Our international shame

Written By: - Date published: 7:41 am, February 13th, 2013 - 192 comments
Categories: International - Tags: , ,

It’s not often I agree with Judith Collins but when she describes Richard Prosser’s racist filth as an “international embarrassment” I couldn’t agree more.

That said, her government’s collusion in the Pacific Solution is probably even more damaging to our international reputation. New Zealand has long had an international reputation for being a fair dealer, a nation that leads on human rights issues and the environment. But this government has backtracked on both.

I could make economic arguments about how this brand damage will cost us (and it will) but to be frank, I’m sick of the bullshit game of monetising everything in order to ascribe it value. Which is to say we shouldn’t be as worried about what this costs us as we should be about the fact we are a better nation than this and we should be aspiring to be better.

In the meantime, yes, Winston needs to sack Prosser. But while we’ve got a government willing to dog-whistle on refuges and an opposition that colludes in those dog-whistles (such as David Shearer refusing to state he’d scrap Key’s Pacific Solution policy) I’m not holding my breath. If he does go I suspect it’ll be more for how explicit he made himself rather than the sentiments he expressed.

Update: Darien Fenton has pointed out some of the work she’s done on the Pacific Solution issue and it’s good solid Labour values stuff. I just wish David Shearer’s line had been that strong from the start.

192 comments on “Our international shame ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Matthew Hooton 1
    13 February 2013 at 7:50 am

    Winston can’t sack Prosser. Winston agrees with Prosser. See for example http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10338138 Apparently, moderate Muslims shield fundamentalist, terrorist Muslims. This guy became Helen Clark’s foreign minister and is your next coalition partner, or ours, or preferably no ones.

    • mickysavage 1.1
      13 February 2013 at 8:12 am

      Well Matthew Key seems to be backing away from his refusal to negotiate with Peters or NZ First despite his earlier “principled” stance. Not so principled now is he.

    • Skinny 1.2
      13 February 2013 at 8:15 am

      Yes and we know where all those disgruntled ACT & National voters are going to turn too. Good old Winston Peters and his NZ First Party. And your acutely aware Matthew that Peters holds a revengeful grudge against National & ACT for the smear campaign they ran against him a couple elections ago.

      Revenge is sweet Hootan! that is why he will not run with Key.

      • Pascal's bookie 1.2.1
        13 February 2013 at 8:34 am

        They also hold a grudge because Don Brash stole their immigration policy

        http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10366124

        Hooten doesn’t like to talk about those days though.

      • Pascal's bookie 1.2.2
        13 February 2013 at 8:35 am

        And here’s another one:

        http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10402759

        because when you tak to a Muslim there’s a good chance you’ve talked to a terrist by gad.

      • Pascal's bookie 1.2.3
        13 February 2013 at 8:36 am

        But the revenge Winston would really want would be to brought back home to national. He’d far rather make Key eat crow by having him at his side than anything else.

        • Matthew Hooton 1.2.3.1
          13 February 2013 at 10:19 am

          I agree with that. If it came down to it, and Key would deal with Peters, then I think Peters would choose National over Labour/Green.

          • vto 1.2.3.1.1
            13 February 2013 at 10:24 am

            What motivations lie behind your posts Mr Hooton? What are they intended to achieve? Merely some blog banter of banality? Or online oratory of other outcome?

          • Skinny 1.2.3.1.2
            13 February 2013 at 10:25 am

            Oh come on Matthew this is about starting a smear campaign early to frighten ‘both’ left & right supporters so NZFirst don’t get to the 5% threshold. The likelihood of Peters choosing National is slim as you well know.

            • Colonial Viper 1.2.3.1.2.1
              13 February 2013 at 10:36 am

              What? National’s mates are targetting Winnie again? Shit these guys are slow learners.

              Winston, stand that fucker down. If not for racism, then for extreme bad judgement in publishing his racist views and then standing by them.

          • Andre 1.2.3.1.3
            13 February 2013 at 11:16 am

            Patrick Gower ‏@patrickgowernz
            Key & Shearer are so desperate for power both are prepared to do deal with Winston’s #Wogistan #prosser party BLOG:

    • The Al1en 1.3
      13 February 2013 at 8:52 am

      “or ours”

      Like you’d have anything to do with it except peddle their bullshit and sniff for crumbs.
      Ours 😆

    • BLiP 1.4
      14 February 2013 at 12:21 am

      .

      Winston can do what he likes, regardless of whether he’s using Prosser to round up the provincial and rugby club oiks that would otherwise vote for National Ltd™. I’m sure it suits Winston to have a kamikaze MP on hand to keep the publicity up. Nothing worse than not being talked about. In the meantime, Prosser and John Key share something in common . . .

      “. . . the good news is that I was having dinner with Ngati Porou as opposed to their neighbouring iwi, which is Tuhoe, in which case I would have been dinner, which wouldn’t have been quite so attractive,” he said . . .

      . . . an international reputation for being ignorant bigots, the pair of them.

  2. ak 2
    13 February 2013 at 8:02 am

    Ah. Winnie-bash time comes around again in Hooterville. Quite rightly too, he’s a real worry to his old Bash party, eating his parents. The Great Brown Tory Hope of yesteryear now demonised for what he was intensely nurtured, by the very same venal scum.

    Yes, admirable sentiments from Collins: someone dig up her comments on Orewa One and compare and contrast……

    • Pascal's bookie 2.1
      13 February 2013 at 8:29 am

      Or the Civil Union Bill readings.

    • Jackal 2.2
      13 February 2013 at 11:33 am

      Are you guys talking about the same Judith Collins who said this:

      Guyon Spiner: How can it be that we lock up people at double the rate of France?

      Judith Collins: Well what we have for instance is we have say 15% of the population Maori…

      Has everyone got that? Bigotry against Muslims not OK… racism against Maori bonza beaut mate!

      Interestingly the Sallies report (PDF) released today that looks into incarceration rates has confirmed that Maori are discriminated against by the Police and our judiciary system. Just following the ministers directive I suppose.

      • marty mars 2.2.1
        13 February 2013 at 11:39 am

        + 1 Exactly right Jackal

      • NickS 2.2.2
        13 February 2013 at 11:49 am

        And you can guarantee talk back will be filled with morons claiming that their the ones being discriminated against, with a unhealthy dose of “it teh Maori’s own faultz!11!!” on the side over this.

      • Rogue Trooper 2.2.3
        13 February 2013 at 1:05 pm

        Excellent Jackal

      • TheContrarian 2.2.4
        13 February 2013 at 1:08 pm

        Are you accusing Collins of being bigoted toward Maori, Jackal?

        Why don’t you post the whole quote:

        “JUDITH: Well what we have for instance is we have say 15% of the population Maori, we have 51% of our prison population’s Maori. That’s a shocking statistic.”

        Followed by:

        “JUDITH: Well I don’t think the Maori population are the cause of crime. Not at all. “

        • Rogue Trooper 2.2.4.1
          13 February 2013 at 1:09 pm

          hows things?

        • Te Reo Putake 2.2.4.2
          13 February 2013 at 1:21 pm

          Cheers, TC. That was a cheap, cowardly shot from The Jackal and not the first time he’s left out crucial information in a post in order to big himself up.

          Poor form, Jackal. Do you have the cojones to apologise to Collins and TS readers?

        • vto 2.2.4.3
          13 February 2013 at 2:25 pm

          ha. The steaming cesspit of NZ’s race relations continues to emit odours from all those who shit.

        • Jackal 2.2.4.4
          13 February 2013 at 2:42 pm

          TheConformist

          Are you accusing Collins of being bigoted toward Maori, Jackal?

          No! What I’m saying is that Collins, the Police and the judiciary system are all prejudiced against Maori.

          Here’s what Sallies state in their recent report:

          Over the six years covered by this data, Maori males have been up to 30% more likely than non-Maori males to be prosecuted by Police for the same or similar crime.

          Their’s isn’t the first research to show such racism within government institutions either.

          • TheContrarian 2.2.4.4.1
            13 February 2013 at 2:49 pm

            Collins was expressing her shock at the fact we have such a large Maori population in jail.

            Your slimy quote mine implied Judith Colin blamed the fact we had 15% Maori population as the cause of crime. As TRP says “That was a cheap, cowardly shot”

            That is dishonest and untrue by a mere cursory glance at the actual comment.

            The adult response would be to retract your comment

          • Te Reo Putake 2.2.4.4.2
            13 February 2013 at 2:49 pm

            More self serving rubbish, Jackal. Here is your comment:

            “Has everyone got that? Bigotry against Muslims not OK… racism against Maori bonza beaut mate!”

            That’s based on your cynical misrepresentation of what Collins said. Its a form of lying to deliberate give a false impression in order to make an unwarranted smear.

            • Jackal 2.2.4.4.2.1
              13 February 2013 at 3:15 pm

              There’s nothing to apologise for as my assertion is based on the evidence that’s provided. If you want to ignore the evidence and that Collins is responsible as a minister, go right ahead. She’s a bigot because she doesn’t even acknowledging that there’s a problem of racism within the judiciary and Police force… Ignorant like you guys.

              • TheContrarian …
                13 February 2013 at 3:20 pm

                Nothing in what Collins actually said in the interview betrays any sort of bigotry despite your crude and dishonest attempt.
                This has nothing to do with claimed inherent racism in the police force and has everything to do with you implying Judith Colin blamed the fact we had 15% Maori population as the cause of crime through a dishonest quote mine.

                You are being extremely dishonest. But I expect that from you.

                • Jackal …
                  13 February 2013 at 3:39 pm

                  You really do have a bee in your bonnet about this eh TheComformist.

                  Nothing in what Collins actually said in the interview betrays any sort of bigotry despite your crude and dishonest attempt.

                  So let’s quote the entire relevant part then:

                  GUYON But how can those two things be true Minister, how can it be that we lock up people at double the rate of France?

                  JUDITH Well what we have for instance is we have say 15% of the population Maori, we have 51% of our prison population’s Maori. That’s a shocking statistic. It’s also true for other countries, for instance Australia, there are some parts of Australia where they have 3% of the population is Aboriginal but 30% of the prison population is.

                  GUYON So that’s the difference?

                  JUDITH I think the fact is, is that when we have a quite significant group of people who unfortunately often feel that they are not part of the system, not part of the social connections that the rest of us have, there is more of a likelihood towards crime.

                  In other words Collins is saying that it’s all te Maoris fault that they commit crime because they aren’t a part of society.

                  Could you highlight where Collins states that it’s prejudices within the Police force and judiciary system (which the research shows is the main reason for higher incarceration rates of Maori) within her pontifications there or anywhere TheConformist?

                  Purposefully ignoring the problem when Collins has the power to make changes is also racism.

                  In regard to Richard Prosser’s racism, it’s clear that Collins was simply scoring cheap political points against NZ First, while harboring racist sentiments herself. We usually call such people hypocrites!

                  You are being extremely dishonest. But I expect that from you.

                  I’m not sure how my opinion can be dishonest, but more importantly are you going to acknowledge that the research is correct or not?

                  • Mary …
                    13 February 2013 at 4:56 pm

                    Collins is correctly pointing out that crime is often the consequence in situations where those committing the crime do not feel part of society. The inference is that Maori are over-represented in the crime statistics because of this reason. The problem is that Collins is blaming the individual person for feeling “that they are not part of the system, not part of the social connections that the rest of us have…” Collins’ expectation then is that Maori should just sort themselves out and start ‘feeling part of society’ otherwise we’ll just keeping locking ’em up. That’s where the difference of opinion here is. For Collins it’s all very simple: be good or we’ll get you. But of course Collins is no intellectual so that’s all we can expect from her and those of her ilk.

                    • Foreign Waka …
                      13 February 2013 at 7:14 pm

                      Regardless of the ethnicity of anyone committing a crime, perhaps it has escaped you all that a person has a CHOICE, to do the crime or not. Simple as that. To contort this in any other way is just an excuse to go and kill, maim, steal and pilferage of the fellow citizen whose CHOICE is to be honest. There are many people who do not feel part of the society; recent immigrants, refugees, some of the disabled, elderly etc. who CHOOSE not to do the crime.

                    • One Tāne Huna …
                      14 February 2013 at 3:25 pm

                      Baby steps. What overlying factors influence people’s “choices”, Foreign Waka?

                    • Jackal …
                      14 February 2013 at 3:43 pm

                      Foreign Waka

                      We’re talking about the CHOICE of the Police and the judiciary system to discriminate against Maori Foreign Waka, which the research clearly shows is the case.

                      Whether Maori undertake more crime on average than non Maori because they choose to has not been established… It is however likely that Maori undertake more crimes of necessity because they’re marginalized to a greater extent by a discriminatory system than non Maori.

                      What has been established beyond a doubt however is that Maori are discriminated against by the Police, and this is one of the main reasons for a higher Maori incarceration rate in New Zealand. Change that aspect of our Police culture and we will see reductions in the Maori incarceration rate.

                • TheContrarian …
                  13 February 2013 at 3:45 pm

                  Now you are shifting the goal posts Jackal.
                  Another dishonest technique.

                  You selectively quoted Collins to make it sound as if she was implying the fact we had 15% Maori population as the cause of crime.

                  That is dishonest.

                  • Jackal …
                    13 February 2013 at 4:07 pm

                    Nup! I’m still talking about the Q+A statement and the research I highlighted in my first comment.

                    Did you like it how she tried to justify our high rate of Maori incarceration by saying there’s lots of Aboriginals in Australian jails as well, and that makes it all OK does it?

                    What about the follow up of what National will do about the issue? As you obviously haven’t bothered to read the research, our recidivism rates haven’t improved at all, so effectively National has done nothing!

                    • TheContrarian …
                      13 February 2013 at 4:10 pm

                      You selectively quoted Collins to make it sound as if she was implying the fact we had 15% Maori population as the cause of crime.

                      Dishonest.

                      And now you try to imply that she was trying to justify by comparing it to Australia. Which is also dishonest because she isn’t justifying it – she thinks it is shocking, not that it is OK.

                      Jesus man, you a fucking terrible at this

                    • Jackal …
                      13 February 2013 at 4:12 pm

                      Could somebody fix that stuck record please?

              • Te Reo Putake …
                13 February 2013 at 3:33 pm

                What evidence did you provide, Jackal? Half a quote which destroys the context and meaning of the full comment is not evidence of anything but your own mendacity.

                • Jackal …
                  13 February 2013 at 3:41 pm

                  There’s six years of research by the Salvation Army to begin with… Why not start there Daveo. Oops! I mean Te Reo Putake.

                  • Rogue Trooper …
                    13 February 2013 at 3:44 pm

                    u r a pretty cool ol’ dog in your own way

                  • Te Reo Putake …
                    13 February 2013 at 3:45 pm

                    More self serving rubbish. You lied to smear Collins. Weak, disrespectful and lazy.

                    • TheContrarian …
                      13 February 2013 at 3:47 pm

                      All Jackals dodging doesn’t change his selective dishonest quoting.

                    • Rogue Trooper …
                      13 February 2013 at 3:50 pm

                      how come you don’t put a comprehensive “post” together T?

                    • Jackal …
                      13 February 2013 at 3:57 pm

                      Just incase you hadn’t noticed, I’ve quoted the entire relevant part now TheConformist… In my opinion it still makes Collins look like a bigot!

                    • Te Reo Putake …
                      13 February 2013 at 4:51 pm

                      “Just in case you hadn’t noticed, I’ve quoted the entire relevant part now TheConformist… In my opinion it still makes Collins look like a bigot!”

                      So what? Have you got the guts to acknowledge you were wrong to selectively misquote her to make your ‘bigot’ smear look accurate? The story here isn’t Collins, it’s your dishonesty.

                      So what’s more important to you? Collins or your credibility?

                    • TheContrarian …
                      13 February 2013 at 4:55 pm

                      He won’t do it. He’ll come up with some kind of squirm to get out of the fact he was being dishonest and disingenuous.

                      My 2 yr old niece has greater self awareness than Jackal.

                    • Jackal …
                      13 February 2013 at 6:10 pm

                      Wow! You guys are real loyal Judith Collins fans.

                      Te Reo Putake

                      So what? Have you got the guts to acknowledge you were wrong to selectively misquote her to make your ‘bigot’ smear look accurate?

                      I wasn’t wrong to select the most relevant part to what Collins said to support my argument that she’s racist TRP.

                      Oh look… Labour MP Chris Hipkins also used the same quote. Here’s what he says about it:

                      I don’t think the rest of Collins quote makes her look any better. Her first response when asked why NZ had a higher imprisonment rate than other countries was to say it was because of our Maori population. Her “them and us” attitude reflects the National Party’s “Iwi/Kiwi” heritage, yet the Maori Party continue to support them in government.

                      If you feel so strongly about it, why don’t you make a formal complain about Hipkins to Labour TRP?

                      The story here isn’t Collins, it’s your dishonesty.

                      You haven’t established that I’ve been dishonest… You are welcome to believe that there’s a “story” concerning the quote I used if you like, although I think you’re being a bit delusional.

                      So what’s more important to you? Collins or your credibility?

                      Clearly the fact that we have a bigot as the Minister of Justice, ACC and Ethnic Affairs is far more important than whether you think I’m credible or not TRP.

                      The Conformist

                      He won’t do it. He’ll come up with some kind of squirm to get out of the fact he was being dishonest and disingenuous.

                      By “squirm” do you mean that I simply disagree with you both?

                      My 2 yr old niece has greater self awareness than Jackal.

                      As usual your argument is based on ad hominem drivel TC… You and TRP cannot even bring yourselves to acknowledge the evidence I’ve supplied that supports my argument. Ignorance is bliss I suppose.

                    • Te Reo Putake …
                      13 February 2013 at 6:23 pm

                      More bullshit, Jackal. Hipkins was just as wrong as you and like you, he was quickly pulled up in the comments for being dishonest. He. like you, then tries to weasel out of it. So fucken what? You’re both full of shit. Admittedly, its worse for Hipkins; he’s a paid professional and you’re just a hopeless amateur, but lying is still lying. And you, pal, are a liar.

                    • Jackal …
                      13 February 2013 at 6:38 pm

                      You haven’t established that I was dishonest TRP by using the relevant part of Judith Collins’ statement, no matter how many times you repeat yourself.

                      I suspect your the type of guy who screams feckless insults at his neighbors as well, and you’re the only one on that Red Alert post from July 2010 claiming that Chris Hipkins was dishonest… You really look a bit foolish!

                    • Te Reo Putake …
                      13 February 2013 at 6:45 pm

                      More lies! Read the comments, fool. Still, you did make me pissed enough at the dishonesty of Hipkins that I posted a comment 3 years after the event. That’ll show ’em!

                      By the way, now that we know you cribbed the whole thing from Hipkins, without attribution, how does that make you less dishonest?

                    • Jackal …
                      13 February 2013 at 6:54 pm

                      Te Reo Putake

                      More lies! Read the comments, fool. Still, you did make pissed enough at the dishonesty of Hipkins that I posted a comment 3 years after the event. That’ll show ‘em!

                      Nobody else is calling Hipkins a liar or dishonest in the forty odd comments there TRP… You’re clearly out on a limb all by yourself.

                      By the way, now that we know you cribbed the whole thing from Hipkins, without attribution, how does that make you less dishonest?

                      Actually, I found the Q+A transcript first and linked to it… You’re such a plonker Te Reo Putake, and there’s no point in continuing this debate further.

                    • TheContrarian …
                      13 February 2013 at 6:57 pm

                      “You haven’t established that I was dishonest TRP by using the relevant part of Judith Collins’ statement, no matter how many times you repeat yourself.”

                      Yes we have, you just said it yourself:

                      Jackal: “..I was dishonest…”

                      See – I used the most relevant part of your comment to prove it.

                    • Te Reo Putake …
                      13 February 2013 at 7:57 pm

                      Nice one, TC!

                    • Jackal …
                      14 February 2013 at 9:46 am

                      Yeah! You really showed me there TC /sarc.

                    • TheContrarian …
                      14 February 2013 at 2:53 pm

                      Pulling out the most relevant part again

                      Jackal: “..You really showed me there..”

                      Yes I did. I showed you just how dishonest it is to quote-mine someone and present it as if they were saying something they weren’t.

                    • Jackal …
                      14 February 2013 at 3:35 pm

                      TheConformist

                      I showed you just how dishonest it is to quote-mine someone and present it as if they were saying something they weren’t.

                      Wrong! Even though she tries to backtrack, the full quote by Judith Collins as provided still shows that she blames te Maori for their overrepresentation in our corrections system.

                      In contrast, your “quote-mining” of my comments just makes you look like a plonker!

                      Like you, Collins completely fails to acknowledge that the research shows Maori are discriminated against by the Police and that’s one of the main reasons for such overrepresentation… A fact you’re obviously at pains to ignore for some reason TheConformist ?

                      Please stop being silly and debate like an adult TC.

                    • TheContrarian …
                      14 February 2013 at 3:37 pm

                      It shows nothing of the sort.

                      And you still haven’t addressed your dishonest quote mine which was actually the point of this..err..’discussion’

                      Figures.

                    • Jackal …
                      14 February 2013 at 3:48 pm

                      What are you talking about? I’m starting to think you’re a little bit retarded TheConformist.

                    • TheContrarian …
                      14 February 2013 at 3:49 pm

                      So you admit you dishonestly quote-mined Collins to make it sound like she blamed our crime problem on our population being 15% Maori

                    • Jackal …
                      14 February 2013 at 5:16 pm

                      Ah no! What gave you that idea TheConformist? As much as you want me to change my opinion, unless Collins acknowledges and addresses the main issues and causes of Maori over-representation in our jails (which is unlikely), my opinion will remain the same.

                    • TheContrarian …
                      14 February 2013 at 5:25 pm

                      This has nothing to do with Collins admitting why the real causes of crime and inherent injustice towards Maori.

                      You took a sentence in which Collins was describing the statistics of our prison system and misquoted to make her sound like the cause of crime was the fact we have a 15% Maori population.

                      That is dishonest – that you cant see that and you keep muddying the waters is no surprise because you appear to be functioning at level of a ten year old.

                    • Pascal's bookie …
                      14 February 2013 at 5:38 pm

                      But Contro, she was citing the statistics to explain why we have a higher incarceration rate than France.

                      She was asked ‘how do explain the difference’, and she explained it by pointing out that we have a 15% Maori population, and that Maori are incarcerated at a very high rate.

                      How does that explanation explain our higher rate than France?

                      What’s the logic she was using?

                      Make me a syllogism. And see if you can make it valid by including the disclaimer about not blaming Maori.

                      She couldn’t, she changed tack and said we have a higher rate because of higher crime, (caused by what according to her logic? hint: Maori feelings), and note how that explanation contradicts where the point inn the interview where she said we were a safe society.

                      The fact is she contradicted herself all over the place. So calling it quote mining when you focus on the logic and ignore the ‘I’m not a racist” stuff is just bullshit.

                    • Jackal …
                      14 February 2013 at 6:26 pm

                      +1 Pascal’s bookie

                    • Te Reo Putake …
                      14 February 2013 at 6:36 pm

                      What’s the diff? If they are disenfranchised, they’re going to feel disanfranchised. Or don’t you think maaris feel? 😉

                    • marty mars …
                      14 February 2013 at 10:40 pm

                      putting a winky face doesn’t hide the truth voice – The Jackal was on the money with his first post on this issue and you are defending collins and taking the piss out of tangata whenua whilst taking the piss with your name – feeling good about all that are you? That is disrespectful imo.

                • One Tāne Huna …
                  14 February 2013 at 3:55 pm

                  I’m with Jackal on this one. Why doesn’t Collins talk about the conditions under which crime flourishes? Why, instead, is ethnicity front and centre of her analysis?

                  • TheContrarian …
                    14 February 2013 at 3:58 pm

                    The issue isn’t that content of Collins message, it is Jackal dishonestly using a quote mine to make is seem as if Collin’s is saying our crime is due to us having 15% Maori population when in the interview she states the exact opposite.

                    Do you, OTH, defend jackals misuse of Collins quote to imply she thinks the exact opposite of what she states?

                  • felixviper …
                    14 February 2013 at 4:04 pm

                    Yeah I agree. Jackal’s quote might’ve been a bit slippery, but it actually conveys exactly what Collins is trying to ‘say without saying’.

                    • TheContrarian …
                      14 February 2013 at 4:07 pm

                      Apart from where she says

                      “JUDITH: Well I don’t think the Maori population are the cause of crime. Not at all. “

                      Where as jackal cut it off with

                      “JUDITH: Well what we have for instance is we have say 15% of the population Maori”

                      Which implies Collins claims we have crime due to our Maori population which she clarifies as definitely not what she thinks and in fact stems from disenfranchisement. The statistics themselves she describes as shocking.

                      This is called quote mining:

                      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_quoting_out_of_context

                    • One Tāne Huna …
                      14 February 2013 at 4:15 pm

                      Yes, that’s why Felix uses the phrase “say without saying”. That you can’t hear the dog-whistle, Contrarian, says more about your hearing range than anything.

                    • felixviper …
                      14 February 2013 at 4:16 pm

                      Meh, I think she knew exactly how her statement would be interpreted.

                      btw I don’t think you’re being anal about it, not at all.

                    • TheContrarian …
                      14 February 2013 at 4:18 pm

                      If you going to say she means something other than the words she uses then why bother misquoting her at all?

                      Why not just quote her in full and call her a liar instead of these silly quote mines to imply she said something she didn’t?

                    • Pascal's bookie …
                      14 February 2013 at 4:18 pm

                      I’m not a racist but…

                    • TheContrarian …
                      14 February 2013 at 4:20 pm

                      @Felix – dishonesty isn’t something one should just let past. The site is dedicated to exposing dishonesty in politicians (in part) so why should the commentators/authors be held to a different standard?

                    • McFlock …
                      14 February 2013 at 4:29 pm

                      lolol
                      why indeed?

                    • felixviper …
                      14 February 2013 at 4:34 pm

                      “Why not just quote her in full and call her a liar”

                      She’s not really lying though, that’s the beauty of it.

                      And in the hierarchy of sins, a pseudonym on a blog being a bit sneaky with a quote is far less of a concern to me than a Minister of the Crown saying that we wouldn’t have much crime if it weren’t for those bloody maarees.

                      Which is what she said, really.

                    • Pascal's bookie …
                      14 February 2013 at 4:39 pm

                      Jeez Felix stop lying, she said she’s not a racist but the reason we have a high incarceration rate is because so many murrays in prison and that’s a shame is what it is but there you go.

                    • Pascal's bookie …
                      14 February 2013 at 4:43 pm

                      ‘Honestly, I’m not racist, but the fact is they are not in jail because they are Maori, but because of the way Maori are.’

                    • TheContrarian …
                      14 February 2013 at 4:44 pm

                      Well she actually said the complete opposite of that Felix but it is your prerogative to belief what you want about her.

                    • Pascal's bookie …
                      14 February 2013 at 4:49 pm

                      So if I quoted myself from above thusly:

                      “I’m not racist”

                      Would that be quote mining?

                    • felixviper …
                      14 February 2013 at 4:52 pm

                      To be fair though, she did point out that Australia hes a similar problem with abos, and they’re a totally different strain of darkie.

                      So not just blaming maarees. Not at all.

                    • TheContrarian …
                      14 February 2013 at 4:55 pm

                      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quote_mining

                      http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Quote_mining

                      In the jackal example Collins was explaining our prison statistics and how they compare to other countries and her view that the statistics were ‘shocking’. Jackal quoted a single sentence which implied her comment was that we have a crime problem due to our population being 15% Maori

                    • Pascal's bookie …
                      14 February 2013 at 4:56 pm

                      “Which implies Collins claims we have crime due to our Maori population which she clarifies as definitely not what she thinks and in fact stems from disenfranchisement.”

                      This would be quite a powerful argument if she said Maori were, in fact, disfranchised, rather than that they felt disenfranchised. Which is a whole different thing altogether, and what she actually said.

      • travellerev 2.2.5
        13 February 2013 at 4:06 pm

        Which is really funny because the French have a huge Muslim population (5.5 % or half of the total of immigrants living in France) from all their Muslim ex colonies who by the way apart from one questionable event have never en masse (French) turned to terrorism weirdly enough.

        Pied noir (Black feet) they are called to this day because at some stage the French decided that everybody had to wear shoes in their colonies so the inhabitants who true to the colonial extortion spirit didn’t have a coin to scratch their butts with painted their feet to look like they were wearing shoes to avoid punishment.

        • Te Reo Putake 2.2.5.1
          13 February 2013 at 4:29 pm

          Yep, the Algerians and other victims of French colonialism would have plenty of reason to resort to terrorism, but, for the most part seem to have taken the option of mass resistance to gain their independance instead.

          Interesting about the pied noir term, btw. I thought that it was the term for the european Algerians (ie the ones with French heritage who sided with France against the indiginous population). I first heard it in reference to Albert Camus, who was born in Algeria. It would be ironic indeed if the term is now the opposite of its original meaning!

        • Epping Road 2.2.5.2
          13 February 2013 at 6:22 pm

          Pied noir has never meant the Muslim Berbers travellerev. It has always meant French Europeans in Algeria.

  3. Skinny 3
    13 February 2013 at 8:03 am

    Peters needs to show leadership & admonish Prosser for his racist rants. Most of us are well aware of Prossers bigoted ideology. I could imagine the huge outcry if he made anti Jewish remarks similar. Pretty spineless stuff Tosser!   

  4. karol 4
    13 February 2013 at 8:15 am

    Yes, agree that the government is showing a poor set of social and human values.

    Irish: typo – I think the government has a pretty poor record on the limited support of (women’s) refuges, but it seems more blatant than dog whistles. OTOH, Key has been dog whistling on refugees several times over the last couple of years.

  5. VivaciousViper 5
    13 February 2013 at 8:40 am

    Prosser is a Tosser.
    No one can put a prickly rose around it and call it pretty,his loose lips will bring NZ
    First down, down in the polls.
    Winston has the ability to address this properly and act.
    As an aside, i watched a painful interview between TV3’s Smalley and Shearer about the Tosser’s potential verbal incendiary device, Shearer was his usual stammering and bumbling self,oh dear,sigh.

    • Andre 5.1
      13 February 2013 at 9:32 am

      http://t.co/KHc3c3fi Good piece about Farrar and his ploy?

    • NoseViper (The Nose knows) 5.2
      14 February 2013 at 5:27 pm

      VV
      Well said about the Tosser’s potential verbal incendiary device – more dangerous than an IED – Improvised explosive device. Certainly it has gone off dangerously on Winston’s foot, but he thinks he has bulletproof legs so no worries and no concern about NZ’s standing overseas, which is rather strange in one who did have the Foreign Affairs portfolio at one time.

      Pertinent quote from Wikipedia –
      He also accused the Labour Party of having an “ethnic engineering and re-population policy.”[5] In July 2005, Peters said New Zealand should err on the side of caution in admitting immigrants until they “affirm their commitment to New Zealanders’ values and standards.” On the same occasion, Peters claimed to know that Muslim extremists were regularly entering New Zealand, and accused Islam in New Zealand as “having two faces – a moderate face and a militant underbelly”. However, he refused to identify the person or the source.

  6. Bill 6
    13 February 2013 at 9:09 am

    I’ve always found NZ and many NZers (including far too many who identify as being ‘of the left’) are incredibly adept at denying the extent of their racism as well as the racism inherent to NZ society.

    The equivocations or downright stupidity and antipathy exhibited by the likes of Prosser, Key, Shearer and many, many others are the result.

    • Colonial Weka 6.1
      13 February 2013 at 10:24 am

      Agreed.

      On Nine to Noon, Prosser described what he wrote in Investigate as a particular ‘style’. He regrets that, but because he won’t acknowledge the racism he can’t regret the racism. Handy. His framing the issue as style goes along with his statement that his views as a columnist are completely separate from his role as an MP. So apparently now one can be a racist fuckwit in one part of one’s life but that won’t affect how one operates in another part of one’s life eg how one helps run the country (although Kathryn Ryan made it pretty obvious that Prosser is a waste of space in parliament).

      It was good to hear Ryan making her contempt apparent.

      • AmaKiwi 6.1.1
        13 February 2013 at 10:52 am

        “his statement that his views as a columnist are completely separate from his role as an MP”

        You’re surprised? Lying about one’s real intentions is the first rule for getting elected.

      • marty mars 6.1.2
        13 February 2013 at 10:55 am

        Yes I listened to that too – by his logic he wouldn’t get to fly because of those ‘previous terrorists’ the IRA and he looks like they supposedly look. I needed a wash after listening to his foul opinions.

    • NickS 6.2
      13 February 2013 at 11:55 am

      None so fucking wilfully blind as the privileged to that which would show them in the harsh light of day to be fools and bigots.

  7. vto 7
    13 February 2013 at 9:22 am

    Our further international shame is moving towards a system similar to apartheid. Especially given we protested against that abomination and hold ourselves in such high regard in this area. It’s like the 100% Pure bullshit.

  8. AmaKiwi 8
    13 February 2013 at 10:28 am

    The reason we need a 4 year parliamentary term is so people like Richard Prosser can (tic appropriate answer):

    1. have time to become enligtened
    2. allow time for the voters to forget how incompetent/dangerous some MPs are
    3. (please add additional reasons because I’m stumped)

  9. Andre 9
    13 February 2013 at 12:47 pm

    NZ needs to take its head out of its arse and grow up. We lack any sophistication in our thinking .Head up and look around ,we are so far behind in future thinking .Still thinking of color /creed. Before good and fair ….. Prosser is the poster boy of old New Zealand..

  10. Darien Fenton 10
    13 February 2013 at 12:57 pm

    Irish : Did you miss these?

    “Labour’s Darien Fenton joined the attacks, saying the Government had its own law change in train as part of the Immigration Amendment Bill that would allow for the mass-detention of a group of 10 or more asylum seekers who arrive in a group by boat.

    “Just last year the Prime Minister John Key and his Immigration Minister, Nathan Guy, were describing asylum seekers who arrived by boat as ‘queue jumpers’ and ‘illegal immigrants’,” Fenton said.

    “Now, however, it seems Mr Key is prepared to take a number of the very same people – from recently reopened Australian detention centres on Papua New Guinea’s Manus Island and Nauru – that he has previously disparaged.”

    And this :

    Labour’s immigration spokeswoman Darien Fenton shares Amnesty’s concerns.

    “It really is tacit approval of the Australian system which has been so widely criticised,” she said.

    “Lots of New Zealanders would be concerned … if they knew the conditions [asylum seekers] would be sent into, which is effectively being behind barbed wire, living in tents, awful conditions.”

    Four radio interviews and TV on Saturday alone. Questions in the House yesterday from David Shearer. Quite a lot of Labour on this.

    • quartz 10.1
      13 February 2013 at 1:12 pm

      Interesting. Will the next labour government revoke the arrangement?

    • AmaKiwi 10.2
      13 February 2013 at 3:13 pm

      @ Darien Fenton

      Darien,

      You need a 1 sentence sound bite for the tv news.

      Preferably just a phrase, a label: “The Key is to forget.” “Key’s cabbage boat to residency.” “Prime Minister Mr. Double Talk.” “Key changes policies faster than he can justify them.”

      I am not in p.r., but I know a good one when I hear it.

      Nail the bast*rds!

      • NoseViper (The Nose knows) 10.2.1
        13 February 2013 at 4:15 pm

        Or something like Labour’s policies will be up and going faster while Key’s just lie and fester (with mould as an extra).

        • Johninsg 10.2.1.1
          13 February 2013 at 4:41 pm

          Winston has a certain touch for one-liners:

          “Judith Collins should stop behaving like Joan Collins, okay”

          We’ll not see Joan/Judith the same way again:

          • gobsmacked 10.2.1.1.1
            13 February 2013 at 5:03 pm

            @Darien

            It is not the fault of Irish Bill, or anybody else, that your leader cannot communicate Labour’s position clearly – or even decide what it is.

            I appreciate that you can’t comment publicly, but I’m sure MPs were banging their heads on the wall when Shearer waffled his responses to media questions yesterday.

            If it helps you to keep shooting the other messengers, go ahead. But your real problem is THE messenger, and you know it. The leader gets ten times more coverage than a spokesperson, and you can’t deal with that communication defecit by issuing press releases or running around on blogs.

            If he needs help, here it is …

            “This policy is wrong, unnecessary, and stupid. Labour will scrap it.”

            Not hard, is it?

            • Johninsg 10.2.1.1.1.1
              13 February 2013 at 6:00 pm

              +1

              “I’m sure MPs were banging their heads on the wall when Shearer waffled his responses to media questions yesterday”

              I have been banging my head so much and so hard the past few months with my clenched fist and I wonder how much longer will the majority of the Labour caucus have to bang their heads and actually do something.

              I do not say this easily but feel I have to voice this online for the good of my Labour Party.

              How much more time does the lead messenger of the leading opposition party need? I have been waiting and waiting for some clear, coherent, articulate messages from him. But with another day that passes, it seems like he draws greater attention to the ‘mess’ in message and messenger.

              For the record, I am a current member of the NZLP and I would be happy to verify this by showing my membership card to someone who posts on here (but not certain special people like the MP for South Dunedin).

              • xtasy …
                14 February 2013 at 1:46 am

                I am not a member of NZLP, but I have also suffered major concussions due to banging my head and other body parts around, knowing no other way to deal with utter distress and depression. I even a times contemplated to make an end to it all, but then again, I cannot blame that just solely on the Labour Party.

    • IrishBill 10.3
      13 February 2013 at 6:17 pm

      Sorry Darien – I’d only seen the lead media with David Shearer when I wrote the post. I’ve updated appropriately.

      • Darien Fenton 10.3.1
        13 February 2013 at 9:16 pm

        Cheers Irish

        • bad12 10.3.1.1
          13 February 2013 at 9:28 pm

          Good to see you here at the Standard having a look and a comment….

        • xtasy 10.3.1.2
          14 February 2013 at 1:38 am

          Darian, thanks for coming here and taking your position. I am one of the hardest of critics of your party here, and I make no doubts about it.

          Yet I have always respected your firm position on the lot of the disadvantaged, whether it is migrants or youth or unemployed or other workers.

          What I miss with Labour (Label Labour term, I suppose) is a reconnection to old values. This may appear old fashioned to some, but older and even younger Labour supporters are desperate to find out what Labour now stands for, so they can identify and offer their full support.

          We have had much vague and double talk, and most know not what to think of Labour, and so many are affectionate towards the Greens and also Mana.

          Do you blame them? They want social improvements, jobs and fair deals in all social and economic areas. So your party is challenged. Deliver, talk and we will listen and talk also, so far most of us are NOT convinced.

  11. Rogue Trooper 11
    13 February 2013 at 1:03 pm

    …”the twin evils of diversity and multiculturalism”-the “leader” of NZ First. How freakin’ embarassing. wtf is wrong with the attitudes of some people? every-time i switch on my new / old telly there is some new cringe-dweller building a hedge for us to look over at the rest of the world laughing at us. very sad.

  12. NoseViper (The Nose knows) 12
    13 February 2013 at 2:19 pm

    NZ First showing its dross side and Winnie showing how ambivalent he is about some standards. He can’t stand on the Winebox soapbox for ever to give him height and visibility.

    Prosser needs to go. We don’t want eejits like him fouling further our convoluted political playing field. You’re not allowed to do racial sledging in European football. Can’t politicians like Winston adopt some of the gravitas of his namesake. He could even take on the working rules of professional sport as guides to behaviour if there are none at present.

    • Rogue Trooper 12.1
      13 February 2013 at 3:18 pm

      feckin’ “eejits”. (we must be the laughing stock of the pacific soup with clowns like prosser and wishart (good on ya Farrer)

  13. Te Reo Putake 13
    13 February 2013 at 3:56 pm

    Good work from Hone Harawira stopping Prosser from trying to weasel out of the issue in Parliament:

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/8295162/Wogistan-MP-should-resign-Islamic-leader

  14. travellerev 14
    13 February 2013 at 4:16 pm

    I don’t get it. The global MSM has been telling us that only Muslims are prone to terrorism even if it break the laws of Physics when they do. We have happily joined the coalition of the killing to “liberate” “catch Osama bin Laden” “liberate the women of Afghanistan” and other assorted lies of convenience and while we did not officially joined the cultural and physical destruction the SAS is or was present in Iraq and other country we were told filled with ragheads and other assorted dine names to describe the people who lived there. Not only that Muslims so we are told are unable to liberate themselves so we helped the Libyans with some Kinetic liberation and now we are gearing up to destroy ney liberate Syria on our way to Iran and Prossner is the racist?

    All he is doing is drawing the consequences of the 10 year Muslim vilification propaganda campaign. Muslims are not to be trusted and especially those of the warrior age. You never can tell. They might just up and attack you while you are on your way to some nice warm holiday country.

    If you believe that 19 young Arabs with box cutters broke the laws of Physics on 9/11 all because they hate our freedoms and have a different religion which makes them prone to irrational violence you are just as prejudice and racist as Prosser.

    • TheContrarian 14.1
      13 February 2013 at 4:19 pm

      Why do you continue this “even if it break the laws of Physics when they do” BS.

      It has been shown to you several times that no one can break the laws of physics therefore no laws of physics were broken.

      • travellerev 14.1.1
        13 February 2013 at 4:49 pm

        ROFL! Fuck, now that is an amazing way of circular reasoning!

        For those of you more intellectually inclined. The official story is impossible as that would mean all laws of physics would have to be violated. As dipshit here points out that is impossible so something other than the official CT must have taken place.

        • TheContrarian 14.1.1.1
          13 February 2013 at 4:57 pm

          “The official story is impossible as that would mean all laws of physics would have to be violated.”

          No it doesn’t. Nothing that happened broke the laws of physics. But please explain what you think ‘broke the laws of physics’

          And all laws of physics? Even the strong nuclear force? Are you sure about that

          • McFlock 14.1.1.1.1
            13 February 2013 at 5:10 pm

            thermo-nuclear-nano-thermite was secreted into photocopier toner cartridges by the illuminopaperazzi, that’s the only way buildings can collapse when fucking great aircraft fly into them.

            • higherstandard 14.1.1.1.1.1
              13 February 2013 at 5:37 pm

              How dare you take the piss !

              Everyone not hoodwinked by the MSM knows it was the reverse vampires in league with the zombie overlords from Europa.

              • Colonial Viper …
                13 February 2013 at 6:07 pm

                Well, it would be so easy to get into this…just look out for the pyroclastically expanding clouds of high pressure ejecta as the Twin Towers collapsed.

                • McFlock …
                  13 February 2013 at 6:38 pm

                  Oh. My. God. Pyroclastic flows! It all makes sense! The CIA wasn’t involved – the National Geographic Channel detonated a microsupervolcano right under WTC in order to milk massive revenue from anniversary specials for the next hundred years! THAT’s why they stick to the “official” MSM “hijack” story – they storyboarded it themselves months beforehand!

                  • Colonial Viper …
                    13 February 2013 at 9:50 pm

                    *Shrug* you can see the high velocity horizontal flows of disintegrated building materials for yourself McFlock, in every piece of footage of the Tower collapses.

                    • Te Reo Putake …
                      13 February 2013 at 9:56 pm

                      Yep, and you can see the planes being flown into them too. What’s more likely? That what we know happened happened or what loons think might have happened happened?

                      Edit: just for fun, what are the odds of it being anything other than the truth? 1 in 100? 1000? More?

                    • McFlock …
                      13 February 2013 at 10:07 pm

                      Well that just demonstrates that you have no idea what a “pyroclastic flow” is. Or, indeed, what “horizontal” means.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      14 February 2013 at 12:46 am

                      Well that just demonstrates that you have no idea what a “pyroclastic flow” is. Or, indeed, what “horizontal” means.

                      meh.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      14 February 2013 at 12:49 am

                      That what we know happened happened or what loons think might have happened happened?

                      *Shrug*

                      You may think that severe asymmetric damage to a skyscraper can lead to a completely balanced and symmetric collapse directly on to the skyscraper’s own footprint, but I do not.

                    • emergency mike …
                      14 February 2013 at 4:12 am

                      “Yep, and you can see the planes being flown into them too.”

                      Ah the old ‘da planes flew into da buildings and den dey fall down wut r u talkin fool’ response. Hey TRP here’s a thought, pretend the loons are right and the WTC buildings were taken down with explosives after the planes flew into them. In this scenario would you see planes being flown into the buildings? Yeah, you would. Doesn’t that make your comment a worthless pile of dung? Yeah, it does.

                      What’s more likely? What are the odds? More inanity. Either there was some kind of conspiracy or there wasn’t. Any attempt an calculating a probability is about as pointless as doing the same for the existence of God.

                      “That what we know happened happened or what loons think might have happened happened?”

                      There it is. You ‘know’ what happened. Well if you know something then anyone who disagrees with you must be wrong by definition right? QED. End of. This is what prompted me to comment.

                      I’m not a 911 ‘truther’ nor ‘debunker’, but I am open-minded. I watched one of travellerev’s youtube links once. It was some 2hr odd conference of experts presenting their reasons for their doubts about the official narrative from different perspectives. They weren’t loons, I didn’t see any tinfoil hats. They were intelligent and articulate, and highly qualified. Some of them were more persuasive than others, but at the end it was difficult to disagree that there were serious questions that deserved answers. But maybe the wikipedia geniuses here know better.

                      I value conspiracy theories as they invite us to question the status quo. Failure to see the value in that is a failure of the imagination. That doesn’t mean one should swallow them at face value, rather that I find it strange that people are happy to swallow the status quo at face value, like frightened sheep. That’s what it comes down to. People don’t like having their socially agreed upon construct of reality threatened. It would be better for their little minds if we all just sang la la la in unison.

                      We should be suspicious of what we think we ‘know’. We once knew that the earth was flat, and that the sun moved around us. Scientists laughed at Einstein’s theories when they were first published, musicians laughed when they first saw the first two bars of Beethoven’s fifth.

                      CV: “You may think that severe asymmetric damage to a skyscraper can lead to a completely balanced and symmetric collapse directly on to the skyscraper’s own footprint, but I do not.”

                      Me neither. Particularly concerning building 7.

                    • Pascal's bookie …
                      14 February 2013 at 7:44 am

                      “completely balanced and symmetric collapse directly on to the skyscraper’s own footprint”

                      Where did that happen. Not in New York. You do know what a footprint is right? And how far debris from the buildings spread? or that you can argue for a ‘footprint collapse’ or a ‘pyroclasitc flow’ but not both?

                      ffs

                    • Pascal's bookie …
                      14 February 2013 at 7:48 am

                      Mike: ” I find it strange that people are happy to swallow the status quo at face value”

                      Why do you assume people are doing that?

                      I too have watched plenty of eve’s videos ( And I’ll just wonder here again why so much truther stuff is in video form which makes fact checking and quoting cumbersome), but I then took time to check out the counter points. You should look deeper. Don’t just accept that these guys are being honest just becasue a few of them speak well. Question their narrative just as hard as you would the ‘official’ one. See what happens.

                      I’ve found that many of the things they say simply don’t stack up. they repeat clear and obvious falsehoods years after they have been debunked.

                    • emergency mike …
                      14 February 2013 at 1:15 pm

                      “Why do you assume people are doing that?”

                      I was speaking generally rather than about anyone here or any particular issue. Maybe I wasn’t clear about that. I assume it because I see with my own eyes people unquestioningly parroting what the man on the TV told them all the time.

                      “I too have watched plenty of eve’s videos ( And I’ll just wonder here again why so much truther stuff is in video form which makes fact checking and quoting cumbersome), but I then took time to check out the counter points. You should look deeper. Don’t just accept that these guys are being honest just becasue a few of them speak well. Question their narrative just as hard as you would the ‘official’ one. See what happens.”

                      Ah yes but did you take the time to check out the counterpoints to the counterpoints? Now who’s making assumptions – did I say ‘I think they are are right because they sounded like such nice intelligent guys’? Or that I hadn’t checked out the debunking websites too? I’ve got my doubts about the official story, but I’ve got my doubts about my doubts too. I’m all for healthy scepticism, I just don’t like the closed-minded kind.

                      “I’ve found that many of the things they say simply don’t stack up. they repeat clear and obvious falsehoods years after they have been debunked.”

                      I’m not much interested in getting into the nuts and bolts of yet another 911 debate. I’ll leave that to blog warriors keener than I. My objection was to TRP’s stupid reply which I’ve heard one too many times.

                    • McFlock …
                      14 February 2013 at 1:22 pm

                      Mike, this morning when you woke up, you had no idea whether the act of turning on a computer would blow up the planet.

                      I’m shocked that you didn’t keep an “open mind” about the possibility, and recklessly risked all our lives. Because calculating probabilities is pointless.

                    • Pascal's bookie …
                      14 February 2013 at 2:28 pm

                      Now who’s making assumptions – did I say ‘I think they are are right because they sounded like such nice intelligent guys’?

                      It’s not a direct quote, but you did say:

                      It was some 2hr odd conference of experts presenting their reasons for their doubts about the official narrative from different perspectives. They weren’t loons, I didn’t see any tinfoil hats. They were intelligent and articulate, and highly qualified. Some of them were more persuasive than others, but at the end it was difficult to disagree that there were serious questions that deserved answers. But maybe the wikipedia geniuses here know better.

                      the bolded sections seem to imply that you found it difficult to disagree that there were serious questions because of the impression you had of their intelligence.

                      Or that I hadn’t checked out the debunking websites too?

                      No but you did say that “maybe the wikipedia geniuses here know better.” Which gives a pretty strong clue about how much follow up you did.

                    • emergency mike …
                      14 February 2013 at 6:22 pm

                      One of them wore a tie that I quite liked. Some of them were more persuasive than others, but at the end it was difficult to disagree that there were serious questions that deserved answers.

                      PB are you going to conclude that the above implies that I found it difficult to disagree that there were serious questions because one of them wore a tie that I quite liked? I said they were intelligent and articulate, and highly qualified simply to counter TRP’s assertion that these people are ‘loons’ meaning lunatics I’m guessing. They didn’t look like lunatics. Did the fact that they didn’t look like lunatics persuade me? No PB, it didn’t. It was their arguments that I found persuasive.

                      Did I pledge my allegiance to team truther there and then? No, I didn’t. I’ve also seen a number of debunking websites and videos that were also persuasive to varying degrees. So as I’ve said, I have doubts about my doubts, but overall I’m left unsatisfied with the official story. Maybe all that means is that the official story has not been well elucidated, or maybe it means something else.

                      “No but you did say that “maybe the wikipedia geniuses here know better.” Which gives a pretty strong clue about how much follow up you did.”

                      Does it? Again I can’t see how you conclude y from x here… That sentence was meant as a dig at the blog warrior debunker compared to the highly qualified persons I was referring to. (I admit it’s a throwaway cheap-shot.)

                    • McFlock …
                      14 February 2013 at 6:39 pm

                      Here’s the thing, EM.

                      I don’t believe that people can do even a tiny amount of research into an incident – any incident – and not form a pretty solid idea about what happened. They may be right or mistaken, but you obviously have opinions.

                      For example, when you said

                      CV: “You may think that severe asymmetric damage to a skyscraper can lead to a completely balanced and symmetric collapse directly on to the skyscraper’s own footprint, but I do not.”

                      Me neither. Particularly concerning building 7.

                      That seems to imply that you believe building 7 collapsed in a “completely balanced and symmetric” manner into it’s “own footprint”.
                      I think that if it had for whatever reason fallen in that way, that truly would have broken the laws of physics. Even controlled implosions don’t manage to do it. Therefore that description obviously does not marry with reality, therefore it is nutty.

                    • Pascal's bookie …
                      14 February 2013 at 7:29 pm

                      Nah, your tie example is a non sequitur. It would make no sense to think someone was right just because of their tie.

                      I said you thought they were right because you thought they were intelligent; because that’s pretty much what you said. Admittedly, that doesn’t make a whole lot of sense either in that it’s a bit of a tautology but that’s your argument’s problem not mine.

                      It’s interesting that you found that many of their arguments were not convincing. It would be interesting to talk about that. But you said you don’t want to get into the details about what people are saying. That’s unfortunate, because it makes it nigh on impossible to make calls about how intelligent and reasonable they really were.

                      For example, if you found out that the repeated claims that ‘the towers fell at free fall speed and therefore must have been a controlled demolition’ were nonsense; then I would think that would tell someone quite a lot about the honesty and or understanding of the people who made such claims.

                      But that’s just me.

                    • emergency mike …
                      14 February 2013 at 7:58 pm

                      “Mike, this morning when you woke up, you had no idea whether the act of turning on a computer would blow up the planet.

                      I’m shocked that you didn’t keep an “open mind” about the possibility, and recklessly risked all our lives. Because calculating probabilities is pointless.”

                      So being open to considering fringe theories means that I have to guard myself against the negative outcomes of every possible conceivable universe McFlock? Strawman much?

                      I’m afraid I’m not familiar with your turning on a computer can blow up the planet theory, but from what you’ve told me about it so far I’m not convinced. Nor interested.

                      My statement about calculating probabilities was specifically in reference to TRP’s ‘which 911 explanation is more likely’ and ‘what are the odds?’ questions. Asking for such a number is pointless. People will give different answers and all of them will be impossible to verify.

                      Even if there was a total consensus about the number it still wouldn’t mean anything. It would just be a measure of public perception about the probability of 911 being some kind of conspiracy. So what? How would that relate to the reality of whether or not it actually happened?

                      Unless the number was 42. That would definitely mean something.

                    • Te Reo Putake …
                      14 February 2013 at 8:06 pm

                      “My statement about calculating probabilities was specifically in reference to TRP’s ‘which 911 explanation is more likely’ and ‘what are the odds?’ questions. Asking for such a number is pointless. People will give different answers and all of them will be impossible to verify.”

                      Your last sentence also applies to 911 truth deniers. 12 years, no evidence. But a shitload of unverifiable theories of what “might” have happened. On the upside, nobody much gives a flying one about this crap any more. It’s rapidly heading into outer space to join Elvis on Mars.

                    • emergency mike …
                      14 February 2013 at 8:17 pm

                      “I said you thought they were right because you thought they were intelligent; because that’s pretty much what you said. Admittedly, that doesn’t make a whole lot of sense either in that it’s a bit of a tautology but that’s your argument’s problem not mine.”

                      I’ll try once more. I added the sentence about seem being intelligent because TRP called them ‘loons’. That was the only reason. I did not say, nor did I mean to imply, that I believed them just because they seemed intelligent. That would be dumb. I hope this clears things up for you.

                      I’m not interested in discussing what they said since as I said, I’m not interested in a what really happened debate. That wasn’t my reason for posting. I’m sure if you joined in the fun over at your nearest truther blog you could have yourself a merry old time if that’s what you’re after.

                    • emergency mike …
                      14 February 2013 at 8:24 pm

                      McFlock – Now that you mention it, buildings don’t even have feet. So it would be a logical impossibility for them to even have a footprint to fall into.

                      Sorry, like I said, not interested.

                    • Pascal's bookie …
                      14 February 2013 at 8:32 pm

                      ,i>I did not say, nor did I mean to imply, that I believed them just because they seemed intelligent. That would be dumb.

                      No less dumb than saying they weren’t loons because they seemed intelligent.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      14 February 2013 at 8:54 pm

                      Awesome thread derail.

                      It’s almost like people defending their own belief systems to the (rhetorical) death.

                    • McFlock …
                      14 February 2013 at 11:46 pm

                      I’m afraid I’m not familiar with your turning on a computer can blow up the planet theory, but from what you’ve told me about it so far I’m not convinced. Nor interested.

                      But apparently if I put on a suit and tie and did a youtube video, you might be. The sudden power drain could cause a cascading blackout that could interfere with Echelon signals and send HAARP a corrupted instruction that would irradiate the polar atmosphere, causing a catastrophic feedback loop in the earth’s magnetic core…

                      Oh, and look up “building footprint” in the dictionary. Borrow CV’s, after he’s looked up “pyroclastic”.

                    • TheContrarian …
                      14 February 2013 at 11:53 pm

                      Look McFlock

                      A completely inept presidential administration was able to smuggle masses of thermite into a building with 24 hour security, including bomb sniffing dogs, so they could frame 19 Saudi highjackers in order to invade Afghanistan so they’d have justification to invade Iraq because what they really want to do is impose US hegemony on Iran.

                      It’s perfectly simple.

                    • McFlock …
                      14 February 2013 at 11:59 pm

                      That’s exactly what they want us to think!

                      meh. I’m done with this episode of Idiot Fantasy Island.

                      d’oh edit: CV – smart enough to use a dictionary.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      14 February 2013 at 11:59 pm

                      You guys are so smart you must be right.

                    • TheContrarian …
                      15 February 2013 at 12:01 am

                      We’re through the looking glass now, gentleman

                    • emergency mike …
                      15 February 2013 at 2:17 am

                      But apparently if I put on a suit and tie and did a youtube video, you might be.

                      Oh look another strawman. Quelle surprise. You’re quite good at them though.

                • TheContrarian …
                  13 February 2013 at 6:59 pm

                  pyroclastically ?

                  You use that word but I do not think it means what you think it means

    • bad12 14.2
      13 February 2013 at 4:52 pm

      Not wishing to get the whole 9/11 debate going again and ruin the post i am going to say simply yes i agree with you,

      Getting back to Richard Prosser tho, sad sack of s**t that He is probably thinks that all the attention presently being focused upon Him is great,

      Who tho is the danger here, the Kiwi kid of Arab extraction living a few doors down from me polishing his old used car like it’s a Bentley or Prosser himself,

      Here’s an MP who in all reality has thrown a tantrum through the pages of ‘Investigate magazine’ because He got held up in a line at the airport for a security check,

      The above is not the truth though, that, the truth, got buried in the torrent of abhorrence leveled at the racist rubbish Prosser had written for that magazine, and so it should have been, the torrent of abhorrence that is,

      Prosser though has probably thanked His lucky stars that the focus,(as yet), has remained upon the abject stupidity of His comments and not on the FACT that Richard Prosser by His own admission tried to board the plane carrying a f**king KNIFE,

      Prosser who attempted to pass through the security check with a folding pocket knife on His person and then argued with airport security who refused to allow Him to proceed unless the folded pocket knife was handed over then went on to have printed the abusive racist rubbish that appeared in ‘investigate magazine’,

      That is the genesis of the Richard Prosser magazine article and i have to ask the question here again, just who is the more dangerous, the Kiwi-kid of obvious Arab extraction down the end of the street polishing His wheels until they shine or the MP from the NZFirst list attempting to board a flight at a NZ airport armed with a folded pocket knife in His possession,

      That’s actually borderline illegal, as far as my reading of NZ law goes it says that your allowed to carry a knife in a public place if you have a reasonable excuse for doing so,

      My view is that Richard Prosser the NZFirst MP should not only be given the kick from His Party and the Parliament He also should be the subject of a Police investigation to ascertain why He was carrying that folded pocket knife in the first place…

      • One Tāne Huna 14.2.1
        14 February 2013 at 8:32 am

        Um, plenty of people carry pocket knives. They can be used for many things. When you fly, though, you put it in your luggage (not hand luggage) or leave it at home. Pretty basic stuff these days. Prosser couldn’t even get that right either.

        • bad12 14.2.1.1
          14 February 2013 at 1:34 pm

          Because ‘plenty of people carry pocket knives’ does not make such carriage legal, what ‘reasonable cause’ would you advance if you were searched by the plod and be found with such a knife in your possession,

          What reasonable excuse does a Member of the New Zealand Parliament have for the carriage of a pocket knife, especially attempting to board a domestic air flight in possession of one when the very security checks that provoked His abysmal display of racism was to detect people carrying the very thing that was found on His person…

          • McFlock 14.2.1.1.1
            14 February 2013 at 2:01 pm

            Forgot to take it out of his pocket in the rush for the plane. Same reasonable excuse everyone else has when transitioning from a public area to a higher security area.

            • Roy 14.2.1.1.1.1
              14 February 2013 at 4:19 pm

              On the contrary, the Dom-Post this morning said Prosser has carried it as hand-luggage some 30 times. That means he has broken regulations some 30 times, of course. This was not a single instance of forgetfulness. CArrying a knife in the cabin is something he is in the habit of doing.

              • Colonial Viper …
                14 February 2013 at 5:41 pm

                Ahhhh the appearance of boarding security in airports but with no actual security. Great.

            • bad12 14.2.1.1.1.2
              14 February 2013 at 5:36 pm

              Its illegal to carry a knife in public without having a reasonable excuse…

              • McFlock …
                14 February 2013 at 6:03 pm

                Yes. Reasonable. Like “I might need to cut, screw, saw or scrape something”.

                • bad12 …
                  14 February 2013 at 6:38 pm

                  Your use of the word ‘might’ takes away the reasonable cause, that you might have to do something doesn’t make ‘reasonable cause’,

                  You ‘might’ get away with, ”i am meeting my mate down at the wharf to go fishing, he has the rods and asked me to bring a knife to cut up the bait”,

                  Of course the plods having plenty of time these days might just check that story out and spank you for the BS…

                  • McFlock …
                    14 February 2013 at 6:56 pm

                    Nope. It might be a reasonable preparation to make.

                    The police might take it to court to test the excuse, but that’s all a trial is for. Unless it was an obvious weapon and my excuse was completely bogus (e.g. if I made the fishing excuse for a 30cm blade, but had never been fishing in my life) then the reasonable excuse thing comes into play.

                    The obvious point is that the “weapon” prosser had to mail home was a piddly little number that was a reasonable utility/pocket knife. I very much doubt it was a Rambo-blade. Otherwise it would have been confiscated and a charge could follow.

                    The point is that we don’t need to walk around, terrified that something we need to carry for even sentimental reasons might result in us being charged with a weapon-carrying offense. Not if we’re reasonable folk who view things as tools, not weapons.

                    Ever seen a hat pin, as a woman might wear to a formal party?
                    Purely decorative, yet smaller prison shanks have killed…

          • One Tāne Huna 14.2.1.1.2
            14 February 2013 at 2:38 pm

            Reasonable cause? To carry a multi-purpose tool? Are you for real?

            “Essential Gear:

            Pocket knife, flash-light, magnifying glass, needle and thread, matches, a marble, pencil and paper, a handkerchief, band-aids and fish-hooks.”

            The Dangerous Book For Boys Conn Iggulden.

            [summarised by OAB]

            and what McFlock said.

            • bad12 14.2.1.1.2.1
              14 February 2013 at 5:33 pm

              The dangerous book for boys might not be a very good guide to what is actually legal in this country,

              According to the Police and the law it is illegal to carry a knife in a public place without reasonable excuse,

              http://www.police.govt.nz/node/23130

              http://www.police.govt.nz/service/firearms/swords-knives.html

              http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1981/0113/latest/DLM53545.html

              http://www.legislation.govt.nz/pdlink.aspx?id=DLM329710

              Like to see any of you lot strolling up to one of the local plod saying ha ha ha i have a pocket knife and there is nothing you can do about it,

              Possess a pocket knife for peeling the oranges perhaps??? better be carrying the fruit with you if the plods ever get to search you and find that pocket knife,

              Still begs the question why does NZFirst MP Richard Prosser carry with Him an offensive weapon???to defend Himself against the odd muslim terrorist that might stray His way perhaps???…

              • McFlock …
                14 February 2013 at 6:24 pm

                It is legal to carry a knife, if you have a reasonable purpose for it.
                Self defense is not reasonable.

                Little knives are often useful. This is reasonable.
                Rapiers aren’t usually useful. They are not reasonable.

                He doesn’t carry an offensive weapon.
                He carries a tool (as well as being one himself).
                The fact it is regarded as a TOOL and not a weapon is a reasonable excuse for a small pocket knife.
                The difference generally involves possible uses, length, number of blade edges, shape of blade, conceal-ability (is it disguised as a pen or credit card?), speed in deployment (flick knives / one-handed opening) and, of course, whether you wave it in somebody’s face or stick it in their gut.

                As for your “oranges” example, “immediacy of use” isn’t in the criteria. “Reasonable” is. All I have to do is say that I planned to buy oranges for lunch. Whether that is a plausible excuse for a reasonable purpose depends entirely on the context of the situation. I actually have encountered folks who did the equivalent (for other rules/laws) of that “nothing you can do about it” attitude. That merely gave an incentive to find something else they were doing that I could “do something about” – if only to teach them a bit of courtesy and humility.

                Given that you seem to have difficulty understanding the word “reasonable”, I suggest that you avoid carrying any tool or object that could be construed as a weapon. Including car keys or a pencil.

                • bad12 …
                  14 February 2013 at 6:50 pm

                  Ever been arrested for something Mac, i will guess no that’s why you sit there tapping your spurious bullshit into this post,

                  As far as the word reasonable goes it is not my definition of the word that counts, it is the definition firstly of the plods and then secondly the courts that defines what in a legal sense is reasonable,

                  Get arrested for driving while disqualified and when the plods search you at the shop and find that pocket knife you get charged with possession of an offensive weapon, that’s what actually happens in the real world which obviously doesn’t encompass you sitting in front of your PC wanking on about the word reasonable…

                  • bad12 …
                    14 February 2013 at 9:17 pm

                    It is also illegal under NZ civil aviation law to carry onto an air-plane (1),anything that could be used as an offensive weapon, and (2), any knife with a blade 60cm or more in length…

                  • McFlock …
                    14 February 2013 at 11:54 pm

                    Yep.
                    Commission of a crime. And of course the “while disqualified” is an automatic contempt of cop.

                    Been present at a few arrests – enough to know when an officer is willing to use all the law, and when they might let little irrelevancies slide with a warning or whatever. But each officer has different tolerances. Which decrease dramatically if they think you’re a dick.

  15. aerobubble 15
    13 February 2013 at 5:28 pm

    prosser ? who?

    sorry, Key wants us to believe that refugees want to come to NZ despite Australia booming and the fact that if they land in NZ waters they wont get access to OZ welfare when they move across the ditch looking for a living wage. No refugee is wanting to come to NZ when a quick right turn will see then landing on Australias easter seaboard (if they coming south for NZ).

    prosser?

  16. Robert Atack 16
    13 February 2013 at 7:28 pm

    Maybe we should be discussing the ‘McCarthy’ way ‘we’ have all been coned into thinking ‘Muslims’ are a danger to us?
    Multinational companies (and maternity wards) are way worse, and have helped set humankind on a non stop ride to extinction. Muslims have helped, but no more than any other ethnic group … as a mass…
    It has been mostly our ability to run from facts that has killed us off.
    I really can’t play the blame game, in the end humans are just stupid.

  17. Foreign Waka 17
    13 February 2013 at 7:42 pm

    Mr Prosser made a stupid comment, felt righteous and got carried away. We will not be able to really understand his motivation why he has had this put in writing and published too. He has however, a responsibility towards the people of the country (all of them), the parliament and his party and should understand his obligation to stand down.

    • Te Reo Putake 17.1
      13 February 2013 at 8:00 pm

      Yep. Remind me again what what happened to Paul Holmes after ‘cheeky darky’? Sacked wasn’t he? It’s waaaay beyond that level of stupid, so why’s Prosser waiting? Does Winston not like the next one on the list?

      Edit: Helen Mulford, since noone’s asking. Got a bad case of the David Moyes’ eyes, so should fit right in! http://vote.co.nz/2011/candidates/profile/helen-mulford

      • Foreign Waka 17.1.1
        13 February 2013 at 8:26 pm

        Maybe Mr Prosser his trying to hold on and it is a bit tricky to just toss someone out. I am sure that god’s mill grinds slowly but is still inescapable….

  18. xtasy 18
    13 February 2013 at 11:17 pm

    All I can and will say on this is: Prosser made a real “dick” of himself, and it is not the first time he has done so. It does not display much intelligence, particularly re the anti muslim rant. I do not consider this “racist”, as criticising people’s religion is of a bit different a category. He may to some have earned himself the “racist” tag by going on about “Wogistan”, but I feel that is not sufficient for that.

    Prosser lives in South Islandistan, which is in large part a good part of the country, but also has some bizarre, backward minded individuals live here and there, who are not that enlightened about the rest of the world. Some “have it off” with sheep I hear, do not take my word for it though.

    So that is, from my view, where Prosser comes from. He better get another life, as I feel, no matter how desperate Winston may be to keep his crew together, his days could well be numbered.

    Even Winston has learned by now, that such narrow minded ignorance, let alone anti religious or even racist ranting, will not help him and their cause at all. He has to count every voter and member, and some of them, as he admitted, may well be some conservative minded muslims who cherish NZ.

    Yes, even muslims and other religious or non religious members of NZ society are standing up for this country, so Winston has learned this, and Prosser will have to learn it, or join the National Front, perhaps?!

  19. Jenny 19
    14 February 2013 at 4:30 am

    ‘

    Prosser is not sorry, Prosser is a liar.

    Justifying his racist outburst by claiming emotional distress. Prosser claimed on National Radio that he had been upset that a treasured personal gift, he had owned for years, to wit a pocket knife had been confiscated at the airport by security.

    ‘This is understandable, he was upset, he didn’t really mean what he’d written.’

    However it turns out, this is a deliberate lie made up to cover for his racist abuse.

    Prosser’s precious pocket knife wasn’t confiscated at all.

    Far from confiscating the knife, security officials ‘‘facilitiated’’ Prosser back to the Air New Zealand counter where the knife was put through as checked in baggage.


    VERNON SMALL, ANDREA VANCE, HAMISH RUTHERFORD AND NICOLE PRYOR     MP should resign

    Will Winston Peters expel Prosser for being an unrepentant racist?

    For misleading the public as to his motives, will Winston Peters expel Prosser for being an unrepentant racist, and a liar to cover up the fact?

    Or is New Zealand First a safe haven for sexists and racists?

    • Jenny 19.1
      14 February 2013 at 5:33 am

      “I’m apologising unreservedly”

      Richard Prosser

      By lying?

      I don’t think so.

      This is not an unreserved apology until Prosser also apologises for misleading the public as to his motive.

  20. Jenny 20
    14 February 2013 at 4:33 am

    Winston Peters tries to deflect criticism of his openly racist MP with an unjustified sexist indignity directed at the Minister.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/8295162/Wogistan-MP-should-resign-Islamic-leader

    “Ethnic Affairs Minister Judith Collins said Prosser can’t return to Parliament with any credibility and should apologise to the whole of New Zealand.

    “Judith Collins should stop behaving like Joan Collins, okay,” Peters retorted.”

  21. kiwicommie 21
    14 February 2013 at 2:43 pm

    Just because some Muslims/insert religious or ethnic group here, commit crimes or terrorism doesn’t make the entire group criminals or terrorists. Prosser seems like he is attempting to be the Geert Wilders of the South Pacific.

  22. aerobubble 22
    15 February 2013 at 2:06 pm

    Look this is just a complete distraction, Prosser was the weak link on the right and so had to up his game to distract us all from the real menace to Democracy in NZ. The way in which Keys government consistent abuse the law and commonsense.

    Take the nonsense over refugees. Refugees who want to goto OZ for the lifestyle will target NZ… ….so what… …they can be second class kiwis in OZ!!! Please. How is it refugees are supposed to be no different and can be also placed in detention whether they land in NZ or OZ, yet kiwis living in OZ have to subsidies Aussie welfare but not get that same welfare assistance?

    Now, sure Howard could do whatever he wanted, Clark could do nothing to stop Howard, it is of course a Australian policy that makes kiwis into second class citizens, and well thinking about it, if your a rich Kiwi in NZ why wouldn’t you want t harvest kiwi wages in Australia, I mean they should get away, if they are going to get paid more in OZ we sure can’t have that, given how little we pay here.

Links to post