Oh the insanity!

“No doubt this will not stop DoC taking exclusive ownership of large areas of accessible foreshores and seabed because DoC has total confidence in its belief that it should own and manage the whole country.
I can understand that if you are the world’s largest possum farmer, then you need all the land you can get. But I suspect that by the time we have sorted out this current debate we will wake up and find half the seabed has been taken from us anyhow – but by DoC rather than by Maori.”

DoC’s new marine park on the west coast of Auckland has been put in place to effectively expunge a mining right to the iron sands, a licence properly held but now effectively valueless. Why would anyone invest in New Zealand? But DoC and their friends regard all mining as raping of the Earth Mother. So grumpyoldhori I would get that greenstone while you still can!

This page may help you understand a few things about Loose Change.

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=911_morons

Read it man, its the truth, i dont lie man, its all true man, im telling you. How is that guy from Loose change alive man? I thought he would have been assasinated man

“These are all good reasons – hence when the Nats win tomorrow (and they will) you won’t see me on here decrying Key’s election as the worst thing that’s happened to the country since Pearl Harbour or 9/11.

(Time and place for everything, eh Phil?…..”

OK, RRM, I’m not going to live that one down, am I. (Unless something unthinkable actually happens…..and I truly hope not, for America’s sake and the whole world’s).

Here’s what the estimable Victor Davis Hanson said, and that is how I SHOULD have put it:

“…..the suicide of both print and electronic journalism has ensured that, should Barack Obama be elected president, the public will only then learn what they should have known far earlier about their commander-in-chief — but in circumstances and from sources they may well regret……”

By the way, that is a surprisingly decent summary of yours about John Key, considering you’re a lefty about to see his team lose. But I suspect that deep down, you’d like to see Labour get back to its decent workingman and Catholic roots and give away the social engineering, nanny state, feminism, “sexual revolution”, and political correctness stuff………eh? But I don’t know who’s going to do it, as the party has been irretrievably stacked over the last few years.

I’ll return your compliment about John Key, and say that I admired David Lange most of the time, likewise Mike Moore, I also thought well of Clayton Cosgrove and Damien O’Conner, and I think John Tamihere was right, the best man in the party, but he was too little, too late to rescue the Labour Party from the Trojan Horse takeover it has experienced at the hands of the “H” brigade. Perhaps he can be brought back if the “Goff moderates” prevail over the next 3 years?

Furthermore, I don’t know if I’ve ever commented before here, I always thought the Republicans overdid the mean-spirited pursuit of Bill Clinton, and invited a backlash as a consequence. Clinton deserved credit as a “least bad” option in a necessary Democratic Presidential interlude in US politics. It will be difficult now for them to look appropriately righteously indignant over a “worst bad” Democratic President.

There is hardly an anti-American crowd guru more revered than Noam Chomsky. He may be politically sick in the head, but he is not so stark, raving bonkers as to buy that stuff. Listen to him on the subject HERE:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzGd0t8v-d4

(And that is “Part One”, follow the embeds for Part 2)

Maybe CIA trained operatives that had gone rogue and based themselves in Afghanistan had enough nouse and daring to formulate and execute this plan which took America by surprise, maybe people find this the most hardest thing to believe.

If you really think the country should spend tens of billions of dollars putting in fibre to homes, then what will be left? This would make Cullen’s trainset look like a good idea.

I did my masters thesis on fibre. I use and pay for one at my office. I have the quotes for how much it cost to drag the fibre 120m up the road to our building (40k). I pay the bill for the international data charges. Hands up who else knows anything about it.

So negative karma me if you like, but really, if we spend all the country’s money on putting in fibre to every home (even just in urban centres), we won’t have any money left for things like education or health. There are better things to spend that kind of money on, especially since DSL2 will give you over 20Mbps without having to dig a single trench.

Now an upgraded fibre backbone I would support. And an upgraded international link. That would actually provide more usable bandwidth over existing access technologies. We aren’t even maxing out (not even close) DSL in most cases.

“If MMP enabled the major party that came in a distant second in tomorrow’s election to form the winning team, I think there would be such outrage up and down the country – wrong-headed or not, it would happen – that MMP would quickly join the audio cassette and CB radio in the dustbin of history”.

I think he is spot on. MMP has already suffered by the fact that a candidate can be heavily defeated in an electorate seat and still make into Parliament on the list (and potentially become a Minister!). MMP will suffer even more if the runner-up in this election is able to govern. I would like to see the losing party accept its loss gracefully and to invite the winner to form the next government. I’d also like MMP tweaked so that firstly, the winning party must be given first choice of forming a government, and secondly, the number of list MPs is reduced to, say, 20. In other words, the vast majority of seats should be electorate seats.

Jastown you may be correct in many respects – I don’t know what your beliefs actually are so I can’t judge but mate, you’re wasting your breath. If you’re really passionate about flagging the issues because of their inherent importance then I suggest you setup your own site and tell the story in a logical concise way with as much objective transparent evidence and background as possible.

Most people won’t accept anything you say or even look into it, because your suggestions and allegations break their paradigm of how they believe the world works. That paradigm has been built up over their lifetime and the more interested they are in politics, military, finance and general institutional frameworks, the stronger it is. This is why most people won’t accept that the official 911 story is full of holes even though that is transparently obvious. They can’t and won’t look at it objectively as a forensic investigator might, because they can’t and won’t be objective since it involves breaking their paradigm of how the world works. The secret of course is to ignore the questions of who did it, how they did it and why they did it and concentrate purely on the official story and how believable that is.

A paradigm is a huge thing to change in people because it involves changing your lifetime investment in emotional as well as intellectual issues. To explain what a paradigm is, look at the internet and compare computing pre and post internet. The internet is a new paradigm in computing and look at the changes it has wrought.

Paradigms in politics are things like communism vs capitalism; democracy vs regimes like Burma/NK and conservatism vs socialism.

See how easy it is to look at something that’s completely objective like computing and talk about paradigms but as you move into politics and institutions it becomes much more emotional.

The more emotional people are about it, the more those people on either side of the paradigm will take completely opposite conclusions from exactly the same event and furthermore they’ll be absolutely vehement in their defence of their position, their passion rising depending on how far they are toward either end of the spectrum.

Look at how we conservatives argue against the lefties and we’re both convinced we’re right and importantly that we can justify our conclusions scientifically, by pointing to the conditions in the world that we observe.

Unlike computing, we can’t and don’t argue the toss objectively although importantly, we absolutely believe that we are indeed being objective.

That’s what people who see things in conspiracy so-called “theory” are up against when they try to alert people to it and that’s why most people dismiss it out of hand – they don’t and they won’t even consider it.

Shame I won’t be here for the rest of the day but if you want a good Kiwi conspiracy theory jastown then google “Opal file.”

You strike me as a very open-minded person.

This is Jastowns’ first comment on Kiwiblog. It’s being provided for, er, strictly educational purposes, you’ll understand.

And, boy, does Jastowns have a cracker of a story to tell:

November 4th, 2008 at 7:45 pm
…
there is much more going on than you have been told
just prove me wrong only one rule no government info unless its from japan, italy,russia,iran,they know the truth and have started to release there info to the public not that any of you will see it unless you look outside main stream media

November 4th, 2008 at 8:17 pm
…
i am a free thinker that will not be told what to believe,i make up my own mind from the research i gather ,please prove me wrong,
…

November 4th, 2008 at 11:05 pm
…
i read most of your comments and know government propaganda is working well
i never lie,and what is on these two vids is the most important info you will ever see
info most of you need

Such a promising start. I can’t wait for the next instalment from Jastowns!

A fair while ago, I got told gratuetous foul language was a sign of rank ignorance. I am not really seeing any evidence to the contrary here (but then again the people who told me this were probably conspirators set out to erode popular support for Jastowns’ opposition to the new world order).

You’re carving out a niche for yourself as Kiwiblog’s conspiracy theorist, or village idiot (whichever you prefer). Unfortunately, with today being election day, we can’t discuss specific policy. But I’ll be expecting you to produce “the truth” (with irrefutable evidence) that you keep wittering on about. And, no, dodgy links to crackpot YouTube videos (which is the sum and total of your “case” to date) don’t count – I want to see references to reputable websites.

Or is it just easier to admit you’re wrong?