Open mike 23/12/2012

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, December 23rd, 2012 - 176 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

Open mike is your post. For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the link to Policy in the banner).

Step right up to the mike…

176 comments on “Open mike 23/12/2012 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. KhandallaViper 1
    23 December 2012 at 6:35 am

    The continual decline in the quality of life for the majority of Kiwis started before the GFC. The decline in the productive sector commenced during the last Labour Government.

    There is a “conventional wisdom” in Wellington that involves pro-forma tut tutting about the high levels of emigration, youth unemployment and the current account deficit.
    The dangerous dependence of primary sector exports while R&D based innovation and entrepreneurship are dis-incentivised is acknowledged but not solutioned.

    Wellington is not working. Our Politicians do not have any sense or urgency!

    Why? Because they are unconnected with the people who are at the receiving end of he policy failure. Sadly this applies to both National and Labour.

    This is most obvious to a Labour supporter who sees that the most vulnerable part of our society, those 800,000 people who saw no value in voting in 2011, are ignored by the current leadership, while we use scarce funds to engage ” focus groups” to tell us what voters are thinking!

    WTF? Our Labour Party is so dis-jointed that our MPs and their Wellington staff do not realise that they can find out what the voters want by engaging with the membership. For free!
    The party needs to get back to working with the membership, get back to its roots, work with ALL New Zealanders.

    We have been loosing for the past 6 years because we ave failed to give Kiwis a reason to vote for us. To win in 2014 we have to have a party that is exciting to those 800,000.

    • Jenny 1.1
      23 December 2012 at 6:40 am

      Hear, hear.

    • Another Viper 1.2
      23 December 2012 at 7:41 am

      The Constitutional Review should be celebrated because it gives a new framework in which the members can engage in policy making.
      The MPs can’t ignore us. Members must make sure their wishes are heard and that there is mindset in the leadership team that will take them seriously.
      That is the only way we can gaze a united party that will win in 2014.
      Real people politics and genuine (& competent communications) does not need a layer of marketing people. Dump the bullsh*t and get connected with the members. Then we will know what is needed to be relevant to the 800k.

      • Fortran 1.2.1
        23 December 2012 at 1:24 pm

        AnotherViper

        Changing the leadership framework will do nothing unless constructive understandable policy is formulated for the 2014 Election.
        On paper, with the Greens, we can be in power, but it is cohesive Labour Policy that people will expect, and accept.
        Weasel words and pious incoherent platitudes, as expounded by the Greens, will not do.
        Labour must identify it self alone, and not as an adjunct of the Greens

    • Tim 1.3
      23 December 2012 at 7:46 am

      Ditto hear hear!
      Which is why, after a long time (lifetime) supporting Labour, I can no longer vote for them. Ever since the neo-liberal capture it’s been a matter of voting for a least, worst option – that is until the realisation that there are alternatives whereby one can vote for parties that are closer to Labour traditions than that bearing the flag – Greens and Mana (for example).
      There are benefits too – one doesn’t have to support insipid little creatures that pop up on “Breakfast” with equally insipid creatures from a Gnat Party.

    • Napkins 1.4
      23 December 2012 at 8:46 am

      Why engage with the wider membership when all the wisdom of the world exists within 500m of Boulcott St, Wellington? /sarc
      More seriously, you are correct, Labour has been undermining itself for many years now. Even a growing proportion of the middle class (household incomes above $50K but less than $100K) are beginning to see that things are very wrong.

      • GeoffCartwright 1.4.1
        23 December 2012 at 8:52 am

        That is my position too, everyone o talk to from the marginalised non voter to the so called middle class is getting it these day, even entrenched Tories know something’s up just can’t admit that it’s the system failing.
        So Hear Hear, hear the people voices and act now.

        • TiggerViper 1.4.1.1
          23 December 2012 at 9:27 am

          Nicely put KV.

        • Jenny 1.4.1.2
          23 December 2012 at 9:57 am

          ‘

          Here is a rap song that sez it all.

          http://soundcloud.com/homebrewcrew/home-brew-listen-to-us-feat

          “GST will rise to 15%”, John Key

          “This is a complete and utter hoax, even if you believe in global warming sir and I am somewhat suspect on it” John Key

          ….cos this ain’t no fuck’n joke, we’re fuck’n broke.
          Far from cutting coke.
          All we got is luck and hope.
          Dreams going up in smoke.
          “One day, some way”, Yeah, that’s what we used to say.
          Now we black out, simply write so the futures not great.
          The youth that we threw away ain’t never coming back.
          Our permanent record won’t end up forever like a cat.
          Where I come from, minimum wage is what we run on.
          No wonder why we are spending our pay getting drunk on some cheap shit.
          Standing in line for some free shit, to eat, and contemplating crime, with the weetbix
          The same old story that you have heard a million times before.
          I bet their party doesn’t even let it cross their mind no more.
          Fuck’n Prime Minister ain’t even got the time to talk.
          Cutting off the dole.
          Trying to justify why we’re poor.
          Acting like we’re happy, working underneath the iron claw.
          Where you don’t even need to give a reason why we’ve been fired for.
          Trying to fight the law is like trying to fight a tiger for. Ask my old man they locked him for just trying to score. Fuck working in a factory until your 94.
          Course we resort to crime
          And all you get from crime is court. And that’s a fucked up system where justice is just a, juxtaposition between the police and the justice system. Who the fuck is going to listen to us.
          What do they know about missing the bus, it is just another prison of dust. They keep the bread and they give us the crust. And the system is such that there is no politician to trust, that’s gonna listen to us…….

          Thanks to Cut Your Hair, for bringing this slice of genius to my attention

          All transcription errors are my own.

    • Anne 1.5
      23 December 2012 at 10:27 am

      Khandalla’s comment is so good and so on the money, I should like to see it as a separate post.

      Something on which all can ponder over the holiday break. You never know, some of our illustrious Labour MPS might see it too – and ponder themselves. There are some Lab pollies who understand what needs to happen, but I fear they have been largely silenced. We have seen what was done – and continues to be done – to David Cunliffe because he dared to stand up and support the membership having a greater say in the management of the Labour Party.

      Yes, I can hear the ABC club now… rubbish, it suited Cunliffe’s political ambitions to support them. A cop out – beltway crap from beltway career pollies who don’t give a damm about the members except at election time.

      One small point in the last sentence KV. It’s losing – not loosing.

    • David Viperious H 1.6
      23 December 2012 at 11:20 am

      But the big difference between the parties is that the Nats know they can afford to alienate the 800,000 votes because they’ll pick up the ‘redneck’ vote. Now Labour NEED the 800,000 votes BUT they have NO idea on how to connect with those voters. So unless the Greens connect to those voters and get up to 20% of the vote. Then the Nats will win the same way they won last time. By APATHY

      • Crimson Nile 1.6.1
        23 December 2012 at 11:55 am

        That analysis might not be quite correct. The Nats don’t want to alienate or antagonise those 800,000 non-voters. The Nats want those people apathetic, seeing no alternatives, and having insufficient motivation to actually turn out and vote. Supporting Shearer in charge of Labour is part of the strategy to ensure that Labour does not present a strong, credible, alternative vision of New Zealand.

        The last thing the Nats want to do is to make those 800,000 non-voters angry enough to actually turn up at voting booths.

        Hence, we will see a small increase in the minimum wage, etc.

        The reason that Labour has no idea how to connect with those voters is fairly simple I believe – the Labour hierarchy is too full of people who have no personal connection with those voters.

    • NoseViper (The Nose knows) 1.7
      23 December 2012 at 5:16 pm

      Hear +100 KV
      I’m afraid we’re stuck in current management style which proscribes listening to the people and prescribes the clever and smart use of funding to have huddles no doubt arranged by PR fairies. These can actually be seen by human eyes as they flit around all the smart places and talk the talk and wear the executive dress and work hard at creating mythical scenarios. And we have been told that Peter Jackson and Weka Workshop are the most creative and imaginative people in the land! And at the back of my mind I feel the words ‘ best practice’ coming to the fore why I don’t know. Maybe because this is a term that all these smart, prissy little smarties speak as they talk about going forward.
      GHU.

      It makes sense to ignore ‘the people’ in general especially as they get poorer. Stick to where the money is and do its bidding and reap the benefits of a good salary and who cares if the people without initiative and the right fit struggle on benefits of another sort.

  2. The Al1en 2
    23 December 2012 at 6:43 am

    Two more tracks and off, hopefully not with another name to add to the list.
    Going to be some album cover. All those I’ve emailed and pestered for help, to stop a one percenter from shafting my community, and to grow food to feed the hungry. All those names that did fuck all when it really counted, I got you covered.

    Still need legal help to set up a trust and sign contracts to show I’m 100% genuine. So if you’re a legal beagle and want in, let me know.

    Track 5: Humanoid Logic Machine. http://www.al1en.org

    So you know.
    Nothing to prove. Nothing to fake or hide.
    Nothing to lose. Nothing to break inside.
    Nobodies fool. Nobodies mistake.
    Nobodies fear, I couldn’t take apart and remake.

    I know that I’m old and I’m grey and I’m wasting here,
    But I fight every day, in my way, just to stay clear.
    Breathing ultrasound, buried underground, living like a light unseen.
    I’m not breaking down, I’m just counting down. A Humanoid Logic Machine.
    Counting down and down. Just so you know.

    So you know.
    Nothing to prove. Not even my innocence, Nothing to fake. not even my fake.
    Nothing to lose. There’s no-one or anything, Nothing to break. I couldn’t replace.
    Nobodies fool. Nobodies second choice, Nobodies mistake. Regrets go unclaimed.
    No one I fear. There’s no-one I ever met, I couldn’t take down. could ever get near.

    I know that I’m old and I’m grey and I’ll waste down here,
    But I fight every day, in my way, just to stay clear.
    Breathing ultrasound, buried underground, living like a light unseen.
    I’m not breaking down, I’m just counting down. A Humanoid Logic Machine.
    Breathing ultrasound, buried underground, living like a light unseen.
    I’m not wasting time, I’m defining ‘fine’. The AL1 Logic Machine.
    Counting down and down and down. ‘Til you know.
    And now you know.

    • leftriteleft 2.1
      23 December 2012 at 8:36 am

      Cheers Al1en,
      That’s cool music. Keep up the good work.

    • Napkins 2.2
      23 December 2012 at 8:40 am

      A very rare humanoid logic machine, a compassionate one.

      • The Al1en 2.2.1
        23 December 2012 at 11:20 am

        Thank you very much, both of you.

        As soon as I get the paperwork sorted and get someone to do the website, I’ll put a donate button up and see where it goes.
        “Download for free if you need a dollar more than a hungry child needs a meal” sort of thing. 😉

        They’re the best I can do with limited equipment and talent, but it’s the thought that counts.
        I’m more than happy for music biz lefties to put up, stand up and form a super group and release them for real, just as long as it’s all done for the cause.

        Perhaps there are some out of work animation guys who can do a video or two. Full credit, just as long as you’re free.
        Any help to save Stan Heather Park for the community of Hamilton West, and do something for real to end child poverty will be warmly received.
        The Al1en.

  3. Morrissey 3
    23 December 2012 at 7:12 am

    Comedy in the service of terror, mass murder and defamation
    Look what you were unwittingly endorsing if you laughed at Bruno

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/palestinianauthority/9413864/Sacha-Baron-Cohen-settles-slander-suit-over-grocer-portrayed-as-terrorist-in-film.html

    Sacha Baron Cohen settles slander suit over grocer portrayed as terrorist in film

    A Palestinian grocer portrayed as a terrorist in the movie Bruno has settled his slander suit against film star Sacha Baron Cohen and David Letterman, his lawyer said on Thursday.

    6:30AM BST 20 Jul 2012

    Ayman Abu Aita’s “case is settled to the mutual satisfaction” of everyone involved, attorney Joseph Peter Drennan said. Court records show the case was designated settled and closed Wednesday. Drennan wouldn’t discuss the terms. Lawyers for Baron Cohen, Letterman and other defendants involved with the movie and Letterman’s Late Show didn’t immediately return calls.

    In the 2009 comedy, Baron Cohen plays an Austrian fashion journalist aiming to make peace in the Middle East. He interviews Abu Aita, who’s labelled in a caption as a member of the militant Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigade.

    Baron Cohen discussed Bruno’s encounter with a “terrorist” on Letterman’s show on CBS.
    A Christian and “a peace-loving person” who was living in the West Bank, Abu Aita has never associated with the Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigade or any terrorist activity, his court papers said.

    He went to the interview that appeared in Bruno thinking he was talking to a journalist about peace activism, his court complaint said. Instead, the movie spurred death threats against him, damaged his business and made him fear for his family’s safety, the complaint said.
    The suit sought millions of dollars in damages.

    A British comedian, Baron Cohen is known for crafting outlandish characters and he often dupes people into interviews to film their reactions to his antics.

    His lawyers and Letterman’s attorneys have said in court filings that free speech rights protected the statements about Abu Aita in Bruno and the Late Show interview.

    Abu Aita’s “name or likeness was used in a newsworthy context in a documentary-style movie that conveys matters of legitimate public interest,” Baron Cohen’s lawyers said in papers filed last year.
    Source: agencies

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/palestinianauthority/9413864/Sacha-Baron-Cohen-settles-slander-suit-over-grocer-portrayed-as-terrorist-in-film.html

    • Te Reo Putake 3.1
      23 December 2012 at 8:16 am

      I see you’re still unable to justify your racist attack on Baron Cohen, Moz. Perhaps you should get some help for that. Maybe work on your misogyny at the same time?

      • Morrissey 3.1.1
        23 December 2012 at 8:27 am

        It’s clear who is racist, and a fanatical, brutal slanderer of democratic protestors.

        Clear if you read the article, that is, and the two I supplied for you yesterday and the day before.

        Still, you refuse to concede, and you remain defiant in your refusal. Your stance would win admiration from a Flat Earther or someone like Leighton Smith, but in the court of rational opinion, your iron-headed intransigence in the face of evidence only makes you look foolish.

        • Te Reo Putake 3.1.1.1
          23 December 2012 at 8:35 am

          Any time you find some evidence, feel free to put it up. 4 days and waiting …

          But all you’ve done in the last few days is destroy your credibility, Moz, without damaging Sacha Baron Cohen’s in any way. I note that righties in your position usually retire their names and return under a new handle hoping noone will notice. Perhaps you might consider that clean sheet option, before you move irrevocably to the white sheet with eye holes position?

          • Morrissey 3.1.1.1.1
            23 December 2012 at 8:40 am

            The evidence I post is not actually there. And now I’m a “righty”. You’re desperate my friend, as well as foolish.

            • Te Reo Putake 3.1.1.1.1.1
              23 December 2012 at 8:46 am

              Your first sentence confirms the paucity of evidence to support your claims against SBC. The second confirms your difficulties with the English language. Comprehension is a vital part of literacy! The third sentence is irrelevant; this is about your complete failure to back up a statement you made, remember? You made the claim, grow some balls and apologise if you can’t substantiate your position.

              • Morrissey …
                23 December 2012 at 9:59 am

                Your continued defiance in the face of the evidence I have provided you for three days running is remarkable.

                If this was a court of law, you would be punished for flagrant contempt.

            • Daveosaurus 3.1.1.1.1.2
              23 December 2012 at 12:08 pm

              What makes you a ‘righty’ isn’t your attack on Baron-Cohen; it’s your strident defence of a rapist, using language straight out of the Tory blame-the-victim manual. What is it now? ‘Surprise sex’?

              • Morrissey …
                23 December 2012 at 12:24 pm

                Someone calling himself “Daveosaurus” has decided to step out of his comfort zone….

                He writes, fantastically, of my “strident defence of a rapist, using language straight out of the Tory blame-the-victim manual.”

                If someone could furnish evidence of me ever defending a rapist, could he or she please post it up some time for us?

                No, Daveosaurus, not you. You’re out of your depth, buddy.

                • Te Reo Putake …
                  23 December 2012 at 12:34 pm

                  Aways happy to assist. Handy collection of your excuses for Assange’s sexual misbehaviour here:

                  http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-29082012/comment-page-1/#comment-514836

                  • Morrissey …
                    23 December 2012 at 12:38 pm

                    Sexual misbehaviour, as in “offends me.” There is no evidence that he raped anyone, and the women being handled by the tender agents of the state in this grotesque persecution of a dissenter did not complain about him.

                    Not that you’d recognize the concept of dissent, being an admirer of state-friendly clowns.

                    • Te Reo Putake …
                      23 December 2012 at 12:50 pm

                      If the victims didn’t complain, why is Assinge hiding? Oh, sorry … they didn’t complain to you, so the assaults aren’t real. Glad we cleared that up.

                    • Morrissey …
                      23 December 2012 at 12:58 pm

                      You know perfectly well why he’s taken refuge.

                      By the way, I wonder how Joe Strummer would have felt about being endorsed by an enthusiastic supporter of state terror.

                      Irony is not your strong point, is it?

                    • Te Reo Putake …
                      23 December 2012 at 1:03 pm

                      So you know even less about Strummer than you know about me, Jews, comedy and women. Quelle surprise.

                    • Populuxe1 …
                      23 December 2012 at 2:42 pm

                      So basically you are not only a rabid froth-at-the-mouth Antisemite, you’re a misogynistic victim blamer as well. I feel truly vindicated. If you have a go at brown people or Asians you can probably get the trifecta.

                  • QoTViper …
                    23 December 2012 at 2:12 pm

                    Gosh, TRP, it’s so unfair of you to provide evidence of things when Morrissey is clearly playing the Don’t Provide Evidence game.

                    • Morrissey …
                      23 December 2012 at 2:33 pm

                      I’ve provided three readings (one for each of the last three days) for Te Reo and anyone else to see for themselves. They detail how a popular mainstream comedian targeted and ridiculed an ethnic group for laughs, libeled a Christian activist on American television by calling him an Islamic fighter, then told merciless lies about it, then had to pay out money to the victim of that libel. Te Reo Putake still pretends that “is not evidence” that the perpetrator of that libel is a racist and a bigot.

                      In the same way, of course, there is no absolute evidence that Paul Holmes is a racist, in spite of all his on-air rants against Maori, “darkies” and Ay-rabs. He tearfully insisted that he was “a good man”, so no doubt that lets him off the hook, just like Baron Cohen is off the hook.

                    • Colonial Weka …
                      23 December 2012 at 2:48 pm

                      “They detail”

                      No, they don’t. One of them lends some support to your opinion, one of them is next to useless at telling us anything. I outlined that here –

                      http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-23122012/comment-page-1/#comment-566153

                      But your links don’t prove anything at all, and don’t come close to being evidence.

                      You do understand the difference between opinion and fact don’t you? (that’s a rhetorical question).

    • Colonial Weka 3.2
      23 December 2012 at 9:29 am

      That Telegraph link shows SBC to have made a colossal mistake that’s impacted very negatively on other people. Possibly that mistake is a result of him being a self-entitled, idiotic jerk. Can’t see anything about his politics and beliefs about race etc.

      • muzza 3.2.1
        23 December 2012 at 9:53 am

        So the repeated *mistakes* made in SBC’s movies are to be interpreted how Weka?

        • Colonial Weka 3.2.1.1
          23 December 2012 at 9:57 am

          No idea muzza, I don’t know anything about his movies. I was just replying to the stand alone example that Morrissey gave above.

          • Morrissey 3.2.1.1.1
            23 December 2012 at 10:00 am

            “Stand-alone example”?

            You’re not simply bewildered as I thought; you’re dishonest to boot.

            • Colonial Weka 3.2.1.1.1.1
              23 December 2012 at 10:05 am

              There’s only one example in that post. And it’s not presented with any context or explanation. I guess that’s the problem with cut and pasting.

              • Morrissey …
                23 December 2012 at 10:19 am

                I provided examples of Baron Cohen’s right wing provocations masquerading as comedy yesterday and on Friday too. That article came from the hard right Daily Telegraph, and it provided plenty of context and background.

                How many examples do you need before you accept something is objectively a fact?

                • Te Reo Putake …
                  23 December 2012 at 10:35 am

                  No, you didn’t. You’ve provided opinions, not facts. You can’t back up your hate filled comments, Morrissey. And this despite you hassling another commenter last week for exactly the same failing. Hypocrite much?

                  Just for context, Morrissey’s unproven (and contradictory) statements include:

                  “That guy’s not funny. He’s even unfunnier when you look at his actual (not “satirical” or “ironic”) support for the mass murder perpetrated by his favorite real-life regime.”

                  “I did think he was funny until I realized how hardline and shameless he is in real life. He actually IS Borat, with all of Borat’s brutal anti-Semitism and callous disregard for others.”

                  “However, it is not conspiratorial or paranoid to see that Sacha Baron Cohen is a brutal and unapologetic supporter of Israel, and a ruthless defamer of the Holy State’s victims.”

                  You’re a gutless wonder, Moz. Put up or shut up.

                  • Morrissey …
                    23 December 2012 at 11:04 am

                    When you’re in trouble, stop digging: not a lesson that’s been learned by our friend Te Reo Putake….

                    No, you didn’t. You’ve provided opinions, not facts. You can’t back up your hate filled comments, Morrissey. And this despite you hassling another commenter last week for exactly the same failing. Hypocrite much?

                    The hate is all on the part of Baron Cohen, activist comedian in service of the Israeli state. I have provided you with THREE articles detailing that politically inspired, ideological hatred in action, but you just keep throwing up your hands and denying the obvious.

                    Just for context, Morrissey’s unproven (and contradictory) statements include:

                    “That guy’s not funny. He’s even unfunnier when you look at his actual (not “satirical” or “ironic”) support for the mass murder perpetrated by his favorite real-life regime.”

                    “I did think he was funny until I realized how hardline and shameless he is in real life. He actually IS Borat, with all of Borat’s brutal anti-Semitism and callous disregard for others.”

                    “However, it is not conspiratorial or paranoid to see that Sacha Baron Cohen is a brutal and unapologetic supporter of Israel, and a ruthless defamer of the Holy State’s victims.”

                    Nothing I said there is “unproven”, unless you refuse to read the links or refuse to watch this…

                    Of course, worshippers of Baron Cohen will think it funny to watch the clip of the Christian activist’s bewilderment during the stunt, but even if they concede it’s funny, they must admit the dishonesty and the rancorous political motive for the fiasco.

                    By the way, You’re a gutless wonder, Moz. Put up or shut up.

                    I’ve put up three times in a row so far. Tomorrow I’ll post a transcript of the atrocity on the link above.

                    • Te Reo Putake …
                      23 December 2012 at 11:12 am

                      You’ve put up nothing, you racist tosser. You berate others for not being able to back up their positions, but you fail to live up to your own standards.

                    • copperhead …
                      23 December 2012 at 3:57 pm

                      honestly guys, we have big problems in this country, who cares about sbc? he is a comedian, most get laughs by shocking people, sometimes they go too far, i notice you have not included billy t or mike king for being rascist, bill maher for showing no compassion for the muslim religion etc etc

                • Colonial Weka …
                  23 December 2012 at 10:36 am

                  Strange as it may seem Morrissey, I don’t actually read everything (or even most) of what you post here.

                  “How many examples do you need before you accept something is objectively a fact?”

                  One would be a good start.

                  • Morrissey …
                    23 December 2012 at 10:46 am

                    Strange as it may seem Morrissey, I don’t actually read everything (or even most) of what you post here.

                    I don’t believe you.

                    “How many examples do you need before you accept something is objectively a fact?”

                    One would be a good start.

                    I’ve given you three examples. But it’s quite clear that you’ve decided to follow the Te Reo Putake model of defiant ignorance. That’s not helpful for your credibility.

                    • Te Reo Putake …
                      23 December 2012 at 11:03 am

                      Morrissey. You’ve given three opinions, but no facts. You are unable to justify your comments. The only credibility under threat is your own and given your weird attacks in recent days on feminism and literacy, you have bugger all left. Why don’t you just pack it in or show some dignity and apologise for your hyperbolic and incorrect position? Or are you just too immature to recognise how deep the hole you’ve dug really is?

                    • Colonial Weka …
                      23 December 2012 at 11:11 am

                      “I don’t believe you.”

                      ROFL. That’s so funny, it’s like you think that if you just assert something, then it’s true. And I think you said the same thing to someone else recently who said they don’t read everything you write.

                      “I’ve given you three examples”

                      My comments up until now have been based solely on the Telegraph link, which doesn’t support your assertion. However I’ve now gone and read the discussions from the past three days. I can see you asserted many many times, and that you eventually provided two links. One is an opinion piece analysing Cohen’s work in a political context.

                      The other is a short report about the response by Hollywood stars to a protest that happened three years ago at the Toronto film festival. It doesn’t describe what the protest is about, nor talk about Cohen’s politics or beliefs about race.

                      You may of course be right about Cohen, and it’s perfectly ok for you to form an opinion about him based on your reading. Just stop pretending it’s a fact. You might find that people are more willing to debate your opinion when it’s presented as opinion.

      • Morrissey 3.2.2
        23 December 2012 at 9:55 am

        Can’t see anything about his politics and beliefs about race etc.

        An English comedian goes into the Occupied Territories, interviews a Christian peace activist on the pretence he is genuinely seeking to engage in diaglogue, and then turns the ensuing fiasco into “comedy”, portraying the Christian peace activist as an Islamic terrorist.

        And you claim that you “can’t see anything about his politics and beliefs”.

        I don’t believe you are THAT dim.

        • Colonial Weka 3.2.2.1
          23 December 2012 at 10:03 am

          Actually I missed that that happened in the West Bank (I was thinking England). But see my reply to muzza – I was going simply off the link you provided, and don’t know anything else about the situation.

          In general I would have to say that the actions could be politically motivated, or they could be just fucking stupid. Not the first time a comedian has done something stupid, nor the first time for an Englishman abroad.

          But really, my comment was just pointing out that the stand alone argument didn’t work.

          • Morrissey 3.2.2.1.1
            23 December 2012 at 10:23 am

            In general I would have to say that the actions could be politically motivated, or they could be just fucking stupid.

            A comedian pretends to be a journalist and dishonestly and cynically obtains an interview with a Christian Palestinian peace activist, who assumes he is acting in good faith. The comedian then pretends that the victim of his stunt is an Islamic terrorist, and repeats the slander on David Letterman’s television show.

            And you really, seriously think that was merely “something stupid”?

            • Colonial Weka 3.2.2.1.1.1
              23 December 2012 at 10:45 am

              No, I’m saying you could have provided context that explained your point instead of just cut and pasting something that you think makes your argument really obvious but doesn’t.

              What I find interesting (still going off just the one Telegraph link) is that someone in his position would consider the dishonesty acceptable. I mean, what did he think was going to happen?

              There’s a whole lot of stuff getting out of hand. We live in an age where people have no sovereignty within themselves in relation to the celebrity world. They are fair game for whatever someone wants to do in terms of the internet, tv, publicity etc. The radio station prank calls is another example. There’s no respect for people having the right to be who they are and have control over that, they can just be used for the next piece of entertainment.

              • Morrissey …
                23 December 2012 at 12:52 pm

                What I find interesting (still going off just the one Telegraph link) is that someone in his position would consider the dishonesty acceptable.

                Baron Cohen was engaging in an exercise of black propaganda, i.e. telling lies, ridiculing and blackening the reputation of a representative of an ethnic group decreed to be an official enemy. And the man he humiliated was not the person he claimed he was. Dishonesty of the type and scale that Baron Cohen committed on the Letterman show is not just acceptable, it is the modus operandi.

                I mean, what did he think was going to happen?

                He did not care. He can wriggle away from anyone who remonstrates by calling it “humour” or “satire”.

    • AwakeWhileSleeping 3.3
      23 December 2012 at 12:07 pm

      Who else wants to see SBC interview our only Sikh MP?

      • Morrissey 3.3.1
        23 December 2012 at 1:00 pm

        There is no mileage in that. Sikhs are not a designated target group with the extreme right in Israel.

        Not yet, anyway.

    • Populuxe1 4.1
      23 December 2012 at 2:51 pm

      Ok, good. We’ve established that you’re anti-Catholic as well as anti-Jew and anti-women. Go on, say something about Asians or brown people.

      • Morrissey 4.1.1
        23 December 2012 at 4:45 pm

        That top-class analyst Populuxe1 has excelled himself with a sterling piece of analysis of this writer, i.e., moi. Let’s sit back and appreciate the workings of a top-class mind at the top of its form….

        Ok, good. We’ve established that you’re anti-Catholic

        Well, I’m certainly anti-Pope Benedict. I don’t think much of the Kennedy family of Massachusetts, either. Devout Catholics, every one of them. And I had zero respect for that Catholic fellow Ryan who was Mitt Romney’s running-mate. Ergo, I am anti-Catholic. Thanks for that, my friend. It’s like you’re a genius!

        …as well as anti-Jew…

        Oh, I see what you’re doing! You’re so clever! I speak out against Israeli crimes and a court clown who supports those crimes, and that means I’m “anti-Jew.” In the same way that speaking out against John Key, whose mother is a Jew, makes me anti-Jew. I don’t think much of Winston Peters, Tau Henare or Pita Sharples, either—therefore I am anti-Māori. I have criticised the corrupt Patsy Wong, which makes me anti-Chinese. I don’t like Robert Mugabe, which makes me anti-African. I’m very opposed to Barack Obama, which makes me anti-African American, I guess.

        …and anti-women.

        Yes, I guess it started when I realized what a nasty fascist ideologue that awful Margaret Thatcher was. She was a WOMAN! That makes me anti-women. And I despised Golda Meir—yikes, she was not only a woman, but Jewish, too, wasn’t she! Which damns me twice over!

        Go on, say something about Asians or brown people.

        Already covered that, my friend. Way ahead of you!

        • Rogue Trooper 4.1.1.1
          23 December 2012 at 4:56 pm

          “there is a light, that never goes out”.

          -Salford Boys 🙂

          (did you know, every time i come to this I.C, there is the “correct” music playing? Thats the “power” of the internet) Go on c. and df, take me on… 🙂

          • Morrissey 4.1.1.1.1
            23 December 2012 at 6:40 pm

            “there is a light, that never goes out”.

            I think poor old Populuxe1’s light has gone out.

  5. veutoviper 5
    23 December 2012 at 9:39 am

    Well, what is the Herald coming to?

    I usually don’t read either Kerre Woodham or Rodney Hide’s columns in the online opinion section, but did so this morning and just about fell off my chair!

    Firstly Hide’s column entitled ‘Note to Collins: We want to see justice being done’. A taste of the first and last paras – the meat is in the middle.

    Imagine the scene at police HQ and Crown Law: Justice Binnie has done the unthinkable; he’s written an independent report. Worse, he’s damned Crown Law and Police to hell.

    The Government response has been masterful … but hardly justice.

    …Justice Binnie – and the Privy Council – raise a disturbing question about whether our justice system has the ability to self-correct. The Government’s response, sadly for us, provides the answer, loud and clear.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10855740

    I never thought I would ever agree with anything Hide said or wrote – this must be the one exception that makes the rule.

    AND then Woodham’s column entitled “Nats run out of fuel” which covers more than just the increased fuel tax.

    In what should have been a lovely, relaxing wind-down to the year, I found myself getting wound up instead.

    Normally, talkback in the week before Christmas is full of callers ringing in with lovely stories of family get-togethers and their own personal Yuletide traditions, and we wish each other well for the holiday season. Nice, warm, fuzzy stuff.

    This year, however, the news of a fuel tax hike on the same day the Remuneration Authority announced a pay rise for MPs – backdated to July 1, what’s more – had us incensed.
    …
    Well, I’m not. Why can’t he just concede that this politics lark is a darn sight more difficult than he thought it would be? National was voted in because they promised voters they had the answers. They’d be a breath of fresh air. They were business people who knew a thing or two about making money, not academics who’d spent most of their lives in ivory towers.

    Well, they may know how to make money for themselves but they don’t seem to have any answers when it comes to making the country richer.

    If, after four years of government, the best strategy they can come up with to produce a surplus is to raise the fuel tax, they are devoid of initiative and bereft of imagination.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10855729

    Never thought Woodham would get incensed at anything this NAT govt did.

    • LynWiper 5.1
      23 December 2012 at 10:10 am

      Ditto, and especially Rodney Hide’s column. Fortunately I was sitting up in bed doing my usual early morning read of opinions and news before starting the day, so no falling! I found both columns surprising, refreshing and encouraging!

      • KJT 5.1.1
        23 December 2012 at 12:43 pm

        Occasionally I am pleasantly surprised by Rodney Hide.

        When he talks about police and democracy he often makes sense. Just keep him off economics, and social justice, please

        • veutoviper 5.1.1.1
          23 December 2012 at 2:44 pm

          Agreed.

          I have just had another look at Hide’s column and the comments, the majority of which are supportive of Hide’s position.

          BUT what is really interesting is that after just 34 comments, debate has now been closed off. The first comment is timed at 11.08am and the last at 11.19am – ie comments were closed off after only 11 minutes! What gives?

          Re Woodham’s column, comments are now up to 142 and still coming which is amazing for two days out from Christmas day – and have not been closed off. In terms of Likes, the most liked comment is at 125.

          From a quick trawl through the comments, my perception is that there are a lot of different commenters compared to the usual regular Herald commenters – and many seem to be previous Nat voters who are ‘seeing the light’. Perhaps the worm is on the turn.

          Compared to the numbers of comments on Woodham’s article, yesterday’s Armstrong and O’Sullivan columns have only attracted 43 and 29 comments respectively.

          • Anne 5.1.1.1.1
            23 December 2012 at 5:23 pm

            The first comment is timed at 11.08am and the last at 11.19am – ie comments were closed off after only 11 minutes! What gives?

            That is interesting. Who moderates the MSM online comments? An on duty sub-editor perhaps?

            What might have happened: someone with authority in the Nat. Party (umm, from the Justice Minister’s office or maybe the Justice Minister herself?) has been in touch with someone at the HoS and told them…

            What the hell do you think you’re up to. You’re supposed to be on our side. Stop the comments immediately or I will have your membership of the Back Scratchers Club indefinitely suspended.

            If it wasn’t for the continued commenting on Woodham’s column I’d say it was a lazy moderator sleeping off too much Xmas cheer.

  6. Dr Terry 6
    23 December 2012 at 9:47 am

    I have for long been a supporter of Matt McCarten for his column in the Sunday Herald. But more recently, I have become somewhat bewildered by some of the directions he is taking. Am I alone here, or do a few others think similarly? Frankly, Paul Little is rising in my estimation. And today, even Kerre Woodham provided the best column I have ever seen from her!

    Today Matt picks his TOP 10 politicians First there is Shane Jones (congratulated for being the only Labour MP “who smacks the Greens when they get too sanctimonious” Since when were the Greens sanctimonious?) Tony Ryall has been superb in the health portfolio. Fair comment on Hone Harawira. Judith Collins at no. 6, can you believe? (“Probably National’s scary next next leader” proclaims Matt.)
    Fair comment re. Phil Twyford. But who other than Paula Bennett is placed at no. 4!! “The darling of the masses”. The poor believe she’s “one of them” can you believe? Now where the hell does he get this from? Happily, Russel Norman comes in at no. 2 for he “actually understands economics” (yet he heads a “sanctimonious Party?) And who else is at no. 1,but Matt’s “politician of the year” , David Shearer, the leader who foiled the “covert campaign” of David Cunliffe (who was rightly dispatched to sit among the back benches). “It was a masterstroke to seek a unanimous vote for his leadership” Do I need to comment upon this?)

    Maybe I have got it all wrong, in which case I am ready to castigate myself. Nevertheless, I would like to know responses of other readers.

    • mickysavage 6.1
      23 December 2012 at 10:01 am

      I read it too Dr Terry and I am still shaking my head.

      Shane Jones a pollie of the year for mucking up something that bad that he is an adverse Auditor General’s report from being toast? And his redeeming behaviour is abusing Labour’s only realistic coalition partner?

      I agreed about Ryall. He has neutered problems with Health, at least for now. I also agree about Hone.

      Twyford though? He has precious little to do with the reorganisation of Labour in Auckland. He has kept the Te Atatu seat electorate intact, thanks heavily to some very dedicated supporters but he has had very little to do with the rest of Auckland. Activists rather than MPs can be credited with the shape of Labour in Auckland.

      Collins, he has to be kidding. Paula, what is he smoking?

      Russell, fair enough.

      And Shearer? At a time when Labour in opposition is 10 points ahead of the tories in the United Kingdom and Labor in Australia has, according to some polls, gained the lead over the Coalition, Labour in NZ is still double digits behind National and leaking support elsewhere. And this is despite the Nats being in all sorts of turmoil.

      I feel like Matt and I exist in different realities.

      • muzza 6.1.1
        23 December 2012 at 10:07 am

        I feel like Matt and I exist in different realities.

        Morning MS –

        You certainly do, as do we all, those who are not in politics or the media are simply locked out of the *game* , which is played by those who are involved.

        Thats the feeling you have, think about it!

    • veutoviper 6.2
      23 December 2012 at 10:06 am

      As you will see from my comment @ 5 above, I am somewhat bewildered by some of the Herald columnists of late. (Another one was Toby Manhire’s column entitled “John Key a likeable dork” – but he got a pounding in the comments!)

      Just looking at the Herald’s “Top 10 politicians for 2012” and this seems to be the HOS editorial – not Matt McCarten’s column. Haven’t read the article properly yet.

      http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10855714

      However, I have been bemused/disappointed by some of Matt’s more recent columns.

      • LynWiper 6.2.1
        23 December 2012 at 10:19 am

        Agree with all of the above comments. I also miss Matt’s columns of the past, although read the Top 10 Politicians as the HOS editorial and was similarly in disagreement with the choices.

    • alwyn 6.3
      23 December 2012 at 12:00 pm

      Don’t take it so seriously. Matt is clearly just joking. If that wasn’t obvious earlier it should become glaringly obvious when he gets to number 2.
      Anyone who can read a comment like “The Greens co-leader is one of the few MPs in any party who actually understands economics” without bursting into laughter clearly has no sense of humour.
      Can anyone show me a genuine economist who agrees with Norman’s idea that we can solve our problems by printing money?

      • KJT 6.3.1
        23 December 2012 at 12:54 pm

        That comment shows you have no comprehension of either economics, or history.

        A country lending to itself for employment and infrastructure “printing money” as economic ignoramuses like to call it is much more sensible than paying overseas banks through the nose to do the same thing.

        We did it in the 30’s. That is how New Zealand paid for much of the infrastructure we still use now, and got ourselves out of the depression before most other countries, I may add.

        The USA new deal was also “printing money”. Not to mention Germany “printing money” to change an inflationary path after WW2.

        It was also done later for housing corporation loans and the DFC.

        Even the conservative economists in the IMF recommended that NZ do so.

        Have a look at Icelands recent growth, they told the banks, and neo-liberal economists, to get stuffed, “printed money” and imposed exchange controls, (all the things the dogma insists we cannot do) compared to Ireland, still desperately trying to get out from under the huge price they are paying to the banks.

        http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/dan-white-the-economic-return-of-iceland-has-proved-that-the-joke-was-on-us-3327164.html

        “Remember when the Icelandics did the unthinkable and, unlike Ireland, told bank creditors to take a hike? They also imposed capital controls and allowed the value of their currency to fall – the Icelandic krona has lost almost half of its value against the euro over the past five years.

        The “experts” queued up to assure us that these latter-day Vikings would be severely punished for their impertinence. While no one forecast that a hole would open up in the North Atlantic and swallow Iceland whole, some of the predictions came pretty darned close.

        Meanwhile, we in Ireland did what we were told and repaid over €70bn of bank bonds at par. By doing so, even at the cost of bankrupting the State, the “experts” assured us that we would retain the confidence of the markets. Now, four years later, it is clear that, not for the first time, the “experts” have got it wrong. Catastrophically and utterly wrong.

        Since putting the taxpayer on the hook for the banks’ debts, the domestic economy has shrunk by almost a quarter in nominal or cash terms. And any real recovery is still a long way off. The documents along with this month’s Budget reveal that the Department of Finance is expecting Irish GNP, basically the domestic economy, to grow by 1.4 per cent in 2012 and 0.9 per cent next year. Other forecasters are taking a far more pessimistic view.

        Way out in the North Atlantic, things have turned out rather differently. Economic growth is expected to be 3.1 per cent this year and 2.2 per cent in 2013″”.

        • alwyn 6.3.1.1
          23 December 2012 at 6:12 pm

          I read the article in The Independent that you referenced with some interest. Quite what it has to do with what Russel Norman is proposing is unclear.
          A few comments I would make are –
          Norman has claimed he wants to reduce the value of the NZ dollar. Iceland’s currency has dropped to half its value in five years. What would happen if we did that here? Most of NZ’s imports and exports are priced, in NZ, at world trade prices. Thus on these we would have inflation of 100% over five years or about 14% per annum. To keep overall inflation below that figure would require, in practice, that wages rise at a slower rate than goods prices. If this is what Norman wants he wants falling real wages.
          The Iceland Government refused, as I understand it, to take responsibility for the borrowing, by nominally Icelandic banks, from people outside Iceland which was then loaned to people outside Iceland. Can you tell me what money the NZ Government ever paid out in an equivalent situation? The only large payout was for money loaned to SCF, largely by New Zealnders and which was then “loaned” to other organisations in NZ. SCF should never have been included in the scheme in the first place. Perhaps Michael Cullen will someday explain why his Government did it.
          Russel Norman has proposed that the Reserve Bank hand over to the Government money which the NZ Government will then use to but overseas assets to replenish the Earthquake and War Damage Fund. This is to be free of interest.
          The Independent article however talks about the Iceland borrowing $1 billion at about 400 basis points over a US reference rate. This means that they are BORROWING from a foreign lender at quite a high interest rate. What resemblance does this have to Russel’s scheme.

          • KJT 6.3.1.1.1
            23 December 2012 at 8:25 pm

            Iceland shows the B-s inherent in your support of “conventional” “economics”

          • bad12 6.3.1.1.2
            23 December 2012 at 10:37 pm

            More National Party lies!!! South Canterbury Finance was not included in the Banking guarantee scheme by Cullen, it was with deliberation that English included South Canterbury Finance in the scheme despite Treasury advice not to do so,

            Russell Norman has never claimed that He want’s the New Zealand dollar devalued by 50%, which is just another lie on your part pathetically trying to smear Norman,

            For 2 billion dollars of printed cash per annum over 3 years the NZ dollar could be devalued by up to 15% with an inflation rate of less than 3%…

            • alwyn 6.3.1.1.2.1
              24 December 2012 at 12:05 pm

              Ok. To your three points.

              The deposit guarantee was announced by Labour in their election campaign.
              Labour remained the Government until 19 Nov 2008 which was the day that John Key was sworn in as PM. Treasury announced that SCF was included in the scheme on the same day. I hardly think that English had time to make the decision do you. The decision was definitely made when Cullen was still Minister of Finance.

              I have not claimed that Russel Norman has said he wants to devalue the dollar by 50%. Norman has said he wants to develop the dollar but, when asked, he will never say what he thinks the “correct” exchange rate should be. KJT was quoting with approval a story about Iceland and implying that this is what we should do. I simply gave an opinion on what the Icelandic actions would mean here.

              Perhaps you have some refernce as to WHY you say that “2 billion dollars … less than 3%”.
              There must be something other than your unsupported word for this.

              • KJT …
                24 December 2012 at 8:55 pm

                I did not say that, Alwyn, I was giving an example of how divorced from reality your type of economic ideas, and NACT’s, really are.

                • alwyn …
                  25 December 2012 at 8:47 am

                  I don’t understand you reply. I was commenting on a post by Bad12. What is it you are talking about KJT.
                  I don’t see anything that I have claimed you said and I don’t understand what it is that you say is an example “divorced from reality’ that you think I am talking about.
                  Please note. If you have seen a rather fuller response it was because when I was writing it I thought that your comment, and the one I was responding to, were by the same person.
                  I deleted it when I realised that they were not.

          • Draco T Bastard 6.3.1.1.3
            24 December 2012 at 6:57 am

            Perhaps Michael Cullen will someday explain why his Government did it.

            It was this government that signed them back into the scheme after they were told that SCF were most likely breaching the conditions of the scheme. Can’t blame that on Cullen.

            • alwyn 6.3.1.1.3.1
              24 December 2012 at 12:21 pm

              I have heard rumours that the reason their membership in the scheme was continured was that it was certain that if it had not happened SCF would have instantly gone bust and the losses would have been immediately fallen due. As much as anything it appears that the Government hoped that keeping going a bit longer might enable the business to be cleaned up without having the large losses realised. I don’t know whether this was really the case but it makes a certain sense. It was the original inclusion of SCF that was the real mistake and as I have noted in the Chronology above that can be blamed on the then Labour Government.

              • KJT …
                24 December 2012 at 8:58 pm

                It was continued because a large number of National supporters and funders, who, surprisingly, 🙂 invested after they knew it was going to fail, and be bailed out with interest, stood to lose their money.

                Actually this has a name, insider trading!

                • alwyn …
                  25 December 2012 at 8:27 am

                  To correct your story a little.
                  Lots of people invested because they saw it as an investment that paid a very high return and that was guaranteed by the Government so that there was very little risk of losing anything. Once it had been guaranteed by the Government it really didn’t matter how risky the company really was.
                  Neither you nor I have any idea who they were and whether the were National, Labour, Green or New Zealand First supporters. Given the published material a lot of the investors with the group probably voted NZF although I doubt if they really appreciated what was going on.
                  They did not KNOW that the company was going broke. They simply didn’t care. It’s not called Insider trading. It’s called moral hazard.

                  • Crimson Nile …
                    25 December 2012 at 8:39 am

                    Your analysis is naive in the extreme. The Government guarantee was deliberately set up so that private investors would take massive gains and the public massive losses.
                    Your assumption that the highly efficient network of high net worth individuals did not know about the faltering state of SCF and the opportunity to make a quick short term gain cannot be substantiated, given how closely knit the network of high networth individuals is.
                    Public money went to private individuals. The list of the top 20 beneficiaries needs to be published.

                    • alwyn …
                      25 December 2012 at 9:07 am

                      I don’t think you are actually to different in your views than I am.
                      I don’t think the scheme was really set up to transfer large amounts of public money into private hands. It was cobbled together in a hurry, and not fully thought out or publically considered for two reasons. The first was that once Australia had announced their scheme for bank deposits we had to or there would have been a massive outflow of funds to Australia. The second, and very unfortunate one, was that the Labour Party wanted to announce it as part of their election campaign launch and kept its components secret from the public, and the other parties. It was not properly planned and should never have included groups like SCF. For that we can fairly blame Labour.
                      It didn’t need anyone to KNOW that SCF was faltering and their collapse wasn’t a necessary to make a gain. It was only necessary that the return they were offering was essentially risk-free. It wasn’t SCF going broke that led to the return. A high return would have been achieved whatever happened to SCF.
                      As a final point you talk about “the highly efficient network” They aren’t really any more knowlegeable than anyone else. You only have to look at the people who invested with Bernie Madoff to see that. Ross Asset Management appears to be another.
                      The fact you say that the top 20 investors with SCF need to be published also indicates that you do not KNOW who the investors were.

                    • Crimson Nile …
                      25 December 2012 at 9:20 am

                      Nonsense Alwyn. Grnated, the scheme was ORIGINALLY set up in a rush yes. But they had over a year to reset its terms and conditions before resigning SCF up to it for the last time. English could have easily tightened up the conditions to limit the Crowns losses, in its final iteration. He didn’t.
                      So what you present is not an excuse, its not even a reason.
                      And we’re not talking about Bernie Maddoffs scheme are we, we’re talking about a well connected group of wealthy Canterbury, farming and National based insiders.
                      Time to publish the list of top beneficiaries from the Government’s bail out so that EVERYONE KNOWS.

                    • alwyn …
                      26 December 2012 at 2:24 pm

                      A brief response to Crimson Nile’s 9.20am comment.
                      There is no reply showing so I hope that this ends up in the right place.
                      A very brief chronology.
                      The original inclusion of SCF in the DGS was announced on 19 Nov 2008.
                      It would apply until 12 October 2010.
                      The Receivers for SCF were appointed on 31 August 2010.
                      This is BEFORE the expiry date of the first guarantee scheme. It wouldn’t have mattered whether or not they were included in the extended scheme. The Crown would still have been liable.
                      As I suggested earlier if SCF had not been included in the extended scheme there would have been an IMMEDIATE attempt by depositors to withdraw all their funds which would have caused the group to fail immediately, so the Crown would have to have paid out then. As it was there were some stories that they were included in the extended scheme to try and get the company back into a stable state. That failed, and may have been wishful, thinking but it might have prevented the fall.
                      There was no way however to avoid the original committment of a guarantee.

                  • KJT …
                    25 December 2012 at 8:48 am

                    Of course they knew it was going broke.

                  • KJT …
                    25 December 2012 at 1:56 pm

                    You are in a bit of a rush to assume I do not know who at least some of them were.

                    People rather closely connected to National and ACT.

                    I was even told by one what was going to happen, and that I would be silly not to get in on a sure thing.

                    They didn’t seem to see anything wrong with rorting the tax payers, though the same person has a different view on “bloody bennies”.

                    Accusing them directly of insider trading, a criminal act, by name, is not something we can do on a blog though.

                    • alwyn …
                      26 December 2012 at 2:31 pm

                      I totally fail to see how one can gain by the company collapsing, as opposed to getting ones capital and interest returned from a successful business.
                      I am quite prepared to accept that someone would say that one might as well take 10% (or whatever it was) from SCF with the investment being Guaranteed by the State as opposed to getting 4% (or whatever) from a trading bank with the same security.
                      Naturally one would, if interested in a maximum return, take the higher rate at the same level of risk.
                      How the fact that the company was expected to collapse made it better than it being successful is nonsensical.

      • bad12 6.3.2
        23 December 2012 at 1:21 pm

        The United States, Britain, and Japan, just to name a few country’s are chock full of economists who agree with ‘printing money’,

        Barak Obama President elect having taken advice from economists and while ‘inflation’ is at basement level will, in His own words print money monthly until unemployment falls,

        As of last week the newly elected Prime Minister in Japan has indicated the same thing,

        At the point of the New Zealand general election in 2008 the interim report to the incoming National Government from the IMF was that the Government of New Zealand should seriously consider ‘printing money’ as a tool to stabilize the economy,

        While employment continues to flee off-shore to the Asian and Indian economy’s it is unsustainable for the Slippery National Government and it’s village idiot Finance Minister to continue to borrow 300 million dollars a week which has lead in 4 years to a growing debt mountain that will soon rival that of Greece, Ireland, or Italy, that has produced not an iota of ‘growth’ in the New Zealand economy,

        Imposing further petrol taxes in order to ‘balance the books’ is in fact futile as this will simply lead to a direct transfer of ‘disposable income’ to the Government leading to less transiting the local economy and even more recessionary pressure within that economy,

        In effect robbing Peter to pay Paul will simply lead to the point where Peter must again be robbed,

        Perhaps a genius of your stature has the answer to the current ‘depression’ occurring within the New Zealand economy, so instead of bagging The Greens Russell Norman over His support for ‘printing money’ you should have the testicular fortitude and the intellectual rigor to, while you criticize, offer an economic solution yourself…

      • Draco T Bastard 6.3.3
        23 December 2012 at 2:00 pm

        Can anyone show me a genuine economist who agrees with Norman’s idea that we can solve our problems by printing money?

        I’ve got a better question or two: Can you show me a genuine economist that actually knows what an economy is? and Can you show me one that actually knows what the purpose of the economy is?

        Listening to the “economists” is what got us into the problems that we have. This does tend to indicate that they have NFI WTF they’re talking about.

        • Rogue Trooper 6.3.3.1
          23 December 2012 at 2:10 pm

          here brother; been learning about the “power”; just livin’ on a budget 😉

      • RedLogix 6.3.4
        23 December 2012 at 2:20 pm

        Can anyone show me a genuine economist who agrees with Norman’s idea that we can solve our problems by printing money?

        Tell us alwyn … where exactly do you think money comes from?

        • Rogue Trooper 6.3.4.1
          23 December 2012 at 2:26 pm

          Amen brother; we are in the House. 🙂

        • alwyn 6.3.4.2
          23 December 2012 at 6:34 pm

          I really can’t be bothered giving you lessons in elementary economics.
          If you really want to know why don’t you visit your local library and borrow a book on the subject.
          Even a very elementary, ie High School level, one will explain it to you.

          • Draco T Bastard 6.3.4.2.1
            23 December 2012 at 6:59 pm

            Translation: alwyn doesn’t have friggen clue where money comes from.

          • RedLogix 6.3.4.2.2
            23 December 2012 at 7:27 pm

            @alwyn,

            Fundamentally we use money for two related but distinct purposes:

            1. A medium of exchange

            2. A store of value.

            Note carefully that the first of these purposes is essentially de-coupled from time. In this sense we are mostly using money as a convenient way to avoid the complications and inefficiencies of barter. When we are thinking about money like this we really don’t care how much money is in circulation; just as long as it continues to circulate we don’t really care if a load of bread costs one cent or a million dollars … as long as incomes match.

            The second purpose however is fundamentally different. We want one unit of currency to be able to buy what today what it did yesterday … or ten years ago. Now suddenly the time value of money is important. This is critical when debt (or savings) come into the picture.

            Those people who think of money purely in it’s ‘store of value’ aspect have a great deal of trouble getting their heads around the fact that money in itself has absolutely zero worth in itself.

            Which is why so many people struggle with the concept of what money really is in the modern economy. The actual amount of coins and notes in circulation (M0) is typically around 1% of GDP. In this country it’s about $3b while GDP is in the order of $200b.

            The vast majority of money (M3) is pure credit money. It was effectively ‘printed’ by the banking system. Now of course the retail banks in this country are very low in the feeding chain; they don’t get to create the credit … they have to borrow it from much bigger and more powerful fish in the pond overseas.

            This is the hard part for most people used to the idea that money has to represent something ‘real’. It doesn’t. What we really have is a pure credit system. All the ‘money’ we use is nothing more than electronic blips which amount to nothing more than a ‘promise to pay’.

            If everyone went to their bank tommorrow and demanded cash out on their accounts, AND everyone attempted to pay back ALL their debts … the amount of cash available would fall short by many orders of magnitude. Credit money is not real; it’s nothing more than a vast system of bookeeping.

            Of course interest is charged on all this credit money that is created by the private banking system. This is how they exploit their privileged position to become such a large portion of the US and UK economies; why the very largest banks simply become “too big to fail”. They’ve become a tumour too large and advanced to surgically remove without also killing the patient.

            Which of course demands the obvious question; how did the private banks get to have a monopoly on credit creation? And if it’s a good thing for banks to create it, why is it such a bad thing for governments to do so?

            • Colonial Weka 6.3.4.2.2.1
              23 December 2012 at 7:38 pm

              Great explanation, thanks.

              So when Norman talks about printing money, he’s talking about the govt creating credit (rather than coins and notes)? How does the govt do that?

              • Draco T Bastard …
                23 December 2012 at 7:51 pm

                How does the govt do that?

                By typing numbers into the computer at the Reserve Bank.

                here’s the important bit though: That money means absolutely nothing until the government actually spends it into the economy. At that point it means something because it then starts moving the nations resources about in ways that the society needs.

              • bad12 …
                23 December 2012 at 10:58 pm

                And after having created the credit, a debt it owes it’s self the Government at any time can simply forgive that debt,

                It’s a chicken and egg story of what comes first, money or production, capitalists will tell you that production must be expanded befor there can be an expansion in the supply of money,

                That of course is one of the major lies of the ism, monetary expansion can be used to create an asset(production) to the value of the monies printed and the debt owed by Government to it’s self is then negated by the value of the asset owned by the Government…

            • alwyn 6.3.4.2.2.2
              24 December 2012 at 12:25 pm

              That is quite good actually. One normally includes money as being a unit of account but you probably don’t need it here.
              On the other hand why did you feel you need me to explain it for you?

      • Dr Terry 6.3.5
        23 December 2012 at 4:34 pm

        alwyn – I think you might be the “joker” somehow! Don’t you know that numbers of other countries have printed, and are printing money? Norman will have no problem finding economic supporters. But then, to you, just everything is a big laugh, eh? (Even the ultra-serious McCarten (I know him well) does not joke around).

    • Morrissey 6.4
      23 December 2012 at 12:47 pm

      And today, even Kerre Woodham provided the best column I have ever seen from her!

      Considering Kerre Woodham’s Herald on Sunday column has included the condemnation of a mother for showing too much grief at her murdered son’s funeral and the denunciation of rape victims as “slags” and “tarts”, that’s not saying a lot.

      • QoTViper 6.4.1
        23 December 2012 at 2:15 pm

        the denunciation of rape victims as “slags” and “tarts”, that’s not saying a lot.

        *snort* Oh wait, I suppose you vetted their stories and determined they were real rape victims (big points in their favour: not accusing Julian Assange of rape), so carry on.

        • Morrissey 6.4.1.1
          23 December 2012 at 4:25 pm

          Poor old QoVTripe has tried, unwisely, to be clever….

          *snort*

          Cocaine? That explains it, I guess.

          Oh wait, I suppose you vetted their stories and determined they were real rape victims (big points in their favour: not accusing Julian Assange of rape), so carry on.

          Even if you had the ability to write that elegantly and stylishly, it would still be nonsense.

          • QoTViper 6.4.1.1.1
            23 December 2012 at 4:29 pm

            Awwwwww, poor diddums. Did the mean feminist point out your blatant hypocrisy? What a meanie, you should totally make a joke about her being a drug user, that’ll put her in her place.

            • Morrissey 6.4.1.1.1.1
              23 December 2012 at 5:17 pm

              Awwwwww, poor diddums.

              My friend, you’re not clever enough to do this sort of thing.

              Go and read a book, there’s a good fellow.

              • QoTViper …
                23 December 2012 at 5:19 pm

                Oh shit. You haven’t even noticed I’m not a dude. That’s so not a good look for someone who suddenly pretends to care about rape victims.

                • Morrissey …
                  23 December 2012 at 5:27 pm

                  A dull writer is a dull writer. Gender doesn’t really come into it. Thanks for the heads-up, though.

                  • QoTViper …
                    23 December 2012 at 5:31 pm

                    I know you think you’re being really cutting, but referring to me as “dull” is the funniest thing you’ve ever written.

                    • Morrissey …
                      23 December 2012 at 5:37 pm

                      No it’s not. Not even when you try to bolster yourself by pretending it’s all ironic.

                      You deliberately slandered me; I am not slandering you.

                      [RL: OK have you two had your fun? Flamewars are never a good look.]

                    • KJT …
                      23 December 2012 at 9:11 pm

                      QOT.

                      Profane, pedantic about words, (I would say ballsy, but then she would have mine) up-setter of sacred cows and challenger of the establishment and a bit too inclined to bite those on her own side.

                      But dull,

                      never!

                    • QoTViper …
                      23 December 2012 at 9:14 pm

                      Naughty KJT! Why use ballsy when gutsy, stroppy, take-no-prisoners and in-your-face are available? 😛

    • JK 6.5
      23 December 2012 at 4:55 pm

      “David Shearer, the leader who foiled the “covert campaign” of David Cunliffe (who was rightly dispatched to sit among the back benches). “It was a masterstroke to seek a unanimous vote for his leadership” Do I need to comment upon this?)

      When Matt first started writing in favour of Shearer, I thought “someone has got to him” and I still think that. He’s been persuaded by one of his former union mates who is still in Labour that Shearer et al are going down the “right” track for Labour and somehow, for some reason, Matt is not seeing straight. So yes Dr Terry his recent columns are bewildering – are they worth reading ?

      • Anne 6.5.1
        23 December 2012 at 7:28 pm

        Yes, McCarten has been in receipt of a load of hogwash – but well presented hogwash and he’s fallen for it hook, line and sinker. There’s quite a few of them. Mike Williams is another…

        You see, they’re very busy people and they lead very busy lives rushing from one well paid MSM political celebrity slot to another – be it on TV, radio or an opinion column in a newspaper. They have their political contacts – most likely people who have assisted them in their lucrative careers as opinion leaders – and they rely on them to provide a plausible story for their column inches.

        They all belong to the Back Scratchers Club. (Well, that’s my word for it but in my view it’s appropriate). They don’t pay subs etc. but it’s an exclusive club and anyone who dares challenge them is turned into a pariah. I am expecting notification of my ‘pariah’ status in the Labour Party any day now. (joke)

  7. freedom 7
    23 December 2012 at 9:50 am

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/education/8113718/937k-top-up-for-failing-teachers-pay-firm

    now it’s only a $29 million system ??? wtf, it was $30 million last week, wow at this rate it’ll be free by the time they actually sort it out

    If the Ministry expects to pay $100 million over the next eight years that is 12.5 mil a year.
    Was the previous system, that actually seemed to work, really costing 12.5 million a year??
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/7979570/Novapay-firm-blames-teething-issues

    • Dv 7.1
      23 December 2012 at 10:18 am

      No, Novapay is NOT paying, it is the moe, and the schools.
      AND it appears that the data is from the last update available on Nov 11.

      • freedom 7.1.1
        23 December 2012 at 11:04 am

        “No, Novapay is NOT paying” ? what are you referring to?

        and the second link was there for reference to the stated 100 m figure and is clearly dated at the top of the article

        • Northshoreguynz 7.1.1.1
          23 December 2012 at 3:46 pm

          FFS schools pay their staff out of their grant. So what do you think happens when Novopay fucks up? The schools just ask the MOE for more? Yeah right.

        • Dv 7.1.1.2
          23 December 2012 at 3:48 pm

          Freedom

          I interpreted your comment to mean the novapay was covering the short fall. The schools covered $562,000 and the ministry $376,000

          The most up-to-date data available is from November 11.

          Both these are from the first reference.

          • freedom 7.1.1.2.1
            23 December 2012 at 8:19 pm

            people misinterpret stuff all the time,
            ( referring mainly to journos and the Speaker of the House)
            but the 2 points of my comment were quite straightforward

            1: why is the reported price tag getting smaller??? it has been 30 mil since first talked about publicly, the amount of who is covering what amount of which shortfall/error each round does not change the fact it was a 30 mil project now being reported as being 29 mil.

            2: Was the previous system really costing 12.5 million a year??

    • NoseViper (The Nose knows) 7.2
      23 December 2012 at 5:27 pm

      When the police tried to get a magic computer system that did everything and fell into the INCIS black hole, the Police Commissioner gave up his post and was moved sideways into Helen Clark’s administration. I can’t remember that it was allowed to balloon out over decades.

    • KJT 7.3
      23 December 2012 at 9:24 pm

      How much would the school secretary with an excel spreadsheet cost? again!

  8. muzza 8
    23 December 2012 at 10:14 am

    *Celebs* against gun violence

    I’m sure I won’t have to point out the naked hypocracry here, in that the names in the article who are paid by the establishments entertainment propaganda, brainwashing machine, are those same people who peddle violence, S&M, B&D, verbal and physical abuse, murder and so on, as *artists*

    More lies, more spin, more Hollywood stories being made up on cue, to fool and ever limited in thinking capacity public!

    These people are professional actors, they know whats going on, and they are lying opening about it!

    Lifting the lid on Hollywood!

    • Colonial Weka 8.1
      23 December 2012 at 11:19 am

      “Approximately 50 high profile celebrities including Diva singer Beyonce, Selena Gomez, We’re The Millers star Jennifer Aniston, Michelle Williams, Steve Carell, Reese Witherspoon, Jennifer Garner, Gwyneth Paltrow, Cameron Diaz, Mad Men star Jon Hamm, comedian Will Ferrell and Jason Bateman have joined forces in the powerful public service announcement demanding a plan to end gun related atrocities”

      Hardly a rollcall of actors who make violent films 😉

      The problem is that violence per se in a film isn’t the issue, it’s how it’s portrayed.

      • muzza 8.1.1
        23 December 2012 at 11:37 am

        The problem is that violence per se in a film isn’t the issue, it’s how it’s portrayed.

        Weka, its nothing to do with how the violence is portrayed, sheesh, that reads as if you think violence is acceptable, as long as it is *portrayed*, in some *acceptable fashion*???

        Its more to do with how the violence is interpreted, and digested by the viewer Weka, and follows what happens in an individuals perception balance, of what is acceptable and what is not.

        Hollywood can take a very large % of the wrap for where society finds itself, and the continual lowering of the standards , read:, making unacceptable behaviour, acceptable through the medium of *entertainment* is one of the primary causes!

        • Colonial Weka 8.1.1.1
          23 December 2012 at 12:38 pm

          Do you mean that a film maker can make a violent film however they want and the responsibility is with the viewer and they interpret and digest that?

          For me it’s nothing to do with violence being acceptable, but the responsibility that goes with having influence. If someone has the capacity to make a blockbuster film, then there is a responsibility that goes with that around what messages the film sends.

          • Populuxe1 8.1.1.1.1
            23 December 2012 at 2:58 pm

            Nonsense. Clockwork Orange is an incredibly violent film, but it’s also full of artistic merit and social message

            • Colonial Weka 8.1.1.1.1.1
              23 December 2012 at 3:36 pm

              So you think there should be no censorship of any kind, nor film classifications and film makers should just do what they want?

              (I’m not debating the merits or otherwise of Clockwork Orange btw, I just think you have misunderstood my point).

              • Populuxe1 …
                23 December 2012 at 4:53 pm

                Film classifications are fine – I don’t particularly want young children watching Caligula, but on the whole I’m not in favour of censorship without good reason. Obviously there are limits – child pron and snuff films etc, but otherwise no to censorship.

                • RedLogix …
                  23 December 2012 at 8:09 pm

                  If it was just Kubrik and Tarantino I’d have less of a problem. But that’s not it … too much of our ‘entertainment’ is saturated in violence. I just read this piece an hour ago.

                  But when we looked into the impact of violence in the media, we were shocked at what we found. We, like many people we know, and perhaps you reading this, had a series of wrong-headed notions about the nature of the problem. We found that the issue has been studied for well over 40 years, and has been the subject of over 1,000 studies — including reports from the Surgeon General’s office in 1972, and the National Institute of Mental Health. The studies “point overwhelmingly to a causal connection between media violence and aggressive behavior in some children,” according to the American Academy of Pediatrics.

                  We were especially surprised to learn that researchers, as summarized by the French Canadian media activist and researcher Jacques Brodeur, claim to have proven that “the effect of media violence is bigger than the effect of exposure to lead on children’s brain activity, bigger than the effect of calcium intake on bone mass, bigger than the effect of homework on academic achievement, bigger than the effect of asbestos exposure on cancer, bigger than the effect of exposure to secondhand smoke on lung cancer.”

                  It always struck me as bizzare how the act of making life was deemed basely pornographic while the act of destroying it was deemed fine entertainment.

  9. muzza 9
    23 December 2012 at 10:23 am

    Original Bain Lawyer passes comment

    David Bain’s first defence lawyer – the man who fronted in court when his client was convicted of the 1994 murders of his parents, brother and two sisters – says a compensation report from a Canadian judge does contain errors, but still thinks he deserves a payout

    But hang on a minute

    Speaking to the newspaper yesterday, Guest, struck off for professional misconduct in 2001 for lying to a client and taking $25,000 more in costs than he was entitled to,

    Struck off for misconduct read, theft/lying, and still being asked for comment, geez we are in a fucked up mess in NZ!

  10. beatie 10
    23 December 2012 at 10:33 am

    The MSD welfare ‘reforms’ are closely following the British model. Here’s a taste of whats to come with next year’s move to a ‘universal’ benefit.

    http://johnnyvoid.wordpress.com/2012/12/22/jims-christmas/

    • Descendant Of Sssmith 10.1
      23 December 2012 at 12:32 pm

      Here’s one UK response

      http://www.newday.com/films/A_Days_Work.html

    • bad12 10.2
      23 December 2012 at 6:59 pm

      Jim’s story with a small tweak or two could be my own, obviously the trashing of our welfare system isn’t as advanced as that of the English and having managed to kick 2 of my 3 addictions and found a way to negate the costs of the 3rd i am managing,

      Should ‘time limits’ and such other BS become the norm here i will most definitely not be resorting to Jim’s solution, if anyone is to in the end pay an ultimate price for the impoverishment and humiliation that goes with the territory it will as far as i am concerned have to be those who impose such on people…

  11. felixviper 11
    23 December 2012 at 11:15 am

    This is over a year old, but it’s also a hilarious refutation of exactly the sort of fallacy that gets raised here anytime the status quo is questioned.

  12. muzza 12
    23 December 2012 at 11:45 am

    Paedophile escapes jail because of health

    A judge today sentenced a repeat paedophile to home detention, rather than jail, because the former Salvation Army volunteer is sick with smoking-related emphysema.

    Trevor Hall had admitted four charges of indecent assault and had previously been jailed for similar offences in Australia.

    The 60-year-old is a heavy smoker with emphysema, who claims his health has worsened since being charged with molesting a seven-year-old girl.

    And today, despite advice that Hall could be cared for in jail, the judge sent him home.

    “The point is your medical circumstances would make a sentence of imprisonment disproportionately severe to you and therefore out of kilter,” says Judge Peter Rollo of Tauranga District Court.

    As Hall was sentenced to 12 months home detention, a $2000 fine and $30 a week in reparation, one man screamed at the judge from the public gallery, “Was it okay to sexually assault children?” and was escorted outside.

    Protecting NZ’ s paedos, one Judge at a time….Why on earth would judges continue protect these types…/rhetorical!

    • muzza 12.1
      23 December 2012 at 4:38 pm

      Bail for former Catholic brother facing 252 child sex charges

      Bernard Kevin McGrath, a former St John of God brother appeared in Christchurch District Court today over a warrant to extradite him to Australia to face charges laid in Newcastle in June.

      He was jailed for five years in 2006 for sexually abusing boys at Marylands School in Christchurch in the 1970s and paroled in 2008.

      McGrath, 65, is alleged to have repeatedly raped, molested and abused dozens of young boys at church-run institutions in the Newcastle-Maitland diocese during the late 1970s and 1980s.

      Yeah, kids in this country are well looked after….

      He was bailed on strict conditions, including a ban on contact on children aged under 16 and from coming within 100 metres of a school, despite opposition from the Crown

      Oh, thats ok then, he has been told to stay away from children, and schools, wonder how thats worked out for his victims previously!

      Glad theese judges are protecting the Children as well as they do in the family courts!

  13. Morrissey 13
    23 December 2012 at 12:42 pm

    NEWS FROM THE POLITICAL FRINGE
    Larry “Lackwit” Williams is the BEST POLITICAL JOURNALIST in N.Z.

    No, that was not a joke, it’s the result of the latest scientific poll over at Cameron Slater’s blog. Either there are a lot of very st000-pid people posting there, or a lot of guys and gals with a WICKED sense of humour….

    http://www.whaleoil.co.nz/2012/12/whaleoil-awards-best-political-journalist/

  14. bad12 14
    23 December 2012 at 2:45 pm

    Betcha NZFirst’s Winston Peters has a good Christmas, having dispatched Mr ‘overly-ambitious’ Brendan Horan to Siberia as an independent Winston will be patting Himself on the back for a job well done,

    What i, and possibly Winston, ‘saw’ in the recently disposed of Mr ‘overly ambitious’ Brendon was another future bad buzz for NZFirst in the vein of ‘the tight 5’ who quit NZFirst to help prop up a previous National Government,

    We have to take it upon ‘face value’ as to the reasons that Winston disposed of Horan but who would have any confidence in a politician who could turn on and off an obviously fake smile faster than even Slippery the Prime Minister can,

    I have the sneaky ‘feeling’ that the number of calls made to the TAB Winston got to view via the Horan phone record was not the only series of phone calls that lead Winston to be rid of Horan,

    Was there not also a series of phone calls made from that phone between Horan and a as yet un-named National back-bench MP tasked by the Party hierarchy to ‘get close’ to the now disposed of MP…

  15. Rogue Trooper 15
    23 December 2012 at 2:59 pm

    testing 🙂

  16. The Pink Postman 16
    23 December 2012 at 3:03 pm

    I would like to ask our Standard readers their view of nationalizing the Casinos.? Is this a vote winner for a left wing government like the next Labour led Green government/. My personal view is that it would be a good source of revenue for a government that wants to have a decent future for all society. .

    • Crimson Nile 16.1
      23 December 2012 at 4:20 pm

      “I would like to ask our Standard readers their view of nationalizing the Casinos.? Is this a vote winner for a left wing government like the next Labour led Green government/.”

      The irony would be that casinos make most of their money from the working class who cannot afford to gamble. So sure, this would be fitting.

      Perhaps we’d be better off to nationalise Telecom and Contact Energy, just as two suggestions. Then run them as not for profits, giving the economic benefit of state ownership back to the people of New Zealand.

    • BillODrees 16.2
      23 December 2012 at 6:28 pm

      We already have “bullshit community trusts” taking money from the poor and under-educated via slot machines and transferring that money to middle class rugby and racing communities.

      We need less gambling in this country.

  17. Rogue Trooper 17
    23 December 2012 at 3:21 pm

    just gonna have a leak, and i shall share my thoughts, yet, while I think of it, before I put some Cat on the ol’ walkman, do you really want me to travel to ak, down a litre of Dewars and visit you c.
    Is that want you really want? I know you… and (obviously) you, along with 100’s of people in HB know me (witnessed at the Reformed congregation this am; long “chat” with the incumbent shepherd, appears we have the same teleological journey). Do you really want to take me on c.?; I master fear early in the morning, from time to time; lift the Rock, and there is the slater. 🙂
    (yes, you and df have taken on the Wrong Man; power grows, if you do not abuse it, just like plants)

    -autobiographical memory brother ( brother is 81).mmmm…smell that fear. (it’s only 81 and the dogs, with a little Confuscian backing). well, while i take a leak, i shall hug my Dog brothers for the third time this afternoon.

    -servant

  18. Rogue Trooper 18
    23 December 2012 at 4:13 pm

    testing; back from tending to the leeks 🙂

  19. Rogue Trooper 19
    23 December 2012 at 4:38 pm

    well, Pop, you have certainly grown, along with The Standard; (Joe. S? well obviously I know his work well) :). anyway, climate change IS real; foolishness to deny it; speaking as a fool. Have you been snooping on my “stored” library ad?;i certainly do not have Amnesia, well, i traded in my copy, and as fore Vargas Llosa and Salman?; passing on fiction at the moment; adhere myself to The Monk Downstairs when the Spirit is willing. 😉 ; whatta ya wont to do? place me under “house observation” like our wise Chinese Taoist friend? (just tryin’ to stay outa jail; nz Aotearoa does not require a Dog Day Afternoon as we have just witnessed in Amerika;sic.) AS I wrote earlier this year, however, despite the “massaged” statistics, the “outsiders” are gonna outbreed the law in the west.(i fought the Law and…i won; thanks North :))

    -caesure (when one has nothing, one has nothing to lose; interesting, i do Bear the responsibility for the Big Red seed that was sown with my brother, yet there is always the Joker and the “bow” to play out) Play on. 🙂

    (apologies for forgetting you Red, and our excellent disciple muzz in recent eulogy)

    however, I had been recently “sucked” back into nicotine by “eve ” nonetheless, passed on now, Thanks be to our Lord.the “boids” have faded away, now it is just the “anasthetic” to be abandoned; one day at a time; This Too, Will Pass.

    -God Bless The Standard. (you are doing Excellent work karol and Bill)

  20. Rhinoviper 20
    23 December 2012 at 7:59 pm

    Watched… accidentally… a few minutes of OneNews before turning off in disgust. First item seen: a report on how people pressured to buy presents were falling behind in paying for rent and food, cooed over by sanctimonious reporters and newsreaders – and then an immediate cut to what was no more than an advertisement for more consumer crap that is the must-buy present this year. More expressions of emotion from the reporters and presenter-bots, this time enthused.

    Oh well, just another reminder why I don’t bother with the MSM. I suppose I need those from time to time.

  21. freedom 21
    23 December 2012 at 8:29 pm

    Sad news form the USA
    The NDAA has passed, so now you can be put in jail for discussing the US constitution

    how? well you can be (and people have been) put on terrorist watchlists for quoting/referring to the US Constitution, especially when referencing the right to free speech and public assembly

    it is a very short walk from that to using the NDAA to imprison those that believe in the founding document of Obomber’s America, the Constitution of the United States

    now, Obomber has a veto, but will the guy who signed the first draft into law really change tack?

    We are talking about a dude who gifted F-16 fighters, the same week he got a Noble Peace Prize

  22. AC 22
    23 December 2012 at 8:34 pm

    Performance Pay for politicians is needed. The performance of many of our MPs has been disgusting this year. How could we go about this? We may be able to do this by pulling names from a ballot each year- like jury service. These chosen few get to decide how much each MP deserves. Crazy as it sounds, this is what this government wants to do to teachers (Judged by the Principal or BOT). Politicians need to lead by example. How many lies an MP makes during their term would be a good criteria to start from. The world’s economic problems should not be an excuse for the NZ unemployment rate, as poverty should not be an excuse for children failing in our school system. Speaking of our education system- we have a top shelf education system and I am concerned that this government is going to change something world class into something at a 3rd World standard. Our children were performing much better under the previous government and the curriculum was more balanced catering for the strengths of individual children. Our children deserve the best and I believe this government does not have the same view of our children.

  23. muzza 23
    23 December 2012 at 9:20 pm

    Given the *Thick Blue Line* and piss poor record of solving crimes, let alone *homicides* in this particular part of NZ.

    Some of the articles have some glaring overlaps, poor reporting, call it what you will. It also strikes that Detective Senior Sergeant John Rae (who plays many roles in Canterbury policing), appears to have been caught out by the *efficiency* of the investigation “It came really unexpectedly,” Detective Senior Sergeant John Rae said.”

    The following links, in approximate order of publication, based on time/date stamps only.

    1 http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10854323

    2 http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10854546

    3 http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/porirua/8088676/Mischievous-loving-mother-dead-in-doorway

    4 http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/8087424/Young-mum-dead-Possible-weapon-found

    5 http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/8094470/Sina-Solomona-murder-Bloody-handprint-discovered

    6 http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10855162

    7 http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/auckland/news/nbnat/488757004-youth-charged-with-murder-of-sina-solomona

    8 http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/8101705/Arrest-in-Sina-Solomona-murder

    9 http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/8106863/Relief-over-murder-arrest-in-Ashburton

    • McFliper 23.1
      23 December 2012 at 9:29 pm

      What’s your point?

      • Colonial Weka 23.1.1
        23 December 2012 at 10:26 pm

        I was wondering that too.

        Also why Stuff used the word ‘boy’ to describe the person arrested. Does that mean a pre-teen?

        • muzza 23.1.1.1
          24 December 2012 at 8:25 am

          19 December 7.49pm

          Sense of Urgency

          Police are reinterviewing some of the people they spoke to in the early stages of their inquiry into the murder of Ashburton woman Sina Solomona.

          Detective Senior Sergeant John Rae said police still believed it was likely the suspect would be among the 25 to 30 people they had already spoken to, however they had an open mind and were seeking as much information from the public as possible.

          “We still have an open mind, it could be someone out there we don’t know anything about yet.”

          Police were no closer to making an arrest and there was no list of suspects at this stage.

          That is truly awful writing – Reinterviewing, police believe likely suspect will be among those already spoken to, but yet no list of suspects ???

          20 December 10.54 – (Updated)

          Arrest Made

          A male youth has been arrested and charged with the murder of Ashburton mother Sina Solomona.

          “It came really unexpectedly,” Detective Senior Sergeant John Rae said.

          The youth appeared at the Christchurch Youth Court this morning. (Thursday)

          Rae said it was “certainly” good to have an arrest and it had given investigators a clear definition of where they were going in the investigation, which was still continuing.

          There was also no evidence of a fight or scuffle, and there was no sign of any defensive wounds to Solomona’s hands and arms.

          So within what would be a matter of hours in reality, a few more in the reporting timeline, police were no closer to an arrest, nor a list of suspects, 19/12 Herald – to a youth arrested charged with murder and remanded following a court appearance 20/12 Stuff, and no evidence of a fight or scuffle, or defensive wounds.

          Sergeant John Rae has gone from believing the suspect (not that there was a list of any) would come from those spoken to already, 19/12 Herald, to “it came really unexpectedly” 20/12 Stuff.

          Now perhaps the police did not want to let on they were within hours of making an arrest, which could explain some of these statements and reporting, possibly…

          21 December 0500 (pre written 20/12 or earlier)

          Relief

          Ashburton residents are relieved at news of an arrest for the murder of Sina Solomona, saying they did not want “another Kirsty Bentley” case.

          A boy appeared in the Youth Court yesterday charged with Solomona’s murder after being interviewed by police on Wednesday. He was remanded in custody to reappear on January 14.

          Solomona was killed in her Cass St home between 2.20am and 2.40am on Saturday. The 22-year-old mother suffered blunt trauma and blade injuries to her head, face and throat.

          A boy/youth, blunt trauma, blade injuries to face a throat, but yet no sign of “a fight or scuffle or defensive wounds.. So we have to believe that either, she has hit from behind, then her face and throat were cut, or that she was hit from the front, and did not defend herself

          Remembering that a “possible weapon” had already been found 17/12 Stuff

          Police investigating the death of Ashburton woman Sina Nerisa Solomona say they have recovered a possible weapon from the scene.

          Detective Senior Sergeant John Rae would not be drawn on what the possible weapon was, other than to say some “items of interest” had been obtained by police.

          Rae said the items would be shown to family members to determine whether they were from the house or “introduced”.

          “There are possibilities that we have a weapon, but we can’t guarantee it,” he said.

          “After the post-mortem, we will have an indication if the items we’ve got were used in the attack.”

          Terribly confused reporting, and so much of it compared to many other homicides read about. Alongside that there are some rather strange/mixed comments by Sergeant John Rae (could be the poor reporting, although they are quotes)

      • marty mars 23.1.2
        23 December 2012 at 10:36 pm

        Yes, why are you linking to that case again?

        You got a quota or something muzza?

        • marty mars 23.1.2.1
          24 December 2012 at 9:39 am

          So muzza do you stand by your statement made when you first alluded to the msm report of this terrible story where you said “Reads like a *clean up* job is being done!” ? Is that how it ‘reads’ muzza or just what you wish. Heart is not that hard to come by you know.

          http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-16122012/comment-page-1/#comment-563498

          • muzza 23.1.2.1.1
            24 December 2012 at 9:48 am

            Hi Marty..

            Yes I stand by it, and yes it is a terrible incident, just like every other rape, murder or act of violence/abuse which this country produces!

            The original article certainly read like a *clean up job*, and the reporting of it still reads like incompetance, along with the quotes from John Rae!

            Why so hostile Marty, your attempts to read through my posts is failing you, talk of my wishing for ???, and lack of heart etc, ive touched a nerve with you somewhere.

            Having read the articles and my comments/observations, perhaps you have somethig more detailed to add Marty?

            TRP/McFlock – They’re observations, read the links and make your own, instead of just asking what the point is!

            • marty mars 23.1.2.1.1.1
              24 December 2012 at 10:27 am

              Not really muzza I just have something inside that reacts to injustice and exploitation. When an innocent person or community is used by someone else for their own ends and without consideration of the actual people involved it pisses me off, and it especially pisses me off when the person doing it pretends some sort of innocence or consideration when that is the opposite of what they are doing. Much of the stuff that you post has some merit but this type of post is rubbish mate, pure shit. Up your game for next year fella.

              and have a great festive season 🙂

              • muzza …
                24 December 2012 at 10:42 am

                Hi Marty, so thats a resounding no from you to the addition of any useful/detailed commentary, and yes to what pisses you off personally, very good!

                Next time, feel free to comment on my querying of the articles, that would be a contribution.

                If you’re going to throw mud, at least have something constructive to say, not just fire back with your own prejudice and nothing else!

                Anyways…

                All the best to you too bro, have a enjoyable festive time, to you and yours.

                • marty mars …
                  24 December 2012 at 11:00 am

                  still don’t get it eh muzza – never mind. Leave the innocent alone and we’ll get on fine.

                  • muzza …
                    24 December 2012 at 11:14 am

                    Marty you know what, if you feel I’m not getting your view, that’s down to your own perception of things, your bias if you will, but we are on the same page with the sentiment of leaving the innocent alone!

                    • marty mars …
                      24 December 2012 at 11:52 am

                      cool mate we are good – anytime (I think that) you cross the line i’ll point it out as I have with this case, and you can do the same for me.

                      The ascension was great and amazingly the fifth dimension looks remarkably like Golden Bay – who’d have thunk it 🙂

            • McFliper 23.1.2.1.1.2
              24 December 2012 at 1:50 pm

              Well, the points I draw from it seem to be:

              a) a tragic incident has occurred and has been investigated, with a young man going before the courts which will then seek out the truth of the matter; and

              b) you seem to have drawn some conclusion or opinion about (a) along the lines of something is untoward in the investigation; and

              c) you have just enough shame (or maybe just an awareness of the standards tolerated by some moderators) to stop short of explicitly stating your sick little theories in direct connection to the real pain and suffering the families of all involved are enduring this holiday season.