This entry was posted
on Wednesday, October 21st, 2009 at 8:00 am and is filed under Uncategorized.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
Interestingly we are going to have a debate about the electoral system without ever having had a serious debate about the constitution. I thinks it’s high time to look at that much more fundamental issue first, also in the context of the upcoming debate about the monarchy.
The shit storm over Superfreakonomics climate change / geoenginnering chapter is hilarious
The system is just too complex to geoengineer go the belivers but here is a computer modlel that we
worship that has not got anything right yet either. Put your hand in the hand of the hand you love.
Dimmo I agree we should be looking at the whole constitutional thing along with the monarchy, but the MMP referendum can still fit within that, one step at a time might be all some can deal with. There are still a few people that are scared of cutting the GB apron strings, I guess they still live at home with their mothers.
But we have a constitution, it’s the Treaty of Waitangi. in it you can find the structure of our electoral system, the checks and balances, seperation of judiciary and legislature and all the other needful things.
John Key wants NZ productivity to increase? I can only say the economic gap will widen as we pray for milk price increases and our attention is focused on 1% tax cuts and foreshore ownership.
@Menace: that’s where you hit the debate. Some say that although we have no written constitution, we do have a comprehensive system consisting of legislation, conventions and a whole bunch of other more or less obscure instruments (like letters patent) and residual powers, together comprising a sound construct.
In my view that is nonsense, and what we need is a simple and straightforward written document with constitutional (that is fundamental and overriding) authority (plus the structure to enforce it), which sets out some fundamental principles and which limits and structures government. The US constitution would be a very good starting point for such an exercise. The critical issue will be how such a constitution achieves its authority, something that normally requires a revolution to do properly. (Comments on this remark will be interesting)
“..We can join Bill McKibben on Oct. 24 in nationwide protests over rising carbon emissions.
We can cut our consumption of fossil fuels.
We can use less water.
We can banish plastic bags.
We can install compact fluorescent light bulbs.
We can compost in our backyard.
But unless we dismantle the corporate state ..
.. all those actions will be just as ineffective as the Ghost Dance shirts donned by native American warriors to protect themselves from the bullets of white soldiers at Wounded Knee.
“If we all wait for the great, glorious revolution there won’t be anything left,” author and environmental activist Derrick Jensen told me when I interviewed him in a phone call to his home in California.
“If all we do is reform work, this culture will grind away.
This work is necessary, but not sufficient.
We need to use whatever means are necessary to stop this culture from killing the planet.
We need to target and take down the industrial infrastructure that is systematically dismembering the planet.
Industrial civilization is functionally incompatible with life on the planet ..
.. and is murdering the planet.
We need to do whatever is necessary to stop this.”
The oil and natural gas industry, the coal industry, arms and weapons manufacturers, industrial farms, deforestation industries, the automotive industry and chemical plants ..
.. will not willingly accept their own extinction.
They are indifferent to the looming human catastrophe.
We will not significantly reduce carbon emissions by drying our laundry in the backyard .. and naively trusting the power elite.
The corporations will continue to cannibalize the planet for the sake of money.
They must be halted by organized and militant forms of resistance.
Jesus of Nazareth underwent Jewish and Roman trials, was flogged, and was sentenced to death by crucifixion. The scourging produced deep stripelike lacerations and appreciable blood loss, and it probably set the stage for hypovolemic shock, as evidenced by the fact that Jesus was too weakened to carry the crossbar (patibulum) to Golgotha. At the site of crucifixion, his wrists were nailed to the patibulum and, after the patibulum was lifted onto the upright post (stipes), his feet were nailed to the stipes.
The major pathophysiologic effect of crucifixion was an interference with normal respirations. Accordingly, death resulted primarily from hypovolemic shock and exhaustion asphyxia. Jesus’ death was ensured by the thrust of a soldier’s spear into his side. Modern medical interpretation of the historical evidence indicates that Jesus was dead when taken down from the cross.
The complete article (illustrated) here (PDF 600kb).
“The crisis of global heating is a social problem.”
WTF.! This crisis is the slowest and longest running potential event that society can imagine.
Worse than that, the direction of heating / cooling is so clearly variable it is not sensible to extrapolate over a period greater than “peak to peak” oscillation of what ever objective measurement you are lucky enough to have faith in.
Asteroid strike is more certain than this infantile crap that you surround yourself with.
..Study delves back into 200,000 years of history to demonstrate the devastating impact of global warming
A frozen lake on a remote island off Canada’s northern coast has yielded remarkable insights into how the Arctic climate has changed dramatically over 50 years.
Muddy sediment from the bottom of the lake, some of it 200,000 years old, shows that Baffin Island, one of the most inhospitable places on Earth ..
.. has undergone an unprecedented warming over the past half-century.
Scientists believe the temperature rise is probably due to human-induced warming.
It has more than offset a natural cooling trend which began 8,000 years ago.
Instead of cooling at a rate of minus 0.2C every 1,000 years –
– a trend that was expected to continue for another 4,000 years because of well-known changes to the Earth’s solar orbit –
– Baffin Island, like the rest of the Arctic, has begun to get warmer ..
Some say that although we have no written constitution, we do have a comprehensive system consisting of legislation, conventions and a whole bunch of other more or less obscure instruments (like letters patent) and residual powers, together comprising a sound construct.
And that was really great. Trouble is, that stupid old fool Sir Geoffrey Palmer tampered with it and stuffed in his blasted Bill of Rights Act. Thin end of the wedge and a bad precedent. Now any nutjob with a barrow to push can start playing around with constitutional matters.
Frankly, I wouldn’t trust any of them to come up with anything sensible or in the “people’s interest”. (Just think of the EFA debacle.)
Those who say we have no potential climate problem and that’s the end of the story have no credibility. Anyone with any clues should surely accept that it could be a problem, it is just whether it is a significant problem or not, whether humans could be causing any of it, and whether we can or should try and do anything about it.
@Colonel Masters: the simple fact that Geoff Palmer could insert his BORA demonstrates convincingly that it wasn’t ‘really great’ after all. A solid constitution (and I agree there aren’t many of them around) would not allow such an exercise, nor about 75% of the legislation that gets passed here on a daily basis.
cha reading it through, if it was my daughter who had been raped and badly injured I would have gone postal with the sods who decided that locking her in a container with no food nor water was a good idea.
Just how sick are those damn politicians in supporting that companies actions by voting against that bill.
Not knowing him I still had respect for Judge Richard Goldstone for his decades of work in South Africa.
Then came his biased partial prejudged fact finding report on behalf of the UNHRC and with whom he worked closely Human Rights watch for info on the ground.
Robert Bernstein the founder of Human Rights Watch has written an opinion piece in the NYTimes castigating HRW and Goldstone for failing the 350 million people in Arab and particularly Iranian lands. What’s particularly satisfying reading this is his credentials are impeccable even to the lefties.
“And that was really great. Trouble is, that stupid old fool Sir Geoffrey Palmer tampered with it and stuffed in his blasted Bill of Rights Act. Thin end of the wedge and a bad precedent. Now any nutjob with a barrow to push can start playing around with constitutional matters.”
I think the insertion of the “principles of the Treaty of Waitangi” clause into the SOE bill and subsequent judicial activism has a lot to answer for as well.
We do have a constitution but it is not written into a single document. The main body is in the Statutes of Westminster.
While the idea of a written constitution has appeal for those of us who believe we need restraints on the powers of Government that is unlikely to be realised in NZ at this time. Magna Carta was the first such document and the US Constitution is one of the most recent and best known.
If you read the US constitution, including the amendments, it clearly declares the basic freedoms of the people and the whole document focuses on what Government may not do. Unfortunately, the US founding fathers are not around to write a similar document for us today.
I am reasonably certain that any Constitution written in NZ today would be a document establishing people rights to goods and services to be funded by other people. It would declare a right to a house, to a job, to a basic minimum income , to a pension, to health care, and to a 100% pure environment. There would be no statement about rights to private property. OR of our right to the pursuit of happiness. Even if there were such statements the courts would soon overturn them. Look what happened to the RMA.
The Colonel (9.52 post) and Owen (11.22) are spot on about our constitutional arrangement.
However, can I break a new topic for a minute….
Interesting action may be on the cards for Christchurch Airport, and the MSM as is often the case, appears to be asleep. Change brewing might include Bro. Key’s Government delivering a slice of the airport to Ngai Tahu, and property developers getting a windfall from relaxed airport noise and operating restrictions.
Christchurch International Airport Ltd is a substantial business. Assets total $745,000,000 and profit and after-tax profit in the latest year was more than $14,000,000. The airport was voted NZ Airport of the Year for 2009.
The airport is three-quarters owned by Christchurch City, and one quarter owned by the Government, with that quarter under Ngai Tahu’s right in perpetuity to first and second options to buy Crown property in the South Island. (I think Attorney-General and Treaty Negotiations Minister Chris Finlayson in an earlier private role helped negotiate this on Ngai Tahu’s behalf.)
1. The Government has just appointed Christchurch tycoon George Gould as one of its nominee directors on the board of Christchurch Airport. National has its own favourites for such State directorships, just as Labour does. However, Gould is an interesting case. He is a hard-nosed, successful financier, who has left some small shareholders in public companies he has dominated feeling short changed, though he has made good gains for other small shareholders. Ahareholders who asked questions as public companies sometimes got short shrift.
2. Christchurch Airport has a new chief executive, Jim Boult, a Wakatipu-domiciled entrepreneur who has been active in property development there, and still has property investments. Boult has a strong business background, and he will benefit the airport by developing more of its substantial land holdings.
3. Some property speculators on the edge of Christchurch have been unhappy with airport-based restrictions on land use, based on protecting airport growth and the airport being hampered in hours it can operate and other effects of noise complaints. These speculators are reportedly happier with the airport regime under Boult.
4. Christchurch’s relatively new chief executive Tony Marryat(who today, ratepayers learned has just received a 22 per cent pay rise), gets an easy ride from one of the weakest councils ever to run the city. Under him and the lightweight mayor, Bob Parker (a TV personality of yesteryear), Christchurch City provided a sweetheart deal to troubled property developer Dave Henderson – an ACT backer in Christchurch.
Put these together and you get the picture of Bro. Key delivering a chunk of Christchurch’s prime business asset to Ngai Tahu, and property development surging on the north and north-western sides of Christchurch, near the airport.
The remaining question is what’s in it for George Gould? Why would such a busy go-getter agree to serve on a publicly owned corporation’s board? He can make much better money per hour in his other businesses.
The whole AfPak situation is sobering. That American Thinks that “there is no substitute for successful preemption. ” It’s a bit late for preemption in AfPak though, they let things slip while they were busy preempting somewhere else.
The harsh reality is that AfPak may never be solvable by force (ask the Russians and the families of the million dead from that preemption), and it may be far from ready for democracy. It will never be win or lose, it will likely end up being an extracation with as little damage and as much pride as possible.
The debate about a Constitution or how the electoral system works or doesn’t
will all be pointless blah blah once that “Climate Change’ treaty is signed in
Copenhagen in December.
People would do well to wake up! to what is going on, and fast.
Lord Christopher Monkton explains in this speech to the Minnesota Free Market Institute.
Oh we have so much to look forward to as a little country on the edge of the world being advised by the experts how to run our affairs and told what to do all in the name of climate science but really marxism.
Tell me did I vote for a centre right govt to enable all this?
I haven’t seen anyone make a rational case that links climate change to marxism. It just seems to be climate change bad, marxism bad, so climate change must be marxism.
It was well known in Bernstein’s days that HRW avoided commenting on Israel.
Just to address a couple of points or not touched on by HRW’s response:
1. Israel, by it’s own actions, is turning itself into a pariah state. Blaming people of conscience for Israel’s own failings is simply deflection.
2. More deflection by pointing the finger at surrounding states. Yes, human rights abuses abound in those states too, mainly with the active complicity, even financing, by the US and Israel. How does this excuse Israel’s human rights abuses?
3. In the latest attacks on Gaza and Lebanon, Hamas and Hezbollah did not “choose” to wage war. Israel was the clear aggressor in both cases. In Gaza, Hamas has only a desert and a city in which to fight. No doubt Israel would be very happy if Hamas members voluntarily stood in the desert providing target shooting for Israel’s oh-so-brave IDF. In Lebanon, Hezbollah fought the IDF to a standstill in the hilly and wooded border area between the Litani River and Israel’s northern border, while Israel bombed Lebanon’s infrastructure to smithereens, killing hundreds of civilians, many of whom would have been totally opposed to Hezbollah.
And it’s worth remembering that Hezbollah and Hamas only sprung up in response to Israel’s brutal occupations of Lebanon and the Palestinian territories.
3. Bernstein says: “Nevertheless, there is a difference between wrongs committed in self-defense and those perpetrated intentionally.”
But this is simply not true under international law, otherwise Hamas would have a ready made defence to what ever it has done since it was formed, in 1987, under Israeli occupation. Even recently, in 2006, Israel imposed a blockade on Gaza. A blockade, in international law, is an act of war, and was Israel’s excuse for the 1967 war. Consistency is just too much to hope for.
4. Regardless of the risible propaganda by Israel that it “did more to safeguard the rights of civilians in a combat zone than any other army in the history of warfare” the facts tell the opposite story. Gaza was a closed off shooting gallery, and almost all usually safe havens were bombed, including UN facilities. Even Israel’s soldiers report that their orders were that every person was a military target. Many, to their credit, objected to that order.
And completely missing in the Bernstein narrative is any acknowledgment of the cause of the conflict. I mean the over-arching conflict.
What is it?
It is the complete denial to Palestinians, since as early as the 1920s, of the basic human right of self-determination. And every other human right into the bargain.
But that’s the last thing Israel’s propagandists want you to think about.
If you go to this link http://www.palestine-studies.org/enakba/index.html and look for ” All that remains” and click on “click here” Appendix II gives the run up to 1948. Look especially for ongonig denial of Palestinian rights in favour of European Jewish immigrants.
You either left this bit out on purpose or you didn’t read the blog properly.
” This website is (mostly) satire. Its creators do not endorse r*pe nor do they oppose anti-r*pe legislation.”
You can find the disclaimer at the end of the page you linked to.
You will recall the satire DPF posted about the Greens and abortion some weeks back. While that exercised a great many people, this website is also satirical – whether you agree with the subject matter (for either DPFs post or your linked website) or not ( and I don’t myself regarding either subject). You surely don’t think Republicans equate such an atrocious act to something as inane as buttering their toast and in doing so treat it in such a light hearted manner?
Sarkozygroupie are you a kiwi ? because any damn kiwi worth his or her’s salt would bloody well know it is satire without needed a cricket bat on the side of the head.
another dubious top ten honour for ‘lil ol’ new zealand..)
“..No. 6 New Zealand
Gini score: 36.2
GDP 2007 (US$ billions): 135.7
Share of income or expenditure (%)
Poorest 10%: 2.2
Richest 10%: 27.8
Ratio of income or expenditure, share of top 10% to lowest 10%: 12.5
According to the OECD, New Zealand had the biggest rise in inequality among member nations in the two decades starting in the mid-1980s.
The country’s economy emerged from recession in the second quarter, but with growth of just 0.1% ..
.. the central bank is likely to keep interest rates low until well into 2010.”..
(haven’t they done well?..national and labour..?..)
that fact again..?
“..According to the OECD, New Zealand had the biggest rise in inequality among member nations in the two decades starting in the mid-1980s..”
Gini score: 36.2
GDP 2007 (US$ billions): 135.7
Share of income or expenditure (%)
Contribution to GDP by their own hard work and productivity: Poorest 10%: 2.2
Contribution to GDP by their own hard work and productivity: Richest 10%: 27.8
Ratio of income or expenditure, share of top 10% to lowest 10%: 12.5
Stupiddumbtwat bawwwwwwwwwwwws about conservatives, Luc blames Israel for everything bad, phool thinks the hardcore enviro-luddite Jensen talks sense and Peteypoos doesn’t understand that redistribution of wealth rather than practical solutions are the only things being suggested by enviro-Communist groups such as Greenpeace. Just another day on General Debate.
I resent that little misallusion to my good name, hurfy. What’s facts got to do with blame? Facts are neutral. I just create a “no spin zone” to allow the desert to bloom, the facts to flourish, parsing the propaganda, shining a beacon on the bombast. Remember, the “spin” stops here!
Now then, on a completely different matter, why don’t we hear cries of the dog wagging the tail every time Rodney opens his bombastic mouth like we used to when Helen was the boss and MeFirst the tail? Why does Rod remind me so much of Piggy (peace be upon him)?
Tax returns could be scrapped under radical new proposal
* Exclusive by Steve Lewis
* From: The Daily Telegraph
* October 21, 2009 12:00AM
TREASURY boss … Ken Henry who has led the review of Australia’s tax system. Source: HWT Image Library
AUSTRALIA’S tax system will be overhauled and refunds simplified under a blueprint being proposed by Treasury boss Ken Henry.
Dr Henry’s reforms would result in taxpayers receiving a one-page summary from the Australian Tax Office which would include a standard “deduction” for necessary work expenses as well as salary details.
If taxpayers were happy with the ATO’s calculation, they would tick the form and lodge it via the internet – and wait for their refund.
I see that Claire Curran and another commenter have disagreed with `Intolerent Trevor’ over at Red Alert. I watch with interest to see if they will be edited, warned or banned as happens to most people who disagree with him.
Luc Hansen says “Remember, the “spin” stops here!”
Great! So if we look at your previous post I can pick out a few simple spins.
“Israel, by it’s own actions, is turning itself into a pariah state.”
This is hardly a fact, but a inferred conclusion. With a few weasel words. Yet it is at the start of the piece there are no facts to support yet. Verdict: Spin!
“Israel was the clear aggressor in both cases.”
Hang on, in Lebanon, Hezbollah launched a daring raid into Israel. Hamas started launching Grad and Katyusha rockets that put hundreds of thousands of civilians in danger. If there is any assertion as to who the agressor is, it is certainly not “clear”. Verdict: Spin!
“almost all usually safe havens were bombed, including UN facilities.”
Are you referring to the UN coumpound, which the UN then said was not bombed or targeted? Well known SPIN!
“It is the complete denial to Palestinians, since as early as the 1920s, of the basic human right of self-determination. And every other human right into the bargain.”
The cause of the conflict? How many rounds of peace talks have to be nixed? Why can’t there be states side by side? What happened to tolerance??
Look mate – you don’t like Israel. That’s clear. But don’t try and get us to believe that you are the sole source of fact when you are just sprouting the same sort of propaganda you accuse others of.
Until there is tolerance, understanding and dialogue between both sides, nothing is going to happen. And attitudes like yours are just as bad as the attitudes you criticise.
Tim. I’m happy to explore each of your points further with you. But first, can you tell me this: how does one dislike a country? How can one dislike a country?
Back in the days the the USSR was our big bogeyman, I used to say that if we had dinner with a Russian family we would all have a fine time. I think the same about the people of Israel. And same for Palestinians. As I have said before, I believe the non-Palestinian citizens of Israel, like the Palestinians of the OPT, are poorly served by their leaders.
But my main point always is this: Palestinians were and are denied the No 1 right granted to European Jews. The right of self-determination. This is the original and ongoing injustice.
It is also, if you think about it, the same principle behind our treaty settlement process. We are now compensating Maori for our failure to extend this right to them, even after signing a treaty guaranteeing this right.
But let me take a wild guess – you guys don’t go for that either right?
Luc – The basic point is this: Don’t spout your opinions as facts, and then try to claim some kind of high ground over others.
Have you been there? I’m guessing no.
So please don’t try to put yourself out there as some all knowing expert, when clearly, you are not.
Under a 2 state solution, both parties would be granted the right to Self Determination. Each party will need to make concessions.
This is all irrellevant if the individual people on both sides don’t try to see things from each other’s view point. If you could see what a tangle of complex cultures are involved you would realise that it’s not a simple thing….
HD Just watched it.
Property rights, whomever owns the meeting can charge what they like for entrance just like any other meeting.
Goff is a goof and he has no shame.
There you go again Tim…just FYI my “spin” comments were intended as self satire…obviously far too subtle for you. By all means, stick to Safran.
This is actually a site for spouting opinions, isn’t it? What are you presenting? Even when you are busy trying to shout me down?
And this is a doozey: “Under a 2 state solution, both parties would be granted the right to Self Determination. Each party will need to make concessions.”
But this imperious, supposedly slam dunk, definitive statement of so-called facts fails when confronted with reality.
1. Both sides granted the right of self determination. Sort of begs the question, why now and not in 1948 or earlier, say 1920s? And do you mean Palestinians can vote to reclaim their land, if they so wish? I suspect not.
2. Each party will need to make concessions. Palestinians currently occupy much less than even the 22% of historic Palestine originally on their side of the Green Line. How much more compromise do you ask of them?
3. The two state solution. What two state solution? The so-called settlements and checkpoints and road blockages have forced Palestinians into almost non-contiguous bantustans, an unviable “state.” And the Israeli government is on record as according Palestinians only a sort of autonomy, an occupation by remote control. By the way, UNSC Res 242 calls for a negotiated settlement to the refugee issue and Israel has always steadfastly refused to even open negotiations on that topic. Another compromise required from Palestinians?
4. The final refuge for a bankrupt position: “complex.” Bullshit. International law is squarely on the side of Palestinian rights. Only the US self-interest and its veto is preventing the commonsense, legally and morally correct solution. And wankers here try to say the US is not an imperial power!
5. The arguments you and others here deploy are eerily similar to those the white South Africans used to justify apartheid, which is essentially what the Palestinians are subjected to.
It’s getting late, but check back here tomorrow and I will answer your earlier points.
Mr Key later said only a limited amount of money was available and trade-offs had to be made, including in wage negotiations.
“If wage rounds are high, ultimately it means the government can employ fewer people, or some people are going to miss out. And I think that’s something that’s worthy of consideration.”
Labour’s education spokesman, Trevor Mallard, said it was “outrageous” to propose setting the education groups against each other.
“You don’t take money off one group of people in a workforce to pay another.
So here we Have Trev telling us that the Govt. shouldn’t take money off one group of people in a workforce to pay another.
Well excuse me. What outright hypocrisy. Labour and this Govt and most of those before have been doing this since taxation began. Trev needs reminding about stuff like WFF, Labour party theft of our tax funds by retrospective legislation and we could post all day about this.
Taxation is about taking someone else’s money from the workplace to give to someone else.
Hey DPF, when you arise from your early morning slumber lets have a good post on this subject, if for no reason but to castigate Trev for his stupid statement.
Gees the morning gets worse. About time to cancel the RWC. ITs distracting the govt form doing what needs to be done and its wasting taxpayers money all over again. I refuse to contribute to it and will not be paying tax to feed this debacle.
McCully and IRB square off over fern
4:00AM Thursday Oct 22, 2009
New Zealand’s silver fern emblem is at the centre of a battle between the government and the International Rugby Board that has thrown the World Cup’s volunteer programme into disarray.
Rugby World Cup Minister Murray McCully is insisting the silver fern be added to the volunteers’ uniforms, with the IRB’s logo.
But the IRB is resisting because of the fern’s strong association with the All Blacks and the bias this would create if it were worn by the thousands of New Zealanders expected to volunteer.
It is understood the IRB also feels the fern is not consistent with the “look and feel” of the already-decided tournament branding.
The volunteer programme is a vital part of the government’s plan for “a nation of four million hosts”.
Labour’s education spokesman, Trevor Mallard, said it was “outrageous” to propose setting the education groups against each other.
“You don’t take money off one group of people in a workforce to pay another. This is a priority area and in the end the Government has to find the cash for it.”
October 21st, 2009 at 8:16 am
Interestingly we are going to have a debate about the electoral system without ever having had a serious debate about the constitution. I thinks it’s high time to look at that much more fundamental issue first, also in the context of the upcoming debate about the monarchy.
October 21st, 2009 at 8:17 am
The shit storm over Superfreakonomics climate change / geoenginnering chapter is hilarious
The system is just too complex to geoengineer go the belivers but here is a computer modlel that we
worship that has not got anything right yet either. Put your hand in the hand of the hand you love.
October 21st, 2009 at 8:24 am
Simon – I understand what you were trying to say, and agree with you, but have you been around to Philu’s place for breakfast?
October 21st, 2009 at 8:29 am
Dimmo I agree we should be looking at the whole constitutional thing along with the monarchy, but the MMP referendum can still fit within that, one step at a time might be all some can deal with. There are still a few people that are scared of cutting the GB apron strings, I guess they still live at home with their mothers.
October 21st, 2009 at 8:39 am
But we have a constitution, it’s the Treaty of Waitangi. in it you can find the structure of our electoral system, the checks and balances, seperation of judiciary and legislature and all the other needful things.
October 21st, 2009 at 8:41 am
“seperation of judiciary and legislature”
Yeah right eh Jude – Thanks for the laugh kiwi.
October 21st, 2009 at 8:45 am
dimmocrazy, sounds good
Can anybody tell me what we have as a constitution atm???
October 21st, 2009 at 8:49 am
Heres an awesome piece of equipment. . .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SOESSCXGhFo
John Key wants NZ productivity to increase? I can only say the economic gap will widen as we pray for milk price increases and our attention is focused on 1% tax cuts and foreshore ownership.
Now, where is that robot maid …
October 21st, 2009 at 8:58 am
@Menace: that’s where you hit the debate. Some say that although we have no written constitution, we do have a comprehensive system consisting of legislation, conventions and a whole bunch of other more or less obscure instruments (like letters patent) and residual powers, together comprising a sound construct.
In my view that is nonsense, and what we need is a simple and straightforward written document with constitutional (that is fundamental and overriding) authority (plus the structure to enforce it), which sets out some fundamental principles and which limits and structures government. The US constitution would be a very good starting point for such an exercise. The critical issue will be how such a constitution achieves its authority, something that normally requires a revolution to do properly. (Comments on this remark will be interesting)
October 21st, 2009 at 9:05 am
Thanks Brain breakfast is the most important meal of the weekend.
October 21st, 2009 at 9:14 am
http://whoar.co.nz/2009/a-reality-check-from-the-brink-of-extinction/
“..We can join Bill McKibben on Oct. 24 in nationwide protests over rising carbon emissions.
We can cut our consumption of fossil fuels.
We can use less water.
We can banish plastic bags.
We can install compact fluorescent light bulbs.
We can compost in our backyard.
But unless we dismantle the corporate state ..
.. all those actions will be just as ineffective as the Ghost Dance shirts donned by native American warriors to protect themselves from the bullets of white soldiers at Wounded Knee.
“If we all wait for the great, glorious revolution there won’t be anything left,” author and environmental activist Derrick Jensen told me when I interviewed him in a phone call to his home in California.
“If all we do is reform work, this culture will grind away.
This work is necessary, but not sufficient.
We need to use whatever means are necessary to stop this culture from killing the planet.
We need to target and take down the industrial infrastructure that is systematically dismembering the planet.
Industrial civilization is functionally incompatible with life on the planet ..
.. and is murdering the planet.
We need to do whatever is necessary to stop this.”
The oil and natural gas industry, the coal industry, arms and weapons manufacturers, industrial farms, deforestation industries, the automotive industry and chemical plants ..
.. will not willingly accept their own extinction.
They are indifferent to the looming human catastrophe.
We will not significantly reduce carbon emissions by drying our laundry in the backyard .. and naively trusting the power elite.
The corporations will continue to cannibalize the planet for the sake of money.
They must be halted by organized and militant forms of resistance.
The crisis of global heating is a social problem.
It requires a social response..”
phil(whoar.co.nz)
October 21st, 2009 at 9:20 am
Greg is the Treaty is a consitution then it only applies to 10% of the population.
Would you like a dictionary for Christmas?
October 21st, 2009 at 9:27 am
Hypovolemic Shock And Exhaustion Asphyxia
Jesus of Nazareth underwent Jewish and Roman trials, was flogged, and was sentenced to death by crucifixion. The scourging produced deep stripelike lacerations and appreciable blood loss, and it probably set the stage for hypovolemic shock, as evidenced by the fact that Jesus was too weakened to carry the crossbar (patibulum) to Golgotha. At the site of crucifixion, his wrists were nailed to the patibulum and, after the patibulum was lifted onto the upright post (stipes), his feet were nailed to the stipes.
The major pathophysiologic effect of crucifixion was an interference with normal respirations. Accordingly, death resulted primarily from hypovolemic shock and exhaustion asphyxia. Jesus’ death was ensured by the thrust of a soldier’s spear into his side. Modern medical interpretation of the historical evidence indicates that Jesus was dead when taken down from the cross.
The complete article (illustrated) here (PDF 600kb).
October 21st, 2009 at 9:29 am
Murray – What’s with the dictionary comment? You think a constitution is only some formal document that exists on paper?!
October 21st, 2009 at 9:45 am
Dimmocrazy – We can substitute a ‘Bill of Rights’ with a ‘Bill of Entitlements’. That should make it easier to get adopted by the masses.
October 21st, 2009 at 9:45 am
phil said,
“The crisis of global heating is a social problem.”
WTF.! This crisis is the slowest and longest running potential event that society can imagine.
Worse than that, the direction of heating / cooling is so clearly variable it is not sensible to extrapolate over a period greater than “peak to peak” oscillation of what ever objective measurement you are lucky enough to have faith in.
Asteroid strike is more certain than this infantile crap that you surround yourself with.
happy days..
October 21st, 2009 at 9:51 am
one for db..
(are you watching too much fox..?..)
http://whoar.co.nz/2009/baffin-island-reveals-dramatic-scale-of-arctic-climate-change/
..Study delves back into 200,000 years of history to demonstrate the devastating impact of global warming
A frozen lake on a remote island off Canada’s northern coast has yielded remarkable insights into how the Arctic climate has changed dramatically over 50 years.
Muddy sediment from the bottom of the lake, some of it 200,000 years old, shows that Baffin Island, one of the most inhospitable places on Earth ..
.. has undergone an unprecedented warming over the past half-century.
Scientists believe the temperature rise is probably due to human-induced warming.
It has more than offset a natural cooling trend which began 8,000 years ago.
Instead of cooling at a rate of minus 0.2C every 1,000 years –
– a trend that was expected to continue for another 4,000 years because of well-known changes to the Earth’s solar orbit –
– Baffin Island, like the rest of the Arctic, has begun to get warmer ..
.. especially since 1950..”
phil(whoar.co.nz)
October 21st, 2009 at 9:52 am
And that was really great. Trouble is, that stupid old fool Sir Geoffrey Palmer tampered with it and stuffed in his blasted Bill of Rights Act. Thin end of the wedge and a bad precedent. Now any nutjob with a barrow to push can start playing around with constitutional matters.
Frankly, I wouldn’t trust any of them to come up with anything sensible or in the “people’s interest”. (Just think of the EFA debacle.)
October 21st, 2009 at 9:54 am
Republicans for rape, and conservative types wonder why normal women vote for them in such small numbers.
http://www.republicansforrape.org/
And no, the Nats are not conservative they are becoming a fine new Labour party.
October 21st, 2009 at 10:03 am
Those who say we have no potential climate problem and that’s the end of the story have no credibility. Anyone with any clues should surely accept that it could be a problem, it is just whether it is a significant problem or not, whether humans could be causing any of it, and whether we can or should try and do anything about it.
October 21st, 2009 at 10:05 am
How would you enforce something that isn’t written down with them there in our parliament?
October 21st, 2009 at 10:13 am
grumpyoldhori, i’m not clicking on that at work – you sure it isn’t a hoax?
October 21st, 2009 at 10:18 am
@Colonel Masters: the simple fact that Geoff Palmer could insert his BORA demonstrates convincingly that it wasn’t ‘really great’ after all. A solid constitution (and I agree there aren’t many of them around) would not allow such an exercise, nor about 75% of the legislation that gets passed here on a daily basis.
October 21st, 2009 at 10:23 am
No hoax Stephen and a SFW mefi post with some background.
October 21st, 2009 at 10:49 am
cha reading it through, if it was my daughter who had been raped and badly injured I would have gone postal with the sods who decided that locking her in a container with no food nor water was a good idea.
Just how sick are those damn politicians in supporting that companies actions by voting against that bill.
October 21st, 2009 at 10:53 am
Not knowing him I still had respect for Judge Richard Goldstone for his decades of work in South Africa.
Then came his biased partial prejudged fact finding report on behalf of the UNHRC and with whom he worked closely Human Rights watch for info on the ground.
Robert Bernstein the founder of Human Rights Watch has written an opinion piece in the NYTimes castigating HRW and Goldstone for failing the 350 million people in Arab and particularly Iranian lands. What’s particularly satisfying reading this is his credentials are impeccable even to the lefties.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/20/opinion/20bernstein.html?_r=1
October 21st, 2009 at 10:57 am
“And that was really great. Trouble is, that stupid old fool Sir Geoffrey Palmer tampered with it and stuffed in his blasted Bill of Rights Act. Thin end of the wedge and a bad precedent. Now any nutjob with a barrow to push can start playing around with constitutional matters.”
I think the insertion of the “principles of the Treaty of Waitangi” clause into the SOE bill and subsequent judicial activism has a lot to answer for as well.
October 21st, 2009 at 11:03 am
I can’t wait for the Maori seats to be scrapped and every bit of law cleaned from racist inclusions benefiting one ethnos over any others in NZ.
October 21st, 2009 at 11:22 am
We do have a constitution but it is not written into a single document. The main body is in the Statutes of Westminster.
While the idea of a written constitution has appeal for those of us who believe we need restraints on the powers of Government that is unlikely to be realised in NZ at this time. Magna Carta was the first such document and the US Constitution is one of the most recent and best known.
If you read the US constitution, including the amendments, it clearly declares the basic freedoms of the people and the whole document focuses on what Government may not do. Unfortunately, the US founding fathers are not around to write a similar document for us today.
I am reasonably certain that any Constitution written in NZ today would be a document establishing people rights to goods and services to be funded by other people. It would declare a right to a house, to a job, to a basic minimum income , to a pension, to health care, and to a 100% pure environment. There would be no statement about rights to private property. OR of our right to the pursuit of happiness. Even if there were such statements the courts would soon overturn them. Look what happened to the RMA.
October 21st, 2009 at 11:24 am
The sadness is you may well be correct Owen.
October 21st, 2009 at 11:31 am
The Colonel (9.52 post) and Owen (11.22) are spot on about our constitutional arrangement.
However, can I break a new topic for a minute….
Interesting action may be on the cards for Christchurch Airport, and the MSM as is often the case, appears to be asleep. Change brewing might include Bro. Key’s Government delivering a slice of the airport to Ngai Tahu, and property developers getting a windfall from relaxed airport noise and operating restrictions.
Christchurch International Airport Ltd is a substantial business. Assets total $745,000,000 and profit and after-tax profit in the latest year was more than $14,000,000. The airport was voted NZ Airport of the Year for 2009.
The airport is three-quarters owned by Christchurch City, and one quarter owned by the Government, with that quarter under Ngai Tahu’s right in perpetuity to first and second options to buy Crown property in the South Island. (I think Attorney-General and Treaty Negotiations Minister Chris Finlayson in an earlier private role helped negotiate this on Ngai Tahu’s behalf.)
1. The Government has just appointed Christchurch tycoon George Gould as one of its nominee directors on the board of Christchurch Airport. National has its own favourites for such State directorships, just as Labour does. However, Gould is an interesting case. He is a hard-nosed, successful financier, who has left some small shareholders in public companies he has dominated feeling short changed, though he has made good gains for other small shareholders. Ahareholders who asked questions as public companies sometimes got short shrift.
2. Christchurch Airport has a new chief executive, Jim Boult, a Wakatipu-domiciled entrepreneur who has been active in property development there, and still has property investments. Boult has a strong business background, and he will benefit the airport by developing more of its substantial land holdings.
3. Some property speculators on the edge of Christchurch have been unhappy with airport-based restrictions on land use, based on protecting airport growth and the airport being hampered in hours it can operate and other effects of noise complaints. These speculators are reportedly happier with the airport regime under Boult.
4. Christchurch’s relatively new chief executive Tony Marryat(who today, ratepayers learned has just received a 22 per cent pay rise), gets an easy ride from one of the weakest councils ever to run the city. Under him and the lightweight mayor, Bob Parker (a TV personality of yesteryear), Christchurch City provided a sweetheart deal to troubled property developer Dave Henderson – an ACT backer in Christchurch.
Put these together and you get the picture of Bro. Key delivering a chunk of Christchurch’s prime business asset to Ngai Tahu, and property development surging on the north and north-western sides of Christchurch, near the airport.
The remaining question is what’s in it for George Gould? Why would such a busy go-getter agree to serve on a publicly owned corporation’s board? He can make much better money per hour in his other businesses.
October 21st, 2009 at 11:53 am
For all you action types out there, yet another US rightest hawk warning.
Sobering reading.
http://www.americanthinker.com/printpage/?url=http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/10/lose_afghanistan_lose_pakistan.html
October 21st, 2009 at 12:07 pm
The whole AfPak situation is sobering. That American Thinks that “there is no substitute for successful preemption. ” It’s a bit late for preemption in AfPak though, they let things slip while they were busy preempting somewhere else.
The harsh reality is that AfPak may never be solvable by force (ask the Russians and the families of the million dead from that preemption), and it may be far from ready for democracy. It will never be win or lose, it will likely end up being an extracation with as little damage and as much pride as possible.
October 21st, 2009 at 12:10 pm
@Owen: of course, and hence my remark about the proper process for establishing a sound constitution.
October 21st, 2009 at 12:13 pm
Hello All!
The debate about a Constitution or how the electoral system works or doesn’t
will all be pointless blah blah once that “Climate Change’ treaty is signed in
Copenhagen in December.
People would do well to wake up! to what is going on, and fast.
Lord Christopher Monkton explains in this speech to the Minnesota Free Market Institute.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stij8sUybx0
At the moment we still have some say in our lives with the New Zealand Corporate policy
still being developed here, mostly by us. (Local Bankers)
This will change once this treaty is ratified.
Then all our govt. will be doing is administering the policies of the UN/IMF.
We will get to keep Parliament so that the population stays with
the illusion of living in a democracy and having representation in govt.
Sparky
October 21st, 2009 at 12:55 pm
There’s a funedmental conceptual difference between treaty and consitution Not. I thought a dictionary definition might help understand this.
October 21st, 2009 at 1:08 pm
Yes Sparky that same fair minded UN that spawned this lot as well, all from a subcommittee of an committee.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704500604574480932924540724.html
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/oct/19/the-un-sides-with-terrorists/
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/editorials/un_show_trial_zERckschijasm8D6ntL1GL
http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/story.html?id=2104171
Oh we have so much to look forward to as a little country on the edge of the world being advised by the experts how to run our affairs and told what to do all in the name of climate science but really marxism.
Tell me did I vote for a centre right govt to enable all this?
October 21st, 2009 at 1:43 pm
I haven’t seen anyone make a rational case that links climate change to marxism. It just seems to be climate change bad, marxism bad, so climate change must be marxism.
October 21st, 2009 at 2:17 pm
@sparkyspitz 12:13 pm
Oh dear, a link to supercrank Monckton!
And I thought I’d seen all here. Guess it will be Walt Brown next.
October 21st, 2009 at 2:17 pm
MikeNZ @ 10.53am
http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2009/10/20/why-we-report-open-societies
Human Rights Watch response to Bernstein.
It was well known in Bernstein’s days that HRW avoided commenting on Israel.
Just to address a couple of points or not touched on by HRW’s response:
1. Israel, by it’s own actions, is turning itself into a pariah state. Blaming people of conscience for Israel’s own failings is simply deflection.
2. More deflection by pointing the finger at surrounding states. Yes, human rights abuses abound in those states too, mainly with the active complicity, even financing, by the US and Israel. How does this excuse Israel’s human rights abuses?
3. In the latest attacks on Gaza and Lebanon, Hamas and Hezbollah did not “choose” to wage war. Israel was the clear aggressor in both cases. In Gaza, Hamas has only a desert and a city in which to fight. No doubt Israel would be very happy if Hamas members voluntarily stood in the desert providing target shooting for Israel’s oh-so-brave IDF. In Lebanon, Hezbollah fought the IDF to a standstill in the hilly and wooded border area between the Litani River and Israel’s northern border, while Israel bombed Lebanon’s infrastructure to smithereens, killing hundreds of civilians, many of whom would have been totally opposed to Hezbollah.
And it’s worth remembering that Hezbollah and Hamas only sprung up in response to Israel’s brutal occupations of Lebanon and the Palestinian territories.
3. Bernstein says: “Nevertheless, there is a difference between wrongs committed in self-defense and those perpetrated intentionally.”
But this is simply not true under international law, otherwise Hamas would have a ready made defence to what ever it has done since it was formed, in 1987, under Israeli occupation. Even recently, in 2006, Israel imposed a blockade on Gaza. A blockade, in international law, is an act of war, and was Israel’s excuse for the 1967 war. Consistency is just too much to hope for.
4. Regardless of the risible propaganda by Israel that it “did more to safeguard the rights of civilians in a combat zone than any other army in the history of warfare” the facts tell the opposite story. Gaza was a closed off shooting gallery, and almost all usually safe havens were bombed, including UN facilities. Even Israel’s soldiers report that their orders were that every person was a military target. Many, to their credit, objected to that order.
And completely missing in the Bernstein narrative is any acknowledgment of the cause of the conflict. I mean the over-arching conflict.
What is it?
It is the complete denial to Palestinians, since as early as the 1920s, of the basic human right of self-determination. And every other human right into the bargain.
But that’s the last thing Israel’s propagandists want you to think about.
If you go to this link http://www.palestine-studies.org/enakba/index.html and look for ” All that remains” and click on “click here” Appendix II gives the run up to 1948. Look especially for ongonig denial of Palestinian rights in favour of European Jewish immigrants.
None of this can be undone, but perhaps we can hope for this: http://www.presstv.com/detail.aspx?id=88491§ionid=351020202
October 21st, 2009 at 2:20 pm
Grumpyoldhori
You either left this bit out on purpose or you didn’t read the blog properly.
” This website is (mostly) satire. Its creators do not endorse r*pe nor do they oppose anti-r*pe legislation.”
You can find the disclaimer at the end of the page you linked to.
You will recall the satire DPF posted about the Greens and abortion some weeks back. While that exercised a great many people, this website is also satirical – whether you agree with the subject matter (for either DPFs post or your linked website) or not ( and I don’t myself regarding either subject). You surely don’t think Republicans equate such an atrocious act to something as inane as buttering their toast and in doing so treat it in such a light hearted manner?
October 21st, 2009 at 3:17 pm
the ministry for the environment has ranked all our rivers..for pollution..
and down where bloody-hands-bob abuses/exploits his cows..
guess what..?
it’s the dirtiest..
take a bow..!..bloody-hands-bob..!..)
“..So which rivers fare the worst?
Well, the Manawatu River stands out by featuring in the bottom ten of all three tables.
In fact the whole Manawatu-Wanganui region does pretty badly ..
.. with three sites in the bottom ten for recreational water quality..”
phil(whoar.co.nz)
October 21st, 2009 at 4:03 pm
Sarkozygroupie are you a kiwi ? because any damn kiwi worth his or her’s salt would bloody well know it is satire without needed a cricket bat on the side of the head.
So which country are you posting from ?
October 21st, 2009 at 4:05 pm
oh joy..!
http://whoar.co.nz/2009/countries-with-the-biggest-gaps-between-rich-and-poor-were-number-six-new-zealand-had-the-biggest-rise-in-inequality-among-member-nations-in-the-two-decades-starting-in-the-mid-1980s/
another dubious top ten honour for ‘lil ol’ new zealand..)
“..No. 6 New Zealand
Gini score: 36.2
GDP 2007 (US$ billions): 135.7
Share of income or expenditure (%)
Poorest 10%: 2.2
Richest 10%: 27.8
Ratio of income or expenditure, share of top 10% to lowest 10%: 12.5
According to the OECD, New Zealand had the biggest rise in inequality among member nations in the two decades starting in the mid-1980s.
The country’s economy emerged from recession in the second quarter, but with growth of just 0.1% ..
.. the central bank is likely to keep interest rates low until well into 2010.”..
(haven’t they done well?..national and labour..?..)
that fact again..?
“..According to the OECD, New Zealand had the biggest rise in inequality among member nations in the two decades starting in the mid-1980s..”
everyone got that etched into the brain..?
now..as a starting point..
how to undo that..?
or..are we all ‘happy’ with that..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
October 21st, 2009 at 4:19 pm
One could also interpret it as:
Gini score: 36.2
GDP 2007 (US$ billions): 135.7
Share of income or expenditure (%)
Contribution to GDP by their own hard work and productivity: Poorest 10%: 2.2
Contribution to GDP by their own hard work and productivity: Richest 10%: 27.8
Ratio of income or expenditure, share of top 10% to lowest 10%: 12.5
October 21st, 2009 at 5:28 pm
Just wondering if General Debate is off to bed early tonight so he’s up with sun in the morning?
October 21st, 2009 at 5:31 pm
cha @ 9.27 am
A textbook example of how to make fictitious characters seem real.
October 21st, 2009 at 5:33 pm
“According to the OECD, New Zealand had the biggest rise in inequality among member nations in the two decades starting in the mid-1980s.”
the bottom of the barrel dragging us down the toilet again – and what can you do to improve that phool? – start by getting a paid job perhaps
October 21st, 2009 at 6:45 pm
Stupiddumbtwat bawwwwwwwwwwwws about conservatives, Luc blames Israel for everything bad, phool thinks the hardcore enviro-luddite Jensen talks sense and Peteypoos doesn’t understand that redistribution of wealth rather than practical solutions are the only things being suggested by enviro-Communist groups such as Greenpeace. Just another day on General Debate.
October 21st, 2009 at 7:31 pm
I resent that little misallusion to my good name, hurfy. What’s facts got to do with blame? Facts are neutral. I just create a “no spin zone” to allow the desert to bloom, the facts to flourish, parsing the propaganda, shining a beacon on the bombast. Remember, the “spin” stops here!
Now then, on a completely different matter, why don’t we hear cries of the dog wagging the tail every time Rodney opens his bombastic mouth like we used to when Helen was the boss and MeFirst the tail? Why does Rod remind me so much of Piggy (peace be upon him)?
October 21st, 2009 at 8:05 pm
Muddy sediment from the bottom of the lake, some of it 200,000 years old, shows that Baffin Island, one of the most inhospitable places on Earth ..
..I’ll shout you a one way ticket philwhore…
October 21st, 2009 at 8:06 pm
Tax returns could be scrapped under radical new proposal
* Exclusive by Steve Lewis
* From: The Daily Telegraph
* October 21, 2009 12:00AM
TREASURY boss … Ken Henry who has led the review of Australia’s tax system. Source: HWT Image Library
AUSTRALIA’S tax system will be overhauled and refunds simplified under a blueprint being proposed by Treasury boss Ken Henry.
Dr Henry’s reforms would result in taxpayers receiving a one-page summary from the Australian Tax Office which would include a standard “deduction” for necessary work expenses as well as salary details.
If taxpayers were happy with the ATO’s calculation, they would tick the form and lodge it via the internet – and wait for their refund.
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/money/money-matters/tax-returns-could-be-scrapped-under-radical-new-proposal/story-fn300aev-1225788998686
October 21st, 2009 at 8:12 pm
LUC
The cap fits, wear it.
October 21st, 2009 at 8:19 pm
Ah, Mike, did you check the HRW response to Bernstein, or is that just a stretch too far for you?
October 21st, 2009 at 8:50 pm
I see that Claire Curran and another commenter have disagreed with `Intolerent Trevor’ over at Red Alert. I watch with interest to see if they will be edited, warned or banned as happens to most people who disagree with him.
October 21st, 2009 at 8:55 pm
yes Luc
I have read other reports on him and the HRW.
I don’t just read Hudson, Cato and Rutherford Institutes
October 21st, 2009 at 9:18 pm
Lol. They’re confident that they’re overtaxing so many workers that there are efficiencies to be gained by automating the returns process.
October 21st, 2009 at 9:23 pm
Luc Hansen says “Remember, the “spin” stops here!”
Great! So if we look at your previous post I can pick out a few simple spins.
“Israel, by it’s own actions, is turning itself into a pariah state.”
This is hardly a fact, but a inferred conclusion. With a few weasel words. Yet it is at the start of the piece there are no facts to support yet. Verdict: Spin!
“Israel was the clear aggressor in both cases.”
Hang on, in Lebanon, Hezbollah launched a daring raid into Israel. Hamas started launching Grad and Katyusha rockets that put hundreds of thousands of civilians in danger. If there is any assertion as to who the agressor is, it is certainly not “clear”. Verdict: Spin!
“almost all usually safe havens were bombed, including UN facilities.”
Are you referring to the UN coumpound, which the UN then said was not bombed or targeted? Well known SPIN!
“It is the complete denial to Palestinians, since as early as the 1920s, of the basic human right of self-determination. And every other human right into the bargain.”
The cause of the conflict? How many rounds of peace talks have to be nixed? Why can’t there be states side by side? What happened to tolerance??
Look mate – you don’t like Israel. That’s clear. But don’t try and get us to believe that you are the sole source of fact when you are just sprouting the same sort of propaganda you accuse others of.
Until there is tolerance, understanding and dialogue between both sides, nothing is going to happen. And attitudes like yours are just as bad as the attitudes you criticise.
October 21st, 2009 at 9:46 pm
Starting tonight on the Publicly funded ABC TV:
John Safran’s Race Relations
http://www.abc.net.au/tv/guide/netw/200910/programs/LE0803V001D2009-10-21T213000.htm
I’m not sure if his other work made it to NZ – (and this is supposed to be the most controversial).. but I will be watching!
October 21st, 2009 at 9:47 pm
TimG_Oz: re 9:23pm – Water, meet duck’s back!
October 21st, 2009 at 10:33 pm
Tim. I’m happy to explore each of your points further with you. But first, can you tell me this: how does one dislike a country? How can one dislike a country?
Back in the days the the USSR was our big bogeyman, I used to say that if we had dinner with a Russian family we would all have a fine time. I think the same about the people of Israel. And same for Palestinians. As I have said before, I believe the non-Palestinian citizens of Israel, like the Palestinians of the OPT, are poorly served by their leaders.
But my main point always is this: Palestinians were and are denied the No 1 right granted to European Jews. The right of self-determination. This is the original and ongoing injustice.
It is also, if you think about it, the same principle behind our treaty settlement process. We are now compensating Maori for our failure to extend this right to them, even after signing a treaty guaranteeing this right.
But let me take a wild guess – you guys don’t go for that either right?
October 21st, 2009 at 10:39 pm
Luc – The basic point is this: Don’t spout your opinions as facts, and then try to claim some kind of high ground over others.
Have you been there? I’m guessing no.
So please don’t try to put yourself out there as some all knowing expert, when clearly, you are not.
Under a 2 state solution, both parties would be granted the right to Self Determination. Each party will need to make concessions.
This is all irrellevant if the individual people on both sides don’t try to see things from each other’s view point. If you could see what a tangle of complex cultures are involved you would realise that it’s not a simple thing….
October 21st, 2009 at 10:49 pm
Biggest non-controversy ever.
October 21st, 2009 at 11:07 pm
HD Just watched it.
Property rights, whomever owns the meeting can charge what they like for entrance just like any other meeting.
Goff is a goof and he has no shame.
October 21st, 2009 at 11:32 pm
Hey
Just found this neat collection of slides of Sarah Palin
http://www.newsday.com/long-island/politics/sarah-palin-photos-then-and-now-1.152609?image=28
shit I’d much rather look at her than OB1
October 21st, 2009 at 11:33 pm
There you go again Tim…just FYI my “spin” comments were intended as self satire…obviously far too subtle for you. By all means, stick to Safran.
This is actually a site for spouting opinions, isn’t it? What are you presenting? Even when you are busy trying to shout me down?
And this is a doozey: “Under a 2 state solution, both parties would be granted the right to Self Determination. Each party will need to make concessions.”
But this imperious, supposedly slam dunk, definitive statement of so-called facts fails when confronted with reality.
1. Both sides granted the right of self determination. Sort of begs the question, why now and not in 1948 or earlier, say 1920s? And do you mean Palestinians can vote to reclaim their land, if they so wish? I suspect not.
2. Each party will need to make concessions. Palestinians currently occupy much less than even the 22% of historic Palestine originally on their side of the Green Line. How much more compromise do you ask of them?
3. The two state solution. What two state solution? The so-called settlements and checkpoints and road blockages have forced Palestinians into almost non-contiguous bantustans, an unviable “state.” And the Israeli government is on record as according Palestinians only a sort of autonomy, an occupation by remote control. By the way, UNSC Res 242 calls for a negotiated settlement to the refugee issue and Israel has always steadfastly refused to even open negotiations on that topic. Another compromise required from Palestinians?
4. The final refuge for a bankrupt position: “complex.” Bullshit. International law is squarely on the side of Palestinian rights. Only the US self-interest and its veto is preventing the commonsense, legally and morally correct solution. And wankers here try to say the US is not an imperial power!
5. The arguments you and others here deploy are eerily similar to those the white South Africans used to justify apartheid, which is essentially what the Palestinians are subjected to.
It’s getting late, but check back here tomorrow and I will answer your earlier points.
October 21st, 2009 at 11:36 pm
Aye Luc, lottsa fun tho.
October 21st, 2009 at 11:38 pm
cha: green karma from me for that!
October 21st, 2009 at 11:42 pm
Smirking
October 22nd, 2009 at 12:08 am
Surprise, Otwat wants a stronger Yurpan Onion.
Considering his cack-handed handling of wanting Turkey in the EU (double surprise), perhaps he should keep his mouth shut on such affairs.
October 22nd, 2009 at 6:37 am
Suns up. Wgtn snoozes.
Anyone notice how those that stay out late to blog Gen debate tend to go on about mindless stuff?
October 22nd, 2009 at 7:01 am
Why we need GD early.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10604648
Mr Key later said only a limited amount of money was available and trade-offs had to be made, including in wage negotiations.
“If wage rounds are high, ultimately it means the government can employ fewer people, or some people are going to miss out. And I think that’s something that’s worthy of consideration.”
Labour’s education spokesman, Trevor Mallard, said it was “outrageous” to propose setting the education groups against each other.
“You don’t take money off one group of people in a workforce to pay another.
So here we Have Trev telling us that the Govt. shouldn’t take money off one group of people in a workforce to pay another.
Well excuse me. What outright hypocrisy. Labour and this Govt and most of those before have been doing this since taxation began. Trev needs reminding about stuff like WFF, Labour party theft of our tax funds by retrospective legislation and we could post all day about this.
Taxation is about taking someone else’s money from the workplace to give to someone else.
Hey DPF, when you arise from your early morning slumber lets have a good post on this subject, if for no reason but to castigate Trev for his stupid statement.
October 22nd, 2009 at 7:04 am
Gees the morning gets worse. About time to cancel the RWC. ITs distracting the govt form doing what needs to be done and its wasting taxpayers money all over again. I refuse to contribute to it and will not be paying tax to feed this debacle.
McCully and IRB square off over fern
4:00AM Thursday Oct 22, 2009
New Zealand’s silver fern emblem is at the centre of a battle between the government and the International Rugby Board that has thrown the World Cup’s volunteer programme into disarray.
Rugby World Cup Minister Murray McCully is insisting the silver fern be added to the volunteers’ uniforms, with the IRB’s logo.
But the IRB is resisting because of the fern’s strong association with the All Blacks and the bias this would create if it were worn by the thousands of New Zealanders expected to volunteer.
It is understood the IRB also feels the fern is not consistent with the “look and feel” of the already-decided tournament branding.
The volunteer programme is a vital part of the government’s plan for “a nation of four million hosts”.
October 22nd, 2009 at 8:05 am
I would wear the Silver Fern anyway if i were a volunteer.
Sod the IRB we’re Kiwis not chickens.
I’ve got one on my coats lapel, so would use that one.
Wowsers
October 22nd, 2009 at 8:07 am
Quote of the year from mallard:
Labour’s education spokesman, Trevor Mallard, said it was “outrageous” to propose setting the education groups against each other.
“You don’t take money off one group of people in a workforce to pay another. This is a priority area and in the end the Government has to find the cash for it.”
The last paragraph is priceless