Open mike 14/12/2012

91 comments on “Open mike 14/12/2012 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Jenny 1

   14 December 2012 at 6:10 am

   Tears for a dying world

   http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-502563/Floods-tears-climate-change-hard-man-breaks-summit.html

   http://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development/poverty-matters/2012/dec/06/philippines-delegator-tears-climate-change

   While in an act of treachery and cowardice Green Party supporter weka writes that Climate Change is “equally” important to all those “other issues”, without bothering to name them.

   Deliberately ignoring the fact that as the Philippines delegate has said Climate Change will make poverty, social justice and inequality worse. (which I presume are the “equally important other issues” weka was alluding to)

   Climate Change is not one just one issue equal with all others. To argue that, is to call for the Green Party to sell out.
   • Colonial Weka 1.1

     14 December 2012 at 6:34 am

     So if Jenny is allowed to call me a treacherous coward, can I tell her to go fuck herself for deliberately misrepresenting my views, without me having to go into the whole tiresome bullshit?
     • One Tāne Viper 1.1.1

       14 December 2012 at 7:05 am

       +1

       Jenny’s fundamentalist monomania undermines her message better than any fossil fuel shill ever could.
       • Draco T Bastard 1.1.1.1

         14 December 2012 at 10:43 am

         /agreed
       • Jenny 1.1.1.2

         15 December 2012 at 3:29 am

         Time will tell.

         You have admitted that the Green Party has changed its focus “a bit”.
         You should ask yourself, why?

         When you have determined what the political pressures were, that worked on the Green Party to change its focus “a bit”.

         You could also ask yourself; What is to stop the same political forces that acted on the Green Party to change their focus “a bit”, from influencing the Green Party to change it’s focus “a bit” more, and “a bit” more”, and “a bit” more.

         Once you start trading principle for position it is a slippery slope.
         • Colonial Weka 1.1.1.2.1

           15 December 2012 at 9:17 am

           Jenny stop being such a patronising idiot. Of course I’ve thought about why the GP has shifted its position, and of course I’ve thought about how much the GP will have to compromise in order to be part of govt. I also have an analysis that looks at those things and what the challenge for the GP are. Which you would know if you were bothering to read my comments and pay even a modicum of intelligence to understanding them. But you’re not. All you are doing is manipulating other people’s arguments to suit your own agenda. I’m not the stupid, ignorant person in this conversation.
           • Jenny 1.1.1.2.1.1

             16 December 2012 at 9:29 am

             Of course I’ve thought about why the GP has shifted its position, and of course I’ve thought about how much the GP will have to compromise in order to be part of govt. I also have an analysis that looks at those things and what the challenge for the GP are.
             Colonial Weka 15 December 2012 at 9:17 am

             CW please could you please just patronise me again by letting me see your “analysis that looks at those things”.

              
       • Jenny 1.1.1.3

         15 December 2012 at 3:32 am

         Monomania?
         Is this another term of abuse applied inside the Green Party against anyone who tries to make Climate Change a leading issue?
         Weka has already accused me of being a climate change “obsessive”.
         While this may be a term of abuse inside the Green Party. Not being a member of that party, I can wear this label without fear, or shame. IMO it is far better being a climate change obsessive, than a willful opportunist climate change ignorer for narrow political gain.
         • Jenny 1.1.1.3.1

           15 December 2012 at 4:37 am

           “I’d Rather Fight Like Hell” Naomi Kleine. http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2012/12/13 Is climate change is equal with “all other important issues”, or will the fight against climate change inform and invigorate the fight for all other important issues? “Climate change is the human rights struggle of our time” Naomi Kleine. <blockquote>….Climate change has the ability to undo your historic victories and crush your present struggles. So it’s time to come together, for real, and fight to preserve and extend what you care most about — which means engaging in the climate fight, really engaging, as if your life and your life’s work, even life itself, depended on it. Because they do.</blockquote> Monomania? Obsessive? Or telling it like it is? Now, is not the time, for the Green Party to back off on climate change not even “a bit”. Instead they should be hammering it as hard as they can in every forum they can “obsessively”(as if their lives depended on it). But no, instead blinded by the siren call of those soft comfy seats on the front bench, the Green Party have decided to change their focus “a bit”.
           • Jenny 1.1.1.3.1.1

             15 December 2012 at 4:52 pm

             “I’d Rather Fight Like Hell” Naomi Kleine. http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2012/12/13 Is climate change is equal with “all other important issues”, or will the fight against climate change inform and invigorate the fight for all other important issues? “Climate change is the human rights struggle of our time” Naomi Kleine. <blockquote>….Climate change has the ability to undo your historic victories and crush your present struggles. So it’s time to come together, for real, and fight to preserve and extend what you care most about — which means engaging in the climate fight, really engaging, as if your life and your life’s work, even life itself, depended on it. Because they do.</blockquote> Monomania? Obsessive? Or telling it like it is? Now, is not the time, for the Green Party to back off on climate change not even “a bit”. Instead they should be hammering it as hard as they can in every forum they can “obsessively”(as if their lives depended on it). But no, instead blinded by the siren call of those soft comfy seats on the front bench, the Green Party have decided to change their focus “a bit”.
             • Colonial Weka …

               15 December 2012 at 4:57 pm

               Liar.
         • Colonial Weka 1.1.1.3.2

           15 December 2012 at 9:20 am

           Paranoid monomania then.
            
           I don’t have a problem with you being obsessive about CC. Your obsession with the GP is pretty weird though. I also have a problem with you telling lies, manipulating other people’s views and positions, and being generally stupid when it comes to all that. I also have a problem with how your approach is likely to undermine addressing CC in a real way.
           • Jenny 1.1.1.3.2.1

             16 December 2012 at 12:10 am

             I don’t have a problem with you being obsessive about CC. Your obsession with the GP is pretty weird though
             Colonial Weka

              
             Why do I pick on the Greens.

             Because I think that the New Zealand Green Party could make a real impact on a global scale against Anthropomorphic Climate Change.

             New Zealand could become a showcase for the world. That spurs the the populations of the major emitting nations to demand similar programmes.

             But do the Green Party see this? Is the Green Party backing off on climate change because they think, like most people do, that this problem is intractable, it is just to big, and that there is nothing meaningful that can be done?

             I have full confidence that the Green Party could make a real difference on this issue like no other.

             To see them backing off makes me angry.

             Climate Change is the most pressing human issue of our era (if not of any era).

             Threatening, as it does, mass extinctions not matched since the cretaceous, predicted to wipe out whole ecosystems and the species that rely on them. If humanity survives, (which is not certain) most projections calculate a human death toll not matched since the black death.

             What could be more important, or even of equal importance?

             Nothing
             • Colonial Weka …

               16 December 2012 at 10:13 am

               “To see them backing off makes me angry.”
                
               Right. So just say that instead of making shit up. Most people can relate to feelings of frustration and anger over important issues.
                

               Because I think that the New Zealand Green Party could make a real impact on a global scale against Anthropomorphic Climate Change.
                

               You wish. But you don’t come up with any credible plan about how that could happen. The GP on the other hand, who are experts in what they can do about CC, has certainly considered this and made decisions based on reality not on wishful thinking.

                
               But do the Green Party see this? Is the Green Party backing off on climate change because they think, like most people do, that this problem is intractable, it is just to big, and that there is nothing meaningful that can be done?
                

               I don’t think so. The people I know aren’t thinking that. I personally do think it’s far too late to do much, but I don’t believe that we should do nothing. Most people I know and read are more optimistic than I am. If you think that the GP have changed tack (and no, again, they haven’t ‘backed off’) because they’ve given up, then show some evidence. Or go ask them.
       • Jenny 1.1.1.4

         15 December 2012 at 4:59 pm

         thel;lasd;ljas;lfkjas;lf
     • QoTViper 1.1.2

       14 December 2012 at 11:31 pm

       I feel a response of “link or GTFO” is definitely warranted.
     • Jenny 1.1.3

       15 December 2012 at 3:11 am

       Time will tell.

       You have admitted that the Green Party has changed its focus “a bit”.
       You should ask yourself, why?

       When you have determined what the political pressures were, that worked on the Green Party to change its focus “a bit”.

       You could also ask yourself; What is to stop the same political forces that acted on the Green Party to change their focus “a bit”, from influencing the Green Party to change it’s focus “a bit” more, and “a bit” more”, and “a bit” more.

       Once you start trading principle for position it is a slippery slope.
     • Jenny 1.1.4

       16 December 2012 at 12:13 am

       No. But you do have a duty to point out where I have misrepresented your views.
2. AwakeWhileSleeping 2

   14 December 2012 at 7:13 am

   I wish I’d made a submission against the changes to the Social Security Act. What we have is bad enough without punative changes that are coming…
   http://www.pundit.co.nz/content/beneficiary-impact-highlights-poverty-of-social-policies
   • Colonial Weka 2.1

     14 December 2012 at 7:28 am

     Very good post by Bradford.
      

     In the 2000s Labour was responsible, among other things, for getting rid of the much-needed Special Benefit, reintroducing ‘no go zones’ in rural areas, introducing massive structural discrimination against the children of beneficiaries via the In Work Tax Credit, and undermining in legislation the very purpose of social security itself as established by Labour’s own forebears in 1938.
     David Shearer’s recent speech in which he talked about a sickness beneficiary in a way guaranteed to appeal to beneficiary bashers nationwide has not given me confidence that Labour will do any better when they are once more part of Government.
     So my challenge goes out equally to Labour – please let us know clearly before the next election what your policies on welfare and jobs are going to be. Are you going to overturn all of National’s reforms? Are you going to grant the In Work Tax Credit in respect of all children? Are you ever going to listen to those of us who do know what’s actually happening out here when you formulate your next round of income support and employment policies?
      

     My emphasis. I’m curious now what sources political parties use to inform themselves about welfare issues.
     • Jim Viperald - Once was colonised 2.1.1

       14 December 2012 at 7:42 am

       Thanks for pointing that out. Looks like it was posted on Pundit:
       http://pundit.co.nz/content/beneficiary-impact-highlights-poverty-of-social-policies
     • AwakeWhileSleeping 2.1.2

       14 December 2012 at 8:00 am

       Ideology mainly. And at least two Key politicians who can claim they’ve been there.
       • Colonial Weka 2.1.2.1

         14 December 2012 at 8:22 am

         Let me rephrase: what useful and valid sources do political parties use to inform their welfare policy? I think we can just ignore NACTUF. I was thinking more about Labour, the Greens, Mana, the Maori Party, maybe NZF.
       • Lanthanide 2.1.2.2

         14 December 2012 at 9:18 am

         “And at least two Key politicians who can claim they’ve been there.”

         Yeah, way back in the past when things were very different to how they are now.
     • aerobubble 2.1.3

       14 December 2012 at 3:29 pm

       Its believed by some that if you give people money for nothing they will asked for more money.
       Originally an argument used against welfare, but isn’t and should be applied to bankers and the wealthiest now. They do less and less, some even say driving us to extinction (or atleast massive civilisational collapse). Welfare has always been a compromise, it drives up wages on small firms because it take people out of the workforce, its a jobs program for middle class people to run, its a no monetry tax on the poorest, and it justifies a whole raft of compliance laws on business (which aids the big companies who have a multiplier effect) all justifed (rightly) on removing slums, producing kids who can read and fight in wars, and basically glue civic society together 9as we can see when if fails and we get criminal gangs). So welfare as constructed is bad, but whats on offer from the right would be its removal ad the natural follow on, the communist revolution (or rightwing thousand year reich). What we actually need is the redistribution of
       wealth without government conditions, a negative income for everyone to keep them out of poverty, then remove taxes on employment, so people can work for luxuries. The problem is this would wipe out the value of much of the wealth accrued by the richest, and that’s why its the perfect time to do it, since the richest have already done that, wipe out their accrue calls on future wealth, peak oil means the old wealth creators the rich are hoarding aren’t worth the ticket price.
       Its time for a rethink because we need every citizen to do the green thing, and the only fair way to do that is to have them engaged in capitalism. Capitalism has been stolen from the people by governments, and turned into faceless markets where their very lives are pored over and profited from.
3. Morrissey 3

   14 December 2012 at 7:49 am

   Melissa Davies, TV3’s substandard “London correspondent”
   TV3 Sunrise, Friday 14 December 2012, 7:28 p.m.

   Want to find out what’s going on in London? Well, the folks who run TV3 had the brilliant idea of sending over one MELISSA DAVIES to keep us informed. Only one flaw in that cunning plan: Melissa Davies is utterly ignorant, and instead of trying to be a reporter, seems to be content to read out press releases prepared by the U.K. government….

   SIMON SHEPHERD: And, finally Melissa, another long-running story over there: Julian Assange in the news again.

   MELISSA DAVIES: [sniggers] Yes, he’s been holed up in the Ecuadorian embassy for six months now. He’s announced he’ll be running for a seat in the Australian Senate!

   SIMON SHEPHERD: He’s been holed up there. Okay, Melissa Davies in London. Time coming up to 7:30.

   Referring to a political dissident as a common criminal—“holed up” instead of “granted political asylum”—is a dereliction of her duty as a journalist. Melissa Davies is nothing but a conduit of black propaganda.
   • Te Reo Putake 3.1

     14 December 2012 at 10:54 am

     Er, ‘holed up’ is a perfect phrase to descibe Assange’s attempt to avoid facing justice. When chased, rats do tend to ‘hole up’.
     • Morrissey 3.1.1

       14 December 2012 at 11:02 am

       Er, ‘holed up’ is a perfect phrase to descibe Assange’s attempt to avoid facing justice. When chased, rats do tend to ‘hole up’.
       It’s the perfect phrase if you’re in the business of black propaganda, as the British regime is. You should apply for a fee for acting as their uncritical mouthpiece.
       • Te Reo Putake 3.1.1.1

         14 December 2012 at 11:23 am

         ‘Black propaganda’. Is that a new euphemism for sexual assault?
         • Morrissey 3.1.1.1.1

           14 December 2012 at 11:43 am

           “Black propaganda’. Is that a new euphemism for sexual assault?”

           No, it means a sustained programme of lying, defamation and character assassination. It’s the kind of thing that mad Maoists, Stalinists and Trotskyists did in the 1960s, and ex-Trots like this fool did until his sudden demise last year…
           http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_4C_tSMqS810/Sj0tGFTshlI/AAAAAAAAEDc/FKbFx167wIQ/s400/Christopher+Hitchens+and+atheism.JPG
           • Morrissey 3.1.1.1.1.1

             14 December 2012 at 11:55 am

             ERRATUM
             “…until his sudden demise last year…”

             Apologies for the error. I should have written “…until his long-drawn-out and public demise last year.”

             Please correct your print-outs.
           • McFliper 3.1.1.1.1.2

             14 December 2012 at 11:56 am

             Oh – like what several Assange supporters have been engaged in, from “sex by surprise” to “illegal to have unprotected sex” and so on.
                    
             Thanks for the clarification.
             • Morrissey …

               14 December 2012 at 1:35 pm

               ‘Oh – like what several Assange supporters have been engaged in, from “sex by surprise” to “illegal to have unprotected sex” and so on. Thanks for the clarification.’

               You obviously need help with a lot of things—like we all do. But I think you know perfectly well that a dissenter and his supporters pouring scorn on false accusations is stratospherically different from the full machinery of state, plus its ancillary organs like the totalitarian “liberal” media and their uncritical consumers, engaging in a campaign of character assassination.
               • Te Reo Putake …

                 14 December 2012 at 1:46 pm

                 Nice words, Mozza. The problem is that the accusations don’t appear to be false at all. What Assange himself has admitted about his sexual behaviour tends to make the accusations look very likely to be true. Just to wind you up further, I think that even if the Americans said they intended to extradite him from Sweden and Sweden also agreed to change their laws to allow it, I still think Assange should face his accusers. The hypocrisy of championing transparency and openness while hiding from both is shameful.
                  
                 No means no. And being a celebrity is no guide to guilt or innocence, nor a defence in court, as operation Yewtree shows all too clearly.
                 • Morrissey …

                   14 December 2012 at 2:21 pm

                   1.) “Nice words, Mozza.”

                   Nothing “nice” about them at all. Simple facts, unadorned—that’s all.

                   2.) “The problem is that the accusations don’t appear to be false at all.”
                   Argument by continued assertion of an already discredited accusation. That’s not the most convincing rhetorical strategy, my friend.

                   3.) “What Assange himself has admitted about his sexual behaviour tends to make the accusations look very likely to be true.”
                   So the guy was (is) a superstar who suffered the galling indignity of having young women throw themselves at him. You can pretend to be disgusted, as his state accusers do, if you want. But whether or not you despise him for behaving like a rock star, you need something better than the unconvincing, in fact discredited, allegations that the state has forced these young women to make.

                   4.) “Just to wind you up further,”
                   Don’t flatter yourself, my friend. I’m not the one hyperventilating about the fact that the U.K. regime has failed dismally in its attempt to prove it’s worthy of its junior partner status by handing a dissenter over to the tender mercies of the world’s worst rogue state.

                   5.) “I think that even if the Americans said they intended to extradite him from Sweden and Sweden also agreed to change their laws to allow it, I still think Assange should face his accusers. The hypocrisy of championing transparency and openness while hiding from both is shameful.”
                   That’s fascinating logic. It could have been used against any fugitive from any rogue regime in history. All those hypocritical partisans in the Serbian hills and all those resistance fighters taking refuge in French forests during World War II should, following your reasoning, have openly and transparently handed themselves over to the authorities. (I’m not joking, by the way—and, more worryingly, it seems you are not joking either.)

                   6.) “No means no.”
                   It certainly does. And no evidence means no evidence. You can rage and threaten to break all international treaty laws, as the U.K. and U.S. regimes have done in their zeal to exact revenge on this dissenter, but when you have no evidence, you have no evidence. Unless, of course, you follow the loon’s logic that all sexual intercourse is rape.

                   7.) “And being a celebrity is no guide to guilt or innocence, nor a defence in court, as operation Yewtree shows all too clearly.”
                   Julian Assange is a journalist and a political dissident and the hero of many young women, who want to sleep with him; Jimmy Savile was a third-rate comedian who forced himself on young girls. The BBC has been instrumental in acting as a conduit for false government accusations against Assange, just as it acted as a conduit for young girls for the old paedophile.

                   You’re trying to suggest that Assange and Savile are comparable, somehow? Does Assange tell unfunny jokes and grope women on camera?
                   • Te Reo Putake …

                     14 December 2012 at 2:26 pm

                     Ooooh, I think I heard a figurative penny dropping in Mozza’s head while that last paragraph was being written!

                     Just to make it easier for you, Moz, yes, I do think there are some similarities between the two. One is a discredited celebrity who used his fame to have sex with the willing and the unwilling. The other is dead.
                   • Morrissey …

                     14 December 2012 at 2:32 pm

                     “One is a discredited celebrity who used his fame to have sex with the willing and the unwilling. The other is dead.”

                     Hell, Te Reo, surely you can do better than that. Who wrote that joke for you? Jimmy Savile?
                   • QoTViper …

                     14 December 2012 at 11:43 pm

                     One is a discredited celebrity who used his fame to have sex with the willing and the unwilling. The other is dead.

                     *snort*
           • red rattler 3.1.1.1.1.3

             14 December 2012 at 8:46 pm

             The imperialist character assassination of Assange should not be ‘likened’ to that of ‘mad’ Maoists, Stalinists of Trotskyists. They are of a very different order. The US is the no 1 global terrorist that dominates the world. Assange understands that. The Stalinist/Maoist dictators were not ‘mad’ but negotiating their survival with imperialism. Trotskyists never got themselves in to a position where they could conduct genocides and suffered purges and insignificance. Recognising this Hitchens made a career move to become a black propagandist for imperialism. There are liars, major liars and hegemonic liars.
             • McFliper …

               14 December 2012 at 8:54 pm

               That’s the shizzle 🙂
     • vto 3.1.2

       14 December 2012 at 11:32 am

       “When chased, rats do tend to ‘hole up’.”

       And rats only ever get chased for good reason eh.

       Why on earth would you trust the british system? And if you do so trust it then how does the Leveson enquiry and its findings around politicians and police fit into that?
       • McFliper 3.1.2.1

         14 December 2012 at 11:57 am

         wasn’t the Leveson enquiry part of the English system?
         • vto 3.1.2.1.1

           14 December 2012 at 12:01 pm

           Probably. So then trust the british system but not the english system ………… lol
           • McFliper 3.1.2.1.1.1

             14 December 2012 at 12:20 pm

             One would be a complete moron to assume any system is perfect.
                  
             But when it gets to be 2 people + 3 or 4 courts vs 1 person’s word, on the balance of probabilities and without clear indications to the contrary I tend to be cool with suggestion that there might be a case to answer. 
             • vto …

               14 December 2012 at 12:30 pm

               Fair enough. But I’m not getting at whether the system is perfect or not in a technical sense. It is about corruption. It is about the interest the USA government has in the case (like dotcom here and our government was corrupted all over the place – police, GCSB, Prime Minister). It is about whether the britishenglish system bends itself to demands beyond its mandate.

               And everyone knows it does. The leveson enquiry is an indicator.
               • McFliper …

                 14 December 2012 at 12:48 pm

                 And on the flipside, everyone also knows that some nice-looking guys who do some very good things in other aspects of their lives commit sexual assault or rape and then deny it to the nth degree.
                        
                 A prime example being Muzza’s St John post (if at all accurate).
             • Morrissey …

               14 December 2012 at 1:40 pm

               Spoken like a True Believer. Folks like you did very well in Russia in the 1930s—until they found themselves consumed by the same state machinery they had enthusiastically championed.
               http://lyndonlarouche.org/doctors-plot.gif
               • McFliper …

                 14 December 2012 at 1:46 pm

                 Folks like you did very well defending their local troop leader or deacon when those horrible allegations were made by those nasty delinquents.
                 • Morrissey …

                   14 December 2012 at 2:30 pm

                   No I did not. When there’s ample evidence, corroborated by dozens, often hundreds of independent testimonies, none of whom has been coerced or inveigled into filing a false complaint, I support prosecution.
                   When there is not a skerrick of evidence, but the state still presses forward with the persecution of a dissenter, it’s an entirely different matter. I do not support that. You, on the other hand, have chosen to align yourself with the state apparatus of persecution and disinformation, for some reason.
                   • McFliper …

                     14 December 2012 at 2:48 pm

                     Actually, I’ve sided with women who made a complaint, oh and ” British justice, which has been and is a real benefit to humankind”.
                             
                     But your point seems to be that we should wait until their are dozens or even hundreds of complainants before Assange should answer questions in a court?
                        
                     And to think you seemed to regard the Savile comparison as unfair.
                   • Colonial Weka …

                     14 December 2012 at 3:07 pm

                     It’s unfortunate that this needs to be pointed out, but often when women are raped there is no evidence beyond what they say.
         • Morrissey 3.1.2.1.2

           14 December 2012 at 1:29 pm

           “wasn’t the Leveson enquiry part of the English system?”

           I think you have (perhaps unwittingly) conflated British justice, which has been and is a real benefit to humankind, with the British state, which is often the polar opposite of that.
           • McFliper 3.1.2.1.2.1

             14 December 2012 at 1:48 pm

             oh, okay, because it was the British justice system that decided Assange had a case to answer in Sweden.
             • Morrissey …

               14 December 2012 at 2:51 pm

               Again, you’ve confused British justice with the British state. You seem to think that Virtue and Goodness resides in the state and vice versa. It’s the same way that Stalin’s followers used to think, and that Israel’s supporters think today.
               • McFliper …

                 14 December 2012 at 2:59 pm

                 So when you talk about “British justice”, what are you talking about?
                    
                 The rules for cricket?
                    
                 Or the system of legal precedence and tradition of Crown accountability that is entrenched in legislation going back to the Magna Carta and enforced by a system of courts and circuit judges to provide consistency in legal interpretation across the nation?
                 • Morrissey …

                   14 December 2012 at 4:18 pm

                   “Or the system of legal precedence and tradition of Crown accountability…”
                   Yes. It’s called the Law. You know, that thing that the British and U.S. governments are so frustrated by.
                   • McFliper …

                     14 December 2012 at 4:23 pm

                     Law without courts is wishful thinking. Like your baseless assumption that Assange is definitely, without a skerrick of a doubt, innocent.
                 • Morrissey …

                   14 December 2012 at 4:47 pm

                   “Law without courts is wishful thinking.”
                   Wishful thinking is that I’ll win Lotto tomorrow night. That the British government must observe the law is not a matter of wishful thinking, it’s a requirement. Either Britain is a rechtstaat or it’s a rogue state—like it threatened to be when it was contemplating the crime of invading the Ecuadorian embassy.

                   “Like your baseless assumption that Assange is definitely, without a skerrick of a doubt, innocent.”
                   I’ve never said Assange is an angel. He has obviously enjoyed the attentions of some of his young admirers. But his accusers and persecutors are charged with backing up their charges with credible evidence. They have failed utterly.
                   • McFliper …

                     14 December 2012 at 4:52 pm

                     And who holds the British government to account? The courts.
                         
                     The same courts that decided during the extradition hearing that Assange’s accusers had actually demonstrated that he has a case to answer.
                         
                     I repeat: the system that ensures the British government follows its requirement to obey its own laws also disagrees with your assessment that Assange’s accusers have failed to provide credible evidence.
                   • Morrissey …

                     14 December 2012 at 7:57 pm

                     “And who holds the British government to account? The courts.”
                     No. The people holding the British government to account are the likes of Julian Assange. Which is the reason for the massive mobilization of state propaganda against him.
                   • McFliper …

                     14 December 2012 at 8:17 pm

                     So Assange is now a fundamental part of the British justice you hold in high regard, but the British courts are not?
                           
                     Ever get the feeling you’re making shit up as you go along?
           • vto 3.1.2.1.2.2

             14 December 2012 at 2:23 pm

             “I think you have (perhaps unwittingly) conflated British justice, which has been and is a real benefit to humankind, with the British state, which is often the polar opposite of that.”

             Yes. We have the exact same problem here in NZ and the best recent example of that is Collins shenanigans.
             • xtasy …

               14 December 2012 at 9:40 pm

               Collins’ summer holiday reading choice: “Mein Kampf”!
     • Dr Terry 3.1.3

       14 December 2012 at 11:42 am

       TRP. Then you are telling us that you are holed up?
4. AwakeWhileSleeping 4

   14 December 2012 at 7:53 am

   And I’m really annoyed that in the media coverage (honestly who actually reads the entire Bill??) I managed to miss this little jem:

   “Under the Bill, an invalid’s beneficiary who is reclassified as a ‘job-seeker’ will face a cut in income from $256 to $213 a week – effectively a benefit cut of $42 per week.”

   http://www.caritas.org.nz/newsroom/media-releases/%E2%80%98open-your-eyes%E2%80%99-caritas-tells-committee-considering-welfare-changes

   God only knows how you are reclassified as a “job-seeker”. Probably if you so much as glance at a job ad….seems like an insidious way to save $$$ at the expense of disabled. Those with disabilities already have higher costs and are more likely to struggle in maintaining long term employment which means their level of debt and quality of life suffers.

   All up it is too closely modeled on the disasterous UK welfare model.
   • Lanthanide 4.1

     14 December 2012 at 9:21 am

     Clearly roads of notional significance are more important to the country than some sick people who sit at home all day playing xbox.
5. vivaciousviper 5

   14 December 2012 at 8:27 am

   Curran has an article in the southland times,stuff site, today titled ‘hands on housing policies needed’
   (sorry can’t link), i have left a comment.
   • Bill 5.1

     14 December 2012 at 8:50 am

     Nice to see her ability to construct a mangled sentence hasn’t improved since her outing on WO. Let’s hear it for the comma! 😈

     There is a lack of affordable entry-level homes, in the 1960s and 1970s, when home ownership was on the rise, 30-35 per cent of the new houses built were entry-level homes. Today, that proportion has fallen to 5 per cent.

     Anyway. All mangling aside, maybe the focus should be on the diminishing amount of disposable income people have? Or maybe an acknowledgement that 30 odd years of wealth redistribution results in more people being able to afford less?

     Or maybe the best idea is just to ‘follow the leader’ and cash in those loyalty bonus points?

     Here’s the link. (And not too sure about the repeated reference to being ‘hands on’. Am I the only one who senses a degree of grubiness in that phrase?)

     http://www.stuff.co.nz/southland-times/opinion/8039308/Hands-on-housing-policies-needed
     • McFliper 5.1.1

       14 December 2012 at 12:09 pm

       Fascinating that she was in comms/pr. 
           
       Maybe it’s the old thing that when she did it professionally she managed just well enough to keep up with a high client turnover rate. and because she did it professionally she assumes that her rushed first drafts don’t need to be proof-read or edited in any way.
          
       I love the way “Labour will fight to create jobs, opportunities and build a smart, powerful economy.” is tacked on with the same relevance as “and Carthage must be destroyed”.
6. muzza 6

   14 December 2012 at 8:52 am

   Has the Oder of St John covered up sexual abuses..

   This is an intertesting timeline of shame!
   • joe90 6.1

     14 December 2012 at 10:57 am

     Nutter!.
     • Colonial Weka 6.1.1

       14 December 2012 at 11:36 am

       What’s your point?
     • joe90 6.1.2

       14 December 2012 at 1:42 pm

       Apart from the possibility that the contents at the link muzza posted are defamatory this issue has been spammed across local bloggs for the past year or more. The names that keep on popping up all have connections to an organisation run by a convicted child sex offender.
       That’s my point.
       • Colonial Weka 6.1.2.1

         14 December 2012 at 1:55 pm

         Still not getting it. Is there a reason you are speaking google-ese instead of speaking plainly?
       • joe90 6.1.2.2

         14 December 2012 at 2:33 pm

         The allegation is that there is a particular group involved in widespread sexual offending of an especially egregious nature and that there’s a grand conspiracy by officials of the state and their allies, the evil femin*z*s and their misandrist gynocracy, to cover up the offending.
         • Colonial Weka 6.1.2.2.1

           14 December 2012 at 5:45 pm

           Who has made that allegation, and how does that relate to muzza’s comment? And, no, youtube vids don’t help either.
       • muzza 6.1.2.3

         14 December 2012 at 9:00 pm

         Actually I had contact with Jaimes Wood, and someone called Niels Holm at the Governor Generals office while this was going on, as per the timeline.

         I was told after I had contact that Jaimes had resigned.

         Defamatory, what the links to the stuff articles as well Joe?
7. bad12 7

   14 December 2012 at 9:32 am

   More praise from an unlikely quarter directed at a just as unlikely recipient,

   Fonterra have decided to roll out the daily dose of the white stuff ‘milk in schools program’ to all 300,000+ primary school kids next year…
   • tc 7.1

     14 December 2012 at 10:19 am

     Building up the feel good vibe for when the shares scheme eventually comes home to roost and people realise they just sold more of NZ offshore under the con of diversity and stability.
8. Anne 8

   14 December 2012 at 10:17 am

   Better keep a close watch on this next week folks.
   (hit the button and move to other end (Monday)

   http://www.metservice.com/national/maps-rain-radar/maps/sw-pacific-recent-latest
   • ANDRE 8.1

     14 December 2012 at 11:40 am

     Re weather map , THANKS .Anne, Sh*# looks like Mr grossers revenge is comming to bight his climate one finger salute!!!!!
     • Anne 8.1.1

       14 December 2012 at 5:42 pm

       @ ANDRE
       Had a look at the latest maps and they have down-graded the predicted intensity. Looks like someone in the Met. Office might have got a bit carried away. Still will pack a punch though.
9. McFliper 9

   14 December 2012 at 12:31 pm

   Doing the rounds on facebook.
   Apparently the post-communist “shock therapy” of privatisation in Eastern Europe killed possibly as many as a million workers:

   During the 1990s, former communist countries underwent the world’s worst peacetime mortality crisis in the past 50 years – with over three million avoidable deaths and 10 million ‘missing’ men, according to the United Nations. 

    
    
10. Draco T Bastard 10

    14 December 2012 at 2:02 pm

    Why Bother

    Why does she bother? It’s obvious what outcome she prefers. Just tell Cabinet that it’s politically expedient to deny compensation to Mr Bain, and avoid further costly reviews. And, in the case of Auckland, just ignore Auckland’s wishes and tell us what Mr Key wants to happen. It will save time and money, and reflect the top-down, sod other views model that this government promotes.
    • xtasy 10.1

      14 December 2012 at 9:35 pm

      You are still here, Draco?!

      I am relieved!

      The Standard has become a bit devoid of high level comments and criticism, although some still here do offer a fair bit of this. It is a bit like a “Stalinist Purge” that appears to have happened!

      I miss MANY commenters of past days, and it is disconcerting!

      How can a David (Joseph) Shearer sleep straight and well at night, if this is supposed to be the “future” of the “Labour led left”?

      NZ is already a dearth, when it comes to social and especially mainstream media. For f. sake, do not let it die. Cancel your bloody memberships and start a bloody new party from scratch, if that is what they do to all you guys, who used to frequent this blog site and keep it so alive.

      What a damned SHAME!
      • lprent 10.1.1

        14 December 2012 at 10:03 pm

        You will find that the comment quality drops leading up to and over Xmas/new year. Seen it 5 times so far.
        • karol 10.1.1.1

          14 December 2012 at 10:07 pm

          Ah.  I was thinking the overall number of comments would probably start dropping about now.  So I went to look at the site stats for this time last year.  But I only found the top posts for the whole year.  Then I got side-tracked looking at some of those golden oldie posts.
        • xtasy 10.1.1.2

          14 December 2012 at 10:43 pm

          Sigh! Seems I have to get into this weird “x-mas spirit”, or what they call it. Thanks for that feedback!
11. Penny Bright 11

    14 December 2012 at 6:44 pm

    This National/ACT Government is VERY vulnerable on corruption, ‘white collar’ crime and ‘corporate welfare’.
    Where the people lead – the politicians will follow?
    (Hopefully …………….. 🙂
    ________________________________________

    NZ IS A CORRUPT, POLLUTED TAX HAVEN!

    MY PUBLISHED COMMENT ON THIS ‘ROLLING STONE’ ARTICLE:
    http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/outrageous-hsbc-settlement-proves-the-drug-war-is-a-joke-20121213
     
    New Zealand – ‘perceived’ to be the ‘least corrupt country in the world’ according to the 2012 Transparency International ‘Corruption Perception Index’ (along with Denmark and Finland) – has a Prime Minister who used to be a Wall St BANK$TER – (in 1999 – 2000 John Key was a former foreign exchange advisor for the New York Federal Reserve, and was the Head of Derivatives for Merrill Lynch.
     
    NZ Prime Minister John Key, is currently a shareholder in the Bank of America.
     
    (This would be unlawful in Australia – but NZ hasn’t even yet ratified the UN Convention Against Corruption!)
     
    EVIDENCE!

    http://www.parliament.nz/NR/rd…
    Rt Hon John KEY (National, Helensville)
    Bank of America – banking
    Bank of America – short term deposit
    __________________________________________
     
    The reality is that New Zealand is a corrupt, polluted tax haven.
    Sorry to pop the hot air balloon……
     
    Penny Bright
    ‘Anti-corruption campaigner’
    New Zealand
    http://www.dodgyjohnhasgone.com
12. muzza 12

    14 December 2012 at 10:01 pm

    I do not understand why Ms Killeen was allowed to avoid standing or even sitting in the dock like every other prisoner,” he complained.

    “Ms Killeen was invited to sit next to her counsel at the table. I have never seen this happen before,” he told Mr Byers.

    Under a section of the Sentencing Act, Killeen was acquitted, even though she pleaded guilty to both forgery charges. A sentencing indication hearing was held in October but all aspects were suppressed

    How the legal/judical insiders work together to protect its own, while giving the plebs a written inside article on how to avoid the *workings of a courtroom* , should they ever find themselves in one!

    Games, threatre, actors – Thats all it is!
13. Jenny 13

    15 December 2012 at 5:01 pm

    ;lasjdaslkjf;lsdfj

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS