The Progressives
October 31st, 2008 at 8:46 am by David FarrarTwo interesting statements from the Progressives:
The Herald reports:
Progressive leader Jim Anderton made an unorthodox and brazen pitch to the elderly yesterday for New Zealand First voters to back him.
He made the bid on the basis that the New Zealand First leader Winston Peters might not be re-elected to Parliament after a series of inquiries into donations to his party.
So Jim is saying Winston is goneburger, so vote for me.
But the real quote that needs more attention comes from Deputy Leader Matt Robson, appearing on Back Benches.
They were talking about the US election and Obama and McCain. Wallace Chapman mentioned that McCain was around the same age as Jim Anderton, and Robson’s nasty littlre retort was:
But Jim can put his hands up over his head and claim victory, McCain can’t do that
How disgusting is that? To denigrate a man who is crippled due to years of torture as a prisoner of war? From Wikipedia:
In August 1968, a program of severe torture began on McCain. He was subjected to rope bindings and repeated beatings every two hours.
Some of the injuries came from his initial treatment when shot down:
Some North Vietnamese pulled him ashore, then others crushed his shoulder with a rifle butt and bayoneted him.
Now this is a war crime and against the Geneva Conventions. Robson has spent a lifetime going on about the Geneva Conventions, and war crimes, but then shows his real colours, by justifying the torture of McCain (after Paul Quinn pulled him up for his offensive comments), and bayoneting of a wounded surrendered solider on the basis that McCain had taken part in a war that killed a lot of people.
People should look at the video at the link above (just after halfway in chapter one) and see how gleeful Robson is in mocking McCain’s injuries and how unrepentent he is when challenged on it.
Related posts:
- Matt Robson on John McCain
- Are the Progressives defunct?
- Progressives going going gone
- HoS on Progressives
October 31st, 2008 at 8:55 am
Like all lefties Matt Robson is a lying hypocrite.
Only the morons and the brain dead would vote for them.
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 8:55 am
To borrow a phrase from Suzanne Paul, ‘That Matt Robson is a nasty piece of knitting’.
Am currently working with Auckland City Council at getting a couple of the Progressive’s billboards removed, the silly buggers (Progressives) don’t know the local bylaws and are blatantly flouting them.
Local bylaws – http://www.aucklandcity.govt.nz/council/members/hoardings/default.asp
Vote:Note 7. no secondary signs, posters, flags etc. may be attached to election signs – if you see it report it.
October 31st, 2008 at 8:58 am
That is disgusting to watch. What a sick prick Matt Robson is, showing his true colours – just a slimey fucking hypocrite.
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 9:00 am
That is absolutely disgusting!
McCain is to the Americans what Charles Upham is to to New Zealanders.
I wonder if denigrating real war heroes is what being a “Progressive” really means.
I don’t think the people of Wigram would want this sort of person representing them in parliament.
He should be asked to apologize forthwith.
If it was good enough for Lockwood Smith then it is good enough for Robson.
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 9:06 am
I have no time at all for Robson. However, on the matter of McCain, I was intrigued by the following news item from The Times. In it, a former Vietnamese jailer denies that the Senator was ever tortured.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article5010491.ece
I guess the Times (the old thunderer) has been sucked in before, and will be again. Who to believe?
[DPF: I don't think there is serious doubt that McCain was tortured - the other POWs have all testified about what happened]
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 9:15 am
“Progressive” Party 2008 Election Policy Announcement:
The “Progressive” Party acknowledges that our previous PC posturing went too far – we now accept that cheap-shot “jokes” about physically disabled people are fine by us. Indeed, people making such moronic “jokes” are considered fit to stand for the “Progressive” Party, and we are keen to represent all like-minded New Zealanders.
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 9:17 am
Matt Robson is a wanker.
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 9:23 am
To steal a phrase:
“A vote for Jim Anderton is a Vote for Matt Robson”
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 9:26 am
What a revolting thing to say. Robson continues in that vein to justify it by saying that more Vietnamese were killed. Helen Clark has gone to great lengths to get onside with war veterans over the past nine years to woo the elderly vote. Robson shows what the Left really do think of war veterans.
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 9:26 am
No doubt about it, some people just need a good “slap”.
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 9:28 am
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA a former VC jailer says he wasnt tortured? HAHAHA
so when a US MARINE says – we didnt torture this piece of shit terrorist.. will you believe him?
as for the dep leader of nothing.. words fail me.
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 9:39 am
I have no doubt that Matt Robson secretly hates blacks & gays, but just hasn’t been caught out publicly making racist and un-PC jokes. The whole bunch of the evil axis members are nothing bu fucking arseholes!
Only good news is that they are coming apart at the seems faster than you can say LOSERS.
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 9:40 am
Like so many of the left, including Helen Klark, Robson was actually on the side of the people John McCain was fighting against. Robson and Klark gave aid and sustenance to the Vietcong, and did all they could to ensure that the Australian and New Zealand and US troops were defeated in Vietnam. They were thanked and praised by Vietcong Generals for giving them hope when they were near defeat.
Victory by the Vietcong, the communist forces that Klark and Robson were helping, resulted in the mass murder of thousands of South Vietnamese, (those who had backed the allied anti-Communist forces) after the allied withdrawal.
These people (Klark and Robson and so many others) are the enemy within, and that NZers ever elected them to be part of the parliament in a country that claims to value liberty is inexplicable. (The question of course is “does NZ still in fact value liberty?”. One never hears it spoken of.)
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 9:51 am
Matt Robson is a Leftie/Commie who is supposedly a friend of the oppressed, including disabled people. However that goes out the window when a disabled person is right wing. Would Robson mock the disabilites of Philip Paxton, a homosexual who works (or used to work) for the Human Rights Commission? I don’t think so, because Robson is a hypocrite.
I have lots of disabled friends and we joke about the effects of their disabilities (e.g. CP = Cerebral Palsy = Constant Pisshead, a reference to the way someone walks/staggers), but that is a privilege gained as part of a friendship. Humour is good, mocking is bad.
Lefties/Commies are *not* friends of the oppressed, that is false advertising given as part of their push for power.
http://www.kiwipolemicist.wordpress.com
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 9:52 am
Another sick and gutless left wing slimeball. Regardless of whether one agrees or disagrees with McCains political views to make a joke like that shows a very sick and psychologically disturbed mentality.
It also makes Lockwood’s silly slip up pale in comparison, but will the media be all over this one? Hell no.
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 10:02 am
If Matt Robson has even the remotest chance of making it into Parliament, the media should be right onto this, but….
However, Dinosaur Anderton’s latest attempt to pinch Peters’ voters should cancel each other out (I hope)>
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 10:10 am
You’re quoting from Wikipedia, so it must be correct.
There was a long article recently in the DomPost – admittedly not much better than Wikipedia – quoting McCain’s captors and saying that he wasn’t tortured. But it’s interesting you have this new found interest in war crimes. What do you think should happen to those courageous men and women who have tortured Iraqi’s?
[DPF: My position is unchanged to when abuses were first uncovered - they should be prosecuted and have the book thrown at them with jail terms]
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 10:11 am
Robson seemed determined to be the funny guy with his pre deveoped one liners that were poorly executed e.g. National’s “possum in the headlights”. That McCain clanger remins me of a bum note in a best mans speech who then goes on to explain why the joke was actually funny.
Best Matt Robson video is here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Kh_gNyRrmo
It’s about Matt Robson looking for his briefcase as far as I can tell (I did have the sound off though)
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 10:13 am
“What do you think should happen to those courageous men and women who have tortured Iraqi’s?”
Here’s another traitor.
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 10:14 am
A shocking experience for anyone to have to go through.
My worry is that it seems that in many American eyes, having been tortured in the Vietnam war is a compelling reason why McCain should be president, and that is just amazingly illogical to me.
Vote for his current policies if you like, but if his history in Vietnam is important to you, then at least acknowledge that you are asking for a sympathy vote and nothing more.
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 10:15 am
“My worry is that it seems that in many American eyes, having been tortured in the Vietnam war is a compelling reason why McCain should be president,”
Name one such American you sad lying fuckwit. Just one will be fine.
[DPF: Less abuse please. You could have made your point without the middle four words]
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 10:20 am
“but if his history in Vietnam is important to you, then at least acknowledge that you are asking for a sympathy vote and nothing more.”
No, it means that normal people understand that anyone who could go through that, and both survive and go on to decades of public service, has courage, loyalty and character.
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 10:23 am
ross, anyone who has bayoneted an Iraqi prisoner, crushed their shoulder, or the other extreme torture suffered by McCain should absolutely be punished.
As for those who are guilty of tearing pages out of the Koran in front of people, denying them time to pray, keeping them awake at night – well, I guess every newborn baby would be guilty of torture if we considered those things to be worthy of punishment. That is my concern with the noise around Iraqi “torture” – the devaluing of a word that used to mean something and used to attract opprobrium. And, once we have labeled unlike things using the same word, we can then play the moral equivalence game, as you are doing here.
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 10:23 am
I am an Obama supporter and I am horrified by this statement. Other Obama supporters I know are equally unimpressed.
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 10:31 am
“you sad lying fuckwit”
That’s a bit personal isn’t it? And there I was trying to discus the topic. Charming!
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 10:31 am
Following on from a previous post on Clark and Goff and other socialist luminaries one remembers well these people hurling abuse and other things at Police and those of us who couold see right thru them during the so called anti Vietnam period. I certainly remember watching the Friday night protests in Queen St with Clark et al A disgusting anti authority anti establishment ranting of the half hinged. The Vietnam war as just an excuse for these deranged fools.
Only those of us who witnessed these scum can atest to the venal and feral behaviour The only other incident that comes close is the Dec 1984 Queen st riot and that was a one off. In the late 60s early 70s it was a weekly spectacle.
This is why I have always been so amused at the blind Emperors clothes following Clark has had over the years.
When you see people behaving as she was its incredible but not surprising that she has conned so many with her smoke and mirrors snake oil tricks.
Fools always follow other fools.
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 10:32 am
@ Lee
Vote:“courage, loyalty and character”
Careful, Lee, those are not PC words and you could find yourself in big trouble these days.
Hopefully the circumstances will change quite soon, and we can revert to such traditional values that have stood the test of time.
October 31st, 2008 at 10:32 am
Disgusting.
But then again: who is Robson?
He’s a no-account pinko looser who’s name we know solely because he has spent his political life riding on someone else’s coat tails.
I would love for Matt Robson to meet McCain, although this won’t happen because Robson will never be that important. Do you think Robson would have the balls say this shit to the McCain’s face, old and disabled as he may be?
No fucking way.
Regardless of how you view his politics, John McCain is a real man. Matt Robson is an emasculated dishcloth of a human-being, to call him a shadow of a man would be an affront to shade everywhere.
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 10:35 am
A few reasons why the NZ media may not give a damn.
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 10:44 am
“Helen Klark [and] Robson [were] actually on the side of the people John McCain was fighting against. Robson and Klark gave aid and sustenance to the Vietcong, and did all they could to ensure that the Australian and New Zealand and US troops were defeated in Vietnam. They were thanked and praised by Vietcong Generals for giving them hope when they were near defeat.”
Wow – 3 sentences, 4 lies. (And 5 fans as at 10:42am…) Oddly impressive!
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 10:50 am
“you sad lying fuckwit” That’s a bit personal isn’t it? And there I was trying to discus the topic. Charming!”
Glad you asked. I’m saddened that such people as think like you exist in such numbers in NZ, and its sad for you that you have developed such thinking patterns. Your post is so flawed in logic and fact and so detached from reality, it could only have been made by someone whose brain is fucked beyond repair- IOW, a fuckwit. Lastly, your claim was a lie, and you could have rectified that perhaps by providing an instance of any American, just one who thought as you claim they do, but you couldn’t. So “sad lying fuckwit” personal or not (WTF that got to do with it?) is an acceptable objective and rational response to your sick delusional communist propaganda.
Robson’s remark concerning McCain is indefensible on so many levels. Its no surprise to see the likes of you trying to obfuscate and shift the discussion away from something that so openly exposes the rancid hate that underpins leftist ideology.
I don’t know why you hang around here all day with your incoherent shit and your infantile handle, one that in its feebleness is nothing but evidence of your own witlessness and lack of intelligence. Maybe you’ve heard this before. Can’t take the heat stay out of the kitchen. Loser.
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 10:50 am
There is no excuse for Robson’s comments, but coming from no.2 in a party labelled “Jim Anderton’s Progressives” he’s obviously got huge self esteem & ambition issues, obviously a perfect candidate for Parliament ( not ).
Vote:Regarding ‘baiters return to 4 letter commentary, he mentions name one american who would vote McCain because he has been tortured, that’s tough, scarily a number of American’s have fallen for the torture is good concept ( totally ignoring the attitudes they had towards Japan/Vietnam because those countries tortured their soldiers ), would they vote for McCain because they thought he’d accept torture, if they were ignorant I think so & to be fair if they are obviously unaware of the complex issues torture creates, but then they’d have to be pretty deaf as well because McCain is hardly surprisingly ardently anti-torture.
October 31st, 2008 at 10:50 am
I’m actually speechless.
Surely the leftist pigs can stoop no further?
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 10:54 am
“Oddly impressive!”
Your unsubstantiated assertions aren’t.
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 10:57 am
Notes from one of Matt Robsons speeches – can’t stand people that try to gain benefit from the emotions of people who have been affected by war only to openly mock and trash people involved down the track – regardless of your opinion on particular conflicts or of war in general there is no room to take the piss out of those injured or killed in conflict.
25 April 2001
Speech Notes – Hon Matt Robson: Lest We Forget, Anzac Day Address
The title of this address is “Lest we forget”.
We remember the sacrifices of those who died. We remember those who were injured. We remember those who lost loved ones.
We remember those people, mainly women, who had to devote so many years of their lives, after wars were over, to looking after relatives and friends whose wartime experiences left them permanently sick, disabled, or psychologically damaged or disturbed.
The suffering and the cost of war to individual men and women can never be reversed, and it must never be forgotten. But my theme extends further, to a wider theme. It is “Lest we forget the lessons of history”.
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 10:58 am
# Ratbiter (94) 0 1 Says:
October 31st, 2008 at 10:44 am
(Quoting Redbaiter)“Helen Klark [and] Robson [were] actually on the side of the people John McCain was fighting against. Robson and Klark gave aid and sustenance to the Vietcong, and did all they could to ensure that the Australian and New Zealand and US troops were defeated in Vietnam. They were thanked and praised by Vietcong Generals for giving them hope when they were near defeat.”
“Wow – 3 sentences, 4 lies. (And 5 fans as at 10:42am…) Oddly impressive!”
Ratbiter, that is such an IMPRESSIVE putdown, yeah right. To you and your fellow leftists, a “lie” is a truth that you hate, and the “truth” is a lie that you love.
But that comment of yours is insincere beyond belief given that people like Klark and Robson who did just what Redbaiter truthfully said they did, are acclaimed for it among the company of their own, probably including you. Get back down the pit to your master.
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 11:01 am
Oh, “(And 5 fans as at 10:42am…) Oddly impressive!” That was 9 fans a few minutes later, too, including me. We are not ALL sick-in-the-head Commie sympathisers or brain dead “fed-bullshit-by the-MSM masses” here on Kiwiblog, Ratbiter, much as you and your lefty wannabe totalitarian mates would like that to be the case.
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 11:03 am
Oh in THAT case I’ll take it all back. Helen Clark was right there in the jungle with the VC, mopping their brows, setting their boobie traps and loading rounds into AK47 clips for them. It’s just like ‘baiter said. I see now how misguided I have been…
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 11:04 am
DPF: My position is unchanged to when abuses were first uncovered – they should be prosecuted and have the book thrown at them with jail terms]
Mr. Farrar- this person, by his use of the term “courageous men and woman” is trying to implicate all of the soldiers fighting for the west in Iraq and elsewhere in the actions of a few. He is not really concerned about the victims of the “abuse” (as opposed to torture) . His intention is to smear the US armed forces, weaken western society and make it more vulnerable to take over by the extreme left.
[DPF: Less than 0.1% of soliders did any abusing. I am angry at those who did because indeed it allows people to try and smear the 99.9% who acted honoruably and treated the prisoners well]
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 11:07 am
stu-tron (2) Vote: Add rating 0 Subtract rating 0 Says:
October 31st, 2008 at 10:57 am
“Notes from one of Matt Robsons speeches – can’t stand people that try to gain benefit from the emotions of people who have been affected by war only to openly mock and trash people involved down the track – regardless of your opinion on particular conflicts or of war in general there is no room to take the piss out of those injured or killed in conflict…….” etc
Good point, stu-tron, but it is worse than that. People like Matt Robson and the whole “ban war” brigade play the emotional “loss and suffering” fiddle purely as a means to an end, the end of weakening OUR resolve to fight for OUR culture and freedoms. Their deafening silence on the death tolls following Communist victories, and their idolisation of Fidel Castro and murderous henchmen like Che Guevara, says a lot about them.
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 11:12 am
Comrade Jum may as well grease up the old folks as he dosen’t cut the mustard as minister of agricultrue. What a waste of space this two bob is, this fool pretends to be the farmers champion but at the same time the moron goes on about the carbon tax scam and how we all must pay. Lying commie fuck, him and his ilk have sucked the country dry over the last decade and see the farmers and our cows as their only cash stream left and the bastards want their cut, there is going to be trouble if these pricks are returned to power. I don’t believe farmers will lie down to be screwed up the arse by these criminals.
As for his sidekick “Matt no guns Robson”, guns are the only thing stopping these power mad pricks form kicking in the doors. And please don’t anyone say this would never happen in NZ, just look at all our freedoms that have been slowly wittled away in the last nine years.
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 11:16 am
Ratbiter,
Both Helen and Goff, and I dare say a lot of other lefties of their generation DID support the VC, even if they did so from a distance. This is openly acknowledged by the same people.
When the VC took over the South Goff flew a VC flag from whatever student flop he was living in at the time. Do you think he did so just because he liked the colour’s?
And here is what it has led to:
http://www.prlog.org/10060813-laos-vietnam-new-campaign-to-exterminate-hmong.html
But you wont see Robson, Goff or any other Stalinists complaining about the genocide of then Hmong people. Theur “human rights” dont get to count.
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 11:22 am
Well clearly there is little difference between being “anti war” and being “pro the enemy” in this school of thought!
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 11:42 am
Anderton is a one man band revelling in his own vanity. He’s the only plonker in our political history that names a political party after himself. Hell, even Winston hasn’t done that! In a recent press interview, Jimbo claimed that the only real reason he’s standing (and at 71 its probably with the help of a zimmer frame) is only to get that asshole Matt “conjugal visits for criminals” Robson into parliament to carry on the pitiful party. Frankly the prospect of the Jim Anderton Progressive Party losing Wigram and being tossed into a footnote of socialist history is long overdue.
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 11:55 am
Ratbiter,
your mis-representing what we are saying.
I have no doubt that some of the people opposed to the Vietnam war were genuinely anti-war. But there is also a vast mountain of evidence that many on the Left sympathized and supported with the VC, because they were perceived as the good guys and fellow Leftists. This is not news, its not a conspiracy theory, its common knowledge.
Why did Goff fly that flag????? Answer me that one.
And I find it interesting how conveniently selective you so-called “anti-war” folks are.
Here is a list of wars and human rights attrocities that most of the anti-war crowd did not protest.
The genocide of the Hmong people (they fought against the VC, so the “anti-war” crowd don’t give a damn about them)
Argentina’s invasion of British territory. (That nasty Thatcher was PM, so the anti-war crowd did not protest against the Fascist regime in Argentina and its brutal invasion).
Russia’s invasion of Afghanistan. (Communist good guys, so they did not protest that one)
Slobodan Milošević’s wars of genocide (SM was an anti-Western Socialist, so one of the good guys, the “anti-war” crowd only came out when the US got involved and used military force to try and stop the genocide. Apparently the anti-war crowd thought the genocide was just fine, but the US’s attempt to stop it an “imperialist war crime”).
Saddam Hussein’s brutal invasion of Kuwait. (Again the anti-war crowd were nowhere to be seen, until the US decided to stand up to Saddam).
And that is just a small sample of a very long list when the “anti-war” people were a no show.
Most of the hardcore “peace activists” are not genuinely anti-war. They are dangerous, dishonest and infantile left wing “useful idiots” hiding behind false anti-war propaganda while in truth they are just supporting the latest fashionable anti-Western tyrant or terrorist.
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 12:08 pm
Lee;
I think it has to do with keeping your own house in order.
Nothing you or I could realistically say or do would affect (for example) whether Russia goes to war in Afghanistan or not. But Russian soldiers did not represent us here in NZ so any objections from NZ individuals are somewhat academic.
OTOH when YOUR country’s armed forces are engaged in a war that you don’t agree with, they are direct representatives of you. So you are ACTUALLY RESPONSIBLE for it, therefore you are morally obliged to put political pressure on your country’s leaders to stop it, if you don’t approve of it.
(I don’t believe flying the Vietcong flag in New Zealand is a particularly smart or effective way of doing this, but people don’t lead perfect lives.)
OR have it your way, and we’re all somehow “just supporting the latest fashionable anti-Western tyrant or terrorist.” Tarring people you don’t like with the brush of your own choice seems to be the Kiwiblog way anyhow…
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 12:08 pm
DPF, can you put Robson’s statement on a billboard in Wigram?
Winnie’s toast anyway, so you would probably get better value for money
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 12:11 pm
From the horse’s mouth. Bui Tin, a former colonel in the North Vietnamese army, answers these questions in the following excerpts from an interview conducted by Stephen Young, a Minnesota attorney and human-rights activist [in The Wall Street Journal, 3 August 1995].
————————————-
“Question: How did Hanoi intend to defeat the Americans?
Answer: By fighting a long war which would break their will to help South Vietnam. Ho Chi Minh said,
“We don’t need to win military victories, we only need to hit them until they give up and get out.”
Q: Was the American antiwar movement important to Hanoi’s victory?
A: It was essential to our strategy. Support of the war from our rear was completely secure while the American rear was vulnerable. Every day our leadership would listen to world news over the radio at 9 a.m. to follow the growth of the American antiwar movement. Visits to Hanoi by people like Jane Fonda, and former Attorney General Ramsey Clark and ministers gave us confidence that we should hold on in the face of battlefield reverses. We were elated when Jane Fonda, wearing a red Vietnamese dress, said at a press conference that she was ashamed of American actions in the war and that she would struggle along with us.
Q: Did the Politburo pay attention to these visits?
A: Keenly.
Q: What of Nixon?
A: Well, when Nixon stepped down because of Watergate we knew we would win. Pham Van Dong [prime minister of North Vietnam] said of Gerald Ford, the new president, “he’s the weakest president in U.S. history; the people didn’t elect him; even if you gave him candy, he doesn’t dare to intervene in Vietnam again.” We tested Ford’s resolve by attacking Phuoc Long in January 1975. When Ford kept American B-52′s in their hangers, our leadership decided on a big offensive against South Vietnam.
Q: What else?
A: We had the impression that American commanders had their hands tied by political factors. Your generals could never deploy a maximum force for greatest military effect.
———————————————–
This is why I have always stood firm against criticism of the Iraq war and by association George Bush. It is important above all that we support our soldiers and the soldiers of the US, who no matter what their personal political position, put their lives on the line to provide us and the Iraqis with the right to vote. (Something the Iraqis previously did not have.)
Losing the war because we have helped the enemy defeat them (by doing their propaganda) is a gross insult to our soldiers and the sacrifices they and their families have made, and reduces that sacrifice to waste. Once the decision to go to war is made, we are bound to show full support for our military at least until the conflict is over.
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 12:24 pm
Redbaiter is dead right, it is totally unacceptable to undermine the efforts & safety of your fellow countrymen who are fighting and putting themselves in danger.
So if you want to protest against a war, you must do it at home and by directly pressuring the government, not anyone else.
Vote:But if you believe it is wrong that your country is attacking country X, then you are morally bound to speak up or else you are complicit in something you believe is wrong.
October 31st, 2008 at 12:27 pm
Rat,
Your excuse is bullshit.
“I think it has to do with keeping your own house in order”
Crap. Either your antiwar or your not. Being only antiwar when its supposedly “your own house” is inconsistent to say the least. Its also a lie. The same anti-war crowd is always going on about how everything is global, how we should all come together as a single global community, how what happens elsewhere in the world. So your excuse contradicts the very principles the anti-war crowd espouse.
And it is hypocritical for another reason. The US is not your house, and NZ is not involved in Iraq, so by your own argument the anti-war crowd in NZ should NOT have protested against the US action there.
Why did they then? Unless your using a dishonest excuse that you know to be false?
“I don’t believe flying the Vietcong flag in New Zealand is a particularly smart or effective way of doing this, but people don’t lead perfect lives.”
Do you listen to your own drivel???
He did because he supported fellow lefties. That is blindingly obvious. It had nothing to do with an “imperfect” tactical error!
Do you even believe the slippery deceptive tripe your posting here?
Your pathetic excuses have exposed you as a dishonest hypocrite.
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 12:29 pm
Vietnam’s Hero Still Grateful to Anti-War Americans
Reuters ^ | 4/30/04 | Christina Toh-Pantin
HANOI (Reuters) – Twenty-nine years after the end of the Vietnam war, communist military mastermind General Vo Nguyen Giap remains grateful to the Americans who opposed it.
The Vietnam War, known in Vietnam as the American War, has become a hot issue in the U.S. presidential race with Democrat John Kerry drawing attention to his service and President Bush’s Republicans disparaging Kerry’s later anti-war stand.
“I would like to thank them,” the 93-year-old veteran said on Friday of those Americans who opposed the war.
Giap was speaking during a two-hour interview with foreign and domestic media on the 29th anniversary of the fall of Saigon, capital of the then U.S.-backed South Vietnam, that marked the end of the war.
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 12:39 pm
Here is an important quote from the above messages-
“Support of the war from our rear was completely secure while the American rear was vulnerable.”
In other words, the Communist regime brutally suppressed any “peace” protests or anti-war dissent in North Vietnam. The left wing scum in America Australia and New Zealand who protested while soldiers died, and caused the western world to lose in Vietnam, were blind to the fact that they were acting in support of a brutal murderous regime that would have shot protesters dead without blinking an eye if similar protests had occurred in North Vietnam.
Vietnam is today a one party totalitarian communist state. Thanks mainly to the efforts of Jane Fonda, Helen Klark and Matt Robson, and other such anti-democratic left wing swine.
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 12:39 pm
Lee:
“Your excuse is bullshit…. Crap. Either your antiwar or your not.”
Lee, like I said, I have explained MY standpoint to you. Don’t project your own impressions of antiwar people onto me.
“so your excuse contradicts the very principles the anti-war crowd espouse.”
I am not making excuses, I am explaining to you what I believe be the anti-war stance is, based on my own stance.
“And it is hypocritical for another reason. The US is not your house, and NZ is not involved in Iraq, so by your own argument the anti-war crowd in NZ should NOT have protested against the US action there.”
lee, I haven’t protested the US war in Iraq, although I have my private doubts about it. Please inform yourself before calling ME a hypocrite. I have said several times on here that I’ve only ever met one Iraqi and he was fully behind the US and GWB, and I respect his viewpoint.
“Do you listen to your own drivel??? Do you even believe the slippery deceptive tripe your posting here? Your pathetic excuses have exposed you as a dishonest hypocrite.”
Yes I do. I have tried to explain another viewpoint to you – mine. I have done this respectfully. if your response to this is to scream abuse, then fuck you. You are an idiot.
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 1:00 pm
Anyone who abuses ridicules or demeans a soldier is no better than the enemy and should be treated as such, to protest against war and ask that your leaders be held accountable is fine and extremely important in a healthy democracy, but what some of the hard left youth of Clarks era did was little less than Treason.
Flying the Enemy’s flag over your residence is Treason, the man should of been dragged out his bed and shot.
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 1:09 pm
Despicable. I dare him to make that joke at an RSA. How does this worthless slimy sack of shit, who would cry like a little girl if he was ever threatened with what McCain put up with, think he can make jokes about a far, far, far better and more worthwhile man. Every time you think the left has hit rock bottom, they manage to find new depths.
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 1:33 pm
Rat,
your “explanation” did in fact begin as a defense of the “anti-war” movement in general, not a defense of your personal view. I pointed out, with evidence, that the movement has a very hypocritical and selective approach that clearly betrays its bias for anti-Western tyrants and terrorists, and you are now claiming that its only your personal version of the anti-war movement your talking about.
OOhhh, Riiiight.
Your being slippery again.
The so-called anti-war movements history is indefensible and you know it, and you only came here to draw focus away from a nasty little hatemonger like Robson, by talking dishonest drivel about how his comments might be understandable from an “antiwar” perspective.
In short you came to do what your doing with the anti-war issue. Defend the indefensible.
Nice.
Vote:October 31st, 2008 at 2:48 pm
If I could be so bold as to return to the topic of Robson’s comments for a moment…
It surprises me how ineffective NZ politicial campaigns are when it comes to using their opponent’s words against them. For many people, casting a vote ends up being a visceral, emotive act. Unless they’re so rusted on to a particular party nothing can pry them loose, by polling day they’re usually so overloaded by policies and debating points and other intellectual input that if there’s still doubt in their minds when they stare down at the ballot paper, gut feeling takes over.
If, as emmess suggests, that statement were put on a billboard in Wigram, plastered over leaflets and handed out, and asked of Anderton and Robson at every public meeting they attend – just as, say, Ron Mark needs to be challenged at every single Rimutaka candidates’ meeting as to why he thinks it’s acceptable to call opponents pedophiles and then hide behind privilege and refuse to apologise – their true character would be revealed to undecided voters.
Enough undecided voters, perhaps, to consign these hateful little men to the obscurity and meaninglessness they so richly deserve.
Vote: