Open mike 15/11/2010

128 comments on “Open mike 15/11/2010 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. travellerev 1

   15 November 2010 at 7:19 am

   Another bit of news you won’t find in our Corporate MSM.

   In January 2006 KBR a subsidiary of Halliburton was awarded $385 million in order to build temporary detention centres for Homeland security. These centres are build all over the US and are mostly empty to date. They are build for “emergencies”.

   I am a woman who grew up in post war Europe and these camps are making my skin crawl. Why? Because they look just like the German death camps. Lots of barbed wire and close to train tracks.

   Why are they building temporary detention centres all over the US? Want to know more?

   I apologise for the over the top American style presentation but watch this recent documentary presented by Governor Jesse Ventura 1, 2, 3,
   • Bored 1.1

     15 November 2010 at 7:35 am

     The legislation to fill these places is already in place, it just needs another “emergency” like a Reichstag fire, or an aeroplane flying into a building.
     • freedom 1.1.1

       15 November 2010 at 7:54 am

       it is worse than that, the USA is already in a technical State of Martial Law which can be enacted at the stroke of the Presidential Pen, without any event to warrant the action. Technically, the Pres could wake up one day and say fuck it, I rule!

       The Martial Law status was assigned back with President Clinton (the real one johnny)
       and has not been dissolved by either of the successors.
       • joe90 1.1.1.1

         15 November 2010 at 9:05 am

         Repealed in 2008.

         All changes have been repealed, and have changed back to the original state of the Insurrection Act of 1807.
         • travellerev 1.1.1.1.1

           15 November 2010 at 9:49 am

           On 14 September 2001 the Bush administration invoked the state of emergency through the continuity of operations plan . This is an ongoing affair extended by Obama on September 10th of 2010.

           The state of emergency is a way of getting around every protection of citizens against government abuse. In fact Obama has claimed the right to kill Americans and non-Americans through assassinations and without any legal scrutiny and has in fact already ordered the murder of Anwar al Awlaki.

           Added to that the patriot act was forced through the senate after 911 severely restricting civil liberties and granting hugely invasive powers to authorities.
           • joe90 1.1.1.1.1.1

             15 November 2010 at 10:15 am

             But no martial law, rebellion or invasion excepted.
             • travellerev …

               15 November 2010 at 10:43 am

               Who needs Martial law when you can detain and assassinate at will?

               Here is a nice account of the new pat (Grope genitals and breasts) down procedure if you refuse to go through one of those new fangled x-ray machines. Looks like Martial law to me. So don’t patronise me with semantics.
   • Lanthanide 1.2

     15 November 2010 at 10:21 am

     Haven’t watched your links, but ever since I heard about these back in 2007 I’ve linked it up with ‘peak oil riots’ in my mind.
     • Pascal's bookie 1.2.1

       15 November 2010 at 10:53 am

       The NWO/ZOG crowd have been going on about FEMA camps since at least the mid nineties. It’s a part of what the black helicopters are for dontcha know.

       way I see it, the US is an empire right? A big old clunky republican empire with a miliary industrial complex and a big fat bureaucracy. Know what those things do? Make plans. Lot’s of plans. Plans for attacking their neighbours. Plans for being attacked by their neighbours. Plans for their cities getting nuked. None of that implies intentions.

       It. just. doesn’t.

       So would a big old empire with:

       land borders to Mexico, and

       several multi-million population cities sited in various natural disaster zones, and

       enemies both foreign and domestic who may or may not decide to unleash fucking hell on them one day;

       have plans for their main federal emergency response agency with regard to housing potentially millions of people. Of course they fucking do.
       • travellerev 1.2.1.1

         15 November 2010 at 11:08 am

         Wow, what got up your wick PB?

         You think it is normal for any government to spend $385 million on prison camps with barbed wire and near train stations. all over the country? All of sudden out of the blue? Or do you think that maybe they see something in the future that requires a total lock down of society? Such as starvation, homelessness and a possible up rise from the population.

         Just plans and No intention of using them? Fuckin hell, tell that to the Jews and other survivors from Auschwitz and Sobibor. Let me tell you something for nothing, if governments build prison camps they have every intention of using them and I can predict what kind of people will end up in them too. People like me and you. People who ask questions and who criticise the ruling elite. That’s how empires and dictatorships have always operated and that’s what’s going to happen this time and it will happen again and again as long as we don’t stand up to the ruling elites.
         • Pascal's bookie 1.2.1.1.1

           15 November 2010 at 11:22 am

           I’ve heard all this before eve. The other day you got upset when accused of being somehow similar to right wing militia stuff. This FEMA camp stuff is straight from there. That link about ‘informed citizens’ is straight out of there, it’s what they are talking about.

           OMG the govt is coming to get your guns, they are targetting concerned right wing patriots, unjustly blaming them for the terrorist acts they commit! Buy gold, and arm yourself!

           It’s just this:

           http://www.realzionistnews.com/?p=448

           with it’s media face on.
           • travellerev 1.2.1.1.1.1

             15 November 2010 at 12:03 pm

             Have you watched the doco? This doco was aired on last Friday night in the US.

             These buildings are real the really have inward bending fences with real barbed wire. The senator who cosponsored the bill to build these facilities which by the way is linked to the KBR site stating (first comment) they are temporary prison facilities really denies that they exist and the hundreds of thousands of plastic coffins which had been lying in the same spot since appr 2006 were moved to another place after they were filmed.

             I don’t get upset by being called anything PB. Sticks and stones I remember writing. I just don’t subscribe to the left right paradigm.

             I do however object to being bundled in with anti-Semites via a link to a website and I don’t think Jesse Ventura or Alex Jones have ever uttered an anti Semite phrase either.
             That is just a nasty low way of trying to shut me up but then again it says more about you then about me.
             Quit frankly I hope that the moderators disable the link to that nasty piece of shite you just tried to smear me with and perhaps you might want to reconsider how you debate me in the future because if I recall correctly the moderators do appreciate strong debate but calling people names in such a nasty fashion doesn’t go down too well here.

             And for you information I don’t own a gun.
             • Pascal's bookie …

               15 November 2010 at 12:14 pm

               I didn’t try and smear you with it eve. I didn’t call you anything. I just pointed out that this FEMA camp business has been talked about for a long long time. It is an old story that was doing the rounds in the NWO/ZOG circles in the nineties.

               That link you gave is about militia types complaining that law enforcement is unfairly targetting them and what not. It’s all part of the same deal.

               Seriously, if you want to get into these areas, go for it. But be careful. You need to use some discernment. I know you are not the militia type, but you need to do research on those types if you are going to play in the same pool as them.
               • travellerev …

                 15 November 2010 at 12:33 pm

                 Go fuck yourself PB,

                 Linking to a piece of shit like that saying the doco is just that with a nice media coating is clearly trying to smear me by association.

                 According to the constitution of America the People of America are entitled to carry arms and this was especially because they did not trust the government to do the right thing and it is their constitutional right and duty to form militia’s if they so much as feel threatened by the powers that be. That has nothing to do with Anti-Semitism and everything with being a patriot and a good American.

                 With camps going up and banks ripping off the population and no jobs to be had because they only bail the banks out but not the population I would be tempted to get a gun if I lived in the states. You should read the constitution and the (banking) history of the US and then come back and debate me but never ever try to fuck me over again with your vile links.
                 • Pascal's bookie …

                   15 November 2010 at 12:51 pm

                   Yeah that’s right eve. They’re all just Sovereign Citizens eh.
                   • travellerev …

                     15 November 2010 at 12:58 pm

                     I don’t know them, do you? I only know what the media wants me to know and so do you. Armed men prepared to fight against their government are very scary especially for the bastards in power so I’m sure that the mainstream media has every incentive to vilify them. I’m also sure that a lot of them are racist red neck idiots but they are entitled to defend themselves against their government and a lot of Americans take that very serious.

                     And it still does not justify you smearing me with websites which are hateful and extreme. I never propagated anti Semitism or other racist opinions and if it’s al the same to you I will let this be my last interaction with you unless you care to apologise.
                   • Pascal's bookie …

                     15 November 2010 at 1:12 pm

                     I didn’t smear you. I said that the ideas you are spreading stem from the GWO/ZOG crowd from the nineties. I suggested you be more discerning about things.

                     I suggested that because I don’t think you know about where some of the things you are are linking to come from, and that you wouldn’t agree with those things and that you would be concerned about where some of your ideas were coming from.

                     So nah, I won’t be apologising for that.
                   • Pascal's bookie …

                     15 November 2010 at 1:16 pm

                     Some interesting links. Alex Jones’ kind of people:

                     http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/gun-toting-arizona-protester-belongs

                     http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/oath-keepers-arms-about-nh-officials

                     Obviously just being vilified by the MSM though. Nothing to see here, move along.
                 • The Voice of Reason …

                   15 November 2010 at 1:47 pm

                   “According to the constitution of America the People of America are entitled to carry arms and this was especially because they did not trust the government to do the right thing and it is their constitutional right and duty to form militia’s if they so much as feel threatened by the powers that be.”

                   I hate to say it, but’s that’s the view of history that the gun nuts, survivalists and republicans believe, Ev. The liberal view in the states is that the right to bear arms and form militias was to allow localised defence against external forces. Remember, the constitution was formed at a time when the US was not a connected whole, with very little urbanisation and a series of forts as the main military presence and there were threats from the Spanish, English and French, not to mention native americans and Mexicans disputing the theft of their land. It made sense to allow the citizens of frontier towns the ability to defend themselves against those threats. The idea that the threat comes from the federal government is a far more recent meme, but it is built on the two hundred year old dispute about the right balance between state and federal power.

                   While I think your rejection of the left/right paradigm is fine, it does seem to mean you fail to recognise the conservatism of the sources you cite. I don’t have a problem with Jesse Ventura, who portrays himself as fiscally conservative and socially liberal, but his TV program is an obvious play to the kind of people who beleive the governent is out to get them. The title itself should be a clue, eh!

                   This is a left wing site, after all. If you want to advocate the beliefs of Truthers/Tea party/Survivalists etc. you have to expect a vigorous response around here, even if you personally don’t recognise the politics of the issue.

                   And by uncritically quoting right wing sources such as Alex Jones etc. you diminish your argument. If you want to convince readers here, find left wing citations. Hell, why not write a guest post making the left wing case for your beliefs? Even if you don’t like that left/right divide, I’m sure you can put yourself in that mode for the purposes of trying to make an argument that readers here might find sympathy with.
                   • travellerev …

                     15 November 2010 at 2:43 pm

                     I’m sure you are right about the interpretation of the constitution. I have never said that I support militia’s or gun nutters. I also Agree that Alex Jones has some very scary opinions and that while I share with him our views on 911 I don’t have a whole lot in common but that does not mitigate PB’s attempt to smear me with one of the vilest Anti Semitic websites I have seen in a long time and insinuating that Ventura’s doco is just that dressed up with a PC coating.

                     I am perfectly happy to defend statements I make and expect nothing less than vigorous opposition but to declare me guilty by association of Anti Semitism via links to such websites are just not on.

                     Here is a nice link to a very reasonable writer who writes about trust. More especially about how trust is the most important lubricant for any society.

                     If camps with barbed wire fences are build all over America (see links above) very reminiscent of the German death camps which are empty and nobody tells the population why they are there, lies are told about why Iraq needs to be attacked, banks are bailed out jobs are gutted and wages are dropping causing people to loose their homes and having to live on food stamps at some stage some of those people are going to take measures to defend themselves.

                     Clearly a lot of people in the States have trust issues, justified or not, and they do what they feel is necessary. From were I stand (with 911 science proving the official CT a load of crock), they are probably right. But that does not mean I subscribe to every political view they have. 911 is perhaps in most cases the only thing tying me to those people that’s all (And I don’t know how much of those in militias are actually aware of 911 and the problems with the official CT).

                     I don’t have a gun because I believe in being the change you want to see in the world which in my case is it being a peaceful world were I don’t have to have gun to protect myself.

                     I foresee a collapse of the US and therefore China and India (since they earn their money primarily through selling shit and services to the US) Peak oil will put an end to international trade to the point of isolating far away countries such as New Zealand unless we find alternative sources of energy. (Something my husband is still very busy with and at the moment he drives a car with a hydrogen cell (WOFed and all) which saves about thirty percent of his fuel costs) and I believe in cutting my cost of living by growing my own food which makes us less susceptible to price rises plus it is more sustainable then buying you pork from Canada and your veggies from China.

                     I believe in compassion and sharing and that includes information which I believe might be important whether that info is looked at and assimilated is another thing altogether. It most certainly does not warrant PB attacking me as he did.

                     I believe that Israel’s leadership is racist and their politics are detrimental to their own population and Americas this is an opinion I share with many Jews both left and right wing. That does not make me anti Semitic. In fact this is a film made by a group of anti Zionist Jews put online by Gilad Atzmon called the anti Semitic side of Zionism, a must watch if you want to be up and running with what many Jews think of the subject of Israel.

                     In fact if any of you actually thinks that America is justified in attacking Afghanistan and Iraq or other Muslims in Arab countries for what ever reason than that makes you officially anti Semitic as many Muslims are Semites too.

                     We are aware that there are some people who think that it was Jews who did 911. They are isolated and ostracised by the majority of 911 truthers for the bigoted racist assholes they are. To equate my sincere and well documented comments here with those people is just the latest and saddest attempt at silencing me. Not Cool, VOR not cool at all.

                     From what left wing point of view. The armchair socialists? There is no real left wing movement any more. Real left wingers would have pointed the finger at the government a long time ago for 911. They would remember every fucking time the government pulled another false flag out of their heads and remembered.
                   • The Baron …

                     15 November 2010 at 2:54 pm

                     I don’t think anyone is trying to silence you, Eve.

                     They are simply pointing out that these theories are shared by some pretty nutty people. That doesn’t mean that you are nutty, but it does mean that you will have to risk being associated with those nutties.

                     They are also pointing out that there can be some other explanations for these camps that are less nutty.

                     This does not mean that anyone is attacking you, trying to silence you, or are agents of some vast conspiracy. It simply means that other people have other opinions, and they want to engage with you on those. I suggest you try listening and engaging with them.
                   • travellerev …

                     15 November 2010 at 4:54 pm

                     Baron,

                     Giving a link to a racist bigoted Jew hating website and saying that a link to a doco I gave is the same but with a PC coat is not engaging in a fair debate. That is trying to smear me with a pretty broad brush. There are racist bigots everywhere, In fact New Zealand on the whole is shockingly racist compared to Dutch standards and no, that doesn’t mean that every New Zealander is racist but the accepted level of racism permeating every layer of New Zealand society is absolutely gross compared to what I’m used to.
                     So does that mean I can’t quote New Zealanders?
                     Yes, Baron that is a way of silencing. Not in a conspiracy sort of way but in a dumb patronising and above all unfair way.
                     In the years I have commented here I have never ever engaged in racist bigotism and to use that is nasty small minded and yes I’ll say it again SILENCING.
                   • Pascal's bookie …

                     15 November 2010 at 5:10 pm

                     Once again eve, that is not what I did.

                     I’m talking about the ideas.

                     The FEMA camps meme comes directly from the NWO/ZOG stuff from the nineties. The Patriot movement. The militia movement. Posse Comitatus. The Sovereign citizen movement. Those are the circles this stuff comes from. Further back it ties to the birchers.

                     I’m not saying you or Venture are of that movement. I’m not, and I didn’t say that. So stop saying that’s what I did.

                     I’m saying that that is where the idea that you are both repeating comes from. You trying to turn that around to say that I’m attacking you could just as easily be interpreted as you trying to silence me. To prevent me saying where these ideas stem from. Is that info off limits?

                     I specifically said that I mentioned it because I suspected you don’t know where this rhetoric comes from. If you are aware of the links, then you need to be explicit about it upfront.

                     I mentioned it precisely because I don’t think that this is what you are like, and that by mentioning it I might somehow get through to you that you need to use a lot of discernment when you are moving in conspiricist circles. there is nasty nasty stuff out there and you are treading right up to the line on it.

                     You started out, and you are very concerned about, the horrors of mid twentieth century europe. Those ideas take power through rhetoric and fear. You mentioned civic trust. Do you not see that these theorists are seeking to destroy that trust?
                   • Armchair Critic …

                     15 November 2010 at 5:28 pm

                     Baron at 2:54
                     Nicely put. What I’ve been wanting to say, in a lot less words.
       • Lanthanide 1.2.1.2

         15 November 2010 at 11:11 am

         So they’re prepared. They’ve built facilities in advance of any problem at all occurring. Sure, natural disasters are possible, but I don’t think they used these camps to help Katrina victims. In the medium term, it seems that peak oil could easily lead to widespread discontent within the US, and they’ve got all these nice facilities sitting around…

         So maybe they weren’t built for PO specifically. Doesn’t mean they won’t be used for dealing with it.
         • travellerev 1.2.1.2.1

           15 November 2010 at 11:21 am

           I think that the inward pointing barbed wire fences is a dead give away really. In the doco one of the guards states that the barbed wire pointing inward (great for keeping people in against their will) is for the protection of the incarcerated. Huh?
         • mcflock 1.2.1.2.2

           15 November 2010 at 1:33 pm

           Let’s see – Katrina hit in 2005, travellerev reckons the contract for the “camps” was in 2006.

           Oh, and the linked article says that it’s Customs & Enforcement section of homeland security.
           SO Bush paid his mates in KBR to pay the army to make these facilities for immigration detention and/or “emergency” purposes, after Katrina. And he paid them a lot to oversupply – bugger me that’s out of character, it never occurred with their cost-plus logistics contracts in Iraq.

           How many black helicopters land at these camps after mutilating cows? God I miss the 90s.
     • travellerev 1.2.2

       15 November 2010 at 10:57 am

       Yeah that could very well be. If you have ever heard Gerald Celente’s trends forecasts then you will also be aware of the his prediction of tax riots and food riots Based on the collapse of the dollar due to the QE money printing procedures. The fact is that some 400 prison camps (both newly build and converted from other industrial areas etc) are now waiting, most empty but some of them already in use to house whole families (illegal aliens etc.) One of which is shown in the doco.

       What scares the shit out of me is that with more than 40 million people on food stamps in August alone those food riots won’t be far away and with at least 10 or more foreclosures in the pipeline the number of homeless will rise quickly. Celente has a nice one. “When people have nothing left to loose they loose it.” That would be a lot of angry people.

       The police is now trained to see well informed citizens as terrorists. You get the idea.
       • Colonial Viper 1.2.2.1

         15 November 2010 at 2:45 pm

         US will do fine until it experiences its first failed Treasuries auction. Then, run for the hills. With lots of weapons, water and ammunition.
         • Lanthanide 1.2.2.1.1

           15 November 2010 at 2:59 pm

           It’ll probably be more of a grey area than that. It is likely that the treasuries auctions can’t “fail” in the way you propose – eg the FED will come in and print money in order to buy out the auction (aren’t they doing this already?), and then the next auction may be postponed after the usual date or some-such. It is probably after 2-3 or more of these ‘failed-in-all-but-name’ auctions that the jig would be up.

           Basically it’s a question of what the suckers in the US, and internationally, will swallow, in order to kick the can down the road, even if only for a few extra months.
2. Bored 2

   15 November 2010 at 7:31 am

   This is from George Monbiot, outlining a nasty trend from the top down. Its called putting the costs on the masses, avoiding the tops share of the costs. How much of this happens in NZ I am not sure, but I would really like some reassurance.

   It’s arguable that the UK government does not have a spending crisis; it has a tax avoidance crisis. Official accounts suggest that the tax gap amounts to £42bn(2). Richard Murphy of Tax Research has demonstrated that this figure cannot be correct, as it contradicts other government statistics. He estimates that avoidance now amounts to £25bn a year, evasion to £70bn, and outstanding debts to the tax service to £28bn: a total of more than £120bn(3).

   That’s roughly three-quarters of the budget deficit(4). It’s equivalent to 80% of the UK’s revenue from income tax(5). By comparison, benefit fraud, which both the government and the rightwing press emphasised in order to justify the cuts, amounts to £1.1bn a year(6). No one would claim that all this missing money could be recovered. But even if only 20% were clawed back, the most damaging cuts could be reversed.

   http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2010/11/09/the-lax-tax-pact/

   I suspect that what happens in UK happens here, as evidenced by the banks failure to comply with IRD regs in the last few years. Nact sits idly by demanding cuts at the bottom whilst the corporates run away from the costs.
   • ianmac 2.1

     15 November 2010 at 9:50 am

     Avoidance is a fancy name for hiding income in Trusts and drawing down a tiny salary after paying all running costs. It would be interesting to know how much tax is actually paid by these rich/poor people.
     A friend by the way, had a go at creating a Company with his salary as his sole income, and then claiming his daily operating costs like food, clothing, shelter, transport as tax deductible. His plan was blocked by IRD. Pity really.
   • Draco T Bastard 2.2

     15 November 2010 at 12:53 pm

     Capitalists have, throughout history, manipulated government and the rules to enrich themselves at everyone else’s expense and when the bill falls due they blame the less well off, the people that they’ve been stealing from. Does it happen here? Yes.
   • Vicky32 2.3

     15 November 2010 at 5:36 pm

     I am sure it does happen here! The screeching about benefit fraud certainly does…
     Deb
     • Descendant Of Smith 2.3.1

       15 November 2010 at 9:40 pm

       Many of the trusts that I have seen are ostensibly welfare trusts – e.g. set up for the welfare of the beneficiaries of the trust.

       As the general principle in the welfare system is that you first should utilise available resources surely these trusts should be accessed first before state assistance otherwise surely the documents are a fabrication and have no real legal purpose.

       Surely the trustees are remiss for not providing for a (trust) beneficiaries support if they lose their job, become unwell or need to go into a rest home.

       If the trusts were first forced into acting to support their stated purpose then this would surely go a long way to removing the rorting that is going on.

       The first step is clearly to ensure it is compulsory that all trust beneficiaries are notified that they are such and all trusts registered publicly. All state assistance should require then that people are asked if they are a beneficiary of a trust and these details checked against that register.
3. joe90 3

   15 November 2010 at 7:37 am

   From Alternet, Why Germany Has It So Good — and Why America Is Going Down the Drain.

   Germany has somehow managed to create a high-wage, unionized economy without shipping all its jobs abroad or creating a massive trade deficit, or any trade deficit at all. And even as the Germans outsell the United States, they manage to take six weeks of vacation every year. They’re beating us with one hand tied behind their back.”
   • prism 3.1

     15 November 2010 at 10:24 am

     joe90 How does Germany rate on gender equality? In the past women tended to be the hausfrau in the traditional inferior position – at a lower level than nz I thought when I was there in 1970s.
4. Cnr Joe 4

   15 November 2010 at 8:44 am

   Hah! just heard Dunne on am report – 8.43 – he might try a ‘virtual conference’ next time…..
   • felix 4.1

     15 November 2010 at 9:37 am

     Makes sense I suppose for a virtual political party.
   • ianmac 4.2

     15 November 2010 at 9:44 am

     He did say that his 40-50 people at a national conference was pretty good – normal for a small party. Really?
     • Borred 4.2.1

       15 November 2010 at 9:50 am

       Must be a pack of very strange people running lose out there: i suspect they couted their dogs and cats as well.
     • Lanthanide 4.2.2

       15 November 2010 at 10:24 am

       I was expecting him to say something like 100-300.

       How many did Winston get, and he isn’t even in parliament?
       • Lanthanide 4.2.2.1

         15 November 2010 at 11:13 am

         I guess I’m being unfair. NZF got ~4% of the vote while Dunne only pulled off 0.83%
5. sophie 5

   15 November 2010 at 9:57 am

   Oh dear – Russia thinks it has signed up for free trade negotiations with a small island nation in the South Pacific called Newzild-acshully.
   • mickysavage 5.1

     15 November 2010 at 10:14 am

     What is more the Honourable Glorious Leader of this small state can read russian.

     Apparently Honourable Glorious leader said:

     “Kremlin.ru/news – I’ll be checking it out when I get home – it’s a very good site,”
     • Draco T Bastard 5.1.1

       15 November 2010 at 1:02 pm

       http://eng.kremlin.ru/
   • prism 5.2

     15 November 2010 at 10:49 am

     No worries we have managed to trade with Russia through all sorts of difficulties – it’s not new despite Muldoon and Wall’s dancing Cossacks. I seem to remember a time we couldn’t trade using international finance and instead used barter. We will find a way to trade with anyone – we traded with Iran at the time of great upheavals there when red ink was put in the fountains to simulate them gushing blood (and they were thinking of western blood).
     • Vicky32 5.2.1

       16 November 2010 at 6:53 pm

       “I seem to remember a time we couldn’t trade using international finance and instead used barter.”
       Lada cars, I remember my brother telling me…
       Deb
6. prism 6

   15 November 2010 at 10:42 am

   In case some didn’t hear the item on Radio NZ about big gender inequality in nz directorships. This summation is good – of the present tendency in appointments leading to boards which are “Male, pale and stale”. (And inequality in race also no doubt).

   The old boys network all from similar schools and backgrounds plus pecking order with a preference for men with multiple directorships leads to an aggregation amongst a smaller number with few opportunities for new fresh directors to break into the scrum!
7. prism 7

   15 November 2010 at 11:09 am

   Radionz talking to Australian correspondent this morning about Pauline Hansen who left Oz for good some time ago but finds foreign countries spoilt by the foreigners there. So is coming back to Oz and may stand again for another go at a political career. (Sarah Palin etc. Women’s lib has a lot to answer for, women used to know their place and stay there.)

   There was a comment made of Hansen being accused of being a career politician and mention of money available to those putting themselves forward for election. What would that be? Is it government money for electioneering expenses? Sounds different to here.

   captcha – acted
   • Lanthanide 7.1

     15 November 2010 at 11:18 am

     At the time when I heard she was going to the UK to avoid all the immigrants in Oz, I really thought it was just a ‘fact-finding mission’ and she’d be back to Oz with all these ideas about how the UK managed their immigrant problem. Looks like that’s about what happened.

     She was also trying to sell her house, and IIRC there was an muslim couple who wanted to pay her above-market value for it (well over $1M). Anyone know how that turned out?

     captcha: women
     • prism 7.1.1

       15 November 2010 at 12:01 pm

       Lanth – Do you know what funds would be available if she stood for election again?
       Whatever the situation we can do without it here in NZ.
8. prism 8

   15 November 2010 at 11:57 am

   Just been on the phone to Telstra Clear to get an a/c matter fixed and enjoyed their efficient private-company service. 40 consecutive mins later I have finished with answers to my enquiries. One was to cancel my voice messaging which I continued after changing from Telecom. But Telstra system didn’t enable me to increase the default rings from four because my phone is too old, just didn’t work for some reason.

   So I had to buy a new one before I get the proper use of my phone. I have cancelled voice messaging altogether. A case of a big company losing business that must have been easy money. And being efficient no doubt. They efficiently announced at the beginning that the average or longest waiting time was 11 minutes so I got some work to do, but what a service! Say 30 minutes waiting and 10 minutes at the most interchange.

   If it had been an SOE it might have been better, and the government would be getting cash in its pocket. The two people I spoke to sounded Indian, pleasant and helpful, a little hard to understand, presumably outsourced staff while we have unemployed people here who also would do a good job.

   captcha regions hah!
   • Vicky32 8.1

     15 November 2010 at 6:23 pm

     I know Vodafone’s people are in Egypt – one of them told when I advised him to “go to an internet cafe in Queen Street and see if it works” (their website which wasn’t working) and he informed me as to why he wasn’t going to follow my suggestion…
     Deb
9. Tigger 9

   15 November 2010 at 12:21 pm

   Different takes on the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade pact discussions at APEC from Campbell http://gordoncampbell.scoop.co.nz/2010/11/15/gordon-campbell-key%E2%80%99s-illusory-free-trade-gains/ and Armstrong http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10687666

   Why does Armstrong sound like he’s talking about a ten year old girl’s dance competition when he says “The Prime Minister had a very good Apec.” Seriously, isn’t APEC about Key achieving stuff rather than seen to be a ‘player’?
10. prism 10

    15 November 2010 at 12:28 pm

    A lot is interesting me today – thought others might also be, so I hope.
    Reverse home equity got an airing on Radionz this a.m. An older couple took out an $88,500 one at 10.4% pa compounding interest. In two years the total had risen to $110,000 or so. When they asked about breaking the mortgage they were quoted the sum of $225,000. They had the idea that the cost would be just $20,000. (Figures subject to accuracy of memory, not guaranteed.) SO Beware!

    Apparently it is all worked out by a third party, who shall remain anonymous, by an algorithm also anon. Probably called Hal. They are no doubt charging the couple with all the potential profits and payments they factored in for the lifetime of the contract. Now the couple have to pay for theoretical losses from future theoretical profits instead of the costs of withdrawing and rearranging the finance, plus staff time, plus penalty, loss of profit until the money can be utilised elsewhere and perhaps some opportunity cost. Those are possibe considerations – but not $225,000.

    The firm is Bluestone Australia (a bigger and harder entity than a bluechip apparently) operating under the aegis of Westpac.
    • freedom 10.1

      16 November 2010 at 9:32 am

      “Probably called Hal”

      freedom (belatedly) leaps in to defend HAL who it was proven had been corrupted by the human programmers
      “Hal doesn’t know how to lie. He was told to lie by people who find it easy to lie”
11. Draco T Bastard 11

    15 November 2010 at 12:47 pm

    The Phone Call Is Dead

    Mike likes to rub it in MG’s face that the iPhone can’t actually make calls due to terrible AT&T reception, but the truth is that we iPhone users (and to greater extent smartphone users in general) are not primarily using our phones to make calls. We may carry around things we call “phones” but to us they’re just pocket-sized computers.

    I keep a pre-pay (non-smart) phone for those people who are out of touch with reality. I don’t actually use it myself and have no need for a mobile computer.
    • The Baron 11.1

      15 November 2010 at 12:51 pm

      I guess that little prepay phone runs hot whenever anyone feels they need a better grip on things, Draco. But oh well since you don’t like it/don’t have a need for it, I guess they’ll be banned after the revolution too – along with bananas.

      Wow you either have a bad case of god comple or just a massive ego.
      • Draco T Bastard 11.1.1

        15 November 2010 at 1:13 pm

        Did you read the article? It’s all about how use of voice calls is dying. I just pointed out that I’m one of those people who no longer use a phone.
        • The Baron 11.1.1.1

          15 November 2010 at 1:34 pm

          Dud you read my comment? All I’m pointing out is that you sound like an arrogant twat everytime you say things like this:

          “I keep a pre-pay (non-smart) phone for those people who are out of touch with reality.”

          Reality hotline, Draco speaking. Yes you can print your own money – but no bananas for you.
          • felix 11.1.1.1.1

            15 November 2010 at 2:55 pm

            That’s a bit silly Baron. Draco is on record many times saying that banks shouldn’t be allowed to print their own money.
          • Draco T Bastard 11.1.1.1.2

            15 November 2010 at 5:29 pm

            Ah, you obviously got upset by being compared, even if indirectly, to a Luddite.
            • The Baron 11.1.1.1.2.1

              15 November 2010 at 6:08 pm

              Out of interest, what is the number for the reality hotline Draco? I’m feeling out of touch!
        • Vicky32 11.1.1.2

          15 November 2010 at 6:27 pm

          I do! (A prepay non-smart one.) I couldn’t live without it now I have it, but didn’t have one for years after everyone else did.) 🙂
          Deb
    • lprent 11.2

      15 November 2010 at 7:47 pm

      ….have no need for a mobile computer.

      I do. If I didn’t have a cellphone I wouldn’t be able to read half of the stuff that goes on in this site. I do a lot of the scanning whilst I have ‘dead’ time on the bus-stop and bus.
12. BLiP 12

    15 November 2010 at 1:12 pm

    Prime Minister John Key said today that he ordered “pretty much” exactly the same breakfast from room service that US President Barrack Obama ordered.

    “It was amazing”, Mr Key said to panting reporters, “I just felt like eggs bennedict, fruit and English breakfast tea. It wasn’t until the waiter mentioned it was the same breakfast ordered by the Presidential Suite that I knew He was eating the same as me . . . except he ordered coffee. And muesli.”

    Mr Key’s tour-de-force diplomatic mission to haul Japan and APEC into line with international free trade standards continues this afternoon when he will sit next to the brother-in-law of the first cousin, once removed of Naikaku sōri daijin.

    Update at 6pm.
    • ianmac 12.1

      15 November 2010 at 3:46 pm

      BLip. Is that the same as a friend who was at the QE11 Stadium years ago, and challenged John Walker to a race around the the track. The challenge was not accepted so my friend won by default.
      When I asked this friend about the circumstances of his presence at QE11 he said, “Oh there was no-one there. I just wandered in to have a look at the empty venue. But I can say John Walker did not accept my challenge.”
      Claim to fame you see.
      • BLiP 12.1.1

        15 November 2010 at 4:12 pm

        Heh! Yeah, I guess. Except, not only did John Key state that he “almost” sat next to Obama, one newspaper (at least?) thought the claim was sufficient to merit publication. You’re friend, I suspect, was taking the piss – John Key and his fawning entourage were serious.

        Jokes aside, it is serious when the media is complicit in the “brand association” tactic. Check out every story about Key’s trip and you’ll find a link, however, tenuous to Obama.
    • freedom 12.2

      16 November 2010 at 9:36 am

      and being at the same hotel, they used the same toilet paper too,
      well John used his to wipe his nose, but still
13. The Voice of Reason 13

    15 November 2010 at 3:27 pm

    Travellerev: We seem to have run out of room on the thread above, but to be clear, if you rely on anti-semites to back your arguments, then I guess logic suggests that you are indeed guilty by association. But it was PB saying that, not me. Me? I’m pro Israeli, pro Palestinian and anti racist and anti zionist.

    The reason I asked if you’d consider trying to find some left wing links that back your position is because I spent a fruitless couple of hours last week trying to do just that, without success. I thought I owed it to you and the other two to at least investigate the possibility that Trutherism could be left wing. Turns out it’s not. It seems to the exclusive property of people who believe the US federal government is conspiring against it’s own citizens in order to build a world government. A fair few supporters are convinced that it is, indeed, a Jewish conspiracy.

    You may not accept that view yourself, but it is the dominant philosophical position of the Truther movement and you are wrong to say that racist arseholes are rejected. They are not rejected because they appear to form the majority of the adherents to the fantasy. Which I think is what Bookie was trying to point out. Go ahead and try to find left wing links in support of the Truthers. There are bugger all. Compare that with right wing links and you will find that your movement is overwhelmingly conservative, with an activist base that is borderline nuts.

    Please feel free to prove me wrong. I’m sure the mod’s would welcome a post that makes the case for lefty readers of the Standard to get on board with the Truthers. I just don’t think it’s possible to do so.
    • freedom 13.1

      16 November 2010 at 9:40 am

      We will say this once more… It is not the US Government, it is factions within the US Government, and all Governments on this planet

      Why must you constantly put this incorrect statement in your discussions, the plan for Globalisation is out in the open, the sooner you believe it the sooner you can be prepard to face the consequences
14. Colonial Viper 14

    15 November 2010 at 3:35 pm

    So, asks the New York Times, who will stand up to the super-rich?

    The top 1 percent of American earners took in 23.5 percent of the nation’s pretax income in 2007 — up from less than 9 percent in 1976. During the boom years of 2002 to 2007, that top 1 percent’s pretax income increased an extraordinary 10 percent every year. But the boom proved an exclusive affair: in that same period, the median income for non-elderly American households went down and the poverty rate rose.
15. Vicky32 15

    15 November 2010 at 6:14 pm

    MPs’ travel perks are going! Pansy Wong is the straw that broke the camel’s back (cliche alert, 3 News!!!)

    Deb
    • felix 15.1

      15 November 2010 at 6:17 pm

      Well, kind of: http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2010/11/key-wants-to-retain-rort.html
      • Vicky32 15.1.1

        15 November 2010 at 6:30 pm

        Thanks! (I was just going by the 3 News reporter’s feverish excitement..)
        Deb
16. felix 16

    15 November 2010 at 6:26 pm

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/4347123/PM-says-travel-perk-should-be-dumped

    I see that Pansy Wong’s electorate office doubles as the registered office for at least two of her/her husband’s companies. I wonder how much they’re ripping off the public purse with that little scam. Do the companies pay rent? Use the phones? Gee I hope the electorate staff don’t do any work for the Wongs’ businesses.

    Oh and one of those companies – Shipley and Wong – is half-owned by Former National Party PM Jenny Shipley and co-directed by her husband Burton Shipley.

    Why am I not surprised?
17. Sean Brooks 17

    15 November 2010 at 8:04 pm

    Why isnt the teacher who called a female student a sl*t fired?
    • felix 17.1

      15 November 2010 at 8:18 pm

      Good question.
    • The Voice of Reason 17.2

      15 November 2010 at 8:26 pm

      Because she doesn’t exist, Sean. You actually mean the school dean who said a particularly obnoxious student’s slutty dress sense made “look like a slut”. Not the same thing at all. And good on her! Not the best choice of words, but you’d have to agree with the no nonsense approach.

      BTW, if you’re actually interested in why she will not be getting disciplined, try reading the full article, not just the headline.
      • felix 17.2.1

        15 November 2010 at 8:31 pm

        So telling a child “you look like a slut” is substantially less disgraceful than “you are a slut”?
        • The Voice of Reason 17.2.1.1

          15 November 2010 at 9:26 pm

          Yes, that’s right. One is an allegation, the other is a subjective fashion critique. Here’s an article about the difference:

          http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/opinion/editorials/4336906/Editorial-The-schoolgirl-and-the-skirt
          • felix 17.2.1.1.1

            16 November 2010 at 9:14 am

            That remark makes you seem like an arrogant fuckwit.

            But that’s just a subjective writing critique.
            • The Voice of Reason 17.2.1.1.1.1

              16 November 2010 at 9:40 am

              Well, you asked the dumb question, Felix. I thought I was playing nice by not pointing that out at the time and just linking to an editorial that made an effort to explain the difference.
              • felix …

                16 November 2010 at 11:13 pm

                I’m having trouble finding the bit in that editorial which explains the difference. Can you point it out for me?

                Is it near the bit that says “There is a difference.”?
      • Pascal's bookie 17.2.2

        15 November 2010 at 8:31 pm

        What does a slut look like? What’s a slut for that matter?

        Not unrelated:

        This is some bullshit too:

        http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2010/11/too-much-stimulation-ok-to-sell-male.html
        • NickS 17.2.2.1

          15 November 2010 at 9:21 pm

          …

          But dontcha know, it’s bad for teh ladies to know they can also fix their sex issues with drugs, cause like it’s all in their minds?!

          Mind you, it’s hardly unexpected given the massive “moral outrage” over a nipple a couple of years back. Also, why can’t we have viagra adds with gay couples for a change? It’s not like erectile dysfunction is just a hetero-male thing…

          What does a slut look like? What’s a slut for that matter?

          Dudebros believe it to be a women who not only likes and demands good sex, but will tell them to fuck off if she doesn’t like them. It also refers to drunk chicks who are too drunk to give consent, and anyone with the somewhat vanilla kink of public exhibition.

          There’s also the women calling other women “slut” issue (not the playful version), but my knowledge base lies mainly with dudebros and less with retarded primate social power structure stupidity and other things such as advanced patriarchy blaming explanations.
        • Vicky32 17.2.2.2

          16 November 2010 at 12:58 am

          In this context, a slutty looking girl is one who is in danger of having her intentions misunderstood… There were more tactful ways the dean could have put it, but reading the article, I am with the Dean.
          ” Amethyst, on the other hand, is guilty of a whole lot of stuff, namely breaking school rules, but more importantly, she is headed in the wrong direction. She has been absent from classes, getting in trouble with her teachers and last week was involved in a physical altercation with a male pupil.

          The length of her skirt is a trivial matter, but it is a matter Newlands College has chosen to make an issue of. School guidelines require girls’ skirts to touch the ground when they kneel. By Amethyst’s own admission, her skirt was about 10cm above that target. ”
          When I was at school, centuries ago, according to my son, uniform rules were a lot stricter. (To the point of being ridiculous – panama hats and ties for goodness’ sake – for girls! And wse froze our assets off in winter etc… Nevertheless, we didn’t wear jewellery, and the girls who hiked their skirts up were rebuked. So we got on with what we were supposed to be there for – learning!
          And it worked. We all did pretty well..
          Deb
          • Pascal's bookie 17.2.2.2.1

            16 November 2010 at 5:07 am

            I’ve got no problem with a school enforcing it’s rules. I’m still not clear on why a slut is someone who is in danger of having their intentions misunderstood. Trav misunderstood my intenetions in this thread. Am I a slut? I don’t wear a skirt though, short or otherwise so that can’t be right.

            Should a teacher, for whatever reason, tell a young woman that wearing a short skirt is what sluts do? That if she wears a short skirt then, what, exactly? What about the boys at the school. Is this a helpful message for them to hear?
            • Vicky32 17.2.2.2.1.1

              16 November 2010 at 7:02 pm

              AFAIK the teacher (the Dean) had only good intentions – she wanted to wake up the girl’s ideas, and point out to her that she was advertising herself in a way that boys (being boys, and I have raised boys) might misinterpret.
              I know in an ideal world it wouldn’t matter how a girl or woman dressed, but this is not an ideal world. People see a girl or a woman wearing what my Dad used to call a “bum-freezer” or with a plunging neckline, and they’re going to make assumptions. I am sure you have read that women in business who dress in an ‘obvious’ manner, if they are successful get accused of getting their promotions by shtupping the boss. Or – the boss refuses to take them as anything other than eye-candy and they *don’t* succeed, because their bosses and colleagues don’t look at their brains and their work, but their blouses and their nethers…
              Encouraging girls to dress appropriately for where they are can be and often *is* a feminist action.
              Deb
              • NickS …

                16 November 2010 at 7:53 pm

                /facepalm

                http://ideologicallyimpure.wordpress.com/2010/11/11/newlands-college-to-be-awarded-grand-woman-shaming-prize-at-secret-patriarchy-conference/

                And of course it’s entirely feminist to bow down to what is obviously a fucktarded bit of conformist patriarchal douchebaggery and not bother standing up not just for you own rights, but those of others. With a massive side of victim blaming in linking clothing to sexism etc, and assuming that the clothing someone wears gives people the right to deny another their rights.

                You’d think years of activism would have made people realise that standing up for your rights is the only way to fight those who would deny you them, but no…
                • Vicky32 …

                  17 November 2010 at 5:22 pm

                  There’s the ideal world in which girls/women can dress as they choose, and not meet with horrible and unintended consequences. Then there’s the real world in which Amethyst lives, and in which I as a woman live, and in which we will always be judged by what we wear…
                  I am reminded of the issue of hijab. It’s mostly men who yell that women can’t possibly *want* to wear it, and insist that women who do, have been “brainwashed by patriarchy”.
                  Er – no. They *want* to cover up because they want not to have to deal with judgements about their attractiveness. Years ago, I like my younger sister had what was jokingly called the “great 40-inch”.. (bust obviously) and she and I got sick of saying “my face is up here, mate”.
                  As I said, the real world, although the ideal one would be lovely.
                  • NickS …

                    17 November 2010 at 5:43 pm

                    And I’m going to repeat myself:

                    You’d think years of activism would have made people realise that standing up for your rights is the only way to fight those who would deny you them, but no…

                    Meh, too tired and stressed to add to this.
      • NickS 17.2.3

        15 November 2010 at 9:01 pm

        http://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/2010/04/04/what-is-slut-shaming/

        Read it.

        Understand it.

        And if you start mansplaining, I’ll skip the 2 citalopram I take every day just for you so I may wield the all mighty fucked off feminist cluebat. /grumble grumble.
18. Roflcopter 18

    15 November 2010 at 8:07 pm

    So, Liz Tanielu is a dumb-ass coconut?

    Way to go lefties! Doing Mana proud!
    • felix 18.1

      15 November 2010 at 8:16 pm

      ??

      edit: Ah I see, DPF posted something so you can all pretend not to be racists for a few hours. Let’s see how that goes, shall we?
    • felix 18.2

      15 November 2010 at 8:25 pm

      Aaaaand a quick scan of the kiwiblog thread shows you, Roflcopter, exposing your ugly racist nature 3 minutes before you rode over here on your high horse.

      What a fuckwit.
      • Roflcopter 18.2.1

        15 November 2010 at 8:31 pm

        Ummm no, because on Lita’s logic, I’m allowed to…. so fuck off.
        • Pascal's bookie 18.2.1.1

          15 November 2010 at 8:32 pm

          You’ve always been allowed to dumbarse. It’s whether you should.
          • Roflcopter 18.2.1.1.1

            15 November 2010 at 8:50 pm

            Well, apparently it’s ok, in a funny kind of way.
            • felix 18.2.1.1.1.1

              15 November 2010 at 9:04 pm

              Don’t blame some other idiot for your racism. You said it, I figure you meant it.

              Maybe you were just trying to be funny – I don’t know and I don’t really care – but they’re your words so it’s up to you to own them, not anyone else.
              • Roflcopter …

                15 November 2010 at 9:16 pm

                So you do think Lita is a racist then?
                • felix …

                  15 November 2010 at 9:21 pm

                  Maybe. I don’t know anything about Lita apart from what DPF wrote (and I think I’d be a bit of a moron if I took DPF at face value).

                  But what if she is? How does that change your racism, Rofl?
                  • Roflcopter …

                    15 November 2010 at 10:04 pm

                    Apparently, it’s the Pacific way, so can hardly be called racism.
                    • felix …

                      15 November 2010 at 10:14 pm

                      I don’t care what you think Rofl. You’re either a racist or a troll or both. Big whoop.
                • Blighty …

                  15 November 2010 at 9:25 pm

                  roflcopter.

                  I see someone shoot someone. the shooter say it’s ok.

                  I then shoot someone and claim that it must be ok because the first person did it.\

                  Does that make it ok? no, it makes me a killer regardless of the rights or wrongs of the first person’s actions.

                  and you’re racist scum who was just dying for ‘permission’ to let your hate out.
                  • Roflcopter …

                    15 November 2010 at 10:06 pm

                    Awesome, keep ’em coming.

                    According to Marty’s reasoning, I’m not racist… you lot really need to get your stories straight.
                    • felix …

                      15 November 2010 at 10:17 pm

                      How about you explain exactly where I’m conflicted rather than just insinuating that you know what I think.

                      Go on. Expose the inherent contradiction in my words.
        • Marty G 18.2.1.2

          15 November 2010 at 9:30 pm

          rolf. don’t tell people to fuck off on this website. That’s the authors’ prerogative… you do respect private property rights don’t you?

          and I do love how all your lines are faithful cut and pastes of Farrars. It shows you to be a free-thinking individual, and not at all a cretin who repeats whatever a fat old loser tells him/
    • Granted for taken 18.3

      15 November 2010 at 11:08 pm

      Labour must be hoping that calling Polynesians who don’t vote for them “dumb coconuts” will work for them just as well as trying to destroy the Maori Party.

      ooooh, moderation. so much for free speech in the land of lefties.

      [The moderation catches any first time poster. You have no idea how much spam that protects us all from. So yeah, so much for your first conspiracy theory here eh. — r0b]
19. Bob Stanforth 19

    15 November 2010 at 8:49 pm

    So, two things:

    1. If the campaign on this site – yes, this site – to remove Paul Henry from his job for a racist comment – your words – is the be all and end all – I await with huge interest your calling for the sacking of someone who would dare say via social media that someone is a, and I quote ” stupid assed coconut”. Shall I hold my breath?

    2. Lets have a fr’instance. Lets say the partner / husband / wife / significant other of a cabinet minster is caught, in flagrante delicto, in another jurisdiction, and for interests sake, in a public toilet. Lets say its, um, the US. Would you be comfortable with that being hushed up, with the DPS being flown to that jurisdiction to bring that personage home to NZ, and all hushed up.

    Purely hypothetical question of course. What say you? Would you be horrified?

    No, really, come on.

    ASM: harmless. Quite possibly, but then, maybe not.
    • Pascal's bookie 19.1

      15 November 2010 at 9:04 pm

      You got the “quote” wrong. And someone’s facebook page isn’t the national broadcaster. Have we got the context for the quote? I’m not defending it in any way. I’d just like to see the context. I know dpf is saying why he thinks she said it, but I’d like to see the context all the same.
    • mickysavage 19.2

      15 November 2010 at 9:43 pm

      It is a purely hypothetical question. You wingnuts should learn how to recognise reality.
20. Marty G 20

    15 November 2010 at 8:54 pm

    Bob S. Your comment is moved to open mike because the accusations and muckraking in it are off topic.

    If you want to try to defend Wong, Key, and the other rorters do it directly, not with the dumb tactic of accusing others of being bad too. The biggest problem with that tactic, apart from avoiding the issue at hand, is it effectively concedes that the Nats are wrong-doers but says ‘it’s not so bad because others are bad too’

    If you don’t want to to defend the rorters and rip-off artists say so.
    • Bob Stanforth 20.1

      15 November 2010 at 9:01 pm

      Oh, my bad, how dare I 🙂

      So, lets go with the first question then.

      Can I call someone a dumb assed coconut, in writing, and keep my job? Would you support me doing that? Or would you campaign for my removal?

      Serious question.

      We can get to the other shit later 🙂 Or is all this not allowed?
      • felix 20.1.1

        15 November 2010 at 9:12 pm

        Bob: I’m pretty sure that as long as you put heaps of smiley faces in your comments everyone will think you’re totes friendly and you’ll be able to get away with making shit up and saying anything you want.
        • NickS 20.1.1.1

          15 November 2010 at 9:32 pm

          [Edit] @Felix, reply function is broken.

          Personally, I’m all for replacing all smiles with low-res pixel-art goatse icons.

          At least until I’ve slept.

          And damn does dpf not understand hypocrisy, along with why you don’t assume a minor bit of stupidity means all Labour minions bully Pacific Islanders to vote Labour.
      • Marty G 20.1.2

        15 November 2010 at 9:14 pm

        in general, racial epithets are best left alone. There’s obviously an bit of an exception when one uses a racial epithet about one’s one ethnic group. Comedy is full of it, as is every day speech.

        Take, for example, Paul Henry calling himself a gypo. That he tried to use his ethnic heritage to excuse his behaviour was reprehensible but that he used a racial epithet for the Romany people to describe himself wasn’t generally viewed as a problem since he himself is (or so he claims) Romany. After all, if that word is insulting then he was only insulting himself and his people – it lacks the vital ‘othering’ (which involves seeing another ethnic group as ‘less’ human) of racist speech.
        • Blighty 20.1.2.1

          15 November 2010 at 9:22 pm

          quite right. many African-Americans use the ‘n’ word but would be offended if a non-African-American did. They say ‘it’s our word’. On other words, they know that when they say it it doesn’t bear any racial hate but coming from someone of a different ethnic group it is likely to be racist.
          • felix 20.1.2.1.1

            15 November 2010 at 9:33 pm

            Heh, that reminded me of this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=waehONGY-yI

            edit: That was meant to be in reply to Blighty. Are the replies going weird or am I losing my tiny little mind again?
            • Marty G 20.1.2.1.1.1

              15 November 2010 at 9:37 pm

              yeah, the replies have stopped being indented from 19.1,

              I have no idea why but I’d hazard a guess that lynn is trying something new out back.
              • lprent …

                16 November 2010 at 12:41 am

                Nope – usually a result of a deleted comment where someone had already answered. There is no good solution for it at present..
                • felix …

                  16 November 2010 at 9:16 am

                  Could be due to moving Bob’s comments over from the other thread.
                  • lprent …

                    16 November 2010 at 1:40 pm

                    Yeah. When I do it I also move any replies over as well. That seems to work pretty well.

                    I must remember to send an e-mail to Marty & the others.
                  • lprent …

                    16 November 2010 at 1:48 pm

                    Yep. Moving Marty’s replies to Bob over as well fixed the problem…

                    Kind of obvious, and I guess the plugin should do it automatically. Oh well Lyn is away for 12 days at a festival / industry thing, I guess looking at that will help fill up the hours.. 😈
      • Joachim's 20.1.3

        15 November 2010 at 9:27 pm

        “Can I call someone a dumb assed coconut, in writing, and keep my job? Would you support me doing that? Or would you campaign for my removal?”

        Doubt you are important enough to bother with doing any of the above, realistically.
    • Marty G 20.2

      15 November 2010 at 9:06 pm

      your second post is also on open mike now, Bob. If you want to talk about other people without any reference to the issue at end you can have that conversation in open mike. That’s what the post is for.

      Or, why not just drop the act?

      Why not tell us why you think that Wong and Key are still good people, which is why you are so desperate to run distraction and talk about something else?

Links to post

1. The Standard: posted on 14 November 2010 at 5:03 pm

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS