Hmmm, so if Norman said that the EFA was flawed and should never have been enacted, how exactly could he be quoted out of context? A more likely scenario is that Norman realised that his voice was a lone one and that he would be made to look like a clown for supporting the EFA.

Normam should have just politely declined to be involved with Edwards’ work.

Oh, and Danyl, given your propensity to appear on PA, should we conclude that you too are biased and therefore anything you say – no matter how well researched it might be – should be taken with a grain of salt?

And, as I said before, Norman’s accusation that Bryce was biased and acting in bad faith has been nicely confirmed by Bryce’s decision to forward their correspondance on to a National Party blogger.

Reading the post again this morning it seems even siller than it did last night. Example:

Norman or his staff seemingly went through two and a half years of writings by Edwards to compile their dossier on him.

I guess it’s possible Norman had his staff compile a ‘dossier’, possibly working away while prisoners screamed in agony from the torture chambers that possibly exist in the Green Party offices, but it seems rather more likely that Norman went to Bryce’s web site, clicked the the Green Party tag in the word cloud, spent a minute scanning the posts, realised that every single one was highly critical and cut and pasted a few selections into a document. Admittedly, this scenario isn’t as fun as imagining a cadre of KGB style Green Party functionaries compiling a ‘dossier’ though.

and then they ambush him with questions they think make him look foolish.

So any question to Norman in an interview would be off limits then ?

As I said earlier; The Green’s are surely in trouble when they don’t want people to have an unrestricted right to protest at the same time as they want to retain the right to have anonymous donations funneled through secret trusts.

Oh come on Ryan, they asked him for input. He had the perfect opportunity to add his views or temper the debate but decided to spit the dummy.

If the shoe was on the other foot do you think Norman would have asked Edwards et al for their views!

Depends. It seems that Norman believed they were asking for his contribution so that they could quote him out of context and attack his own views. If Norman had asked them for their views for a work specifically aimed at discrediting their views, they might have been similarly suspicious.

It’s a bit like how Dawkins hardly does interviews any more, because so many evangelical Christian film-makers trick him into doing interviews he thinks is about other stuff, and then they ambush him with questions they think make him look foolish.

It’s possible that the authors actually wanted Norman’s views and that they would be taken constructively, but it being an ambush is not so outlandish an idea that Norman can be blamed for suspecting it.

Apparently not.

It has always been about the PR and awareness, rather than the power savings, always.

The EFB was always about PR and profile, rather than the fairness, always.

Cookin what Greenfly … ‘P’ perhaps?

I saw agood film about communism taking power over people a few days ago, it’s called Journey from the Fall and is about what happened to the Vietnamese people after the Americans withdrew from Vietnam in 1975.

the Green-Communist party needs to be outlawed in NZ. It’s inhuman.

March 30th, 2009 at 9:16 pm
“..Ignore message, attack messenger..”

you were banging on about brian edwards..

..idjit..!

..what else to do but ‘ignore’/laugh at..?

phil(whoar.co.nz)

Yes Phil, I made an error.

Unlike the Greens, I acknowledge that, and I move on.

This does not change the fact that Mr Norman appears to insist on academic and intellectual honesty from everyone, save himself.

Earth hour was never about using less power, as shown many other places, turning everything off for an hour saves far less than swapping a few bulbs for energy saver ones.

You lot can fight the battle of the graph anyway you like, but unfortunately for you lot, many thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of people turned their lights off for it, you can show overall consumption graphs all you like, but it is undeniable that many people switched off for that hour, you lot are acting like a bunch of tools. It has always been about the PR and awareness, rather than the power savings, always.

I’m sure how ever if you chumps are so willing to be martyrs to the cause, the power companies might be keen to have an earth hour every month.

The truth is there was no reduction in power usage last Saturday night.

Whaleoil has the graphs from Transpower, and they show that power usage during Earth Hour was actually up on the previous Saturday.

http://www.whaleoil.co.nz/?q=content/earth-hour-bollocks#disqus_thread

A complete farce. A lie that the mainstream media are happy to participate in.

Redbaiter is constantly accusing journalists in the mainstream media of being liars. Liars for leftists. Untrustworthy propagandising soviet style scum.

Here’s the proof.

The watermelons are liars and so are their mainstream media acolytes.

It is a plain and indisputable fact.

Whale’s charts are proof that the NZ news media is largely in the grip of cowardly cheating leftist liars and propagandists who have betrayed the once honourable craft of journalism to the cause of global socialism.

Apart from making absurd claims “

As far as I can see it’s DPF and his disciples making absurd claims.

Anyway, hypocrisy much, normally kiwiblog is the first place you’d find people advocating the censoring of ivory tower academics. Then again, as soon as it supports your own views, it must be right! (its ok for us but not ok for them remember!)

And oob, care to remind me of the party vote statistics, ACT compared to the Greens, for the last few elections.

Just wait till there’s the Select Committee on Climate Change underway for the real “you’re not qualified” comments to start flying.

This could set a dangerous precedent – Good to get it out in the open so we can see what’s coming.

AGW anyone?

Any Green is a legitimate target.

<sarcasm>
Hit em with a base ball bat. The watermelon ones are great to eat but the occasional real one makes a fricken mess that takes ages to clean up.
</sarcasm>

Russel Norman is showing plenty of grunt and decisiveness here and it worries those here (and there are plenty of you), who imagine (hope, pray)that the Greens are pale and wishy-washy. He isn’t, we aren’t and it worries you, don’t it!

I am worried.

The Greens are a cancer, feasting upon New Zealand society. They mean to inflict their communist/luddite vision upon New Zealand. The future that the Greens present is a bleak one – state farms, shortages, collectivisation, discrimination, poverty, fear, hunger, oppression.

Decent New Zealand needs boots on the ground. We need to be busting up Green Party gatherings, we need to be administering punishment beatings to Green Party members and activists.

We need to maintain our standards. We need to show the Greens in no uncertain terms that ordinary Kiwis will not bow down under the yoke of communist oppression. We need to fight and we need to punish.

Any Green is a legitimate target.

Save some oxygen for yourself. Apart from making absurd claims you have still done nothing to justify Normans and the Green parties positions on the EFA. Do you think it is a good piece of legislation the party should be wanting to keep and if so why?