Open mike 29/10/13

Written By: - Date published: 7:50 am, October 29th, 2013 - 222 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

openmike

Open mike is your post. For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose. The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy). Step right up to the mike…

222 comments on “Open mike 29/10/13 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. LynWiper 1
    29 October 2013 at 8:03 am

    Child poverty expert goes it alone

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11147721

    Children’s Commissioner Dr Russell Wills has decided to publish his own annual stocktake of child poverty after the Government spurned his call to publish official measures and targets.

    His first annual update will be published in December with analysis by experts at Otago University, edited by a private communications company and totally funded by a $525,000 grant from the philanthropic Wellington-based JR McKenzie Trust.

    He said the project would not involve any taxpayers’ money and he did not need to get it signed off by Social Development Minister Paula Bennett, who appointed him in 2011 for a five-year term.

    Well done Dr Wills and the JR McKenzie Trust. Thank you Simon Collins for an informative article.

    • Jim Nald 1.1
      29 October 2013 at 11:09 am

      +1

    • Rogue Trooper 1.2
      29 October 2013 at 11:12 am

      Thanks LynW

    • vto 1.3
      29 October 2013 at 11:17 am

      I wonder why this horrible government doesn’t want an annual stocktake on child poverty?

      Would it be the same reason that this horrible government doesn’t want an annual stocktake on the environment? Perhaps the Commissioner for the Environment should also go it alone.

      Horrible people in this government that is for sure.

  2. LynWiper 2
    29 October 2013 at 8:05 am

    Child poverty expert goes it alone

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11147721

    Children’s Commissioner Dr Russell Wills has decided to publish his own annual stocktake of child poverty after the Government spurned his call to publish official measures and targets.

    His first annual update will be published in December with analysis by experts at Otago University, edited by a private communications company and totally funded by a $525,000 grant from the philanthropic Wellington-based JR McKenzie Trust.

    He said the project would not involve any taxpayers’ money and he did not need to get it signed off by Social Development Minister Paula Bennett, who appointed him in 2011 for a five-year term.

    Well done Dr Wills and the JR McKenzie Trust. Thank you Simon Collins for an informative article.

  3. Not a PS Staffer 3
    29 October 2013 at 8:35 am

    Local Government democracy is too important to NZ to be ignored by the Labour Party countrywide. Many units of the party engage in a variety of ways in the process and the overall result adds little to Labour achieving its core aims.
    At best we stop conservative and nutty elements wrecking local authorities. At worst, through our weak governance of Local democracy, we are opening the party to the risks of brand damage and wasting of resources.
    Local democracy is a great opportunity for Labour to become the strongest party in New Zealand.
    David Cunliffe should grasp this opportunty.

    • karol 3.1
      29 October 2013 at 8:39 am

      Strong local democracy is essential to democracy.

      • Draco T Bastard 3.1.1
        29 October 2013 at 11:13 am

        +1

        It’s the local democracy that will engage people in the national debate. We need it to be strong and for people to know that their ideas count.

        EDIT: hmmm, this one didn’t go into auto-spam

        [lprent: looks like akismet is dicking about with their rules. Not surprising considering how much spam I have been fielding for the last few weeks. ]

    • Tat Loo (CV) 3.2
      29 October 2013 at 8:40 am

      +1

    • Bill 3.3
      29 October 2013 at 9:38 am

      Local Government bureaucracy, because that’s what you’re actually referring to, isn’t democracy. Seems we agree that local democratic governance is important. Shame then, that in common with far too many people, you fail to recognise that bureaucracy stymies and suppresses democracy and, further, would promote it as democracy.

      This position (cheer leading bureaucracy as though it’s democracy) parallels the positioning of commissars in the USSR of old who expressed their concern for communism by promoting systems of totalitarianism.

    • weka 3.4
      29 October 2013 at 4:05 pm

      “At best we stop conservative and nutty elements wrecking local authorities.”

      Federated Farmers still seem to be in control of the regional councils.

    • miravox 4.1
      29 October 2013 at 8:53 am

      A resumption of mil to mil talks says Johnathan Coleman.

      mil to mil… jeepers, what sort of idiot language is that.

      Presenting ol’ Chuck with a No.1 All Blacks shirt too – I guess if Mr Hagel knew anything about rugby he might question being a prop for the press conference.

      Absolute cringe value, aside from being deeply disappointing, imo.

    • Brett Dale 4.2
      29 October 2013 at 9:50 am

      Karol:

      Oh dear, let the anti usa bullshit begin.

      Read further karol, this is not a bad thing.

      • Draco T Bastard 4.2.1
        29 October 2013 at 11:16 am

        Yes it is, we shouldn’t continue to be part of the empire.

      • karol 4.2.2
        29 October 2013 at 11:18 am

        Brett, so the US military is the same as the entire US?

        • Brett Dale 4.2.2.1
          29 October 2013 at 12:41 pm

          Karol:

          Im telling you, this is going to led to the usual anti usa BS.

          If there is some sort of sports event on, there will be protesters yelling at a usa
          team, (same sort of protestors, first year UNI students who have never owned a
          passport, but think they know all about life, because they’ve gone to wikileaks)

          • vto 4.2.2.1.1
            29 October 2013 at 12:47 pm

            Instead of consistently residing in the first round of thoughts that come into your mind Brett perhaps you would do well to pause and let the second round of thoughts seep in for some consideration before dumping such shallow comments …

            • Brett Dale 4.2.2.1.1.1
              29 October 2013 at 6:01 pm

              VTO:

              Seriously this is going to turn into the usual anti american hatred that the left gets off on, in this country. I hope no one tries to hand me anti usa leaflet when the street protests starts.

              • Murray Olsen …
                29 October 2013 at 7:00 pm

                Why do you hope that? What would you do?

              • marty mars …
                29 October 2013 at 7:07 pm

                When does this all kick off brett cos so far, um – it’s only you spreading the dirt on that very large and varied grouping of states known as the USA, only you…

                • Brett Dale …
                  29 October 2013 at 7:35 pm

                  Marty:

                  When the exercises begin between the NZ and USA military in November here, there will unfortunately be protestors and another wave of anti Americanism will start in NZ.

                  • Pascal's bookie …
                    29 October 2013 at 7:57 pm

                    hey Brett. You know how when we talk to China about stuff we always bring up human rights?

                    We don’t do that with America, but do you think we should?

                    Obama said he was going to investigate and possibly prosecute people for torture, as treaties the US has signed require. But he hasn’t. That means they are in breach of treaties that we are also signatories to.

                    It’s very unlikely that we will ever need to ask the US to join us in some sort of military adventure, but kind of likely that they will ask us to join them in one. Whoever that is against, they may well decide that seeing the US doesn’t abide by treaties against torture, they won’t either.

                    Is that something we should be comfortable about?

                    • Brett Dale …
                      29 October 2013 at 8:32 pm

                      Pascal Bookie:

                      You know when the government of a country does something bad, how come you dont burn their flags and protest them, how come when there is an international sports comp on, its the american team that got abuse, but north korea got waves and smiles, how come if there is a disaster in the USA, people bring up a war they involved in, but if there is a disaster somewhere else, people wont mention the wars of that country?

                    • Pascal's bookie …
                      29 October 2013 at 9:33 pm

                      Yeah, North Korea gets no shit at all. And we don’t ask China about human rights abuses ever. No one protests about Tibet. No one has said anything at all about tehse things.

                      Seriously though, why don’t we ask the US about the torture they did? Is it rude? Does it not matter when they do it?

                      The thing is, they are supposed to about freedom Bret. North Korea, oddly enough, isn’t. No one expects totalitarian fucked up states to recognise human rights.

                      Are you saying we should expect no better from the US?

                      Or what?

            • felix 4.2.2.1.1.2
              29 October 2013 at 6:33 pm

              Hey vto, I don’t think he knows about second breakfast.

  6. phillip ure 6
    29 October 2013 at 8:53 am

    um..!..my comments are just disappearing..?

    phillip ure..

  7. phillip ure 7
    29 October 2013 at 8:54 am

    test..

    phillip ure..

  8. Morrissey 8
    29 October 2013 at 9:22 am

    The Hall of Hogwash

    Exhibit No. 6: DAVID CAMERON

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

    “We have a free press, it’s very important the press feels it is not pre-censored from what it writes and all the rest of it.”

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

    —British prime minister DAVID CAMERON, in a speech threatening newspapers that reveal government crimes. Oxford, Monday 28 October 2013
    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/28/david-cameron-nsa-threat-newspapers-guardian-snowden

    hogwash, n. 1. Worthless, false, or ridiculous speech or writing; nonsense; 2. Garbage fed to hogs; swill
    
hypocrisy, n. 1. the practice of professing standards, beliefs, etc., contrary to one’s real character or actual behaviour, esp. the pretence of virtue and piety; 2. an act or instance of this

    More hogwash….
    No. 5 JIM MORA: “Without bashing poverty, ahhhh, …. uh, again, we’re not trying to bash people in poverty, but, uh,….”
    No. 4 JIM MORA: “The United States has been a bulwark against totalitarianism, hasn’t it.”
    No. 3 JOHN KERRY: “The best way to give these negotiations a chance is to keep them private.”
    http://www.jpost.com/Diplomacy-and-Politics/Kerry-prolongs-trip-set-to-meet-Abbas-in-Ramallah-320386
    
No. 2 DAVID CAMERON: “We never support, in countries, the intervention by the military.”
    
No. 1 BARACK OBAMA: “Madiba’s moral courage…people standing up for what’s right….aaaahhhh, the yearning for justice and dignity…”

  9. rich the other 9
    29 October 2013 at 9:23 am

    2ND Poll,
    Don’t ya just love it.
    Bye Bye labour thank’s greens

    • rich the other 10.1
      29 October 2013 at 9:36 am

      Karol,
      I did say the 2nd poll which confirms the trend.

      • karol 10.1.1
        29 October 2013 at 9:38 am

        I’m not sure where your “bye bye Labour comment comes from, rto.

      • lprent 10.1.2
        29 October 2013 at 2:15 pm

        I did say the 2nd poll which confirms the trend.

        I presume you are talking about the polls yesterday?

        What frigging trend? Both polls covered exactly the same period 19th-23rd of October. To provide a “trend” they’d have to have been on different parts of the timeline.

        Having a major difference between the two polls taken on the same days, and getting such different results indicates that the only “trend” is that trying to do “trends” between polls by two different companies is a exercise for fools.

        But from your statement it appears that you are simply too stupid to understand even that…

    • marsman 10.2
      29 October 2013 at 9:39 am

      Good one Karol..

      • greywarbler 10.2.1
        29 October 2013 at 10:14 am

        You get my second Sysiphus award karol – the first one went to Felix. This is for effort and endurance in dealing with wilful ignorance and pushing unenlightened darkness away into zombie land.

    • Bill 10.3
      29 October 2013 at 9:45 am

      Has the person who supplied DC the investor poster boy for first time buyers been identified? And has it been determined whether the recommendation was a a fuck up or a deliberate piece of monkey wrenching? Either way, has the responsible person been appropriately dealt to? That b/s essentially tripped DC at the starting gate and fed straight into the meme that he’s ‘just another rich prick’ who’s out of touch and doesn’t give a fuck.

    • Rogue Trooper 10.4
      29 October 2013 at 11:17 am

      Excellent, and timely, karol. 😀

  13. rich the other 13
    29 October 2013 at 9:44 am

    What a great way to start the week ,
    labour in the political mire and more good news , in Ausse the labour opposition is now supporting Abbot in dumping the carbon tax.

  14. marsman 14
    29 October 2013 at 10:15 am

    This headline in Stuff is laughable when one actually reads the article. it is the very man whose administration wrecked the SOE who ‘backs’ partial privatisation.

    Mixed ownership backed – business | Stuff.co.nz :-
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/9336610/Partial-privatisation-better-for-Solid-Energy-Key

    • Draco T Bastard 14.1
      29 October 2013 at 11:49 am

      “People look at it through rose-tinted glasses, but the reality is the SOE [State-Owned Enterprise] model is not actually a brilliant model,” he said

      Well, considering that the SOE model is based upon the private sector model we can only assume that John Key thinks that our entire economy is fucked due to this drive for privatisation.

      As has been shown around the blogs: Solid Energy collapsed because of what National did (Cancelling the bio-fuel requirements, pushing for more debt so as to pay higher dividends), not because of what Solid Energy did or would have done if National hadn’t screwed them.

      Critics have also slammed the Government’s partial sell down of Meridian Energy as a failure, after the shares were valued at $1.50 – the lowest of the estimates originally given by the Treasury.

      But Key said the Meridian shares were never worth the top estimated figure of $1.80.

      So that would mean that when he said that they’d get a billion or so more he was lying.

      If you look at something like Meridian, it’s going to have a yield of eight or nine, even 10 per cent to begin with, depending on prices, where people buy and what the company does.

      Yeah, because the people who would be buying are really big bludgers who think everyone else owes them a excessively well paid living without them having to actually produce anything.

  15. Tracey 15
    29 October 2013 at 10:16 am

    Chickenpox doing rounds in mt albert schools. My teens works in afterschool programne and has caught it. If you have had it before beware shjngles check early for symptoms cos tgey can dise ya but only effective in 1st 24 hours

  16. Tracey 16
    29 October 2013 at 10:18 am

    You are right bill. Now we just have to find a square big enough for our 2.5m voters to meet each day to cast their votes and debate.

  17. marsman 17
    29 October 2013 at 10:23 am

    Laughable headline in Stuff:-

    Mixed ownership backed – business | Stuff.co.nz

    It’s not till one reads the article that one finds out that the man whose administration wrecked the SOE with it’s interference is the one who ‘backs’ the mixed ownership.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/9336610/Partial-privatisation-better-for-Solid-Energy-Key

  18. Redbaiter 18
    29 October 2013 at 10:23 am

    An interesting article on the views of the recently crowned Miss World.

    One month before she was crowned Miss World, Young was interviewed by the local television network ANC. She told the host: “I’m pro-life, and if it means killing someone that’s already there, then I’m against that of course. …I’m against abortion.”

    ANC Host: What about contraception?
    Young: “Well, I don’t engage in stuff like that as of now. I think that sex is for marriage.”

    Host: Wow! Very good! Ok, divorce?
    Young: “I’m actually against divorce because I’ve seen, of course, that in my family. So, I think that if you marry someone, that should be the person you should be with forever.”

    Host: Now a woman as gorgeous as yourself, how do you say ‘no’ to sex?
    Young: “You just say ‘no.’ That’s it. I mean, if they try to push you, then you step away because you know that that person doesn’t value you; doesn’t value the relationship as much; and if the guy is willing to, you know, to sacrifice that, then that means a lot.”

    During the competition for Miss World, Young stressed her desire to stand by her “core values” and lead others toward social unity. Her integrity and willingness to stand by her beliefs attracted the judges’ attention.

    Social unity- interesting new concept right? Meanwhile-

    A remit at next weekend’s Labour Party conference proposes that the party’s list fairly represent-

    “sexual orientations”, as well as tangata whenua, gender, ethnic groups, people with disabilities, age and youth.”

    So while Miss World is for social unity, it appears the Labour Party is for social division. Obviously there’s some difference forces at play here. What concepts are old fashioned and what concepts are trending? I suggest the answer to that question is not what a lot on the left would wish it to be.

    • fender 18.1
      29 October 2013 at 11:51 am

      By all means allow ‘Miss World’ to draft your philosophy….it suits you more than that bikini you have on.

    • Zorr 18.2
      29 October 2013 at 11:52 am

      Social unity is brought about through acceptance

      What Miss “World” is promoting is a very unharmonious view of the world and is a viewpoint that has contributed to many of our modern ills

      And yes, I should probably not feed the troll

    • Draco T Bastard 18.3
      29 October 2013 at 11:57 am

      Social unity- interesting new concept right?

      Didn’t see anything in what she said there that would promote social unity. Saw quite a bit that would probably cause social dysfunction though.

      it appears the Labour Party is for social division.

      Nope, accepting people for who they are tends to increase social unity.

      What concepts are old fashioned and what concepts are trending? I suggest the answer to that question is not what a lot on the left would wish it to be.

      I suggest that you haven’t got a clue as to what you’re talking about. All you have is belief about how good things used to be.

      Hint: We changed because the way things used to be sucked.

    • Tiger Mountain 18.4
      29 October 2013 at 12:05 pm

      ‘Rodbeater’, socially conservative Miss Worlds are not exactly ‘go to people’ for those interested in developing policy for left political parties.

      • Redbaiter 18.4.1
        29 October 2013 at 12:28 pm

        That was my point actually.

        Miss Worlds over the last few decades have been known for expressing boilerplate left wing politically correct views in response to most questions.

        Apparently that’s changing,

        Do you think you’re missing something? In danger of waking up in some subterranean cave someday?

        All the responses so far seem to indicate a group think mentality too.

        Just saying, you don’t think you might be failing to notice a trend? like the record producers who told the Beatles that they were out of style?

        • Rogue Trooper 18.4.1.1
          29 October 2013 at 12:32 pm

          “bigger than Jesus” for a while

        • One Anonymous Knucklehead 18.4.1.2
          29 October 2013 at 12:33 pm

          Redbaiter may I please have the address of your pharmacist?

        • Draco T Bastard 18.4.1.3
          29 October 2013 at 12:48 pm

          Do you think you’re missing something?

          Nope, we’re all quite aware that the people who judge these things are courtiers for the ruling class and so show their conservatism. We’re also quite aware of how much being anything other than a conservative can be detrimental to peoples careers. It’s the result of dictatorial capitalism which only rewards the arse kissers.

          All the responses so far seem to indicate a group think mentality too.

          Nope, what you’re seeing are people who are capable of thinking for themselves coming to the same conclusion from the evidence. The evidence that conservatives deny because it goes against their beliefs.

          • Redbaiter 18.4.1.3.1
            29 October 2013 at 1:25 pm

            Well I think you are wrong.

            I think that you are going to increase an already growing separation from the NZ voters by pushing racial and sexual division.

            Furthermore, I think there are many in the Labour Party or at least on the left who agree with me. (they probably wouldn’t write it here though)

            It doesn’t make the worker’s better off and I know it offends many of them.

            Its your head, and of course you’re free to keep it in the sand if you so wish, but I think the section of the Labour Party who think such issues still have traction are out of touch now and are going to be more so in the future.

            • richard 18.4.1.3.1.1
              29 October 2013 at 2:01 pm

              RB, please explain how ensuring fair representation of all people in NZ is socially divisive.

              Common sense says that ensuring fair representation of all people in NZ is socially inclusive, so I’m intrigued at how you arrived at your argument.

            • Paul 18.4.1.3.1.2
              29 October 2013 at 4:52 pm

              zzzzzz

        • phillip ure 18.4.1.4
          29 October 2013 at 5:28 pm

          @ redbaiter..

          “..Just saying, you don’t think you might be failing to notice a trend?..”

          as in the collapse of the neo-lib consensus..?

          ..where new-labour = old-tory..?

          ..aye red..!

          ..the revolution is coming..

          ..but not the one you want..eh..?

          ..you are totally in rearguard-action at the mo’..

          ..eh..?

          ..and that way for the forseeable future..

          ..eh..?

          ..and really red..

          ..aside from (aging) reactionaries..such as yrslf..

          ..who really cares if someone/anyone is gay..or not..?

          ..it’s off the radar..red..

          ..as are you..and yr twisted/bigoted belief-system..

          ..eh..?

          ..phillip ure..

  19. uke 19
    29 October 2013 at 10:27 am

    [Apologies if posted already…]

    The 1913 Great Strike – class war 100 years ago

    Labour Weekend this year coincided with the centenary of the early stages of one of the largest and most violent strikes in New Zealand’s history. The Great Strike of 1913 has been described by historian Peter Clayworth as ‘the closest we have come to a Pakeha Civil War’.

    The ‘great strike’ was in fact a series of strikes throughout New Zealand, occurring from mid-October 1913 to mid-January 1914. ‘The Great Strike saw riots, gunfire and cavalry charges on the streets of Wellington’, says Ministry for Culture and Heritage Chief Historian Neill Atkinson. ‘A general strike in Auckland paralysed the city for a fortnight, and strikers controlled the coal mining areas of the West Coast for over a month.’

    The strike was a power struggle of militant unionists against organised employers and farmers, backed by the government. Up to 16,000 workers downed tools at a time when New Zealand had a population of just over 1,000,000.

    The Ministry for Culture and Heritage, in association with the Labour History Project, has created a feature on the NZHistory website to mark the centenary. It includes an illustrated overview of the main events and a map showing key locations around the country. Founded in 1987 as the Trade Union History Project, the LHP is an independent heritage organisation dedicated to preserving and fostering New Zealand’s labour history.

    The LHP has also created the 1913 Strike Flickr page where images from sources around the country are being collected, including recently digitised copies of documents from Archives New Zealand. “Having all the 1913 Strike images and documents in one easy to search digital repository is a major step towards improving the coverage of this important part of our history” says Clayworth.

    Wellingtonians can also take part in guided walks of significant sites relating to the Strike which will run every Sunday in November from 10am-12pm.

    See all this and more at:
    http://www.nzhistory.net.nz/politics/1913-great-strike (NZHistory)
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/1913strike/ (Flickr page)
    http://1913greatstrike.org/ (1913 Strike: Centennial events)

    • greywarbler 19.1
      29 October 2013 at 11:16 am

      Thanks uke – for heads up about the labour strike centenary and archive.

      It particularly interests me as I replied to a comment from A Tradesman recently complaining about conditions and suggesting that workers be asked about what they wanted. I suggested that he/she didn’t wait to be asked but just stated in various venues what was wanted. The retreat from self-involvement leading to complacency of workers has I think led to us losing so much gained, without having a real chance to have a period of change allowing interaction with employers to enhance conditions and preserve businesses.

      Knowing when to push, and when to give, and when to walk away and think is needed. And an understanding of the structural, the cyclic and the strategic situation is necessary, and sacrifice of time outside of working hours would be required if workers are to assist themselves to maintaining conditions and working with employers to enable continual work, and have provisions for workers when changes occur.

      So informative to see what the militant workers went through. It will be sad if we have to start the process again from square one.

    • Rogue Trooper 19.2
      29 October 2013 at 11:23 am

      nicely strung uke

    • karol 19.3
      29 October 2013 at 11:28 am

      Thanks, uke. What an excellent collection of images!

    • Rosie 19.4
      29 October 2013 at 3:00 pm

      Uke, thanks for the heads up re the guided walks of relevant 1913 strike sites, in Wellington throughout November. Thats excellent to know about. Several years ago there was a good 1913 Strike exhibition at Wellington Museum of City and Sea. It really was very moving, and I’m looking forward to learning more on the walks.

  20. Matthew 20
    29 October 2013 at 10:40 am

    Good to see Labour are considering making their list more representative

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11147719

  21. tricledrown 21
    29 October 2013 at 10:54 am

    Bill of course the right don’t have big bearaucracies .
    They just have consultants (cronies) .They only cost five times the price of the equivalent public servant and only work for 12 hrs a year of that for their $500,000 pay packet.

    • Bill 21.1
      29 October 2013 at 11:27 am

      What? You’re comparing left wing statist entities to right wing corporate entities and suggesting that encompasses the range of possibilities…and ducking the issue of democracy in the process. Why?

  22. lprent 22
    29 October 2013 at 10:59 am

    That was odd – a pile of comments (about 60) went into auto-spam at about 9pm last night (I’d gone to bed). I finally got time to read my mail, do a moderation sweep, and just found and cleared them. The reports of bugs found after a long weekend’s sailing, fire alarms and various other domestic tasks this morning chew up a lot of time.

  23. karol 23
    29 October 2013 at 11:03 am

    Glenn Greenwald interview on Democracy Now.

    GLENN GREENWALD: Right. The Der Spiegel report is using a document that demonstrates that that embassy is essentially the outpost for NSA spying. And this is quite common for the NSA to do in capitals in the allies most closely aligned with the United States. And obviously what this does is it undermines trust between these allies and the American government. It also makes a mockery out of diplomatic treaties, which really do bar the exploitation of diplomatic relations, diplomatic buildings and other forms of diplomacy as a means to engage in surveillance, both on citizens indiscriminately and democratically elected leaders, as well.

  24. Tracey 24
    29 October 2013 at 11:07 am

    Redbaiter

    I hope this helps

    Alcoholics Anonymous General Service OfficeAddress:PO Box 6458, Wellington 61413rd Floor (we are in room 11, turn left just before the end of the corridor) Anvil House 138 – 140 Wakefield Street (opposite Michael Fowler Centre Carpark)Wellingtone-mail:nzgso@aa.org.nzTelephone:+64 4 472 4250Fax:

  25. Tracey 25
    29 October 2013 at 11:19 am

    Nats continue to present us as irrelevant and joke worthy….did he drop his daks for chuck during or after the press conference?

    as for the private public schtick only those who cant read and believe everything john key says will swallow it.

    funny how 30 years of non military cooperation didnt make the sky fall like so many righties in the 80s claimed.

    Dr Coleman gave a joking reply when asked at the Pentagon press conference whether New Zealand was concerned by the latest claims.”New Zealand’s not worried at all by this, we don’t believe it would be occurring.”Quite frankly there’d be nothing anyone would be hearing in our private conversations that we wouldn’t be prepared to say publicly.”He went on to describe a newspaper cartoon run here which depicted a spy listening in to a communique from New Zealand – who had fallen asleep.”So I don’t think New Zealand has anything to worry about.”

  26. Morrissey 26
    29 October 2013 at 11:22 am

    Interesting things they keep off the News

    No. 3: Daily pogroms in the Occupied West Bank

    Armed settlers attack mosque, burn cars in West Bank village

    http://electronicintifada.net/content/armed-settlers-attack-mosque-burn-cars-west-bank-village/12848

    See also….
    No. 2: U.S. drones have killed more than 2,500 Pakistanis
    http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=10870
    No. 1: Guantanamo Bay captives
    http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-13102013/#comment-708863

  27. Rogue Trooper 27
    29 October 2013 at 11:57 am

    “There are two gates of Sleep, one of which it is held is made of horn and by it easy egress is given to real ghosts; the other shining, fashioned of gleaming white ivory, but the shades send deceptive visions that way to the light”.
    -Virgil, Aeneid

    “Untaught the noble end of glorious truth,
    Bred to deceive even from their earliest youth”.
    -Viscountess Irwin

    “Deceive boys with toys, but men with oaths”
    -Lysander

    “So may the outward shows be least themselves:
    The world is still deceived with ornament.
    In law, what plea so tainted and corrupt
    But, being seasoned with a gracious voice,
    Obscures the show of evil? In religion,
    What damned error, but some sober brow
    Will bless it and approve it with a text,
    Hiding the grossness with fair ornament?
    There is no vice so simple but assumes
    Some mark of virtue on his outward parts”

    – The Merchant of Venice Act 3: Scene 2

    -I reside at Table Mountain, and my name is Truthful James;
    I am not up to small deceit, or any sinful games.- Bret Harte (damaged people are dangerous, they know they can survive).

  29. karol 29
    29 October 2013 at 1:06 pm

    Why is everything so quiet today, in my ‘hood and online? Where is everyone?

  30. Not a PS Staffer 30
    29 October 2013 at 1:16 pm

    Sue Moroney has a great sense of humour!!!!

    Trevor Mallard, in an interview a coupe of weeks ago says:

    “He had not attended Labour’s caucus retreat in Dunedin last week because the party’s whip, Sue Moroney, had asked him to speak at an animal welfare conference instead.”

    Telling Trevor that he is not wanted at a caucus retreat and that he should F off and go to an animal conference instead is a great piece of political theatre.

    Promote Sue!

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz-labour-party/news/article.cfm?o_id=264&objectid=11140010

  31. amirite 31
    29 October 2013 at 1:18 pm

    Frivolous question: what happened to the funny faces avatars? I like them.

    [lprent: The weekend is over. So I reverted to the defaults. If you want a avatar with more personality then you can put your own one up at gravatar. ]

  32. Chooky 32
    29 October 2013 at 2:55 pm

    • How Do Court Reporters Keep Straight Faces?

    These are from a book called Disorder in the Courts and are things people actually said …in court, word for word, taken down and published by court reporters that had the torment of staying calm while the exchanges were taking place.

    ATTORNEY: What was the first thing your husband said to you that morning?
    WITNESS: He said, ‘Where am I, Cathy?’
    ATTORNEY: And why did that upset you?
    WITNESS: My name is Susan!
    _______________________________
    ATTORNEY: What gear were you in at the moment of the impact?
    WITNESS: Gucci sweats and Reeboks.
    ____________________________________________
    ATTORNEY: Are you sexually active?
    WITNESS: No, I just lie there.
    ____________________________________________
    ATTORNEY: What is your date of birth?
    WITNESS: July 18th.
    ATTORNEY: What year?
    WITNESS: Every year.
    _____________________________________
    ATTORNEY: How old is your son, the one living with you?
    WITNESS: Thirty-eight or thirty-five, I can’t remember which.
    ATTORNEY: How long has he lived with you?
    WITNESS: Forty-five years.
    _________________________________
    ATTORNEY: This myasthenia gravis, does it affect your memory at all?
    WITNESS: Yes.
    ATTORNEY: And in what ways does it affect your memory?
    WITNESS: I forget..
    ATTORNEY: You forget? Can you give us an example of something you forgot?
    ___________________________________________
    ATTORNEY: Now doctor, isn’t it true that when a person dies in his sleep, he doesn’t know about it until the next morning?
    WITNESS: Did you actually pass the bar exam?
    ____________________________________

    ATTORNEY: The youngest son, the 20-year-old, how old is he?
    WITNESS: He’s 20, much like your IQ.
    ___________________________________________
    ATTORNEY: Were you present when your picture was taken?
    WITNESS: Are you shitting me?
    _________________________________________
    ATTORNEY: So the date of conception (of the baby) was August 8th?
    WITNESS: Yes.
    ATTORNEY: And what were you doing at that time?
    WITNESS: Getting laid
    ____________________________________________

    ATTORNEY: She had three children , right?
    WITNESS: Yes.
    ATTORNEY: How many were boys?
    WITNESS: None.
    ATTORNEY: Were there any girls?
    WITNESS: Your Honor, I think I need a different attorney. Can I get a new attorney?
    ____________________________________________
    ATTORNEY: How was your first marriage terminated?
    WITNESS: By death..
    ATTORNEY: And by whose death was it terminated?
    WITNESS: Take a guess.
    ___________________________________________

    ATTORNEY: Can you describe the individual?
    WITNESS: He was about medium height and had a beard
    ATTORNEY: Was this a male or a female?
    WITNESS: Unless the Circus was in town I’m going with male.
    _____________________________________
    ATTORNEY: Is your appearance here this morning pursuant to a deposition notice which I sent to your attorney?
    WITNESS: No, this is how I dress when I go to work.
    ______________________________________
    ATTORNEY: Doctor , how many of your autopsies have you performed on dead people?
    WITNESS: All of them. The live ones put up too much of a fight.
    _________________________________________
    ATTORNEY: ALL your responses MUST be oral, OK? What school did you go to?
    WITNESS: Oral…
    _________________________________________
    ATTORNEY: Do you recall the time that you examined the body?
    WITNESS: The autopsy started around 8:30 PM
    ATTORNEY: And Mr. Denton was dead at the time?
    WITNESS: If not, he was by the time I finished.
    ____________________________________________
    ATTORNEY: Are you qualified to give a urine sample?
    WITNESS: Are you qualified to ask that question?

    ______________________________________
    And last:

    ATTORNEY: Doctor, before you performed the autopsy, did you check for a pulse?
    WITNESS: No.
    ATTORNEY: Did you check for blood pressure?
    WITNESS: No.
    ATTORNEY: Did you check for breathing?
    WITNESS: No..
    ATTORNEY: So, then it is possible that the patient was alive when you began the autopsy?
    WITNESS: No.
    ATTORNEY: How can you be so sure, Doctor?
    WITNESS: Because his brain was sitting on my desk in a jar.
    ATTORNEY: I see, but could the patient have still been alive, nevertheless?
    WITNESS: Yes, it is possible that he could have been alive and practicing law.

    • Draco T Bastard 32.1
      29 October 2013 at 3:09 pm

      😆 😈

    • dv 32.2
      29 October 2013 at 3:19 pm

      They are really good.

      I was once cross examined and in a witness box, and being asked really long double negative questions.
      I sort of warned the lawyer but she kept persisting, so I answered the next question “The answer is a logical no> The judge asked the lawyer if she understood the answer. The long questions stopped

      Nowhere as good as those though.

    • Morrissey 32.3
      29 October 2013 at 4:19 pm

      ATTORNEY: Your name is John Archibald Banks?
      PRISONER IN DOCK: [long, awkward pause] I can’t remember.

  33. Tigger 33
    29 October 2013 at 3:50 pm

    http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11147936

    Jonathan Coleman on NSA spying: “Quite frankly there’d be nothing anyone would be hearing in our private conversations that we wouldn’t be prepared to say publicly.”

    Funny, I didn’t get that sense from National earlier this year…

    http://i.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/politics/9073177/Collins-slams-contemptuous-attitude-over-emails. Judith Collins certainly wouldn’t agree.

    “I felt it was a chilling experience to realise that ministers and staff emails and their right to privacy was treated with what I would say was, frankly, a contemptuous attitude,” Ms Collins told Mr Henry, referring to the way the inquiry had sought information about MPs.”

    So if Dr Coleman doesn’t have anything to hide he will happily publish his emails. Just the work ones for now, Doc. Yeah, thought not… It’s only my privacy you want to trade to the USA.

    • phillip ure 33.1
      29 October 2013 at 6:00 pm

      coleman was just on nat-rad/checkpoint..

      ..and i wd advise seeking it out..

      ..it is a textbook arse-kissing of america..

      ..and coleman veers into deep farce..

      ..when he said that he hasn’t asked american spooks if they are spooking all over us/the govt/key etc..

      ..’cos..get this..!..he trusts that they wouldn’t..

      ..brilliant..!..eh..?

      ..and colemans’ nervous laugh as he tries to smear this one all over us..

      ..is also an audio-treat to relish..

      ..(and this was the line he tried on american journalists..

      ..they burst out laughing at him..

      ..as should we..)

      ..phillip ure..

    • David H 33.2
      29 October 2013 at 11:06 pm

      http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9338530/Key-confident-US-didn-t-spy-on-him.

      Yep because they know he’s a useless, ass kissing. photo op hunting, spiv.

      And this is so apt.
      http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=spiv

      A flashy, slick operator who makes a living more from speculation or profiteering than from actual work. The kind of guy who wears a shiny medallion, goes bankrupt from a dodgy swampland development scheme, but still has a big house in his wife’s name.
      This real estate boom is a spiv’s paradise.
      con-man bling dodgy flashy sheister grifter

  35. Adrian 35
    29 October 2013 at 5:24 pm

    Bargain Of The Century !!!!!! Pay ONLY $ 1.50 now and SELL, SELL, SELL for $1.08 only hours later !!!! How to make MILLIONS on the NZ sharemarket. Just ask Honest John and Straight Up Bill.

  36. chris73 36
    29 October 2013 at 5:50 pm

    Ok lefties heres some free advice for you…just because you think the elections done and dusted is still no reason to bring up quotas that might be considered controversial:

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11147719

    I’m not sure if its the collective lefts memory at fault but the last time a quota was being talked about it didn’t end up going so well for Labour

    So my advice would be to tell all the loonies in your party (yes I realize thats quite a few) to keep their gobs shut and wait until the election is won before springing things like this

    Yes it may be worthy and it might be an issue that needs to be addressed but wait until after you’ve won the election before discussing because if theres one topic that will get Colin Craig into parliament (and with him National) its this

    Basically don’t count your chickens until they’ve hatched

    • felix 36.1
      29 October 2013 at 6:28 pm

      How Labour picks candidates is none of your fucking business.

      • chris73 36.1.1
        29 October 2013 at 6:33 pm

        Absolutely right but I was working on the assumption that Labour want to get back into power

        • bad12 36.1.1.1
          29 October 2013 at 6:39 pm

          You were working on the assumption that anyone in the Labour Party would give you or anything you say more than 5 seconds of attention,

          The Labour Party has for quite some time attempted to select a broad range of candidates from across all spectrum of society and refining and defining this is going to make not one iota of difference to the voters,

          Colon Craig tho shooting off His doofus mouth about the make-up of the Labour Party is likely to have the voters running a mile…

          • TheContrarian 36.1.1.1.1
            29 October 2013 at 6:55 pm

            Over at Kiwiblog Farrar looked at the numbers and found 12% of Labour’s sitting MP’s are homosexual which would be more than representative of NZ as whole so not sure what the idea of having a quota is based upon. The diversity of NZ or is it some other measure.

            • chris73 36.1.1.1.1.1
              29 October 2013 at 6:59 pm

              This isn’t about quantifiable figures this is about the Rainbow Wing shoring up its influence

              • Pascal's bookie …
                29 October 2013 at 7:34 pm

                What does that mean?

                • chris73 …
                  29 October 2013 at 7:44 pm

                  Pretty simple really get more mps into caucus from the Rainbow Wing and you have a greater chance of controlling caucus, I just don’t see the unions giving up their power quite so easily

                  • Pascal's bookie …
                    29 October 2013 at 9:42 pm

                    Oh. So you think all gays are obviously members of the ‘rainbow wing’, like Finlayson is in National, because gay.

            • Lanthanide 36.1.1.1.1.2
              29 October 2013 at 9:08 pm

              I think the point, TC, is that Labour are expecting to have quite a few more MPs after the next election, which means they probably have to make a bit of an effort to keep up proportionality amongst the various minorities they are trying to balance.

        • felix 36.1.1.2
          29 October 2013 at 6:45 pm

          The Shearer years are over, and with them are gone stupid ideas like letting David Farrar join in making Labour policy (WTFF????), hanging out with Hooten, and taking advice from National spinners seriously.

          • TheContrarian 36.1.1.2.1
            29 October 2013 at 6:56 pm

            Farrar helped form Labour policy? Really?

            • felix 36.1.1.2.1.1
              29 October 2013 at 8:11 pm

              Curran had a project going that was all about developing policy in open meetings with labour members and non labour members alike. She was stoked that Farrar got involved, because even though he’s spent his whole life as a National party volunteer, employee, contractor, booster and member, he actually totes wants the best for the Labour party too.

              No idea if anything came of it.

              • TheContrarian …
                29 October 2013 at 8:20 pm

                Well – having an outside, unaffiliated (unaffiliated with parties on the left that is) voice in policy discussion is a good thing. Prevents things from becoming an echo chamber and I don’t think Farrar would purposely sabotage as he is upfront in his affiliations. However it is one thing to learn from the criticism of your opponent and another to actively take their advice. One would hope it was the former.

              • Tat Loo (CV) …
                29 October 2013 at 9:58 pm

                No worries mate, I’m sure something good will come of it.

    • karol 36.2
      29 October 2013 at 6:31 pm

      Thanks for the advice. I’m a leftie, but not a Labour Party member. Why do you think I need your advice?

    • bad12 36.3
      29 October 2013 at 6:34 pm

      Yawn Colon Craig and the National party will not a Government make, Craig has no support so for every % of right-wing support Craig manages, and after the media spin of the last week a lot of breath will have been wasted if He cannot get 1%, National has to lose support,

      The Tory dog is about to begin to chase it’s tail in a futile attempt to manufacture Colon Craig into a viable coalition option my view is the 3% that Craig will pull as a maximum even in the unlikely event of Him winning an electorate seat wouldn’t give National a majority even with the ‘Hairdo’ and the ‘Convicted Banks’ still retaining their seats,

      You are better off with the ‘National have enough support to Govern alone’ line…

      • chris73 36.3.1
        29 October 2013 at 6:55 pm

        Thats kinda my point, Colin Craig will struggle to win the new seat on the north shore (if in fact there is one created) and even if he does he probably wouldn’t drag in anyone else but you know the media will probably interview Colin Craig because they know they’ll get a soundbite out of him and theres nothing a politician needs more than time on tv and he only needs to rope in a few percentage of the religious types and suddenly he might well get the new seat and 3-4% votes

        • lprent 36.3.1.1
          29 October 2013 at 11:00 pm

          Unlikely to be a new seat in other north shore. The growth isn’t large enough. I would expect the new seat to either be in the isthmus or maybe west. Look at a map and figure out how to get growth in the center, north, and south balanced with the least amount of seat shuffling..

        • bad12 36.3.1.2
          30 October 2013 at 7:34 am

          And you don’t Chris73 see Nationals hand firmly on the steering wheel of the present ‘media campaign’ on behalf of Craig’s Christian Conservatives,

          Mind you i pick you as one to not have seen any campaign at all, having been bombarded by the media you are doing exactly what they expect you to do, mouth off about Craig’s Conservatives,

          For the last few days, despite having NO political profile, Nothing of any import to impart, and Not even being represented in the Parliament various print media and at least two of the television broadcasters have been running news items in what looks like a serious campaign to build Craig’s profile i would assume has the National Party as it’s sponsor,

          This campaign on behalf of the Conservatives has in the last two mornings had Slippery the Prime Minister appearing on TV and radio talking up Craig’s chances,

          What this smacks of is a desperation by National polling in the low 40’s knowing that it’s present coalition partners Banks and Dunne are in trouble within their electorates and the Maori Party faces electoral oblivion in 2014,

          i doubt whether even the highly unlikely insertion into the Parliament of a few Conservatives will be enough to give the PM the numbers He so desperately begs from the electorate…

    • Not Another Sheep 36.4
      30 October 2013 at 1:47 am

      Chris73
      The headline “Labour to look at ‘fairly representing’ gay members in Parliament “ was just the attention grabber , for homophobes! Young, then deliberately choosing this angle to overtly (and subversively) persuade and endorse contempt and prejudice of other human beings. You then deliberately took up the cry ‘oh shit, be afraid, homos in parliament!’ and hence you furthered Young’s cause, spreading her antipathy yourself.

      This action was more a reflection on you and those you purport to represent, yours and the Right’s thinking about entitlement to “cleansing” populations.

      The article went onto say that selection “.. would require the list-ranking committee to pro-actively ensure that its list fairly represents “sexual orientations”, as well as tangata whenua, gender, ethnic groups, people with disabilities, age and youth.”

      So Chris73 from your posting, what you are advocating is that Labour should stay silent about addressing human rights issues in their words and actions. In this case, you condemn Labour for publically and pro-actively building up one of the foundations of upholding human rights and equality so that ‘oppressed’ groups can represent and speak for themselves; have self-determination.
      Is that why Labour lost the last election and will lose the next one – because they ( the “loonies” ) represented social justice ? That they should, us Left “loonies…. keep their gobs shut and wait until the election is won before springing things like this [enacting human rights]?”

      Is it because the Right actively coin propaganda phrases such as “Gaybours” to stir up fear and pseudo-antipathy (“the worst side of one’s self”), that they win elections?

      National’s secrecy and blatant inactivity eg. Children’s rights, their silence on matters of addressing human rights ( here and internationally), their contemptible scoffing at Labour when they address representation of human beings in Parliament, is that silence not the same as being complicit in abuse? Your “advice” Chris is more reflective upon yourself and all the National/Right voters, more a measure of the inadequacy of yourself and the Right’s paucity of morals.

      “Basically don’t count your chickens until they’ve hatched”. How could the lefties count their chickens, they don’t have any?
      The “chickens” are all in the cowardly, silent, indolent Right as abuse and injustices flourish under their arrogant, deviant rule.

      Found a theme song for you and the Nats conference, bloody catchy and F#*! Ing funny for the Left to sing for you too.
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u52Oz-54VYw
      check out the full lyrics.

      A catch phrase even Chris for the Nats next campaign
      “So love me, love me, love me, I’m a liberal”

  37. karol 37
    29 October 2013 at 6:29 pm

    Tonight on The Beatson interview on Face TV 7.30pm, it’s about blogs interviewing news rooms, with guest, Bomber Bradbury.

    • bad12 37.1
      29 October 2013 at 6:43 pm

      Karol is FaceTV available on the freeview platform???…

      • karol 37.1.1
        29 October 2013 at 7:03 pm

        No, unfortunately, bad. It’s on Sky. Plus, until December, it’s on analog free-to-air, but, I think can only be received in the Auckland region.

    • karol 37.2
      29 October 2013 at 8:15 pm

      Hmmm… did Bomber say the top 4 NZ blogs, according to Open Parachute, are WO, KB & The Daily Blog?

      He then proceeded to only mention those blogs by name.

      Bradbury said that it’s the vitriol in the comments section that put people off reading blogs, hence TDB having a tight policy on that.

      Sounds to me that Martyn is aiming for the professionalisation of blogs, or at least, TDB. Nothing wrong with that. The NZ political and current events needs something with professional status to counter the biases in the MSM. But it makes a site a very different beast from a blog where a lot of people get to discuss topics.

      • just saying 37.2.1
        29 October 2013 at 10:54 pm

        Unfortunately Martyn can’t seem to separate his ambitions and his own ego from his decision-making. His tight control means the comments on his blog reflect his own views predominantly – a little like how the newpapers select ‘letters to the editor’ – the best examples of assenting views and the worst from those who disagree.

        Shame really. There are some really good writers there. I suspect many will end up here or as independents in the long run.

  38. Huginn 38
    29 October 2013 at 6:45 pm

    Philip Mirowski, my favorite economic historian, has just published a book on the problem with neo-liberalism.

    Never Let a Serious Crisis Go to Waste: How Neoliberalism Survived the Financial Meltdown
    by Philip Mirowski

    After the financial apocalypse, neoliberalism rose from the dead—stronger than ever
    At the onset of the Great Recession, as house prices sank and joblessness soared, many commentators concluded that the economic convictions behind the disaster would now be consigned to history. And yet, in the harsh light of a new day, we’ve awoken to a second nightmare more ghastly than the first: a political class still blaming government intervention, a global drive for austerity, stagflation, and an international sovereign debt crisis.

    Philip Mirowski finds an apt comparison to this situation in classic studies of cognitive dissonance. He concludes that neoliberal thought has become so pervasive that any countervailing evidence serves only to further convince disciples of its ultimate truth. Once neoliberalism became a Theory of Everything, providing a revolutionary account of self, knowledge, information, markets, and government, it could no longer be falsified by anything as trifling as data from the “real” economy.

    – James K. Galbraith:
    “Mirowski exposes the neoliberal takeover of minds and culture with an erudition, style and—dare I say it?—vocabulary that makes deep digging in this Great Bog of Repression almost a pleasure. This book shows how economic ideas caused the crisis. And it demonstrates their enduring triumph, which is that nothing has changed or will change, as we careen from the last disaster to the next one.”

    http://www.versobooks.com/books/1416-never-let-a-serious-crisis-go-to-waste

  39. feijoa 39
    29 October 2013 at 6:47 pm

    Yes, well I heard Sean Plunkett this very morning on Radio Live (it was not my choice of station!!) talking at length on this very matter of the quota remit for Labours conference
    He had the listeners all rarked up on how Labour has lost the plot / heads in the sand / I thought Labour was for the working man / Labours full of pointy headed liberals / blah blah
    If this gets away on you DC, watch out
    David Shearer has already stumbled around it
    The media will manipulate this for all its worth

  40. joe90 40
    29 October 2013 at 8:47 pm

    This from the side bar is rather interesting.

    http://publicaddress.net/hardnews/mega-strange/

  41. Brett Dale 41
    29 October 2013 at 9:30 pm

    Felix:

    I expect more from you, than the usual dig at usa about war.

    Yes a group can protest who they like.

    They can chant and sing, and cry SHAME SHAME SHAME.

    They can sing shonia lange songs about being “neutral and nuclear free”

    What protest group should NEVER be allowed to do is…

    Ruin memorial sites. Cause harm by being physically threatening.

    Cause harm and hurt by doing actions that goes against someones culture or religion or beliefs.

    EG: You dont burn the koran, you dont draw a picture of Mohammed, you dont burn a country’s flag, you dont yell abuse at someone’s young family members because of their accent, you dont step on flowers or tear down messages of love and support at a memorial site.

    Doesnt matter if you dont agree with a country’s policy, or the sexist practises of a culture or a religion. You dont get to do stuff like that.

    Protest, be loud, sign a petition, take off shoes, wear an annoymous mask, go on blogs, go to the uni’s coffee house and scoff how uneducated people are, but there are things you dont get to do.

    I

    • Pascal's bookie 41.1
      29 October 2013 at 9:40 pm

      Don’t think you really grok this free speech business Brett.

      Do you think those things you describe are evil or something, such that people shouldn’t ‘get’ to be allowed to do it?

      Why do you hate America so much? Most of the things you describe are protected speech under the US constitution.

      • Brett Dale 41.1.1
        29 October 2013 at 9:55 pm

        Pascal:

        You cant yell fire in a movie thereate and say free speech, that is illegal.

        You cant desecrate graves or desecrate memorial sites.

        You cant incite a riot.

        What part of that dont you understand.

    • felix 41.2
      29 October 2013 at 10:39 pm

      Hi Brett.

      What did I say about the usa exactly?

  42. joe90 42
    29 October 2013 at 9:59 pm

    Wow.

    Maori police were deliberately excluded from knowing anything about Operation 8 until after the termination phase; that is the armed paramilitary operation on 15th October 2007. Superintendent Wallace Haumaha who until 2007 was the National Strategic Maori Advisor, and is now the General Manager Maori, Ethnic and Pacific Services, was deliberately excluded. His network of Police iwi liaison officers was also deliberately excluded.

    http://www.putatara.net/2013/10/operation-8-maori-police/

  43. Brett Dale 43
    30 October 2013 at 1:52 pm

    Genfer,felix.pascal, knucklehead.

    You have all failed to answer my question.

    Do you think its okay for protest groups to desecrate memorial sites?

    I say NO.

    • framu 43.1
      30 October 2013 at 2:27 pm

      your in no position to complain brett – theres plenty of questions you couldnt be arsed answering

    • fender 43.2
      30 October 2013 at 2:37 pm

      What’s that you’re saying Leaky Pail….you don’t want anyone spray-painting “here lies the smartest man on the internet” on your tombstone? Well that just gives me the tombstone blues

      If I’m “Genfer” now due to your renaming….thanks, I’m honoured to wear any name your holiness sees fit to give me…

      Why do you hate America Brett?

      • Brett Dale 43.2.1
        30 October 2013 at 3:13 pm

        fender:

        That was just a error in me typing your name. so sorry about that.

        Again I dont believe someone should be allowed to wreck a memorial site and
        call it a political protest.

        • lprent 43.2.1.1
          30 October 2013 at 4:15 pm

          I dont believe someone should be allowed to wreck a memorial site and call it a political protest.

          I can think of numerous cases where that would be the case. For instance during and after the fall of the Berlin wall and subsequent liberation of countries behind it there were numerous instances of memorials to Lenin and Stalin that were toppled and desecrated in political protests. Not to mention all of those memorials to heroic Soviet soldiers and workers.

          During the second world war, allied troops were assiduous in running tanks over memorials to people like Kaiser Bill and for that matter Hitler. Personally I’d class those actions as political protests.

          Hell I could go on back into every military action I’m aware of for examples of similar political protests. There were those lovely examples in Iraq of US troops tearing down memorials to most things to do with the regime, along with some repressed minorities.

          So what you’re saying is that those people were complete arseholes? Or are you such a hypocrite as to say that it is only the memorials that you care about that should not be subject to political protest?

          • Brett Dale 43.2.1.1.1
            30 October 2013 at 4:24 pm

            Iprent:

            Please, you know what I meam. That is patronizing.

            I mean if there is a disaster or terrorist attack somewhere, and people leave flowers and notes of thoughts and wishes, you dont step on the flowers, and tear the notes now.

            You know excatly that was the point I was making , so dont be a fuckin biatch.

    • Pascal's bookie 43.3
      30 October 2013 at 2:47 pm

      Ok Brett.

      It depends on what you mean.

      1)Do I think destroying public property should be a crime? Yes.

      2)Am I a strong supporter of free speech? Yes.

      3)Are those two statements in conflict at the margin? Yes

      4)Do I think people who feel strongly enough about something, and are prepared to break the law and wear the consequences of that, are ipso facto bad people just because they broke the law? No.

      5)Would I support some people who did that, and oppose others who did it based on their reasons? Yes

      6)Is that hypocritical? No.

      7)Why? because the support would be for or against the protest, not the symbolic action per se. (see point 4)

      Now why don’t you know that flag burning is protected speech in the US?

    • One Anonymous Knucklehead 43.4
      30 October 2013 at 3:36 pm

      You had an answer from me, wretch. You just didn’t comprehend it.

  44. Brett Dale 44
    30 October 2013 at 3:24 pm

    Pascal: So you dont feel someone who would desecrate a memorial because of theirbeliefs is a bad person?

    This is where we disagree.

    • One Anonymous Knucklehead 44.1
      30 October 2013 at 3:35 pm

      No, that isn’t what Pascal said, you asshole. No-one is obliged to respect or live up to your strawmen.

    • Pascal's bookie 44.2
      30 October 2013 at 3:39 pm

      It all depends.

      let’s try some hypothetical memorials and see how you would feel about someone who ‘desecrated’ them.

      1) A memorial to all the lambs killed in meatworks, spray painted with a cock and balls by a farmer who lost his land due to a downturn in lamb prices.

      2) A memorial to airmen who lost their lives in bomber command splattered with red paint by someone who lost their parents in Dresden.

      3) The same memorial, defaced with an Iron Cross by a neo-nazi.

      4) A japanese memorial to their war dead defaced by a former ‘comfort woman’.

      5) The same memorial defaced by someone protesting a Japanese Prime Minister’s visit to teh memorial.

      6) A Parihaka memorial burnt down by a John Ansell fan.

      I’d feel differently about all the people who defaced these memorials, that’s where we disagree.

      Now how come you hate the US’s first amendment?

      • Brett Dale 44.2.1
        30 October 2013 at 4:27 pm

        Pascal Bookie.

        Read my previous post, you will be the type of CUNT who wouldve gone on messages boards after the boston bombing, where that little kid died and wrote BS like “What about Iraq”

        • Pascal's bookie 44.2.1.1
          30 October 2013 at 4:40 pm

          Wow. That’s uncalled for Brett.

          All I was trying to do was explain my position regarding the question you asked me to answer.

          How about you respond to the fact you don’t really understand the US constitution, and that you in fact seem to think it allows things you don’t think should be allowed?

          eg flag burning, koran burning etc.

          • Brett Dale 44.2.1.1.1
            30 October 2013 at 4:48 pm

            Pascal Bookie:

            Im done here, as soon as the mods sees the reply’s im banned.

            If people here think they can destroy a 9/11 memorial or a boston bombing
            memorial because they dont like usa international policy, well that is just sad
            beyond belief and quite sickening.

            Imagine if some extereme right wing bigots in new zealand started to destroy
            memorials, and then said “Oh its a political protest against socialism” there
            would be outrage and rightly so.

            • Pascal's bookie 44.2.1.1.1.1
              30 October 2013 at 5:09 pm

              Yeah well. If you want to just imagine a bunch of stuff about what I’d do and then be outraged about it then I don’t see much point in trying explain what I actually think either.

            • lprent 44.2.1.1.1.2
              30 October 2013 at 5:29 pm

              Ah why? You may be wrong headed (IMHO), but you are arguing a point of view (hypocritical and untenable as it is)…

              Incidentally what is your view on the cases of desecration of memorials that I pointed in in http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-291013/#comment-718915

              • Brett Dale …
                30 October 2013 at 6:07 pm

                Iprent

                Your comparing statues of people who ordered the murder of millions of people to a seven year old boy who was a victim of a bombing?

                Thats grotesque.

                PS: So your not banning me.

                Ive just done a post at my site saying im banned here, what the fuck am i suppose to do now?

                • One Anonymous Knucklehead …
                  30 October 2013 at 6:22 pm

                  Your English is grotesque. Not to mention your feeble attempts at logic. You’re out of your depth at the shallow end.

                • Pascal's bookie …
                  30 October 2013 at 6:30 pm

                  “what the fuck am i suppose to do now?”

                  how about ‘stop making up shit about what other people reckon or would do and just read what they say instead’?

                  radical thought, but worth a crack.

                • Pascal's bookie …
                  30 October 2013 at 6:49 pm

                  Ok Brett, I’ve read your post.

                  So to The blog “The Standard”
                  its goodbye, its sickening that
                  you think your allowed to destroy memorial
                  sites to the victims of 9/11 and the Boston
                  Bombing because you don’t like USA
                  international policy.

                  I have zero respect for you guys, what you think your
                  allowed to do is beyond repugnant and
                  it’s cruel.

                  It’s a sad day for humanity when people think
                  they can do actions like this and call it a political
                  protest.

                  Npw who exactly has said they think people are ‘allowed’ to do this?

                  It’s clear you have zero respect fro people here, but it’s not because of what we say, it’s in spite of it. Your question was a general one about all memorials. It really was. Scroll up and look.

                  Have a look at how the conversation all started. You don’t like people criticising the US. We get that. But whenever anyone says that there are in fact things that it’s ok to criticise the US about, you drag out all these alleged horrible things random people have done and say that if you criticise the US then you must be like that, or that you imagine the person would support it, or whatever.

                  It’s bullshit Brett. Just read what people say, and get the chip off your shoulder.

                  And if you want to know what to do about that post, I’d now suggest ‘apologise’.

                • lprent …
                  30 October 2013 at 7:05 pm

                  I have zero idea of what you are trying to compare it against – you hadn’t bothered to provide any context. But I will give you a hint – the legal structures don’t look at how many memorials you defaced. They look at the crime to establish guilt. What you are talking about is sentencing.

                  But lets continue with your chain of logic (rather tha way that the law would view it)..

                  For instance around the Boston (to follow your geographical obsessions) I seem to remember that there was a deliberate gift of smallpox laden blankets to Indians in the hope of extinguishing opposition to the taking of land. By your logic, “Your comparing statues of people who ordered the murder of millions of people” is exactly the equivalent to “selling smallpox ridden blankets to native inhabitants” – so you’d condone destroying memorials in that case?

                  Ive just done a post at my site saying im banned here, what the fuck am i suppose to do now?

                  Learn not to lie?

                • lprent …
                  30 October 2013 at 7:05 pm

                  I have zero idea of what you are trying to compare it against – you hadn’t bothered to provide any context. But I will give you a hint – the legal structures don’t look at how many memorials you defaced. They look at the crime to establish guilt. What you are talking about is sentencing.

                  But lets continue with your chain of logic.. For instance around the Boston I seem to remember that there was a deliberate gift of smallpox laden blankets to Indians in the hope of extinguishing opposition to taking of land. By your logic, defacing the “Your comparing statues of people who ordered the murder of millions of people” is exactly the equivalent to “selling smallpox ridden blankets to native inhabitants” – so you’d condone destroying memorials in that case?

                  Ive just done a post at my site saying im banned here, what the fuck am i suppose to do now?

                  Learn not to lie?

  45. Brett Dale 45
    30 October 2013 at 6:37 pm

    Pascal/Knucklehead

    I asked the question, and didnt really get an answer, until I asked several times over.

    my english grotesque?, thats umpossible.

    • One Anonymous Knucklehead 45.1
      30 October 2013 at 6:42 pm

      You ask the rhetorical equivalent of “when will you stop beating your wife” and you think you deserve an answer beyond ridicule and contempt?

      Get a life, witless.

      • Brett Dale 45.1.1
        30 October 2013 at 6:53 pm

        Knucklehead:

        I neevr once said this, you think people who dont wash would be less sensitive.

        Im not saying YOU will stomp on flowers and destroy a memorial, im saying DO YOU think its wrong that people do this, since that jackass Iprent decided to compare it to a statue of a world leader who killed millions, how else do i know what a bunch of sdirty stinky greasy hippies think.

        (Now am I banned? I dont want to have to go and fix my post)

        • One Anonymous Knucklehead 45.1.1.1
          30 October 2013 at 6:57 pm

          you dont (sic) feel someone who would desecrate a memorial because of theirbeliefs (sic) is a bad person?

          Scroll up fuck wit.

        • marty mars 45.1.1.2
          30 October 2013 at 8:43 pm

          “how else do i know what a bunch of sdirty stinky greasy hippies think”

          the ‘dirty, stinky, greasy hippies’ lines are hateful – and you have eaten it up hook, line and sinker – btw I bet you have never met a real alternative thinker with attitudes like yours but keep spraying on your brut mate lol and Dr. Emmett Brown was a hippie.

    • Pascal's bookie 45.2
      30 October 2013 at 6:54 pm

      And when you got an answer, you ignored it and made up some shit and threw a tantrum and called me a cunt and ran away to your own blog and had a hissy fit.

      Don’t forget that part.

      Or the part where you’ve ignored all the other questions.

      For example, would you think all the people in the hypothetical examples I gave of memorial desecrations were bad people?

      • Brett Dale 45.2.1
        30 October 2013 at 7:07 pm

        Pascal:

        If you pulled down a statue of stalin or saddam hussein your not a bad person.

        If you step on flowers left for the memory of a seven year old boy your disgusting.

        After all the names I have been called over the years here by people, i think throwing in the c word once is not a bad thing.

        • One Anonymous Knucklehead 45.2.1.1
          30 October 2013 at 7:11 pm

          I’m sure you’re not a bad person either, but your petulant gibberish is often so bad it’s not even wrong.

        • Pascal's bookie 45.2.1.2
          30 October 2013 at 7:18 pm

          Ok.

          So you’ve realised that this:

          Do you think its okay for protest groups to desecrate memorial sites?

          I say NO.

          is kind of simplistic. That the question is hard to answer yes or no because the context of the memorial, and the motives for desecrating it, matter.

          Now get this part, which will blow your mind. the law doesn’t, and shouldn’t care.

          I know right! Amazing. Either destroying a memorial is against the law, or it isn’t. But at the same time, citizens might support a protest, or they might not. Depending on context.

          And you get called names, often, for being a bit thick and not reading what people say. You said I’m probably a ‘cunt’ because of something you made up about me.

  46. Brett Dale 46
    30 October 2013 at 7:21 pm

    Pascal:

    I never made anything up about you.

    • Pascal's bookie 46.1
      30 October 2013 at 7:25 pm

      “you will be the type of CUNT who wouldve gone on messages boards after the boston bombing, where that little kid died and wrote BS like “What about Iraq””:

      Also

      “So you dont feel someone who would desecrate a memorial because of theirbeliefs is a bad person?”

      I might, or I might not. Depends on the context, which I explained, and you ignored in order to make up the idea that I “dont feel someone who would desecrate a memorial because of theirbeliefs is a bad person?”

  47. Brett Dale 47
    30 October 2013 at 7:26 pm

    iprent:

    Again you just dont get it, bringing up people in boston giving blankets with chicken pox to indians, has nothing to do with stomping on flowers, left for a dwead seven year old boy, thats equal to the mother fuckers (hey im like Hone now) saying “WHAT ABOUT IRAQ”

    If someone does a post of sympathy when a hurricane blows down half of Oklahoma.

    That is what i have a problem with.

    • Pascal's bookie 47.1
      30 October 2013 at 7:34 pm

      Good for you.

      But not everyone who criticises the US does that, or the internet would be filled with hundreds of millions of such comments everywhere you look.

      And quite often, when someone criticised the US, you attack them, accusing them of being like this thing, or that thing, or whatever. It’s ridiculous Brett. And you should grow out of it. You make US defenders look like a bunch of paintywaists.

      • Brett Dale 47.1.1
        30 October 2013 at 7:37 pm

        Pascal:

        I honesty feel that kiwis are just too precious when it comes to the USA, Im not even talking about the political stuff either, I cant begin to tell you how many times, I have to defend myself for American Football or a particular genre of music.

        How about each to their own.

        • Pascal's bookie 47.1.1.1
          30 October 2013 at 7:58 pm

          Everyone is precious though Brett.

          Cheese eating surrender monkeys, for example.

          It’s humans.

    • lprent 47.2
      30 October 2013 at 7:41 pm

      People write about what they have a interest in. But generally I personally don’t have a problem with people taking political protests to inanimate objects. That can be handled with the usual property laws. I prefer political protests doing that to taking political protests towards killing or injuring people.

      For instance (since you raised it) Iraq is a good example. It isn’t hard to argue that the US war in Iraq was just a massive political protest. Iraq and its leadership had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11, had no WMD’s worth mentioning, and didn’t tolerate the types of groups that launched attacks against the US. Yet the US launched and unprovoked attack against them in a petulant political protest… How many people did that kill? Last count I heard was well over a million civilians laid directly to military actions by the US and their allies.

      BTW: I still have absolutely no context about what you are waffling about. However I think that your sense of scale is quite distorted and very hypocritical.

      • Brett Dale 47.2.1
        30 October 2013 at 7:48 pm

        Iprent:

        and there it is , sums up your ideology.

        The one million number has been so shot out the water.

        Oh you know those daily car bombs, anit the usa that is killing those people, but believe what you want to believe.

        PS: If you have read any of my posts at the democraticunderground, you would know i was 100% against the iraqi war.

        • lprent 47.2.1.1
          30 October 2013 at 7:56 pm

          and there it is , sums up your ideology.

          What? That I care more about damage to people than I do about damage to property?

          It is funny that. Because that is exactly the way the law perceives it as well. Can I suggest that you look at the crimes act some time… The relative sentencing for different types of crimes will obviously be a revelation to you.

        • Pascal's bookie 47.2.1.2
          30 October 2013 at 8:11 pm

          Brett.

          Did you know that the US sent a guy into Iraq who had a record of liaising with, and training, the death squads in South America?

          About the same time that John negroponte was appointed US ambassador in Iraq too. Wanna guess who was a US diplomat in South America when the death squads were operating?

          Wanna guess what happened in Iraq when those guys settled into their work?

          No one knows how many people died in Iraq.

          But counterinsurgency is messy cruel and harsh work. Always. people talk about hearst and minds a lot, and that makes sense in a way. but the reality is, if you are running a counter insurgency, especially in a country that isn’t your own, it’s really hard to say that you should sacrifice your troops to protect people who might be insurgents. Really hard to do that.

          So what usually happens is, you send in hard hard guys who will do nasty nasty things. And you’ll try and keep your hands as hidden as possible. you train locals. you ‘lose’ lots of high explosive and ammo. You express concern about counterfeit security forces committing atrocities. You torture people. You punish communities for possibly supporting insurgents. You turn a blind eye to people on one side launching revenge attacks. You make sure that people fear being accused of being in cahoots with teh insurgents.

          Really fear. Not ‘Oh my god they might kill me’ fear. The fear that’s worse than that, because in an ugly war like iraq, people rpne to supporting a faction are past fearing their own death. you have to make them fear for the family and their neighbours.

          It’s a really fucking ugly business, and the guys in the pentagon know that, as do the CIA and all the rest. And they lie about it, and blame all the bad shit on the ‘bad’ guys.

          I think that’s worth opposing.

          If you’ve the stomach for knowing what went on Iraq, and what anti Americans oppose them for, settle down and watch this. It’s solid reporting.

          http://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2013/mar/06/james-steele-america-iraq-video

          There’s a short version there too.