Silliness on history of NZ Wars

June 27th, 2008 at 8:24 pm by David Farrar

The only way Labour can win is a campaign of denigration against , so they had a go with all guns blazing yesterday over his comments that NZ was formed peacefully.

The NZ Herald compares his comments to Michael Cullen’s and indeed Anand Satyanand and all have said much the same thing. It is indeed one of the things we should be proudest of is that NZ was formed by peaceful treaty not violent conquest.

Of course there were breaches and conflicts later on. NZ behaviour in the 1800s especially was not ideal and this is one of the reasons why five generations on we are trying to do fair settlements of those grievances.

Tags: ,

108 Responses to “Silliness on history of NZ Wars”

  1. Southern Raider (1,366 comments) says:

    Labour are picking the wrong battles.

    The average kiwi struggling to pay the bills, fill the car and put up with the shitty winter weather doesn’t care what John Key said about this issue. It made the bottom part of the third page.

    I encourage Labour to keep on missing the point and proving themselves to be completely out of touch and irrelevant.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. jafapete (766 comments) says:

    Okay, so the civil war — because that is what the Land Wars were — came after the Treaty. Actually, I’m inclined to give Key the benefit of the doubt on this one. Even though I would never have *written* it like that myself, it’s an easy enough mistake to make when you’re thinking off the top of your head.

    But it comes after the war in Iraq being declared over by Key, not being able to remember where he stood on the Springbok Tour in ’81, and so on. That’s the point.

    When it comes to mis-speaking, he’s giving John McCain a run for his money.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    “When it comes to mis-speaking, he’s giving John McCain a run for his money.”

    Or perhaps even Barak Hussein Obama.

    Quote:

    On this Memorial Day, as our nation honors its unbroken line of fallen heroes — and I see many of them in the audience here today — our sense of patriotism is particularly strong.

    Over the last 15 months, we’ve traveled to every corner of the United States. I’ve now been in 57 states? I think one left to go.

    There was something stirring across the country because of what happened in Selma, Ala., because some folks are willing to march across a bridge. So they got together and Barack Obama Jr. was born [Obama was born in 1961. The Selma march took place in 1965.]

    Iran doesn’t pose a serious threat to us — tiny countries with small defense budgets can’t do us harm.

    In case you missed it, this week, there was a tragedy in Kansas. Ten thousand people died — an entire town destroyed.” [The actual death toll: 12.]

    Unquote

    The tip of the iceberg actually. Just another dumbarse leftist.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Patrick Starr (3,675 comments) says:

    However correct he may have been in what he said he has to smarten his act up in saying anything that may be taken out of context. I’m sure this will come with experience but probably no need for him to make such statements at this point when
    1./labour hacks are clearly circling awaiting a Nats kill.
    2./ Labour are self destructing

    I don’t think he should have bothered to challenge 1ZB, – just let it ride. The news wasn’t what he said so much as his reaction to the mountain made from it

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. 3-coil (1,182 comments) says:

    May have been P3 in the NZ Herald SR, but not so on TV.

    The naked bias of both TV1 and TV3 was obvious, both had it placed early in their “show” – no mention of Dr Cullen or GG’s comments (that would require a little bit of research… so didn’t really expect it!)

    Broadcast/nationwide television stations out-paced by Granny-Herald – priceless!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Southern Raider (1,366 comments) says:

    Jafapete if you read the transcript Key did actually go on to mention the landwars. The TV news teams just took him out of context to make a story.

    Yet we have the Ministry of Social Development paying staff that are union members a $750 cash bonus in an election year and no mention of this in the media!

    What should be the story raised Key and the treaty or Labour paying off the unions?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Fairfacts Media (370 comments) says:

    Indeed Southern Raider.
    They didn’t mention the latest twists and turns on Baygate.
    Tv1 and TV3 are incredibly unprofessionbal.
    You cannot believe it.
    At least TV1 mentioned Cullen’s commnts.
    But for TV3 not to in its night time bulletin was amateusrish in the extreme.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. homepaddock (429 comments) says:

    Someone should tell Labour that if you’re in a hole and keep digging deeper the dirt starts falling on top of you.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. jafapete (766 comments) says:

    Redbaiter, Glad to see you’re back and in form. How did the exams go?

    Never said that Obama has never mis-spoken. But you’re right. I should have written:

    “When it comes to mis-speaking, Key’s giving John McCain and Barack Obama a run for their money.”

    Happy?

    PS Should probably have included something about wanting wages to fall in the original comment.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. jafapete (766 comments) says:

    Redbaiter: “Just another dumbarse leftist.”

    I don’t know about “just another”. Not many freshmen senators who hardly anybody has heard of finish up as odds-on favourites to win the presidency, having beaten the establishment candidate with all the contacts, etc.

    As for “dumbarse”, I think that he has a real degree from Harvard, not a crap token degree like the dumbarse who currently pollutes the White House. Do dumbarses often get to edit the HLR? Sounds quite clever.

    “Leftist”? Someone who says that states should be able to execute people for “heinous” crimes like child rape. So long as they’re fair about it. And who opposes gun controls…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    it sorta goes with keys’..”i don’t remember what my attitude was to the springbok tour”..(!)

    eh..?

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. dad4justice (7,406 comments) says:

    I remember the springbok tour and the phool bars. Go red and blue squads, smack, whack a lippy shit stirring communist.

    Edit -eh? Silly Philly??

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    then there was his classic..”the iraq war is all but over’..

    and you hafta ask yourself..

    in these (upcoming) troubled-times..

    ..do you want someone who knows nothing more than how to make money by betting against the new zealand dollar..?

    ..and being part of the economic paradigm that has brought us to this economic mess/meltdown in the first place..?

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    “Not many freshmen senators who hardly anybody has heard of finish up as odds-on favourites to win the presidency,”

    Odds on? Like John Key, the novice who’s about to kick the arse of a lifetime extremist left wing political animal? Your sycophantic Obama worship is just more partisan leftist bullshit. He apparently can’t even change a lightbulb (let alone fly a jet fighter like Dubya).

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. getstaffed (9,188 comments) says:

    Labour are picking the wrong battles.

    Indeed SR. This must speak volumes about how Labour works internally. Playing the player so long that the ball has gone, lights out, park closed and disinterested spectators have long since departed.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    gee ratbiter..you’re going to have a sad/stressful christmas..aren’t you..?

    obama in the white house..

    and lab/grn/mp ruling you here in new zealand..

    (heh..!..)

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    and let’s not forget his off-sider..that guy who was born wearing a suit..

    simon ‘all the way with bush!’ power..

    (yesterdays men/yesterdays politics..)

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. 3-coil (1,182 comments) says:

    philu – are you seriously picking the “green-lipped mussells” to win here?

    You might be right with Obama though – Americans are that stupid!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    Don’t really matter too much who wins in the US. The leftists have totally fucked that country anyway. Like NZ, the election there is a choice between Tweedle Dumb and Tweedle Dumber.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Strutta (67 comments) says:

    3-coil said “- Americans are that stupid!”

    No more stupid than Kiwi’s who vote for Labour

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. tim barclay (886 comments) says:

    “the only way Labour CAN WIN is a campaign of denigration against John Key!!!!!! You do say some very strange things. How could Labour possibly win this way. I do not know how Labour can win. Maybe change their name could help. Anyhow I do not want JUST a National win, I want the permanent political destruction of the New Zealand Labour Party, which is long overdue.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. radvad (620 comments) says:

    And yet in the same week we have dear leader saying NZers are too thick to answer a simple question in a polling booth without getting confused. I mean, how can we even be trusted with a vote?
    The Nats should have been all over that one. Sadly they let another opportunity to show Clark up go by.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    “do you want someone who knows nothing more than how to make money by betting against the new zealand dollar..?”

    Even if the premise of that question was accurate, apparently the NZ population (in droves) would rather that than the current bunch of power obsessed ideologues. (BTW Phil, forget about predicting election outcomes. You’re such a dumbfuck you couldn’t forecast the weather for yesterday.)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    hey ratty..i’ve been calling this economic meltdown for the last 18 months..eh..?

    (this one that is such a surprise to most..

    but hey..!..don’t let the facts get in the way or anything..eh..?

    and all that time..dumbfucks like you were saying much what you’re saying..

    go figure..!

    (feckin’ idjits..!.)

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Political Busker (231 comments) says:

    Michael Cullen was talking about a different period and a different topic. I don’t know the last dates of conflict in the country but his statement is calculated into the last 150 years. John Keys comments are far more broad. He would have no credibility left unless he referred to the land wars as stated above.

    The Treaty wasn’t a smooth negotiation. There was considerable dissent during the period and the anger and animosity was growing throughout as far as I have read – which isn’t too much. Yet legislatively there is a considerable challenge on the views that are presented by any member of sovereign authority and in this way I think Michael Cullen’s comments are well weighted against what could have been said. He identified in his answer to the question that there was no Maori representation in parliament at the time it was formed. That’s telling. Additionally in reports from the British parlaiment just after the signing of the Treaty, the attitude of parliament is abundantly clear. They were milling timber for all they were wotrth and trading with India for shipping masts. The statement made by one of the members clearly indicated that they simply didn’t care about hte indigenous folk, they wanted what they could mill and use. The philosophies of the cultures was completely different and handled by the acting power in such a way. So for any new Zealand politician to act in innocence that the settling period was exemplary is simply little but a mirror image of the past.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Craig Ranapia (1,912 comments) says:

    Sigh… another ‘neutron bomb’ that’s rapidly turned into a damp squib. Sorry to disappoint the resident wingnuts of either stripe, but neither Cullen nor Key are some kind of domestic David Irving.

    And the real story here is shamefully superficial media who were more interested in beating up some “gotcha!” non-story driven by a soundbite, denuded of context or nuance, rather than putting the time and effort into actual journalism. Got to say the MSM coverage of the ‘Treelords’ deal was stunning in its depth, breadth and careful setting of current events in a finely textured historical context — NOT!!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    “And the real story here is shamefully superficial media”

    I presume you meant to say “shamelessly”. Whatever, its hardly “the real story”. I’m surprised anyone would expect more. Its not news that the NZ media are in the main a collection of partisan leftist dipshits. As for your constant vain posturing as some kind of well balanced clear thinking example to us all (“resident wingnuts of either stripe) its supremely boring, especially as you never say anything that amounts to much more than a pinch of goat shit. Why don’t you just come out of the leftist closet too and be done with it?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. Craig Ranapia (1,912 comments) says:

    Redbaiter:

    Thanks for proving my point — do you actually put any thought into your screeds, or do you just push a button that randomly arranges the same dozen clichés and insults? You and Sonic might feel the need to turn every damn thing into a spittle-flecked fit of partisan hysterics, but I don’t. There’s nothing “leftist” about not being able to muster any outrage over the quoted comments from Key and Cullen.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Political Busker (231 comments) says:

    Craig Ranapia,

    I thought your original comment was fair. I’m not sure which part scored the dollop of goat. I imagine judging the numbers to yours and redbaiters respective titles that there is a thick blanket of little black pellets smattered on a mountain.

    “Got to say the MSM coverage of the ‘Treelords’ deal was stunning in its depth, breadth and careful setting of current events in a finely textured historical context — NOT!!”

    What were the fundamental points that were lost to the coverage?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Razorlight (43 comments) says:

    There has been a couple of comments over the past day across blogland noting Key cannot remember where he stood with the Springbok tour.

    Is that really so unbelievable?

    I know many people were very passionate and even miltant in ’81 being either pro or anti tour. But I can assure you not everybody held a strong position one way or the other. I know my mother held the opinion at the time sport and politics should not mix, but felt sick seeing the violence in New Zealand that the tour produced. If you ask her now what side of the debate she was on, she would struggle to tell you simply because she had a foot in both camps.

    Is it not concievable that John Key was in a similar position. Or even at that time was apolitical and watched the stories on the news but did not care.

    It is wrong to suggest every person must have an opinion on every social issue. A PM needs to have an opinion but a young male in ’81 doesn’t.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. paradigm (507 comments) says:

    Some percieve Key’s off the cuff talking style as a failing, it certainly constrasts the photoshopped, stagemanaged labour image. However I think I prefer the former to the latter.

    I have to say I have very little confidence with the reporting of either television news provider. Both seem incapable of seeing beyond the tip of their noses and conducting a little research. They are exculsively focused on producing scandal and human interest stories (a slightly off topic example: recently TV3 ran a ‘run your car from water’ story. The claimed performance of the device violated the first and second laws of thermodynamics, and yet the overall tone of the story was based around “wouldn’t it be wonderful if it works” rather than “this is con, don’t buy it”.)

    Back on topic, I agree with Reverend Patricia Bawden’s comments in the article where she supports Key’s original statement, that “When John Key says this country grew from the seeds of peace he was actually quite right. It did start in peace. The tensions came after the signing at Waitangi and that was years before the Maori Land Wars.”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Frank (320 comments) says:

    The Treaty was intended to facilitate the annexation of the North Island as the first step to bringing law an order into a lawless, uncivilized, growing colony. It also made Maori British citizens, to join with the influx of settlers.

    When the British Home Office viewed the Treaty, they described it as a legally naïve, hastily drawn-up document in order to annex the territory.

    The Tribunal can only consider any breaches of the three Articles:.

    The first extinguished all their rights, including customary practices that became illegal under British law at the instant they became British citizens. It is difficult to envisage any breach of this by the Colonial Power. But the same cannot be said of Maori, particularly when they often assert a right of custom that is not lawfully available to other citizens. There is no ‘Tribunal’ to rectify these increasing breaches. The 2nd Article is the one used (and abused) to claim a breach and this is where the other major flaw has crept into the interpretation.

    It has created a major Industry and is upholding the rights of one section of people at the expense of the other.

    It is creating Apartied in reverse?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. Political Busker (231 comments) says:

    Razorlight,

    I agree. I was with the protestors and hitched from Auckland down to Wellington, helping to marshall and travelled to Hamilton to be on the marches and just a step or two away from getting through the hole in the fence to get onto thefield before it was closed off. Yet for the last game in Auckland, I simply became deflated and found the whole concept of civil conflict disingenuous. I left: early.

    I think your further right where John Key’s interests were not in politics. I had no clue about anything political until running into the beast of the Family Court. Like you say it isn’t any great suprise. Yet the issue that I find most significant about John Key’s short political history is that he made a stateemtn that is unforgivable relative to his flip flop on Iraq. He then excused the different statement saying that he was politicaly naif. He said, quite effectively that it is OK to lie, you just have to be efficient.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. capills_enema (194 comments) says:

    “Like NZ, the election there is a choice between Tweedle Dumb and Tweedle Dumber.”

    Yeah, but one of them can fly a ‘jet fighter’ almost as good as Dubya can, Mr Baiter! He only got shot down once. So let’s vote for him, I reckon.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Political Busker (231 comments) says:

    Frank,

    “that became illegal under British law at the instant they became British citizens”.

    Please excuse me if this appears in anyway like a lesson on history, but I am particularly interested in closing this argument down to fact. Unfortunately my circumstances will not allow me much more time at the computer and I will enter into a void after tomorrow. Yet if there is significant dialogue over a period of absense I will return with more information. I don’t yet have a question to ask but I want to counter your comment with what I presently believe to be the facts. The dates and years without the access to references are close estimates if not accurate. Please be encouraged to contest anything I state so I can research it.

    You say British Law: The English Laws Act 1852 was the constitution of the British Law that you claim. Until its constitution the treaty was nothing more than a piece of paper in English parliament and held no authority. The English were left with a considerable problem for James Busby having built the Declaration of Independence in 1835. The indigenous people had legal ownership, in English terms anyway of the land. Military conflict or assimilation were the preferred option, yet obbviously, geographically the latter was a nonsense. The DOI was proclaimed from New South Wales so military superiority was already an impossibility. The Australians would have been bound to defend the integrity of their intervention and they too were British. The treaty became a necessity as the option of assimilation had already been technically ruled out.

    James Busby, if indeed it was at his hand had crafted an extraordinary document in the DOI. It must have been an incredible headache. The English had to have the authority from the DOI ceded, so they were forced to build a treaty. I haven’t read all that many of the select committee notes from the British parliament but enough, as I wrote earlier, to gain the tenure. Additionally the geographical dilemma must have been an impossibility – maybe 5 weeks between current communications? That wouldn’t have stopped parliament, however, from debating with passion this extraordinarily rich resource so deeply cast into the waters of a southern and savage unknown.

    The DOI remains independent. The reason for this is because to lose its independence it must be violated. The treaty and the DOI cannot rest in jurisdiction side by side, because then nothing would be bound. It is the fact of this independence that is shrouded into our darkest of political place. The English Laws Act 1852 was constiuted into the DOI on Jan 12 1840, some few weeks prior to the treaty. With the ceding process that could ordinarily be promoted as excuse enough for International comity, the evolution of colonisation would have thereby have been secured in an unprecedented fashion. As it is as I read history through the bits and pieces I do read this has been the promotion prior to the rediscovery of the existance of the DOI. Yet lately, the weight of its significance is quickly taking its toll.

    The DOI is exclusive of any alien. No alien has any entitlement unless the independent framework of the indigneous people, no matter their condition in 1835 was shown respect and maintained. Any such alien meeting these conditions may be given entitlement yet would require the acknowledgement of those indigenous peoples before such extraordinary authority over their existance could be granted. Well, obviously the colonisers didn’t think like this, other than for those of them around who though like Busby. The stunning component of the DOI is it stabilised an abridgment of time to an encouragement for the indigenous people to justify their differences.

    The English version of the treaty and substantiating English Laws Act did not demonstrate any respect for the status of the DOI and invaded the DOI. It was effectively a document of internationally improper and illegal theft. The Maori version, however, which was the Maori signed to justify their whenua in evolution and development directly factored the DOI. So in brief only one part of the treaty holds legality and that part is in a demonstrably as deep neglect.

    “It has created a major Industry and is upholding the rights of one section of people at the expense of the other”.

    In this I agree, but probably not in the same capacity as you. There is simply a differnt type of work to be factored into the negotiations, that would appear on the surface, at least, to be absent.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. Steve Withers (98 comments) says:

    There are a lot more Maori in the Labour Party than in National. They obviously see Key’s comments in a different light and have responded to how they see them. I’m not sure National dismissing that response is going to convince Maori that National is knowledgeable and aware of the full picture. It would tend to reinforce the impression already rendered.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. Duxton (540 comments) says:

    There is a lot of ignorance in this country about the New Zealand Wars, full stop. This includes those who are so quick to denigrate Key.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. jafapete (766 comments) says:

    Steve Withers: “I’m not sure National dismissing that response is going to convince Maori that National is knowledgeable and aware of the full picture.”

    Good point Steve. National are actively trying to woo the Maori Party, but keep stuffing up because they are so far behind when it comes to understanding Maori perspectives. They should stick to bashing the Wananga for the benefit of the redneck vote.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. big bruv (12,319 comments) says:

    Jafa & Comrade Withers

    I am astonished that as Labour supporters you both have the audacity to come here and claim that Labour are the party of the Maori people, like lemmings Maori voted for your corrupt party for decades, what did they get in return?……jack shit!

    Please do not attempt to re write history, Maori have seen through the charade that is Labour, one only needs to compare the likes of Sharples and that fat useless tub of lard Horomiha to see where the future of the Maori party is going.

    Labour have lost the Maori vote, I fully expect them to win all of the Apartheid seats in the coming election, under the leadership of Sharples Maori have a future that is not dependent on racist hand outs from the corrupt Labour govt every three years.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Ross Miller (1,624 comments) says:

    Gueez Wayne … as the NZ economy crumbles the MSM whip themselves into a frenzy over a non story that became even more ‘noner’ once the comments of Cullen and the GG were thrown into the mix.

    Come on Barry Soper … give yourself a swift uppercut and start reporting the real issues rather than sycophantically parroting of Labour Party Press Releases.

    Mind you … BS represents that school of journos who have supped well and long from Helen’s table and I guess they are calling in the credits.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Lee C (4,516 comments) says:

    Kiwiblog has gone off the boil a bit so I thought would visit The Standard under ‘deep cover’. So disguised as ‘Monkey-Boy’ I spent a couple of day provoking people. Infantile I know, but rather entertaining.
    Anyway.
    It occurred to me that I know what Labour are doing wrong, and they are so deeply engrossed in their self-destruct tactics, that they may be unable to dig their way out if they are not careful. What is it? Yes, they are attacking Key too much and not promoting their own policies well enough.
    Ironic, because one of their attacks on Key is that he will not discuss policy.
    A classic example of this shoot yourself in the foot strategy was Cullen’s pointless, unecessary, ridiculous and infantile ‘attack’ on John Key that he is unfit to govern because he doesn’t know his history. It was an attempted dogwhistle to the party faithful which promotes this rather sad idea:
    “John Key is an old-fashioned white middle-class ignorant racist, so if you are Maori or left-leaning… BEWARE!!!” One reader claimed that this made Key akin to a ‘holocaust denier’…
    And of course The Standard were all over it. Until it was pointed out that that Cullen had said much the same thing as Key did some time ago, and so had the Governor General.
    When the National Party complained, this was taken as proof by some readers that there is a VIRWC (Vast International Right-Wing Conspiracy) to ‘Muzzle’ journalists who do not play ball.
    Even as that ridiculous assertion failed to gain traction, The following Standard posts back-tracked and tried to assert it ok everyone, we can dogwhistle ‘Key the racist’ because Cullen’s ‘context’ indicates that Cullen is just a great guy wh is proud of his country.
    They won’t back down, face facts and move on. It was a pathetic beat-up. It backfired. When you even have a staunch advocate of Maori such as Willy Jackson saying ‘It made Labour look silly.’ You have to question the wisdom of this approach.
    But compare this to the marvellous work Cullen has done this week and in previous months to reach settlement with Maori. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/story.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10518751
    And what does Cullen, and Clark and The Standard do? Overshadow an historical triumph with a piece of doggy-doo smear tactic against John Key, which only succeeded in making Key look like a decent guy who is being unfairly maligned, and Labour looking like a bunch of inept and mean-spirited losers.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. jafapete (766 comments) says:

    Big Bruv, “…like lemmings Maori voted for your corrupt party for decades, what did they get in return?……jack shit!”

    Come on BB, you must have had time to take a quick look at the newspapers this week, surely. If not, read the last paragraph of LeeC’s post.

    Actually, LeeC might even have a point. See, that’s what a few days at the Standard will do for you!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. radar (319 comments) says:

    I love that Redbaiter manages to squeeze an entire paragraph of insults toward Barack Obama into a post about New Zealand history. That’s amazing.

    And he calls Senator Obama “Just another dumbarse leftist”.

    Senator Obama, at the age of 47, has secured the nomination of the Democratic Party for the Presidency of the United States. He is a graduate of Harvard Law School, where he also taught constitutional law, and was the first black editor of the Harvard Law Review.

    Meanwhile, Redbaiter….comments on blogs.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. jafapete (766 comments) says:

    radar, you might enjoy my rejoinder to redbaiter of 9.41pm.

    His response to the points which you also make was, “Don’t really matter too much who wins in the US. The leftists have totally fucked that country anyway. Like NZ, the election there is a choice between Tweedle Dumb and Tweedle Dumber.”

    I’m wondering which leftists he has in mind. Ronald Reagan? Perhaps one or both of the Bushes?

    Redbaiter is best appreciated as the local answer to Sasha Baron Cohen — it’s not the content, but the utterly outrageous style that amuses.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. Murray (8,835 comments) says:

    The greatest ignorance was displayed by the media referring to “Maori Wars”.

    And now we hear from more ignorant bastards here as they whine about their perceived “race war”.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Political Busker (231 comments) says:

    Lee C,

    I think at this stage I agree. Yet, that is when the luxury is to think in hindsight.

    If the party strategists are intense, and they have to be otherwise they wouldn’t get paid, (where it is their job to carry all of the crap) and the theory is that when people panic they make ever worsening decisions then it stands to reason that the bitch fight they have in parliament is ony suspended for the period when the bitchfighting ring is closed.

    A good example recently was remarkable and I think it still leaves the nation of blogs humbled by all of the MP’s quality behaviour and me still a long ways off figuring out the rules of the cross benches mangle. When the veterans were in the gallery recently, there could be no more poignant time, in my opinion where the MP’s should have been humbled into their deepest holes recognising the most pitiful behaviour a politician could exercise over the population of their responsibility. Sending a fellow human into a toxic airspace, to stand alongside those driving steel rain onto a village of innocents, for the power gains of those identical in stature of their own authority is the lowest act of humanity. Yet when Howard Morrison sang in the short air from the gallery dwarfing all alien behavoiour into insignificance against our heroes of time, the MP’s below stood tall, straight and hard deep in personal concession and humility; yet bold in the face of a fire from hell sucking for an instance, the same fear and tears the same sweat, blood and broken bones, and the same rich smell from a thick curd of orange haze. The ambience of ordinary returned as the truth flaked to a shoulder, like a white scratch settled and calm upon a crystal grave.

    So then they got back into it and after a few words had been exchanged nothing seemed to exist in what had just transpired. I wonder if Nandor’s little theatre play on Jeanettes bench smashing his watch (he must have left some deep marks on the bench), as I am sure he wished managed to suspend his time.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    “I’m wondering which leftists he has in mind. Ronald Reagan? Perhaps one or both of the Bushes?”

    Jezuz.. You really can’t detect any difference between Ronald Reagan and George Bush? Bush is the biggest spending most socially liberal POTUS ever. His government has betrayed Conservatives (lost both houses) and although they continue to support him on the Iraq war, (as anyone but a terrorist loving commie scum would do), he’s suffering an immense amount of criticism on social issues. You need to get your head out of the Guardian and your arse out of that university once in a while. Touch the soil. Breathe some real air. Read Townhall. Free Republic. How can you come to a rational decision on any issue when all you ever resort to is the same old same old one sided propaganda outlets?

    You use the term redneck so often, when in your isolated and narrow views and experiences and information sources, you’re the mirror image of that stereotype- an academic wandering the corridors of ivory tower colleges and smoking your pipe in heavily curtained staff rooms and as completely shut off from the rest of the world as any sun burnt plow pushing wheat belt ignoramus.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    “Yet when Howard Morrison sang in the short air from the gallery dwarfing all alien behavoiour into insignificance against our heroes of time, the MP’s below stood tall, straight and hard deep in personal concession and humility; yet bold in the face of a fire from hell sucking for an instance, the same fear and tears the same sweat, blood and broken bones, and the same rich smell from a thick curd of orange haze. The ambience of ordinary returned as the truth flaked to a shoulder, like a white scratch settled and calm upon a crystal grave.”

    Political Busker: In the blogosphere, idiots are a lot more tolerable when they’re SUCCINCT. Look it up.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    yeah..!..it’s rare that i agree with ratty..

    but busker..(i’ve been meaning to tell you for some time..)

    ..your writing is like big lumps of clotted cream of words..

    ..all ‘stuck together’..in an incomprehesible/indechipherable/headache-inducing mess..

    setting new benchmarks of/in verbal diarrohea..

    get back to your thesaurus/learn-a-word-a-day-program..!

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. Lee C (4,516 comments) says:

    busker – that was beautiful mate, big-ups to you. Any one who can antaoganise Ratty and Phool in one go is ok in my book.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. Ross Miller (1,624 comments) says:

    Actually Busker it was ‘Frankie’ that sung from the Gallery day and I think I speak for most if not all of my fellow VVets when i say that most Party leaders did us proud that day. The only possible exception was Turia who repeated the canard that 66% of those who served were Maori. Still, I acknowledge she was speaking to her own constituency and that in Maoridom and on the Marae it is permissible to exaggerate to make the point.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. Political Busker (231 comments) says:

    I thought she did quite well (I ranked her best on the day oddly enough) Ross Miller,

    Had Howard Morrison etched in my brain but that’s me all over – make an idiot’s mistake but keep rolling with Punch.

    Philu – that’s unfair! Loss of 1 Karma. You say on that sight that your a whistle blower. I don’t think you are. If you suggest that you are a whistle blower and someone proves for you that there is a major and serious floor in the system then shouldn’t you do something about it? Don’t know, I thought that was integrity.

    Good to see you agreeing with ratty though (?) Can’t remember my School C mark in English, just over 30 something. Maybe if I take a laxative or two I can get it all flowing a bit better… smooooth like. Good advice though I’ll take it on board thanks.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. calendar girl (1,108 comments) says:

    Busker@2.24am: “Yet for the last game in Auckland, I simply became deflated and found the whole concept of civil conflict disingenuous.” You should give up using big words until you understand their meaning. (Actually, trimming 90% of the other words would help too.)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. Political Busker (231 comments) says:

    calendar girl,

    thanks, but I looked it up, in a book. It said exactly what I wanted it to say.

    However, back to the main thread. I’ll apologise: Sorry. I’m difficult to read. Has anyone seen an (In English written) signature recently dated January 12 1840 on the Declaration of Independence 1835?

    If you do, can you tell me please. I’m walking up from Wellington to Waitangi between September 11 and October 28 and I’m sure the Chiefs up there would be REALLY keen to see it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. Nomestradamus (2,753 comments) says:

    Political Busker:

    Please excuse me if this appears in anyway like a lesson on history, but I am particularly interested in closing this argument down to fact. Unfortunately my circumstances will not allow me much more time at the computer and I will enter into a void after tomorrow. Yet if there is significant dialogue over a period of absense I will return with more information. I don’t yet have a question to ask but I want to counter your comment with what I presently believe to be the facts. The dates and years without the access to references are close estimates if not accurate. Please be encouraged to contest anything I state so I can research it.

    Have you debated PhillipJohn/Roger Nome yet? I have a feeling you guys would enjoy each other’s company – something like a deep wavelength of mutual understanding and admiration :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. Political Busker (231 comments) says:

    Nomestradamus,

    thank you for the tip, yet you push me to answer to my own cause. I’m a little dissapointed, however (you’ll remember my provocation on your provocative statement). I was keen to twist my waffling synapsis somewhere within reach of your own sphere. Maybe it will take some time? However, seriously what I mean to do here is to start to engage the blogsphere into some kind of proactive behaviour against fact that isn’t simply made up. I figure from my initial search that this is the site for me to ‘sting’ (with all respect David Farrah). You see everyone says I’m a clod and that gives them good cause to ignore me.

    I’m not a clod really (I’m … a … and a… blah .. blah .. blah) who doesn’t care anymore. I’ve been done too much damage by those who run the system. I am at the business end of what I am doing. I am bring you all serious facts about the nation from a long period (8 years) of a gruelling existence that requires professionals who run the nations administration to pay a respectful attention. I figure I’ll find you folk right here. By the way Jodi: that was a pretty slap, bang precision entry don’t you think?

    Take that as an example: Eye to Eye must be paying attention to an allegation I have made, here on this show/blog. Either that or I have confused them and I will be forced to repeat it. “(Oh no – not again, not “90″ more times squeals calendar girl audibly twisting over the borrowed thesaurus…) Will the DOI be talked about yesterday/Friday? Where’s the signature? And if it isn’t there then shouldn’t it be there?

    Cheers,
    Nostra… appreciate the direction.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. roger nome (4,067 comments) says:

    Busker:

    My disciple “nomestradamus” (his second consecutive name that is derived from his interactions with me) is right you know. In kiwiblog world the facts are the tools of evil “leftists” who are really just trying to dupe the good folk of the kiwiblog right. Just talk good ol’ right-wing “common sense” and you’ll get along here just fine :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. Political Busker (231 comments) says:

    Ha ha ha…

    now isn’t that one a turn up for the books, I’m not sure I can spell it, let alone get my mouth around its construction… um plod/bod-not-clod-mod-bod;or sod? Is that it?

    Oh well, I suppose plod a bit of an improvement.

    Cheers,
    Boss…

    yeah right :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. roger nome (4,067 comments) says:

    Um, call me obtuse if you like busker, but what the hell are you going on about?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. Lee C (4,516 comments) says:

    Why am I getting an image of two nervous men meeting in a motel parking lot?
    roger is that an open invitation?
    Ok,
    You are obtuse.
    by the way everyone ‘framze’ has relocated to 3109 Great North Road, New Lynn, ph 826 5281.
    For all your custom-framing requirements. Free quotes over the phone. Degree certificates a specialism.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. roger nome (4,067 comments) says:

    Lee- you know better than we do, but please spare us the detail.

    Anyhow, back on topic. Key is an internationalist who has spent most of his adult life outside NZ in the sole pursuit of money an power. Are we really surprised that he knows next to nothing about this country? Moreover, do we really want someone with no perspective on, or sense of, this fine land’s history, people and culture(s) leading us? How can he possibly lead us into the future if he lacks even a basic understanding of our past?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. roger nome (4,067 comments) says:

    It’s called a rhetorical question Lee. But you never were the sharpest knife in the draw, so I’ll let you off.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. Political Busker (231 comments) says:

    There you go Nomestradamus.

    I haven’t read any PhillipJohn.

    roger nome,

    I didn’t mean to infer that you were obtuse. You told me that this blog was for the right and that moving along slowly was the way to go. Or at least that is how I comprehended your message. My previous post declared to you that it was neither the left or the right who were the focus of my attention in writing to a blog but getting the public to be committed to the truth. If was disparaging then I think it was well deserved. In my opinion you simply slagged off what I had said as if it was an irrelevancy. I had a similar argument recently with Judge Fraser in Feilding as he instructed me that domestic violence was an irrelevancy in property relationship matters. He was wrong. He hadn’t read the rule book properly. He wanted not to read what I was saying, he wanted to get on with the task that he saw was at hand. He dismissed my opinion and it will bear cost.

    I don’t mean you disrespect I simply mean to get the job of protecting the public interest properly done. As my dad would say, “If you don’t have justice: then you have nothing”.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. Nomestradamus (2,753 comments) says:

    Political Busker:

    ([Y]ou’ll remember my provocation on your provocative statement).

    Ok, I don’t want to take this thread off-topic, so one response.

    I presume you’re referring to this. If so, a polite request: please don’t misrepresent my position on a complex issue. First, PhillipJohn presumed to lecture Sonic on having “respect for [a woman's] boundaries”. I was simply reminding Phillip John of his own “harmless banter” on another thread – and, by implication, exposing his hypocritical stance. Second, I was also observing that the thread topic had nothing to do with abortion, and yet some people were apparently conflating the two issues. You seem to have construed “pro-lifers” as evidence of me having a pro-abortion stance. I’d suggest that abortion is a complex issue, I haven’t shared my position on it, and you shouldn’t be pigeon-holing me on the basis of one word.

    But that’s another thread, so let’s not debate it here.

    On the subject of this thread, I’m surprised at your claim that “Michael Cullen was talking about a different period and a different topic”. From the NZ Herald article: “Mr Brownlee’s response seemed to leave Dr Cullen short of an answer. [Cullen] later said he was referring to the unbroken institution of Parliament“. From where I sit, Brownlee scored a king-hit.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. jafapete (766 comments) says:

    Nome: “How can he possibly lead us into the future if he lacks even a basic understanding of our past?”

    Well, the Americans voted for someone as President who couldn’t find the USA on a map and…

    Yeah, see what you mean.

    Hey 26 negative kharma in my first comment (second from the top). Must be because I said I’d give Key the benefit of the doubt on this one, eh.
    PS Time for a visit, Nome.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. Lee C (4,516 comments) says:

    roger it’s spelled ‘drawer’.

    Easy on the ‘NIMBY’ homophobia, there rog, it’s peeking through, like a turtle’s head in your liberal (ahem) drawers.. along with that ‘international jewish conspiracy’ thing you tried to get me into with that you tube link that time..

    Is this the devious direction you are steering us into when to when you talk about ‘internationalist’ Key.

    That’s just sad.

    Still, relax dude, like Dirty Harry said ‘A Man’s got to know his limitations.’
    I’m quite at home with mine, but you don’t seem to know what yours are.

    The main thing is, though, that at least you are happy in your……………..

    ‘moronhood’…
    a fish shooting like barrel in

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. Political Busker (231 comments) says:

    Thank you,

    I concur and withdraw. I dind’t take you as having a pro-abortion stance at all.

    I’m not so sure about who won the joust of the front bench at all, I think they were all completely inept and floundering in a shameful past. Yet when they all stood to our veterans I was teh one who felt ashamed that we might not all be honourable New Zealanders. I don’t know quite how I got there but it was overwhelming and I felt privileged to be in the gallery.

    Cheers.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. roger nome (4,067 comments) says:

    “Nomestradamus”

    “But that’s another thread, so let’s not debate it here.”

    Why are you introducing the topic then? As usual you’re pretending to not thread jack, whilst dedicating 90% of what you type to off-topic nonsense.

    Now as to the topic of your thread-jacking. My piss-taking of the National Party’s apparent “sugar daddy” culture (i.e. scantily clad, young women paraded about by wealthy elderly men) was aimed at pointing out what this means for the status of women (it was a pro-feminist argument). But that’s the National Party all over, just one big priveliged white old-boys network, full of homophobes (90% of them voted against the civil unions bill) and mysogenists (voted against every piece of legislation that the Labour Party have introduced, aimed at making NZ a more gender-equal society) .

    Also, how was I disrespecting the women’s boundaries? I’ve never even communicated with any of them. So where’s the hypocrisy. All in your head I’d suggest.

    “I’d suggest that abortion is a complex issue, I haven’t shared my position on it”

    No, you never take time to put forward your position on anything. That’s why you’re usually a waste of time.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. dad4justice (7,406 comments) says:

    At least he doesn’t send other bloggers nude pictures of American politicians Phillip John !@!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. Lee C (4,516 comments) says:

    ‘As usual you’re pretending to not thread jack, whilst dedicating 90% of what you type to off-topic nonsense.’

    Like that time you inferred that another blogger is a paedophile?
    Or that time you insulted someone (and people with the condition) by saying they had ‘Downs Syndrome’?

    Now this thing about “i.e. scantily clad, young women paraded about by wealthy elderly men)” Making it sound like you are ‘pro-feminist’, and are ‘on-thread’ when it comes across as a boy with some serious issues.

    Where is it written in feminist polemics that a woman should be forced to wear something that she might not wish to, or that she can’t date whom she wishes?
    Or is it that you think that these women to which you refer ar too stupid to make up their own minds?

    Is feminism akin to Islamic fundamentalism in your book?

    That sounds like sexism to me, roger.

    God you are soooo ‘mid-eighties’ in your thinking!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. roger nome (4,067 comments) says:

    Lee:

    You wanted to take the thread down a path aimed at your sexual gratification. I simply have no interest in that, whether it involve women, men or anything else for that matter.

    Then you desperately try to smear me as anti-Semitic because I don’t believe that the intentions of the global banking elite are in most people’s interest. Frankly your conflation of the international banking elite with “the Jewish community” says a lot more about you than it does me.

    Also you say that you try and play within your limitations, but you patently just aren’t smart enough to be effective at this kind of mud-slinging. You strike me as an insecure little man who is desperately trying to deflect attention away from your inadequacies through propagating lies against people who choose to show them up. Sad.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. Nomestradamus (2,753 comments) says:

    PhillipJohn/Roger Nome:

    Why are you introducing the topic then? As usual you’re pretending to not thread jack, whilst dedicating 90% of what you type to off-topic nonsense.

    For the love of God, read the thread properly. Political Busker introduced the topic with “([Y]ou’ll remember my provocation on your provocative statement)“. I explained my contribution on the other thread – it was for Political Busker’s benefit. My explanation was accepted, and we’ve moved on. Apparently you haven’t, but that’s your problem.

    No, you never take time to put forward your position on anything. That’s why you’re usually a waste of time.

    Go fuck yourself. Just the other day I provided a fairly comprehensive (and researched) post on the s 59 referendum issue. If you can’t see any point in my posts, well I can’t be responsible for your intellectual shortcomings.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. dad4justice (7,406 comments) says:

    Phillip John has more than a Maori War going on amongst his neuron transmitters? What a tick – tock, blockhead.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. Political Busker (231 comments) says:

    If there is a tradition of cultural conflict in this modern period, that can be fired so quickly, like Don Brash’s Orewa speech and at the moment, besides the Treelord’s settlement, it is to be centered on law and order, then why isn’t the emphasis on constructing an effective and marae based, primary judicial system that is marae based and accessible to every New Zealander?

    1: On conception it has the same kind of flavour as the way the Family Court was formed. First, as far as I am aware, the issues that were raised in family conflict were, if necessary, dragged into the District Court and became open public slather. Then the Family Court was formed and it became, I imagine quickly, the most well used Court. In 1995 with the upgrading of the Domestic Violence Act 1995, it became a feeding ground for lawyers who were immune from prosecution: and they fed; the lawyers fed and they fed as they still feed today, (although few may recognise how). So in the negative the argument would goes stale if the model used is the same.

    2: Sharma law offers a considerable model on how it could be succesful where in one legal system is sectioned to a lesser authority and the two work in parallel agreement. If applying this to NZ for our history, it would only work if all would take a the right to use its facility; yet that freedom would be advantagous rather than any burden.

    3: The Family Court in my isolated opinion is an institution that needs to be disassembled and the access to law be reintergrated into the District Court marshalling and its criminal responsibilities. This would leave the difficult areas of social turmoil without direction: or would it? If the civil function of the Court were replaced within the community, such as like with a marae based and primary Court system, then the social health is developed and dependent on health from within those communities.

    4: Logically if the argument stacks up against pressures I have no access to measure the communities become stronger – rapidly.

    If we have stroong communities they will care for themselves. If they suffer central government is bound to the responsibility to lift there performance.

    If this is done and Maori have their own parliament that works from Waitangi, then you could dispand the Maori seats and implement a robust two stream system. One people, two connecting systems [?]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. xenophon (25 comments) says:

    Busker – apart from a talent for circumlocution you really have nothing to offer. Like all the die-hard lefties, you cannot stand the reality that Key is a self made man with a family, who looks and sounds good to the tax-paying workers of this clountry. They don’t care if he is “a rich prick”. They admire him for it. They are heartily sick of you and your ilk (the Clark / Cullen cabal) telling them how to live their lives, stealing their hard earned incomes to “redistribute” to their political supporters, telling them how they should bring up their kids etc. Many of them voted Labour last election but cannot and will not when they compare Key with Helen and her cohort of tired, talentless acolytes – they just do not represent the values and aspirations of Kiwis today. That is why they will be booted out of office. Get used to it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  76. roger nome (4,067 comments) says:

    Lee:

    “Where is it written in feminist polemics that a woman should be forced to wear something that she might not wish to, or that she can’t date whom she wishes?”

    Predictable, when you’re too stupid to debate the real issues, just make up a straw-man hey lee? My comments were aimed at highlighting the highly gendered nature of the National party. Men were clearly not valued for their conventionally physically attractive attributes (they were typically old and ugly, the shape of their bodies weren’t accentuated by their clothing and they had little skin showing), whereas women were (they were typically young, beautiful, and wearing revealing outfits that accentuated their bodies). The physical attractiveness of the women was clearly a much more integral aspect of their social currency than was the case for the men.

    Conclusion: In the world of the right, women are valued as sex objects, and men are valued for their money and power/status. Disgusting

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  77. Lee C (4,516 comments) says:

    Wow roger, so no denial about the homophobic/anti-semite thing then?
    No reference to the paedophile /Downs Syndrome stuff either.
    Just lots of bluster about what an ‘insecure little man’ I am in your opinion.

    Funny I didn’t even mention ‘insecurity’ or ‘little’ but now you have seen fit to raise the issue…

    I’ll take all that bluster as an admission, that you were wrong, and the evident hurt in your tone as an apology.

    I accept your apology, not because I am better than you, but because deep sown you know I am right.

    roger, you have a great day, now.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  78. jafapete (766 comments) says:

    xenophon, “Busker – apart from a talent for circumlocution you really have nothing to offer. Like all the die-hard lefties, you cannot stand the reality”

    “Leftie”?! No friggin’ way. You must be able to tell a right-wing troll pretending to be left-wing from the real thing. Unintelligible verbal diarrhea. Probably just Redbaiter’s latest ruse.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  79. Political Busker (231 comments) says:

    xenophon,

    prior to becoming the Busker – no problem – problem, you are absolutely right. I trusted Labour. I would have fought and died honourably under those principles. Yet because I do not live in a period where there has been war demanded of the menfolk, I like you say have become soft, cushioned to flourish in an era where discipline could be compromised because there is little else to do if you don’t like money.

    But not just thinking warm fuzzy thoughts makes people fat, you know, whether emotionally or physically. In fact the physical burden is far more likely to be from the benefit of wealth. The benefit of povery only buys so much sugar and fat.

    These days I am better versed and trust both groups less than I trust any champion for social discipline, yet more than I trust the Green support regime of human: genetic engineering. My vote is not with Labour or National. So while you may think you have me type cast, it would be inconsistent with how I see myself.

    Debating your primary challenge of my politics with your prejudicial demand, where I have conceded to a degree that the ‘rich prick’ comment scored a big hit on the National bench for me, I like the idea of a tip/percentage of the top tax rate being turned back to the performance earners to use at their own discretion on where they would see that investment used in the public sector.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  80. Lee C (4,516 comments) says:

    “Conclusion: In the world of the right, women are valued sex objects, and men are valued for their money and power/status. Disgusting

    me thinks he doth protest too much.

    Just leave it roger, you have dug yourself into a hole, and now you are pulling the dirt over yourself.

    Still as long as it is only dirt you are pulling. heheheh.

    Do you type one-handed while you do all that ‘scantily clad’ stuff, rog?
    You do don’t you?

    Disgusting.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  81. Lee C (4,516 comments) says:

    jafa I have someond from cystic fibrosis visiting the shop with a collection box next week – your $10.00 will be the first into it. thnx

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  82. roger nome (4,067 comments) says:

    Lee-

    “Wow roger, so no denial about the homophobic/anti-semite thing then?”

    No need to deny the ridiculous. Also, I did state why your accusatons were false, thus stating an effective denial.

    “No reference to the paedophile /Downs Syndrome stuff either.”

    Bored of addressing those off-topic non-issues every time a right-wing troll brings them up. But here goes – I never called anyone a peadophile, so stop lying.

    The second was just me stooping to the normal level of kiwiblog discussion. Something I’ve done several times in my 3000 odd posts. It’s not something I’m proud of.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  83. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    “Probably just Redbaiter’s latest ruse.”

    Another problem with leftists/ progressives- they frequently fail to understand that not everybody out there subscribes to the same nihilistic amoral behaviour patterns they do.

    “Time for a visit Nome”

    Don’t forget the vaseline woger.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  84. dad4justice (7,406 comments) says:

    woger likes the KY jelly.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  85. Political Busker (231 comments) says:

    Damn Jaffa,

    just for that I went up to put you at 32 but slipped left and pulled you down to 30

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  86. roger nome (4,067 comments) says:

    Lee:

    “Do you type one-handed while you do all that ’scantily clad’ stuff”

    Again trying make this thread about your own sexual gratification.

    “me thinks the doth protest too much.”

    Firstly, it’s “methinks” dumbarse. Also, I haven’t really protested to you trying another false smear against me. I’ve simply made my argument for why I think the National Party is a sexist institution. You don’t deny that, so by your logic it must be true.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  87. Lee C (4,516 comments) says:

    roger, Bill said it best:

    Thou rascal beadle, hold thy bloody hand!
    Why dost thou lash that whore? Strip thine own back;
    Thou hotly lusts to use her in that kind
    For which thou whipp’st her. The usurer hangs the cozener.
    Through tattered clothes small vices do appear;
    Robes and furred gowns hide all. Plate sin with gold,
    And the strong lance of justice hurtless breaks;
    Arm it in rags, a pygmy’s straw does pierce it.
    None does offend, none, I say, none. I’ll able ‘em.
    Take that of me, my friend, who have the power
    To seal th’ accuser’s lips. Get thee glass eyes,
    And like a scurvy politician seem
    To see the things thou dost not.”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  88. roger nome (4,067 comments) says:

    Wonder where Bill lifted that from? It’s a nice little piece, if a wee bit fantastical, pompous and sanctimonious.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  89. Lee C (4,516 comments) says:

    Relax roger, take a chill pill you will give yourself a coronary with that anger management issue of yours. Just take it like a man, and accept that you were once more caught out talking bollocks.

    I forgive you.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  90. jafapete (766 comments) says:

    “Damn Jaffa, just for that I went up to put you at 32 but slipped left and pulled you down to 30″

    Busker, I’m probably more disappointed by that than you are. BTW, it’s jafa, as in Aucklander.

    Redbaiter, “the same nihilistic amoral behaviour patterns they do.” Well, if you think that the likes of Whale Oil are guided by anything more than immature and amoral standards, then… but wait, you jest of course.

    LeeC, Terrific.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  91. Political Busker (231 comments) says:

    Philu,

    I’ll just add to that. The interim website is now down and the upgrade occurs on July 1st. So if you want to check the Act Interpretation Act you will have to do it from the library. By the way, the High Court Rules haven’t been up on the site at all which is really odd considering their importance. Really odd that the Acts Interpretation Act went down just when I needed it most. Still getting used to that kind of stuff.

    Back to the thread though – some time ago – I was trawling through what was just and what was not and it dawned on me that I should be able to make a claim under the Waitangi Tribunal. Why should I be excluded? I didn’t think to engage law at that stage and just went with my gut and rang them up…

    PB “I’d like to make a complaint”
    WT “What is it?”
    PB “I want to complain for Maori children that under the treaty they are entitled to compulsory te reo (language teaching)”.
    WT “good idea”
    PB “great, where do I sign”.
    WT “Are you Maori”.
    PB “No”.
    WT “Sorry this is only for Maori”.

    So hang on I thought, just the same as it is for men who are challenged as owning the system, I’m not allowed to have a complaint under the treaty.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  92. Frank (320 comments) says:

    Political Busker Says:
    June 28th, 2008 at 3:13 am

    Frank: “that became illegal under British law at the instant they became British citizens”.
    You have shown genuine interest,. So I will provide a few further details to assist you as to what is occurring.. It is a somewaat lengthy discourse and has been summarized. My apologies

    Significance of the Treaty – The Waitangi Tribunal

    The Treaty was “not intended to fossilize the status quo, but to provide direction for future growth and development … it was … intended … as a foundation for a developing social contract.

    Motunui-Waitara Report (1983) P 52 :”The Treaty was intended to facilitate the annexation of the North Island as the first step to bringing law an order into a lawless, uncivilised, growing colony”.

    Other sentiments as expressed here are for conforming to a written contract for social order. “The Treaty was an acknowledgement of Maori existence, of their prior occupation of the land and of an intent that the Maori presence would remain and be respected”..

    Orakei Report (1987) P 183 . “Acknowledging possession of parts of the land. The remainder was ceded absolutely”.

    The functions and roles of the Courts and the Waitangi Tribunal:

    The Courts and the Tribunal have different functions “but supporting each other”!
    The Courts interpret and apply legislation, including references to Treaty principles:
    “What legislation”? !The Treaty is an agreement that contains “no principles to be applied”?

    The Waitangi Tribunal considers claims by Maori against the Crown of breaches of the principles of and recommendations to the Crown.-

    Two distinct “Crowns” are involved here. The latter is of questionable existence. This innocuous looking statement contains two fundamental flaws. The Tribunal can only consider any breaches of the three Articles.

    The first extinguished all their rights, including customary practices that became illegal under British law at the instant they became British citizens. It is difficult to envisage any breach of this by the Colonial Power. But the same cannot be said of Maori, particularly when they often assert a right of custom that is not lawfully available to other citizens. There is no ‘Tribunal’ to rectify these increasing breaches. The 2nd Article is the one used (and abused) to claim a breach and this is where the other major flaw has crept into the interpretation, as the above words illustrate:

    .”To enlarge the terms [of the Treaty"] to cover situations not foreseen in 1840. “Here is a frank admission that nullifies the 3 Articles”. This is now being applied to cover all subsequent government legislation, policies and practices. On this basis it would mean — to give a factual example:

    In 1842, Maketu, a relative of the Nga Puhi chief Hongi was charged with the murder of the grandson of another tribal chief. He was tried in court, found guilty and executed. So that any proven living relative today could lodge a successful grievance claim with the Tribunal on the grounds of the death penalty having now been abolished – not foreseen in1842. Such a ludicrous consequence reflects on the ill-advised (and possibly illegal) decision to backdate these claims from 1975 to 1840. It should have stopped at 1931, the year Britain passed the Statute of Westminster (or 1947 when NZ finally accepted the Statute) that severed all power & responsibility over her former Dominion. Any claim for grievances that took place before 1931 should have been referred to Britain, authors and cause of the Treaty.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  93. roger nome (4,067 comments) says:

    Lee C talk bollocks? Why not on kiwiblog!

    Actually I have a reasonably logically consistent belief system when it comes to gender politics. I ought to, having a partner that lectures in gender studies. We often take the piss out of people (male and female) who perpetuate archaic gender roles. It’s interesting to see the response you get when doing it here though – it’s a very defensive stance you tend to get – kind of like you’re hitting the right with ideas hey haven’t ever thought about before (be them relatively simple) – and when confronted with something they don’t understand, well an angry and scared response is what you get.

    Anyhow, I’m off to get drunk with my mostly queer mates, then watch my partner’s rock band play (she sings and plays rhythm). What a homophobic and sexist evening I’m in for!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  94. Political Busker (231 comments) says:

    Frank,

    thank you and absolutely with no disrespect, I will read your post with interest.

    Where is the signature on the DOI 1835 documenting Jan 12 1840?

    Kind regards,

    Benjamin Easton
    (of a) father’s coalition.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  95. dad4justice (7,406 comments) says:

    What a crackpot story invented by a disturbed individual woger.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  96. Lee C (4,516 comments) says:

    WoW that’s so cool, roger! If I’d known what a hep-cat you were I wouldn’t have dreamed of questioning your credentials.

    Interestingly enough, (to me anyway) I used to sing and play rhythm myself once that was in another lifetime…. sigh…

    Now I’m just a fuddy duddy old righty with gender issues.

    Ah well, our time will come, young man.

    Oh yes it will…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  97. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    “..Philu,

    I’ll just add to that..”

    busker..you appear to be mistaking me for someone who reads your unique brand of gibberish..

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  98. Political Busker (231 comments) says:

    enjoy the piss-take roger,

    when the thread regrades I look forward to the gender debate.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  99. Political Busker (231 comments) says:

    that’s al’right Philu, I’m used to it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  100. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    i’m sure you are busker..i’m sure you are..

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  101. Lee C (4,516 comments) says:

    group-hug, anyone?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  102. Political Busker (231 comments) says:

    Well,

    that’s me until Wednesday. I’m behind on an update and the mail is cramming out of the edges of my Yahoo. If anyone wishes to subscribe to some infrequent and difficult to chew through mail your welcome to contact laos_newzealand@yahoo.co.nz I’ll put in a plug for the blog and maybe bring in a new reader or two. Cheers…

    …group he hug he says… ha :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  103. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    “Well, if you think that the likes of Whale Oil are guided by anything more than immature and amoral standards,”

    That’s rich considering you’re apparently quite happy to fraternise with a dishonest creep who posts messages all over the net using someone else’s image as an avatar.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  104. Patrick Starr (3,675 comments) says:

    “Something I’ve done several times in my 3000 odd posts.”

    (Roger thinks only 3000 of them were odd!)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  105. dad4justice (7,406 comments) says:

    Patrick , roger nome 3000 odd are that, but added commentary as Phillip John must at least be double my tally of comments, and it must be remembered I have many dad4justice impostors in my rather astronomical count.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  106. Nomestradamus (2,753 comments) says:

    PhillipJohn/Roger Nome:

    Bored of addressing those off-topic non-issues every time a right-wing troll brings them up. But here goes – I never called anyone a peadophile, so stop lying.

    More lies from you – time to set the record straight:

    roger nome
    December 7th, 2007 at 7:04 pm

    Stop lying Pascal -

    You said your wife had no education (which was [l]ater shown to be a lie). I thought to myself, well I’ve never met an adult in NZ with no education, so I facetiously asked you, in order to reveal your lie, if you married your dog. You were lying then, and you’re lying now ….. liar.

    “alluded that D4J was a child molester the other day”

    Do you know what “alluded” means? If so, you’re lying again. I quoted a person who had accused D4J of being a paedophile, and asked him if that was true (in the context obviously wasn’t a serious question). Now, should I have baited him like that? Probably not, but I never alluded to him being a paedophile.

    As I pointed out on that thread, as a matter of legal principle, repeating a defamatory allegation (even by posing it as an innocent question) can expose you to liability. Your claim that “in the context [it] obviously wasn’t a serious question” is shallow.

    I’ve figured out your blogging personality. You say something outrageous, then when called on it, pretend it was just “humourous banter” or a “facetious question”. I think the word “disgusting” (you used it above) sums you up very well.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  107. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    “But it comes after the war in Iraq being declared over by Key”

    Something he was actually quite right about, and has been proved so. Naturally you won’t hear this from the craven leftist suckholes calling themselves journalists in NZ, and who desperately want to conceal this truth. Bush has won in Iraq. The left, Pelosi, Reid, and all the numb nutted terrorist supporting commie academic and media scum who did the propaganda for Al Qaida are traitors. These are the two outcomes that history will eventually record.

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/gerard_baker/article4221376.ece

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  108. RRM (8,988 comments) says:

    “Leader of the opposition glosses over bloody civil war episodes of the country’s history.”

    Nothing to see here. Unfair (and “Silly”) to expect the Leader of the Opposition to be any more than *moderately* well-read on our history, after all?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.