Open Mike 30/11/2017

163 comments on “Open Mike 30/11/2017 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. One Anonymous Bloke 1

   30 November 2017 at 6:20 am

   As predicted…

   Despite motorists having a $630 million expressway, new figures show the rush-hour crawl along State Highway 1 between Wellington and the Kāpiti Coast is moving slower than before the new road was built.

   A colossal waste of money, based on rhetoric that has been known to be false since at least 1930. Oh, and it’s already falling apart too.
   • Antoine 1.1

     30 November 2017 at 8:30 am

     Monument to the folly of the National Govt

     A.
     • Muttonbird 1.1.1

       30 November 2017 at 8:53 am

       It’s curious you sign off each comment with “A”.

       Do you think it add legitimacy to your opinion? To me it’s a form of ego projection.

       M.
       • Antoine 1.1.1.1

         30 November 2017 at 9:44 am

         One should have the decency to put one’s name to what one writes (*)

         A.

         (*) Even if it isn’t actually one’s name
   • Bearded Git 1.2

     30 November 2017 at 9:21 am

     Well done Stuff for highlighting this

     It should be the lead story on TV1 tonight. Something like “National blew two-thirds of a billion dollars on roads where public transport would have sorted-out the problem.”

     BG.
     • cleangreen 1.2.1

       30 November 2017 at 4:55 pm

       100% BG.

       If we get back our RNZ/TVNZ from the lingering national trolls running our RNZ/TVNZ Media network; – we should/could hear/see more public affairs stories aired then.

       Go Minister of broadcasting Claire Cullan take our RNZ back please!!!!!!
   • cleangreen 1.3

     30 November 2017 at 12:20 pm

     National = road rogues
     National = rail destroyers.
2. Ed 2

   30 November 2017 at 6:52 am

   Wonder if the recent revelations that Key lied about spying get traction.
   It is a concern so many NZers fell for the spell of such a conman and others actually admired his brazen dishonesty.
   35 years of neoliberalism poisons people’s minds .
   • stunned mullet 2.1

     30 November 2017 at 7:38 am

     The PM and Ed Sheehan’s twittering will get far more hits.
3. North 3

   30 November 2017 at 7:41 am

   There needs to be some in-depth enquiry into Paul Quin’s ‘consultancy’ activities given the mention of him in this article: http://digitaldjeli.com/2012/amnesty-international-denounces-use-of-torture-in-rwandan-military-detention-rwandan-pr-reacts/

   Particularly when out of his own mouth – (see post https://thestandard.org.nz/phil-quin-our-medias-goto-dogwhistling-aussie/) – “……I’m on an indefinite sabbatical, roaming between Wellington, Vietnam, Europe and the U.S., as I try to write in my own voice for a change.”

   “…….as I try to write in my own voice for a change.” What exactly does that mean ? That he will assume a voice not his own ? For personal gain ? In contrast Ghahraman performed a prosecution and defence function in a transparent, formalised process which no one, not even Paul Quin, challenges. A different quantity entirely from that of the paid propagandist…….a status which with his own words Paul Quin seems to acknowledge.
   • Muttonbird 3.1

     30 November 2017 at 8:56 am

     From the Quin thread

     A couple of thoughts having read that digitaldjeli article;

     It’s important to know what people’s motivations are and take that into account when listening to their ‘message’.

     In Phil Quin’s case he has acted directly (and probably still does indirectly) in PR consultancy for the Paul Kagame government and at one point specifically for Rwanda Police.

     It’s worth noting the Kagame regime and its police and military are heavily criticised for human rights abuses including the use of torture.

     In reality Phil’s work in Rwanda involves actively and in current time defending the regime for contemporary abuses and advising them on how to paint any opposition as ‘genocide deniers’. This what he did to Ghahraman.

     Interestingly while his website does say he did consultancy work in Rwanda, it doesn’t say it was for the Rwanda police who seem to be indulging in torture. Absolute clarity of course is something he and other RWNJs demand of Ghahraman.

     Oddly though the media tells us he is a saint who ‘worked with genocide victims’.
4. Andre 4

   30 November 2017 at 7:50 am

   Dolt45 tries using a visual layout from “The Apprentice” for his “presidential” messaging.

   https://www.salon.com/2017/11/29/the-chilling-proof-trump-is-treating-the-presidency-just-like-the-apprentice_partner/

   It goes over about how you’d expect.

   https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-empty-chairs_us_5a1e4d97e4b0dc52b02a33db
5. North 5

   30 November 2017 at 7:55 am

   Sorry folks……”Paul” means “Phil”. Don’t want to be unkind to former National Party list MP Paul Quinn whom from my Barrett’s drinking days in Wellington 40 years ago I recall as a pretty convivial character.
   • Bearded Git 5.1

     30 November 2017 at 9:26 am

     A mere detail, but you have raised a good issue this morning-who is paying Phil Quin? I think we should be told.
   • marty mars 5.2

     30 November 2017 at 9:26 am

     I bet he’s been fending off confused media for days. I thought initially it was him – glad it’s not though im not a quin/n fan although I did name my newfy quinn but that was after the dylan song.
6. Sanctuary 6

   30 November 2017 at 8:02 am

   I don’t listen to any sort of talkback or bother much with the NZ MSM, so I may be living in a bit of a bubble.

   But I have got the distinct feeling from reading social media feedback that the shock jock onslaught on Golriz has fallen flat on it’s face. The “scandal” just refused to develop any legs. The dirty politics machine that feeds the coterie of angry middle aged white male shock jocks & their assorted hangers on like Quinn and Soper never got the wider breakout it was after in it’s attempted character assassination.

   I see the old man defeatist of the left Chris Trotter is wringing his hands again at the fecklessness of the Greens political management, but I am wondering a question.

   Is the power of the corporate MSM – almost every opinion writer in the Herald, all the “senior correspondents”, Garner, Hoskings, Soper, et al – seriously on the wane in the face of millennial disinterest in the anger and misogyny they are peddling? Are they actually becoming old men waving their fists at clouds as the zeitgeist leaves them behind?

   To me, the election outcome indicated that a decisive number of Kiwis no longer get their news from MSM sources. Perhaps the real story of Golriz is the decisive victory of the left’s twitter and FB army over the the attempted smearers?
   • Bearded Git 6.1

     30 November 2017 at 9:28 am

     Trotter hates the Greens-he is old school Labour.
   • NewsFlash 6.2

     30 November 2017 at 11:38 am

     Sanctuary

     I think your right, social media is replacing the old style, and it is very effective and also allows interaction by way of commenting directly to the article and with other participants.

     The oldies (us) tend to watch or listen to the news, but the level of bias and disregard for true journalism has turned it into a lottery as to is accuracy.
     • David Mac 6.2.1

       30 November 2017 at 2:20 pm

       Yes, it’s a paradigm shift in how we consume news. Traditional news services might report ‘The bank was robbed’. We often find out about the robbery via traditional sources but more of us are spending more time with a medium that allows us to function as the social emotionally driven animals we are and articulate how we feel about the robbery.
   • North 6.3

     30 November 2017 at 11:08 pm

     You’re right Sanctuary……fashioning myself (falsely of course) as young, vibrant, wickedly ‘potent’ and attractively devilish, I don’t give a fuck about Hosking’s Maserati/Ferrari penis-extension, or Garner’s strutty ass, or Soper’s so ‘Gloss’ stubble……they’re old and boring! Of course they get a whiff of my styles and they’ll get very nasty. Mock the fuck out of the boring self-loving fools I reckon.
7. JC 7

   30 November 2017 at 8:03 am

   With the alledged allegations of Sexual Misconduct againt Matt Lauer,

   http://money.cnn.com/2017/11/29/media/matt-lauer/index.html

   I wonder if the lease of Hunter Valley Station will be revoked under the OIO… for failing the test of Good character…

   https://www.odt.co.nz/news/national/american-tv-host-buys-13m-otago-property

   https://www.linz.govt.nz/regulatory/overseas-investment/applying-for-consent-purchase-new-zealand-assets/preparing-your-application-oio/investor-test/good-character
   • marty mars 7.1

     30 November 2017 at 9:13 am

     Yes I saw and wondered that too. He wouldn’t pass at this stage so revoke the deal and give the land back to tangata whenua. Sorted ☺
     • JC 7.1.1

       30 November 2017 at 1:36 pm

       Great Solution!

       Don’t know what the outcome was re Rafael and Federico Grozovsky – who bought Onetai Station in 2014?

       “The Labour Party revealed last week the brothers had been found criminally responsible for dumping chemicals from their Argentine tannery.

       The brothers are linked with Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca, which is at the centre of the Panama Papers revelations about how the rich hide their wealth in overseas trusts.”

       http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/302966/oio-apologises-over-taranaki-farm-sale

       https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/302988/labour-to-reveal-more-foreign-buyer-%27mistakes%27

       https://www.nbr.co.nz/article/oio-failed-show-ministers-all-good-character-info-argentinian-brothers-b-188927
   • Cemetery Jones 7.2

     30 November 2017 at 9:36 am

     Another day, another prominent Trump morality critic turning out to be just as bad. Gawsh.
8. Ad 8

   30 November 2017 at 8:05 am

   OMG Garrison Keillor goes down on workplace misdemeanours as well.
   • Antoine 8.1

     30 November 2017 at 8:30 am

     No!!! Really?
     • Morrissey 8.1.1

       30 November 2017 at 8:42 am

       Leading thinker Rush Limbaugh has all the answers…..

       https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vx_lfFwrw5E

       https://www.politico.com/story/2012/03/boehner-limbaugh-slut-remark-inappropriate-073546
     • Ad 8.1.2

       30 November 2017 at 8:43 am

       https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/garrison-keillor-fired_us_5a1ee935e4b017a311ebcad2?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009

       Here you go.
   • marty mars 8.2

     30 November 2017 at 9:19 am

     Hardly a misdemeanour and all I read was his side plus him saying women tried to touch him up all the time when getting selfies so, you know, what’s the problem with touching a woman’s bare back eh.

     Time you trusted someone other than a voice on a radio you know ad.
     • Ad 8.2.1

       30 November 2017 at 9:22 am

       Use the term you like.
       It’s there in the HuffPost link supplied.
       • marty mars 8.2.1.1

         30 November 2017 at 9:30 am

         I re-read it and couldn’t find that word.
9. Morrissey 9

   30 November 2017 at 8:16 am

   GROPERS
   No. 13: WILLIAM JEFFERSON CLINTON

   In a gripping account punctuated by sobs, the Arkansas woman told “Dateline NBC” that in her Little Rock hotel room, Clinton suddenly “turned me around and started kissing me, and that was a real shock. I first pushed him away. I just told him ‘no.’ . . . He tries to kiss me again. He starts biting on my lip. . . . And then he forced me down on the bed. I just was very frightened. I tried to get away from him. I told him ‘no.’ . . . He wouldn’t listen to me.”
   https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/broaddrick022599.htm

   http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2016/10/11/joy-behar-calls-bill-clinton-accusers-tramps-on-view.html

   “GROPERS” is presented by GroperWatch, a division of Daisycutter Sports Inc.
   No.1 George Herbert Walker Bush; No. 2 Bill O’Reilly; No. 3 Al Franken; No. 4 Robin Brooke; No. 5 Lester Beck; No. 6 Arnold Schwarzenegger; No. 7 Joe Biden; No. 8 Rolf Harris; No. 9 Harold Bloom; No. 10 Sir Jimmy Savile; No. 11 Dr Morgan Fahey; No. 12 Prince Harry, AKA “The Big H”
10. Carolyn_nth 10

    30 November 2017 at 8:21 am

    Interesting. Independent, trust run NZ public TV, free online.

    Kia Ora! Welcome to NZPTV – a hub for independently made Kiwi documentaries, dramas, films, discussion and arts programmes plus stories from around the world with a New Zealand focus.

    It’s free, just sign in and start watching.

    We are not government funded and we don’t have shareholders.We are owned by a Trust that gathers donations and sponsorships to assist independent producers create programmes in the public interest. So we hope you will chip in to help make that happen.

    Bryan Bruce is CEO – in the video
    • Morrissey 10.1

      30 November 2017 at 8:36 am

      If Labour has any sense at all, it will support and fund this.
11. wyndham 11

    30 November 2017 at 8:51 am

    Why do I always feel the need to go and have a shower after listening to a Guyon Espiner interview on Morning Report ? Is it because of his ill concealed political bias towards the Right ? Is it the, I don’t know, slimy way he tries to undermine the thought train of the interviewee? His constant interrupting ? There is so much I just feel is creepy.
    His interview with David Parker this am. was a classic example of his style. Or lack of it !
    • In Vino 11.1

      30 November 2017 at 6:32 pm

      Agree, and I dislike his weasel-way of subtly inserting his insinuations into his victims’ mouth. He deserves to be limited to interviewing Winston.
    • North 11.2

      30 November 2017 at 10:37 pm

      Guyon always strikes me as the deputy head prefect of Scots College about 40 years ago…..the one who puzzled everybody on account of his frequent disappearances into the admin block (read headmaster’s office) during periods. Suspected but no one knew for sure that he was in there tittle-tattling on everyone. With those ever so earnest slappy little wettish ‘public’ schoolboy lips. Nothing against him mind ‘cept he’s basically a well fed, well housed, well warmed Tory. Who just cannot keep his fucking mouth shut as subjects attempt to answer questions he’s put to them. Very naughty !
12. eco maori 12

    30 November 2017 at 9:41 am

    I think sky TV just wants to domanate our sports broad casting and squeeze more money out of us so a big no to there actions to ban some Internet sites.
    I take offence to the statement of of William Gallagher. If I examine what happened in the 18th century with NZ Maori and the settlers the way I see it is that Maori did not have any concept of land being sold traded we were part of mother earth. Maori had no notion of assets and that assets appreciated in price so Maori had no concept of the value of land or assets. So does one think that all Maori land was traded in a fair and just way we’ll no because that would be like I played a game of scrabble against my 10 year old granddaughter. You no that at the end of the game I will own all the assets and my granddaughter will have non because she doesn’t no the value of assets and how money works. So you no that my hiperthetal game with my granddaughter would be un fair and this is a fact being ignored by the other cultures of NZ. The neo liberals drilibritly leave a lot of fact out of OUR treaty settlement process like the 1¢ in the dollar reparation Maori are getting. So please don’t let national play the racial card to divide and conquer us left voters . I have had someone say your people sold there land for blankets and wanted more money later on. They in reality thought that they were leasing Maori land out not selling it out right. Well that’s my opinion Kai kaha
13. eco maori 13

    30 November 2017 at 9:51 am

    Why are the MSN not picking up the story on shonky key and the NSA Speargun project this was a massive attempt by key to control everything in NZ WTF Come on people we need this story out there in the public view so this can never be imposed on us I got a bad feeling when I first seen shonky key. Ana tou kai
14. james 14

    30 November 2017 at 10:37 am

    More and more is coming out about Golriz

    Giving a speech (and Golriz was there) James Shaw very clearly said that she was a prosecutor –

    “Golriz is now a human rights lawyer who worked as a prosecutor at the United Nations tribunals for Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia.”

    Pretty clear there. Was he mistaken? Was he trying to mislead us? Was he misled?

    http://www.nziia.org.nz/Portals/285/documents/lists/259/Speech%20-%20NZIIA%20(James%20Shaw)%20-%2030%20May%2017%20(Final).pdf

    top of page 2

    I think there are enough confusing stories about this that it is not unreasonable to think that some people have tried to rewrite history (or at least have deliberately confused the situation at certain times).

    (Yes – I got this link from Kiwi blog – but that does not change the words or the misleading nature of Shaws speech.
    • Muttonbird 14.1

      30 November 2017 at 10:43 am

      Yes – I got this link from Kiwi blog

      You don’t need to say Kiwiblog is where you got the link.

      It’s well known that’s where you get all your opinions from!
      • james 14.1.1

        30 November 2017 at 11:17 am

        “It’s well known that’s where you get all your opinions from!”

        you state this as fact – yet it is incorrect.

        But try commenting on the substance of the point – and not trying to make it a personal attack.

        Or do you have no defence for James Shaws comments
        • marty mars 14.1.1.1

          30 November 2017 at 11:27 am

          It’s true James you are just a spinner with real true rginal thinking – oh deary the right are very scared and desperate now – soon they’ll have you sniffing through rubbish bins for dirt James lol that’s opposition for ya.
        • Muttonbird 14.1.1.2

          30 November 2017 at 11:33 am

          The Greens could run a tighter ship for sure. It was a wrong statement but unintentional as far as I’m concerned.

          Not to mention irrelevant.
          • Macro 14.1.1.2.1

            30 November 2017 at 1:45 pm

            Actually it was not an incorrect statement. She has worked as a prosecutor for the UN’s International Criminal Tribunals around the world – as well as defence counsel.

            I am proud of many of my former students, but the one I am most proud of is Golriz Ghahraman, who took my international criminal law course many years ago at the University of Auckland and is still a dear friend. In the years since my course, Golriz has worked on the Karadzic case, earned an MSt in human rights from Oxford, served as a prosecutor at the Cambodia tribunal, and developed a glittering legal practice representing the powerless and disenfranchised in New Zealand. Most impressive of all, though, just a few weeks ago Golriz became the first refugee MP in New Zealand history — she and her family fled Iran when she was a young girl — as a member of the Green Party.
            Golriz’s success is a tribute to hard work and commitment, and I can only imagine how inspirational her story must be for refugees and women in New Zealand and elsewhere. Which is why I am furious — absolutely furious — about an attack on Golriz written by “a former Labour staffer in New Zealand and Australia” named Phil Quin that is as mendacious as it is shameless.
            Golriz’s sin, in Quin’s eyes? Having the temerity to work as a defence attorney on the Nzirorera and Bikindi cases at the ICTR:

            http://opiniojuris.org/2017/11/28/a-shameless-attack-on-golriz-ghahraman/
            I see Quin has now backtracked and apologised. He might had thought a little more carefully before he bad mouthed this incredible young woman
            https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/99390271/phil-quin-apologises-for-calling-green-mp-golriz-ghahraman-a-genocide-denier
            • weka 14.1.1.2.1.1

              30 November 2017 at 6:10 pm

              Shaw said she was a prosecutor in the Rwanda trials. I think that’s the mistake, she was on the defence team.
      • cleangreen 14.1.2

        30 November 2017 at 5:04 pm

        Is he going to tell us all about the panama papers/ barclay/afgfanistan/who leaked Winstons private details?

        Guess not so we will at least await for a court to find out eh?
    • Rosemary McDonald 14.2

      30 November 2017 at 10:50 am

      ffs James, mate…can you give it a rest?

      You’ve done enough for a mallowpuff, or whatever it is you’re paid in.
      • james 14.2.1

        30 November 2017 at 11:18 am

        How about you try to debate the point – and niot making it a personal attack.

        Or are you happy with James Shaw telling lies (for whatever reason).

        And it is a lie – because what he said is untrue.
        • Rosemary McDonald 14.2.1.1

          30 November 2017 at 11:20 am

          James..its all over red rover…see 15.1

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i9QEAtcz3o8
        • The decrypter 14.2.1.2

          30 November 2017 at 11:38 am

          james –you have not got your BA in trolling yet!!
          • james 14.2.1.2.1

            30 November 2017 at 2:16 pm

            No – but I take it from your comments in this blog calling women ‘Blond Bimbos’ that you have your Masters in misogynistic studies.

            https://thestandard.org.nz/invisibill/#comment-1418846

            now – can we drop the useless comments and start debating the points.
        • Macro 14.2.1.3

          30 November 2017 at 1:55 pm

          James! James has not been telling lies
          https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/99390271/phil-quin-apologises-for-calling-green-mp-golriz-ghahraman-a-genocide-denier
          She has worked both as a prosecutor and on occasion as defence counsel. Both are important – as you will find in your law studies if Justice is to be served. And: I shall let her explain it to you:

          She said it was “incredibly important” even genocide-accused had a sound defence.

          In the Rwandan example, the nation had been marred by “generations of prejudice and hate” feeding into outbursts of violence and “this was the worst case of it in 1994”.

          “But if you leave it, or you perpetrate victor’s justice then you leave this legacy of groups blaming each other as groups and people coming around to a vendetta generations later,“
        • joe90 14.2.1.4

          30 November 2017 at 6:26 pm

          because what he said is untrue.

          Well he could have done a ponyboy and misheard, misspoke, but did not lie….
    • mauī 14.3

      30 November 2017 at 11:21 am

      She worked in a court that prosecutes people for human rights abuses did she not?
      • james 14.3.1

        30 November 2017 at 11:52 am

        But thats not what he said.

        Here – let me break it down to less words for you:

        “Golriz is now a human rights lawyer who worked as a prosecutor”
        • Bill 14.3.1.1

          30 November 2017 at 1:08 pm

          “Golriz worked for United Nations Tribunals as part of both defence (Rwanda, the former Yugoslavia) and prosecution (Cambodia) teams.”

          Meaning James, that she has been on prosecution and defense teams, right?
          • james 14.3.1.1.1

            30 November 2017 at 1:14 pm

            Where are you quoting that from – is it in the same speech that we are talking about?
            • adam 14.3.1.1.1.1

              30 November 2017 at 1:27 pm

              No point letting truth get in the way of your hit job, ah james.
              • james …

                30 November 2017 at 1:31 pm

                adam – I can only think you are having trouble reading.

                I quoted directly from James Shaw speech.

                He has since apologised for being wrong in what he said – so name one “non-truth” that I have said in this.

                So the only one playing with the truth is you – either that or you are unable to work it out for yourself
                • adam …

                  30 November 2017 at 4:40 pm

                  No james, as you always do, you twist things to fit your personal agenda.

                  Which in this case, is to do a hit job on a MP.

                  So the truth, like many of your brethren on the right is political, hence why you can not see the wood – for the trees.
                • mikeS …

                  1 December 2017 at 6:39 am

                  I don’t know why you bother James. From what I can see you’ve stated only facts and quotes from the people involved. You’re wasting your time trying to defend yourself against those who either have a case of cognitive dissonance or are simply unable to admit they are wrong.
            • Bill 14.3.1.1.1.2

              30 November 2017 at 5:50 pm

              It’s from her bio on the Green Party web page.

              https://www.greens.org.nz/candidates/golriz-ghahraman-mp

              The point, James, is that Shaw (by the words you attribute to him) was absolutely correct in what he said. She worked in prosecution teams.

              Anyway. Apart from the bullshit being peddled by some (eg – yourself James), I’m left wondering if some of the angst coming from others is rooted in some bullshit notionof morality that would have us believe the UN always prosecutes for the good, and therefore to be good, someone must be on the side of the prosecution.
              • james …

                30 November 2017 at 6:28 pm

                “The point, James, is that Shaw (by the words you attribute to him) was absolutely correct in what he said. She worked in prosecution teams.”

                He said:

                ““Golriz is now a human rights lawyer who worked as a prosecutor at the United Nations tribunals for Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia.”

                You get that the whole kerfuffle is that she worked on the DEFENCE TEAM right?
                • McFlock …

                  30 November 2017 at 6:41 pm

                  You get the kerfuffle that human rights lawyers ensure the human rights of everyone, right?

                  You get the point that even though the system might be adversarial, the same organisation ensured everyone got fair representation, because that’s how human rights work, right?
                • Bill …

                  30 November 2017 at 7:17 pm

                  You said he’d said

                  “Golriz is now a human rights lawyer who worked as a prosecutor”

                  I answered to that.

                  I don’t understand the kerfuffle. The UN is an institution that exercises power. And just like any other institutional power, it’s not intrinsically benevolent or any such like.

                  Which is why I wrote the second part to my previous comment (maybe you missed it).
                • North …

                  30 November 2017 at 10:47 pm

                  Boiling it all down a bunch of stinking misogynistic Tories don’t like a woman like Golriz because she has what all of them and theirs, and that fumes-spewing D10 Caterpillar Bennett, don’t have……brains, elan, and guts.
              • mikeS …

                1 December 2017 at 6:43 am

                If Shaw was “absolutely correct” as you’ve stated, then why has he apologized for his mistake?

                Although in saying that, having to apologize even though you are absolutely correct is not necessarily uncommon these days..
        • One Two 14.3.1.2

          30 November 2017 at 2:36 pm

          A little mind, looking for jollies on a blog site..

          Time for some self reflection Jimbo…long overdue…
          • james 14.3.1.2.1

            30 November 2017 at 2:39 pm

            And yet – here is James Shaw all over the news websites having to explain how he got it wrong over Golriz in his speech.

            and the insults, and not adding anything to the conversation really dosnt make you look the smartest. Esp when I was right !
            • adam 14.3.1.2.1.1

              30 November 2017 at 4:44 pm

              Nope you were/are just a prat in carrying on a hit job. At least everyone here now knows you don’t support human rights or a fair trial.
              • cleangreen …

                30 November 2017 at 5:10 pm

                Yep that’s about right he appears to be a support hit for the past Government alraight so belongs on Kiwiblog not here.

                I am now left wing there I have said it, can he?

                I side with ‘You Fool; as he/she said only that Shaw got it wrong, not that he lied.

                I heard this on RNZ news myself too.
                (I am not a green party member I just believe in honesty.

                I voted every election Labour/NZF.
    • You_Fool 14.4

      30 November 2017 at 11:52 am

      Whilst I know I am just feeding a troll who already knows this, I have decided to actually engage you in this.

      Having read the link finally (your link doesn’t work, and I wouldn’t trust anything from Kiwiblog unless i can find it via google), it does appear to be an error by James Shaw. I don’t think he deliberately lied, but merely got it wrong (or at least his speech write got it wrong and no one picked it up). The focus of the speech was not on the new candidates, but on the Green’s commitment to change the government for the betterment of everyone. The bits about Golriz Ghahraman seems a bit of a last minute(ish) inclusion, due to releasing the party list that morning.

      I do think that most of this (the greater Ghahraman mud-slinging) has been blown up because of a lack of understanding on what the court systems are actually like, as well as a desire to be concise by PR people (hence the wording on the website). It would appear that the speech writer for this speech also misunderstood the words used, and that Ghahraman was to polite to correct her leader on a minor point in a public forum.
      • james 14.4.1

        30 November 2017 at 11:56 am

        Sorry re link – for some reason it dropped the .pdf off at the end.

        “it does appear to be an error by James Shaw. I don’t think he deliberately lied, but merely got it wrong (or at least his speech write got it wrong and no one picked it up).”

        This may well be true – but it seems unusual that several papers have gotten it wrong, and each time she ends up prosecuting. And then she never reads the articles (or her greens party bio) and corrects the mistake.
        • You_Fool 14.4.1.1

          30 November 2017 at 12:04 pm

          It appears to me that the only time she was said to be a prosecutor on the trials was this speech by Shaw. Any other time was just saying he was a part of the trial, and any time she was asked she said she was part of the defense. The only issue is people like you with a bone to pick not understanding what the words actually mean and choosing a different interpretation of the slightly ambiguous original statement on the greens website (which was a true account of what happened, just keeping things concise). Also the mudslinging by someone with skin in the game who seems to be someone who had conflicts of interest (and opinion)

          I am not sure what cover up or conspiracy you think is happening.

          Also re link… even putting the .pdf on didn’t open the file.
          • james 14.4.1.1.1

            30 November 2017 at 12:56 pm

            Thats the point – that was not the only time.

            Here is another:

            https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/oct/17/the-refugee-mp-golriz-ghahraman-on-why-she-had-to-enter-new-zealand-politics

            edit – that link works 😉
            • You_Fool 14.4.1.1.1.1

              30 November 2017 at 4:01 pm

              It appears the guardian got it wrong in the original article and have now amended once someone noticed. I still don’t see a conspiracy, other than lazy people making assumptions about someone else without clarifying.
              • McFlock …

                30 November 2017 at 4:09 pm

                I also see the guardian typo’d “prosector”.

                Somehow the Greens will get blamed for that, too…
        • Psycho Milt 14.4.1.2

          30 November 2017 at 12:45 pm

          …it seems unusual that several papers have gotten it wrong, and each time she ends up prosecuting.

          Doesn’t seem unusual to me. Lazy buggers jump to conclusions and don’t check them, in this case the assumption that a human rights lawyer working on war crimes cases would be prosecuting. DPF based this whole dirty-politics hit on that assumption, so it’s hardly surprising there are journos who make the same assumption. Fact is, we know she did mention to interviewers that she was involved in defence as well as prosecution – if lazy bastards reported it otherwise, that’s their mistake, not hers.
          • james 14.4.1.2.1

            30 November 2017 at 12:54 pm

            “Fact is, we know she did mention to ONE interviewer”.

            I do not think it has been established that she has mentioned it to more than one.

            Happy to be corrected if you have any evidence
            • McFlock 14.4.1.2.1.1

              30 November 2017 at 1:31 pm

              lol
              Happy to be corrected if you have any evidence of anything other than people running their own abridged (and slightly wrong) versions of her CV.
              • james …

                30 November 2017 at 2:18 pm

                Yeah – she makes it so clear – and everyone else gets it wrong. Thats a TUI billboard right there.
                • McFlock …

                  30 November 2017 at 2:51 pm

                  Come on, be fair – you guys have to work really hard to feel misled over this.

                  to do so you have to ignore everything she’s said, and her CV, and assume that she personally vetted the wording used by every reporter, editor, and speechmaker who felt compelled to say/write a couple of sentences about her background.
                  • cleangreen …

                    30 November 2017 at 5:18 pm

                    ‘Let it go michael’ ‘james’ – (credit to Vogels bread advert’)
            • Psycho Milt 14.4.1.2.1.2

              30 November 2017 at 2:59 pm

              “Fact is, we know she did mention to ONE interviewer”.

              Well, if you’re counting, we know she mentioned it to two: Kirsty Johnston and whoever did the Vice interview.

              But so what? Do you have some basis to suspect she might have been happy to talk about her defence role to one or two interviewers, but to others she decided to give the misleading impression she’d only worked as a prosecutor? Because that sounds laughable to me.
            • weka 14.4.1.2.1.3

              30 November 2017 at 6:02 pm

              “Fact is, we know she did mention to ONE interviewer”.

              I do not think it has been established that she has mentioned it to more than one.

              Happy to be corrected if you have any evidence

              Here you go,

              http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/11/five-times-golriz-ghahraman-was-open-about-her-defence-work.html

              Now, upthread you accused James Shaw of telling a lie because of a mistake he made in a speech. In your mind mistakenly saying something untrue = telling a lie. You just made a mistake in what you said about Golriz so I think it appropriate from now on we call you a liar.

              Today I’m going to call you a fucking liar, because you’ve obviously not bothered to follow the story even in the MSM but are quite happy to spread lies about Ghahraman from a place of being ill informed. That looks like out and out prejudice to me. That you are doing so in a clear dirty politics context makes you a dirty politics apologist (at the least).

              If none of that is true, if you’re not a fucking liar, bigot and dirty politics apologist, don’t @ me here, demonstrate it in your behaviour over the next week and month and year. Because the shit that is going on right now in NZ is dangerous for democracy and the well being of this country and you are going to have to pick a side. I’m not talking left right here, I’m talking right and wrong in terms of ethics.
              • james …

                30 November 2017 at 6:20 pm

                Weka,

                Wrote a long reply – decided to delete. But things are obv getting heated in here.

                I will apologise for anything that I said on this matter that may have been incorrect, and will not comment on this matter further.

                Peace out !
                • In Vino …

                  1 December 2017 at 12:51 am

                  James – never have I known someone to spend so much time and effort claiming they were right when the leader of a political party later openly admitted it was so, but in such a non-issue of irrelevance.
                  You have succeeded, I think, in helping NZ to understand that the empty diatribes directed at Golriz are nothing more than that.
                  Thanks for your help, James. Legal experts who universally exonerate Golriz (find one who condemns her) would probably also like to thank you.
    • North 14.5

      30 November 2017 at 11:13 pm

      You seem to be over-investing in this Golriz bizo James. what’s up ? Maybe you should give it a break and try Bitcoin. Sir john Key’s running seminars you know….
      • james 14.5.1

        1 December 2017 at 10:32 am

        Apparently on John Key – there are indeed a few people dumb enough to fall for that.

        On Golriz – Im simply stepping out of the conversation on that one.
        • Muttonbird 14.5.1.1

          1 December 2017 at 10:39 am

          Wise decision. It looks like you guys have lost that one as well as the GE.
        • Robert Guyton 14.5.1.2

          1 December 2017 at 10:43 am

          That whole “Quin back-tracking and apologising” thing must have hurt, James! You’d backed him to the hilt, invested in his claims and suddenly, gosh, sorry everyone, I was wrong; you must have felt a right git!
          • james 14.5.1.2.1

            1 December 2017 at 11:59 am

            No – he backtracked on calling her a genocide denyer (something that I did not mention at all in my post – I doubt anyone could be involved in any side of this and be one).

            But – the rest continue to raise legitimate questions about people being misled.
            • Robert Guyton 14.5.1.2.1.1

              1 December 2017 at 3:43 pm

              No. Not “legitimate questions”, James. Low-brow mud-slinging is all and you lapped it up like spit milk, Tory kitten that you are.
15. Muttonbird 15

    30 November 2017 at 10:41 am

    Some serious backtracking by Quin here. When you start deleting tweets, it’s all over.

    http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/11/guy-who-called-golriz-ghahraman-a-genocide-denier-denies-calling-her-a-genocide-denier.html
    • Rosemary McDonald 15.1

      30 November 2017 at 11:09 am

      Well, bugger me…

      https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/99390271/phil-quin-apologises-for-calling-green-mp-golriz-ghahraman-a-genocide-denier

      https://m5.paperblog.com/i/105/1052423/eating-crow-L-aHdZc3.jpeg
      • Muttonbird 15.1.1

        30 November 2017 at 11:23 am

        Good that it’s across media but they still won’t say what exactly Phil Quin did in Rwanda.

        As described above and in the other thread he worked directly for the undemocratic Kagame regime and the Rwandan Police force. Apart from the imprisonment of opposition figures, there are serious questions about brutality and the use of torture by that government and its machinery in order to hold onto power.

        Phil Quin appears to have facilitated that and advised them on how to shut down dissent.

        I’d like to see the media get to the bottom of his story too instead of calling him a former Labour staffer and portraying him as some sort of missionary figure.
    • joe90 15.2

      30 November 2017 at 12:38 pm

      Seems Phil Quin is an idiot.

      This (hopefully) my final tweet on all this – Phil Quin repeatedly said Peter Robinson, co-author of article with @golrizghahraman, was a genocide denier. Never gave evidence when I asked for it. Another int'l law academic rejects another Phil Quin claim: https://t.co/8SlKikvzSd— Max Harris (@mdnharris) November 28, 2017

      https://dovjacobs.com/2017/11/28/a-ridiculous-attack-on-peter-robinson/

      Dov Jacobs is an Assistant Professor of International Law at Leiden University (one of the best universities in Europe for international law). More on him if you want to check his background here: https://t.co/ipJdPFD1vA. /2— Max Harris (@mdnharris) November 28, 2017

      https://twitter.com/mdnharris/status/935649043358904320
16. Rosemary McDonald 16

    30 November 2017 at 10:41 am

    For those of us concerned about Science in New Zealand…this from Natrad this morning is well worth a listen…http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/ninetonoon/audio/2018623630/loss-of-top-scientists-will-damage-uni-research

    The part of the program where the Vice Chancellor has her turn is a classic tirade of un – punctuated corporatespeak.

    I seriously believe it was a robot speaking as barely was there any pause for breath.

    Impressive, and disturbing that again Kiwi science (and surprisingly, nursing) will take yet another hit.

    Ryan did eventually get the VC to stop speaking and tried to get a couple of salient questions to her …but sadly….only succeeded in pushing ‘play’ again.
    • oncewastim 16.1

      30 November 2017 at 11:58 am

      It was bloody painful to listen to the woman!
      I almost felt embarassed for her.
      But when all said and done, her and her ilk are the natural consequence of commoditising education. The business of business, everything costed and fuck all valued.
17. Ad 17

    30 November 2017 at 12:28 pm

    James Shaw has had to come out and apologise about Ghahraman:

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11950392

    This is her last line of defence.
    If the leader coming out with a mea culpa doesn’t shift the media narrative, I can’t see her surviving.

    Pretty starkly obvious that the Beehive media team are intent on solely protecting their government, otherwise they would have put a fresh story out there to compete with the Gharaman one.

    Robertson will change the narrative with the 6 monthly budgetary review set peice tomorrow, but a week is a long, long time to swing in the cold media air.
    • Bill 17.1

      30 November 2017 at 1:05 pm

      No Ad. Shaw has apologised about what he said about Ghahraman.

      I admit to being somewhat aghast at the pathetic handling of all this. It does. not. bode well. That said, there is absolutely no reason whatsoever why she won’t “survive” (as you put it).

      Fuckers have to get their shit together though.
      • Ad 17.1.1

        30 November 2017 at 1:16 pm

        This is Shaw putting his political body on the line to stop the story.

        Her boss.
        Replay this under Clark and shed be gone already.

        They’re a small set of mps with a small agenda to make happen. Can’t afford another big hit.

        Shaw is gutsy to do it, but it better work.
        • weka 17.1.1.1

          30 November 2017 at 1:27 pm

          Looks to me like normal GP response. Seeing a mistake and acknowledging it. It’s what adults do. Hardly putting one’s body on the line to say yep there’s a mistake in one line of a speech I gave 6 months ago, my bad.
        • Bill 17.1.1.2

          30 November 2017 at 1:39 pm

          Well Ad, if your take is correct, and given this wee doozy in the piece you linked, it ain’t working…

          Ghahraman worked in the defence team as an unpaid intern at the Rwanda Tribunal for Joseph Nzirorera, who died before he could be convicted of genocide…

          The rest of that para goes on to mention that Simon Bikindi (the guy beside her in the photo doing the rounds) was convicted of “incitement to genocide”.

          Doesn’t mention that the prosecution was seeking conviction on the weightier charges of genocide, or that they tried to use his fucking song lyrics as evidence!

          cut and paste of verdict according to wiki

          In December 2008, Bikindi was sentenced to 15 years in prison with credit for 7 years already served, for incitement to commit genocide. The conviction stemmed from the fact that the court considered it proved beyond reasonable doubt that towards the end of June 1994 he had made a speech from an Interahamwe vehicle equipped with a Public address system, urging and subsequently reminding the Hutu population to exterminate all Tutsis, whom he referred to as “snakes”.[17] All the other charges were dismissed; in particular, the court considered that while some songs had an inciting character, they had all been written before 1994, thus before the genocide, and that there was not sufficient evidence to prove that Bikindi had played a role in the dissemination of his songs on radio during the genocide, or that he had personally engaged in killings or organising of militias
    • North 17.2

      30 November 2017 at 11:17 pm

      My goodness Ad……you’re sounding cynical and sly to match Steven Joyce……”I can’t see her surviving”. Get a grip man.
18. Grey Area 18

    30 November 2017 at 12:43 pm

    She just needs to hang in there and I really hope she does. She has done nothing wrong.

    This is just a Dirty Politics hatchet job and must be resisted. This shit has got to stop!

    Kia kaha Golriz!
19. mary_a 19

    30 November 2017 at 1:05 pm

    Now here’s a turn up for the books …

    Those journalists involved in Winston Peters complaint re his alleged leaked personal superannuation overpayment details, are now quite agitated. RW journalists have approached their union for assistance, claiming Peters is harassing them, interfering with the right of freedom of speech!

    WTF!!!!!

    In the past nine years, journalists of the right wing persuasion, have never acted as the proxy of the people, giving Key and Natz a smooth run all the way through! In fact they still are playing Natz’s game of dirty politics. Golriz being a very recent prime example of their biased sewer tactics!

    Draining of that cesspit of squalor, is proving to be not such an easy task!

    Anyway as old Jonesy would have said “they don’t like it up ’em!” Too bloody right they don’t. I hope Winston wins his case.

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/99380954/winston-peters-called-on-to-abandon-harassment-of-journalists
    • james 19.1

      30 November 2017 at 2:22 pm

      “Anyway as old Jonesy would have said “they don’t like it up ’em!” Too bloody right they don’t. I hope Winston wins his case.”

      Fair enough – everyone is entitled to their views . But can you please state one thing in Winstons case against the journalists that they should be sued for?

      Should Journo’s be able to be sued for publishing something that is true?
      • Muttonbird 19.1.1

        30 November 2017 at 2:28 pm

        It was also confidential.

        Or do you think everyone’s private information should be available to be published?
        • james 19.1.1.1

          30 November 2017 at 2:32 pm

          If it is in the public interest then – why not.

          There were plenty on here that were happy when other journalist published confidential information in the public interest.
          • Muttonbird 19.1.1.1.1

            30 November 2017 at 2:37 pm

            And who decides what’s in the public interest? The National party ministers doing the hit-job?
            • james 19.1.1.1.1.1

              30 November 2017 at 2:41 pm

              The person who publishes it.

              Can you please state one thing in Winstons case against the journalists that they should be sued for?
              • David Mac …

                30 November 2017 at 3:03 pm

                I think that will come down to Winston’s lawyers being able to prove that a man that was asking the nation to vote for him had his prospects hobbled by a published manipulation of the truth.
                • james …

                  30 November 2017 at 3:36 pm

                  and what was this ” manipulation of the truth”?

                  Nobody as far as I have read has said any of what was published was untrue.
                  • David Mac …

                    30 November 2017 at 3:46 pm

                    I guess it’s going cost Winston 1000’s to have that question explored James. Days of chewing it over in court. A bet that wiley old fox is unlikely to be making unless the trainer has had a word in his ear. My 2 bob are on Winston’s horse.
                    • alwyn …

                      1 December 2017 at 12:28 am

                      And my bet is that this case of Winnies will be paid for by the taxpayer.
                      I wonder if the agreement for the Crown to pay for all the costs of Winnies’ Court Cases was one of the items in the 38 pages that JA is insisting on hiding from the New Zealand public?
                      Along with the instructions that no-one from the Green Party is to be allowed into any position of power in the Government.
              • Muttonbird …

                30 November 2017 at 3:03 pm

                He’s not sueing journalists. He’s asking for the communication, if any, between them and senior government figures.

                In this case it’s the apparent collusion between the government of the day and the media to do an expose on a political rival. You say the media decides the public interest but when the leak came from government offices it’s all a bit murky.
                • james …

                  30 November 2017 at 3:35 pm

                  “He’s not sueing journalists. He’s asking for the communication, if any, between them and senior government figures.”

                  Really – what do you call it when he seeks monetary damages form journalist?

                  You are either a liar – or sadly uninformed.

                  https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/99333558/deputy-prime-minister-winston-peters-seeks-monetary-damages-from-journalists
                  • Muttonbird …

                    1 December 2017 at 1:19 am

                    Uninformed about a two day old development? Guilty!

                    As the article says this was not in the original claim. The original claim asked for information on communications between ministers, senior public servants, and the media in oder to get to the bottom of what Peters considers an illegal leak.

                    Looks like the judge wants Peters to state his further intentions now if a case for civil action can be made against some or all of these parties. For what reason I don’t know – I’m not a lawyer. But if a case can be made that these two members of the media colluded with government ministers or staff on the release of Peters’ confidential information and that the action is unlawful then yes, sue them for damages.

                    Now, it looks like you’ve gotten yourself into trouble for calling people liars all day. Perhaps you just need to wind your neck in.
                    • james …

                      1 December 2017 at 10:28 am

                      Perhaps then you should not make a statement of fact without looking into it. Else you look stupid.
                    • Muttonbird …

                      1 December 2017 at 10:37 am

                      At least you’ve walked back from ‘liar’. Even the slow learners get it eventually.
      • mary_a 19.1.2

        30 November 2017 at 5:52 pm

        James (19.1) … Winston Peters’ superannuation details are private and confidential. The journalists concerned breached confidentiality, which is or should be sacrosanct.

        True or not, the disclosure of Winston’s overpayment was obviously done with malice, to hit NZF at the last election.
20. veutoviper 20

    30 November 2017 at 1:26 pm

    I have not had time to keep up with everything on TS in the last few days, so sorry if this is repeating information elsewhere here, but here are a few statements on the criticism of Golriz Ghahraman from various NZ legal organisations

    NZ Law Society – http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1711/S00326/implied-criticism-of-defence-lawyers-unacceptable.htm

    NZ Criminal Bar Association – http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1711/S00347/nz-criminal-bar-association-defends-golriz-ghahraman.htm

    New Zealand Bar Association – https://www.nzbar.org.nz/news/nzba-responds-criticism-lawyers-defending-war-criminals

    h/t Felix Geiringer https://twitter.com/BarristerNZ

    Also here is Gordon Campbell’s (excellent as always) take on the situation (and other topical matters)

    http://werewolf.co.nz/2017/11/gordon-campbell-on-journalism-peters-and-ghahraman/

    Liked this bit

    No doubt, the Greens can be irritatingly sanctimonious at times. But so can Steven Joyce. And Ghahraman’s frankness about her past career has made for an interesting contrast with another politician – former PM Bill English – whose own party also packaged him in glowing personal terms. Throughout 2017, we all heard a great deal about Honest Bill, the no frills, straight shooter from Dipton etc even while English peddled patent untruths about the Barclay affair, and Labour’s tax plans. Ultimately, if the likes of David Farrar and Jordan Williams want to campaign for political truth in packaging, maybe they should start closer to home. Because in that regard, Golriz Ghahraman seems to be the least of our problems.
21. ianmac 21

    30 November 2017 at 1:58 pm

    “Phil Quin apologises for calling Green MP Golriz Ghahraman a ‘genocide denier’

    Sort of. He denies it at first but his tweets exist still. Pity the other hunters cannot or will not recant.

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/99390271/phil-quin-apologises-for-calling-green-mp-golriz-ghahraman-a-genocide-denier
22. joe90 22

    30 November 2017 at 2:05 pm

    Theresa May condemns addled dotard for promoting far right hate, addled dotard replies to the wrong Theresa May.

    Theresa @theresamay, don’t focus on me, focus on the destructive Radical Islamic Terrorism that is taking place within the United Kingdom. We are doing just fine!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 30, 2017
    • Macro 22.1

      30 November 2017 at 2:18 pm

      lol!
      🙄 gezz that man is an idiot, bigot, xenophobe and sexual predator and he just gets worse.
      HTF anyone could have voted for him – Oh I know! He’s the most popular President ever – with the alt right.
    • mikeS 22.2

      1 December 2017 at 6:53 am

      Yes he’s a dick, but he has actually got a point regarding the radical Islamic terrorism in the UK.
23. james 23

    30 November 2017 at 2:23 pm

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11950439

    A fuel tax for Auckland.

    This wont hurt struggling families in the slightest.
24. piper 24

    30 November 2017 at 2:28 pm

    This week in the house,the opposition have been baiting the speaker about his ruling impartiality.Listening from day one, of our coalition government,the speaker has introduce simple rules,that fairly access those on both sides a supplementary question add on,if one or other side stepped out of line.Today being Thursday,home time for the polo!s,was simple SIMON,looking for a quick exit from the house,as he belligerent challenged the speaker,who has been serious fair,and not ejected anyone yet.
25. alwyn 25

    30 November 2017 at 2:37 pm

    Well it didn’t take very long to reach this state did it?
    https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/99402320/business-sector-most-downbeat-since-early-2009-anz-survey
    Business confidence is at its lowest level since early 2009. And we’ve only had this Government for about 6 weeks.
    Why can’t they get things under control. They had 9 years to come up with some plans and projects and they wasted it all.
    • AB 25.1

      30 November 2017 at 3:39 pm

      Your assuming that surveys of business confidence are a meaningful measure of something, and that that ‘something’ is important.
      These are contentious assumptions.

      Also, say I went to a group of people and asked “are you happy that the party you didn’t vote for is in government?” Would I then make great play of the fact that they said “no” – as though that told me something new?

      Society is not an appendage of business – get used to it.
    • One Anonymous Bloke 25.2

      30 November 2017 at 4:12 pm

      While I know you just love working yourself up into a frenzy, It would be unfair to let you remain ignorant.

      The evidence shows business leaders are naturally less confident about the wider economy when there’s a Labour Government in charge, yet they remain relatively more confident about their own businesses. Hence any slump in wider business confidence is more a reflection of business leaders’ pro-National bias than a genuine slide in confidence linked to conditions on the ground.
      • Macro 25.2.1

        30 November 2017 at 4:38 pm

        Interestingly the town talk here is that things are quiet…
        Can’t say I have noticed it – the usual summer rush is upon us now with the supermarket queues increasing in length, and parking spaces becoming tighter by the day. But you know – consumerism has to be alive and well.
        I guess the hype for Black Friday which really is a north american thing didn’t result in a rush to the special bins – oh dear! Long faces. Let’s blame it on the Govt.
        • One Anonymous Bloke 25.2.1.1

          30 November 2017 at 7:00 pm

          I suspect that nine years of the “right wing bonfire” has produced a predictable result. Treasury’s been saying for a while that the economy’s sustained by immigration, as opposed to innovation.

          The economy needs a solid dose of Keynes.

          The country needs an ethical correction.
26. joe90 26

    30 November 2017 at 2:47 pm

    Thug bro’s

    .@netanyahu yesterday announced that #Israel is set to open an embassy in #Kigali. He made the announcement in a tweet after meeting with President #Kagame in Nairobi, #Kenya. "This historic step comes as Israel is expanding its presence in #Africa." https://t.co/P61iSgbnr5 pic.twitter.com/HgJwhcawds— Government of Rwanda (@RwandaGov) November 29, 2017
27. piper 27

    30 November 2017 at 3:09 pm

    Duck,put away the book you,have cherished this seat you hold,get your shit together and get on with it.Or is the other side correct challenging your competence.
28. james 28

    30 November 2017 at 3:41 pm

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11950585

    This is going to be comical.

    On one hand
    “Peters plans to ignore the advice of top officials at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade and will introduce the royalty which was promised in the Labour-New Zealand First coalition agreement.”

    On the other
    “But Parker backed Vitalis. He told reporters export taxes were prohibited by all of New Zealand’s trade agreements “so we have got to find a remedy that is consistent with those obligations.”

    and what was promised:

    “Labour and New Zealand First’s coalition agreement specifically includes a provision to “introduce a royalty on exports of bottled water.”

    So lets do this and see what happens….
    • Muttonbird 28.1

      1 December 2017 at 1:02 am

      Just raise the permit for bottlers which use artesian or river sources.
      • mikeS 28.1.1

        1 December 2017 at 6:55 am

        Just put a tax on taking water for bottling and don’t call it an export tax..problem solved
29. Molly 29

    30 November 2017 at 3:45 pm

    Despite the number of well-written and accurate responses, the howls of outrage regarding Golriz Ghahraman continue. All howls and no ears.

    A pack of pseudo- alphas running round in circles claiming to be another one who managed to draw blood.

    When you have someone who considers themselves not only a self-made man, but a well-made man, the mere existence of people who go through life concerned about such abstract issues as human rights, equality or environment make them extremely uncomfortable.

    The self-image of such people requires a narrow mirror, (and the necessary absence of any comparative value systems.)

    Otherwise:
    – next to a compassionate person they appear vindictive,
    – next to a truthful person they look deceitful,
    – next to a honorable person, they look soulless,
    – next to a thoughtful person, they look witless,
    – next to a kind person, they look venal,
    – next to a whole person, they look piecemeal.

    It is so much simpler to believe that they are the top of the heap, even if it is a vindictive, deceitful, soulless, witless, venal, piecemeal heap. (The thought that not everyone cares to climb that particular pile is particularly galling, and is dismissed as soon as it occurs.)

    The delight to discover – or create – a perceived link in the chainmail of a shining knight!

    The passionate dismantling of words, punctuation marks and edited articles shows a discernment for clarity and fullness not often exhibited by those who are currently engaging in such a dazzling display of wordplay gymnastics.

    I’ve been reading the comments by some of our own Standard rightwingers, and I find it hard to give them any credit at all, as they wilfully disengage when responses show their logic failures, and their stated standard of accuracy and reality is so far removed from their usual lassez-faire approach to truth and honesty that it is pitiful.

    And despite it all, the truth is one that Ghahraman does not have to apologise for.

    We are once again witnessing an example of deliberately, and falsely representing facts in order to diminish someone – in order to ignore their voice.

    Also given published papers that confirm the falseness of our last PM, a suspiciously timed case of DP, or at very least a prime example of bullying. By grown adults who should know better.

    I do feel a kind of embarrassment for them, which does not make a difference in the scheme of things but does make me wonder: Do they have such low standards for themselves that these actions are supposedly elevating them?

    …and why the hell are we still giving them an audience?
    • ianmac 29.1

      30 November 2017 at 3:49 pm

      I should have put this here

      “Phil Quin apologises for calling Green MP Golriz Ghahraman a ‘genocide denier’

      Sort of. He denies it at first but his tweets exist still. Pity the other hunters cannot or will not recant.

      https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/99390271/phil-quin-apologises-for-calling-green-mp-golriz-ghahraman-a-genocide-denier
30. piper 30

    30 November 2017 at 3:59 pm

    Debate,why the notes.
31. joe90 31

    30 November 2017 at 4:11 pm

    The evangelical nut jobs gotta have Jews to fulfill their end times body count so they can get themselves raptured AF.

    The Israeli gov't says Trump is going to recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital shortly, probably by this coming Sunday, on the back of Evangelist pressure. Also: moving the embassy to Jerusalem. https://t.co/YHIS5aXlX7— Lisa Goldman (@lisang) November 29, 2017

    https://twitter.com/lisang/status/935939813915676673
32. piper 32

    30 November 2017 at 4:23 pm

    Wains in the parliament house,its time to say,we are changing our humanity care,do you wish your child to be a media ridicule of your political care.
33. piper 33

    30 November 2017 at 4:45 pm

    We shall be thankful for the Parlamentry break.A break bleating,do i need another three years.Who shall lead our hope.Bingo number, crusher,number basher,number blond.Desporation,is in the wind.
34. rod 34

    30 November 2017 at 5:20 pm

    Is James really Mike Hosking in drag ? I understand James is his third given name.
    • James 34.1

      30 November 2017 at 9:31 pm

      Nope.
      • rod 34.1.1

        1 December 2017 at 4:59 pm

        Not very convincing James, try a bit harder.
35. cleangreen 35

    30 November 2017 at 5:25 pm

    Winston is entitled to search for the truth about who leaked his private information, it is our rights to seek justice and if anyone has an issue with this then we have a real problem as when justice is not done the society will break down as we all bekieve in justice being served.

    Date for court is 7th December so come on you two Journalists!! let us see them if you have nothing to hide whats the issue? do you want to impeade justice being sought?
    • James 35.1

      30 November 2017 at 8:44 pm

      On those grounds I assume you did not approve of the book Hagar did with the private correspondence of Whaleoil that was stolen.

      Or are you a hypocrite. Yeah thought so.
      • John up North 35.1.1

        30 November 2017 at 10:45 pm

        James, James, James…….. the material Hagar included in his book has been proven to be of benefit to the pubic interest/good. If you don’t recall or didn’t read the book it clearly outs the whole machine behind Dirty Politics, names names and uses the “stolen” emails as proof as to the characters hard at work.

        Yes, we all acknowledge there was a hack, and the hacker realising the material he obtained outlined nasty behavior by shitty people passed that material on in what I would call a whistle blower action.

        The hacking of the oily one was an action that was illegal.

        The whistle blowing and publishing of the material was not………… else Hagar would have been dragged through the courts or sued by people named in the book ( funny thing that not a single person named in the book has brought any proceedings against Hagar…………… wonder why that is???)

        This was found to be in the public interest/good.

        The invasion of privacy of a citizen (who was also a politician) revealed no information that was in the public interest/good, the initial mistake which lead to the overpayment was a MSD error (some 50,000 others also were overpaid in the same period) and clearly was a leak with the aim to discredit Winston and have a negative impact on NZF come polling day.

        So Clean Green and others are not being hypocritical about this issue and your whole argument is tosh same as the BS you peddled with Golriz.

        Oh and how bout that John Key fella being found out lying to NZ about Speargun?? Maybe he’ll keep his word and resign.
        • james 35.1.1.1

          1 December 2017 at 10:27 am

          Who makes you the arbitrator of what is or is not in the public interest?

          ” initial mistake which lead to the overpayment was a MSD error”

          Do you have a citation for this statement of ‘fact’? Because I have not see this at all?
          • Jeremy 35.1.1.1.1

            1 December 2017 at 5:03 pm

            As you cannot seem to be able to use a web search engine:

            https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/98422219/thousands-of-overpaid-pensions-superannuation-no-more-an-issue-than-tax-refunds
            • Muttonbird 35.1.1.1.1.1

              1 December 2017 at 5:13 pm

              Trouble for James is if he doesn’t do the research he looks a bit stupid.
          • solkta 35.1.1.1.2

            1 December 2017 at 5:12 pm

            You really are a crap troll.
36. Pete 36

    30 November 2017 at 9:06 pm

    We had a Prime Minister who for years lied about many things large and small. More of those lies come to be known as time marches on.

    And on a site like this I find someone accusing of James Shaw of lying and acting as if it is one the crime of the century or at least he is unfit for the job he is in.

    I personally don’t think he did lie, but say he did. What would be the real import of what he did? Is democracy at risk? Did a Government get to be in power because of it?

    One thing the past few years has taught us is that lying is okay. It’s what you do. Well it’s what people like John Key and Bill English were accustomed to doing and accomplished at.

    The outrage by the champions of Key, English, McCully, Collins and Co. at the thought of politicians other than National lying at once makes me want to laugh, to spew and also say, “Fuck off.”
    • McFlock 36.1

      30 November 2017 at 9:22 pm

      Ever hear the saying “don’t vote, it just encourages them”? What about “they’re all as bad as each other”? Or maybe “they’re all liars, just out for the money”?

      All of those lines that are used to discourage people from voting, to get them to opt-out of following what’s being done to them and in their name.

      That’s what lets 47% tories win government.

      There’s only one side that has habitual and orchestrated liar, and they want everyone to think all the parties are as bad as they are. Because then they win.
37. Robert Guyton 37

    30 November 2017 at 9:19 pm

    Run, Jamesy, run!
    • James 37.1

      30 November 2017 at 9:34 pm

      Robert my old stalker. Hope you are well.
38. eco maori 38

    30 November 2017 at 10:32 pm

    Thanks for the video escort to Auckland but you have to tell the people in front of me to drive a bit faster or at least 90klm lol. We are visiting my daughter and mokos while Iv got a couple of days off. Could see they were trying to drum up some drama they must behave like this to make up for there other inadequacy. lol Kia kaha
39. mosa 39

    30 November 2017 at 10:38 pm

    Corporate news and the royal diversion.

    https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2017/11/28/bbc-dedicated-50-coverage-harrys-engagement-heres-forgot-cover/
40. piper 40

    30 November 2017 at 10:52 pm

    Who says,question,dare we chance them

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS