General Debate 2 March 2009

Email
Facebook
Twitter
Comment60

Uncategorized
General Debate

Comments (60)

Login to comment or vote

Tauhei Notts

There is a piece in the opinion page of today’s New Zealand Herald about medical ethics that should be mandatory reading. If anybody can provide a link to it, the rest of the country would be well served by reading about it.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 8:52am
Nookin

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/health/news/article.cfm?c_id=204&objectid=10559397
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 9:10am
Ryan Sproull

The thankful we don’t have cops like these. To my knowledge.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 9:40am
Murray

Requiring people to read something discrimates against far too many New Zealanders Tauhei.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 9:59am
john terris

The recent proposals by the government to clamp down on Internet piracy, which is standard legislation in many parts of the world, has brought Internet users out in a fine old rash, marching to Parliament and calling it all an attack on Freedom of Speech. They present themselves under the flower-power label of the Creative Freedom Foundation. Cute huh?

If you care to get behind their slightly hysterical arguments, however what you find there is an attempt to justify piracy. They are also attacking the right of governments to tell Internet Service Providers what they may or may not do within national boundaries.

What’s going on here? Do these people seriously suggest that cyberspace is somehow exempt from all laws designed to regulate behaviour in a civilized society?

Let’s take a similar “fr’instance”.The presence of Child Porn on the Internet is also of increasing concern, as is the stalking of children via social websites. The NZ Police have just set up a special unit to deal with it. Child pornography is of course illegal in most countries, including our own, but the Federal Australian Government of Kevin Rudd has recently proposed legislation requiring ISP’s (i.e. Internet Service Providers like Google and Yahoo) to ban Child pornography.

The debate there – essentially between on the one hand, libertarians who promote the right of adults to watch what ever they like, including Child porn, sex with animals, and “snuff” movies of real life murders (even if it is illegal); and on the other hand Children’s Rights advocates (who say that the right of children to protection is paramount) is ongoing and fierce.

This is a debate which goes far beyond Freedom of Information and is about the right of governments to govern in accordance with the wishes of the majority, which are that Child porn should be banned, as should stealing others intellectual property.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 10:09am
cha

Rawiri Falwasser
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 10:13am
MyNameIsJack

john terris, take a look at the other thread on S92A and you will see this is a lot less about “…the right of governments to tell Internet Service Providers what they may or may not do within national boundaries.”

It is a whole lot more about foreign governments telling a National govt what it may or may not do.

It is NOT piracy; it is theft or copyright infringement, and we already have laws dealing with these two issues.

Why do you think the internet should be treted differently to the mail, a photocopier or a VCR?

I use a VCR / DVR to copy movies. Is my electricity disconnected?

I use a photocopier to copy books> is my copier lease suspended and my electricity cut off?

I use the mail to send these illegal copies to friends. Is my mail cut off?

Are you getting the picture yet?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 10:20am
cha

Rawiri Falwasser and the Whakatane Cell video
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 10:31am
AG

Tahui Notts:
“There is a piece in the opinion page of today’s New Zealand Herald about medical ethics that should be mandatory reading. If anybody can provide a link to it, the rest of the country would be well served by reading about it.”

Serious? You can’t find the NZ Herald website? Odd.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10559397
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 10:37am
lofty

Interesting to see Mallard commenting on Kiwiblog lately, he too is coming to where the crowds gather to celebrate good news.
Perhaps if (when) you are reading this Mallard, you can explain to the readers your ridiculous statement, about prospective employees not seeking work with employers with under 20 staff, as they will in all probabilty be fired before their 90 days is up.
It is too much to think that you would assist in getting the country back on to it’s feet.
You really show your irrelevance at times like this.
There is a difference betwen being in opposition, and utter mischief making with statements of absolutely no substance.
Just your normal bully boy tactics I suppose, why should we expect any change in you.
Are you still bewildered as to why you and yours lost the election?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 10:45am
Chuck Bird

There are two excellent articles on Muriel Newman’s Forum.

http://www.nzcpr.com/

The first is by Muriel, “Tackling the Tough Issues”. It looks at the cost of family breakdown and family violence. The cost is in billions.

The second article is by Stuart Birks, “Rethinking Stopping Violence Programmes”. It shows that blaming men for the vast majority of domestic violence has not worked.

It would be great if Mr Key would read these articles and take note of them. If family breakdown could be reduced it would save the country billions.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 10:54am
wreck1080

Labour complaining about the cop who refused a breath test.

This is hilarious, after 9 years of preferential police treatment labour are now complaining.

But, in my opinion this cop should be sacked immediately for bringing the police into disrepute (again).
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 11:03am
fredinthegrass

John Terris
IMHO I thought the real fuss was over the ‘accuser’ becoming ‘judge and jury’.
NO government has the right to that.
There is a process in place to deal with theft or copyright infringement and
S92A was outside that process.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 11:26am
Inventory2

So the age of stand-over tactics from the union movement isn’t over then…

http://keepingstock.blogspot.com/2009/03/old-fashioned-unionism.html
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 11:56am
PhilBest

wreck1080 (303) Vote: Add rating3 Subtract rating 0 Says:
March 2nd, 2009 at 11:03 am

“Labour complaining about the cop who refused a breath test.

This is hilarious, after 9 years of preferential police treatment labour are now complaining…..”

Come on, Wreck1080, you are hardly scratching the surface of Labour’s model for policing and justice.

Get soft on criminals. Make excuses for them. Leave them on the streets to “punish society”; after all, it is society as a whole that is responsible for these people’s derangement in the first place.

Don’t protect your own citizens from criminals. Punish your own citizens if they defend themselves.

Make private property of no consequence, deserving of no efforts for protection or as a basis for punishment. Someone was deprived; someone else had what the deprived person needed; they took it; insurance will pay. End of story. Oh, sorry, you don’t even need to take something, even if you just mindlessly smash up other peoples property, the story ends at Insurance ponying up.

Make public property and crimes “against the state”, no matter how trivial, of all consequence. Invent increasing numbers of pretexts on which to entrap basically decent and harmless people, and devote policing resources to that. Make it a significant source of government revenue. This especially applies to Road policing.

Lower the standards for police recruitment and training. Make the training reflect all your “liberal” and politically correct objectives, including those I have outlined above. Do not worry about the best police leaving the force. In fact, encourage them to leave by placing them in situations of ethical dilemma that they can’t cope with. The objective is to have a politicised force of low-browed thugs who will do the bidding of populist socialist politicians without question.

Oh, I almost forgot. If the top man in the police force is likely to be an obstacle to your plans, the first thing you must do on taking office, is to frame him and get rid of him. We forget Doonegate at our ongoing peril.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 11:56am
PhilBest

I mean no offence to DPF in saying this; his is the best mainstream NZ blog. But for those who want more frequent, crunchy, detailed, and hard hitting analysis and discussion of the economics surrounding the current crisis, I strongly tip two blogs that are on DPF’s own “must read” list: if you don’t already look at “No, Minister” and “Not PC”, start doing so.

http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/must_read_blogs
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 12:11pm
Jack5

Change of subject tack, if I may for a minute please:

Mascot Finance into receivership today, but depositors are protected under the Government guarantee, or at least depositors who signed up after the guarantee was introduced.

It would be nice to know what, if any share of the taxpayer burden will be shared by the directors of Mascot.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 2:19pm
thedavincimode

I can assist you there Jack5. After detailed research, including evaluation of various combinations, permutations and extrapolations of the relevant interpolations, I calculate that percentage to be nil.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 2:33pm
gingercrush

Is there a way to put Philbest on ignore? I’m sorry but either he gets his own thread to copy and paste 1/2 dozen useless pieces of information or one is able to ignore him, so one doesn’t need to scroll down half the page to get back to ordinary discussion.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 2:44pm
freethinker

Wreck
It is not possible to bring into disrepute an organisation that is already disreputable.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 3:20pm
llew

David Bain will be retried.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/4865525a11.html
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 4:03pm
PhilBest

Gingercrush: “useless pieces of information”, or information that is unpalatable to you and the Lefty and PC thought police?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 5:21pm
Jack5

Kiwiblog followers seem to include plenty of people versed in the law — from both sides of it.

What to they think of the appropriateness of Arthur Allan Thomas going to Christchurch apparently to sit in the court during selection of jury and the retrial of Bain? As a layman I just wonder whether it is right for any party to try to influence the jury apart from prosecution, defence, witnesses, and judge.

Today’s Christchurch Press reports Thomas on this thus:

Thomas was not worried what effect his presence would have on the trial.

“Maybe it’ll give the jurors something to think about; make them think very carefully.”
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 5:55pm
billyborker

PhilBest – useless pieces of (non)information.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 6:13pm
billyborker

Jack5, is the court open to the public? If yes, then why would you object to a member of the public sitting in the court.

The bigger questions are:

1. Why re-try Bain.

2. How much will the retrial cost?

3. If he is convicted, wHat will the sentence be? Keep in mind that it will be reduced by time already served.

4. Is this the best use of $Tax?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 6:18pm
dad4justice

Why worry billy porker ’cause Helen looks like to snare a good UN job. Who said crime doesn’t pay? Was it fugley or James Sleep?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 6:23pm
Jack5

Billborker:

Regardless of the rights or wrongs of the Bain case, Thomas would not be there as a “member of the public sitting in the court”. Of course justice must be open, and be seen in action, but in this case Thomas indicates that at least part reason for his presence will be to influence the jury.

What if a high profile gang leader were to sit in court to influence the jury? Or a skinhead? Or a convict who has finished his sentence? Or someone from Sensible Sentencing with a high profile crime victim?

Thomas is certainly not the equivalent of a gang leader, but he has a high national profile as a man pardoned by Muldoon after being found guilty by two juries. He doesn’t live in Christchurch, but it seems that he is there to send a message to a jury. That message will be surely to lean on the side of the defence.

The right to attend a court must surely be balanced against the need for an impartial hearing. If a member of the public is trying to send a message to the jury during the hearing, how impartial is it?

What do Kiwiblog posters think on this?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 6:29pm
billyborker

does anybody know what drugs this dad4justice freak is on, and what he is on about?

Jack5, following your line of non reasoning, how would you determine who can and cannot sit in open court at a public trial?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 6:39pm
Jack5

Ignoring your ad hominem comment billy (6.39pm), I agree there would be a problem of determining who could and who could not sit in open court.

You could start, however, with those who declare they will attend court to influence the jury. Then give the judge the right to bar others who are related to the case, with right of appeal.

The right to attend court is for justice to be seen, not to give every citizen in the country the right to influence the jury or be entertained with live drama. Courts allow news media representatives attend as the eyes and ears of the public. That makes proceedings open.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 7:11pm
billyborker

for fuck’s sake – has everyone got thin skin disease today? Suggesting you were not reasoning is NOT ad hom, you fucking moron! That’s ad hom.

OK, so IF I don’t decalre I am there to influence the jury, but my name is Arthur Allan Thomas, can I sit in the court? Or would you simply suspect I am there to influence the jury?

Courts allow news media representatives attend as the eyes and ears of the public. That makes proceedings open.

Then obviously you, like me, ignore redbaiter’s rantings about the GLWCTCTMSM.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 7:19pm
Jack5

Billyberserker, in response to your 7:19.

In the unlikely event that Thomas began showing up at murder trials all over the country, you could take that as reasonable evidence he was there to influence juries. If McVicar of Sensible Sentencing Trust sat through every murder and violence trial (if that was possible) you could make the same deduction.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 7:26pm
philu

annual police hunt for marijuana on the west coast of sth island..

..operation lasted one week..

..5,000 plants seized/destroyed..

..(police place commercial value of each plant at $1,000)

..just the helicopter hire for this folly cost $67,000..

..that is 13 grand per plant..!

..just for the helicopter hire..!

..the actual cost per plant will be much higher..

..how much longer can this madness be allowed to continue..?

http://whoar.co.nz/2009/comment-whoarthe-financial-insanities-around-the-annual-boys-own-seeking-pot-adventures/

phil(whoar.co.nz)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 8:56pm
colinm

I sort of agree with you phil.
But! Don’t worry, the revenuers will make up the shortfall with a larger quota of tickets.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 9:00pm
big bruv

I am appalled that A A Thomas is going to be sitting in the court, it seems that Bain’s team will stop at nothing to have this case thrown out before a jury gets to hear the evidence, I suspect Bain’s team are afraid of another trial as anybody who sits trough it can only come out with the logical conclusion that he (David Bain) is a guilty as sin.

People seem to forget that five innocent people lost their lives, to suggest that David Bain has served his sentence already is blatantly untrue, the man should be in prison for the rest of his life.

Anybody who studied the Arthur Thomas case will know that Thomas was never guilty of murder and was indeed “fitted up” by the police, equally they will also know that Thomas was not, and remains far from, the sharpest knife in the cupboard, Thomas is being used by Bain, Joe Karem and co and it is a pity he cannot see it.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 9:07pm
Mr Noisy

philu

You were obviously hitting the decimal point on your calculator a few too many times 😉

$67,000/5,000 = $13/plant, not $13,000!

Not a bad effort/result ratio if you ask me…
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 9:08pm
big bruv

Phool

The “madness” will continue just as long as wankers like you think it is fine for our kids to be around or introduced to drugs.

I find it strange that you spend a lot of your time telling us to listen to the scientists re global warming yet you refuse to listen to scientists and doctors who increasingly tell us that Cannabis is a very dangerous drug.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 9:11pm
Patrick Starr

Bruv – I agree re Bain – but as far as Arthur Thomas. The one thing I have learnt from litigators is “tell me the exact truth so I know when the other party is lying”

Have you ever considered – (as in the OJ case) how on earth did they know beyond doubt that the cartridge case had been planted – unless the guy who did the crime told them he never dropped a cartridge case?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 9:16pm
Paul Marsden

About Thomas. Well, the court’s can’t have it both ways. They send an innocent man to jail for the best part of his life and I even wonder if any of the jury or, any of the judges as participants in his unjust incarceration, even personally apologised to him?

Thomas is free to do as he wishes. Personally, I think he is a powerful reminder of all that is wrong with ‘justice’ in NZ. His presence in court should give notice to all the particpants in the Bain case, to think and act very carefully.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 9:18pm
heathcote

Phool

The police should’ve just gone to your place. Cheaper & more effective.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 9:22pm
big bruv

Patrick

The cartridge case could NOT have been there, a friend of Harvey Crewe’s told the police that he and another officer had sieved that flower bed at least twice and nothing had been found apart from a planted case left their to make sure they were doing a thorough job.
Also the evidence given by the officer in court re the dry soil that “poured out” proves it was planted.

Never forget that the friend of Harvey’s who helped sieve the flower bed’s evidence was suppressed by the Police, he was not allowed to tell his story about thoroughly sieving the bed prior to the “finding” of the cartridge.

Thomas was fitted up, of that their is absolutely no doubt.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 9:22pm
gingercrush

I am neither a lefty nor politically correct.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 9:23pm
philu

ahem..i stand corrected on my bad maths..( i blame the pot..eh..?..

..the rest of the story stands..

..phil(whoar.co.nz)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 9:25pm
big bruv

Should read…

“Thomas was fitted up, of that there is absolutely no doubt.”
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 9:26pm
philu

“..yet you refuse to listen to scientists and doctors who increasingly tell us that Cannabis is a very dangerous drug…”

any actual evidence supporting that one….?

..or did you just pluck it from that orifice again..?

phil(whoar.co.nz)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 9:31pm
gingercrush

Did anyone catch 60 minutes today with the Antonie Dixon story? Rather interesting I thought and I wonder why some of the information explored in it have not been mentioned in the media. I’m surprised TV 3 played the angle with both Barry Hart and the sister questioning whether it was Suicide. It certainly tells a different side to the subject.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 9:37pm
Patrick Starr

Bruv – but how did they know to focus – and re focus on the cartridge case?. it was one small bit of evidence amongst hundreds.

and I’ve always wondered how Thomas knew his gift to jeannette had never been opened?

gingercrush – if it wasn’t suicide someone deserves a medal
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 9:40pm
big bruv

“any actual evidence supporting that one”

Yep, there is a truck load of it.

You should try reading some Phool, although its not going to make any difference, Cannabis will not be legalised in your lifetime nor mine, for that we should both be happy.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 9:41pm
philu

i ask again..

..any links/evidence..?..

..or do we just have to take your ‘word’ for it..

..phil(whoar.co.nz)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 9:43pm
big bruv

Patrick

He did not know it had never been opened.

As for the cartridge case, it was the most compelling piece of evidence, and lets not forget that the Thomas rifle was proven by Dr Sprott to be one that COULD NOT have fired the fatal shots.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 9:44pm
big bruv

or do we just have to take your ‘word’ for it..

Not at all Phool, go and have a gander and see for yourself, the evidence is compelling.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 9:46pm
wikiriwhis business

You are really on fire on some of these threads tonight Big Bruv

lmao 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 9:51pm
wikiriwhis business

“yet you refuse to listen to scientists and doctors who increasingly tell us that Cannabis is a very dangerous drug”

Cannabis use institutionalises users.

Most users want to be istitutionalised anyway. They simply can’t cope with reality and can’t fulfil their potential to its fullest.

They can never do without the drug either. They can’t be disciplined with it’s use and and become toxic abusers.

Not to mention societies true drains and sickness beneficiaries who cause many modern social problems and nightmares.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 9:57pm
big bruv

Should I take your word for it Wiki? 🙂

Phool will be most angry with you if you do not provide a link or two.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 10:01pm
wikiriwhis business

“Phool will be most angry with you if you do not provide a link or two.”

Either phool hasn’t read a newspaper in 20 years and therefore shouldn’t be commenting on this blog

or he doesn’t live in NZ which still disqualifies him from this blog.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 10:10pm
wikiriwhis business

Incidentally, I wasn’t alluding to phool about the threads.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 10:11pm
Patrick Starr

Bruv
I have no doubt the cops planted, fitted & turned evidence, – and no doubt they fucked up

I also have no doubt that, because of all of that it does not necessarily make a man innocent – it just proves the cops were stupid
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 10:17pm
freethinker

Pat

It does not make him guilty either. The fact that the cops planted evidence idscredits them as Deceivers and therefore guilty of perjury or incompetent or both. Funny that no perjury charge was brought or have I missed this?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 10:55pm
Patrick Starr

freethinker
very true. it doesn’t make him guilty – it just reduces him back to the prime suspect
If I was to take the true and untampered evidence against AA Thomas it still leaves a lot of unanswered questions – beyond reasonable doubt??. I don’t think so – but nonetheless it doesn’t make him innocent in my book

I think the best example of punishing the cops for lying by acquitting the defendant was OJ Simpson
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 11:06pm
wikiriwhis business

Am I a little ignorant of this issue or does everyone understand juries punish police with acquittals

personally, I haven’t noticed it in this country yet

But mistrust of the police is rising. Be a peculiar phenomenon, esp if judges have to caution juries or even detain
members for perjury.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 2, 2009 11:12pm
philu

just the usual crap eh bb..?

..no evidence..because there is no evidence..

..save the rantings of delusional individuals such as yourself..

..that you are unable to provide even one credible link..

..really does say heaps..eh..?

phil(whoar.co.nz)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
March 3, 2009 1:40pm

Add a Comment Cancel reply

Login to comment or vote

« Obama’s Budget

The argument that S92A is needed for free trade agreements »

Donations

You can now donate to Kiwiblog

Exclusive content from DPF on Patreon

Become a Patron!

Highlights

The Kiwis are fleeing
Inflation by term
Houston we have a problem
Our immunisation disaster

Never miss a post

Email Address

Links

"Listen!"
Not PC
Why Socialism Won’t Die
Utopia
Why Socialism Won’t Die
No Minister
Luxon’s demoted ministers might take comfort from the British politician who bounced back after the Gallipoli debacle
Point of Order
Word of the day
Hompaddock
THE WAY THINGS WERE
No Punches Pulled (Bob Jones)
Eruption of pro-Palestinian protests on American Campus evidence of a conscience – the difference between Anti-Semites and Anti-Zionism
The Daily Blog
Open mike 26/04/2024
The Standard
"Comity" versus the rule of law
No Right Turn
Jacinda’s legacy – Increasing number of abortions
Bob McCoskrie's McBlog
United Rugby Championship Predictions for Week 15
Stats Chat
Again, hate crimes are not necessarily terrorism.
Kiwipolitico
Despair - construction consenting edition
Offsetting Behaviour
Coalition Promises
NZCPR
Tougher than that
Croaking Cassandra
ABs stripped of 2011 title after try disallowed
Imperator Fish
Legal Beagle: Election '23: The Special Votes
Public Address
Making this movie might have been a mistake
Liam Hehir
Why I am retiring from political blogging
Kiwi FireWalker
Angie Warren-Clark: Meet the Newbies
Dan Moskovitz