you did none of that.

                    • Shadrach

                      “Firstly, it’s an unsupported assertion.”
                      An assertion is part of an argument, in the context it was made. Empathy is not mutually exclusive with disagreement.

                      “that bigotry excludes empathy…”
                      Isn’t that what you’ve argued?

                      “…that this group expresses empathy…”
                      Well they do. But then even if they didn’t, that isn’t a reason to deplatform them.

                      “and that this group has opinions on bathrooms.”
                      That’s a little flippant. And irrelevant. Because it is no reason to deplatform them.

                      Which is repeatedly what you seem to advocate for people you disagree with.

                    • McFlock

                      Dude, your comment was irrelevant. “Part of an argument” does not an argument make, any more than “part of a plane” is a functioning aircraft. And information added to the discussion after the fact does not suddenly make your solitary, orphaned, non sequiter comment relevant.

                      Bored now. Learn to read, learn to quote what was actually written (you “posturing” fool), and learn how to present a coherent argument without someone else having to provide both sides.

                    • Shadrach

                      “Dude, your comment was irrelevant.”
                      Only if you didn’t read TRP’s comment. Which clearly you hadn’t.

                      “Part of an argument” does not an argument make…”
                      I never said it did. You’re the one banging on about assertions not being an argument.

                      And so we return to my very first comment to TRP. “It is possible to empathise with trans people and hold the views of expressed by some feminists about bathrooms. It’s sad you seem intolerant to those views, even more so considering you have suffered abuse yourself.”

                      Go for gold those women, despite the best efforts of people like McFlock to shut you down.

  10. rata 11

    Just close all schools, Polytechs and Universities.
    Let every one study from home online.
    Let individuals set up clubs for sporting, musical ,artistic, tech etc .
    Establish your own social and business networks.
    Competition and choice are good.
    Ka pai ne?

    • OnceWasTim 11.1

      You’re becoming quite an interesting specimen eh @ rata
      Is it possible you aspire to a future slot on ‘Dancing With The Stars”? given the failure of the hero you seem to worship
      – Foreskin of the bullet point…………
      – Rote ‘learnings’……………
      – Talking points in defense of a learned ideology, yet one that when someone challenges you, you seem ill-prepared to defend.

      “Full of shit”, and “kaka”, are expressions that immediately spring to mind.

      • greywarshark 11.1.1

        A cool beer and a good book, well away from the computer would be efficacious OwT. You can recommend the same for me when you think it appropriate.

        • OnceWasTim 11.1.1.1

          🙂
          Believe me! I distance myself from the computer as often as I can in favour of a good book, music, experimenting with forms of energy generation, and engaging with human specimens – unmediated and in their physical form. In fact, after 30+ years in IT and the PS, a complete purge has made for a much happier life. Oh, and being debt free – aside from the smidgeon of a student loan resulting from Mr Joyce’s prejudice against those over 50 (which I have absolutely NO intention of repaying)

          Sometimes BS and utter kaka needs to be challenged though, and you’ll have to admit, some of the comments from SOME regulars here are entertaining – in a Fox News/bulleted talking point/ kitsch veneered Formica kind of way.

  11. Adrian Thornton 12

    Venezuela Accuses U.S. of Secretly Shipping Arms After Weapons Found on Plane with Possible CIA Ties..well worth watching.

    From McClatchy..

    Air charter firm, client both deny role in alleged shipment of arms to Venezuela

    Read more here: https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/national-security/article226011940.html#storylink=cpy

    • mosa 12.1

      Thanks for posting this Adrian.
      It does not seem likely that anyone will be held accountable either as there is no federal law against this.
      Very convenient for the government agencies involved.
      The hypocrisy here is incredible when you have Trump wanting to build a wall to keep criminals out on the Mexican border yet they are quite happy to illegally smuggle weapons into another country to help overthrow that countries government and doing it covertly.
      This analysis from Mother Jones.

      Rep. Caroline Maloney (D-N.Y.) first learned that there is no federal law against gun trafficking at, of all places, a Fast and Furious hearing. In June 2011, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform convened to scrutinize the gunrunning sting known as Fast and Furious, which had flown off the rails when agents from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) allowed assault weapons to land in the hands of Mexican drug cartels. Much of the hearing was occupied with Republicans skewering the Obama Administration, but for a moment, the narrative flipped when Peter Forcelli testified. Forcelli, the ATF’s Phoenix field office supervisor, described just how difficult and often pointless it is to go after gunrunners. He described the existing laws against them as “toothless,” adding that it’s “difficult to obtain convictions.”

      ADVERTISING

      Maloney recalls being astounded by what she heard. “He basically said, ‘We don’t even prosecute illegal gun trafficking because there is no real penalty.’ After that hearing I questioned him more. I looked at it and there was really no federal crime for buying a gun and giving it to another person who couldn’t get it, or selling guns to drug cartels, traffickers, whatever.”

      “The fact that we don’t have a federal law prohibiting firearms trafficking is simply outrageous.”
      According to the ATF, 50,000 firearms are illegally trafficked across state lines every year. Yet the closest thing to a federal anti-gun trafficking law is a prohibition on “straw purchasing”—when someone buys guns for people who legally can not. But that offense is usually prosecuted as a minor paperwork violation and rarely results in prison time, even if the purchaser was part of a larger gunrunning ring. The penalties for straw purchasers “are very, very low,” says Lindsay Nichols, a senior attorney at the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. Convicted buyers get “maybe one year of probation, maybe some community service.” Gunrunners who face serious time will often get sent away on related charges, such as drug or financial offenses, which carry stiff penalties.

      “Gun traffickers know what’s going on,” Brooklyn District Attorney Kenneth Thompson recently told me. Thompson made going after gunrunners a personal crusade during his time as DA, taking more than 550 illegal guns off the streets between 2014 and his untimely death from cancer late last week. “They can make a substantial amount of money trafficking in these weapons, and the penalties are not that severe,” Thompson said. “They get people who have clean records to buy these guns and give them to these gun traffickers, knowing that they’ll be used to commit crimes. Gun violence and gun trafficking go hand in hand.”

      In the 2011 Fast and Furious hearing, Maloney pressed ATF agent Forcelli on what might help law enforcement go after gun traffickers more effectively. He responded, “I think that perhaps a mandatory minimum of a one-year sentence might deter an individual from buying a gun. Some people view this as no more consequential than doing 65 miles per hour in a 55 mile per hour zone.”

      Two years later, in February 2013, Maloney introduced the Gun Trafficking Prevention Act, which would increase the penalties for straw purchasing to up to 20 years in prison, and also finally made firearms trafficking a federal crime that could add up to 5 years to gunrunners’ sentences. The lessons she took away from the Fast and the Furious hearing remained fresh, as did a later hearing on the crimes of William Spengler, who in 2012 murdered his sister and set fire to his house, then ambushed firefighters and cops, killing two and wounding two before being shot himself. Because Spengler was a felon—he’d bludgeoned his grandmother to death with a hammer two decades earlier—he used his 22-year-old neighbor in Rochester, New York, to buy the AR-15 and pistol-grip shotgun that he used for the murders.

      “Some people view this as no more consequential than doing 65 miles per hour in a 55 mile per hour zone.”
      Law enforcement groups, including the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association, Major Cities Chiefs Association, and the Police Foundation, came out in support of the proposed legislation. It was also the first bill of its kind to attract bipartisan support. Five Republicans signed on as cosponsors, including Rep. Scott Rigell (R-Va.), who had an A- rating from the National Rifle Association (NRA). He commended the bill as “common sense legislation…directed at keeping guns out of the hands of criminals.”

      Then along came the gun lobby. The NRA pushed against the bill, and it never got out of committee. Its Senate counterpart, however, raced through the Judiciary Committee and appeared poised to win full Senate approval. That came to a quick end after the NRA demanded a change to the bill’s straw purchasing clause that would require prosecutors to prove that purchasers knew they were buying guns for someone who was legally prohibited from owning one or was intending to commit a crime. It was, as Maloney puts it, “a nearly impossible standard.” The bill died the following week.

      Rigell, who was up for re-election the next year, became the target of an even more hardline gun rights organization. The National Association for Gun Rights, which bills itself as the “fastest growing guns right group in America,” had launched a million-dollar campaign to go after any members of Congress who supported new gun laws. NAGR’s attack ads depicted Rigell as a gun-grabber who “who wants to pass Obama’s gun control” and “wants gun owners in a federal registration system”—something that was nowhere to be found in the gunrunning bill and that Rigell had never advocated. At the end of the ad, a voiceover stated, “Scott Rigell doesn’t sound like a Republican” as his face morphed into President Obama’s.

      “I outright oppose any initiative that would directly or indirectly result in the creation of a national database of firearms and or firearm owners,” Rigell said in an interview with Politico at the time. “Their charge that I am leading this, that I am supporting this, is an egregious lie, and completely unfounded…They are lying about who I am.”

      Despite the misleading ads, Rigell won his 2014 primary. But when Maloney reintroduced the gun trafficking bill in the next session of Congress, he was notably absent from the list of co-sponsors. Maloney views the fallout from her bill as a lesson in how the gun lobby operates. “What they do, if someone does go on a bill, they then go after that person, and make them an example. They target whoever is doing it and try to defeat them or go after them so that other people become scared and don’t do it.”

      In the meantime, straw purchasing and gun trafficking continue largely unabated. While many prosecutors find gunrunning cases daunting or unrewarding, Brooklyn DA Kenneth Thompson was one of few who tried to tackle them. In October 2015, Thompson served an 8-member gunrunning ring with a 541-count indictment for smuggling more than $130,000 worth of guns into New York City. Michael Bassier, the 31-year-old ringleader, used a collection of straw purchasers to buy weapons from southern states before transporting them north on buses. It was Thompson’s third major bust of a gun trafficking ring.

      “He basically said, ‘We don’t even prosecute illegal gun trafficking because there is no real penalty.’”
      But there are always more weapons out there. “I’m concerned that there are so many ways for them to flood our streets with guns,” Thompson told me. “The guns are coming up in cars, in Chinatown buses, on airplanes. These traffickers are exploiting weak gun laws. It’s left up to state prosecutors like me.” He added that sting operations to find and bust gun dealers are costly and “involve great danger to the undercover agent.”

      Maloney is thinking of adding new elements to her bill, such as a minimum sentence for straw purchases. “Of all the bills that we have out there,” she laments, “the one that there absolutely is no argument against is the Gun Trafficking Prevention Act. This is a bill that law enforcement has literally asked for.”

      Without a federal law against gun trafficking, gunrunners, more often then not, will get off easily, regardless of where their weapons end up or how they’re eventually used. “The fact that we don’t have a federal law prohibiting firearms trafficking is simply outrageous,” said Thompson. “Until we have our federal government step up, it’s going to continue to be a problem.” Until then, cops and prosecutors will be left to their own devices. With Thompson gone, now there’s one less DA focused on the problem.

      FACT:
      Mother Jones was founded as a nonprofit in 1976 because we knew corporations and the wealthy wouldn’t fund the type of hard-hitting journalism we set out to do.

      Today, reader support makes up about two-thirds of our budget, allows us to dig deep on stories that matter, and lets us keep our reporting free for everyone. If you value what you get from Mother Jones, please join us with a tax-deductible donation today so we can keep on doing the type of journalism 2019 demands.

      • greywarshark 12.1.1

        I think we usually have paragraphs picked out and put on this post that illustrate the commenter’s point and then the link to go to for the rest plus suggestions as to where the good value information is in the original article that the commenter finds useful.

        Otherwise it bogs down the post and it is better for people to look up some things themselves at other blogs and journals then they can read the item plus have a browse and have a taste of what they offer.

    • Cinny 12.2

      Thanks for posting Adrian, much appreciated.

  12. Gabby 13

    I’d be taking a pretty close look at those ‘aid convoys’ massing on the border too.

  13. esoteric pineapples 14

    The image/experience of walking along a beach and hearing seagulls will likely be just a historical memory for children being born in 2019.

    https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/new-zealands-seagull-population-under-threat-unbelievable-declines?auto=0&variant=tb_v_2&fbclid=IwAR3iUHtOblhDizRb5BsuwBxYOvwPpGy8gPP1_4utk2zSGXJEeFodUwR7Niw

    • WeTheBleeple 14.1

      Another strong point for creating offshore ‘islands’ that double as fertiliser repositories:

      Seagulls (and other species) need predator free nesting grounds.

      Additional habitat for seaweeds etc for oceanic food chains.

      Guano is collected and sold to offset cost. (world phosphate stocks are depleting, like oil, where return on effort to mine it continues to diminish).

      Way upstream all that tilling and fertilising that gets in the water wrecks the rivers wrecks the estuaries wrecks the breeding grounds breaks the food chains… We need ecosystem restoration right across catchments. Carrying capacity, bulk plantings, minor earthworks en masse to retain water, soil and nutrients.

      • greywarshark 14.1.1

        Hi WtB I like that idea. You keep them coming.
        Are you on Facebook?

        • WeTheBleeple 14.1.1.1

          Lasted a few months on Facebook it was expected of me to be on it, it’s kinda rubbish. Been off a few years now.

          If TRP has my email he’s welcome to pass it to you and Robert, but I’m obviously not comfortable handing it over here.

  14. mosa 15

    Mr Espiner and Labour ( coalition ?) start for 2019.

    Guyon Espiner: Year of delivery begins in defensive crouch

    Analysis – Labour will count itself lucky the Newshub-Reid Research poll was held for nine days and released the night before MPs returned to Parliament on Tuesday.

    Jacinda Ardern speaks to media after her first major speech of the year to a business audience at a central city hotel in Auckland.Labour will count itself lucky after the results of Newshub’s latest poll, Guyon Espiner writes. Photo: RNZ / Claire Eastham-Farrelly
    The poll, completed on 2 February but not released until 11 February, provided a welcome distraction for a government that has had a rocky start to the year.

    The headlines were damaging for National, with Newshub calling it a “disastrous” poll for the party and a “dark day” for its leader, Simon Bridges.

    Those kinds of stories create their own energy, sucking the politician into a whirlpool of uncertainty about their leadership.

    It’s difficult to escape that – just ask Phil Goff, Andrew Little, David Shearer or David Cunliffe.

    I’ll leave the quibbling over the interpretation of polls to the politicians and the partisans but we do have a genuine issue in our modern media environment: Strapped for cash, almost everyone has given up polling.

    The only media company now to poll consistently is TVNZ, which has for the last four years run its Colmar Brunton poll once every two months.

    The News Hub Reid Research Poll in the media this week was the first poll it has done since March 2018. Newshub reports that National “plunged” 3.5 percent (which is about the margin of error in the poll). But since when? Well, since nearly a year ago.

    Now, the poll may well be an accurate snap shot in time but establishing meaningful trends is the key thing in polling – and that is almost impossible if you leave it 11 months between surveys.

    None of those nuances will change the public narrative of course. Labour gets a big motivational boost as the most popular party on 47 percent, six points clear of National.

    If you step back and consider that when Jacinda Ardern took over the leadership from Andrew Little Labour was in the mid-20s, it is an extraordinary rebuild.

    Having rightly raised their glasses to the leader who has nearly doubled their support, Labour MPs might also benefit from a sober reflection of how they start the Parliamentary year.

    For a government promising ‘a year of delivery’ it has begun in something of a defensive crouch.

    Even as the ‘delivery year’ tagline was minted by the prime minister her housing minister conceded he was not delivering on Kiwi Build. Not even close – 1000 promised in the first year, fewer than 50 delivered.

    There are questions too about whether the Provincial Growth Fund is delivering. National claims just 54 jobs have been created. Shane Jones disputes this but won’t bolster his case with numbers.

    Waitangi Day again produced good photo-ops of the PM behind the barbecue in the sunny north, but there was a long shadow too. Hopes of a Ngāpuhi settlement, high at Waitangi in 2018, have faded.

    While there was goodwill towards Ardern, Ngāpuhi leader Sonny Tau asked politicians to come back next year with a clearer understanding of the Treaty. It was a not so subtle dig at her fumbled response to a reporter’s questions about what was in the document.

    With many of the government’s working groups reporting back this year, much of the hard stuff lies ahead.

    The report of the Tax Working Group, led by former Finance Minister Michael Cullen, will be released shortly. Having gone to the country in 2011 and 2014 with a capital gains tax policy from opposition and lost – do they finally dare to implement it from government?

    This will become a bigger challenge if the economy slows. National has already begun to try and weave the prospect of a Capital Gains Tax into reports that investor confidence – at two-year lows this week according to ASB – is dropping.

    Fears about New Zealand’s deteriorating relationship with China is one of the government’s other big challenges this year and is linked to economic performance given our trade reliance on the super power.

    If the economy holds National has little chance. A personality contest would be no contest at all. The polls tell Bridges he can’t compete with Judith Collins on popularity, let alone Jacinda Ardern. But he knew that anyway.

    Perhaps that’s why Bridges is opting for policy over personality, promising to release eight positioning papers this year.

    That is to be welcomed. If it is to be a ‘year of delivery’ then let’s see the Opposition deliver too.

    The polling contest is always entertaining but ultimately politics is a contest of ideas.

    • rata 15.1

      “The polling contest is always entertaining
      but ultimately politics is a contest of ideas”
      Polls = Entertainment.
      Politics = Ideas.
      So which won has facts, evidence, truth, or substance?
      Probably neither.
      The best Spin doctors win.
      Except when Winston Peters is in the house.
      So maybe just let Oliver the Octopus decide

    • Gabby 15.2

      Where did Sniggering Guyno get the idea Slick Britches was opting for policy? Slick’s briefing notes?

  15. greywarshark 16

    Plastic pollution: One town smothered by 17,000 tonnes of rubbish
    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-46518747

  16. Muttonbird 17

    Great news. Wealthy foreigners and domestics will no longer be able to hoard the jewels in Crown lake side and high country land.

    https://i.stuff.co.nz/environment/110557002/the-multimillion-dollar-public-land-sales-scheme-tenure-review-will-be-stopped

    • AB 17.1

      “In numerous cases, land that was privatised by the Crown for significantly less than market value was quickly on-sold for enormous profits.”

      But people get rich only by working hard and being job creators. Nothing to do with owning assets that produce unearned/passive income streams.

  17. greywarshark 18

    National faking at being politicians for 9 years suddenly have all the answers, before the questions are even asked! A bloody marvel.

    SkyCity replacing Grenfell-style cladding panels: ‘We just need to get on top of this’ – National
    The government is being too slow to introduce new regulations and policing measures on building supplies, the National Party says, as SkyCity announced its convention centre would be further delayed by the replacement of flammable panels.
    https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/382434/skycity-replacing-grenfell-style-cladding-panels-we-just-need-to-get-on-top-of-this-national

    • greywarshark 18.1

      Wouldn’t it be great if National in its 9 years could have built parts of a city with these beautifully designed traditional styled buildings attractive multistorey homes.
      Then they could have staged some terrific local people-powered events like this flash mob from Peschiera del Garda (Verona) Italy who have created a complex event, and filmed it well, and put it on youtube not just on tv on demand with barriers to overcome to view it.

      • ianmac 18.1.1

        What a heart warming glorious flash mob event. Just Wow! Thanks Grey. And of course your point about a certain group who lack sensitivity and/or imagination, is well made.

  18. mosa 19

    New Zealand ‘s commercial fishing damage to the environment an RNZ report.

    More endangered animals killed in commercial fishing nets

    For the third day in a row news has emerged of endangered animals getting killed by the commercial fishing industry.

    In the past decade, female Antipodean albatrosses have begun spending long periods in the eastern Pacific, where they are at risk from foreign fishing fleets.The Antipodean albatross Photo: CC BY-NC 2.0 Nik Borrow / Flickr
    Yesterday it was revealed four endangered New Zealand sea lions were killed in commercial fishing nets in one week.

    On Tuesday the government released information that five Antipodean albatrosses and one Gibson’s albatross were killed when they were caught by a longline fishing vessel in December. Both species are considered nationally critical. Two black petrels, which are nationally vulnerable, and one Buller’s albatross were also killed.

    On Monday, it came out that four nationally endangered Hector’s dolphins had been killed in fishing nets in December.

    Earlier this week, the Conservation Minister Eugenie Sage said the deaths of the seabirds showed the fishing industry needs to do more to avoid seabird bycatch.

    “Antipodean and Gibson’s albatrosses are as endangered as kākāpō. We must do all that we can to protect them,” Ms Sage said.

    Forest & Bird Ocean Advocate Katrina Goddard said commercial trawlers should not be fishing in the same patch of water an endangered animal lives and breeds in.

    “There is no way anyone would be allowed to accidentally kill four kiwi in the course of making a profit, so why are commercial fishers allowed to kill endangered native animals?”

    The deaths that were revealed this week were just the ones that have been made public, she said.

    “New Zealand’s fishing industry is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of marine mammals and thousands of seabirds every year, and those are just the ones we know about.”

    Ms Goddard told Morning Report the deaths are completely avoidable.

    “We need to remove trawling from where our nationally critical sea lions are foraging, it’s that simple. We know where they go, how long they’re out there…”

    “We need to protect them because they’re being killed” – Katrina Goddard
    The government needs to stand up to the industry who are blocking projects that would make a difference like marine reserves and cameras on boats, she said.

    “The system is broken and we have some bad apples in the fishing industry.”

    • veutoviper 20.1

      Congratulations indeed!

      I am so pleased for Mandy. A very talented family those Hagers.

      I love Mandy’s writing. Radio NZ ran audio episodes of her “Singing Home the Whale” last Oct which was absolutely a must listen for me and had hard ole me in tears at times.

      Still available in RNZ archives if anyone wants to listen. I much preferred the audio to reading the book itself which is an unusual choice for me as I usually prefer the written word.

      https://www.radionz.co.nz/collections/readings/singing-home-the-whale-by-mandy-hager

      Calling Cinny – great for your girls if they have not already read the book! (Actually even if they have read the book,)

      • Cinny 20.1.1

        Thanks for the link, looks awesome will put the girls on to it. Gosh they love the sea those girls.

        Thanks again 🙂

        • veutoviper 20.1.1.1

          Just need to say, while it is classed as young adult it is not a soft happy story in many parts and is quite stark in its reality, but from what I have heard, you have not cottonwooled your girls so I think they will be able to handle it.

          • Cinny 20.1.1.1.1

            Appreciate the disclosure 🙂

            Reality is important, if a story stirs up feelings that’s when the magic happens.

            Sounds like Mandy Hager is one very talented lady.

            • veutoviper 20.1.1.1.1.1

              I would really like to know what you and the young ones think, Cinny. Keep ,me informed. If you get a moment – and want to – would also like to know your views on the discussion up at 10. But only if you are comfortable etc.

    • ianmac 20.2

      Well done Mandy.

  19. One Two 21

    a THE INTERNET OF THINGS COULD DROWN OUR ENVIRONMENT IN GADGETS

    But that doesn’t mean we should ignore the other problems.

    Companies that are promising a new, connected future must do more to ensure this future is a sustainable one

    And that’s going to mean releasing more information to the public–at the very least.

    A simple read outlining some high level pros and cons around sustainability and environment…

    Little to no analysis and does not refer to health issues or the inherent dangers in the design …

  20. Cinny 22

    Does national even realise that the average right wing voter doesn’t like China?

    This whole china narrative is a dead cat me thinks.

    • Stuart Munro 22.1

      The message is not to their voters but to their funders – they reckon they can get along without the former as long as they have the latter.

      • Cinny 22.1.1

        Thanks for explaining Stuart, that makes sense.

        The right wing national voting exhusband was complaining the other week about what he deems is a Chinese invasion. He’s not very multicultural (his loss).

        I did mention to him if he was concerned about such matters maybe he might wish to pay more attention to who funds the national party.

  21. Alan 23

    Orr points out a few issues with Kiwibuild, doh!!

  22. greywarshark 24

    We are supposed to be a country that has good human values. We need to sack
    Immigration and start again. This is not good enough civil servants. It seems that you are a lot of self-centred machine-like people. Make sure you have laws that are reasonable and fair and treat people correctly and fairly, as a joint approach.

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12203129

    An Immigration New Zealand letter threatening to deport a 2-year-old, New Zealand-born girl has left her family shocked and heartbroken.

    Zara Lambojo, born to Filipino parents who are here on temporary visas, has been told she is here unlawfully and could face deportation if she does not leave the country immediately.

    Mother Aileen Lambojo, 44, was in tears when she told the Herald about the January letter and said she was turning to prayers and her church pastors to help her understand what was happening.

  23. greywarshark 25

    Floodwater swells Queensland’s Flinders River into a 60km-wide ‘mega river’
    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=12203900
    On satellite imagery the massively-widened river can easily be seen in the north of the state.

    Also visible is the brown cloudy swirls of stained water emptying into the usually pristine waters of the gulf. The flow is choked with debris, soil and dead cattle.

    A major flood warning remains in place for the system.
    Sky News Weather channel meteorologist Rob Sharpe told news.com.au the sheer size of the swollen river was why up to half a million cattle had perished — there was simply no dry land for them to get to in time….

    Experts are considering mass burial pits as the best option for Queensland’s farmers with the defence force also in talks to bring in heavy machinery to dispose of the cattle corpses.

    Just bury them on your own land Oz. Don’t try and hive them off on us.

    And all Australia – (and NZ) learn and look at the water management system that the Mulloon Institute has worked hard to set up. One guy probably died from striving to get this moving forward with often lukewarm reception from politicians.
    https://the-riotact.com/vale-tony-coote-am-a-visionary-for-the-landscape/259711

    This is one item on how the Mulloon Creek Natural Farms system acts to limit the bad effects from mass flooding.
    …in the past water distributed itself across the floodplains by a series of ponds and spillways, but nowadays, with the way the land has been managed, we see more a network of creeks.

    These creeks move water at great speed and in vast quantities so in times of heavy rain they are responsible for losses of nutrient rich topsoil (rather than redistributing it over the land, which is ideal) and in times of low rainfall they remain dry, as does the land, which is already parched of water.

    With the existence of these creeks we see mass flooding when the waters break their banks, and more severe effects from drought,
    http://www.youthfoodmovement.org.au/sustainable-farming-mulloon-creek-natural-farms/

    They have some good ideas over at Oz if they can get past the politician portcullis.
    Our CEO will be in Melbourne for a Master Class on story telling. If you’re interested in how to build a narrative for your:
    https://www.facebook.com/GoterraAustralia/ insect farming business, be sure to RSVP. Melbourne Accelerator Program

  24. Ed1 26

    Have the Green Party been sucked in by the rhetoric of the Right?
    https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/110541179

    Now if you ask “Does New Zealand have a Capital Gains Tax”?, then the answer may well be no – but if you probe a little further we do have an Income Tax Act, which under certain circumstances (and in fact quite frequently taxes income that arises from capital gains. So what do we want, a new act separate from Income Tax to tax capital Gains? Apparently that is what National think the government wants to do, and what the Green Party are asking for. Gosh, a new tax! doesn’t that just confirm all your suspicions about our new Government that put the biggest party into opposition? A New Tax is horrendous, and when you think about it possibly treasonous against right thinking taxpayers . . .

    Investigate a bit further, and you find that when capital gains are taxed, or when that income is not included in taxable income, is a murky and difficult area – see:
    https://www.canstar.co.nz/home-loans/the-low-down-on-capital-gains-tax-in-new-zealand/
    and
    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=12054132
    or even look up tax on capital gains on the Inland Revenue website!

    Now our current system of taxing capital gains has developed over a lot of years – and the way in which exemptions are determined is now so complex that many feel the need for professional advice – and in some cases it appears that taxable income can be affected by developing complex and possibly multi-national trusts to ensure that taxable income only emerges in the lowest tax jurisdiction – or perhaps does not emerge anywhere. For ordinary New Zealanders, it is something that doesn’t often affect them – fewer even own their own home than used to; but introducing a new tax? Is my home at risk?

    So are National just a bit confused – well actually no – they increased tax on capital gains on property when they introduced a “bright line” test that said if you buy and sell a property quickly the gains will be regarded as taxable. Ask yourself, did National introduce a capital gains tax?

    A tax that is too vague, inconsistent in application, and which ordinary people cannot understand is probably not desirable, and it needs review. We do not have a “comprehensive” or a “broad” capital gains tax, but through the Income Tax Act we do tax a lot of capital gains. National don’t want you to know that – or who currently pays tax on capital gains (it may be you are already paying a bit through your Kiwisaver Fund), but the rhetoric of “Labour introducing a Capital Gains Tax” will feed the prejudices of their bigotted and ignorant supporters – and those who do understand will not object to the implicit lie. There is really no need for the Green Party (or Labour or NZ First for that matter) to feed that propaganda by repeating it – lets have some changes to retain the exemption of the family home from a tax on capital gains (at least up to a value bigger than most family homes), but changes to give more fairness, clarity and simplicity to our income taxes.

  25. mosa 27

    No right turn says once again the law means nothing.

    Disposing of public records without authorisation is a crime. Destroying them to prevent their release under the OIA is an aggravating factor in that crime. But when push comes to shove, it seems that the Chief Archivist isn’t actually interested in enforcing the law:
    Archives New Zealand has decided not to prosecute the former chairman of RNZ Richard Griffin over a voicemail left on his phone by former government minister Clare Curran a year ago.

    Ms Curran called Mr Griffin after it was revealed he and the RNZ chief executive Paul Thompson had misled the committee over the nature of a meeting between the former head of news Carol Hirschfeld and Ms Curran.

    In the voicemail, she urged Mr Griffin to write to the committee to correct the record as soon as possible but Mr Griffin took that to mean she would rather he wrote than turned up in person.

    He subsequently refused to hand over the voicemail despite formal requests for it.

    Chief Archivist Richard Foy said the matter did not meet the threshold for prosecution.

    I guess it was all just too hard. But with this decision, the Chief Archivist has sent a clear message to Ministers and officials that its perfectly OK to illegally dispose of or even destroy public records to thwart an OIA request, and that they will face no penalty for doing so – undermining our entire system of transparency. And from the public servant responsible for protecting that system, that is simply unacceptable.

    As for Griffin, with this sort of approach to public records and accountability to parliament, he is unfit to ever work in government again.

    • veutoviper 27.1

      I am disappointed but not surprised, mosa. As others here know, I commented quite a lot last year on my own experiences with Griffin over the years. LOL.

      But I suspect that the whole procedure to lay a charge etc would well outweigh the costs, publicity etc of any outcome. Griffin is now well into his mid to late 70s and his final months of his tenure as Chair of the RNZ Board were less than pleasant so I doubt that he will be seeking any form of govt employment, directorships etc in the future.

    • greywarshark 27.2

      The Chief Archivist hasn’t been in the job for long. I wonder how much attachment he has to the nation’s history and its importance to our beliefs about ourselves and our past experiences. He might just be a good network operator.

      Looking at the details about the salary for the job, which presumably is a bit out of date, but the junior levels start at $40,000 which is peanuts. The senior about five years experience have a low ceiling.

      Pay
      Archivists with up to four years’ experience usually earn
      $40K-$60K per year

      Archivists with five or more years’ experience usually earn
      $60K-$70K per year

      Training
      Usually three to five years.
      Source: Careers Directorate – TEC research, 2018.

      It doesn’t rate looking after our precious records highly.
      https://www.careers.govt.nz/jobs-database/arts-and-media/culture-heritage/archivist/

  26. greywarshark 28

    I was given a graffiti book with some for every day of the year and it is amusing.

    A recent one:

    Religion is man’s attempt to communicate with the weather.
    Seen in Kingsbridge in Devon.

    • alwyn 28.1

      I like it

      My favourite item on religion was, at least as well as I can remember it.

      “The English, being a religious race, and trying to grasp the concept of eternity, invented Test Cricket”

  27. Eco Maori 29

    Kia ora The AM Show There you go Water problems in Gisborne faulty supply pipes we need to show more respect for water and invest in the best maintenance of the our water infrastructure to stop the waste of water including waste water .
    Its very dry in NZ people in rural NZ will have to be very careful with these conditions that are unusually dry conditions that has never been seen before global warming is hear and now .
    It nice to see a story on bill & shonkys lolly scramble with Aotearoa land in the south island Richard that’s bullshit they got to own the land at 5% of the value of the land gift land to Doc and sell making tens of millions . That was part of the process to privatisation on NZ land they said the process was strenuous so any who got the land privatise HAD THE NATIONAL PARTY IN THEIR POCKETS full stop state welfare for the ultra wealthy WTF. I do back prisoners having a TV. The bill cosby issues what that conferms is that there is one law for the rich and one for the POOR common person the common person will be locked up for life. The #METOO movement is not a attack on all men it is bring up to the through the suppression powers that men have on society all the WRONGS that a few men who are disrespect Wahine to the light of the day and is empowering Wahine it’s not a man hunt. He is a puppet of the old—.men who really run Gisborne so they can do what they want in Te tairawhiti we need more tangata whenua running for council in Gisborne I.E hog all the great resources of te tairwhiti and very little left for Maori .
    judy you been sad of late what’s wrong the lolly scramble is over for you greedy lot. No national is slumping in the polls and now the the poll numbers conferms that the government has a democract mandate to rule.
    judy that’s your mess that’s the way Chris.
    duncan you look like you should have taken judy out on a date yesterday kissing her ASS. There you go national didn’t want heaps of kiwis on Kiwi saver that’s why judys lot took away the $1000 kick-start Kiwi saver national would prefer that everyone go into huge debt to buy a house and retire in debt so the banks can fleece them .
    . Tamariki that end up in state care get the worst in our society dished up to THEM. David good on you but alcohol is one of the main drivers of family Violence I say that you would be better campaigning against ALCOHOL and family Violence. I have already written a OUR fisheries and the issue with our wild life Eco Maori is not giving you more tools to hit our humane government on the head with Ka kite ano

  28. WeTheBleeple 30

    I can confirm the National Party had a lolly scramble (of public assets) going on for their donors. I was told several times by excited business types that buying houses was ok, but getting a tenure was where it’s at…

    They were also repeatedly excited about bottling water.

    It’s all about return on investment, and they think people getting ordinary interest accumulation are idiots. Hundreds of percent profit, that’s what get’s them out of bed.

  29. Eco Maori 31

    Thanks to the good people whom maintain thestandard.org.nz
    ECO MAORI is sorry for once again over heating the hardware Ka kite ano

  30. Eco Maori 32

    Eco Maori smells a rat Looks like the sandflys are going to try and stich me up with the all female neighbours again. Get them to spin lies about me get me in there jail cells an beat the a false confession our of Eco Maori they have no evidence that ECO MAORI has committed any crime so they will try and make it up that’s how NZ unjustice system works whanau.
    Ana to kai Ka kite ano P.S they have tried every dirty trick in their dirty book

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Membership: Australia and New Zealand Electronic Invoicing Board
    The Governments of Australia and New Zealand have announced the membership of the Australia and New Zealand Electronic Invoicing Board (ANZEIB) today. This is an important step towards implementing e-Invoicing across both countries to help businesses save time and money ...
    6 days ago
  • An end to unnecessary secondary tax
    Workers who are paying too much tax because of incorrect secondary tax codes are in line for relief with the passage of legislation through Parliament late last night. The Taxation (Annual Rates for 2018-19, Modernising Tax Administration, and Remedial Matters) ...
    1 week ago
  • Chatham Islands pāua plan approved
    Efforts to reverse the decline in the Chatham Islands pāua fishery are the focus of a new plan jointly agreed between government, the local community and industry. Fisheries Minister Stuart Nash says the plan was developed by the PauaMAC4 Industry ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Bill introduced for synthetics crackdown
    The Police will get stronger powers of search and seizure to crackdown on synthetic drugs under new legislation, which makes the two main synthetics (5F-ADB and AMB-FUBINACA) Class A drugs. The Government has today introduced the Misuse of Drugs Amendment ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Blasphemous libel law repealed
    The archaic blasphemous libel offence will be repealed following the passing of the Crimes Amendment Bill today, says Justice Minister Andrew Little. ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Coalition Government lassos livestock rustling
    New rules to crack down on livestock rustling will come into force following the passing of the Crimes Amendment Bill says Justice Minister Andrew Little. ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Medieval law axed
    The ‘year and a day rule’ rule will be repealed following the passing of the Crimes Amendment Bill, says Justice Minister Andrew Little. ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Further steps to combat tax evasion
    Further steps to combat tax evasion Revenue Minister Stuart Nash has announced New Zealand is expanding its global ability to combat tax evasion by joining forces with authorities in 30 countries and jurisdictions. Cabinet has agreed to add another ...
    2 weeks ago