Open mike 21/02/2015

Written By: - Date published: 7:15 am, February 21st, 2015 - 397 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

National clowns key parata smith english brownlee
Open mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose. The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step up to the mike …

397 comments on “Open mike 21/02/2015”

    • without clicking on yr link..

      ..if u r asking if lenovo pre-installed spyware on their products..

      ..the answer is yes..the company has admitted it..

      ..and you do know that encryption is a joke..eh..?

      ..the spooks just bye-pass it..

      .and go straight into yr phone sim-card….

      ..privacy..?..it’s all over..rover…

    • One Anonymous Bloke 1.2

      Apparently so.

      Lenovo plans to release an automated tool that will remove the Superfish adware from affected PCs on Friday, said the company’s chief technical officer, who admitted that Lenovo had “messed up.”

      Lenovo’s CTO, Peter Hortensius, told PCWorld that the company has published instructions on how customers can remove the Superfish software themeselves, but promised an automated solution by week’s end.

      PC World instructions on how to remove it.

    • tc 1.3

      Yes, wired descibed their response as ‘astonishingly clueless’ and its since about june 2014 they loaded this MITM (man in the middle) security breach in such a ham fisted way a decent hacker can use its fake credentials to get at your lenovo.

      KAsperspy have been installing spyware that remains after a HD rebuild for 14 years and the UK and US GCSB equivalents broke into SIM card makers systems and stole the encryption keys so mobile device comms can be breached.

      Privacy and security pretty much doesnt exist in the digital world, the snowden material keeps on giving.

  1. “..Ten things feminism has ruined for me..

    ..Bras – bikes – and Thomas the Tank Engine…

    – Emer O’Toole mourns some of life’s simpler pleasures..”

    (cont..)

    http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2015/feb/20/ten-things-feminism-has-ruined

  2. Dialey 3

    So John Key had dinner at Donghua Liu’s home and secured $25k for the party – oops caught out again – surely reason to resign!

    • Paul 3.1

      The man has no shame.

    • freedom 3.2

      And still no mention of any progress on the still undeveloped $70 million Alpers Ave Redevelopment Project that Donghau Liu is meant to be building. The development was the reason he got residency in the first place wasn’t it?

      http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11224055

    • keyruption – saw the # don’t know if I’ve nicked it.

      The PM has always maintained that he met Donghua Liu at a National Party fundraiser but would never say where. Today, the Weekend Herald can reveal that the fundraiser was actually a private dinner at Mr Liu’s $4.75 million home in Remuera, where a smiling Mr Key and Jami-Lee Ross, the MP for Botany, were photographed alongside Mr Liu and his young family. Afterwards, Mr Liu donated $25,000 that same month to Mr Ross’ election campaign.

      http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11405494

      What a dirty key.

      • Tautoko Mangō Mata 3.3.1

        I note that the journalist covering the Donghua Liu story is Jared Savage. This article is definitely an improvement on his infamous articles from last year, which, although proved to be largely baseless, were very damaging. I have always held the opinion that Jared had been somewhat naïve and had been exploited. Like anyone who has ever been suckered, he deserves to be able to redeem himself and this is a good start IMHO.

        • tc 3.3.1.1

          Redemption would start with an apology over the smear of DC and inserting them into the timeline to show how gave what and when so folks can see how the total lack of verification and investigation done.

          Assume a DP agenda with Savage and his masters till they prove otherwise as a safety first approach. They have senior editors who approve what the kids put forward thats if it is his own work in the first place.

        • Tautoko Mangō Mata 3.3.1.2

          …or on the other hand, it is me who is being naïve and Jarrod is working with WO to oust FJK and leave the way open for JC..

          For a timeline of the items omitted by Jarrod in his timeline today, here is Frank Macskasy’s list.
          http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/06/23/the-donghua-liu-timeline-damn-lies-dirty-tricks-and-a-docile-media/

    • Picard101 3.4

      Good luck with that wish.

    • Clemgeopin 3.5

      National rich pricks are greedy unethical political prostitutes. Cash for favours from dubious characters.

      China wants some corruption fugitives in NZ returned as per a recent news report. The only problem is China will not hesitate in shooting their corrupt capitalists or politicians!
      http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11370877

  3. les 4

    from the NZH…scandalous…’Aucklanders now have their very own man in London, at a cost to ratepayers of more than $230,000.

    Auckland Council’s economic development arm has created a special contract in London for one of its senior executives, Grant Jenkins, who has moved his family to England.

    His English-born wife, Kate, was homesick and had been longing to return home for several years, according to a former council staffer.

    The Jenkins have set up home with their two children outside London in the village of Bourne End in Buckinghamshire.

    As well as paying about $196,000 for a 12-month contract, ratepayers are picking up Mr Jenkins’ work expenses and office costs at New Zealand Tourism’s headquarters in New Zealand House near Trafalgar Square.

    Ratepayers have paid an administration fee of about $15,000 for his contract and contributed $19,841 to the family’s relocation costs.’

    Brett O’Riley, head of Auckland

    • and i am sure les..that you will be feeling for the poorest..eh..?

      ..wot with rents going up by 9% in the last 12 months..eh..?

    • tc 4.2

      Come on akl needs more immigration, cant you see all that empty land around the volcanoes that needs filling, then onto all that scrub in west akl.

    • Colonial Rawshark 4.3

      Ahhhh, do I hear the Tories singing out about the ratepayer gravy train? Where is the taxpayers union on this issue?

    • The Fairy Godmother 4.4

      Yes and they couldn’t even give all council employees a living wage. shame. Talk about welfare for the rich.

  4. Loving the photo this morning, clowns are freaky.

    • weka 5.1

      The look on Key’s face.

      • rawshark-yeshe 5.1.1

        did someone make the choice of no joyce ??

        brilliant image … thanks for the chuckles.

        • Clemgeopin 5.1.1.1

          “did someone make the choice of no joyce ??”

          The clowns you see are running after the other thicko clown, Joyce, who is in front (off camera) sprinting away with a few Sky City donated grateful gambling chips for the use of the NNC (Nasty Nat Club).

  5. “..OK – don’t read this article about passive-aggressive behaviour – Honestly – it’s fine..

    ..Many people encounter passive aggressive-behaviour on a regular basis.

    Many people even use it – perhaps unknowingly.

    How can something seemingly self-contradicting become so common?

    And why is it so jarring –

    – even when compared to straightforward ‘normal’ aggression?..”

    (cont..)

    http://www.theguardian.com/science/brain-flapping/2015/feb/19/ok-dont-read-this-article-about-passive-aggressive-behaviour-honestly-its-fine

  6. Paul 7

    Renters paying for Auckland’s house prices.
    Barely any pay increases on minimum wage while rents increase 9% in a year.
    Even the property people are calling it grim for renters.
    And our wonderful government want to diminish state housing.
    This will get messier and messier.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11405512

  7. RTM 8

    Canterbury museum is the latest target for the anti-intellectuals who earlier attacked Nicky Hager and Eleanor Catton: http://readingthemaps.blogspot.co.nz/2015/02/a-quick-note-on-exhibitionism.html

  8. BLiP 10

    I’ll just leave these here . . .

    How to: Use Signal – Private Messenger (iPhone)

    https://ssd.eff.org/en/module/how-use-signal-%E2%80%93-private-messenger

    How to: Use RedPhone (Android)

    https://ssd.eff.org/en/module/how-use-redphone-android#overlay=en/node/53/

  9. Quote of the day:

    “What happens when renewable energy runs out?”

    Ukip candidate Victoria Ayling.

    • tc 11.1

      Then she went off in search of a can of striped paint

    • weka 11.2

      It’s actually one of the most pertinent questions of our time (although I suspect that Ayling wasn’t asking from that position). We live on a finite planet. What happens when we reach the limit? People assume that the sun is infinite (which for our purposes it is). But space (land) isn’t. Nor are metals. Nor are the efficiency ratios or EROEIs. Too many people are mistaking renewable for infinitely available. It’s not.

      • phillip ure 11.2.1

        weka..

        ..should the sun blink out..(move away..?..)

        ..the sustainability or not of our day-to-day energy will be the least of our worries..

        ..and that you have considered this joke/example of rightwing brain-fart seriously..

        ..to the extent of musing on how finite the sun is..

        ..and fretting about ‘what if?’..

        ..is actually even bloody funnier than the original joke..

        ..well done..!..

        • TheContrarian 11.2.1.1

          Move away? The sun? What?

        • marty mars 11.2.1.2

          you missed wekas point phil – I’d say because you read up to a point and then your brain started on your rebuttal and didn’t read the rest – irony is that that is what people say they do with your comments – human is as human does eh.

          “But space (land) isn’t. Nor are metals. Nor are the efficiency ratios or EROEIs. Too many people are mistaking renewable for infinitely available. It’s not.”

          This is a very valid point and the basis of why we have treated mother earth so poorly plus the selfishness of only thinking of ourselves and our lifetimes as if they were so special – they are – to us.

          • BLiP 11.2.1.2.1

            Yep. Petard. phillip. Hoisted.

            Classic.

          • phillip ure 11.2.1.2.2

            was she eating bacon when/as she fretted..?

            (speaking of humans doing things that are not infinitely-resourced..eh..?)

            ..and you missed my point..

            ..when someone is publicly fretting/preaching at me about how we should all be more ‘sustainable’..

            ..and they have just wiped the pig-fat from their lips..

            ..i call ‘bullshit..!’..

            • marty mars 11.2.1.2.2.1

              riiiight so not about the post at all but rather the vendetta – I missed the point because you never made that point

              fail award for today… on its way 🙂

              • ‘vendetta’..?

                weka has long been loud and clear about her contempt for vegans and their arguments..

                ..so when weka preaches on such matters..’sustainable’..

                ..and she has just lift her head from chewing on a pig-carcass..

                ..for the sermon..

                ..i will/will continue to go ‘oi!’

                ..i get a hypocrisy/irony-overdose..

                ..and must speak out..

                ..i get/have a similar reaction to things like greenpeace-bbq’s..

                • A lot make fun of you by talking about bacon butties and worse – why don’t you post on their (unrelated to the vegan subject) comments like you did here?

                  • because they are baiting..

                    ..whereas weka seems to believe her own bullshit..

                    ..and you can’t see the hypocrisy etc i highlight..?

                    ..people urging others to use led-lightbulbs..and self-congratulating themselves for how fucken ‘green/planet-caring’ they are..

                    ..while chowing down on pig-fat..?

                    ..and wrapping their bodies in dead-animal skins..

                    ..u can’t see how totally full of bullshit they are/that is..?

                    • you didn’t highlight any hypocrisy you said

                      “weka..

                      ..should the sun blink out..(move away..?..)

                      ..the sustainability or not of our day-to-day energy will be the least of our worries..

                      ..and that you have considered this joke/example of rightwing brain-fart seriously..

                      ..to the extent of musing on how finite the sun is..

                      ..and fretting about ‘what if?’..

                      ..is actually even bloody funnier than the original joke..

                      ..well done..!..”

                      which missed the point but now that you’ve elaborated deeper…

                    • BLiP

                      Your opinion is noted. Handy Hint: swaggering about The Standard picking at the scabs of your own meta-perspective version of petty, insoluble squabbles while spraying spittle-flecked invective like a drunken Tory wife-beater at those with whom you probably have most in common is not the best way to win friends and influence people. Just saying.

                    • irrational hate-spiels against vegans/those fighting for the animals..?

                      ..ditto..!

                  • weka

                    “A lot make fun of you by talking about bacon butties and worse – why don’t you post on their (unrelated to the vegan subject) comments like you did here?”

                    And please note that I’m not one of the ones that ridicules phil by talking about bacon butties. I just present arguments that he has no meaningful reply to.

                    For the record (not that phil is capable of understanding the distinction I am about to make, nor is he capable of honesty), but I’m not anti-vegan. I think veganism is a fine choice for individuals who it works for. What I don’t like are fundamentalists (all people should be vegan/everyone can do well on a vegan diet) and arguments based around sustainability that refuse any discussion or real life relevance. Pretty sure that’s all on record already, but thought it worth repeating.

                    • I know you’re not one of the bacon butties and I know you’re not anti-vegan but good to repeat it for those that don’t read all of the comment 🙂

                    • weka

                      Thanks marty, I’ve appreciated your comments in this thread. My for the record thing was for others 😉

      • millsy 11.2.2

        Yes. Experts believe that the sun will ‘die’e ventually.

        In a few million years.

  10. ianmac 12

    Seen this?
    “The PM has always maintained that he met Donghua Liu at a National Party fundraiser but would never say where. Today, the Weekend Herald can reveal that the fundraiser was actually a private dinner at Mr Liu’s $4.75 million home in Remuera, where a smiling Mr Key and Jami-Lee Ross, the MP for Botany, were photographed alongside Mr Liu and his young family.

    Afterwards, Mr Liu donated $25,000 that same month to Mr Ross’ election campaign. But the following year, Mr Liu became a political embarrassment for the Government after a Herald investigation revealed the impact of the property developer’s links to the National Party….”
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11405494

    • Visubversaviper 12.1

      And where is John Armstong’s call for him to resign I ask?

    • tc 12.2

      Banana rebuplic, brought to you by the herald, mediawonks, redneck rantland radio, RNZ and TVNZ.

      With thanks to besties Slater, Farrar and all the shills within the aforementioned.

      • greywarshark 12.2.1

        Clothesline NZ where nearly all of us have been hung out to dry. Dry is going to be the new bad word for us all.

    • There is a timeline of the Liu saga on page A3. They have left out “Herald publishes false story about Liu donations to Labour and puts (another) nail in the coffin of David Cunliffe’s election chances.”
      Absolutely no mention of the alleged links to Labour. They did it – why can’t they own it? B%$#stards.

    • rawshark-yeshe 12.4

      Liar, liar, pants on fire. How can so many good Kiwis not see this ??

      And I think Mr Liu must have released the story and photos !! He is still under the courts on charges of thoroughly bashing his wife and mother-in-law .. have to wonder what the veiled threat is here to Key et al ?

      • veutoviper 12.4.1

        When I read the Herald story, my immediate thoughts were that Liu had a hand in the story – particularly the release of the photos.

        I was therefore amused to read this morning’s tweets by Fran O’Sullivan of all people on the subject, and the responses.

        Just one – “And today utu is exacted. National will live to regret this.” Still have to pinch myself to be sure that Fran actually wrote that!

        • rawshark-yeshe 12.4.1.1

          Amazing !! Wonder if Collins is the utu-seeker ???

          Yes, hard to believe Fran wrote that .. thx for posting VV 🙂

        • Tracey 12.4.1.2

          but liu waited til After the election…

          • veutoviper 12.4.1.2.1

            I presume you mean that Liu waited until after the election to provide the details of the dinner, donation, photos etc to The Herald.

            According to the Herald article, the decision to return the donation to Liu was made after the election and the election returns had come in.

            The article quotes Ross as saying:
            “So when the [donation and expense] returns were being put together after the election, it was decided the $25,000 should be returned to the donor because it was not used.

            “There was no intent to slap anyone in the face.”

            http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11405494

            IMO, the returning of the donation to Liu showed a total lack of understanding of the importance of ‘loss of face’ in terms of Chinese cultural etiquette – and this is what would have driven Liu to seek utu. There was even discussion on WO yesterday of this factor.

            • Tracey 12.4.1.2.1.1

              K. Just so long as we are all clear that Liu isn’t “doing the right thing”, he is being as self-interested as ever… God forbid anyone (not meaning you) turns him into some kind of hero.

  11. Chooky 13

    sustainable dairy farming?…yes there is one Greenie farmer trying to do it…and leading the way

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/countrylife

    http://milkingonthemoove.blogspot.co.nz/2012/10/the-mobile-milking-system.html

    • tc 13.1

      Country calendar has covered others over the years, mostly traditionals who had a WTF moment, changed direction and now have less but healthier cows, diversity of income and better ROI.

      • greywarshark 13.1.1

        I listened with interest to Country Life on Radionz this a.m.,not all of it, but I heard an interesting price discussion for milk powder. The voice said it could be sold for $46 retail by Danone or Nestle, and Fonterra got $4 and the dairy farmer got $4, something in that nature. Naturally the retail price will always be dearer reflecting all related costs and then margins for all the fingers in the pie at the merchandising end. But that is a stark illustration of being a commodities dormouse, (as in Alice book and the sleeping, cute dormouse.)

        The bloke said that this was how it was, and going for more revenue by squeezing the land and resources more to get bigger yields (at what would then be a lowering price – supply and demand economics working here) was a fallacious idea. And stupid, I thought. As I said a few days ago I remember criticism of the choice of a commodities-experienced leader for Fonterra for the last Fonterra CEO, or one before that.

        What happened to diversification as a healthy direction for NZ? Too much trouble comes the obvious answer, unexpressed verbally, but observable from the direction of policy and general political interest from big business-oriented movers and shakers.

  12. Philip Ferguson 14

    Capitalist ideology, hegemony, public atttitudes, shifts in bourgeois ideology. . .

    Articles at: https://rdln.wordpress.com/2015/02/20/bourgeois-ideology-popular-attitudes-shifts/

    Phil

  13. Morrissey 15

    World Vision’s Chris Clarke needs to do some serious reading;
    His indolent views on Syria and Palestine are astonishing

    Radio NZ National, Saturday 21 February 2015

    Kim Hill had an interesting talk with Chris Clarke from World Vision this morning. Mr Clarke has been in Syria working with refugees for many years. Much of what he said was excellent, but he let himself (and the listeners) down by throwing up his hands and pretending it was all too “complex” to understand what was happening there. Worryingly, he even said that this has been “going on” there for well over a thousand years and that Syrians “are used to conflict”. That’s analysis on the level that Garth “Gaga” George used to bring to Jim Mora’s Panel.

    In fact, of course, the situation is easy to understand, even if the confounding hypocrisy of the politicians responsible for the disaster is not.

    I sent the following email to the host…..

    The “complexity” of Syria and Palestine

    Dear Kim,

    Chris Clarke talked about the “complexity” of the situation in Syria. In fact, the situation is quite clear: since 2011 the United States, Great Britain, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Qatar have funded, armed and rhetorically stoked a violent insurrection against the Assad government.

    Last year during a Qatari state television (Al Jazeera) discussion about the Islamic State in Iraq, General Mark Kimmitt plainly and unashamedly stated: “The end game here is still Syria. Our guns are still trained on Syria, and Syria is not off the hook.”

    Later, when mention was made of the Israel-Palestine conflict, Chris Clarke sighed and said: “There are no simple solutions.” Actually, the solution is simple: observe international law and end the illegal occupation of the West Bank and the blockade of Gaza.

    Yours sincerely,

    Morrissey Breen
    Northcote Point

  14. Morrissey 16

    What happens when someone doesn’t read and study enough?
    This happens….

    * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

    “I’m not sure how wrong the Crusades are. The Crusades were kind of an equal battle between two groups of barbarians. The Muslims and the crusading barbarians. What the hell?”

    * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

    —former New York City Obergruppenführer ADOLF GIULIANI expresses his bewilderment.

    http://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/rudy-giuliani-president-obama-doesnt-love-america-115309.html

  15. saveNZ 17

    Pathetic article by Fran in the Herald endorsing Labour and National stacking the odds on the surveillance committee.

    Goodbye democracy in this country.

    Considering NZ First and Greens make up 20% of the NZ vote and government, not sure how this can be called democracy.

    It is more like ‘fight club’.

    • DoublePlusGood 17.1

      Well, that would explain why they don’t want to talk about it…

    • Picard101 17.2

      Labour has made the right move.

      • freedom 17.2.1

        How exactly is restricting democratic oversight the right move?

        Unless of course you are approving of moving NZ even further to the right ?

        • Picard101 17.2.1.1

          Labour cannot favour one possible support partner over another.

          Perhaps the better move in an mmp world is to look how the committee is made up, as opposed to attacking labour for refusing to play favourites when they will prob need more than just the greens come 2017.

          • freedom 17.2.1.1.1

            or,
            offer the spot to the other parties for them to select who takes the position.

            It is not a reason simply to say
            ‘oh well, bit tough to choose, better we keep the spot for ourselves then.’

            • Picard101 17.2.1.1.1.1

              Can you imagine the circus that would follow???? No, labour made the right and sensible choice.

              • freedom

                Well, the Greens have undeniably shown the least circus like behaviour of any political party this past decade, NZ first has also been very stable in its dealings with other parties over the same period, so what exactly is this spin you are selling meant to achieve?

                and why does your ‘linked handle’ go to a” deleted page “?

                • Picard101

                  You misunderstand the uses of the word.

                  If you think for a moment NZF and the Greens would not come to public verbal blows if given the job of picking among themselves, then you don’t know them very well.

                  There is no spin. Labour did the right thing. If anything needs changing it is the mark up of the committee. 3 seats for the government, 2 for the main opposition party, and 1 for any party with over, say, 5 MPs get 1 seat.

                  • Colonial Rawshark

                    You can keep repeating the “Labour did the right thing” line until you are blue in the face.

                    The fact is, they did not do the right thing, and it blew up in their faces, which was also utterly predictable.

                    • Picard101

                      Ummm how has it blown up for them? The only ones who care are the Greens and their supporters. And even then, at a guess, interest is dwindling for the supporters.

                      And if you think the greens would say no to being in government because of this you are mistaken. Labour can do as it wants. The greens have no one else.

                      They know it, the public know it, their clued up supporters know it.

                    • Colonial Rawshark

                      And if you think the greens would say no to being in government because of this you are mistaken. Labour can do as it wants. The greens have no one else.

                      I guess that Labour getting 25% in the last election, losing the last 3 elections in a row, and having it’s % vote decline for 4 straight elections has given you this arrogance.

                      Fucking bizarre.

                      Personally at this stage I think the Greens should demand 1/3 of the seats in Cabinet next election.

                    • Picard101

                      Yea, if you think that you really are just as blind as those on the right.

                    • Colonial Rawshark

                      The Green party vote has now increased to 40% of Labour’s vote.

                      I’m not the one who is acting blind to the trends.

                    • Picard101

                      The greens will get what they are given. The other option is national in government. Well provided NZF doesn’t pip them at the post again.

                      That would be hilarious.

                    • Colonial Rawshark

                      OK mate, it seems to me that you have no concept of an MMP political space compared to FPP, nor what it takes to build strong coalition partnerships which can win the trust of the electorate going into an election campaign, but that’s up to you.

                      5 straight % vote declines for Labour remains on the cards.

                    • weka

                      “And if you think the greens would say no to being in government because of this you are mistaken. Labour can do as it wants. The greens have no one else.”

                      I think at this stage no-one can predict what the GP will do in 2.5 years. In the past I have argued that the GP would be stupid to choose to stay out of govt, but now I think they have more options than they did in the past and things are not as straightforward as you seem to think. You have to remember that the GP want change not power. If they feel that being in govt with Labour will lessen their ability to effect change then why would they do that.

                      You also have to remember that the GP have long known about the approaching CC crisis and their view on the importance of this will affect all other decisions they make. To assume that they will take a minor role in gov as opposed to a partnerships is a mistake.

                      At this point in time there is no reason to think that Labour will not sideline the GP in favour of NZF again. Unless that changes in the next year I would expect to see a shift in GP position.

                      Labour have a window. I still have some hope that Labour will get its shit together, but it’s possible the window is starting to close already. Little is crucial as to whether the relationship between Labour and the GP will work or not. At the moment I’m willing to accept that he fucked up rather than took an intentional stance to put the GP in their place. But there won’t be too many more chances at this.

                      Bear in mind also that a significant chunk of the Labour party is unhappy with Labour’s direction. There is a also a chunk that expects Labour to form a good working relationship with the GP.

                      People aren’t going to wait forever.

                    • Picard101

                      Weka, there is also a chunk of labour supporters who would prefer going with NZF and keeping the greens out.

                      Labour should build a working relationship with all possible partners, and if the greens ever want to be in government then they need to learn to shut up and put forward a united front.

                      CR I understand mmp well. It seems the greens don’t.

                    • Colonial Rawshark

                      I hope you don’t tell your business or personal partners to “shut up”, fall in line, and take what they are given with a smile. What a fuckwit.

                      And tell me, what fictional MMP universe do you live in that Labour and NZF are going to form the government together without the Greens?

                    • Picard101

                      And that’s why the greens don’t belong in government.

                      One where we are some way out, and who knows what might happen. Oh it is very unlikely, but who knows. A girl can dream.

                    • Colonial Rawshark

                      I think you’ve made a deliberate, calculated and very obvious effort to alienate Green party supporters reading The Standard.

                      Bravo, dickhead.

                    • Picard101

                      So as a member of the general public with no influence on the formation of the next government cannot express their preferences?

                      If the green readers are aniliated from a board by one poster, then that is their own silly thin skinned fault.

                    • weka

                      “CR I understand mmp well. It seems the greens don’t.”

                      That would be the GP that was instrumental in giving NZ MMP 🙄

                      “Weka, there is also a chunk of labour supporters who would prefer going with NZF and keeping the greens out.”

                      No doubt true, but doesn’t have any relevance to what I said. I see you have avoided responding to my points almost completely and instead just parroted your same lines again.

                  • freedom

                    You’re a fan of circles, I get it! Circles are awesome, fun and useful. They have changed the way the world functions in many diverse ways. As a form of discussion though, they quite quickly become tiresome.

                    by the way, just interested, what usage of which word did I misunderstand ?

                    • Picard101

                      Lol, if there is one thing a number on the left and right share it is the level of indignation and ivory towerness they demonstrate when more rational and practical heads won’t blindly go along with them.

                      The word was circus.

                    • freedom

                      Have to admit I am not seeing what you are getting at regarding use of the word circus. Perhaps you would care to enlighten me as to what your interpretation of your usage was meant to portray?

                      I think it is safe to say most readers would have taken the word as to mean the rambunctious melees of tit for tat press releases and the name calling in the House and the back channel innuendo of wrongdoings by other parties.

                      not really behaviour the Greens are famous for … they tend to just say straight out what pisses them off

                    • Picard101

                      You need to watch more parliament tv.

                    • freedom

                      I am a very regular viewer of the antics in the House, which is probably why I mentioned the House in my previous reply to you.

                      The Greens are without doubt the most evenly behaved party in the House. Especially when the behaviour of the Government and Labour are used as comparison.

                      So no, you did not explain anything there

                      and why is your linked handle going to a deleted page???

                    • Picard101

                      We must watch different versions.

                      But regardless, go team labour. Keep all your options open, don’t tie yourself to the greens and have no other plan.

                      Why are you so keen to spy on me? I wouldn’t have a clue where my “handle” goes.

                    • freedom

                      not spying, most linked handles go to people’s blogs is all

                      p.s. locking other parties out of democratic oversight positions is Labour “keeping its options open” ….

                      I think Chief Engineer La Forge needs you on the bridge

                    • @ picard..

                      ..u r talking absolute horseshit when u accuse the greens of misbehaving in parliament..

                      ..the nearest they get to that is when kennedy ‘death-ray-eyes’ graham gets pissed at one of the clowns..

                      ..he then fixes them with the glare..

                      ..and they have been known to yelp/cower/whimper/suddenly need to ties their shoes..

                      ..aside from that the greens are paragons of virtue in their behaviour in parliament..

                      ..so much so that part of me goes:..’yes..!..yes..!..we all get it..!..u r really polite’..

                      ..but how about displaying some mongrel..?

                      ..the times call for it…

                    • Picard101

                      Ohhhh. One, I don’t even know it was linked to anything and 2 I don’t have a blog.

                    • Picard101

                      Like I said Phillip, different versions.

                      Now I’m off to town. Can’t sit around yammering with green voters all day.

                    • Pascals bookie

                      Not spying, just recognising patterns.

                      You’ve used a different handle here before eh?

                    • freedom

                      Pascal’s Bookie, you may remember Picard101 from this ‘debate’ about Hone a while back /harawiras-recount-bid-did-not-backfire/

                    • Pascals bookie

                      Christ, what a bore. circa 2006 era trolling techniques.

                    • Picard101

                      So amusing. Yet another thing some on the left and right share. Anyone who disagrees with them is a troll.

                      How stupidly ignorant.

          • saveNZ 17.2.1.1.2

            You sound like you’re paid to write that. No wonder Labour is losing big time, all the ‘advice’ and ‘support’ they get on the hard right issues. Totally works with Act and Maori, at this stage their bromance with National might just get Labour into even more decline.

            Labour should read dirty politics a bit more, because they are being played like a fiddle by all this ‘advice’ and ‘support’ for their actions by some, that surprisingly their real voters are up in arms about.

      • Paul 17.2.2

        Having just read this thread, it would appear you have come on this site to cause an argument and inflame opinion by your comments about the Greens.
        Try making conversation in a more constructive manner.

  16. dv 18

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/66481093/up-to-100-kiwi-troops-poised-to-join-war-in-iraq

    But the deployment is deeply opposed by Opposition parties who have warned that it could drag New Zealand into another long and bloody conflict, just two years after Kiwi troops were pulled from Bamyan, Afghanistan, a decade after the American invasion.

    The divisions over Iraq are so deep Prime Minister John Key is likely to seek a Parliamentary debate without a vote, in stark contrast to 2003 when Helen Clark sought Parliament’s backing to send the SAS to Afghanistan.

    • freedom 18.1

      http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/02/ankara-close-deal-train-fsa-turkey-150217181531857.html
      “The aim of the deal is for Turkey, as well as Qatar and Saudi Arabia, to train as many as 15,000 men in three years, the NTV said.”

      I wonder why NZ does not have such clearly stated objectives ?

      • Pascals bookie 18.1.1

        Because there are two wars, and that’s a different one.

        You’ll note that in the Syrian anti-IS war the Baghdad govt is not on the same side as the people in this new training mission.

        • freedom 18.1.1.1

          ssshhhhh that’s meant to be a secret, like McCain meeting with members of the IS leadership to [redacted because reality frightens people]

    • rawshark-yeshe 18.2

      !00% proof of Key’s dictatorship via grovelling to US — sending troops with no mandate. What a selfish and despicable coward he is to refuse to put it to a vote. And questionable legal status to boot, so ignorant he is.

      Guess Max won’t be going then ?

    • Paul 18.3

      No vote.
      No democracy.
      The fascism isn’t even subtle now.
      NZ is sleepwalking into feudalism.

  17. Lanthanide 19

    Anyone notice on the feed bar to the right, there’s a tab specially for Daily Blog, and it says it was removed at the request of Daily Blog?

    Pretty petty…

  18. ianmac 20

    By the way I admire the clever clown image at the top of the page. Blended so well and with a message.

  19. Molly 21

    One for you Chooky.

    A link to a GlaxoSmithKline document tabled at an Italian court, that awarded compensation to a boy for vaccine induced autism.
    Of particular interest is the constant reference to scientific studies reinforcing vaccines are always safe and effective, and those deaths recorded from Page 647 onwards. (This relates to thimerasol based vaccinations – but they were also proclaimed to be safe by the pharma companies for many years – until they weren’t).

    It’s been a long while for me when I used access to the internet to find related studies quoted in books both for and against vaccinations and came to the conclusion that like any medication, it must be assessed on a case to case basis.

    My oldest son is late teens, so it has almost been twenty years to when I first looked into vaccinations. At the time, I delayed vaccinations and followed a different schedule. Chose not to get the meningitis vaccine, because at the time the predominant NZ strain was different from that which the offered vaccine provided for. Also, did not get the gardasil vaccination for my daughter, as cervical cancer is 100% curable if it is detected by regular smear tests. I believe that human nature will mean that those who think they are protected by Gardasil will avoid or delay smears – possibly with negative outcomes.

    On a personal note, my son who is on the austism spectrum – but not severely, had his first vaccinations at six months. His vocalisation stopped immediately, and did not return for another six months. I reported this to the GP, but have no idea if it was recorded as an adverse effect. He also had gastro-intestinal problems that are often associated with autism spectrum, (and gluten intolerance) but was mostly breast-fed at that time.

    I think the strong anti anti-vaccination, is somewhat disturbing in that it requires complete adoption of ALL vaccines in order to show that you are a caring parent or society member.

    • Incognito 21.1

      Cervical cancer may have a very high cure rate if detected in time; early detection and diagnosis is key to successful treatment of cancer. HPV can also cause oropharyngeal cancer which is also treatable when picked up early enough. Once you are infected with HPV Gardasil will not get rid of it; the virus can quite easily spread as we all know well.

      • Colonial Rawshark 21.1.1

        IMO, if a vaccination hasn’t been shown to reduce your real-life chance of death from all causes by at least 1/1,000, consider it strictly optional. There are more important and more real risks to worry about.

        Molly:

        and came to the conclusion that like any medication, it must be assessed on a case to case basis.

        Absolutely. People who thumbs up or thumbs down “vaccinations” as a whole, clearly have no idea of the concept of risks versus benefits versus unknowns.

        • DoublePlusGood 21.1.1.1

          And that sort of thinking is why we have measles rampaging back.

          • Colonial Rawshark 21.1.1.1.1

            “Rampaging back”

            Dunno why you think hyperbole is going to help your case.

            You set a threshold figure for reduction in risk of death then. Mine is 1/1,000. Below that I think a vaccination can be said to have a fairly low level of benefit because you are far, far more likely to die from some other cause. What’s your suggested level.

            • Psycho Milt 21.1.1.1.1.1

              This is a poor approach in several ways:

              1. Vaccination isn’t just about benefit to the individual, it’s also about benefit to the herd, ie the society you live in. Please take your society into account, unless you’re a nihilist.

              2. Your figure for reduction in risk of death should be based on the likely fatality rate of the disease if nobody was vaccinated. If your calculation of the risk of not being vaccinated is based on getting the benefit of most other people having been vaccinated, again it’s nihilism.

              3. Your figure ought also to take into account the risk of not dying, but of suffering a period of debilitating illness. Well, unless, that is, you find periods of debilitating illness a refreshing change.

              4. The appropriate measurement isn’t the reduction in risk of death, it’s the difference in risk between being vaccinated and not being vaccinated (with the risk of not being vaccinated calculated in terms of what the risk would be if no-one was vaccinated, as per item 2 above). In pretty much all cases (otherwise there wouldn’t be much point to the exercise), the difference is enormously, ridiculously in favour of being vaccinated.

              • Molly

                You make the assumption that adverse reactions are carefully monitored and recorded so that informative statistics on adverse reactions and non-vaccinated recovery are available to be compared. They are not, and if they were – useful decision making information would be gained.

                In two cases with adverse reactions with vaccines, I rang my GP to inform them that my children had “possible” adverse reactions to the vaccinations. Both times, I was listened to with a very cavalier attitude, and I suspect neither was recorded or forwarded to the MoH.

              • The Murphey

                Q. Which agency controls the budget and recommendations list for vaccinations ?

                Q. What are the dangers of revolving door policy and conflict of interest ?

                Q. Why would it be unfathomable to accept that fraud and corruption exists inside the pharmaceutical medical science and associated industry ?

                Former CDC Director Now President of Merck’s Vaccine Unit

                In the summer of 2011, Merck president Julie Gerberding said in a news interview that she’s “very bullish on vaccines,” as she recounted the various ways she helps Merck sell its products. What she didn’t divulge was her motivation for leaving her job as director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)—an agency charged with overseeing vaccines and drug companies—and join Merck in the first place, back in January 2010.

                If you don’t see the enormity of the influence her former high-level ties to the CDC can have, just consider the fact that Merck makes 14 of the 17 pediatric vaccines recommended by the CDC, and 9 of the 10 recommended for adults, and while vaccine safety advocates are trying to rein in the number of vaccines given to babies, safety concerns keep falling on deaf ears. The vaccine industry is booming, and it’s become quite clear that profit potential is the driving factor behind it.

                One of the reasons for this is because vaccine patents do not expire like drugs do, so each vaccine adopted for widespread use has the potential to make enormous, continuous profits for decades to come. Vaccine makers also enjoy a high degree of immunity against lawsuits—and in the case of pandemic vaccines, absolute immunity—so the financial liability when something goes wrong is very low, compared to drugs.

                • One Anonymous Bloke

                  “Dr.” Larry Palevsky, your “source” – whom you plagiarised, is a “holistic practitioner”. He attends meetings with Mr. Andrew Wakefield.

                  The stupid, it’s still burning.

                  • The Murphey

                    Before becoming CDC Director and ATSDR Administrator, Gerberding was Acting Deputy Director of the National Center for Infectious Diseases (NCID), where she played a major role in leading CDC’s response to the anthrax bioterrorism events of 2001. She joined CDC in 1998 as Director of the Division of Healthcare Quality Promotion, NCID, where she developed CDC’s patient safety initiatives and other programs to prevent infections, antimicrobial resistance, and medical errors in healthcare settings. Prior to coming to CDC, Gerberding was a faculty member at the University of California at San Francisco (UCSF) and directed the Prevention Epicenter, a multidisciplinary research, training, and clinical service program that focused on preventing infections in patients and their healthcare providers. Gerberding is a Clinical Professor of Medicine (Infectious Diseases) at Emory University and an Associate Professor of Medicine (Infectious Diseases) at UCSF

                    Q. What was it in my post you were attempting to disprove ?

                  • Colonial Rawshark

                    The stupid, it’s still burning.

                    Actually the most burning, stupid part is that the above comment by The Murphey seems largely factual and correct but because you didn’t like the source, you trashed it. With a bunch of irrelevancies.

                    Ironic really, coming from a champion of scientism.

                    whom you plagiarised

                    Well that’s another judgemental attack presuming bad faith which I don’t think can be justified – I’d say The Murphey put that entire section in italics to indicate it was cut and paste from somewhere else.

                    It may not have been clear to you but that’s how it read to me.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      Fuck off Tat.

                      I trashed it because of its source’s conflicts of interest. Go read the whole article.

                      Not to mention the notion of a cherry-picked attack on an individual being cited as some some of substantive commentary on medicine.

                      You want to exploit systemic flaws to boost your ‘argument’? So does Smallpox.

                    • The Murphey

                      You are correct CR that is what clearly had done

                      Aside from being incorrect about the source I used OAB has again decided to exhibit stalking tendencies and exposed his blind spot about the content of the post along with the avoiding the questions

                      In recent times I have posed queries regarding probable fraud and corruption inside the the medical science pharmaceutical and associated industry and lobby groups

                      Regrettably it appears OAB has taken it upon himself to continue to avoid any semblance of sensibility with regards to what is an incredibly sensitive and serious subject

                      I would suggest to OAB that if he has too much prejudice preventing him responding to posts on this subject with the respect that it deserves he should cease and desist

                      It has become too transparent there are ulterior motives sitting behind the stye and mode of his attacks

                    • Colonial Rawshark

                      You trashed what The Murphey put down even though the facts he included in his comment were correct and accurate.

                      In other words, you threw out the baby with the bath water by incorrectly assuming that those facts about Gerberding, the CDC and Merck were wrong, because you didn’t like the source.

                      That’s the inbuilt prejudice of scientism right there.

                      You want to exploit systemic flaws to boost your ‘argument’? So does Smallpox.

                      The small pox vaccination campaign was a one off success against a major global killer. The vaccines being introduced today have no comparable level of benefit, sorry to say.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      No comparable level of benefit? How can you tell without comparing them?

                      The Murphey gets what they deserve for credulity and logic-chopping. I’ll try and be nicer in the future 😈

                    • Colonial Rawshark

                      No comparable level of benefit? How can you tell without comparing them?

                      Oh that’s easy. None of the vaccinations introduced in the last decade have targeted diseases with anywhere near the level of harm that was caused by small pox.

                      Therefore from the very start none of these new vaccinations could deliver comparable benefits to society of the small pox vaccination.

                    • The Murphey

                      The Murphey gets what they deserve for credulity and logic-chopping. I’ll try and be nicer in the future

                      And yet you have still not responded with anything other than name calling insults deflection and fallacy

                      Q. Would you like to argue the questions I posed regarding Julie Gerberding ?

                      Let me attempt to make this uncomplicated for you

                      1. The weapons manufacturers enjoys death and collateral damage to make profit and ensure control

                      2. The banking industry enjoys the death and collateral damage to make profit and ensure control

                      3. Governments and nation states et al enjoy collateral damage and death caused to ensure profits taxes and control

                      Q. Why would the medical science pharmaceutical industry be concerned about the collateral damage and death caused to ensure profit and control ?

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      Mars is made of cheese, since as everyone knows, the Moon is.

                    • The Murphey

                      The nonsense of your comments is speaking volumes on your behalf and I am quite sure there are many who can see through it the same way muzza did

                      This subject matter is too serious for your derailing and infantile facile interjections

                      I request again that you cease stalking my comments as I notice it is the same tactic you employ against others on here who threaten to expose your self perception

                      Wisdom comes from within

              • Colonial Rawshark

                2. Your figure for reduction in risk of death should be based on the likely fatality rate of the disease if nobody was vaccinated. If your calculation of the risk of not being vaccinated is based on getting the benefit of most other people having been vaccinated, again it’s nihilism.

                Why do you patter on about criteria based on whether EVERYONE is vaccinated or not? That is not the question. There is never going to be a scenario where everyone is vaccinated or where everyone is not vaccinated.

                In other words, I am not talking about making a go/no go decision for the entire of society.

                I am talking about criteria for an individual to make a decision for themselves or for a loved on in their care.

                3. Your figure ought also to take into account the risk of not dying, but of suffering a period of debilitating illness. Well, unless, that is, you find periods of debilitating illness a refreshing change.

                Sorry, I don’t count avoiding brief inconvenient illnesses as a compelling benefit of vaccination. At best it is a peripheral benefit especially when compared to lives saved or reduction in risk of death.

                • Why do you patter on about criteria based on whether EVERYONE is vaccinated or not?

                  I don’t. I said “most other people,” not “everyone.” Vaccines are most useful when upwards of 80% of the population is vaccinated. The social benefit of your participation in reaching that high level of vaccinated individuals in the population is very much one of the criteria you should take into account when deciding whether to be vaccinated or not.

                  Sorry, I don’t count avoiding brief inconvenient illnesses as a compelling benefit of vaccination.

                  Jesus H. Christ. Do you at least wash your hands after using the toilet? Even if you don’t count avoiding illnesses as a reason to take some trivial preventative action, people you come into contact with certainly do want to avoid illness and your cooperation would be appreciated.

                  • Colonial Rawshark

                    If the main benefit of a given vaccination is simply to avoid a routine self limiting and brief illness I have no problem with that – just come out and say so to parents in the information literature given to them.

                    Even if you don’t count avoiding illnesses as a reason to take some trivial preventative action

                    Not everyone considers artificially and permanently modifying immune system characteristics as a “trivial action.”

                    • Ergo Robertina

                      Exactly. And in the case of flu, an everyday non-invasive action like hand-washing can be more effective against its spread than the vaccine anyway.

                    • …in the case of flu…

                      Influenza isn’t a “routine, self-limiting and brief” illness, unless you’re one of those people who gets a cold and calls it the flu. And your “hand-washing is just as good” approach is cold comfort to the large number of people vulnerable to being killed by influenza (the very old or young, the already-sick, those with weakened immune systems etc).

                      Not everyone considers artificially and permanently modifying immune system characteristics as a “trivial action.”

                      Any action in which the risk of harm is of the one-in-a-million variety is by definition a “trivial action.”

                    • Ergo Robertina

                      I never said flu was ”routine, self-limiting and brief”.
                      It’s serious – and there are humble preventive methods like hand washing to help halt its spread.
                      The flu vaccine is at its least effective among elderly. And given uptake is reasonably high in NZ (considering it is unfunded for most people) it makes sense to promote everyday prevention measures, even if they’re not of the type to enrich pharmaceutical companies.

                    • It did seem odd that you’d raise influenza, when Colonial Rawshark was talking about brief, routine illnesses. Anyway, do I hear “both?” As in, vaccinating and washing your hands isn’t an either/or. And maybe the elderly do better at avoiding various diseases when there aren’t a whole lot of un-vaccinated people spreading it about?

                    • Ergo Robertina

                      So I introduced a different illness which is also vaccine targeted; that doesn’t seem so odd to me.
                      On the either/both question, you’d have to consider the opportunity cost presented by the flu vaccine, and whether there was greater gain possible through resourcing nutrition advice, housing insulation, and a whole lot of other initiatives if we looked at the problem differently.
                      In the northern hemisphere, the flu jab is even less effective than usual, so far this season (3%):
                      http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/feb/05/flu-vaccine-low-protection-uk-this-winter

                    • The Murphey

                      Dr. Danuta Skowronski, a flu expert at the B.C. Centre for Disease Control in Vancouver, spotted a surprising and unsettling trend when she looked at data on people in British Columbia who contracted H1N1 in the spring and summer of 2009. People who had received a seasonal flu shot the previous autumn were more likely to contract the new pandemic strain.

                      Her findings, which were initially dismissed by many in the global influenza research community, were later replicated in studies done in other provinces as well, leading some to dub the phenomenon “the Canadian problem.”

                      http://www.ctvnews.ca/health/study-raises-red-flag-for-universal-flu-vaccine-1.1431159#ixzz3K6jP4LUP

                      VANCOUVER — There is a mismatch between this year’s flu vaccine and the strains that have been making people in B.C. sick, says an expert in infectious diseases with the BC Centre for Disease Control.

                      H3N2, one of three influenza viruses included in this year’s flu shot, changed after the time the vaccine was being prepared, and a mutated version is circulating far more than is normal for this time of year, said Dr. Danuta Skowronski, epidemiology lead for influenza and emerging respiratory pathogens with the BCCDC.

                      “It’s very unusual. It’s a concerning signal,” she said. “We’ve already had eight long-term care facility outbreaks reported to us and that is very early for typical influenza activity.”

                      http://www.vancouversun.com/Health/Empowered-Health/Mutation+virus+weakened+vaccine+effectiveness/10407696/story.html

                    • Colonial Viper

                      Even independent commentators accept that the UK government has spent many millions of pounds on the flu vaccine on the basis of fuck all evidence of real world benefit. I cant see why it would be that different in NZ. Who needs evidence to justify this expenditure when you can proceed on faith then try and justify it retrospectively.

                    • Ergo Robertina

                      Thanks for the links Murphey, especially the one to the research suggesting the flu vaccine weakens the immune system.
                      Another article on the ”flu vaccine paradox”: http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/flu-vaccine-paradox-adds-to-public-health-debate-1.2912790

                      ”People who receive flu vaccines year after year can sometimes show reduced protection, an effect that Canadian infectious disease specialists say muddies public health messages for annual flu vaccine campaigns.”

                      “These findings are so new, so emerging that policy-makers have not yet had a chance to fully digest them or understand the implications,” Skowronski said.

                      Yes, it’s awfully tricky to incorporate this into vaccine PR. It’s one thing to acknowledge the low rate of protection, by arguing it’s better than nothing, but year on year compromise to the immune system is more difficult to justify.

                    • Colonial Viper

                      Theres a lot of money and a lot of professional careers predicated on justifying it, so its likely they will come up with something.

                    • The Murphey

                      Hi Ego you’re welcome

                      http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/flu-vaccination-ban-goes-national-after-fever-convulsions-in-children-20100422-tglp.html

                      Seasonal flu vaccinations across Australia for children under five have been suspended after 23 children in Western Australia were admitted to hospital with convulsions following their injections.

                      One child, aged 1, remains in a coma in a Perth hospital.

                      http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/ScienceResearch/ucm290700.htm

                      Mutation is enabling some influenza viruses to evade neutralization by previously broadly-active antibodies

                      http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/09/18/world/middleeast/syrian-children-die-after-vaccinations.html?_r=3&referrer

                      An improperly mixed or possibly sabotaged measles vaccine has killed as many as 50 children in insurgent-held areas of northwestern Syria, volunteer medical organizations and physicians reported Wednesday, forcing the suspension of a large-scale United Nations vaccination campaign intended to stop the spread of measles, rubella and polio

                    • The Murphey

                      Ergo my sincerest apologies for the typo with your handle name

                    • Colonial Viper

                      And we know that vaccinated populations encourage pathogen behaviour to change and adapt.

                    • Ergo Robertina

                      Given you could have edited to correct the ‘typo’ during the two minute interval between your comments, Murphey, I’ll infer you’re being snide, which is a bit weird, really.

                    • The Murphey

                      Dec 1 2014 – http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/italy-will-investigate-11-deaths-linked-to-flu-vaccine/story-fneszs56-1227140313129

                      THE number of people who have died in Italy after being administered a flu vaccine made by Swiss pharmaceutical company Novartis has risen to 13.

                      The Italian Medical Agency (AIFA) has warned against panic and stressed there is not proof yet that it was the vaccine that led to the deaths.

                      It said it banned two batches of the product — called FLUAD — as a precautionary measure, pending further studies.

                      Dec 3 2013 – http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30316113

                      http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-12-03/no-evidence-novartis-flu-vaccine-caused-deaths-in-italy

                      http://www.ema.europa.eu/ema/index.jsp?curl=pages/news_and_events/news/2014/12/news_detail_002228.jsp&mid=WC0b01ac058004d5c1

                      There is no evidence the flu vaccine Fluad caused a number of deaths in Italy, EU drug regulators have said

                      ‘No evidence’ is a commonly used term in this instance it was a matter of days after any possible investigation may have begun so quite literally there could be ‘no evidence’

                    • The Murphey

                      Hi Ergo I attempted to edit the original typo however I am using a very locked down browser and any popups or windows for editing simply will not load and I am unable to alter the settings

                      By the time I had loaded the apology I realized I could have asked the mods to edit for me however I was unable to edit the apology either

                      This was a genuinely honest error on my part

                    • Ergo Robertina

                      Sorry for snapping at you Murphey, I was wrong.

                    • Clemgeopin []

                      “Sorry for snapping at you Murphey, I was wrong”.

                      Ergo, that is a really nice mea culpa from you.
                      Dog bless you my child! For your penance, just say about three hail Murphey’s and that’ll do. Piece be with you.

                      .
                      (Joke..lol)

                    • Ergo Robertina

                      lol thank you clem.

                    • Clemgeopin

                      @Ergo Robertina:

                      “lol thank you clem.”

                      U R WELL come!

                      I thonk the murphey has gone to bed. Snoring away… Will get massage in the mourning.

                      Bonum nocte!

          • Molly 21.1.1.1.2

            What “sort of” thinking are you referring to?

            My thinking is that all medications need to be treated with caution and risk assessment, vaccinations included. The number of vaccinations while children are still very young and in neurological and immune system development is steadily increasing.

            Your thinking is what exactly?

            Have you had a look at the adverse reactions that GlaxoSmithKline identified themselves in the link above. Including death, neurological disorders etc.

            Start at Page 685 APPENDIX 5C : Fatal cases – late breaking info if you want to see how many vaccinations are being given to very young infants.

            The first case is a three-month old receiving the following vaccinations all in one visit to the doctor – This case was reported by a pharmacist and by another health professional and described the occurrence of septicemia in a 3-month-old female subject who was vaccinated with combined diphtheria, tetanus-acellular pertussis, hepatitis B, inactivated poliomyelitis and Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccine (Infanrix
            hexa, GlaxoSmithKline), live attenuated human rotavirus vaccine (Rotarix) and pneumococcal vaccines (non-gsk) (Prevenar) forprophylaxis.

            I’m sure I’m not the only parent who has been offered the opportunity to “catch up on vaccinations” while my child is at the doctor with an ailment that already involves a compromised immune system. The focus on raising immunisations makes this approach efficient, but not necessarily one with a positive outcome for the child and family who take up that offer.

            • Colonial Rawshark 21.1.1.1.2.1

              Anyone who is 100% pro-all vaccinations or 100% anti-all vaccinations is a faith-based absolutist IMO.

              The interesting thing is watching how utterly dogmatic the self-proclaimed intellectuals, scientists and rationalists get about this.

              • One Anonymous Bloke

                I’m 100% pro evidence-based peer review. It’s the worst possible system apart from all the other ones.

                • Colonial Rawshark

                  So you’re not 100% pro all vaccinations then?

                  • One Anonymous Bloke

                    That’s right Sherlock, the corrupt* medical professionals who are in ‘cahoots’ with the drug manufacturers can be trusted when they say that vaccines are contraindicated for some patients.

                    *terms and conditions apply.

                    • Colonial Rawshark

                      big pharma is a multi billion dollar industry which relies on the tax payer for $$$. That’s simply reality.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      🙄

                      Your beige drivel is just as compelling.

                    • KJT

                      Vaccination was proved as an effective and safe means of preventing disease long before “big pharma”.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      Nah, back in the day, “Big Pharma” were called “The Illuminati”, and they were invisible magicians who manipulated public health outcomes to make it look as though vaccines worked.

                      Honest, I seen ’em!

                    • Colonial Rawshark

                      Vaccination was proved as an effective and safe means of preventing disease long before “big pharma”.

                      Vaccination is a technology. Like ships are a technology. I presume that there have been many different types of ships, ship designs and implementations of those designs. And I presume that not all of the designs and the way that they were built or the purposes that they were used for or sold for were appropriate, and some were better than others at doing the job. And some were eventually found out, the hard way, to be downright dangerous in unexpected circumstances.

                      That’s exactly the same with any technology, and exactly the same with vaccination.

                • Ergo Robertina

                  To our detriment we lack pluralism in science and contrary to what you claim it is not inevitable.
                  For one perspective on how things might have been different, a recent Mosaic Science piece looked at the death of the radical science movement in the Britain:

                  ”People today often call for evidence-based policies, but the problem is that the power to collect evidence isn’t evenly distributed. In the 1970s, BSSRS worked to change this – and build a science for the people.”

                  http://mosaicscience.com/story/science-people

                  • Colonial Rawshark

                    Now its top down science by the corporate establishment showered down upon the rest of us “ignorant” types who should ideally just comply with the directives of our betters and wisers.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      No, really, fuck off, science denier.

                    • Colonial Rawshark

                      Go worship at the alter of scientism all ye faithful.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      The worst possible altar apart from all the other ones. Bring your skepticism and curiosity and they’ll grow.

                    • nadis

                      I don’t know where you got your numbers from. I also disagree with your assertion that medical researchers, employees of the Ministry of Health, GP’s, Universities, the UN public health programs, UNICEF etc represent the 1%. But who knows. Provide a reference and I’ll read it.

                  • One Anonymous Bloke

                    As opposed to the Science for Martians we have now, because let’s face it, scientists aren’t people.

                    • Ergo Robertina

                      That’s a nutty argument OAB.
                      It’s like saying the neoliberal economic system doesn’t exacerbate
                      negative aspects of human behaviour because, hey, we’re still people.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      No, it’s saying that because scientists are people, other people, with conflicts of interest, can easily cherry-pick scientific errors or individuals to support their personal Dunning-Kruger effect, including me, and the worst possible way to deal with this, apart from all the other ones, is peer review.

                      If you want to believe that Doctors eat babies, sure, go for your life.

                    • nadis

                      come on OAB – I think you are being unreasonable.

                      Personally I pine for a world where the following diseases rage unchecked through the wider population:

                      Anthrax
                      Measles
                      Rubella
                      Cholera
                      Meningococcal disease
                      Influenza
                      Diphtheria
                      Mumps
                      Tetanus
                      Hepatitis A
                      Pertussis
                      Tuberculosis
                      Hepatitis B
                      Pneumoccocal disease
                      Typhoid fever
                      Hepatitis E
                      Poliomyelitis
                      Tick-born encephalitis
                      Haemophilus influenzae type b
                      Rabies
                      Varicella and herpes zoster (shingles)
                      Human papilloma-virus
                      Rotavirus gastenteritis
                      Yellow fever
                      Japanese encephalitis

                      You can take your dangerous and useless vaccinations and blah blah blah blah CIA plot blah blah new world order blah blah blah jews blah blah blah bilderberg blah blah blah……..

                    • Colonial Rawshark

                      BTW almost all those diseases you list have mortality rates and incidence which skyrocket under conditions of poverty.

                      Just saying…

                    • nadis

                      just saying what?

                      Until we solve poverty we should let poor people die because science is hard to understand? Is that what you are just saying?

                      Hang on for a bit while I pop out and cure poverty in Asia and Africa.

                    • Until we solve poverty we should let poor people die because science is hard to understand? Is that what you are just saying?

                      Please, don’t. I have the horrible feeling the answer may be “Yes.”

                    • The Murphey

                      Hang on for a bit while I pop out and cure poverty in Asia and Africa.

                      Nobody with the level of influence required has the genuine interest to do anything with Africa other than enure it remains the way it is

                      I enjoy your financial comments which you post and you understand the information you share however the comments regarding disease and vaccination indicate a lack of understanding

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      🙄

                      *whoosh*

                    • nadis

                      murphey. double whoosh.

                      So do we add you to colonial’s team of science allergics who are happy to see poor people (especially poor black people) die because of your political views on vaccination?

                    • Colonial Viper

                      I have no issue targetting at risk ethnic groups in poor countries with additional medical treatment. Its the shotgun approach to treating everyone the same that i dislike.

                      I could even ignore that what is most voraciously advocated in third world countries tends to be what makes white shareholders in wealthy western countries more money.

                    • The Murphey

                      murphey. double whoosh

                      So do we add you to colonial’s team of science allergics who are happy to see poor people (especially poor black people) die because of your political views on vaccination?

                      Nadis as I stated in my previous comment it appears your words indicate you are are lacking some basic understanding and awareness around the tone and subject matter of the discussion

                      That you believe vaccination is a political issue would reinforce my observation and that you have laced your emotional biased comments with class and race is to suggest you should avoid this topic of discussion

                    • nadis

                      oh hardly. You are the one with an emotional response. You are extrapolating your personal belief about whats right for the individuals close to you, to what is right for society as a whole from a public health perspective – without referencing the science around public health policy.

                      Guess what – when setting policy at a governmental or trans-governmetal level the fact that your little johnny has a .01% risk of a bad reaction to a vaccine is not that important when judged against the net benefit to wider society. And if your little Johnny is a high risk for whatever reason then I’m sure you’ll be advised not to vaccinate him.

                      We live in a free country – and you have the right to opt out of a vaccination if you want to. But if enough people do it, it becomes a selfish choice and creates a tragedy of the commons scenario.

                      Do you believe we should never have used the small pox vaccine? Do you think whooping cough or measles are diseases that belong in NZ?

                      And btw, this discussion and all the other anti-science discussions would be much better if the only citations allowed were by practitioners in that field with studies that are peer reviewed. Youtube is not a research source.

                    • Colonial Viper

                      Sure lets make it so that an elite of 1% or 2% are the only people who get to discuss and debate the issues in society. Thats worked out really well so far.

                      Again, if the main point of vaccination is not for the benefit of the individual child, then just tell parents that upfront. I have no problem with that.

                      BTW a downside risk of .01% with a potential upside of just 0.01% is hardly a compelling case to invest for the good of the market.

                    • The Murphey

                      oh hardly. You are the one with an emotional response.

                      Q. Where is the emotion in my response ?

                      You are extrapolating your personal belief about whats right for the individuals close to you, to what is right for society as a whole from a public health perspective – without referencing the science around public health policy.

                      Q. Can you see the contradiction in your statement ?

                      Q. Which agencies control ‘public health policy’ and how might this be influenced by revolving door policy and other conflicts of interest ?

                      Guess what – when setting policy at a governmental or trans-governmetal level the fact that your little johnny has a .01% risk of a bad reaction to a vaccine is not that important when judged against the net benefit to wider society. And if your little Johnny is a high risk for whatever reason then I’m sure you’ll be advised not to vaccinate him.

                      Q. Can you categorically back up this statement ?

                      Q. How would you back up the statement without deferring to a 3rd party entity ? – (see question about revolving door and conflict of interest)

                      We live in a free country – and you have the right to opt out of a vaccination if you want to. But if enough people do it, it becomes a selfish choice and creates a tragedy of the commons scenario.

                      Q. Do you understand the definition of emotive language ?

                      Q. Why are you judging others based on what you believe ?

                      Q. Do you believe there is a ‘right’ side to this discussion and if so then why ?

                      Do you believe we should never have used the small pox vaccine? Do you think whooping cough or measles are diseases that belong in NZ?

                      Q. I take no position specifically but perhaps you could start with this – http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2000/02/the-virus-and-the-vaccine/377999/?single_page=true

                      And btw, this discussion and all the other anti-science discussions would be much better if the only citations allowed were by practitioners in that field with studies that are peer reviewed. Youtube is not a research source.

                      Q. What does anti science mean to you ?

                      Q. Are you connected to the ‘science’ industry ?

                      Q. Do you believe every individual organization or company inside the ‘science’ industry is devoid of fraudulent or corrupt practice and behavioural tendencies ?

                      Keep examining yourself and asking questions because the answers you seek will come from within

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      Let’s be accurate: ‘from within’ is such a vague imprecise location: wisdom comes from the gut, which as everyone knows has far more nerve endings than the brain.

                • Molly

                  As an example:

                  Quick google on the efficacy of Gardasil will bring up the contrast between Merck’s data, and other published papers that have found no long term benefit.

                  From the abstract:

                  For example, while the world’s leading medical authorities state that HPV vaccines are an important cervical cancer prevention tool, clinical trials show no evidence that HPV vaccination can protect against cervical cancer. Similarly, contrary to claims that cervical cancer is the second most common cancer in women worldwide, existing data show that this only applies to developing countries. In the Western world cervical cancer is a rare disease with mortality rates that are several times lower than the rate of reported serious adverse reactions (including deaths) from HPV vaccination. Future vaccination policies should adhere more rigorously to evidence-based medicine and ethical guidelines for informed consent.

                  Informed consent requires that we get to be given this information alongside the expected benefits when we choose medication.

                  • The Murphey

                    http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2014/03/07/infdis.jiu139.abstract

                    Conclusions. Naturally-acquired antibodies to HPV-16, and to a lesser extent HPV-18, are associated with some reduced risk of subsequent infection and cervical abnormalities associated with the same HPV type

                  • One Anonymous Bloke

                    Wait, what? Someone produced some flawed research, other scientists debunked it, and then you decided that must be evidence of wrongdoing?

                    Hint: The Baltimore Affair.

                    It’s almost as though science works or something.

                    • Colonial Viper

                      Dont be a smartass. The main thing which has “worked” in the case of Gardasil is the transfer of billions of tax dollars to a corporation. The credible appearance of science was merely the accomplice.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      Vaccination is bunk because Gardasil.
                      Like I said to Ergo: the data doesn’t justify the conclusion.

                    • The Murphey

                      OAB your responses and tone have become frantic and it would be my contention you need to separate your ego from the commercial industry as well as ‘the science’

                      You are not ‘the science’ or the commercial industry and you would to well to delineate these aspects if you are to contribute in a rationale manner

                      By attempting to state your position without acknowledging that commercial interests are the antithesis of ‘science’ is inane and an expose of your self perception

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      By failing to grasp that’s precisely what I’m saying you’re simply demonstrating your shallow intellect.

                      You think the astonishing revelation that conflicts of interest are a thing is news to anyone? Next you’ll be telling me water is wet.

                    • The Murphey

                      By failing to grasp that’s precisely what I’m saying you’re simply demonstrating your shallow intellect.

                      In reality was it means is that you are still flailing and the comment regarding your frantic and personally insulting responses has been endorsed by your own words

                      You think the astonishing revelation that conflicts of interest are a thing is news to anyone? Next you’ll be telling me water is wet.

                      I was working to the premise that it was belligerence preventing you responding to my questions around this which you have just confirmed

                      Your attempt to trivialize the transparent impacts of fraud corruption revolving doors and conflict of interest will not provide the shelter for which you crave

                      You know this and I know you do too

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      “Trivialise” – yeah, keep on missing the point: you can come up with as many individual examples of alleged malpractice as you like, and what will that say about the validity of Epidemiology in relation to immunisation programs – nothing.

                      Not a sausage.

                      That’s ’cause they’ve got peer-review and you’ve got Youtube, and you’re too lazy to test your opinions.

                    • The Murphey

                      “Trivialise” – yeah, keep on missing the point: you can come up with as many individual examples of alleged malpractice as you like, and what will that say about the validity of Epidemiology in relation to immunisation programs – nothing.

                      Q. Did you think that comment through before you wrote it ?

                      That’s ’cause they’ve got peer-review and you’ve got Youtube, and you’re too lazy to test your opinions.

                      Examples of ‘alleged malpractice’ already exist in alarmingly high numbers and many more will flood into the mainstream consciousness despite your protestations

                      Meanwhile you can continue to find methods which convince yourself it’s just another crank and to marginalize slander and defame the reputation of any given individual

                      Examine your ego – it is not in your gut

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      Yes, you unbelievably dense fuckwit, as I have been saying, there is malpractice and mistakes are made, you fuckwit.

                      The problem with your empty drivel, you fuckwit, is the significance you attach to that. Conspiracist fuckwits like you never change.

                    • The Murphey

                      http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/millions-spent-on-doctor-gagging-orders-by-nhs-investigation-finds-2041209.html

                      Hospital doctors who quit their jobs are being routinely forced to sign “gagging orders” despite legislation designed to protect NHS whistleblowers, it is revealed today.

                      Millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money are being spent on contracts that deter doctors from speaking out about incompetence and mistakes in patient care

                    • The Murphey

                      Vaccine Injury Table

                      http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/vaccinetable.html

                      National Vaccine Industry Compensation Program

                      http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/127/Supplement_1/S74.full.pdf

                      Congress Gave Pharmaceutical Industry Liability Shield

                      After major pharmaceutical companies threatened to leave the U.S. without childhood vaccines unless they were shielded from vaccine injury lawsuits, the U.S. Congress passed the 1986 law giving major pharmaceutical companies a partial liability shield. The law also shielded pediatricians and all vaccine providers from civil liability for vaccine injuries and deaths

                      Vaccine Court

                      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine_court

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      You trust official documents when it suits you. I’m done here.

                    • The Murphey

                      I use documentations from where I believe they are appropriate at time when I believe it is appropriate

                      Most any source or document can be considered directly or indirectly ‘suspect’ to varying degrees and this is a core premise to my musings

                      I notice you have become severely agitated at a number of commentators today as well as previously which is a pattern formed over an extended time frame by your handle

                      If what myself or others post and link disturbs you into such reaction it would be advisable for you to step back and perhaps engage in some meditation or similar healing activity

                      Namaste

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      🙄

                      Now he’s a doctor.

                      I use documentations from where I believe they are appropriate at time when I believe it is appropriate…

                      Most people just call that “lying”.

                    • The Murphey

                      I’m done here

                      You appear confused incoherent and an actual liar

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      Being done on the subject of immunisation doesn’t prevent me from making observations on other topics.

                    • The Murphey

                      Q. So your reply after the ‘ I’m done here’ comment was not a response to me ?

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      Q. is that the way you interpreted it?
                      A. Then you’re bewildered as well as dishonest.

                  • The Murphey

                    Q. Would you like to explain the interpretation ?

    • The Murphey 21.2

      Hi Molly

      Thank you for posting the link and for sharing your personal experience

    • Ergo Robertina 21.3

      ”I think the strong anti anti-vaccination, is somewhat disturbing in that it requires complete adoption of ALL vaccines in order to show that you are a caring parent or society member.”

      +1 Yep; intolerance around this issue seems to have increased lately.

      • One Anonymous Bloke 21.3.1

        That’s because so many more children are dying from ignorance and selfishness masquerading as choice.

        • Colonial Rawshark 21.3.1.1

          Bullshit. That’s more myth and scaremongering from you. You want to target those most at risk with treatment, I can see the logic in that.

          You want to apply a faith based medical shotgun blast across all of society without descrimination – no thanks.

          dying from ignorance and selfishness

          Nah, the people saying let’s treat the topic of vaccination with a degree of caution don’t tend to be the same people who are making $$$ from selling, organising or administering vaccinations.

          • One Anonymous Bloke 21.3.1.1.1

            Nobel prize to the first post-grad student who demonstrates that the link between vaccines and the companies that produce them is inversely proportional to their efficacy.

            • Colonial Rawshark 21.3.1.1.1.1

              Irrelevant. And who gives a fuck about “efficacy.” I’m talking about real world effectiveness and benefit – reduction in risk of death or some other significant real life clinical end point. Not just intermediate measurements like levels of antibodies or some other half way house metric.

              • One Anonymous Bloke

                You’re a bona fide Merchant of Doubt.

                • Colonial Viper

                  Dont get me wrong: intermediate measures have their uses. But knowing what temperature the oven has been set to is finally less important to me than knowing if the centre of the chicken is properly cooked.

        • Molly 21.3.1.2

          OAB, no comment on the number of vaccinations being given to children at such a very young age?

          Also, you seem to believe that there is a different approach from pharma companies than that which has been used in the past for releasing other medications.

          I temped briefly for SKB in the 1990’s in customer services when I received many distressed, and irate calls from doctors who could no longer get Stelazine, (a psychiatric medication) because the marketing dept had been told to let the stock drop, as the newly patented Aropax was to be offered as an alternative. These drugs require a six-week transition period. Effectively, in order to get the higher profit from the newly patented drug, existing patients were forcibly removed from their existing drug, and by necessity were transferred to Aropax.

          Several years later while in the UK, an expose on Aropax was on TV. SKB had hidden results from the clinical trials that indicated a high occurrence of suicide attempts in teenagers and young people that were given this drug. The boxes of files were kept in a residential unit in Hawaii.

          If you did bother to look at the research – like I did many years ago – you will find many clinical trials are couched in terms that allow for negative outcomes to be ignored or dismissed as due to other factors. There are also studies that indicate less efficacy than that stated by the pharma clinical trials, but you have to go looking for them.

          I’m just a little bit surprised that there is such unquestioning faith in the reporting that comes from the research funding provided by those who profit.

          • One Anonymous Bloke 21.3.1.2.1

            I’m not surprised that you resort to a strawman to bolster your feeble argument: it’s normal behaviour for people to project their credulity onto others.

            Cherry-picking research doesn’t make you informed. Noticing that businesses behave like businesses doesn’t make you profound.

            • Colonial Viper 21.3.1.2.1.1

              Dont be a dick. Molly is pointing out common practices, not exceptional ones. Open your eyes and stop being such a faithful believer in the official narrative.

              • One Anonymous Bloke

                When you stop ignoring my position, (The worst possible system apart from all the other ones, now fuck off, Tat) you’ll be able to construct an argument against it.

                • Colonial Viper

                  Sorry, now you’re just becoming irrational.

                  • One Anonymous Bloke

                    You’ve made no attempt to understand my position, you’re inventing patronising strawmen to cover your failure, so fuck off.

                    • Colonial Rawshark

                      Huh? Why the hostility? Especially when your position agrees with me: you yourself imply that the system you back is imperfect and is subject to various failures and vulnerabilities.

                      That’s the only admission I needed from you on the topic of vaccination, and now I have it. Cheers.

            • Ergo Robertina 21.3.1.2.1.2

              OAB – Denying the well documented, and trying to ridicule Molly and others for participating in debate by minimising the issue, are classic doubt merchant tactics, so a nice bit of projection on to CV up thread.

              • One Anonymous Bloke

                Who’s denying it? Not me. I’m saying the data doesn’t justify the conclusions. Who was it projecting again?

            • Molly 21.3.1.2.1.3

              I’m not cherry picking research. Just providing links to either pharma information or published papers to show that there is a wealth of information out there – some of which is contradictory.

              So I’m just querying your steadfast position that EVERY vaccination project is warranted and beneficial.

              And yes, provided a personal anecdote regarding previous unethical behaviour that at the time I was unknowingly a small bit player in, to show that released clinical trials are sometimes not all the information that was collated.

              I don’t have the degree of trust in the pharmaceutical companies that is required to unquestioningly follow their recommended schedules and number of vaccinations. Given ongoing behaviour this seems to be a sensible approach.

              OAB – You haven’t even bothered to discuss issues such as the benefits of Gardasil vs. regular screening, the number of vaccinations received by very young infants, and the lamentable practice of offering “catch up” immunisations to children while they are already immune compromised.

              These are worth discussing, not dismissing.

              • One Anonymous Bloke

                I haven’t bothered to discuss your cherry-picked example? What the fuck do you suppose “the worst possible system” remark refers to? It means I unquestioningly follow it, doesn’t it.

                On Planet Molly.

              • The Murphey

                Hi Molly

                Regrettably OAB illustrates the severity of the challenge in having a discussion of this nature by exhibiting the fundamental misinterpretation behind the definition of ‘ science’

                What is ‘agreed’ as mantra today is just as likely to be ‘proven’ as incorrect tomorrow

                The reality is the mantra is a human constructed delusion masquerading as ‘fact’ which is being exposed with each passing day

                Stick with your instincts they will serve you well

                • One Anonymous Bloke

                  😆 at the emotive and dishonest employment of the word ‘mantra’.

                  Go for it Molly: this Murphey clearly has your best interests at heart. Me, I’m just being offensive for no reason at all.

                  • Clemgeopin

                    What I want to know is who killed JFK?

                    • McFlock

                      Nobody. It was a purely coincidental case of explosive diarrhea that backed up in his colon and eventually burst through the top of his head.

                      But soon the context of the shared experience and zeitgeist of the universe will reveal the cosmic subjective truth of the illusion we call life, or somesuch bullshit.

                    • Clemgeopin []

                      Interesting theory! I am skeptical, though.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      Buzz Aldrin. It was an accident: that right hook, y’know.

                    • Clemgeopin []

                      Is that right! I am learning something new every day!….

                      Ok, as you were guys.

                      Now about the twin towels…what do the engineers and scientists say? Do they all agree or agree to disagree? Was it a really a bang or a big bang? God only knows!

                      I am out of hear!

                • The Murphey

                  You genuinely have misinterpreted the fundamental definition

                  Peer review is the premise you stand behind which is ‘ agreed opinion’ at a given point in time *

                  * subject to change

                  • One Anonymous Bloke

                    You genuinely have no idea what my point is so why don’t you stick to making yours?

                    Where did you get your self-serving “definition” of peer-review from?

                    • The Murphey

                      Q. Is agreed opinion at a given point in time inaccurate ?

                      Q. Is subject to change inaccurate ?

                      Once you have responded to the majority of my questions today and previously I’ll consider responding to yours

                      Until then I’ll leave your request in the file named hypocrisy

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      Most often you’ll see (if you can be bothered to check) that far from being agreed, ‘findings’ are hotly contested.

                    • The Murphey

                      ‘Hotly Contested’ as you describe the process substantiates both points

                      1. That an ‘agreed opinion’ is achieved

                      2. That change is a constant

                      Q. Why would you wish to be so dogmatic when current ‘agreed opinion’ is subject to change ?

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      Are you making up new meanings of English words much?

                      Contested means no agreement by definition. Do I have to link to the dictionary for each word, or can you pay more attention?

                    • McFlock

                      OAB, I hotly agree with your position.

                    • The Murphey

                      Contested means no agreement by definition

                      Q. Why would you be so dogmatic when there is ‘no agreement by definition’ and change is a constant ?

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      Because it fundamentally affects your false characterisation of peer review.

                      Why do you suppose peer review is necessary in the first place? Let’s make this a multiple choice quiz. Is it:

                      A: Scientists can be trusted or,
                      B: Something else?

                    • The Murphey

                      Q. Why do you insist on avoiding the indisputable conclusion that ‘science’ is in a state of constant and perpetual change ?

                      Q. Are you concerned that by accepting the indisputable conclusion of ‘constant change’ of it would render your dogmatic position to the equivalent of a flat earther ?

                      Q. Are you a flat-earther ?

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      That isn’t what indisputable means, Bellman.

                      Science’ is in a state of constant and perpetual change.

                      No, it isn’t.

                      knowledge about science is not binary – science isn’t either settled or not settled. This is a false and misleading dichotomy. Instead, we know things with varying degrees of confidence – for instance, conservation of energy is pretty well accepted, as is the theory of gravity (despite continuing interest in what happens at very small scales or very high energies) , while the exact nature of dark matter is still unclear. The forced binary distinction implicit in the phrase is designed to misleadingly relegate anything about which there is still uncertainty to the category of completely unknown. i.e. that since we don’t know everything, we know nothing.

                      Gavin Schmidt.

                    • The Murphey

                      . Instead, we know things with varying degrees of confidence

                      Confidence which is developed and formed through change and by change in a continual perpetual cycle

                      Q. How many more times do you plan to confirm the correctness of my statements?

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      If you understood basic English you’d notice that understanding of conservation of energy and most gravitational examples does not “change in a continual perpetual cycle”.

                      Just two examples that render your statement meaningless and your ‘argument’ void.

                      If you want a good analogy try that of an unfinished jigsaw. How much do the finished parts “change in a continual perpetual cycle”?

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      Imagine the scene. Professor Post-Modern Wanker (He’s German) explains:

                      “We had the Moon landings all worked out except that Physics always changes in a continual and perpetual cycle, so we had to wait for it to cycle around again before the launch was successful.”

                      Professor Flatulent Gibberish agrees: “This affects chemistry too. Sometimes water has four Hydrogen atoms, and the Oxygen is replaced by a Carbon atom in a continual and perpetual cycle, and things get a bit smelly.”

                    • The Murphey

                      What you say makes no difference OAB not in any way that can achieve the online credibility you chase as the profanity laced abuse and insults ensure you have none

                      The most bizarre comment imo being the ‘denial’ at 4.38pm Feb 22 which was quintessential goose stepping that I am certain even you felt just a little ashamed to write but simply could not control yourself

                      I’m done here

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      That’s what I thought: you no more have a substantive argument to support your notions of ‘science’ than you do your notions of immunology.

                    • Colonial Rawshark

                      Science and technology today are servants of corporate and commercial ambitions. Get used to it.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      They’re tools, not servants. Anyone can use them. With a few obvious exceptions 🙄

                    • McFlock

                      🙄

                • Molly

                  Hi TM, no problems.

                  Just thought that there may be an opportunity for discussion on some points – and some marginal benefit vaccinations. Apparently, this is too much to ask.

                  The bullying of tone of OAB on this topic is what seems to be occurring everytime vaccinations are attempted to be discussed. As someone who has vaccinated against severe childhood diseases – this hectoring seems a waste of time to read. I turned down “catch up” vaccinations for my children when we were in the doctors offices with other ailments. My oldest son had recurring ear infections which also delayed schedules. I also took into account that the children did not attend daycare, so that they would not be exposed – or expose others – to infection, caused by delay.

                  My children are pretty much over the age of vaccinations now, but did think the initial link worth posting. The fact that an Italian court awarded vaccination damages to a child, and also the tabled report was interesting reading.

                  Could have been an interesting discussion as well.

                  The “vaccine court” in the US, is a no fault court, and it is the US taxpayer that picks up the awarded compensation amounts – because the vaccination programmes are defined at a federal level. Compensation paid out between 1988 and 2015 is $US 3 billion. Which seems quite low at an average of $110 million/year.

                  • The Murphey

                    Hi Molly yes it is unfortunate and unnecessary to use profanity laced insults but that is the default mode for OAB

                    I am appreciative that OAB performs the way he does as it should give anyone who might be fence sitting pause for thought about those who claim to know ‘the science’ and the tactics employed when their belief systems are questioned

                    Trust yourself and your instincts at all times because the are there for good reason

                    For those who still have the capability to interpret their instincts they are an asset which surpasses most any information which comes from human constructed environments and frameworks

                    I hope this experience has not put you off from posting similar comments again in future as I would certainly be interested to hear your comments should you like to share more of them

                    Have a good week

                    • Molly

                      TM. Just had a chance to go back, and read the other threads off the initial post that I missed. (Seemed to be getting nowhere but abusive, but kudos to you for maintaining your equilibrium.)

                      Enjoy your week as well.

  20. My Weekly Medpot Blog post.
    This time going into detail on how and why it is effective for certain types of pain. So much to cover I have spread it into 2 posts, follow up is next week.
    http://yournz.org/2015/02/21/pot-and-pain-part-1/

    Alternate Address
    https://mmj4chronicpain.wordpress.com/2015/02/21/pot-and-pain-part-1/

  21. The European Short Change Con Or Why The Cullen Fund Is A Dead Fund Walking

  22. mary_a 24

    The old cynic in me suspects John Key just might also be calling the shots for Labour, judging by the following article below from Fairfax.

    Denying the NZ Green Party an opportunity to take part in Security decision making, is to deny a proportion of voters representation, considering the Greens are the third major political party in NZ.
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/opinion/66473774/greens-must-learn-sometimes-national-interest-comes-first

    • Paul 25.1

      Great to see that enough people are protesting the TPP in North Canterbury.
      Obviously it was sufficient of a protest for Key to make a dishonest portrayal of the secret agreement to the audience in hall.

      Who were the listeners?
      North Canterbury National Party?
      Even they weren’t that impressed by Key’s bs.

  23. joe90 26

    Say it ain’t so…..

    ..

    It’s true. Don’t believe everything you read on the Internet.

    In fact, according to a study by media researchers, many news organizations fail to do enough to separate fact from fiction, and often help unverified rumors and reports to go viral online.

    “Rather than acting as a source of accurate information, online media frequently promote misinformation in an attempt to drive traffic and social engagement,” said the study led by Craig Silverman, a research fellow at the Tow Center for Digital Journalism at Columbia University.

    While news organizations have always dealt with unverified information, practices at some websites may accelerate the dissemination of fake news, said the report, “Lies, Damn Lies and Viral Content.”>

    http://www.afp.com/en/news/when-fake-news-goes-viral-blame-media-says-study

  24. greywarshark 27

    Slavoj Zizek as usual has something interesting to say – this time about the Charlie Hebdo killings and the western attitude to Islamist feelings. He discusses two writers statements, one Nietzsche and one Yeats.

    Long ago Friedrich Nietzsche perceived how Western civilisation was moving in the direction of the Last Man, an apathetic creature with no great passion or commitment. Unable to dream, tired of life, he takes no risks, seeking only comfort and security, an expression of tolerance with one another:..

    William Butler Yeats’ “Second Coming” seems perfectly to render our present predicament: “The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.” This is an excellent description of the current split between anemic liberals and impassioned fundamentalists. “The best” are no longer able fully to engage, while “the worst” engage in racist, religious, sexist fanaticism.

    New Statesman http://www.newstatesman.com/world-affairs/2015/01/slavoj-i-ek-charlie-hebdo-massacre-are-worst-really-full-passionate-intensity

  25. Paul 29

    Steel structured skyscrapers have never collapsed because of fire, even really serious fires.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/dubai-skyscraper-fire-blaze-rips-through-torch-residential-building-in-marina-district-10061013.html

    Unless you include the amazing coincidence of 3 collapsing because of much smaller fires on one day!

    http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/02/millions-business-people-risk-dying-collapsing-buildings.html
    http://physics911.net/closerlook/

    Many of the world’s present problems ( Middle Eastern wars led by the US, disappearing civil rights) all stem back to 9/11.

    That is why it’s vital we discover the truth about that day.
    And the truth isn’t about the laws of physics being broken!

    • nadis 29.1

      Here you go Paul – you might find the research on this site useful:

      http://apt.rcpsych.org/content/12/6/404

      • Paul 29.1.1

        Personal insults don’t make an intelligent argument.
        However you could show the strength of your argument by refuting the point I made.
        Name a steel framed building that has collapsed due to fire, except on 9/11.
        The Dubai fire again shows this does not happen.

        To help you
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_thinking

        • nadis 29.1.1.1

          Paul

          If you’ve actually read the real research you would understand why people are dismissive of your lack of intellect. (By the way, please describe to me the similarities in construction between the Dubai Tower and WTC, and where the thousands of pounds of jet fuel came from in Dubai, and also what caused the horizontal shearing of load bearing supports in Dubai?)

          Then try here:

          http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a49/1227842/

          I’ll even send you free kindle version of this book if you like – just post an email address you’re happy to publish:

          http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/debunking-9-11-myths-david-dunbar/1102179282?ean=9781588165473&itm=1&usri=9781588165473&cm_mmc=Skimlinks-_-k186085-_-j12871747k186085-_-Primary,AFFILIATES-_-Linkshare-_-TnL5HPStwNw-_-10:1&r=1,1

          and here

          http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf

          If you have not read this from front to back then you are not qualified to comment on this subject and should go back to whatever it is that makes you a productive member of society (i.e., not feebly fumbling on about 911 ).

          That’s a start – then maybe you could actually look at peer reviewed documents by actual engineers and scientists and other silly people like that. Just use google, you’ll be fine.

          Then, because you love critical thinking and are soooooooo good at it, read this when you are next feeling a tiny bit self critical:

          http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-conspiracy-theory-director/

          The worst aspect of feeble minded 911 conspiracy theorists is that you detract from the possibility of sensible debate about post 911 geopolitics, how to deal with the causes of Islamic branded terrorism, the role of the US in the world, state surveillance and other important issues like that.

          Last time a moron started this debate here it went on for days and annoyed everyone. That’s it for me, no more posting on this subject.

          Please seek professional help.

          • Paul 29.1.1.1.1

            Look I have my view and you yours.
            Let’s agree to disagree.

            I am aware of a lot of very well qualified people who also question the physics.
            They have answers to the point Popular Mechanics make.

            http://www.storyleak.com/over-2200-architects-and-engineers-destroy-the-official-911-commission-report/
            http://www1.ae911truth.org/home/676-debunking-popular-mechanics.html

            I desist from making personal attacks on you.
            Please do the same.

            • nadis 29.1.1.1.1.1

              The funniest thing is that surveys in the US show an almost complete overlap between people who believe in a 911 conspiracy and deny the impact of global warming. Welcome to your new neighbourhood. I’m really amazed at how many leftist commentators here so wilfully ignore scientific thought when it suits their anti US or anti capitalism mindset.

              And i’ve read those links. Worthless. Especially the WTC7 collapse which has been fully explained in a peer review process by real engineers.

              • Paul

                Complete overlap ?
                Really?

                Ed Asner
                endorsed Democratic Candidate Marcy Winograd in the 2011 California 36th Congressional district special election.
                came under fire from conservatives for narrating an animation promotional video for the California Federation of Teachers, Tax the Rich: An Animated Fairy Tale.
                does not believe the official line on 9/11

                • Paul

                  Woody Harrelson
                  is an environmental activist. He has attended environmental events such as the PICNIC’07 festival that was held in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, for three days in September 2007
                  is an ethical vegan and raw foodist.
                  is an enthusiast and supporter for the legalization of marijuana and hemp.
                  identifies as an anarchist.
                  does not believe the official line on 9/11

                  • Paul

                    Rosie O’Donnell
                    an outspoken supporter of gun control and a major figure in the Million Mom March.
                    does not believe the official line on 9/11
                    provoked debate, at one time stating “radical Christianity is just as threatening as radical Islam.
                    condemned many of the Bush administration’s policies, especially the war in Iraq and the resulting occupation
                    On May 17, 2007, O’Donnell rhetorically asked, “655,000 Iraqi civilians dead. Who are the terrorists? … if you were in Iraq and another country, the United States, the richest in the world, invaded your country and killed 655,000 of your citizens, what would you call us?

                    does not believe the official line on 9/11

                    • Paul

                      Janeane Garofalo
                      In April 2009, Garofalo drew criticism from The Washington Times when she denounced the Tea Party protests, calling them racist. Garofalo has continued to criticize Tea Party protesters.
                      In March 2003, she took part in the Code Pink anti-war march in Washington, D.C
                      Garofalo has been open and outspoken regarding her liberal political views. She is a staunch feminist.

                      does not believe the official line on 9/11

                    • nadis

                      remind me which one of those is a scientist or engineer? or even has any tertiary training in science?

                    • Colonial Viper

                      The structural failure of WTC7 could have been caused by a deliberate controlled demolition. If you wish to appeal to academic authority, roughly 2000 tertiary qualified architects, engineers and scientists have signed on that it is a distinct possibility which needs a new independent investigation in order to rule out.

                      If you Youtube “Danny Jowenko on WTC7” that raises sufficient doubts in my mind that the official narrative for 9/11 needs to be revisited.

                  • Clemgeopin

                    Woody Harrelson? nah, that is Philu! […runs… lol…]

                  • nadis

                    or this:

                    http://www.nist.gov/el/disasterstudies/wtc/faqs_wtc7.cfm

                    slightly more plausible than Dick Cheney donning overalls and crawling through the air conditioning ducts and setting demolition charges.

                    Here’s a philosohical question for everyone to ponder.

                    Why are so commentators on this site so pro-science when thee issue fits their ideological outlook (i.e., AGW) but so anti-science when it doesn’t (US/911 conspiracy, vaccinations etc)?

                    Really, it’s kind of weird.

            • One Anonymous Bloke 29.1.1.1.1.2

              If any of the qualified people really want to, they can overturn NIST’s findings, and have all the resulting changes to building codes the world over, revisited, and somehow they never seem to get around to it.

              Perhaps they can’t afford the engineering software 🙄

              • Colonial Viper

                What resulting changes to building codes? What US high rises have been condemned or even evacuated as a result of these skyscraper building code changes which identified that they were at risk off similar pancake collapse? Please name 2 for me.

                • One Anonymous Bloke

                  “Similar” – someone flew a plane into them?

                  Your rentier mates were upset.

                  • Colonial Rawshark

                    Don’t be distracted by irrelevancies. According to official reports, the fire was the major cause of the collapses, not the original plane impact.

                    So where’s this list of skyscrapers which have been condemned or evacuated due to these building code changes you talked about?

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      What list? You think I’m jumping through your doubt merchant hoops? Fuck off to ACTville where you belong.

                    • Colonial Rawshark

                      Oh don’t get steamed up now mate, I thought you said that 9/11 structural failures had resulted in building changes all over the world.

                      But apparently you can’t come up with any skyscrapers which have been affected by those changes.

                      That’s OK, I thought you knew what you were talking about.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      What I said was resulting changes to building codes, so take your right wing opinions and merchant of doubt gobshite and fuck off, Tat.

                      No wonder Dunedin’s happy with Clare Curran if you’re the alternative.

                    • Colonial Rawshark

                      You’ve used my IRL name several times now to abuse me on The Standard. The first time I thought it was a once off. Now I know that it is deliberate.

                      Just wondering why you have chosen to do this? Are you trying to be intimidating? What has made you so angry?

                      Edit – in response to your angry cheap shot re: Clare Curran (?!), If I ever wanted to be an MP, I’d be kowtowing to the orthodoxy mate, like you are.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      The hostility you’re experiencing is a direct consequence of your deliberate misrepresentation of my arguments and ethics, and the similarity between such tactics and right wing behaviour, as noted elsewhere on this page.

                      Not to mention the right wing beliefs you’re espousing.

                    • Colonial Rawshark

                      *Shrug*

                      I’m not the bad guy here. You claimed that there were building code changes around the world due to 9/11, but I haven’t heard of any skyscrapers which needed to be abandoned or reworked because of them, and apparently neither have you.

                      BTW the mechanics of the 9/11 building collapses isn’t really a left or right wing issue. They are however an issue of who tends to accept the chosen narrative of authority without question, and who tends not to.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      It’s claimed that water quality is being degraded, but I haven’t seen any cows dissolving in rivers, and neither, apparently, have you.

                      “Without question”. Oh yeah, and how exactly do civil engineers arrive at their conclusions without asking questions? How do we sort out the wheat from the Thierry Meyssan without asking questions?

                      How can we ask over and over again that you come up with an actual piece of evidence which you never do after fourteen years, without asking questions?

                      How can we idly sit by and watch you construct bogus “this was the major cause, not that” narratives when everyone knows what a false dichotomy looks like, without asking questions?

                    • Colonial Rawshark

                      Oh look if you’re happy not to ask questions about the official narrative of 9/11, so am I. Pools of molten steel, explosive clouds out the sides of the buildings caught on camera, eye witness accounts of explosions in lobby areas and basement areas, the original architects for the towers saying that they had been engineered to stand up fine to a Boeing 707 impact, oh yes, none of that is “evidence” to you.

                      Do carry on.

                    • Pascals bookie

                      Not many of those things make sense tho CV.

                      Eg explosions in the bottom of the building, that caused it to collapse some time later from the top, and aren’t heard by everyone in the area like normal explosions?

                      Explosive clouds that are consistent with the air expulsion from the pancake theory?

                      Molten steel that most responders deny seeing, and some of the photographic evidence for is highly contested?

                      You can’t just be sceptical towards one theory, and accept everything from another theory without thinking. That’s not scepticism, it’s willful blindness.

                    • Colonial Rawshark

                      PB, OAB fyi the pancake theory was dismissed several years ago by the authorities in favour of the “inward bowing” theory of collapse.

                      As I said previously: 2 planes, 3 buildings of 2 totally different designs, each suffering quite different damage in different locations but all collapsed vertically on the one day.

                      That’s among the things I don’t like about the official narrative.

                    • Colonial Rawshark

                      Not many of those things make sense tho CV.

                      I don’t disagree. But they must either be explained or ignored in the overall theory of the collapse.

                    • ” … the original architects for the towers saying that they had been engineered to stand up fine to a Boeing 707 impact, …”

                      Not actually true. One engineer said he ran a theoretical test on an unladen 707 hitting the building as already designed and came to the conclusion that it could survive such an impact. Could, not would. Unladen, not fully gassed up. 707 not modern jetliner. Theoretical, not actual.

                      The latter sentence is the actually important one. When the theory was tested in real life, the buildings collapsed. Two of them, having broadly similar aircraft impacts collapsed.

                      If you’re in the mood to be humiliated some more, would you mind indicating which floors the demo explosives were hidden on in each building?

                    • Pascals bookie

                      “fyi the pancake theory was dismissed several years ago by the authorities in favour of the “inward bowing” theory of collapse.”

                      The ‘inward bowing’ explains the initial failure of first floor to collapse, the pancake effect explains the collapse of the other floors.

                      As I said previously: 2 planes, 3 buildings of 2 totally different designs, each suffering quite different damage in different locations but all collapsed vertically on the one day.

                      That’s among the things I don’t like about the official narrative.

                      That’s not really the ‘official narrative’, that’s just a description of what happened. The collapses have been explained pretty well. It hasn’t happened since because there haven’t been any events remotely similar.

                      they weren’t normal building fires. each building had been seriously damaged.

                      You seem to think that because this was a unique event, then normal answers aren’t enough, it has to have almost comically unique explanation. Exotic types of thermite used in unique ways! Hundreds of hours of unseen prep work! The most successfully kept hidden conspiracy ever with the most members! The brave truth tellers being left alone, even though they are blowing the whistle on the most heinous crime committed in history!

                      Occam’s razor is pretty clear here. It’s not even close.

        • ropata:rorschach 29.1.1.2

          According to the Journal of Minerals Metals & Materials this one did.

          A basic engineering assessment of the design of the World Trade Center dispels many of the myths about its collapse. First, the perimeter tube design of the towers protected them from failing upon impact. The outer columns were engineered to stiffen the towers in heavy wind, and they protected the inner core, which held the gravity load. Removal of some of the outer columns alone could not bring the building down. Furthermore, because of the stiffness of the perimeter design, it was impossible for the aircraft impact to topple the building.

          However, the building was not able to withstand the intense heat of the jet fuel fire. While it was impossible for the fuel-rich, diffuse-flame fire to burn at a temperature high enough to melt the steel, its quick ignition and intense heat caused the steel to lose at least half its strength and to deform, causing buckling or crippling. This weakening and deformation caused a few floors to fall, while the weight of the stories above them crushed the floors below, initiating a domino collapse.[…]

          As scientists and engineers, we must not succumb to speculative thinking when a tragedy such as this occurs. Quantitative reasoning can help sort fact from fiction, and can help us learn from this unfortunate disaster. As Lord Kelvin said,

          “I often say . . . that when you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meager and unsatisfactory kind; it may be the beginning of knowledge, but you have scarcely, in your thoughts, advanced to the stage of science, whatever the matter may be.”

          • One Anonymous Bloke 29.1.1.2.1

            I note that office furniture, paper (such as sometimes found in offices) and curtains also burn, and for longer than Aviation fuel.

          • Colonial Viper 29.1.1.2.2

            “This weakening and deformation caused a few floors to fall, while the weight of the stories above them crushed the floors below, initiating a domino collapse.”

            This is where the official narrative falls over, so to speak.

            The floors below the fire and airliner impact had ALREADY been successfully supporting the weight of the floors above for THIRTY years.

            What suddenly changed in their structural integrity to mean that they failed so suddenly and completely on the morning of 9/11 to keep doing so?

            • te reo putake 29.1.1.2.2.1

              I read somewhere that a plane flew into them, but it’s possible it was a hologram, so we really should have an inquiry.

              • Colonial Viper

                Please take the time to read what is actually written.

                • I’ve never been big on fantasy, so my reading is a bit limited in this area. Is it better than Lord of the Rings?

                  • Colonial Viper

                    i already made my point: the lower levels of the twin towers had successfully carried the load of the upper levels for 30 years. What suddenly changed on the morning of 9/11 that they became suddenly unable to carry that same load?

                    • Pascals bookie

                      Wasn’t the same load. Mass moving>static mass.

                    • Some people reckon it was something to do with planes fully loaded with av gas hitting them, but who knows? I think there should be an inquiry, because it could have been Martians or reverse vampires. Or Elvis, because it’s well known that Col. Tom Parker hated New York.

                      Alternatively, we could just wait a little longer for one of the conspirators to admit their part in it. It’s only been fourteen years, won’t be long now. Waiting, waiting …

                      Another possibility is that the steel beams had been weakened by years of forced immunisation on behalf of Big Pharma, but that perfectly reasonable theory has been denied by the official narrative so we may never know the real truth.

                    • Colonial Viper

                      PB: the structure of the twin towers was designed with dynamic loads in mind, and as you know, these structures are typically over designed by a factor of 5 or 10. And the twin towers were also designed to withstand a direct Boeing 707 strike.

                      So I ask again: what was it which catastrophically and suddenly compromised the ability of the lower structure to hold up the impacted upper floors, when the lower structures had successfully held up the upper floors – even in hurricane force winds – for 30 years.

                    • “What suddenly changed on the morning of 9/11 that they became suddenly unable to carry that same load?”

                      A plane hitting them.

                      I reckon weightlifting would be a much more popular spectator sport if the weights were dropped on the competitors from above. Let’s see how good the structural integrity of their legs is then, eh?

                    • Colonial Viper

                      Ok lets run with your weight lifting analogy. A 120kg power lifter who is 2m tall has a plus 15% load dropped on him. That is, as he is standing in his typical weight lifting position, an 18kg weight is dropped on to his shoulders (without resistance, at free fall speed) from a height of 30cm above his shoulders.

                      In the scenario that you support, that 2m tall power lifter would be dropped straight to the ground by the impact of the 18kg weight moving 30cm.

                      BTW because you havent figured it out yet, the lower 85% or so of the twin towers structures were not hit by a plane or suffer any fire. They were at 100% design strength, in theory.

                    • Chooky

                      +100 CV…Many engineers , physicists, chemists who have looked at this issue ask the same questions

                    • Nice try, CV, but again your failure to stick to the facts lets you down. You blithely use 85/15 when that figure applies (roughly) to only one building, It’s 70/30 for the other. And it’s not a drop of 30cm for them, it’s many many tonnes falling many many metres. You simply have no actual evidence that contradicts the truth. There is no need for a further inquiry because we know what actually happened. There are so many real problems in the world, why are you fixated on this reactionary bullshit?

                      ps, chooky, there are two million practising engineers in the States. The percentage who raised ‘issues’ with 9/11 is about the same as those scienticians who deny climate change. Coincidence?

                    • The Murphey

                      You simply have no actual evidence that contradicts the truth

                      Q. What is truth ?

                      Be mindful before you react as the question is not simple as the three words it took to construct it

                    • Pascals bookie

                      “Ok lets run with your weight lifting analogy. A 120kg power lifter who is 2m tall has a plus 15% load dropped on him. That is, as he is standing in his typical weight lifting position, an 18kg weight is dropped on to his shoulders (without resistance, at free fall speed) from a height of 30cm above his shoulders.”

                      hmmm

                      Let’s say you can hold 100kg above your head.
                      How about taking a 100kg dropped from 12feet?

                      The upper part we’re talking about was what? 30 floors? Falling at what, about 20 miles/hour?

                      And your comparing that downward pressure to hurricane wind related bearing factors and not seeing how it would differ?

                      It’s like the difference between saying you can rest a bullet on your chest, catch one when thrown at you, ergo, you’re bulletproof.

                    • Pascals bookie

                      “PB: the structure of the twin towers was designed with dynamic loads in mind, and as you know, these structures are typically over designed by a factor of 5 or 10. And the twin towers were also designed to withstand a direct Boeing 707 strike.”

                      Fair enough.

                      How much extra load was being applied though? 2X? 4X? 10X? Or about 20X?

                      If it was built as you say, to stand 10X the static load, and was asked to support say, 30X the static load, would it collapse?

                      Seems obvious that it would.

                      and lo:

                      Here’s the thing: this calculation indeed takes into account the stiffness of the towers and their horizontal floor supports. Yet, we see that the force of the upper section of tower impacting on the bottom section was about 31 times the static force – the normal weight of the upper section, at rest.

                      Buildings are designed to be stronger than needed, so as to be able to endure wind, earthquakes, and so on. Usually, having the building able to withstand loads a factor of three to five times the actual (static) load is considered adequate for safety. The first floor is simply overwhelmed with a force of 31 times the static load.

                      http://www.nmsr.org/nmsr911a.htm

                    • Colonial Viper

                      “Nice try, CV, but again your failure to stick to the facts lets you down. You blithely use 85/15 when that figure applies (roughly) to only one building, It’s 70/30 for the other. And it’s not a drop of 30cm for them, it’s many many tonnes falling many many metres. ”

                      So you agree my figures apply to one of the twin towers which fell, good. Using the weightlifter example you introduced , it should be clear that the shock of a small fraction of the weight of the supporting structure (the top 15% of the towers by height is actually much less than that by weight as the bottom of the towers are far stronger and heavier due to their load bearing nature) would have provided relatively little shock.

                      Certainly not enough to pummel either the power lifter, or the towers, to the ground.

                    • Nope. Your figures still make no sense.

                      a) because the entire 85% doesn’t have to collapse at once, just one floor at a time. That is, the 15% is concentrated on the single floor (0.9%) immediately below it, then the one below that, 15.9% versus 0.9%. Then 16.8% versus 0.9% and so on. Now the floors are structurally linked so the 0.9% may be 4.5% or even 5.4% at some points, maybe even 6.3%. But 15% of the weight of the building in motion is going to eventually overwhelm the resistance below it. Once the collapse started it was unstoppable.

                      b) that’s actually what happened and you don’t have a scrap of evidence to suggest otherwise.

                      14 years and counting.

                    • “..I reckon weightlifting would be a much more popular spectator sport if the weights were dropped on the competitors from above. Let’s see how good the structural integrity of their legs is then, eh?..”

                      orifice-pluck alert..!

                    • Pascals bookie

                      “Certainly not enough to pummel either the power lifter, or the towers, to the ground.”

                      31 times the static bearing load CV.

                    • Colonial Viper

                      PB: the exercise you pointed me to requires that 3.8m height of the structural reinforcing of the building disappears, thereby allowing a near free fall drop of the upper mass (like dropping an unsupported pack of rice through the air on to kitchen scales).

                      I dont believe that is what happened as the towers remained standing for sometime after airliner impact, suggesting that the downward forces exerted by the upper part of the building were still being matched by upward forces provided by the tower’s structure,

                      The New Mexican calculation should have started with momentum at that steady state = 0. Instead, they started with a massive momentum downwards which they insisted must have been “conserved” right to collapsing down to the ground floor.

                      To do that they completely ommitted (and this is not a small point) the work which needed to be done in deformation and pulverisation of the steel and concrete at every floor.

                    • Pascals bookie

                      You didn’t read the whole piece did you? Or are you deliberately misrepresenting it?

                      The initial failure is covered, so why not address what they say instead of saying they ignore it?

                      Once the perimeter walls snapped, the buildings were no longer capable of supporting the upper sections, and these began to fall. The mainstream view is that the large masses of these upper sections of the towers (about 14 floors for World Trade Center 1, and around 30 for WTC 2) became unstoppable by the time they had fallen the height of one floor (12 feet, or about 3.8 meters), initiating an “inevitable” progressive collapse of each building,

                      I encourage people to pop over : http://www.nmsr.org/nmsr911a.htm and note the picture of the inwardly buckling exterior walls prior to them snapping

                    • Colonial Rawshark

                      I didn’t misrepresent that website. The inward bowing outer steel would only have looked like that if interior support columns were already being cut.

                      And you avoided my key point – the New Mexican website completely avoided discussing the work which would have needed to have been done to pulverise and deform hundreds of thousands of tonnes of building materials.

                      Under those conditions, momentum would not have been “conserved.”

                    • Pascals bookie

                      “The inward bowing outer steel would only have looked like that if interior support columns were already being cut.”

                      Umm, here’s what the website says

                      The key points of this explanation are that the planes started fires when they slammed into the towers, each carrying about 10,000 gallons of jet fuel, and going at hundreds of miles per hour. Several support columns were cut by the airplane impacts, but the hat truss was able to redistribute loads to the perimeter walls, and keep the buildings standing for a while. The fires weren’t hot enough to melt the steel support beams and trusses, but did soften the trusses enought to where they sagged, and pulled inward on the perimeter walls.

                      So yeah, it is discussed.

                      As is the resistance from the support structures during the collapse. In fact, that takes up a major part of the piece, where it’s responding to Gage making this exact claim. The fact is, CV, you are misrepresenting the piece, or failing to understand it. Anyone can see so by popping over.

                      You said the building couldn’t have collpased because it was designed to withstand up to 10X the static load. Most agree that it was facing about 30X the static load. There’s numerous peer reviewed papers to this effect.

                    • Colonial Rawshark

                      So from your point of view, all the major physical questions around the collapse of the Twin Towers have been satisfactorily answered?

                    • Pascals bookie

                      How do you figure that?

                      My points are on specific aspects you have raised. Most of which have been beaten to death on this blog before, and yet you keep raising them. Now you are at the ‘look over there’ phase.

                      What’s next, the flounce? Why not just address the points we are discussing?

            • Pascals bookie 29.1.1.2.2.2

              “The floors below the fire and airliner impact had ALREADY been successfully supporting the weight of the floors above for THIRTY years.”

              yes they had.

              “What suddenly changed in their structural integrity to mean that they failed”

              Nothing.

              What did change was the load the lower floors were bearing. As a mass moves, it produces more force than its static load. So there was a weakening at the crash site, that couldn’t support the floors above, they collapsed adding load to the floors below the fire.

              We’ve been over this before. why bring it up again?

              • nadis

                Stop talking science – you’ll lose the audience.

                I suspect he believes momentum is actually a right wing plot used by the 1% to exploit the working class.

                • greywarshark

                  @ nadis
                  That is a silly remark. You represent yourself as intelligent, if so you should be able to recognise Colonial Viper as your equal. That you can make this sort of put down is an indication of a lack of respect for dissenting others through a mistaken sense of superiority for yourself. You sound like a UNACT politician at Question Time.

                  • Pascals bookie

                    It really isn’t. CV was explicitly saying a building at rest is no different to a building in collapse in terms of load bearing. Which really is stupid.

                    he’s wriggled now, but still not making sense, and he didn’t acknowledge that his original position was nonsense.

                    • Colonial Rawshark

                      Oh I’m happy to accept that loads change when one part of a building enters a failure mode.

                      But you’ve assumed that a building in collapse will keep collapsing – which is of course what is really stupid.

                      You also assumed that momentum is conserved as a building collapses, and no work is done on the underlying structure in terms of materials deformation.

                      That too is really stupid.

                      My point is simple: no other skyscraper in the world has had that happen to it before 9/11 or since 9/11.

                      The fact you are not willing to admit that is what is the nonsense here.

                    • Pascals bookie

                      So why were you asking why the building would collapse on 9/11 seeing it hadn’t collapsed during the years leading up to 9/11?

                    • Pascals bookie

                      Here’s another piece that shows the speed of the buildings collapse compared to free fall:

                      http://www.nmsr.org/nmsr911b.htm

                      the difference in speed is accounted for by the resistance you claim there is no work done on.

                    • Colonial Rawshark

                      So why were you asking why the building would collapse on 9/11 seeing it hadn’t collapsed during the years leading up to 9/11?

                      Not sure, but I think that the official narrative of a pancaking collapse due to fire is bogus.

                    • Pascals bookie

                      What do you mean?

                      You’re not sure why you were asking something?

                      Or because you think the official story* is bogus you therefore ask weird questions for unknowable reasons?

                      *(that the plane impact plus the fire weakened the normal support such that weight was distributed to the exterior walls, which buckled inwards and then snapped leading to a pancake effect collapse)

                    • Colonial Rawshark

                      So you yourself do accept the official narrative around the pancake collapse theory as to what brought down the Twin Towers – which you just so succinctly summarised?

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      “Official narrative” – that’s what NIST does eh, constructs narratives.

                    • Colonial Rawshark

                      So OAB – do you yourself accept the official narrative of the pancake collapse theory of the Twin Towers?

                    • Pascals bookie

                      “So you yourself do accept the official narrative around the pancake collapse theory as to what brought down the Twin Towers – which you just so succinctly summarised?”

                      I’ve not seen anything that leads me to think it’s wrong.

                      Most all of the people who have tried to convince me make repeated dishonest arguments, fail to respond on point to counterarguments, and generally use all the arguing techniques so familiar from debates with creationists, and agw sceptics.

                  • nadis

                    well you can only listen to conspiracy drivel for so long where the driveler ignores facts, by his own admission is anti-science, which given his use of modern technology is both a hypocritical and stupid viewpoint.

                    BTW I don’t represent myself as anything. You can impose your view of me upon my online personality – your choice.

              • Colonial Viper

                You speak as if all the questions have been satisfactorily settled. They havent been. Two planes, three buildings, two totally different skyscraper designs, but same structural failure outcome in each case, on the one day.

                • nadis

                  again:

                  http://www.nist.gov/el/disasterstudies/wtc/faqs_wtc7.cfm

                  and I know it is full of big sciencey words and stuff but read this:

                  http://www.nist.gov/manuscript-publication-search.cfm?pub_id=861610

                  I’ll take that (a peer reviewed report) over a you tube video put up by an unqualified conspiracy theorist any day of the week.

                  • Colonial Viper

                    Ok. The FAQ page tries to tell me that the failure of a key support column on one side of the building led the entire building into an instantaneous symmetrical vertical collapse, 2.25s of which occurred at free fall speeds while all the other key support columns were not compromised.

                    Now THATS a conspiracy theory.

                    On another note, I understand that NIST has refused to release the simulation parameters they used to come up with this scenario so that other people can replicate the modelling.

                    • 2.25 seconds is not instantaneous, CV. If you can’t even get a grasp on the terminology how are you going to be any help to the right wing loons who put this shit out on the interwebs?

                      Nah, what am I saying!? This bollocks entirely relies on the easily led being willfully ignorant when it comes to basic science, so carry on …

                    • Colonial Viper

                      Keep blustering about, but NIST admits that there was 2.25s of free fall in the collapse of WTC7.

                      BTW i used the term “instantaneous” in order to distinguish it from a slow, progressive or partial collapse in stages. Of course, all physical phenomena takes some time to occur within. It would be unscientific of you to expect otherwise.

                    • I don’t expect otherwise, Cv. But nice to read you admitting you deliberately confuse the facts to support your argument. Like that’s never happened before with 9/11 truth deniers 😉

                    • Colonial Viper

                      So you accept NIST’s statement that for 2.25s WTC7 collapsed at free fall acceleration?

                    • No, I don’t accept your meaningless words. Why are fixated on this reactionary tosh? Are there any other right wing theories you find attractive?

                    • Colonial Viper

                      i always understood you as a backer of the establishment narrative.

                    • This ain’t about me, cv. I’m not the one stinking up the joint with righty bullshit. So how about it, any other conservative fantasies you want to share?

                    • Colonial Viper

                      So you’ve decided to frame questions about 9/11 as a right wing preoccupation, instead of dealing with the substance. And yes, thats entirely about you.

                    • Sorry to burst your bubble, but 9/11 fantasies, climate change denial, racist birther debates, gun control and the like are exclusively driven by the US right. It’s one of the reasons I can’t understand how a sensible lefty like you is buying into it. I always took you for someone with a functioning bullshit detector, but lately I’m not so sure.

                      As I said earlier, there are real issues that need looking at. Rightwing fantasies about the gummint aren’t a priority. Or at least, shouldn’t be.

                    • Colonial Viper

                      Yeah sure. Back to your regular scheduled programming.

  26. nadis 30

    So the Greek government has had a reality check and rolled over. A shame, I really think they should exit the Euro. May end up that way as Syriza may fracture, and the leadership will certainly have trouble explaining the gap betwen the new reality and their electoral rhetoric to the locals.

    The Greeks still have austerity but at least they get to choose their own austerity as long as the Troika agrees. That happens Monday – if the Troika don’t agree the reforms and austerity measures proposed by the Greek Government then we are back to no funding for Greece and a potential default as soon as early March. If approved, this package only gets Greece 4 months of funding, then back to new negotiations.

    One Greek commentator describes it:

    …….. the Greek government’s capacity to agree and deliver on the conditionality of the current program remains the key source of uncertainty under the current agreement. Greek press already reports meaningful disgruntlement from within the rank and file of the SYRIZA party on the current agreement, with any pushback likely to be led by Panagiotis Lafazanis, leader of the powerful “Left Platform” within SYRIZA and current head of the important Environment and Energy ministry. Most immediately, the government will have to navigate the fallout from today’s agreement, as well as the “reform list” that will need to be submitted on Monday………

    ……..To summarize, Europe was finally able to achieve progress this evening. But the road ahead remains long, and it remains unclear how the current government can navigate between the commitments it has made to Europe with competing domestic political demands – both internally within the SYRIZA party as well as with the electorate. A small step has materialized, but the hard work is about to begin.

    I think we can now confirm what we all knew. All the power lies with Germany and Europe, none with Greece. The only ammunition they have is a threat to leave the Euro and that is hollow, because the Germans don’t care, and the Greeks are too scared of the domestic fallout if they do. Nothing has changed.

    • Tracey 30.1

      they have a 4 month extension pending a submission from greece on monday…

      • nadis 30.1.1

        not quite. they have a four month extension should the troika approve the plans that Greece put forward to them on Monday (see the second paragraph). Thats no slam dunk given the internal fractures you’ll see from Syriza over the weekend.

        • nadis 30.1.1.1

          a good wrap up of the Greek government capitulation:

          http://www.cnbc.com/id/102444539

          • Colonial Viper 30.1.1.1.1

            Hmmmm looks like elected nation state governments have very little democratic agency nowadays. Greece would be in for 2-3 years of extreme hardship if they left the eurozone, but they would roar out of that as their own country. It probably should be done.

            • nadis 30.1.1.1.1.1

              Bollocks – that is nonsense.

              Greece – the elected nation state government – has full power to do whatever they like. But there are consequences if you rely on the financial goodwill of others. If you don’t want to be beholden to the Germans then don’t borrow 100s of billions of Euros from them. Pretty simple stuff.

              • Colonial Viper

                You know full well that roughly half of Greece’s public debt has been thrust on them via “bailouts” while the Troika has consistently promised that following this formula would lead to economic recovery. And that most of that “goodwill” as you term it, has gone straight into the pockets of Deutschebank et al. Its only years down the track that the majority of Greeks have realised that their – and Europe’s leaders – were very wrong.

                • nadis

                  well you can only listen to conspiracy drivel for so long where the driveler ignores facts, by his own admission is anti-science, and given his use of modern technology is both a hypocritical and stupid viewpoint.

                  BTW I don’t represent myself as anything. You can impose your view of me upon my online personality – your choice.

                • nadis

                  Again that’s crap. Nothing was thrust upon Greece. The Greek government took the money and signed an IOU.

                  Now you can bitch and moan about the sensibleness off that decision, but it was Greece’s choice. Unlike Ireland, Portugal etc, Greece wanted to go business as usual when they were bankrupt.

                  Now I know you and I agree that the best solution for Greece is a managed EUR exit with the assistance of the EU, but Syriza is still on the koolaid – they want the EU standard of living, paid for by the EU. You can’t have that unless you acknowledge you are a beggar reliant on German handouts and the Germans will only give you their money if you do what you are told.

                  Harsh reality time for Syriza. In fact research I’ve been reading this morning suggests Syriza may well fracture over this. Alexis has made promises he cant keep.

  27. Tracey 31

    was searching for something else and found this deeply ironic plea in 2007 by alex swny for auckland to pay low gst…. at a time when he was paying none

    . http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/AK0710/S00123/alex-swney-on-wellington-vs-auckland-cash-wise.htm

    • Once was Tim 31.1

      🙂
      deeply ironic indeed. But then I suspect Alex was more concerned about exercising his ego, cultivating a long grey fringe and how to flick it whilst sucking up to the media as a ‘credible commentator and go-to person’.
      Harder they rise, the harder they fall ….. and there’s a shit load more of ’em in that category.
      Seems to me that being someone’s bitch in a privatised prison is a just reward for Mr Swny’s idea of how the world should work.
      I’m just waiting for the media spin on how unjust it all has been for the poor fellow. Burp!

  28. Ecosse_Maidy 32

    Oh, Caption Competition Picture, its been a while…
    Nasty Party Cabinet, go into premeeting, tai chi and masonic ritual to ward of The Spirits of St Pgitis….before they commence Govt Business.

    What do you mean it isn’t a caption competition???????????

  29. Ecosse_Maidy 33

    LBGT & Green Party, re model Haka

  30. Ecosse_Maidy 34

    Charlie & The Chocolate Factory, The Pre Sequel, audition for Munchkins,,,,,,unfortunately those entries from the Govt Members were a tad off the mark

  31. Ecosse_Maidy 35

    English Cricket Team, try new and desperate measure to put off opposition

    • b waghorn 35.1

      I don’t know guys I think I would rather of taken jail time over community servise at the local kindies .

  32. Alpha z 36

    (“There was no intent to slap anyone in the face.”~Jamie Lee Ross)

    intention was to save his & keys arses smell in the face.

  33. tangled_up 37

    The latest cover of National Geographic:

    View post on imgur.com

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • New digital service to make business easy
    A new digital platform aims to make it easier for small businesses to access services from multiple government agencies, leaving them more time to focus on their own priorities. Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and Minister for Small Business Stuart Nash ...
    3 days ago
  • Million-dollar start to gun collection events
    Million-dollar start to gun collection events  Police Minister Stuart Nash says a solid start has been made to the gun buyback and amnesty after the first weekend of community collection events. “Gun owners will walk away with more than ...
    4 days ago
  • Praise after first firearms collection event
    Police Minister Stuart Nash has praised Police and gun owners after the first firearms collection event saw a busy turnout at Riccarton Racecourse in Christchurch. “Police officers and staff have put a tremendous effort into planning and logistics for the ...
    4 days ago
  • New Police constables deployed to regions
    Seventy-eight new Police constables are heading out to the regions following today’s graduation of a new recruit wing from the Royal New Zealand Police College. Police Minister Stuart Nash says the record high number of new Police officers being recruited, ...
    2 weeks ago