Open mike 24/05/2012

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, May 24th, 2012 - 147 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…

147 comments on “Open mike 24/05/2012 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Dylan 1
    24 May 2012 at 6:59 am

    Contractors in the public service at senior levels about to end in the UK.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/may/23/2400-senior-civil-servants-off-payroll

    What about NZ next???

    • Bored 1.1
      24 May 2012 at 8:22 am

      In good times all skilled people want to contract: they are certain of more work when the term ends, they can demand more cash, and be focused with less responsibility (they no longer officially belong to the organisation). And most importantly, they are not on PAYE which gives them the ability to avoid tax others dont have. When the cash dries up security becomes all, even though contractors hang on as long as they can.

      What I have described is an ethos which is at odds with “public service”. It is a primary reason why “private” contracts should be the exception rather than the rule in “public service”.

  2. Netizen 2
    24 May 2012 at 7:05 am

    So there’s an inconsistency in Shane Jones’ explanation about his humanitarianism over Bill Liu.

    Just a few days before granting Liu citizenship Jones turned down an application from an Iranian refugee to stay in New Zealand.

    Instead he ordered her deportation to Iran under threat of death for converting from Islam to Christianity? Where’s the humanitarian streak there?

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/local-news/north-shore-times/343543/Christian-refugee-sent-back-to-Iran

    • Bored 2.1
      24 May 2012 at 8:27 am

      I will await the Auditor Generals report to draw conclusions. I think Shearer and Jones have done the right thing here as they were never going to beat the Nact attack dogs in the media and the blogs.

      The bigger picture is now clearer: Key cant attack Shearer for how he addresses these issues, Shearer can attack Key over the Banks issue. Smokescreens are only good if you are up wind. Watch key rush through the asset sales before Banks gets nobbled by the law.

    • Vicky32 2.2
      24 May 2012 at 5:43 pm

      Instead he ordered her deportation to Iran under threat of death for converting from Islam to Christianity? Where’s the humanitarian streak there?

      Sadly, she’s not the first sent back when they’d sought asylum for that reason. 🙁 At the same time as one of them (in about 2007?) a gay Iranian was feted and welcomed when he spoke about his fear of being in trouble for his homosexuality…

  3. muzza 3
    24 May 2012 at 7:53 am

    What the EU was always designed to achieve

    “It is a quantum leap of governance, which I trust is necessary for the next step of European integration,” he said. ”

    —Of course the same patterns in the USA

    Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder announced his appointment of an emergency financial manager to Highland Park Schools — a district outside Detroit —

    Asked if the emergency-manager law hands power over to a “dictator,” Schimmel sighed, “I guess I’m the tyrant in Pontiac, then, if that’s the way it is.”

    —We should be 100% concerned about these happenings, as our cities and country is in debt, and the forced sales of our energy security, just the beginning..

    Time for people to open their eyes to the agenda!

  4. Carol 4
    24 May 2012 at 8:26 am

    A newly published case study, resulting from research out of Harvard and Cambridge, provides evidence of the destructive, undemocratic and socially unjust results of neoliberalism.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/may/20/eastern-europe-neoliberal-disaster-arab-spring

    The authors claim to have found that

    claim to have established a “direct link” between the mass privatisation programmes followed by around half the countries of the region – enthusiastically urged upon them by western economists and western financial institutions – and the “economic failure and corruption that followed”. The more closely the countries followed western advice, and the more they privatised, the worse things became.

    {…]
    The level of economic output crashed throughout the region (the average fall in GDP in was nearly 30% in the early 1990s) as eastern Europe suffered a slump far worse than the Great Depression experienced by the US and the UK 60 years earlier, but which the Hollywood film industry or western writers have up to now shown little interest in covering.

    And now the destructive and greedy neoliberal elite are poised to prey on the changes brought by the Arab spring in Egypt and other places in North Africa.

    The article contrasts these policies with Norway, that in 2004 had a high level of democracy, state ownership and standard of living. In contrasts the claims of “freedom” by the privatisers and free marketeers, are shown to be a myth, as their policies bring about the curtailment of political freedoms.

    And this destructive and unjust privatisation and free-market policies are the ones being extended by the current government at a time when the least well-off are already suffering.

    • Draco T Bastard 4.1
      24 May 2012 at 4:39 pm

      In contrasts the claims of “freedom” by the privatisers and free marketeers, are shown to be a myth, as their policies bring about the curtailment of political freedoms.

      Which is exactly what they’re designed to bring about. They do it so well that that must be their function.

      When you privatise the commons then those who are dependent upon those resources will become the serfs of the new owners.

  5. Uturn 5
    24 May 2012 at 8:42 am

    Message for Vicky32,

    Without wishing to intrude too far into your business, and going on simply what I’ve read in your posts, this might be a route away from the problem you talked about here a couple of days ago:

    http://tinyurl.com/88d8uf4

    AFAIR you were saying you have dial-up/online restrictions so you may have missed it – or it may not be useful to you. Wanted to be sure.

    • Vicky32 5.1
      24 May 2012 at 5:50 pm

      Without wishing to intrude too far into your business, and going on simply what I’ve read in your posts, this might be a route away from the problem you talked about here a couple of days ago:

      Thank you Uturn, I had missed it, so I am very pleased!
      Vicky32 🙂

  6. Sam Hall 6
    24 May 2012 at 8:43 am

    Good Morning. Like the Sun I’m shining and not gonna hide behind any clouds all day.
    Even though it is the day of the “Carcass Budget” where the majority of New Zealanders find out “The Remains of the Day.
    Bored; Sometimes I read nuances in your posts that remind me of the way Trevor Mallard speaks.
    which remind me of his better qualities.
    Scientologists: Unbelievable! I wonder how many Barnum ticket buyers there are in NZ signing up for this nonsense and its prehistoric conditioning.
    I tried to find similar blog content to this briefly last night. I value the way posts fall beneath each other. No joy yet,so much noise out there. So off to scroll the blog-roll????

    • Bored 6.1
      24 May 2012 at 9:09 am

      Heaven forbid, like Mallard in his better moments…no. From where I sit he is to the Right of Genghis Khan (may be exaggerating slightly). Actually Sam I am an optimistic realist who runs businesses optimistically (despite disagreeing with the fundamental economic construct), and a futurist who finds willful blindness to known realities somewhat disturbing.

  7. captain hook 7
    24 May 2012 at 9:23 am

    Smee, its budget day today.
    so break out the budget bread, budget baked beans and the budget margarine.
    time for a feast.

  8. joe90 8
    24 May 2012 at 9:24 am

    Once were warmongers.

  9. Dv 9
    24 May 2012 at 9:25 am

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/asia/6975109/Myanmar-protesters-test-boundaries

    “Our country is abundantly rich in natural gas but the former military regime sold it to foreign countries without any consideration for the people,” said activist Ko Htin Kyaw, 49.

    This struck me in light of the NACTS selling off the assets.

    • Draco T Bastard 9.1
      24 May 2012 at 4:57 pm

      NACT is part of the system designed to transfer wealth (both monetary and physical) to the wealthy.

    • prism 10.1
      24 May 2012 at 9:59 am

      Azawad but where is Crimp progressing to? And do we want to be influenced by this man who if airports had body scans would seem to have a brain the size of a pea and a heart twisted and warped.

      No doubt he is receiving quality, concerned medical care for his skin cancer and other ailments – why should we do that? Give him back the same amount as his portion of true community caring offered (apart from showy chest-thumping philanthropy).

    • Morrissey 10.2
      24 May 2012 at 2:46 pm

      Is Louis Crimp a progressive redneck…

      Please don’t use the word “redneck” when you mean to use the word “bigot”.

  11. prism 11
    24 May 2012 at 9:40 am

    Special needs children are to be given ‘intensive wrap-around service’ which will enable them to be cared for at home and go to local schools. Will the children have their own classes or join the tail of the mainstream school which is so much denigrated by the upper class? This pressure on teachers to please their political masters demand higher achievement for all is like lions made to jump through flaming hoops. I think teachers are noble people and deserve respect for their experience and skills and opinions. They resent being whipped verbally and having more and more tasks to perform.

    Time-consuming children with ‘special needs’ from the other children in a mixed class will require more complicated individual teaching plans than for the other children. The education of the average children will deteriorate and teachers blamed. It appears that education is not valued for the children of the mass of the public while the wealthy can advance their own interests by accessing private schools and tutoring which will ensure they can get any good paying positions left in the country. The rest can be hounded from one low income job to another, and probably on a casual basis with their controller governing all their decisions and time, their cellphone, and their employer’s demands for their service at short notice.

    A spokesperson from one school with special needs children says that their needs have to be subsidised from the money from international students. There isn’t adequate funding for these children and those with extreme disabilities are not receiving something called ORS funding which one would think should be mandatory. This is an ideological program and takes away choice and will place considerable demands on poorer parents. However if the government is prepared to do the right thing and support with real money, the care by parents and relatives of these children cost will be alleviated, though time for having a life will diminish and fatigue from
    extra responsibilities will rise.

    • Carol 11.1
      24 May 2012 at 9:47 am

      I cringe when Paula Benefit and ministerial colleagues talks about providing some service that “wraps around” individuals in some marginalised group. They’re trying to sound as if they’re doing something caring at the same time as limiting provisions for that group.

    • joe90 11.2
      24 May 2012 at 9:53 am

      Imagery – wrap round.

  12. prism 12
    24 May 2012 at 9:43 am

    Moderation at present seems extreme. I can’t understand what simple things set it off – I haven’t mentioned nazis for instance nor the H… name. Could it be sensitive to dodgy sounding political terms like “wrap-around intensive service” for special needs children?

    [Not sure what’s going on, sorry – is every comment from you going to mod? — r0b]

    • Morrissey 12.1
      24 May 2012 at 2:56 pm

      I can’t understand what simple things set it off…

      Maybe what alerted the censors was the cockney rhyming slang word “prism”.

  13. Uturn 13
    24 May 2012 at 9:59 am

    Protest action from Auckland University students to Budget planned today, at UoA. If rumours are correct, that action should make 1pm news interesting.

    “We, students, teachers, researchers, workers, politicians, parents…, call for a transformation to the current fees, loans and repayment system in tertiary education. We do not need small reforms, we need structural change. When the government and the elite insist that the only way to fund education is indebtedness, we say that education is a human right and a social necessity. We say that targeting citizen-students who cannot pay and landing them with crippling debt, is a violation of the principles of equality and freedom that our country is supposedly built on. We say that democracy demands educated and creative people, and that these changes, and the fees and loans system as it already stands, impoverish nearly every citizen who decides to pursue tertiary education. We say that the current government and the elite are destabilizing our country and mindlessly trading our future for their own privileged present.”

    The above statement has support from the Council of Trade Unions, the Service and Food Workers Union, Mana, Socialist Aotearoa and Auckland Action Against Poverty.

  14. prism 14
    24 May 2012 at 10:04 am

    Uturn

    We say that the current government and the elite are destabilizing our country and mindlessly trading our future for their own privileged present.”

    Absolutely and exactly. Very well said, and apposite (to show how well educated I am).

    • ianmac 15.1
      24 May 2012 at 12:26 pm

      Great flow of language there BLiP but he nails it. Heaven help Presidential hopefuls if this angry man made it onto the public stage!

  16. Jackal 16
    24 May 2012 at 10:24 am

    Gender inequality in New Zealand

    Did you know that women-owned new enterprises outperform men-owned enterprises and woman gain more tertiary qualifications in New Zealand than men? Despite this, woman on average earn $10,000 less per year than men. There’s no doubt that woman are getting a raw deal…

  17. Sam Hall 17
    24 May 2012 at 10:40 am

    Wellll…went through some time Im not going to see again looking at blogs and added AT,a wider perspective and frogblog.

    What Im really looking for is a topical blog like this with contributions that draw upon the openess that the internet can facilitate. There is sooo much “noise” on the net, but I can see why this blog rates highly re visits.

    If a blog touched upon these themes I would find it really useful for my path I know,
    Sociohistorical cultural context
    Power distribution
    Applied ontology
    Applied epistemology
    Applied Metaphysics
    Nietzsche who I have never really forgotten,and whos analysis remains salient
    Foucaultian analysis
    The intersection between politics and capital.

    Project: analysis and synthesis of Tao application to present historical epoch.

    Once was a Diesel Mechanic but now a gardener.
    First significant employment was growing vegetables for the Chinese and 4 decades later I would be happy to do it again if they wished.
    I even enjoy and learn from Draco T Bastard.

    It has been a lonely 40 years in the desert before I discovered the possibilities of Blogs for learning.
    The western gaze finally provided moi with an “explanation” (mainly description) for my “challenges with Living”; Schizoid, yet my scores on the Big Five identify Openess and Conscientiousness. There used to be an element of neuroticism, hence my hostile attacks on the politicians, but in 1 keystroke, U-Turn led the struggle to cease. Over 40 years to undo the socialisation outcomes of adoption, childhood abuse, childhood parental bereavement, capitalist marketing culture and attacks by the Self upon the Self.
    Thank you again

  18. KATY 18
    24 May 2012 at 10:53 am

    For those who didn’t see the general debate yesterday here is David Shearer spelling out a few home truths for the national party. This the first time That I have seen him on attack like this, It certainly looks like the teething problems are coming to an end, and he is beginning to find the required leadership qualities that will show he can lead labour into that brighter future.

    http://blog.labour.org.nz/2012/05/23/david-shearer-takes-fight-to-government/

    • ianmac 18.1
      24 May 2012 at 12:29 pm

      Watch the faces of the backing MPs. They look pleased and surprised. Go David today in the post Budget debate.

    • Colonial Viper 18.2
      24 May 2012 at 12:33 pm

      Some fire in the belly and some improvisation off the cuff. Nice work David Shearer. Moar plz.

    • Chris 18.3
      24 May 2012 at 1:49 pm

      Thanks for that. DS was very impressive.Nice touch mentioning Moombeam.

  19. weka 19
    24 May 2012 at 11:49 am

    Sending the ashes of loved ones into space is a really good way to use up the last of our cheap oil (tech dude on Nine to Noon was waxing lyrical about the recent advancements of private space travel). Beam me down Scottie (or anywhere but here).
     
     

  20. yeshe 20
    24 May 2012 at 12:09 pm

    Just on TVNZ news .. Tame Iti sentenced to two and a half years in prison … wow.

    • TheContrarian 20.1
      24 May 2012 at 12:12 pm

      If you do that crime…

      “penalties for the possession of firearms and restricted weapons are a maximum four-year sentence and $5000 fine”

      2.5 years which could be a 1/3 of that with parole isn’t very tough considering the max penalty

      • Pascal's bookie 20.1.1
        24 May 2012 at 12:33 pm

        Dude that was illegally hunting and thought Rosemary Ives was a deer & fired his weapon, killing her; got the same sentence.

      • Colonial Viper 20.1.2
        24 May 2012 at 12:36 pm

        I guess its worth the millions in court costs, legal aid fees and anti-terrorist squad actions which were required to get to this point.

        Maybe they could just have sent a couple of constables in to nab him at the start eh.

        • Jackal 20.1.2.1
          24 May 2012 at 12:46 pm

          What would be the fun in that? The cops wouldn’t have been able to run around with guns and terrorize the locals then. Can’t think of anybody else getting such a long sentence for having unregistered guns? Unprecedented!

          • TheContrarian 20.1.2.1.1
            24 May 2012 at 12:51 pm

            edit: Unregistered, illegally modified military weapons.

            • Jackal 20.1.2.1.1.1
              24 May 2012 at 1:08 pm

              I don’t think they were found guilty for modifying military weapons The Contagion.

              2 of Urewera 4 sentenced to 2 1/2 years:

              After a six-week trial earlier this year, all but Signer were found guilty of five charges of unlawful possession of firearms, and one charge of unlawful possession of a restricted weapon – Molotov cocktails.

              • TheContrarian …
                24 May 2012 at 1:12 pm

                I’ll sit out on the modified part but restricted refers to automatic rifles like which are found in the military.

                Come on man, we have all seen the videos. Assault rifles are heavily restricted here

                • Jackal …
                  24 May 2012 at 1:25 pm

                  Rubbish! You can purchase assault riffles here. The restriction relates to how fast they can fire. If that had been modified as you imply, then you would expect the Police to have laid charges for it. You’re arguing from ignorance again The Cnidarian.

                  • TheContrarian …
                    24 May 2012 at 1:49 pm

                    Did I say you couldn’t buy assault rifles here? No, I said they were restricted.

                    i.e.: certain pistols, submachine guns or machine guns defined as Restricted Weapons for collecting purposes but not to fire them or take them from their home other than for exhibition purposes, and Restricted Weapons are to be disabled 

                    These restricted weapons are only allowed to be used/fired if you have special license.

                • McFlock …
                  24 May 2012 at 1:55 pm

                  Um, you seem to be a bit fixated on the rifles – the “restricted weapon” was the molotov cocktail they apparently had.

                  From what I gather, the rifles were just legal ones possessed unlawfully.

                  In this case, “restricted weapon” means “stuff nobody would ever possibly need to be wandering around DoC land with”. Although softening up an area with mortars before going after deer does sound fun. And Barry Crump’s trick of culling wild pigs by putting detonators in potatos probably counts as mine-laying these days.

                  • TheContrarian …
                    24 May 2012 at 1:58 pm

                    Well, the videos do show them in possession of assault rifles as far as I recall

                    • McFlock …
                      24 May 2012 at 2:17 pm

                      It’s lucky the justice system doesn’t rely on your recollection, then

                    • TheContrarian …
                      24 May 2012 at 2:33 pm

                      The court notes mention possession of military style semi-automatic weapons. What’s your point? They weren’t considered restricted? Well, OK then.

                    • McFlock …
                      24 May 2012 at 2:46 pm

                      Not so much that,

                      More that you’re inflating the crimes for which they have been convicted in order to justify the sentence – i.e. taking unlawfull possession of firearms and one molotov and reconstructing it into that they were all running around with full auto M60s like Rambo.

                      And the court mentioned MSSA’s as a possibility if the weapons had high-capacity magazines, but they weren’t convicted of possessing MSSA’s. And no mention was made of magazines being found.

                      But keep up with your stirling defense of the establishment, they might give you a gong one day.

                    • TheContrarian …
                      24 May 2012 at 2:50 pm

                      “But keep up with your stirling defense of the establishment, they might give you a gong one day.”

                      Stirling defense of the establishment? Yeah, don’t think I have defended the establishment anymore than stating they broke a law for which they were punished.

                      You see this is what’s wrong with some of you people on this website – you mistake “Well i don’t really know, but this is how I understand it” or any questioning of what is being said to mean “Conservative, tory, NACt right-winger. Look at you supporting the establishment”. When if you read through my comments I was asking question stating what I knew and not once “defending the establishment” outside of agreeing that those that break laws face consequences – the maximum in this instance being 4 years
                       

                    • grumpy …
                      24 May 2012 at 2:55 pm

                      An MSSA with non automatic fire and a 5 shot magazine is OK, add a high capacity magazine (as they did) and it becomes a “restricted” weapon..

                    • Jackal …
                      24 May 2012 at 3:00 pm

                      All guns are “restricted” in some way. For military style semi-automatic weapons you usually need an E class license, which you also need if you want to shoot shotguns.

                      What I don’t get about this is that there were people there with gun licences. Under current law you’re allowed to operate a gun without a license if you’re under immediate supervision of a licence holder. That’s how most people learn to shoot.

                    • TheContrarian …
                      24 May 2012 at 3:01 pm

                      With some guns ONLY the license holder is allowed to operate  the gun.

                    • Jackal …
                      24 May 2012 at 3:39 pm

                      So what guns can only be used by a lisenced holder and what guns exactly relate to the charges The Corpuscularian?

                    • Draco T Bastard …
                      24 May 2012 at 5:19 pm

                      The court notes mention possession of military style semi-automatic weapons.

                      Can anybody tell the difference between a military rifle and a hunting rifle?

                      Yeah, thought not. Use of military style is just scare tactics in use by the MSM and government.

      • mickysavage 20.1.3
        24 May 2012 at 12:42 pm

        2.5 years which could be a 1/3 of that with parole isn’t very tough considering the max penalty


        You reckon TC.  It is a huge sentence.  It is really rare for Judges to go over half of the maximum sentence.  And when you think of how long it has gone on and the severe penalty the parties have already paid it is very long.  I will be interested to see what the Court of Appeal do with the decision.  You can guarantee that it will end up there.

        • TheContrarian 20.1.3.1
          24 May 2012 at 12:47 pm

          Oh, I agree the entire thing was a complete farce and a monumental waste of resources

          But hard to argue yourself out of having modified military weapons and it isn’t unusual to be given a stiffer penalty if you already have a firearms charge (Iti – discharging a weapon in a public place)

          • Jackal 20.1.3.1.1
            24 May 2012 at 12:52 pm

            Some of which didn’t even work. You might be surprised to learn that there were 7074 reported prohibited and regulated weapons and explosive offenses recorded in New Zealand last year alone. The police usually give a warning for unregistered guns… Sometimes they will confiscate them until a license is obtained. Two and a half years is just mental!

            • TheContrarian 20.1.3.1.1.1
              24 May 2012 at 12:55 pm

              So you think there should be a law change surrounding possession of illegally modified military weapons? Currently its max 4 years, what do you think it should be?

              • Jackal …
                24 May 2012 at 12:59 pm

                I think the law should be applied equally, which appears not to be the case here. I wonder if the judge came under any pressure to make such a disproportionate decision?

                • TheContrarian …
                  24 May 2012 at 1:01 pm

                  “I think the law should be applied equally, which appears not to be the case here”

                  How was it not applied equally in this case?

                  • Jackal …
                    24 May 2012 at 1:11 pm

                    Can you point to a similar case where somebody found guilty for unlawful possession of firearms etc is given two and a half years?

                    • higherstandard …
                      24 May 2012 at 1:20 pm

                      Can you point to a similar case where someone was given considerably less ?

                      I don’t think there has been a similar case in NZ and while I think it was an OTT response by the police to Tama Iti and his mates behaving like unmitigated dick heads for the umpteenth time I’m somewhat conflicted as I do believe a strong message needs to be sent but I’m not convinced this is the right way to do it.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      24 May 2012 at 1:23 pm

                      You get the same if you had actually shot someone, it seems.

                    • Te Reo Putake …
                      24 May 2012 at 1:26 pm

                      That’ll be difficult, Jackal, because each case is different. Usually, there are no conspiritorial aspects, just an individual refusing to obey the law. In this case, the sentence seems appropriate to me, because of the nature of the offending.

                    • Jackal …
                      24 May 2012 at 1:28 pm

                      Can I point to a similar case where someone was given considerably less… why yes!

                      15% of Arms Act offenses go to jail for an average of 10 months.

                    • TheContrarian …
                      24 May 2012 at 1:34 pm

                      “15% of Arms Act offenses go to jail for an average of 10 months.”

                      With parole it is quite possible Iti will only do 10 months 

                    • mickysavage …
                      24 May 2012 at 1:40 pm

                      So what?
                       
                      People who receive ten months will be out in a considerably shorter time than that.
                       
                      And law changes are another diversion.  The current law says the maximum sentence is four years and Iti received a fair chunk of that.

                    • TheContrarian …
                      24 May 2012 at 1:42 pm

                      I was taking it as read i.e people go to jail for 10 months not are sentencing to 10 months.

                      I suppose it is hard to say without seeing the hard data on comparable cases. 

                    • grumpy …
                      24 May 2012 at 2:58 pm

                      …..not forgetting the additional penalty of highly restricted, if not prohibited, international travel.

                      Iti’s days as the darling of Aussie, US and European art circles are completely over.

                    • Adele …
                      25 May 2012 at 7:00 am

                      The sentences imposed on Tame Iti and Te Rangikaiwhiria Kemara are manifestly unfair and speak less about justice and more about the system wanting to exact utu. The judge, in sentencing, spoke more to the crimes they were not convicted on than anything to do with being unlawfully in possession of firearms.

                      Compare the sentences to the fine and community sentence imposed on a Doctor for firing a crossbow within 3 metres of a group of sleeping children; the 2 1/2 year jail sentence for the accidental shooting and killing of Rosemary Ives; the sentence of home detention received by the Wanaka hunter for shooting and killing his best friend. Also compare to the 12 people that were issued with non-compliance notices by Fish and Game for duck hunting without a firearms license.

                      The sentences will go to appeal and if there is justice in the system these men will have their sentences overturned. Grumpy: Iti and Kemara have effectively been martyred and Tame Iti’s international appeal has probably grown more luminescent as a consequence.

                    • higherstandard …
                      25 May 2012 at 9:16 am

                      Given the convictions, the nature of the case and the judges comments Adele what do you think they should have been given ?

                      Do you think they would have been given a lesser sentence if they’d be more open about the what they had been engaged in ?

                    • Adele …
                      27 May 2012 at 1:20 pm

                      Higherstandard

                      You obviously believe Iti, Kemara, Signer and Bailey were ‘thinking acts of terrorism’ or at least ‘crimes against humanity.’ How low is your wattage that you cannot differentiate pulp from fiction? Fiction is in believing that these four neo-liberalised convicts are capable of real acts of terrorism. The pulp is believing that Tame Iti dressed in camouflage makes for a credible Rambo.

                      Tame Iti does not need to resort to terrorism to make his points known. He is the darling of the international twee set, who think it’s ‘très chic’ to have a fully scribed Māori amongst their kind. Indigenous Americans are similarly idolatrised, (every second white person appears to have a ‘native American spirit guide’). Admittedly, there are many within the bourgeois spiritually astute enough to recognise good from bad. Iti and his cohorts are good.

                      Reality TV, however surreptiously created, does not make for good evidence, really. 18 months of covert surveillance and we arrive at a marvellous artform that delivers the following Oscar performances:

                      ”…oh yes, lets assassinate George W Bush, we’ll catapult a bus onto his head…”

                      Bro, where’re we gonna get the bus?

                      Doh!

                      Trademe!

                      or:

                      Bro, we only have one Molotov cocktail.

                      Bro, well, I need the petrol for my car.

                      Bro, your car needs to be catapulted onto GW Bush’s head

                      Bro, that’s not a very nice thing to say about my Holden.

                      Bro, then shoot me with your MSSA (Chorus of chortling in the background followed by a haka).

                      This sentencing has confirmed to the international community that New Zealand is backward in terms of race relations. Paranoia has overtaken critical and reasonable analysis. Although convicted of firearms charges Iti, Kemara, Signer and Bailey were sentenced, in the minds of the ignorant, as terrorists.

                      Precedence establishes what is appropriate sentencing for firearms related charges.

                    • higherstandard …
                      27 May 2012 at 2:01 pm

                      Hi Adele

                      No, I don’t think the Tame and Rangi were ever seriously going to commit acts of terrorism.

                      As I said above I think it was an OTT response by the police to Tame’s usual behaviour which has tended towards the stupid end of the spectrum many times in the past, he is, however, harmless and I can’t recall him ever being accused or convicted of any type of violent offence.

                      I also think many of those he took up into the bush were idiot little anarchists who tend to speak a ‘big game’ but are usually harmless and deluded twits.

                      That being said I’m somewhat conflicted as I do believe a strong message needs to be sent about these type of activities and firearms but I’m not convinced that this sentence is the right way to do it.

  21. DH 21
    24 May 2012 at 12:48 pm

    Who writes the Herald editorials these days? There’s been a number of them lately which have blatantly been pushing National party policy and they’re given authority as editorials which were traditionally the views of the editor of the ‘paper. This one here is a prime example;

    Editorial: Sales good bet for investors, enterprises

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10807947

    It’s nothing more than a brazen attempt to try & refute the growing resistance to asset sales; pure spin. It’s not for the media to tell us what we want, if they’re to take a stand they should be backing public opinion, so why are these biased editorials appearing in the Herald of late? Who’s behind them, anyone know?

  22. HSiu 22
    24 May 2012 at 1:08 pm

    Anyone know what’s going on between Cam Slater (Whale Oil) and [name redacted]?

    http://wonderfulnow.blogspot.co.nz/2012/05/one-more-thing-before-i-go.html

    • dd 22.1
      24 May 2012 at 1:55 pm

      Don’t know but it’s pretty funny/tragic.

      • HSiu 22.1.1
        24 May 2012 at 2:06 pm

        DD – it is.

        Funny as WO is so high and mighty wrt others’ shady dealings.

        Tragic as he has a family and a long-suffering wife.

        Wonder if there’s truth to the allegations.

        Woman in question seems to have taken the blog owner to court for defamation.

        • grumpy 22.1.1.1
          24 May 2012 at 3:03 pm

          Wow, great stuff.

          Readers of Whaleoil will have already put 2 and 2 together and noted his increasing obsession with certain causes.

          • HSiu 22.1.1.1.1
            24 May 2012 at 3:52 pm

            I see – WO’s not very impressed with hetero marriag it seems. He does like to mock the “sanctity of marriage” very much.

        • Jacqueline 22.1.1.2
          24 May 2012 at 3:44 pm

          The woman in question is not taking me to court for defamation for the simple reason that every thing i have stated is true.

          Woman in question is taking me to court after 18 months of putting up with her harassment of me after i supported Slater in staying with his wife and family – for harassment.

          These harassment proceedings were filed prior to me ever naming her on my blog. She has a free lawyer that she likes to use in her pursuit of people that she has real or imagined grievances with.

          I said it on that blog post and i will say it again – i doubt Cameron Slater would want anyone challenging me to prove what i have written.

          • HSiu 22.1.1.2.1
            24 May 2012 at 3:47 pm

            Wow. So you’re claiming Slater cheated on his wife with [name redacted]?

            Why would he? He’s a happily married man.

            • grumpy 22.1.1.2.1.1
              24 May 2012 at 4:01 pm

              ….we haven’t heard from “Spanish Bride” for a very long time…………..

            • Jacqueline 22.1.1.2.1.2
              24 May 2012 at 4:06 pm

              It is a fact.

              Don’t ask me why. I am not an unfaithful married man. How would i know why men do these things.

              I am even more stumped by why he would then sit on the internet airing every one else’s dirty laundry when he has so much of his own – or why she would file harassment proceedings against me because i couldn’t handle having their drama in my life and attempted to end my friendship with her after her suicide attempt when he wouldn’t leave his wife.

              18 months of drama from those two and then i get served with harassment proceedings and [name redacted] goes to the media and claims it is all about Michael Laws.

              I am not about to sit back and take that and i make no apologies for that.

              Cameron’s wife already knows about the affair. [name redacted] emailed her all the gory details – including screenshots of their conversations professing love – when she took offence to him going away with his family over Christmas 2010.

              • HSiu …
                24 May 2012 at 5:09 pm

                Jacqueline – what proof do you hafve?

                • Jacqueline …
                  24 May 2012 at 5:16 pm

                  18 months worth of electronic proof.

                  Don’t even go there…I have proof coming out my ears.

                  • HSiu …
                    24 May 2012 at 5:20 pm

                    no, not proof of her harassing you, but proof Whale Oil cheatd.

                    He’s got himself all high and mighty in his crusades to expose other people – surely he’d cover his own backside?

                    It makes sense now why he thinks marriage is worthless.

                    • dd …
                      24 May 2012 at 5:28 pm

                      I thought whale was some staunch right wing christian. I try my best to ignore him as much as possible so I could be entirely wrong.

                      That is interesting that he thinks marriage is worthless. The guy is just so negative. He must be the most bitter and twisted person in NZ media.

                    • Jacqueline …
                      24 May 2012 at 5:28 pm

                      I have 18 months worth of electronic proof of their affair.

                      Online suicide note by [name redacted] when he refused to leave his wife.
                      Emails from him.
                      Emails from her to him.

                      The whole saga is crazy.

                      One would think if he is going to be high and mighty regarding other people’s morals then he would at least pick someone sane to cheat on his wife with.

                      Instead he picked an absolute psycho,bleated to me about it for 18 months, then ran with his tail between his legs when she harasses me enough to get it printed in the HOS, THEN sits back while his friend Cathy Odgers blogs and laughs about the situation.

                      I thought he was smarter than that as well. Perhaps he has a GOD complex.

                    • HSiu …
                      24 May 2012 at 5:33 pm

                      The HErald article was about Michael Laws, not Slater, I thought.

                    • Jacqueline …
                      24 May 2012 at 5:41 pm

                      The HOS article was about Laws.

                      That suited [name redacted] agenda and was just another in a long line of examples of her harassment of me.

                      None of this is about Laws though and that is why i have blogged the truth.

                    • felix …
                      24 May 2012 at 10:11 pm

                      Why would you want anything to do with that bunch of panty-sniffers anyway?

                      They’re all just going to destroy themselves and each other. Get on with your life and leave them to it.

                      Unless you’re just like the rest of them of course, in which case carry on.

              • mike e …
                24 May 2012 at 11:40 pm

                So why is Cactus Kate of the Alzheimers old Codgers and Tax dodgers Party getting on the case is it because the last of the fundamentalist monetarists are going down the gurgle r and they have to stick together like the captain of a sinking ship.
                Is it mycau this week Cactus the swimming pool must be closed to many sharks circling

                • Jacqueline …
                  25 May 2012 at 7:41 am

                  Felix – I don’t want anything to do with them. I tried to end my “friendship” with [name redacted] who used to Blog on Whale Oil as “Blondie” and for that i have received 18 months worth of her attention and stalking me.

                  When it got to the point that she served me with legal papers that are full of lies because she has a free lawyer and she knows i don’t – and can’t afford one – and then got this whole saga in the media implying it was about Laws – i felt the need to defend myself. It had gotten to the point where i could no longer just delete and ignore her vitriol from my life like i have done for the most part of 18 months.

                  I have quit writing in my own blog because of the element of society that i am not comfortable with – ie the [name redacted], the Madeleine Flannagans, and the Cameron Slaters of this world and their nasty drama that it allowed in to my life.

                  Mike E – no idea why Cathy Odgers felt the need to stir the pot when she knew it was her friend’s cheating that i had been protecting him from being made public for 18 months. Not all that smart but – who knows what goes on in anyone else’s heads.

                  • Te Reo Putake …
                    25 May 2012 at 8:01 am

                    Good on ya, Jacqueline, I hope you get through this drama OK. I guess if there is anything to learn its that you should avoid mentally ill right wingers in future. Although, admittedly, its hard to spot where the politics ends and the illness begins with the likes of Laws.

                    • Jacqueline …
                      25 May 2012 at 8:55 am

                      Thanks Te Reo.

                      Like i said to the editor of the HOS – i have survived worse than this, and i will survive this latest drama.

                      And yes – i digress – mentally ill right wingers should be avoided at all cost. Had i not let Laws into my life – i never would have met Slater – then i never would have met [name redacted] or her Mad lawyer Madeleine Flannagan – and my life would be peaceful right now.

                      They have been like a metastatic cancer in my life…it just keeps spreading.

                      Lesson well and truly learned.

  23. just saying 23
    24 May 2012 at 1:39 pm

    I’m not ususally wild about Geoffry Miller’s stuff, but in this piece, he articulates my feelings in giving Shearer the bollocking he so richly deserves over Shearer’s dealings with fat cats at SkyCity, both in accepting gifts and in cosying-up over leisurely and luxurious dinner parties.

    He’s shaping-up as our own inept and inarticulate version of Tony Blair imo.

    http://liberation.typepad.com/liberation/2012/05/geoffrey-miller-is-taking-gifts-from-lobbyists-ever-a-good-idea.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+typepad%2Fliberationbybryceedwards+%28liberation%29

    Geoffrey Miller: Is taking gifts from lobbyists ever a good idea?

    David Shearer has defended taking free hospitality from SkyCity at the Rugby World Cup by saying he didn’t know at the time about the ‘convention centre for pokie machines deal’. If this is really true, then Shearer is, at the very least, guilty of incompetence, as the deal was announced in June 2011 and he is an Auckland MP. The deal was covered by the media at the time in June 2011. The alternative is somewhat worse for Shearer, namely that he was in fact fully aware of the news of the deal in June 2011, but somehow, in May 2012, fell victim to the rather contagious and virulent malady spreading through the New Zealand parliament: the ‘cannot recall’ disease…

  24. dd 24
    24 May 2012 at 1:57 pm

    DC was good one backbencher’s. As was Norman (As usual).

  25. McFlock 25
    24 May 2012 at 2:54 pm

    Nah, like I said, you’ve been inflating their crime to justify the punishment. Don’t start going all peteg now…

    • TheContrarian 25.1
      24 May 2012 at 2:58 pm

      “you’ve been inflating their crime to justify the punishment” 

      You idiot – the crime being judged has a maximum of fours years. I didn’t inflate that, that is what the law says. 

      • McFlock 25.1.1
        24 May 2012 at 3:30 pm

        Indeed. But the sentence for two people with a collection of automatic weapons or even MSSA’s would reasonably be a bit stronger than for people with the same number of .22 non-MSSA semi-autos and some non-MSSA shotguns, wouldn’t it.

        Like I say, you’re inflating the crime to justify the sentence. Or if you want to get all object-oriented, you’re inflating this instance of crime in order to justify this instance of sentence.

        Personally I don’t see why you’re getting so worked up on being called a defender of the establishment – I mean it simply describes your stretching of interpretation in this particular instance, such as bringing automatic weapons into the discussion about a case that involved none. Now you’re all embarrassed, like a teenager who gets called out on the fact that he’s been fawning blatantly over another cute teenager.

        • TheContrarian 25.1.1.1
          24 May 2012 at 3:33 pm

          Apart from when the judge mentioned said automatic weapons (granted they were semi-automatic).

          Why would I need to justify the sentence? It doesn’t bother what they get. What does bother me is the rabid attitude of people like you.

          • Jackal 25.1.1.1.1
            24 May 2012 at 3:37 pm

            People like McFlock? I doubt you’ve ever met McFlock as I’m sure he/she doesn’t slither under rocks like you The Conformist.

          • McFlock 25.1.1.1.2
            24 May 2012 at 3:38 pm

            Look up the difference between “automatic” and “semi-automatic”. A marked escalation right there.

            “Rabid attitude”? All I’ve done is point out that you managed to shift the level of the crimes for which they were convicted from one case of a restricted weapon (the molotov) and a few not-uncommon firearm possession charges up to everybody having automatic weapons with hi-cap mags. And you get all defensive.

            • TheContrarian 25.1.1.1.2.1
              24 May 2012 at 3:42 pm

              “All I’ve done is point out that you managed to shift the level of the crimes for which they were convicted from one case of a restricted weapon (the molotov) and a few not-uncommon firearm possession charges up to everybody having automatic weapons with hi-cap mags.”

              What utter bullshit. There were auto weapons (semi-auto granted) I never mentioned magazines. I never shifted anything – all I pointed out was that 2.5 years didn’t seem excessive considering the max is 4. Then there was a dispute about the weapons of which I was quite clear that I was running from memory and asking for clarification. But what ever, you win.

              Congratulations. You may now go chuckle about it. 

              • McFlock …
                24 May 2012 at 3:57 pm

                “There were auto weapons (semi-auto granted)”

                “Semi-automatic”: one trigger depression, one bang.
                “Automatic”: one trigger depression, many bangs.

                A significant functional and legislative difference. Semi-autos are fine. Automatics are “restricted”. That is why there was only ONE “restricted weapon” charge – for the molotov. Not for any of the firearms.

                You argued that a sentence of 2 or 3 times the average firearms possession jail sentence was not particularly harsh for possession of “unregistered, illegally modified military weapons”. At least one of those adjectives was false. And you get all persnickety when called on it.

                • TheContrarian …
                  24 May 2012 at 4:06 pm

                  I already agreed, sometime ago, to drop the “illegally modified adjective as incorrect.  

                  Semi-autos are not fine as laid out under the firearms law where Semi-Auto are only to be used or owned by those with a special license.

                  The maximum charge for the offences is 4 years.

                  Iti received a 2.5 concurrent sentence for all charges.

                  Iti should be out much earlier on parole

                  I don’t care how long he gets and am certainly not interested in “inflating the crime to justify the sentence” 

                  Its a moot point because you won the discussion and should be chuckling.
                   

                  • McFlock …
                    24 May 2012 at 6:49 pm

                    lols.

                    Love that – discussion is over but you thought you’d repeat your side anyway.

                    Far from chuckling, I’m still amazed that you chose to make such a categorical statement about which you obviously know absolutely nothing. And I’m pretty sure that’s not much of an exagerration, if at all.

                    For example, semi-automatic firearms are legally fine, exactly the same as bolt action rifles or even a muzzle-loading black powder musket. I think you might be confusing all semi-automatics with “military-style semi automatics”, which are at a higher level of licensing than most firearms (but still not “restricted weapons”, which are another class of no-nos). The latter include things like folding stocks, bayonet lugs (to stick a knife on the end of the weapon), high capacity magazine (the bullet holder holds lots of bullets), and pistol-style hand grips.

                    So the degree of the offense which justified a sentence 2 or 3 times longer than the average for the same offense was “unregistered” – which is hardly out of the ordinary for an unlawful possession charge.

                    There is the matter of the single molotov, but it seems to me that much of the sentencing rests on the judge having the feeling that they really did in fact commit the other crimes of which they were actually acquitted. But they seem to have pretty capable lawyers to sort that out.

              • Pascal's bookie …
                24 May 2012 at 4:05 pm

                “edit: Unregistered, illegally modified military weapons.”

                That’s how you introduced your false decription of what they convicted of. The context was clear enough. Jackal was saying unregistered weapons, and you were saying it was a bit more than that.

                You later admitted that you didn’t actually know what you were talking aboput and that it was all based on some video you’d seen.

                if you don’t care what sentence they got, why have you been provoking arguments and insulting people who do have an opinion about it?

                Hint: the 4 year max is a red herring. No one was saying that they were sentenced above the max. People are just saying tthat they think 2 1/2 years is steep for what they were convicted on, which is fair enough isn’t it?

                • TheContrarian …
                  24 May 2012 at 4:07 pm

                  Hey man, how’s it going?

                • higherstandard …
                  24 May 2012 at 4:48 pm

                  Here’s the police’s view which is worth a look.

                  • Jackal …
                    24 May 2012 at 5:04 pm

                    That’s nice HS but we already know that most of the police case was bullpucky! It’s interesting though that Peter Marshall says there was no explanation given as to what the accused were doing in the Ruatoki, which is a complete lie!

                    We raided because somebody said they were going to catapult a bus onto John Keys head… it was a serious investigation. Yeah right!

      • Jackal 25.1.2
        24 May 2012 at 3:32 pm

        However it appears that the judge took into consideration the charges that were dismissed and not the harm already caused to the accused. Therefore I think McFlock’s statement is correct. The punishment handed down does not fit the crimes committed.

  26. Morrissey 26
    24 May 2012 at 3:22 pm

    The worst and the best of humanity

    Read this and you’ll weep, but you’ll cheer up when you reflect that there are people in the world like Sahar Vardi….

    http://972mag.com/author/lisa/

  27. captain hook 27
    24 May 2012 at 3:22 pm

    hey idot..
    yes you.
    who let you call other people idiots?
    just because you are one does not mean that you know one.

    • TheContrarian 27.1
      24 May 2012 at 3:29 pm

      yeah because I am the guy inflating crimes to justify them getting two years. Do I look like a fucking judge?

      • McFlock 27.1.1
        24 May 2012 at 3:32 pm

        nope. You look like a guy talking about automatic weapons and MSSAs when the case involved neither. Very close to the latter, but nope.

    • higherstandard 27.2
      24 May 2012 at 3:31 pm

      Nice, sort of a haiku version of “I know you are but what am I”

      I really miss the infantalisation diatribes though.

    • prism 27.3
      24 May 2012 at 9:18 pm

      I thought I’d trace the original remark that captain hook was replying to on 27 at 3.22pm. And it was at 2.58 on 25.1 by The Contrarian and there were 19 comments in between, at varying times as late as 7.09 pm.

      It would be easier to connect comment and reply if replies noted the name of the commenter they were reacting to.

  28. Sam Hall 28
    24 May 2012 at 5:14 pm

    I found the rhetoric today very passionate,”well written”. Trev putting the boot into the bully boys while they are down.
    Everyone SPEAK TRUTH TO POWER.
    There may be a vacuum for a Democratic Socialist Coalition.

    Great to see the students getting some adaptive benefit from a liberal education and recognising and speaking truth to intergenerational theft.
    ALL THE RESEARCH, is suggesting the Western Baby Boomer Generation to have been the most self-interested, prolifligate the world has seen since the ascendence of the Catholic Churches, and those offspring they have indulged to be lifting their narcissism to new levels.

    • Carol 28.1
      24 May 2012 at 5:19 pm

      What research? citations or links, please?

    • Colonial Viper 28.2
      24 May 2012 at 6:53 pm

      A Democratic Socialist Coalition.

      Now that’s an idea. Ironically, it would require a few million in funding to make a difference.

  29. Pascal's bookie 29
    24 May 2012 at 9:54 pm

    I know Steve Keen has fans here-abouts,
    and in case any of y’all are not regular listeners of Kim Hill’s radio show of a saturday morning,
    the lovely Mark Cubey reports via the twittering machine
    that Keen and Hill had a rather interesting discussion,
    which will be braoadcast this coming saturday.

    https://twitter.com/markcubey/status/205594861766836224

  30. prism 30
    24 May 2012 at 9:59 pm

    George Carlin has just been in full spate.
    He said that there are some great ideas about how things ought to be in the country – it’s called the American dream because you have to be asleep to believe in it.
    The country is actually owned by a big club – and You Aren’t In It!