Open mike 27/03/2012

69 comments on “Open mike 27/03/2012 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Kotahi Tane Huna 1

   27 March 2012 at 6:29 am

   Day two of Huaweigate. As Prime Minister, it’s important not to comment on security matters, but it is an opportunity to look like Jason Bourne.

   “”I haven’t had any information that would concern me this morning…we have very deep intelligence links, we operate in an environment where we have very good information.”

   Well informed operators’ donkey deep intelligence links notwithstanding, you have to admire the meaningless ambiguity of the first remark.
   • Pete George 1.1

     27 March 2012 at 6:58 am

     From the same article:

     Green MP Gareth Hughes said Parliament’s security and intelligence committee should investigate.

     “If there are these security concerns, that’s the appropriate forum to look into it.”

     The state was handing over a significant amount of money in broadband contracts – $1 billion in total – and should satisfy itself that “we are not being snooped on by the Chinese Government”, he said.

     Greens seem to have a bit of a “pick on the Chinese” obsession. That’s curious as both have some communist roots.

     If we are worried about being snooped on by technology providers shouldn’t we be suspicious of all provider countries?

     What if a country like the US ended up with too much business influence on selective arrests and shutting down of competitive companies?

     A lot of our international communications come and go via Australia. Perhaps they attach sublimal messages like:
     “Move to Australia. Move to Australia.”
     “Don’t catch up with our wages.”
     “Use the Auckland wharfies as a test for how to deal to ours”.

     And Finland, well, who knows what all those little Nokias tell them?
     • mickysavage 1.1.1

       27 March 2012 at 7:16 am

       Petey, petey, petey, petey …

       Off on your morning troll I see.

       1.  Greens are not obsessed with Chinese.  Your rascist dog whistle is disgraceful.
       2.  Greens do not have communist roots.  They are from the environmental movement, you should learn some politics it can be fun and helps when you enter debates.
       3.  Every lefty that I know is suspicious about all technology providers, including the Americans.
       4.  If the US has too much business influence it is a bad thing.
       5.  The only person appearing to receive subliminal messages is you.  You should seek professional help.
       6.  And Finland, wonderful country, wonderful people with a determination to have the best education system in the world.  Something we should aim for. 
       • Fortran 1.1.1.1

         27 March 2012 at 1:23 pm

         Having traded with the Finns they, like the Norwegians, are very dour people with no sense of humour, unless they are plastered, which takes little to do.

         I understand that Brownass’s comments are correct re murder rate, unemployment and GDP.
         Checkout website for finland.
         • lprent 1.1.1.1.1

           27 March 2012 at 1:38 pm

           So? In each case of Brownlee’s cherry picked statistics the differences are low when you consider that Finland extends into the artic whereas we’re blessed with a nice temperate climate and the easy farming to build our economy on. They did it despite their climate with more efficiency as anyone who has dealt with the tech from Finland is aware.

           It was noticeable for instance that Brownlee said that we spent more on education, without also pointing out that we get worse results. Since he is part of a government that is intent on producing increasing how bad the results are, I guess it is hardly surprising that he forgot that.

           The satirist above is right about our sheep, brownlee’s BMI, and that Brownlee is a complete dumbarse fuckwit. Of course those are also cherry picked and I don’t like being kiwi’s being defined internationally by such a dickhead as out leader of parliament like Brownlee.
         • Vicky32 1.1.1.1.2

           27 March 2012 at 6:14 pm

           Having traded with the Finns they, like the Norwegians, are very dour people with no sense of humour, unless they are plastered, which takes little to do.

           Ah well, I am not a businessman! But I do have Finnish friends, and one in particular, was very very funny – but his sense of humour was dry and perhaps a wee bit subtle for you..
           (I am just hearing the Finnish comedian talking to Brownlee – hilarious! “We have Nokia – you have sheep. We have Angry Birds, you have sheep”)
     • Pascal's bookie 1.1.2

       27 March 2012 at 7:18 am

       Why so nasty Pete?

       The greens are pretty consistent on this stuff. Where do they stand on Echelon for example?

       Instead of just smearing them by implying they are racist communists, why not address the issues.

       The Australians think there is sometrhing untoward, enough so thatthey risk a diplomatic incident about it. Do you not think that is something we should at least look into?
     • RedLogix 1.1.3

       27 March 2012 at 7:20 am

       PG,

       You may want to peruse this cautionary tale from the NYT:

       “If a company has significant intellectual property that the Chinese and Russians are interested in, and you go over there with mobile devices, your devices will get penetrated,” said Joel F. Brenner, formerly the top counterintelligence official in the office of the director of national intelligence.

       Theft of trade secrets was long the work of insiders — corporate moles or disgruntled employees. But it has become easier to steal information remotely because of the Internet, the proliferation of smartphones and the inclination of employees to plug their personal devices into workplace networks and cart proprietary information around. Hackers’ preferred modus operandi, security experts say, is to break into employees’ portable devices and leapfrog into employers’ networks — stealing secrets while leaving nary a trace.

       Facts are very hard to come by in this arena. No doubt there is an element of paranoia in the West; equally though the complete lack of transparency and accountability on the part of the Chinese (and other governments) justifies taking a cautious approach.

       Frankly the problem is these days is that no-one, anywhere can assume that they have not been penetrated. While proven cyber-attacks on infra-structure, as per the Stuxnet on the Iranian uranium enrichment facilities are so far rare, by far the most valuable targets would generally have to be commercial. All sorts of commercial and intellectual property that you and I would find boring and tedious, suddenly becomes very useful to the right person in the right context. And much of this information is very loosely secured.

       Moreover with the immense complexity of modern devices it is exceedingly difficult for end-users or even experts, to assure themselve that their systems have not been penetrated or riddled with back-doors.

       There are one hell of lot more very open questions than answers in this field at the moment, and I’m not confident that things will ever improve much in my lifetime.
       • Pete George 1.1.3.1

         27 March 2012 at 7:33 am

         You get it, I agree with your comments, I have much the same concerns. But maybe you could explain more simply to MS.
         • Pascal's bookie 1.1.3.1.1

           27 March 2012 at 7:37 am

           More nastiness Pete? 🙁

           Your first comment certainly didn’t seem to say you agreed with the Greens. It looked like you were dismissing their concerns, but that’s only because of the way you phrased it.

           Perhaps when you agree with someone, you shouldn’t go out of your way to be nasty towards them, and that way people won’t get confused as to what you are saying.

           Just a thought.
           • Pete George 1.1.3.1.1.1

             27 March 2012 at 7:46 am

             I think, particularly considering what is common here, you may be overplaying the ‘nastiness’ thing a tad?

             There are well known communist influences within the NZ Green Party.

             The Greens have been vocal against things like Chinese ownership of NZ land. And trade deals. And Russel Norman has a bit of a history of anti-Chinese protesting and flag disputes.

             Do you think these are all just isolated cases and the Greens anti-ness is balanced across a wide range of countries?
             • Janice …

               27 March 2012 at 8:41 am

               Oxymoron “Pete George – I think”
             • thatguynz …

               27 March 2012 at 10:23 am

               The Greens have been vocal against things like foreign ownership of NZ land. And fair trade deals.
                
               There – FIFY Pete.
           • Pete George 1.1.3.1.1.2

             27 March 2012 at 7:48 am

             Am I flagged on automoderation? My posts seem to be ‘awaiting moderation’ this morning.

             [lprent: Nope. They weren’t there when I looked so I suspect that you were just getting caught in delays to akismet from our server. When it fails to get a fast enough response the system automatically moderates it and then retries a short time later. If gets success within a some time/attempts it also auto-releases it.

             The two times I’ve looked at it, it looks like the actual delay was in the routing out of NZ rather than at the akismet server. ]
             • mickysavage …

               27 March 2012 at 8:06 am

               It is the machine Petey, it is out to get you …

               PS the repeated use of the word “Commun1st” will also do it.

               This sort of obsessional behavior went out in the 1970s.  Or so I thought …
               • Pascal's bookie …

                 27 March 2012 at 8:22 am

                 Pete George (12,710) Says:

                 March 27th, 2012 at 8:03 am
                 Of watermelons and chinese gooseberries….

                 KBs general debate thread, and Pete jumps right in with his nasty little smear, speaking to the choir, hoping for an ‘attaboy’.
                 • Pete George …

                   27 March 2012 at 9:13 am

                   I often post similar here and SB (and also blog) – it’s a good way of comparing responses.

                   You seem ultra sensitve PB. You’ve used the ‘nasty’ word again, and ‘smear’, how long have you been coming here? From yesterday:

                   Over time, you tend to become – to some degree – influenced by the company you keep. If you are by nature a normal well-adjusted individual, then frequenting The Standard too much will, over a period of months, negatively influence you and change you for the worse.

                   I insisted I was strong enough to resist.
                   • Pascal's bookie …

                     27 March 2012 at 9:31 am

                     What is your point pete?

                     I’m saying you are an un self aware hypocrit, who complains about nastiness while smearing and attacking people here all the time.

                     As an example, I’ve used your attack on the Greens here.

                     I’ve never said that you shouldn’t be nasty, I’ve simply said that you are, and that you seem to be unaware of that.

                     It’s an argument, with a conclusion. that being “Pete’s constant attacks on people here about ‘nastiness’ are hypocritical hogwash”

                     what is it that you are trying to say? That I’m a hypocrite?

                     nb: I’m not attacking you for being nasty, I’m calling you a hypocrite.
                   • Pete George …

                     27 March 2012 at 9:49 am

                     You might have a point if what I said was nasty. I made general (and relatively mild) political comments with no personal attacks.

                     However your continued accusations of nastiness directed at me could easily be seen as, well, a bit nasty. And hypocritical.
                   • Pascal's bookie …

                     27 March 2012 at 9:55 am

                     Pete, you insinuated that the Greens were acting out of some sort of anti-Chinese prejudice, ie, that they are racist, and dragged ‘commun1sm’ into it. The intent of that was clear enough without you using the watermelon phrase over at KB.

                     So your repsonse to the issue raised was simply that the Greens are racist commun1sts.

                     I think that’s pretty nasty.

                     And again, I’m not attacking you for being nasty, but for being a hypocrite.

                     How does that make me a hypocrite?

                     Once again, you simply ignore the argument being made, and resort to attacking the speaker.

                     Just as you do, all day, every day.
                   • Pete George …

                     27 March 2012 at 10:28 am

                     Haha, accusing me of “attacking the speaker”. Here.

                     “I’m not attacking you for being nasty,” no, of course not, how many comments have you posted today using the nasty word? Your very first one was “Why so nasty Pete?”

                     Sorry, I hadn’t realised you were joking. You have a nasty sense of humour,.
                   • felix …

                     27 March 2012 at 10:32 am

                     He’s not attacking you for being nasty, Pete, he’s stating the bleeding obvious: that you say some awful nasty things here on a very regular basis.

                     That’s not attacking you any more than I’m attacking the sky by calling it blue.
                   • Pascal's bookie …

                     27 March 2012 at 10:37 am

                     Once gain, yuo’ve missed the point, but I’ll not go over it again.

                     But just to clear, are you saying that calling someone nasty, is itself, nasty?
           • Pascal's bookie 1.1.3.1.1.3

             27 March 2012 at 8:14 am

             I think, particularly considering what is common here, you may be overplaying the ‘nastiness’ thing a tad?

             Not at all pete. You are the one that regularly decries what you call ‘nastiness’ You have made many comments attacking ‘the left’ for it’s ‘nastiness’. You pop in here, call everyone nasty, and pop over to KB and talk about how ‘nasty’ everyone is to you here.

             I don’t think I’m ‘overplaying’ it even a little bit. I’m simply pointing out a fact.

             There are well known communist influences within the NZ Green Party.

             Really?

             So the fact that some members of the greens used to be communist means there are currently ‘communist influences within the NZ Green Party’? Could you point to where the Green party has advocated the nationalisation of the means of production ad exchange, or the abolishment of private property as a concept, or the establshment of a one party state?

             What about Peter Dunnes party? Shouls we examone the political beliefs of evry candidate and MP they have ever had, looking at what they believed in their early years and talk about what that currently tells us about United Futures ‘influences’? I don’t think that would make sense, unless one was looking to make a nasty little smear.

             The Greens have been vocal against things like Chinese ownership of NZ land. And trade deals. And Russel Norman has a bit of a history of anti-Chinese protesting and flag disputes.

             Do you think these are all just isolated cases and the Greens anti-ness is balanced across a wide range of countries?

             They aren’t isolated cases, you are isolating them. the greens have policies about things like military occupations, soveriegnty, self determination, free trade and the like. And yes, they are consistent about them.

             You are ignoring that fact in order to make your little attack about racist communists. Trevor Louden would be proud of you.
             • Pascal's bookie …

               27 March 2012 at 9:57 am

               Perhaps you could try responding to this post Pete, explaining why you ignored the Greens policies in favour of assuming an anti-chinese bias.
2. mickysavage 2

   27 March 2012 at 7:11 am

   The first school PPP has been announced.  Learning Infrastructure Limited has the nod to enter into negotiations to build two schools in Hobsonville.

   One of the directors of this company is David McConnell, a St Stephens Ave fellow resident with the Prime Minister and a Committee for Auckland member as well as being the chair of ATEED and heavily involved in the McConnell group.

   The aim is to achieve value for money but in this case the value is thought to be
   1% over the course of the contract.  Makes you wonder why they are bothering.
   • Tc 2.1

     27 March 2012 at 8:09 am

     More public money for their private objectives, got any more public assets they could have also?
   • marsman 2.2

     27 March 2012 at 8:28 am

     Education for profit.
     • McFlock 2.2.1

       27 March 2012 at 11:39 am

       education for one of key’s neighbour’s profit, it looks like.
       • marsman 2.2.1.1

         27 March 2012 at 2:47 pm

         Exactly.
3. logie97 3

   27 March 2012 at 7:53 am

   KEY TO CHALLENGE OTHER COUNTRIES TO REDUCE NUCLEAR STOCKS
   http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10794836
   …Prime Minister John Key says he will use his four minute speaking slot at the Nuclear Security Summit today to challenge other countries to do more to reduce their stocks of nuclear materials and weapons…

   Why doesn’t he go the whole hog and invite the nations of the world to follow the “proud-of-our-position” example and declare themselves Nuclear Free.
   • locus 3.1

     27 March 2012 at 8:43 am

     Well let’s wait until we hear what he’s got to say, but i’m guessing it will not be something that might upset th US. Has jk ever spoken from the heart about why he is opposed to nuclear powered warships & weapons? I can’t help thinking that when he committed national to retain the law to keep nuclear warships out, it was a political slither to appease the majority of nz public. Do you think he’s got the guts or smarts to make an empassioned speech persuading all non-nuclear nations to join NZ in becoming nuclear free and to totally oppose nuclear powered or equipped warships? No, I think his 4 minutes on the world stage is not going to light any fires.
     • rosy 3.1.1

       27 March 2012 at 8:58 am

       “Has jk ever spoken from the heart… “ …Nope, he doesn’t have one.
     • muzza 3.1.2

       27 March 2012 at 9:27 am

       I think rosy could very well be right…

       “No, I think his 4 minutes on the world stage is not going to light any fires”

       It is 4 minutes on the global stage though, and that is, really what egomaniacs love most!
4. Rosie 4

   27 March 2012 at 8:26 am

   Just as a complete aside:

   Another international effort has been made to help the POAL workers. This time from Labourstart.

   Here is their petition to Len Brown to sign. Some may feel cyncial about this but it’s worth a crack isn’t it?

   http://www.labourstart.org/cgi-bin/solidarityforever/show_campaign.cgi?c=1329&src=lsmm
5. just saying 5

   27 March 2012 at 8:36 am

   Why Labour could easily fund their election campaigns without selling-out to big business. But won’t:

   Tithing. Even now, a ten to 15 percent tithe on MP salaries could bring in 500,000. (I haven’t done exact sums because I can’t be arsed researching how much each one “earns”.) The fact that these representatives prefer to grease-up and be indebted to the oligarchs says it all.

   I do realise a bit more than this is required, but it wouldn’t require moving mountains to raise the rest.
   • Te Reo Putake 5.1

     27 March 2012 at 9:28 am

     The MP’s already contribute at levels similar to that and campaigns cost a hell of a lot more than $500,000. Any other half thought out ideas?
     • just saying 5.1.1

       27 March 2012 at 10:11 am

       You’re saying Labour MP’s kicked in about $500,000? to last year’s election campaign

       Won’t bother even asking for a link. How much did Labour spend on its whole campaign outside of allotted parliamentary funds again?

       I don’t believe you.
       • just saying 5.1.1.1

         27 March 2012 at 10:22 am

         Labour spent 1.75 million.

         You’re saying MP’s contributed nearly a third of the whole budget?
         • Colonial Viper 5.1.1.1.1

           27 March 2012 at 12:04 pm

           I didn’t see Team Macmillan BMW donating $150K to the Labour Party. Did you?
           • just saying 5.1.1.1.1.1

             27 March 2012 at 12:08 pm

             I should bloody hope not…..

             …..But the way things stand, frankly, it wouldn’t surprise me if they did.
             • Rob …

               27 March 2012 at 12:41 pm

               Kind of sad for labour really, given that they set up the original deal.
           • David H 5.1.1.1.1.2

             27 March 2012 at 12:57 pm

             Yeah but they did give ol’ Shonky and co about 50 grand didn’t they?
6. Pascal's bookie 6

   27 March 2012 at 9:36 am

   Ernie Abbott, killed, 27.3.84. RIP

   http://www.nzhistory.net.nz/wellington-trades-hall-bombing
   • Te Reo Putake 6.1

     27 March 2012 at 10:56 am

     Living up the road as I was at the time, I heard the explosion that killed Ernie Abbott. It still rankles that the Police appeared to put in the minimum possible effort in investigating the killing. Presumably they didn’t see killing a unionist as much of a crime, anyway. Happily, that wouldn’t be the case nowadays and the Police will cheerfully devote massive resources to helping National win elections, sorry, investigate crimes involving teapots.
     • Pete George 6.1.1

       27 March 2012 at 12:16 pm

       Presumably they didn’t see killing a unionist as much of a crime, anyway.

       I think that’s quite a nasty ‘presumption’ aimed at the police.

       The killing of Ernie Abbott was terrible, even if killing him was unintentional the bombing was terrible regardless.

       I presume the police would have done as much as they can to solve the murder. PB’s link refers to a “lengthy police investigations”. And…

       A $25,000 reward – then the largest ever put up in New Zealand – was offered for information that led to the capture of those responsible for the bombing. This was doubled to $50,000 in 1985.

       http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/334315/Trades-Hall-bombing-remains-unsolved-24-years-on

       …suggests the level of intent to try and solve it.
       • Te Reo Putake 6.1.1.1

         27 March 2012 at 1:31 pm

         Not everything is nasty, Pete, though I suppose being in the backseat of Peter Dunne’s car that time may have left a nasty taste in your mouth that still affects your perception.
          
         The coppers putting up a reward is an indication that they have no clues about who planted the bomb. That’s because they never put a proper effort into finding the killer in the first place. Their initial response was to blame other unionists and they refused to monitor movements at the airports, despite a strong rumour that the killer was flown in from Sydney to do the job. Their efforts were decried as pitiful at the time, and they really, really tried hard to do nothing. Because, as I noted, they didn’t think unionists dying was such a big deal. That atitude was also evident in the killing of Christine Clark a few years back. They had to be shamed into laying charges and even then, they let him get away with a wet bus ticket style conviction.
          
7. DH 7

   27 March 2012 at 10:37 am

   A brief glimpse behind the scenes of the Reserve Bank;

   http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10793869

   This is the interesting part;

   “In the lead-up to the crisis, the Reserve Bank kept warning the banks about how they were running their business,” he remembers.

   “Every time [governor Alan] Bollard came out and warned them, he would get a visit from each of the bank heads from Australia, who would tell Bollard, in no uncertain terms, not to tell them how to run their business.”

   Translated that says the Aussies were bullying the head of our Reserve Bank. What’s left unsaid is what kind of threats they made; there had to be threats to fit that scenario.
8. MikeG 8

   27 March 2012 at 11:59 am

   What is the Minister of Tourism doing about this?

   hundreds sleeping at Chch airport
   • tc 8.1

     27 March 2012 at 12:10 pm

     Being comfortable and relaxed basking in his ego on the world stage, it’s why he took the job.
   • David H 8.2

     27 March 2012 at 1:00 pm

     Nothing he’s just off playing at being an important person.
9. felix 9

   27 March 2012 at 1:00 pm

   So is Key back for work today?

   Couple of important questions for him to answer in the house, so probably not. And he takes every Thursday off, so that’s definitely out.

   Reckon we might get ONE day of participation in democracy from the lazy pompous sack o shite this week or will he be too busy in Hawaii tomorrow?
10. Fortran 10

    27 March 2012 at 1:30 pm

    We will all learn what the Greens are after the 2014 election when Labour has to go into coalition with the Greens.
    Unfortuantely Labour will not get enough seats to govern alone.
    The Winston Party will be history. Hone will do anything.
    So it will be left to the Greens to take the reins to do whatever they want.
    • Colonial Viper 10.1

      27 March 2012 at 2:46 pm

      The Winston Party will be history.

      And who said you guys were slow learners.
11. Gareth 11

    27 March 2012 at 1:33 pm

    There has been some talk about the future of trade once peak oil takes in particular less trade and heading back to wind and steam power.
    I tend to think that we will see nuclear powered super freighters come to the fore, the tech is there and I’m sure that there will be a tipping point where it becomes cheaper than bunker oil burning ships.
    At a guess i would say they would be able to make much larger freighters than the current ones judging by the size of aircraft carriers etc.
    I suspect that this will be the end of our non nuclear status or it will most certainly put a lot of pressure on it.
    What becomes of the waste is anyone’s guess. Dump site on mars?
    • Colonial Viper 11.1

      27 March 2012 at 2:54 pm

      I tend to think that we will see nuclear powered super freighters come to the fore, the tech is there and I’m sure that there will be a tipping point where it becomes cheaper than bunker oil burning ships.

      .

      Wow. You’re “sure” that there will be a “tipping point”???

      Just like when its too expensive to run trucks on diesel there will be a “tipping point” to start putting nuclear reactors in trucks?

      Sorry mate it’s SF fantasy you are proposing, just like your refuse dump site on Mars. There isn’t the money nor the physical resources and infrastructure around to build hundreds of nuclear powered freight ships.

      Coal steamers and sail ships are the way it will go.
    • Bored 11.2

      27 March 2012 at 3:10 pm

      Gareth, I will take a kindly viewpoint on your nuclear idea because there are a lot of people out there who believe this type of thing is a goer, a techno cure. Would that it was real and true as well, it would be fantastic news.

      BUT….there is always a but. Conventional nuclear is all that’s available now and it has two very bad things that work against it.

      One is EROEI (Google it)..unfortunately all the fuel and energy you use to get the iron, heavy metals, uranium, the processing etc etc, embedded energy totals etc and the energy return is not good. We would be better off just using the fuel / energy conventionally, we would go further.

      Another is that spent fuel rods need to be stored in controlled for many thousands of years before they are stable…cost who knows…that also requires politically stable conditions…how long did the longest know polity yet last.. Rome…where did they go?
      • Colonial Viper 11.2.1

        27 March 2012 at 7:40 pm

        Plus I will be surprised if affordable world uranium stocks last 30 years at current (let alone increasing) usage
12. Dave Kennedy 12

    27 March 2012 at 2:21 pm

    I have just invented a new game, it’s called spot the veges in John Key’s garden:
    http://localbodies-bsprout.blogspot.co.nz/2012/03/politics-and-pumpkins.html
    • Janice 12.1

      27 March 2012 at 5:34 pm

      I didn’t see any vegies, I also didn’t see any childproof fence around the swimming pool. Having the pool open to the house is not allowed, as my daughter found out and had to put a fence between the house and pool, even though it was closer to the house than Johnny’s. Does the ACC have different rules for different suburbs?
      • Dave Kennedy 12.1.1

        27 March 2012 at 5:57 pm

        Obviously different rules and expectations. If you read the article I linked to, Janice, Key lives in a huge mansion with a separate pool house yet his bodyguards were having to live in a camper van. This was an old article and things may have changed, but somehow I doubt it-especially after the revelations about his parliamentary cleaner.
      • Dave Kennedy 12.1.2

        27 March 2012 at 5:59 pm

        Perhaps we should start a new game called “Spot the Pool Fence” 🙂
13. Vicky32 13

    27 March 2012 at 6:21 pm

    I’ve never said that you shouldn’t be nasty, I’ve simply said that you are, and that you seem to be unaware of that.

    Pot. Kettle. Black, PB.. Man you are sometimes extremely nasty and potty-mouthed. I’ve copped shit storms from you for daring to disagree, and so has PG, not that I usually agree with him…
    • Pascal's bookie 13.1

      27 March 2012 at 6:56 pm

      I don’t deny that I’m nasty sometimes though. Pete however, makes great play about the nastiness he finds here.

      The discussion today was more like:

      Pot goes on and on about kettle being black and how disappointing that is, and how if kettles would only refrain from being so blackity black black black, pots like him would like them more

      Kettle says “Umm, you’re black.That’s kind of hypocritical there”

      Pot responds by saying ” Woah, you called me black, what a hypocrite, you’re as black as, you’re being black right now. Why are calling me black, that’s so black of you?”

      Change Pot for pete, kettle for me, and black for nasty, and you’ve got how I see this ‘debate’.
      • vto 13.1.1

        27 March 2012 at 7:04 pm

        someone once told me that patience was a virtue. would that apply here?
        • Pascal's bookie 13.1.1.1

          27 March 2012 at 7:10 pm

          There’s another saying about making a virtue out of a necessity 😉
    • Bored 13.2

      27 March 2012 at 7:53 pm

      Vicky, what is really nasty is the results of the types of things PG and other RWNJs ascribe as good policy etc. They own the ideas, impose them on us and it gets personal.

      An example. PGs beloved Peter Dunne votes for the Nat sell off of assets, power prices go up and some oldies can no longer afford to stay warm. Thats nasty. Its real, and its personal.

      So when I and others sound nasty, well thats just tough tit. Harden up and call a spade a spade, I for one cant be bothered wussing around with nasty tyrants like PG.
14. Draco T Bastard 14

    28 March 2012 at 1:31 am

    Ooops

    They include offers to share content and to join advertising deals, and show studios attempting to strike deals.

    A Warner Bros staff member sought an automated upload service, with an email asking: “We would like to upload our content all at once instead of one video at a time.”

    The site that they were trying to get deals with? MegaUpLoad.

Links to post

1. HostPound.com: posted on 4 April 2012 at 9:01 am

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS