This entry was posted
on Wednesday, January 5th, 2011 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.
“… Research showed that people travelling an average of 1-2kmh slower over their journey could cut the road toll by 3 per cent to 5 per cent. …”
– Go-slow helps keep holiday road toll down KIRAN CHUG – The Dominion Post – http://www.stuff.co.nz
Oh, really?
Surely 10 -20 kmh slower. But hardly any point in the whole article if the one crucial piece of information is up the wop.
wankers who come with such statements need to be challenged and outed as bullshit artists .. that line about reducing deaths by 2-3% is pure fantasy.
Reducing the max speed on the motor/highways to say 104kph will save no lives and will not slow the law breakers down.
When you hear about people caught going 150kph (plus) it is obvious they couldn’t care less about the rules .. same with people driving pissed.
We have among us 1,000′s of people who ignore road rules now, what makes people think a change will make a difference to them.
It’s the same with drinking. We have very strict rules about selling booze to both under-age people and those already drunk but the sellers are obviouly ignoring these strict rules that carry big fines. Don’t change the laws, inforce the ones we have now.
Nice article from Chris De Freitas. And credit to the Herald for printing it instead of the usual rubbish from the alarmists. Its just amazing our Govt (and others) are so quick to Tax us for something which has not been proved and is all based on a scenario modelling a hypothesis! No actual evidence exists proving this positive amplification which is supposed to occur between CO2 and Water vapour.
“Debate focuses on climate feedbacks that may or may not suppress, perpetuate or amplify an initial change caused by increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases. A doubling of carbon dioxide, by itself, adds only about one degree Celsius to greenhouse warming. Computer climate models project more warming because the modellers build in feedbacks from water vapour and clouds that amplify the initial change. These are the so called positive feedbacks. For example, higher temperature would mean more evaporation globally, which in turn means more heat-trapping water vapour is put into the atmosphere leading to even higher temperatures.
On the other hand, negative feedbacks might prevail. For example, more water vapour in the atmosphere could lead to greater cloud cover. Clouds reflect the heat from the Sun and cool the Earth, offsetting the initial rise in global temperature.
The role of negative feedback processes are played down by global warming alarmists, whereas sceptics point to the four-billion-year-old global climate record that shows runaway global cooling or warming has never occurred because negative feedbacks regulate the global climate system.”
… research shows that if there was 1-2% less research, there would be 5% less bullshit …
Yvette, I suspect it really is meant to be 1-2km/h; no doubt arrived at by some fuckwitted averaging of travelling speeds. The same bullshit stats can likely be concocted in relation to drink driving – ‘research has shown that if people drank 1-2% less …’
It’s no bloody wonder the MSD has overspent it’s budget by a BILLION dollars if this is the sort of thnking being employed there. A sickness benefit for Cannabis Addiction? Yet he get’s grant for fencing a swiming pool at “One of his houses”.
When the Chinese centrally planned economy collapses, later this year, it will take out the Australia property bubble and NZ gets crushed as well. It is just a matter of when.
Stagflation well under way in China now. It is game over.
National must not bail out the Aussie banking subsidiaries here. Let the bad banks go under.
I agree. The story about benefit money being paid to the gangster Harris is beyond belief.
No wonder there is such a large number of idlers, bludgers, and parasites with ample time on their hands to plan and commit crimes while the rest of the population pay taxes to support the scum.
Oh really? So, your economics degree, did you shake corn flakes or ricies off it as you took it out of the box? Chicken Little is not a guru, you should know that.
Simon Far too soon to write off China. I’d wait a century or two.
And thank the lord for our Aussie banks. They protected us from the worst. Letting ‘bad banks’ go under doesn’t make any sense at all in our small economy.
Surely this moronic anti-Aussie rubbish is well past its use by. We would be a wreck without them and our standard of living would plummet.
The 1-2% speed thing has been used before.
Remember in the early ’00s when anything that moved got a ticket ,and ACC were a part of that as it seems some of the police budget was coming from them! The 105 k ph threat was bandied about then too.
So it’s come again. This is policing by numbers. It’s not about targetting dangerous drivers ,it’s about targets.
That’s what the journalist should be writing about instead of being a public relations broadcaster for Paula Rose.
If 1kph makes you a dangerous driver liable to cause the death toll to go up it justifies the govt and police management telling their officers to sit in quiet areas issuing tickets to all and sundry,no discretion required like the last time around.
This isn’t just another holiday road toll story it’s about the exercise of power,citizens rights and the relationship between the two.
Talking about moronic and journalists, how often are they going to bemoan the fact that fizzy drinks are cheaper than milk? Haven’t they worked it out yet that one is almost a complete food produced to high standards while the other is no more than sugar and water. And has to be cheap to sell.
Actually, wouldn’t it be news if sugary drinks were dearer than milk?
Bugger off,milk is bad for our rivers, it makes farmers rich and helps this country earn export dollars, we can’t have that!
Sugary drinks make people fat,depressed and disabled and increases hospitalisations and dependence on the state.
So vote Green for an impoverished future. Coming soon to an angry dole queue near you.
RNZ news has reported the 1st fatality of the year from a police pursuit. Wrong, it’s from a thief fleeing the police. The bloody MSM again.
This Darwinian has brought the “holiday”road toll to 13, the same as last years. So the police action this year made no difference to the toll. Well done Paula. There goes the bonus.
I just heard on talkback about Key’s use of an Air Force place like the US President. Does anyone know if he used an Air Force plane to holiday in Hawaii?
ISLAMABAD – The governor of Pakistan’s most dominant province was shot and killed Tuesday by a bodyguard who authorities said was angry about his opposition to blasphemy laws carrying the death sentence for insulting the Muslim faith.
Punjab Gov. Salman Taseer, regarded as a moderate voice in a country increasingly beset by zealotry, was a close ally of U.S.-backed President Asif Ali Zardari. He is the highest-profile Pakistani political figure to be assassinated since former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto three years ago, and his death underscores the growing danger in this country to those who dare challenge the demands of Islamist extremists.
Taseer was riddled by gunshots while walking to his car after an afternoon meal at Kohsar Market, a shopping center in Is
lamabad popular with Westerners and wealthy Pakistanis. He was shot in the back, said Shaukat Kayani, a doctor at Poly Clinic Hospital.
Initial reports indicated the suspected gunman, a police commando guarding Taseer, unloaded up to 26 rounds from a Kalashnikov automatic rifle. The gunman could have fired that number of rounds in a matter of seconds.
[...]
People accused of blasphemy are often killed by extremists or spend significant amounts of time behind bars. In some cases, the charges border on the ridiculous: A man was recently held because he threw away a business card of someone whose first name is Muhammad.
The laws came under renewed international scrutiny late last year when a 45-year-old Christian woman, Asia Bibi, was sentenced to death for allegedly insulting Islam’s Prophet Muhammad.
Taseer called for granting Bibi a pardon, a stance that earned him death threats from Islamists.
[...]
Notice, too, that the Muslim bodyguard who was entrusted with protecting Punjab Gov. Salman Taseer’s life murdered him by shooting him in the back. Are all these murderous Islamic scum such cowards?!
No doubt this piece of human excrement would have been regarded by Reid (and all those who peddle the “Moderate Muslim” myth) as a ‘Moderate’ … right up to the time when he shot his boss in the back.
I’ve said it before, and no doubt I’ll have to say it again – They’re all ‘Moderates’ right up to the time they murder someone or strap on a bomb-pack. When are we in the West going to realise the threat Islam represents to our freedoms and liberties – to our very civilisation?!
No doubt this piece of human excrement would have been regarded by Reid (and all those who peddle the “Moderate Muslim” myth) as a ‘Moderate’ … right up to the time when he shot his boss in the back.
I’ve said it before, and no doubt I’ll have to say it again – They’re all ‘Moderates’ right up to the time they murder someone or strap on a bomb-pack. When are we in the West going to realise the threat Islam represents to our freedoms and liberties – to our very civilisation?!
Kris, a tiny minority of Muslims commit murder. You seem to be complaining that we should consider the overwhelming majority of Muslims who don’t commit murder as murderers-in-waiting.
A tiny minority of Christians commit murder. Shall we consider the overwhelming of Christians who don’t commit murder as murderers-in-waiting?
Religion and everyday life are deeply intertwined on the sub Continent. Mrs Gandhi was murdered by her Sikh body guard.Gandhi himself was murdered by a Hindu extremist over the Pakistan partition.
# ciaron (352) Says:
January 5th, 2011 at 12:30 pm
What about Salman Taseer? Was he not a Muslim?
I’d say his murderer thought not.
The tweets days before his murder by Salman Taseer:
“It doesn’t bother me. Who the hell are these illiterare maulvis to decide to whether i’m a Muslim or not?”
and
“Tomorrow mullahs r demonstrating against me…Thousands of beards screaming 4 my head.What a great feeling!”
Indeed an incredibly couragous man (and a muslim) who dared to stand up against irrationality, intolerance and religious fanatics.
A shame that his name has to be smeared by other religious fanatics like Kris K for their own version of irrationality and intolerance.
To Chuck at 12.16.
You are probably talking about the funding provided for a limited amount of flying on Air Force planes. It has been in place at least since Rob Muldoon’s day.
The last PM (remember her name, Helen I think) certainly used private, tax payer paid, planes quite a lot. Don’t you remember How she showed her amazing calmness and bravery when the door “came open” in flight. At least that was the story.
I very much doubt that Key went on holiday on one though. The money is not provided for that.
It was Helen Clark’s government that insisted on the purchase of these Aircraft, if I remember correctly. They were semi-jokingly referred to by the maintenance crews in the RNZAF as “Broomstick One” and Broomstick Two”.
John Key and his family would have no doubt flown commercially, and at his own expense.
Have a read of the later portions of the Koran and Hadiths and get back to me, Ryan.
Have a look at the reality of 1.5 billion Muslims in the world almost completely going about their lives without committing violent crimes. The reality of Muslims defies your literal interpretation of the Qu’ran just as the reality of Christians defies anti-Christians’ literal interpretation of the Bible.
I have a certain amount of sympathy with Ann Coulter’s view:
“We should invade their countries, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity.”
And just how are you any differnt to Islamist then? Turns out, not at all.
You share the same values, goals and ideals, just a different book.
The danger to our liberties and freedoms are people like you, religiously blinded fanatics, unable to hold a rational thought, no matter what religion they choose to adhere to.
The ryan spouls and eszets are amazing ,they seem to wait around for a chance to jump in to defend Islam AND to attack Christianity/the west. If they’re Muslim fine, if atheist then stupid ,for the very people they defend will be happy to slit their throats to the cries of “Allah akbar”
Sure there are Christian murderers but what is the motivation,not Christianity.
There are Muslim murderers too,Twin Towers,night clubs ,Coptic churches ,synagogues,airplanes,mosques of unislamic islamic sects,cartoonists ,wives ,daughters ,hotels,buses ,trains,airports etc etc etc and the motivation is………
Note this article from Fisk. He mentions Christians w/o justification. The culprits are largely ,yep Muslim….what is it about these people?
I’m not attacking Christianity, I’m attacking double standards. As I said, it’s unfair to judge the reality of Christians (generally not murderers) by literally interpreting the Bible (anti-Christians claiming it’s a violent text).
There are Christians who murder for Christianity, such as the Lord’s Resistance Army in Uganda, or the occasional beating to death of a gay person in the US. But it would not be fair to point to such people and say, “All Christians are murderers, some just haven’t murdered yet.”
Similarly, it’s not fair to point to that very tiny minority of Muslims who commit violent crimes and say the same of all Muslims – that they are guilty without having actually done anything, and incapable of proving themselves innocent.
The reality is that Muslims are constantly plotting to blow crap up in just about every western country.
Plots are constantly being uncovered.
In addition, print anything negative about them and you must fear for your life.
Recently , a bunch of muslims were arrested for plotting to slaughter the entire staff of the Danish newspaper that published a cartoon offensive to muslims.
Even if only 1 in 1000 muslims are militant, then that still means there are 1.5 million muslims who wish to blow shit up.
No sane Christian would argue the LRA are legitimately Christian any more than the Rev Jones in South America was. These people misuse the name of Christianity for their own ends.
In Islam ,unfortunately there is no shortage of theological or political leadership willing to justify violence agaist any and all comers seen as an enemy ,and on the flimsiest of grounds…….put the words ayatollah,fatwa,Iran and Salman Rushdie into the same sentence please and discuss.
After you justify this fatwa ,then discuss “even handedness”.
Then consider the murder of Theo van Gogh and the threats to Ayaan Hirsi Ali
and the planned attack on the Danish cartoon newspaper.
All these examples are of Islamic even handedness,insult Mohammed or Islam and you will die. Please defend these actions in and of themselves w/o introducing the actions of others .
Really? It looks to me like you and eszett are conflating the very tiny minority of Muslims who commit murder and other crimes in the name of their religion with the tiny, tiny, tiny, tiny minority of Christians who commit crime in the name of their religion. In practical terms that’s very much a double standard.
Moreover, it seems like a very rationalised one. After all, you two can be quite comfortable sticking it to the likes of Kris K in public. No matter what you say, he and his ilk are not going to be calling you racists or practicing lawfare by going on about your “hate-speech”, let alone beating you up or killing you.
The Lords Resistance Army? Really? Call me when they’ve established places of worship around the world and started flying planes into buildings while yelling Christ The Redeemer.
Until then I will, as an atheist, ignore the likes of Kris K and focus on the people you wish to ignore – Islamists.
Chuck Bird and Alwyn I suspect even if we mingy scrooges actually allowed our PM to fly in a crappy air force plane for a holiday (god forbid when we insist we pay only for holidays for MPs – no work allowed!), Key would much prefer the first class seats he can easily afford for him and his family.
I definitely would – just as I would take every chance to travel and holiday in privacy.
The latest pathetic gripe about Obama is that he took his kids out of school for their family holiday.
It’s time we allowed our public figures a private life and stopped holding them to a far higher standard than we expect of ourselves.
No sane Christian would argue the LRA are legitimately Christian any more than the Rev Jones in South America was. These people misuse the name of Christianity for their own ends.
In Islam ,unfortunately there is no shortage of theological or political leadership willing to justify violence agaist any and all comers seen as an enemy ,and on the flimsiest of grounds…….put the words ayatollah,fatwa,Iran and Salman Rushdie into the same sentence please and discuss.
In other words, there is no shortage of leaders willing to misuse the name of Islam for their own ends, just as the name of Christianity has been misused by people for their own ends.
After you justify this fatwa ,then discuss “even handedness”.
Then consider the murder of Theo van Gogh and the threats to Ayaan Hirsi Ali
and the planned attack on the Danish cartoon newspaper.
All these examples are of Islamic even handedness,insult Mohammed or Islam and you will die. Please defend these actions in and of themselves w/o introducing the actions of others .
Those were not examples of Islamic even-handedness. I do not defend those actions at all. I simply recognise that they are the actions of an extremely small minority of Muslims, and it is irrational and unfair to consider, on the basis of the actions of these few, all Muslims as murderers whether or not they have ever committed murder.
Even-handedness comes up when you consider that if the same standard was applied to Christians, the actions of a tiny minority would be cause to consider all Christians as murderers whether or not they’ve committed murder.
Really? It looks to me like you and eszett are conflating the very tiny minority of Muslims who commit murder and other crimes in the name of their religion with the tiny, tiny, tiny, tiny minority of Christians who commit crime in the name of their religion. In practical terms that’s very much a double standard.
Could be. Do you have numbers? How many Muslims have committed these violent crimes in the name of Islam? Divide that number by 1,500,000,000. That’s your proportion. It’s pretty small.
Moreover, it seems like a very rationalised one. After all, you two can be quite comfortable sticking it to the likes of Kris K in public. No matter what you say, he and his ilk are not going to be calling you racists or practicing lawfare by going on about your “hate-speech”, let alone beating you up or killing you.
I don’t generally stick it to Kris K. I just disagree with him on several things. If I see a Muslim saying things I disagree with here, I’ll call them on that too.
The Lords Resistance Army? Really? Call me when they’ve established places of worship around the world and started flying planes into buildings while yelling Christ The Redeemer.
Sorry, their murder, rape and use of child soldiers in the name of Christ isn’t a bad thing until they start exporting?
Until then I will, as an atheist, ignore the likes of Kris K and focus on the people you wish to ignore – Islamists.
I don’t ignore Islamic militants, nor do I wish to. I just don’t see them lurking behind the eyes of every law-abiding and non-violent Muslim citizen.
‘I don’t ignore Islamic militants, nor do I wish to. I just don’t see them lurking behind the eyes of every law-abiding and non-violent Muslim citizen.’
Well, you may not, Swiftman, but I was originally addressing Kris saying:
I’ve said it before, and no doubt I’ll have to say it again – They’re all ‘Moderates’ right up to the time they murder someone or strap on a bomb-pack. When are we in the West going to realise the threat Islam represents to our freedoms and liberties – to our very civilisation?!
To which I replied:
You seem to be complaining that we should consider the overwhelming majority of Muslims who don’t commit murder as murderers-in-waiting.
Which he didn’t deny.
I’m glad you don’t see all Muslims as murderers waiting to happen. Neither do I. I think the vast majority of Muslims in the world are just folk trying to work, live, and raise families like the rest of us.
I utterly condemn the violent acts of those few Muslims who do commit violent crimes, whether religiously motivated or not, as I utterly condemn all unnecessary violence.
Sorry, their murder, rape and use of child soldiers in the name of Christ isn’t a bad thing until they start exporting?
I did not realise that the point I was making cut so close to the bone that it required that sort of obtuse rhetoric in response.
Let’s try a different approach to see if we can get any further in mutual understanding. Assess the following in terms of being bad things:
– maniac holding a knife and standing in my kitchen door
– maniac holding automatic rifle and standing at my gate.
– maniac sitting in 1000Kg car bomb at the end of my street.
– maniac sitting in a ship moored in the harbour with an atomic bomb on board.
Hint: the correct answer is not they’re all bad That’s true – and also useless.
That’s very sobering reading, Kowtow.
One can only hope that the likes of Ryan and Eszett take the time to read it … and that they come to the realisation that this is Islam. They might also like to reflect on the persons of Christ and Mohammed, and realise that Christians model themselves on Christ and the New Testament (not the Old Testament, Ryan), while Muslims view Mohammed as their model of all that is ‘good’ – of course lets not forget Mohammed was a … MURDERING, LYING, DECEITFUL, THIEVING PEDOPHILE. And that ALL of his actions can be justified from the Koran and Hadiths.
The Bible tells Christians to “turn the other cheek”, while the Koran and Hadiths instruct Muslims to tear off the cheeks of their ‘enemies’ – to persue them and kill them.
So much for Ryan’s “attacking double standards”.
It would be laughable if it wasn’t so tragic …
I did not realise that the point I was making cut so close to the bone that it required that sort of obtuse rhetoric in response.
Yeah, couldn’t help myself.
Let’s try a different approach to see if we can get any further in mutual understanding. Assess the following in terms of being bad things:
– maniac holding a knife and standing in my kitchen door
– maniac holding automatic rifle and standing at my gate.
– maniac sitting in 1000Kg car bomb at the end of my street.
– maniac sitting in a ship moored in the harbour with an atomic bomb on board.
Hint: the correct answer is not they’re all bad That’s true – and also useless.
The last is worst, working back to the first as least bad.
But while the answer to your question may not be “they’re all bad”, it’s still true that they’re all bad, or at least that they’re all maniacs. And the point I was making was that while the Lord’s Resistance Army could certainly be worse (or at least, wider spread), they are still examples of people committing atrocities in the name of Christ – AND it would be unfair to tar all Christians with the same brush, or to accuse all Christians of being atrocity-committers waiting to happen.
And similarly, it is unfair to tar all 1.5 billion Muslims in the world with a brush dipped in the atrocities of the very few.
Not sure how that analogy works. Tar them with the brush dipped in the atrocities of the very few. I think it works. You see my point.
One can only hope that the likes of Ryan and Eszett take the time to read it … and that they come to the realisation that this is Islam. They might also like to reflect on the persons of Christ and Mohammed, and realise that Christians model themselves on Christ and the New Testament (not the Old Testament, Ryan), while Muslims view Mohammed as their model of all that is ‘good’ – of course lets not forget Mohammed was a … MURDERING, LYING, DECEITFUL, THIEVING PEDOPHILE. And that ALL of his actions can be justified from the Koran and Hadiths.
And yet the overwhelming majority of Muslims in the world are not murderous, deceitful, thieving or paedophilic. Again, as I said before, look at the reality of Muslims in the world, not your interpretation of their holy book. I say the same thing to anti-Christians – “look at all the perfectly nice Christians in the world, not the image you create in your head by your reading of the Bible.”
The Bible tells Christians to “turn the other cheek”, while the Koran and Hadiths instruct Muslims to tear off the cheeks of their ‘enemies’ – to persue them and kill them.
And the Bible (not the Old Testament, Kris) tells Christians that Jesus said, “I come not to bring peace, but to bring a sword.” That’s the kind of thing anti-Christians emphasise, even while you emphasise violent verses and Hadiths. My response is the same to you both: Christians and Muslims are, overwhelmingly, perfectly nice folk who don’t go around committing violent crimes.
So much for Ryan’s “attacking double standards”.
It would be laughable if it wasn’t so tragic …
Kris, you haven’t actually addressed what I was saying. You seem to agree that most Muslims in the world haven’t committed any violent crimes, but you haven’t disputed that you consider them all murderers who haven’t had a chance to kill yet. The double standard is that if you applied the same logic to Christians, you’d consider all Christians as murderers who haven’t had a chance to kill yet.
….AND it would be unfair to tar all Christians with the same brush, or to accuse all Christians of being atrocity-committers waiting to happen.
…
You see my point.
I certainly do.
My point is that while such an approach might seem fair-minded, it implies that I have nothing more to be concerned about with Muslims than I do with Christians, which seems very unfair on the latter, and obtuse, whether deliberate or not.
It also results in useless responses (or no responses) in practical terms. It is an argumentative approach that seems designed to force our society into either worrying about every Christian and Muslim – or not worrying about them at all. Or is this not merely another example of your libertarian socialist approach to our society; that, as with Obama vs. Bush, you consider yourself to be outside both camps and able to take a disinterested approach?
Even-handedness comes up when you consider that if the same standard was applied to Christians, the actions of a tiny minority would be cause to consider all Christians as murderers whether or not they’ve committed murder.
So if Christians had committed all the acts listed by Kowtow you would not be keeping a more wary eye on the likes of Kris K. In fact you’d be making the same claims: that it was only a tiny minority of Christians and we should not link Kris’s words with the actions of his ilk?
Really?
Because that seems to be contradicted by your own comparisons, in which you’re treating the Christian threat equally with the Islamist threat when the latter has a established a vastly larger record of death in recent years in the name of their religion. If you can equate Christians with Islamists now, what would you be like if the levels of religious-inspired violence were on a similar scale?
I just don’t see them lurking behind the eyes of every law-abiding and non-violent Muslim citizen.
Me neither, but there is your conflation again with the word “every”. Kris K may think that “every” is a correct analysis – and that makes him an easy target for you.
Similarly with the word “majority” and “tiny minority”. You’ve pounced on the latter with the question of evaluating numbers, which is no more solidly answerable than if I turned the question around on you for your “majority”. In both cases we’ll likely end up talking about polls taken of Muslim responses over the years in various Western countries.
The real question is whether the tiny minority represents sufficient numbers to continually commit, around the world, the types of acts listed by Kowtow and intimidate the majority sufficiently that they cannot or will not do anything to stop them. I’ve no doubt there are other Salman Taseers’ out there, but they don’t all have to be killed to be rendered useless.
In short the answer to your question is not some quantification or the word every. It is the phrase large enough.
There have been sufficient acts world-wide in the last decade alone – together with near misses that did not result in death, such as the near fatal stabbing of the gay French mayor of Paris several years ago by a gay-hating Muslim – to cause me to look much harder at someone claiming to be a Muslim than I would a Christian, and certainly much harder than I did before the 9/11 attacks.
That seems to me to be a perfectly rational, reasonable assessment of the degree of danger and trying to effectively marginalise me by lumping me in with absolutists is not going to persuade me to your view.
Looks like General Debate has been hijacked once again and become Generally Religous Debate
Aside from Kris K it’s less a debate between religious people than a debate between atheists/agnostics about a particular religion called Islam, it’s potential and actual effects in the West, and what should be done about it.
That seems more like a political/philosophical/ideological debate to me.
My point is that while such an approach might seem fair-minded, it implies that I have nothing more to be concerned about with Muslims than I do with Christians, which seems very unfair on the latter, and obtuse, whether deliberate or not.
It also results in useless responses (or no responses) in practical terms. It is an argumentative approach that seems designed to force our society into either worrying about every Christian and Muslim – or not worrying about them at all. Or is this not merely another example of your libertarian socialist approach to our society; that, as with Obama vs. Bush, you consider yourself to be outside both camps and able to take a disinterested approach?
Maybe. In this case, I don’t think so. I don’t think my approach is designed to force anyone into either worrying about every Christian and Muslim or not worry about them at all, but rather to show the absurdity as treating “Christians” or “Muslims” as some monolithic entity of a billion-plus people about whom as a whole almost anything sensible can be said.
So if Christians had committed all the acts listed by Kowtow you would not be keeping a more wary eye on the likes of Kris K. In fact you’d be making the same claims: that it was only a tiny minority of Christians and we should not link Kris’s words with the actions of his ilk?
Yes. And I’ve pointed out that Christians have committed atrocities. Until Kris gives me any reason to believe he’s going to do the same, I don’t believe he will. And the fact that he and they both call themselves “Christian” is not a good enough reason alone to suspect him of guilt.
Because that seems to be contradicted by your own comparisons, in which you’re treating the Christian threat equally with the Islamist threat when the latter has a established a vastly larger record of death in recent years in the name of their religion. If you can equate Christians with Islamists now, what would you be like if the levels of religious-inspired violence were on a similar scale?
I equate them only for the purposes of defending over a billion law-abiding non-violent Muslims from Kris’s accusation that they’re all murderers whether or not they’ve actually murdered anyone.
Me neither, but there is your conflation again with the word “every”. Kris K may think that “every” is a correct analysis – and that makes him an easy target for you.
Yes.
Similarly with the word “majority” and “tiny minority”. You’ve pounced on the latter with the question of evaluating numbers, which is no more solidly answerable than if I turned the question around on you for your “majority”. In both cases we’ll likely end up talking about polls taken of Muslim responses over the years in various Western countries.
The real question is whether the tiny minority represents sufficient numbers to continually commit, around the world, the types of acts listed by Kowtow and intimidate the majority sufficiently that they cannot or will not do anything to stop them. I’ve no doubt there are other Salman Taseers’ out there, but they don’t all have to be killed to be rendered useless.
In short the answer to your question is not some quantification or the word every. It is the phrase large enough.
There have been sufficient acts world-wide in the last decade alone – together with near misses that did not result in death, such as the near fatal stabbing of the gay French mayor of Paris several years ago by a gay-hating Muslim – to cause me to look much harder at someone claiming to be a Muslim than I would a Christian, and certainly much harder than I did before the 9/11 attacks.
That seems to me to be a perfectly rational, reasonable assessment of the degree of danger and trying to effectively marginalise me by lumping me in with absolutists is not going to persuade me to your view.
I have been addressing nothing but Kris’s assertion that all Muslims are murderers waiting to happen. I did not lump you in with his absolutism; you (apparently) leapt to its defence.
I don’t mind being mentioned as the token Christian, but I think there are a couple of other contributers who also fall into the same category – along with the atheists and agnostics also interested in the subject
Because whatever our belief system, Islam represents much the same threat to all of us in the West (even you, Steve) – as Tom essentially highlighted.
PS Excellent comment at 3:45 pm, Tom.
[And not just because you've increased my Google hit-rate count ]
I have been addressing nothing but Kris’s assertion that all Muslims are murderers waiting to happen.
And I have already addressed your original comment in my 12:52 reply, Ryan:
“You seem to be complaining that we should consider the overwhelming majority of Muslims who don’t commit murder as murderers-in-waiting.”
Have a read of the later portions of the Koran and Hadiths and get back to me, Ryan.
The point being – that ALL Muslims are potentially ticking time bombs (pun intended) if, and I highlight IF, they take the Koran and Hadiths seriously, and IF they aspire to the example set by Mohammed.
Those Muslims that DO NOT hold to their scriptures, and view Mohammed as their example are NOT ‘good’ Muslims. Which goes right back to my original comment where I highlighted Punjab Gov. Salman Taseer’s (a Muslim) murder for NOT defending Islamic blasphemy laws. His murderer (also a Muslim) obviously didn’t view Taseer as a ‘good’ Muslim.
The point being – that ALL Muslims are potentially ticking time bombs (pun intended) if, and I highlight IF, they take the Koran and Hadiths seriously, and IF they aspire to the example set by Mohammed.
Those Muslims that DO NOT hold to their scriptures, and view Mohammed as their example are NOT ‘good’ Muslims. Which goes right back to my original comment where I highlighted Punjab Gov. Salman Taseer’s (a Muslim) murder for NOT defending Islamic blasphemy laws. His murderer (also a Muslim) obviously didn’t view Taseer as a ‘good’ Muslim.
Do you GET IT, Ryan?!
I responded to this, Kris. Almost 1,500,000,000 Muslims every day are not doing any of the violent things encouraged by your interpretation of the Koran and Hadiths. Every day, the real world flies in the face of your expectations of Muslims.
Chris De Freitas’ piece is far too kind to the alarmists. He ignores the fact that the original “evidence” for the theory – the infamous Hockeystick and related graphs – was fabricated from whole cloth and that if the people responsible had been in any other field – accounting or pharmaceuticals for example – they would have been prosecuted for fraud and spent a long time in prison.
He ignores the fact that the charts showing warming over the last few decades have been “adjusted” to manually introduce a wholly false warming signal into the recent trend (it’s not just NIWA that has been completely discredited in this way.)
He ignores that some of the key charlatans at the centre of the alarmism were thoroughly exposed recently when their emails to each other were released onto the Internet: plotting to corrupt the peer review process, boasting of “hiding the decline” in the charts they were creating (and not forgetting the associated programming code and comments which revealed the chaotic mess their records are in.)
He ignores that the alarmists shamelessly contradict themselves even now by claiming that recent recent heavy snow falls around the world are in fact still evidence for global warming.
tom hunter (1,562) Says:
January 5th, 2011 at 2:07 pm
After all, you two can be quite comfortable sticking it to the likes of Kris K in public. No matter what you say, he and his ilk are not going to be calling you racists or practicing lawfare by going on about your “hate-speech”, let alone beating you up or killing you.
You must have missed quite a bit, Kris K has often suggested eliminating or killing those he doesn’t agree with, politically or religiously. Granted he’s unlikely to actually do it himself but he suggests and tries to incite.
The retailers association are bleating about online shopping from offshore sites having an unfair advantage over local retailers as (many/most) of those purchases don’t have GST levied on them. They are now calling for all imported purchases to have GST levied. (This would likely cost more to administer than it is worth – I believe that is the rationale as to why privately imported goods (for personal consumption) with GST or other duties of less than $50 do not have them collected currently.)
Perhaps they need a lesson (or a least a reminder) on competition. I don’t recall hearing the association complain to govt the last time a local retailer offered a ‘GST free’ sale. If their members have real competition from offshore suppliers, they should address the market accordingly.
(It’s also only a very small step from regulating to address this ‘problem’ to seeking regulation against parallel importers – they also undermine ‘traditional’ local retailers’ margins.)
Yet still not so much as you…, which was the original starting point of this discussion.
Tiresome to have to repeat this point – especially to people who claim they’re awfully concerned about religious and political violence – but I’ll worry about Kris K and his ilk when I start to see evidence that people are acting on their words.
Rather like I did with Islamists between the 1990′s and today. I changed my attention and approach in the face of evidence. Apparently you don’t.
bhudson (753) Says:
January 5th, 2011 at 6:34 pm
…
The retailers association are bleating about online shopping from offshore sites…
They’re missing the point.
I reckon very few on-line purchases from overseas are made because someone is saving 15% GST. The cost of shipping individual purchases (vs bulk shipping to a distributor or retailer) would make up that difference. Plus, 15% is often a small price to pay for the protection of the Consumer Guarantees Act.
Rather, the problems are 1) the inefficiency of the whole distribution chain and 2) the docile Kiwi consumer.
1) Every time someone else handles a product on its way from the manufacturer to you, the price rises – may double, in fact. (I was an investor in a company that designed and manufactured a fashion item and observed how an item that cost $3 to manufacture ended up selling for $50.)
And if the distribution chain passes through Australia, it’ll be bloody inefficient (not 100% sure why) and getting goods over here just adds one more step.
I’m – well, not happy, but willing – to pay GST to, say, Fishpond rather than getting a GST-free price from Amazon, if the end price is at least comparable. (Whitcoulls et al can get stuffed.)
2) Every time someone pays $500 for a pair of jeans that would sell for $150 in North America, that weakens the bargaining position of all consumers (at least of expensive jeans) in New Zealand. If enough consumers say, “That [item] is not worth that price and I won’t buy it”, the prices will come down.
Interesting, Tom, that while the article I originally linked to earlier in the day described Taseer as Muslim, your link stated he was a secularist:
A secularist who championed women’s rights and wanted to reform the religious ordinances, Taseer’s assassination will come as a massive blow to all those pursuing constitutional reforms in Pakistan.
Tom, I see more threat to us here from wankers trying to talk up revolution and violence in NZ than Muslim terrorists – it’s possible NZ could be hit by Muslim terrorism but if so it’s more likely to be a one off if it happened. Local zealots trying to incite nutters are more of a potential ongoing threat.
I find that savings from offshore purchases are generally 30% or more (in a number of cases around 50%) but I guess it does depend on the specifics of the goods. I have been charged GST on a number of purchases, but in every case it has still been significantly cheaper to purchase online and import than to buy locally.
Retailers have to wake up and accept that they may well be part of a “global” market now thanks to simplicity of online shopping. They have to realign their business (and probably margins) to compete.
KK- is it compulsory to be a moron to be a bible believing xian, or does that come later?
It is possible, and common, to be both a secularist and a religious follower. Do invest in a quality dictionary, don;’t justb atke Jerry Falwell and redbaiter as fonts of wisdom.
Tom: but I’ll worry about Kris K and his ilk when I start to see evidence that people are acting on their words.
The point Ryan has been trying to get across is that the vast majority of Muslims show no evidence of acting on the sleeper terrorist-in-waiting label that Fletch and Kris keep going on about.
“Meanwhile the family of the teenaged driver who died following a police pursuit in Auckland have remembered him as a ”nice kid”.
Timoti Mohi, 15, died this morning after crashing a stolen car into a power pole near the Market Road off-ramp on Auckland’s Southern Motorway.
A teenage passenger had to be cut free from the wreckage and is in Auckland Hospital with serious leg injuries.
Police had been in pursuit of the vehicle, and another stolen car, in the central city before abandoning the chase when speeds reached up to 180km/h. “
If it’s going to take a civil war to sort this out, then lets get on with it! What I would give to see the lying hypocritical and arrogant Leftist scum and their illegitimate ‘chocolate Messiah’ get theirs. Decent conservatives have had enough – rally the troops and string up the traitors!
What he is talking about is a legitimate response to the moves by Progressives to make Conservatives an extinct species. And he’s talking about the US and their false President. You’re OK way down in NZ Pete. For now anyway.
“I have a certain amount of sympathy with Ann Coulter’s view:
‘We should invade their countries, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity.’”
The smorgasbord “christian” strikes again. You might regard JC as your “lord and saviour” KKK, but he certainly isn’t your role model. Somehow I sense that you wouldn’t ever have been his. I imagine he might consider you a bit of an embarassment.
A+ in Hypocrisy 101. Well done, yet again. You never fail to amuse.
We though get tired of your constant sneering false claims to be “amused” by everyone you don’t agree with. About time you found a new line you cheap little schoolboy wanker.
It is possible, and common, to be both a secularist and a religious follower.
… not if you’re a Muslim, though. In Islam there is no separation between “Mosque and state” – which, of course, was the point I was making, and the same one which you missed.
Mind you, I can understand you missing it – all those competing voices in your head must be a real handicap …
Why? Is your revolution not getting much traction? Can’t you talk anyone into doing your dirty work?
Johnboy, Red has posted more than enough about wanting to string up politicians and journalists, to eliminate anyone he disagrees with. You like his campaign for revolution?
Good to see you expanding your horizons, Pete – if you read enough posts and comments at Crusader Rabbit & TrueBlueNZ you MAY even eventually improve your comprehension abilities … we live in hope and a belief that miracles are still possible even in this secular age.
Have you decided not to push that line at the moment Red? You have mentioned wanting to hang anyone you find disagreeable from lamp posts often enough in the past. And you have talked up armed insurrection, like KK. Entrenched religious intolerance of anyone you don’t like.
You accusing someone of having totalitarian traits is like Phil Goff accusing someone of having poll problems.
“We should nuke their countries and kill them all”
Perhaps, Johnboy, Pete is volunteering for the role of ambassador to the Muslim world, and he’ll go and reason with the Islamists? While the result wouldn’t be quite as quick are your suggestion, I imagine after several months Pete would have bored them all to death.
Pete you wouldn’t have a fucking clue what anyone was saying you blabbering time wasting bandwidth wasting nitwit. 8582 posts of worthless shit in two years. Fucking hopeless.
Redbaiter, you’re so predictable, always reverts to abuse when your your position is indefensible – which is most of the time.
Kris, are you volunteering to “invade their countries, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity”? There’s more Catholics than any other Christians, would you rather they did it for you?
Now your talking Petty. A bloody crusade turning into a world war.
Just what we need to get the wheels of industry turning again.
Given that the West is heading into possibly the worst depression in recent history, and that WWII followed on the heels of the Great Depression of the 30s, then perhaps we’re about due for WWIII. And especially when you start factoring in the Globalists’ and Islamists’ agendas …
To be honest Kris I suspect WW11 was really a continuation of unfinished business from 1918. The Versailles treaty created the sore and the depression just inflamed it.
The Marshall plan with help from the nuclear deterrent stopped that happening again for 65 years so far but it is in our nature to be combative.
Shortage of resources spurred by the madmen of the Asiatic races will start the next one.
As long as they keep it up north it may be to our advantage as long as we have a big friend, something that the lefties think we don’t need in the fools paradise they exist in.
MyBrainOnCrack – “show the difference between Mumtaz Qadri and Scott Roeder.”
The main difference is that Roeder was a schizophrenic not taking meds, which requires a PC crim-cuddler such as yourself to feel sorry for the poor widdle darling and make him a nice cup of tea and tell him how it’s all somebody else’s fault. Rich pricks, probably. Or does the milk of human kindness not flow when the nutter has a loony mission you disagree with?
The point Ryan has been trying to get across is that the vast majority of Muslims show no evidence of acting on the sleeper terrorist-in-waiting label that Fletch and Kris keep going on about.
And the point I have been trying to get across is that concepts such as vast majority and tiny minority are ridiculous argumentative debating terms in the context of said tiny minority still being big enough to cause serious problems in the West. Given that it already has done so it’s amazing that this simple fact has to continue to be pointed out – but that’s cognitive dissonance for you. In short, accepting that point would make yours irrelevant – and you’re not about to let go of that warm feeling the words “vast majority” give you.
Still, I realise that as long as there is a vast majority vs. a tiny minority you’ll feel comfortable and unworried…
Tom, I see more threat to us here from wankers trying to talk up revolution and violence in NZ.
…
Local zealots trying to incite nutters are more of a potential ongoing threat.
Shortage of resources spurred by the madmen of the Asiatic races will start the next one.
You could be right, too.
Although the way China’s gearing up, and with its interest in buying up New Zealand farms, etc, and with Australia’s vast mineral wealth, I think they may also have eyes on Australasia being their southern hemisphere base in the event of a World War. When I mentioned the Globalists and the Islamists earlier I should probably have added the Communists – especially communist China, and likely some expression of interest from the old USSR.
Interesting times – times when a “big friend” never goes amiss.
Tom you’re quite right a very small cell could cause immense damage that’s absolutely the fact.
However what Fletch and Kris go on and on and on and on and (sorry) on and on and on and on and on about (imagine what it’s like being in the debate with them) is the general population dynamics of having Muslims in the community in the first place. Because they, apparently, see potential terrorists all over the place, everywhere. In the supermarket, in the dairy, in the butcher, particularly halal, on the bus, in the train, every single place you go there’s a Muslim just waiting to leap up and cut your throat as he loudly shouts ‘Allahu Akbar’ and his womenfolk do that ghastly ‘ulululuuing’ thing they do.
They don’t seem to understand you see, that not every single Muslim is in fact a terrorist and not even a potential terrorist and the terrible thing is they seem to have no recognition of the fact that the very best way to in fact bring about that outcome is for everyone to behave in exactly the way they are behaving. And aren’t they therefore just great big sillies is my private thought to myself about that.
They don’t seem to understand you see, that not every single Muslim is in fact a terrorist and not even a potential terrorist and the terrible thing is they seem to have no recognition of the fact that the very best way to in fact bring about that outcome is for everyone to behave in exactly the way they are behaving.
Riiiight, so let me get this straight, Reid.
People like me and Fletch are obviously wrong about the vast bulk of Muslims … BUT … if we carry on the way we are we will invoke Islamic aggression/terror (presumably from the vast bulk of Muslims) … and therefore such acts of Islamic aggression will not be the fault of the perpetrators, but RATHER the fault of those who dared to incite them in the first place.
You remind me of the typical cry of the Islamists themselves: “Islam is a religion of peace … and if you deny this truth we’ll kill you”.
I guess I better start apologising in advance for the next Islamist terror plot – it’s obviously my fault, afterall.
Perhaps if we all became Muslim then the peace loving Islamic people would stop killing us?
The trouble is, Johnboy, when they’re not killing the Jew, the Christian, or the infidel, they’re killing each other. So even if the entire world was Islamified, the violence and killing wouldn’t stop. Think Iran-Iraq war.
[Not that I need to tell you - for the benefit of the useful idiot appeasers]
OK Kris. So the straight fact is that the Muslim population in NZ as far as I know hasn’t yet committed a terrorist act, it hasn’t yet demanded that Christians stop ringing their church bells on Sunday, it doesn’t broadcast the call to prayer however many times daily they have a wont to do, it doesn’t demand special political or social treatment in anyway whatsoever and has never done and I don’t know, what do you reckon, let’s say we have 100,000 here right here right now.
I’m just not seeing the problem Kris.
Or do I have to wait. OK, well while I’m waiting for critical mass to develop before they start introducing Sharia Law, perhaps sometimes between now and the time that happens, preferably before you retire tonight, you could answer this: if every one of us believed as you did toward Muslims and we had Muslims living amongst us, how would that sit with your values?
RB, my standard question on Muslims in Europe generally, is why have their own politicians allowed this to happen to their own citizens. And personally I have several answers for that but what do you think?
You think this is a common thing Johnboy? You think its insidiiously creeping into the fabric? Seriously?
If so, what is the best possible strategy with which to attack it?
Is it not, tear the carpet up, and expose the bugs: i.e. isolate them, and kill them.
Way to do that, is to get the whole community on your side, in genuine, not bullshit, partnership, all the time. Then they expose the bad ones, for you.
Appreciate many Muslim people haven’t been bought up in NZ these days. So what? Neither have lots and lots and lots and lots of others.
Sorry reid but the only way to kill a cancer is to cut it out and in doing so you have to take some of the healthy tissue around it as well.
We have to get rid of all Muslims in NZ simple as that. Deport them to countries that share their faith.
Why would a devout Muslim wish to come here and then complain that we should change our ways to suit his faith unless his aim was to eventually submit us all to Islam.
As I have said before, step one is to pull our armies out of Muslim lands.
Then just leave them alone to sort themselves out, and write cheques for their oil for as long as we need to buy it – hopefully, not much longer, if we want our civilisation to survive.
Reid obviously won’t be happy until New Zealand has the same Muslim problems as Paris does (as outlined in Red’s 9:44 pm link).
You may as well say there’s no Muslim problem on the moon, Reid – but only because there are no Muslims there. You really do live in la la land.
And by the way, I think you’ll find that the FIRST hijacking of a plane in NZ was carried out by a Muslim woman. And Muslim MP Ashraf Choudery has already called for the cross atop a certain clock-tower to not be reinstated after routine maintenance.
Why would a devout Muslim wish to come here and then complain that we should change our ways to suit his faith unless his aim was to eventually submit us all to Islam.
Johnboy I think you’re conflating a religious human being for a fanatic who is willing to die for a cause.
The fact people do things in the name of Islam and the fact the Koran and Islamic philosophy has strands in it which can be interpreted as encouraging that, is not significant and the reason is you could paint Christianity in exactly precisely the same way if you wished to – as a religion. Fact is, I could paint Paul, the greatest Christian Missionary who ever lived, as a murderous thug, were I Satan.
You can do it, to any religion.
Now, as to the people who worship that religion, that’s a different matter,
Christians aren’t Muslims, in terms of genetics and temperament because of the geography and gene pools. The Caucasian versus Asian versus Arabic genetic pools.
And that’s what they’ve done in the media, is conflate the religion with the temperament of a people, and melded them together into a story. For most Arabic and the more extreme Asian temperament is such as to be inflamed by the natural reaction of us, to stories of their religious zealotry.
BTW Kris, if every one of us believed as you did toward Muslims and we had Muslims living amongst us, how would that sit with your values?
Its a fine line between a religious human being and a fanatic reid. It doesn’t take much to turn one into the other whatever the religion (you don’t have to dig to deep to find it here).
I’m a realist. I don’t believe in fine words or ardent promises. If I perceive a threat I prefer to act rather than react.
You may make all the apologies you like for Muslims but I see them as a threat to our way of life and a risk we don’t need to tolerate.
As far as I am concerned they bring no good to this country and they should all be deported to whatever Islamic nation they choose where they can pursue their religion as and when they see fit without inconveniencing us.
Kris, if every one of us believed as you did toward Muslims and we had Muslims living amongst us, how would that sit with your values?
If everyone believed as I did … we wouldn’t have non-assimilating Muslims in NZ. The only way a Muslim would get into NZ would be if he fully renounced Islamism … that would sit very well with my values.
Night all – done my dash for the day in Kiwiblog land (or whatever alternative universe this is).
Oh and reid thats for the photo link, I find the decline of Detroit to be truly fascinating. I would love to go over there on a photography trip someday.
Have you watched the BBC documentary “Requiem for Detroit”?
You seem to wear the “hands-on” label as a badge of honour.
Which begs the question: do you still stand by this comment?
Luc Hansen (2,282) Says:
June 30th, 2010 at 8:44 am
IV2 @ 8.18
I find this report truly disturbing. What sort of level of “groping” earns a strike? What man hasn’t “groped” sometime? Like late in the night at a party, during a kiss under the mistletoe at a company bash, brushing past a hot babe in a bar and giving her left buttock a light pinch…even rubbing “inappropriately” while dancing.
While I agree with Murray’s (above) general sentiment, I do think it’s a matter of degree and environment.
If my wife was subjected, for example, to a drunken grope, depending on the actual circumstances and given the serious consequences now awaiting the offender if convicted, I would be loath to press charges, whereas before I would have happily agreed to the guy getting a wake up from the courts.
I wonder if the victim understood that this conviction could result in this person’s future long term incarceration for perhaps relatively minor offences, which may include the inevitable miscarriages of justice?
Absolutely I stand by that. It’s honest comment, in context.
And for true and honest debate, context is important.
You will notice, for example, that I have called for Assange to return to Sweden to face his accusers over a relatively minor charge (the penalty is a fine, at most).
Any chance that you can engage in substance, for a change?
You need to read a little bit of history instead of doing drugs, poor boy.
Our involvement with subjugating the ME began in 1916 with the Sykes-Picot agreement that divided up Arab/Muslim lands before they were even conquered, and never ended, whether through overt or covert operations.
Pull the troops, pay for the oil (even better, go post-oil real quick), and leave them alone.
And for true and honest debate, context is important.
Yes, context is important. I could easily have quoted you as saying “What man hasn’t “groped” sometime?” and left it at that, but I didn’t, did I? Instead, I quoted your comment in its surrounding context, and asked if you still stand by it six months later. I was curious to know if your position had changed, as the “hands-on” label seems to have, er, stuck ever since you made that comment.
You will notice, for example, that I have called for Assange to return to Sweden to face his accusers over a relatively minor charge (the penalty is a fine, at most).
Actually, I have a life outside of Kiwiblog, so I don’t read everything that you say. But I’ve just done a quick targeted google search and found this comment:
Luc Hansen (2,288) Says:
December 21st, 2010 at 10:17 pm
Since we eagerly lap up the Wikileaks leaks, I take it we are all contributing Assange’s defence fund?
I must admit, I would prefer him top go back to Sweden for his questioning session (and it’s only a case of his word against theirs, and it’s only a misdemeanor) but we all know the US is gunning for him so maybe he is better off where he is. I don’t know.
But I do know all you who use and enjoy the results of his work and his courage and don’t donate to keep him going are hypocrites, writ large!
Read in its surrounding context, I think that’s a fairly qualified statement, which makes your characterisation of it above misleading. As you say, for true and honest debate, context is important.
By the way, I’m not sure if your position on criminality is consistent, as I’ve also seen another comment from you supporting Wikileaks supporters’ DOS attacks on Visa.com (“Bloody good job,” you said). Perhaps you could clarify when you think someone should be charged, if not a drunken groper, and if not a misguided computer nerd?
The purpose of doing a targeted Google search was to find a comment that Luc Hansen said he’d made. I initially was going to say “I haven’t seen that comment (which isn’t to say it doesn’t exist)” but then I decided to go looking for it.
I can assure you that the really good lawyers (your words) do Very Important Things, none of which have anything to do with targeted Google searches!
Perhaps this suggestion will help: you could invest in a caselaw database and put your Google skills to good use. Who knows what gold nuggets you might find and share with the Kiwiblog community?
So, in the olden days when the Socialists were in Government in Italy, their leader Bettino Craxi went on a state visit to China. His aide pointed out that in China they were all Socialists. To whom he replied: “But if they’re all Socialists, who do they steal from?”
This joke cost the (left leaning) comedian who uttered it a 10-year ban from Italian TV.
The only “safe” Muslim is one who has left Islam; one who has fully renounced its teachings, its prophet, and its false god – IMHO.
I have a certain amount of sympathy with Ann Coulter’s view:
“We should invade their countries, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity.”
Was Coulter one of GW’s advisers?
Any obviously impossible aim anyway, but just say it was achievable, what then? If all the world were Christians, could anyone seriously believe that there would be no disputes, disagreements, rivalries? No crime, no fighting, no wars, no shite? Wan’t WW I mostly Christian versus Christian? And much of WW II.
KK has already stated he not only wants everyone to be Christians but not just any old Christian, he wants Christians to all be his version of “ideal” Christian. That’s a version that wants to kill off anyone who disagrees. If JC could see what was being suggested in his name he would turn in his grave.
Because they, apparently, see potential terrorists all over the place, everywhere. In the supermarket, in the dairy, in the butcher, particularly halal, on the bus, in the train, every single place you go there’s a Muslim just waiting to leap up and cut your throat as he loudly shouts ‘Allahu Akbar’
I wonder how many of the families of the dead Fort Hood soldiers would accept that sort of suspicion in a heartbeat if it meant their loved ones could be with them today:
You didn’t have to be “alert” to spot Maj. Nidal Hasan. He’d spent most of the past half-decade walking around with a big neon sign on his head saying “JIHADIST. STAND WELL BACK.”
But we (that’s to say, almost all of us; and certainly almost anyone who matters in national security and the broader political culture) are now reflexively conditioned to ignore the flashing neon sign. Like those apocryphal Victorian ladies discreetly draping the lasciviously curved legs of their pianos, if a glimpse of hard unpleasant reality peeps through we simply veil it in another layer of fluffy illusions.
But hey – maybe somebody finally did look at him sideways on that fateful day. I hope they’ve had time to reflect on their error – assuming they survived of course.
….they seem to have no recognition of the fact that the very best way to in fact bring about that outcome is for everyone to behave in exactly the way they are behaving.
Ryan made the same argument some months ago during another tangle with Kris K – self-fulfilling prophecies and all that. The next thing you know people like me will be getting blamed for Darryl Harris committing crimes as a result of losing his benefit. Interesting that a right-winger would subscribe – only in this argument apparently – to such a leftist linkage of cause and effect.
The thing is I doubt that one person in a thousand in the West during the 1990′s ever gave a thought to Muslims or Islamist terrorism, let alone went around seeing potential terrorists everywhere. Yet that genial ignorance did not prevent the African embassy bombings in 1998 or the 9/11 attacks.
But then I also realize that my argument will be considered irrelevant to people who assign the responsibility for the 9/11 attacks not to Islamist terrorists but to….. other actors.
Yeah, and look at the hoo-hah against Bill O’Reilly on “the View” wid Whoopi Goldburg walkin’ out SIMPLY because BO said “Muslims killed us in 9/11″ when he should have said (Lib-speak) “Extremists.” The BIG prob for the West in the immediate future is, how can we all tell? The real onus is on Moderate Muslims to fight back and reclaim the public arena. Where are their intellectuals and academics voicing protest?
If they don’t, we’ll reach a point politically in the West enacting ghastly generalised anti-Muslim laws and restrictions simply to protect Western culture (ala France anti-Burkha, and Germany expelling Turks).
January 5th, 2011 at 8:04 am
“… Research showed that people travelling an average of 1-2kmh slower over their journey could cut the road toll by 3 per cent to 5 per cent. …”
– Go-slow helps keep holiday road toll down KIRAN CHUG – The Dominion Post – http://www.stuff.co.nz
Oh, really?
Surely 10 -20 kmh slower. But hardly any point in the whole article if the one crucial piece of information is up the wop.
January 5th, 2011 at 8:15 am
Sigh, holiday over & back to work…
January 5th, 2011 at 8:17 am
What Ciaron said …
January 5th, 2011 at 8:32 am
wankers who come with such statements need to be challenged and outed as bullshit artists .. that line about reducing deaths by 2-3% is pure fantasy.
Reducing the max speed on the motor/highways to say 104kph will save no lives and will not slow the law breakers down.
When you hear about people caught going 150kph (plus) it is obvious they couldn’t care less about the rules .. same with people driving pissed.
We have among us 1,000′s of people who ignore road rules now, what makes people think a change will make a difference to them.
It’s the same with drinking. We have very strict rules about selling booze to both under-age people and those already drunk but the sellers are obviouly ignoring these strict rules that carry big fines. Don’t change the laws, inforce the ones we have now.
January 5th, 2011 at 8:35 am
95% of Statistics are made up on the spot.
Immutable law of Pure Maths and Statistics.
What a piss take these journalists have been on for so long.
In the absence of a story, or any truth, then just fabricate.
January 5th, 2011 at 8:46 am
Nice article from Chris De Freitas. And credit to the Herald for printing it instead of the usual rubbish from the alarmists. Its just amazing our Govt (and others) are so quick to Tax us for something which has not been proved and is all based on a scenario modelling a hypothesis! No actual evidence exists proving this positive amplification which is supposed to occur between CO2 and Water vapour.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10697845
“Debate focuses on climate feedbacks that may or may not suppress, perpetuate or amplify an initial change caused by increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases. A doubling of carbon dioxide, by itself, adds only about one degree Celsius to greenhouse warming. Computer climate models project more warming because the modellers build in feedbacks from water vapour and clouds that amplify the initial change. These are the so called positive feedbacks. For example, higher temperature would mean more evaporation globally, which in turn means more heat-trapping water vapour is put into the atmosphere leading to even higher temperatures.
On the other hand, negative feedbacks might prevail. For example, more water vapour in the atmosphere could lead to greater cloud cover. Clouds reflect the heat from the Sun and cool the Earth, offsetting the initial rise in global temperature.
The role of negative feedback processes are played down by global warming alarmists, whereas sceptics point to the four-billion-year-old global climate record that shows runaway global cooling or warming has never occurred because negative feedbacks regulate the global climate system.”
January 5th, 2011 at 8:47 am
in the Dominion today:
Former gang leader Darryl Harris will lose the sickness benefit he has claimed for 26 years.
oh no .. it seems he finds it hard to get a job because of his gangland past .. no shit Sherlock
January 5th, 2011 at 8:53 am
… research shows that if there was 1-2% less research, there would be 5% less bullshit …
Yvette, I suspect it really is meant to be 1-2km/h; no doubt arrived at by some fuckwitted averaging of travelling speeds. The same bullshit stats can likely be concocted in relation to drink driving – ‘research has shown that if people drank 1-2% less …’
January 5th, 2011 at 8:54 am
jaba
This is not good news for the demented magpie.
January 5th, 2011 at 9:03 am
“Research showed that people staying at home could cut the road toll by 98 to 100 per cent. …”
January 5th, 2011 at 10:07 am
For when it rains later today.
10 great movie chases courtesy of Top Gear
http://www.topgear.com/hardware/gallery_html/chases01.html
January 5th, 2011 at 10:12 am
Its ok jaba, he still has his taxpayer funded rental portfolio for income
January 5th, 2011 at 10:13 am
Just read the article on that Harris guy in Chch who is about to have his sickness benefit stopped after 26 years.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/4511808/Harris-to-get-benefit-axed-after-26-years
It’s no bloody wonder the MSD has overspent it’s budget by a BILLION dollars if this is the sort of thnking being employed there. A sickness benefit for Cannabis Addiction? Yet he get’s grant for fencing a swiming pool at “One of his houses”.
January 5th, 2011 at 10:18 am
When the Chinese centrally planned economy collapses, later this year, it will take out the Australia property bubble and NZ gets crushed as well. It is just a matter of when.
Stagflation well under way in China now. It is game over.
National must not bail out the Aussie banking subsidiaries here. Let the bad banks go under.
January 5th, 2011 at 10:22 am
I agree. The story about benefit money being paid to the gangster Harris is beyond belief.
No wonder there is such a large number of idlers, bludgers, and parasites with ample time on their hands to plan and commit crimes while the rest of the population pay taxes to support the scum.
January 5th, 2011 at 10:31 am
Simon @ 1018:
Oh really? So, your economics degree, did you shake corn flakes or ricies off it as you took it out of the box? Chicken Little is not a guru, you should know that.
January 5th, 2011 at 10:32 am
Simon Far too soon to write off China. I’d wait a century or two.
And thank the lord for our Aussie banks. They protected us from the worst. Letting ‘bad banks’ go under doesn’t make any sense at all in our small economy.
Surely this moronic anti-Aussie rubbish is well past its use by. We would be a wreck without them and our standard of living would plummet.
January 5th, 2011 at 10:42 am
Political correctness across the Tasman. We should export the ugly comrade Sue Bradford to sort out any child issues.
http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/art-and-design/why-this-photo-cost-hospital-a-charity-bonanza-20110104-19f54.html#poll
January 5th, 2011 at 10:45 am
The 1-2% speed thing has been used before.
Remember in the early ’00s when anything that moved got a ticket ,and ACC were a part of that as it seems some of the police budget was coming from them! The 105 k ph threat was bandied about then too.
So it’s come again. This is policing by numbers. It’s not about targetting dangerous drivers ,it’s about targets.
That’s what the journalist should be writing about instead of being a public relations broadcaster for Paula Rose.
If 1kph makes you a dangerous driver liable to cause the death toll to go up it justifies the govt and police management telling their officers to sit in quiet areas issuing tickets to all and sundry,no discretion required like the last time around.
This isn’t just another holiday road toll story it’s about the exercise of power,citizens rights and the relationship between the two.
January 5th, 2011 at 11:14 am
Talking about moronic and journalists, how often are they going to bemoan the fact that fizzy drinks are cheaper than milk? Haven’t they worked it out yet that one is almost a complete food produced to high standards while the other is no more than sugar and water. And has to be cheap to sell.
Actually, wouldn’t it be news if sugary drinks were dearer than milk?
January 5th, 2011 at 11:29 am
Bloody good GD this morning lads and ladettes keep it up…………………………..
January 5th, 2011 at 11:44 am
just posted on the Dominions site about the road toll .. can’t wait to be shot down
January 5th, 2011 at 11:48 am
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/4511844/Norfolk-pine-has-to-stay-council-tells-family
I struggle to see how an imported species of tree has ” heritage value”.
They should have shut up, cut it down and paid the fine which would have been cheaper than paying $31,000 to the council and lawyers
January 5th, 2011 at 11:50 am
Beab;
Bugger off,milk is bad for our rivers, it makes farmers rich and helps this country earn export dollars, we can’t have that!
Sugary drinks make people fat,depressed and disabled and increases hospitalisations and dependence on the state.
So vote Green for an impoverished future. Coming soon to an angry dole queue near you.
January 5th, 2011 at 11:51 am
100% of putts not hit hard enough dont go in…… found that out the hard way!
January 5th, 2011 at 12:14 pm
RNZ news has reported the 1st fatality of the year from a police pursuit. Wrong, it’s from a thief fleeing the police. The bloody MSM again.
This Darwinian has brought the “holiday”road toll to 13, the same as last years. So the police action this year made no difference to the toll. Well done Paula. There goes the bonus.
January 5th, 2011 at 12:16 pm
I just heard on talkback about Key’s use of an Air Force place like the US President. Does anyone know if he used an Air Force plane to holiday in Hawaii?
January 5th, 2011 at 12:17 pm
More from the “Religion of Peace” – the gift that keeps on giving.
Notice, too, that the Muslim bodyguard who was entrusted with protecting Punjab Gov. Salman Taseer’s life murdered him by shooting him in the back. Are all these murderous Islamic scum such cowards?!
No doubt this piece of human excrement would have been regarded by Reid (and all those who peddle the “Moderate Muslim” myth) as a ‘Moderate’ … right up to the time when he shot his boss in the back.
I’ve said it before, and no doubt I’ll have to say it again – They’re all ‘Moderates’ right up to the time they murder someone or strap on a bomb-pack. When are we in the West going to realise the threat Islam represents to our freedoms and liberties – to our very civilisation?!
January 5th, 2011 at 12:23 pm
What about Salman Taseer? Was he not a Muslim?
Was he then also a threat to our freedoms and liberties?
January 5th, 2011 at 12:29 pm
Hey Chuck, I responded to you over on the “So Sad” thread, if you haven’t seen it already.
January 5th, 2011 at 12:30 pm
What about Salman Taseer? Was he not a Muslim?
I’d say his murderer thought not.
January 5th, 2011 at 12:44 pm
Kris, a tiny minority of Muslims commit murder. You seem to be complaining that we should consider the overwhelming majority of Muslims who don’t commit murder as murderers-in-waiting.
A tiny minority of Christians commit murder. Shall we consider the overwhelming of Christians who don’t commit murder as murderers-in-waiting?
January 5th, 2011 at 12:46 pm
Religion and everyday life are deeply intertwined on the sub Continent. Mrs Gandhi was murdered by her Sikh body guard.Gandhi himself was murdered by a Hindu extremist over the Pakistan partition.
January 5th, 2011 at 12:52 pm
Ryan Sproull 12:44 pm,
Have a read of the later portions of the Koran and Hadiths and get back to me, Ryan.
January 5th, 2011 at 12:55 pm
The tweets days before his murder by Salman Taseer:
“It doesn’t bother me. Who the hell are these illiterare maulvis to decide to whether i’m a Muslim or not?”
and
“Tomorrow mullahs r demonstrating against me…Thousands of beards screaming 4 my head.What a great feeling!”
Indeed an incredibly couragous man (and a muslim) who dared to stand up against irrationality, intolerance and religious fanatics.
A shame that his name has to be smeared by other religious fanatics like Kris K for their own version of irrationality and intolerance.
January 5th, 2011 at 12:55 pm
To Chuck at 12.16.
You are probably talking about the funding provided for a limited amount of flying on Air Force planes. It has been in place at least since Rob Muldoon’s day.
The last PM (remember her name, Helen I think) certainly used private, tax payer paid, planes quite a lot. Don’t you remember How she showed her amazing calmness and bravery when the door “came open” in flight. At least that was the story.
I very much doubt that Key went on holiday on one though. The money is not provided for that.
January 5th, 2011 at 1:00 pm
It was Helen Clark’s government that insisted on the purchase of these Aircraft, if I remember correctly. They were semi-jokingly referred to by the maintenance crews in the RNZAF as “Broomstick One” and Broomstick Two”.
John Key and his family would have no doubt flown commercially, and at his own expense.
January 5th, 2011 at 1:09 pm
The only “safe” Muslim is one who has left Islam; one who has fully renounced its teachings, its prophet, and its false god – IMHO.
I have a certain amount of sympathy with Ann Coulter’s view:
January 5th, 2011 at 1:12 pm
Slimy ocker ex pop singer Peter Garrett’s been trying to shaft us. Nice that Stuff files him under “entertainment/celebrities”. This leak’s gonna put a hole in his yank-hating credibility though with his watermelon comrades.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/celebrities/4512873/Australia-tries-to-steal-US-mission-from-us
January 5th, 2011 at 1:13 pm
Thanks Right of way. Do you know or are you guessing?
January 5th, 2011 at 1:20 pm
Have a look at the reality of 1.5 billion Muslims in the world almost completely going about their lives without committing violent crimes. The reality of Muslims defies your literal interpretation of the Qu’ran just as the reality of Christians defies anti-Christians’ literal interpretation of the Bible.
January 5th, 2011 at 1:25 pm
And just how are you any differnt to Islamist then? Turns out, not at all.
You share the same values, goals and ideals, just a different book.
The danger to our liberties and freedoms are people like you, religiously blinded fanatics, unable to hold a rational thought, no matter what religion they choose to adhere to.
January 5th, 2011 at 1:31 pm
The ryan spouls and eszets are amazing ,they seem to wait around for a chance to jump in to defend Islam AND to attack Christianity/the west. If they’re Muslim fine, if atheist then stupid ,for the very people they defend will be happy to slit their throats to the cries of “Allah akbar”
Sure there are Christian murderers but what is the motivation,not Christianity.
There are Muslim murderers too,Twin Towers,night clubs ,Coptic churches ,synagogues,airplanes,mosques of unislamic islamic sects,cartoonists ,wives ,daughters ,hotels,buses ,trains,airports etc etc etc and the motivation is………
Note this article from Fisk. He mentions Christians w/o justification. The culprits are largely ,yep Muslim….what is it about these people?
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/robert-fisk-the-crimewave-that-shames-the-world-2072201.html
January 5th, 2011 at 1:35 pm
Feminists of the world, unite: http://msn.foxsports.com/collegefootball/story/ESPN-fires-announcer-Ron-Franklin-after-sexist-comments-to-female-colleague-010411/?gt1=39002
January 5th, 2011 at 1:38 pm
Kowtow,
I’m not attacking Christianity, I’m attacking double standards. As I said, it’s unfair to judge the reality of Christians (generally not murderers) by literally interpreting the Bible (anti-Christians claiming it’s a violent text).
There are Christians who murder for Christianity, such as the Lord’s Resistance Army in Uganda, or the occasional beating to death of a gay person in the US. But it would not be fair to point to such people and say, “All Christians are murderers, some just haven’t murdered yet.”
Similarly, it’s not fair to point to that very tiny minority of Muslims who commit violent crimes and say the same of all Muslims – that they are guilty without having actually done anything, and incapable of proving themselves innocent.
I’m defending even-handedness, Kowtow, not Islam.
January 5th, 2011 at 1:41 pm
‘Only’ nineteen hijackers flew on September 11.
How many millions have died as a result?
It only takes a few…
January 5th, 2011 at 1:42 pm
Wait, what?
January 5th, 2011 at 1:47 pm
The reality is that Muslims are constantly plotting to blow crap up in just about every western country.
Plots are constantly being uncovered.
In addition, print anything negative about them and you must fear for your life.
Recently , a bunch of muslims were arrested for plotting to slaughter the entire staff of the Danish newspaper that published a cartoon offensive to muslims.
Even if only 1 in 1000 muslims are militant, then that still means there are 1.5 million muslims who wish to blow shit up.
January 5th, 2011 at 1:50 pm
That’s true, but do you have any reason at all to believe that 1 in 1000 Muslims are militant?
January 5th, 2011 at 2:00 pm
‘That’s true, but do you have any reason at all to believe that 1 in 1000 Muslims are militant?’
This idiot probably believes Adolf Hitler is alive and well on Mars.
January 5th, 2011 at 2:02 pm
No sane Christian would argue the LRA are legitimately Christian any more than the Rev Jones in South America was. These people misuse the name of Christianity for their own ends.
In Islam ,unfortunately there is no shortage of theological or political leadership willing to justify violence agaist any and all comers seen as an enemy ,and on the flimsiest of grounds…….put the words ayatollah,fatwa,Iran and Salman Rushdie into the same sentence please and discuss.
After you justify this fatwa ,then discuss “even handedness”.
Then consider the murder of Theo van Gogh and the threats to Ayaan Hirsi Ali
and the planned attack on the Danish cartoon newspaper.
All these examples are of Islamic even handedness,insult Mohammed or Islam and you will die. Please defend these actions in and of themselves w/o introducing the actions of others .
January 5th, 2011 at 2:03 pm
Plenty of irreligious fanaticism coming through ay ezsett….yawn…
Nothing new there.
January 5th, 2011 at 2:04 pm
I do not.
January 5th, 2011 at 2:06 pm
You do so.
BTW I went to your website. What a pile of shit.
January 5th, 2011 at 2:07 pm
Really? It looks to me like you and eszett are conflating the very tiny minority of Muslims who commit murder and other crimes in the name of their religion with the tiny, tiny, tiny, tiny minority of Christians who commit crime in the name of their religion. In practical terms that’s very much a double standard.
Moreover, it seems like a very rationalised one. After all, you two can be quite comfortable sticking it to the likes of Kris K in public. No matter what you say, he and his ilk are not going to be calling you racists or practicing lawfare by going on about your “hate-speech”, let alone beating you up or killing you.
The Lords Resistance Army? Really? Call me when they’ve established places of worship around the world and started flying planes into buildings while yelling Christ The Redeemer.
Until then I will, as an atheist, ignore the likes of Kris K and focus on the people you wish to ignore – Islamists.
January 5th, 2011 at 2:09 pm
Chuck Bird and Alwyn I suspect even if we mingy scrooges actually allowed our PM to fly in a crappy air force plane for a holiday (god forbid when we insist we pay only for holidays for MPs – no work allowed!), Key would much prefer the first class seats he can easily afford for him and his family.
I definitely would – just as I would take every chance to travel and holiday in privacy.
The latest pathetic gripe about Obama is that he took his kids out of school for their family holiday.
It’s time we allowed our public figures a private life and stopped holding them to a far higher standard than we expect of ourselves.
January 5th, 2011 at 2:11 pm
In other words, there is no shortage of leaders willing to misuse the name of Islam for their own ends, just as the name of Christianity has been misused by people for their own ends.
Those were not examples of Islamic even-handedness. I do not defend those actions at all. I simply recognise that they are the actions of an extremely small minority of Muslims, and it is irrational and unfair to consider, on the basis of the actions of these few, all Muslims as murderers whether or not they have ever committed murder.
Even-handedness comes up when you consider that if the same standard was applied to Christians, the actions of a tiny minority would be cause to consider all Christians as murderers whether or not they’ve committed murder.
January 5th, 2011 at 2:12 pm
I do not.
I agree.
January 5th, 2011 at 2:18 pm
Could be. Do you have numbers? How many Muslims have committed these violent crimes in the name of Islam? Divide that number by 1,500,000,000. That’s your proportion. It’s pretty small.
I don’t generally stick it to Kris K. I just disagree with him on several things. If I see a Muslim saying things I disagree with here, I’ll call them on that too.
Sorry, their murder, rape and use of child soldiers in the name of Christ isn’t a bad thing until they start exporting?
I don’t ignore Islamic militants, nor do I wish to. I just don’t see them lurking behind the eyes of every law-abiding and non-violent Muslim citizen.
January 5th, 2011 at 2:37 pm
‘I don’t ignore Islamic militants, nor do I wish to. I just don’t see them lurking behind the eyes of every law-abiding and non-violent Muslim citizen.’
Neither do we.
January 5th, 2011 at 2:48 pm
Well, you may not, Swiftman, but I was originally addressing Kris saying:
To which I replied:
Which he didn’t deny.
I’m glad you don’t see all Muslims as murderers waiting to happen. Neither do I. I think the vast majority of Muslims in the world are just folk trying to work, live, and raise families like the rest of us.
I utterly condemn the violent acts of those few Muslims who do commit violent crimes, whether religiously motivated or not, as I utterly condemn all unnecessary violence.
January 5th, 2011 at 2:54 pm
Excellent article by Mark Steyn: http://www.newcriterion.com/articles.cfm/Dependence-Day-6753
Hat Tip: TrueBlueNZ
January 5th, 2011 at 3:09 pm
I did not realise that the point I was making cut so close to the bone that it required that sort of obtuse rhetoric in response.
Let’s try a different approach to see if we can get any further in mutual understanding. Assess the following in terms of being bad things:
– maniac holding a knife and standing in my kitchen door
– maniac holding automatic rifle and standing at my gate.
– maniac sitting in 1000Kg car bomb at the end of my street.
– maniac sitting in a ship moored in the harbour with an atomic bomb on board.
Hint: the correct answer is not they’re all bad That’s true – and also useless.
January 5th, 2011 at 3:27 pm
kowtow 1:31 pm,
That’s very sobering reading, Kowtow.
One can only hope that the likes of Ryan and Eszett take the time to read it … and that they come to the realisation that this is Islam. They might also like to reflect on the persons of Christ and Mohammed, and realise that Christians model themselves on Christ and the New Testament (not the Old Testament, Ryan), while Muslims view Mohammed as their model of all that is ‘good’ – of course lets not forget Mohammed was a … MURDERING, LYING, DECEITFUL, THIEVING PEDOPHILE. And that ALL of his actions can be justified from the Koran and Hadiths.
The Bible tells Christians to “turn the other cheek”, while the Koran and Hadiths instruct Muslims to tear off the cheeks of their ‘enemies’ – to persue them and kill them.
So much for Ryan’s “attacking double standards”.
It would be laughable if it wasn’t so tragic …
January 5th, 2011 at 3:27 pm
Yeah, couldn’t help myself.
The last is worst, working back to the first as least bad.
But while the answer to your question may not be “they’re all bad”, it’s still true that they’re all bad, or at least that they’re all maniacs. And the point I was making was that while the Lord’s Resistance Army could certainly be worse (or at least, wider spread), they are still examples of people committing atrocities in the name of Christ – AND it would be unfair to tar all Christians with the same brush, or to accuse all Christians of being atrocity-committers waiting to happen.
And similarly, it is unfair to tar all 1.5 billion Muslims in the world with a brush dipped in the atrocities of the very few.
Not sure how that analogy works. Tar them with the brush dipped in the atrocities of the very few. I think it works. You see my point.
January 5th, 2011 at 3:29 pm
Looks like General Debate has been hijacked once again and become Generally Religous Debate
Oh well back to the tennis. Wow, didn’t Shuai Peng have a great win?
January 5th, 2011 at 3:32 pm
And yet the overwhelming majority of Muslims in the world are not murderous, deceitful, thieving or paedophilic. Again, as I said before, look at the reality of Muslims in the world, not your interpretation of their holy book. I say the same thing to anti-Christians – “look at all the perfectly nice Christians in the world, not the image you create in your head by your reading of the Bible.”
And the Bible (not the Old Testament, Kris) tells Christians that Jesus said, “I come not to bring peace, but to bring a sword.” That’s the kind of thing anti-Christians emphasise, even while you emphasise violent verses and Hadiths. My response is the same to you both: Christians and Muslims are, overwhelmingly, perfectly nice folk who don’t go around committing violent crimes.
Kris, you haven’t actually addressed what I was saying. You seem to agree that most Muslims in the world haven’t committed any violent crimes, but you haven’t disputed that you consider them all murderers who haven’t had a chance to kill yet. The double standard is that if you applied the same logic to Christians, you’d consider all Christians as murderers who haven’t had a chance to kill yet.
January 5th, 2011 at 3:40 pm
Shark sighted at Wellingtons Lyall Bay. That’s good news… the sewerage must have cleared.
January 5th, 2011 at 3:45 pm
I certainly do.
My point is that while such an approach might seem fair-minded, it implies that I have nothing more to be concerned about with Muslims than I do with Christians, which seems very unfair on the latter, and obtuse, whether deliberate or not.
It also results in useless responses (or no responses) in practical terms. It is an argumentative approach that seems designed to force our society into either worrying about every Christian and Muslim – or not worrying about them at all. Or is this not merely another example of your libertarian socialist approach to our society; that, as with Obama vs. Bush, you consider yourself to be outside both camps and able to take a disinterested approach?
So if Christians had committed all the acts listed by Kowtow you would not be keeping a more wary eye on the likes of Kris K. In fact you’d be making the same claims: that it was only a tiny minority of Christians and we should not link Kris’s words with the actions of his ilk?
Really?
Because that seems to be contradicted by your own comparisons, in which you’re treating the Christian threat equally with the Islamist threat when the latter has a established a vastly larger record of death in recent years in the name of their religion. If you can equate Christians with Islamists now, what would you be like if the levels of religious-inspired violence were on a similar scale?
Me neither, but there is your conflation again with the word “every”. Kris K may think that “every” is a correct analysis – and that makes him an easy target for you.
Similarly with the word “majority” and “tiny minority”. You’ve pounced on the latter with the question of evaluating numbers, which is no more solidly answerable than if I turned the question around on you for your “majority”. In both cases we’ll likely end up talking about polls taken of Muslim responses over the years in various Western countries.
The real question is whether the tiny minority represents sufficient numbers to continually commit, around the world, the types of acts listed by Kowtow and intimidate the majority sufficiently that they cannot or will not do anything to stop them. I’ve no doubt there are other Salman Taseers’ out there, but they don’t all have to be killed to be rendered useless.
In short the answer to your question is not some quantification or the word every. It is the phrase large enough.
There have been sufficient acts world-wide in the last decade alone – together with near misses that did not result in death, such as the near fatal stabbing of the gay French mayor of Paris several years ago by a gay-hating Muslim – to cause me to look much harder at someone claiming to be a Muslim than I would a Christian, and certainly much harder than I did before the 9/11 attacks.
That seems to me to be a perfectly rational, reasonable assessment of the degree of danger and trying to effectively marginalise me by lumping me in with absolutists is not going to persuade me to your view.
January 5th, 2011 at 3:49 pm
So, if the coast is clear, should we ask Turiana and Hone to go swimming?
January 5th, 2011 at 3:54 pm
Aside from Kris K it’s less a debate between religious people than a debate between atheists/agnostics about a particular religion called Islam, it’s potential and actual effects in the West, and what should be done about it.
That seems more like a political/philosophical/ideological debate to me.
January 5th, 2011 at 4:35 pm
Maybe. In this case, I don’t think so. I don’t think my approach is designed to force anyone into either worrying about every Christian and Muslim or not worry about them at all, but rather to show the absurdity as treating “Christians” or “Muslims” as some monolithic entity of a billion-plus people about whom as a whole almost anything sensible can be said.
Yes. And I’ve pointed out that Christians have committed atrocities. Until Kris gives me any reason to believe he’s going to do the same, I don’t believe he will. And the fact that he and they both call themselves “Christian” is not a good enough reason alone to suspect him of guilt.
I equate them only for the purposes of defending over a billion law-abiding non-violent Muslims from Kris’s accusation that they’re all murderers whether or not they’ve actually murdered anyone.
Yes.
I have been addressing nothing but Kris’s assertion that all Muslims are murderers waiting to happen. I did not lump you in with his absolutism; you (apparently) leapt to its defence.
January 5th, 2011 at 4:41 pm
I don’t mind being mentioned as the token Christian, but I think there are a couple of other contributers who also fall into the same category – along with the atheists and agnostics also interested in the subject
Because whatever our belief system, Islam represents much the same threat to all of us in the West (even you, Steve) – as Tom essentially highlighted.
PS Excellent comment at 3:45 pm, Tom.
]
[And not just because you've increased my Google hit-rate count
January 5th, 2011 at 4:57 pm
Ryan Sproull 4:35 pm,
And I have already addressed your original comment in my 12:52 reply, Ryan:
The point being – that ALL Muslims are potentially ticking time bombs (pun intended) if, and I highlight IF, they take the Koran and Hadiths seriously, and IF they aspire to the example set by Mohammed.
Those Muslims that DO NOT hold to their scriptures, and view Mohammed as their example are NOT ‘good’ Muslims. Which goes right back to my original comment where I highlighted Punjab Gov. Salman Taseer’s (a Muslim) murder for NOT defending Islamic blasphemy laws. His murderer (also a Muslim) obviously didn’t view Taseer as a ‘good’ Muslim.
Do you GET IT, Ryan?!
January 5th, 2011 at 5:13 pm
I responded to this, Kris. Almost 1,500,000,000 Muslims every day are not doing any of the violent things encouraged by your interpretation of the Koran and Hadiths. Every day, the real world flies in the face of your expectations of Muslims.
January 5th, 2011 at 5:15 pm
Chris De Freitas’ piece is far too kind to the alarmists. He ignores the fact that the original “evidence” for the theory – the infamous Hockeystick and related graphs – was fabricated from whole cloth and that if the people responsible had been in any other field – accounting or pharmaceuticals for example – they would have been prosecuted for fraud and spent a long time in prison.
He ignores the fact that the charts showing warming over the last few decades have been “adjusted” to manually introduce a wholly false warming signal into the recent trend (it’s not just NIWA that has been completely discredited in this way.)
He ignores that some of the key charlatans at the centre of the alarmism were thoroughly exposed recently when their emails to each other were released onto the Internet: plotting to corrupt the peer review process, boasting of “hiding the decline” in the charts they were creating (and not forgetting the associated programming code and comments which revealed the chaotic mess their records are in.)
He ignores that the alarmists shamelessly contradict themselves even now by claiming that recent recent heavy snow falls around the world are in fact still evidence for global warming.
I could go on. And on. And on.
January 5th, 2011 at 5:15 pm
I give up, Ryan!
January 5th, 2011 at 5:24 pm
Adoption. NZ can now adopt Russian children in need of adoption
http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/newsdetail1.asp?storyID=188416
Can NZ children be adopted here or overseas before they get beaten and killed?
January 5th, 2011 at 5:27 pm
Me too, Kris. Happy New Year ; )
Honestly, I’m having far more fun coming up with porn parody titles on Twitter.
#lessambitiouspornfilms
January 5th, 2011 at 5:30 pm
You must have missed quite a bit, Kris K has often suggested eliminating or killing those he doesn’t agree with, politically or religiously. Granted he’s unlikely to actually do it himself but he suggests and tries to incite.
January 5th, 2011 at 5:32 pm
Now THERE’S a topic for discussion, Steve.
January 5th, 2011 at 6:34 pm
And now for something completely different…
The retailers association are bleating about online shopping from offshore sites having an unfair advantage over local retailers as (many/most) of those purchases don’t have GST levied on them. They are now calling for all imported purchases to have GST levied. (This would likely cost more to administer than it is worth – I believe that is the rationale as to why privately imported goods (for personal consumption) with GST or other duties of less than $50 do not have them collected currently.)
Perhaps they need a lesson (or a least a reminder) on competition. I don’t recall hearing the association complain to govt the last time a local retailer offered a ‘GST free’ sale. If their members have real competition from offshore suppliers, they should address the market accordingly.
(It’s also only a very small step from regulating to address this ‘problem’ to seeking regulation against parallel importers – they also undermine ‘traditional’ local retailers’ margins.)
January 5th, 2011 at 6:50 pm
Yet still not so much as you…, which was the original starting point of this discussion.
Tiresome to have to repeat this point – especially to people who claim they’re awfully concerned about religious and political violence – but I’ll worry about Kris K and his ilk when I start to see evidence that people are acting on their words.
Rather like I did with Islamists between the 1990′s and today. I changed my attention and approach in the face of evidence. Apparently you don’t.
January 5th, 2011 at 6:53 pm
I’d say: do nothing at all and let the inefficient go under. The market and competition rule!
January 5th, 2011 at 7:05 pm
bhudson (753) Says:
January 5th, 2011 at 6:34 pm
…
The retailers association are bleating about online shopping from offshore sites…
They’re missing the point.
I reckon very few on-line purchases from overseas are made because someone is saving 15% GST. The cost of shipping individual purchases (vs bulk shipping to a distributor or retailer) would make up that difference. Plus, 15% is often a small price to pay for the protection of the Consumer Guarantees Act.
Rather, the problems are 1) the inefficiency of the whole distribution chain and 2) the docile Kiwi consumer.
1) Every time someone else handles a product on its way from the manufacturer to you, the price rises – may double, in fact. (I was an investor in a company that designed and manufactured a fashion item and observed how an item that cost $3 to manufacture ended up selling for $50.)
And if the distribution chain passes through Australia, it’ll be bloody inefficient (not 100% sure why) and getting goods over here just adds one more step.
I’m – well, not happy, but willing – to pay GST to, say, Fishpond rather than getting a GST-free price from Amazon, if the end price is at least comparable. (Whitcoulls et al can get stuffed.)
2) Every time someone pays $500 for a pair of jeans that would sell for $150 in North America, that weakens the bargaining position of all consumers (at least of expensive jeans) in New Zealand. If enough consumers say, “That [item] is not worth that price and I won’t buy it”, the prices will come down.
(descends from soap-box)
January 5th, 2011 at 7:06 pm
Pete George 5:30 pm,
The only person who seems to miss “quite a bit” around here is non-comprehending twits like you, Pete.
[Edit: You beat me to it, Tom]
January 5th, 2011 at 7:22 pm
Tom Hunter 6:50 pm,
Interesting, Tom, that while the article I originally linked to earlier in the day described Taseer as Muslim, your link stated he was a secularist:
January 5th, 2011 at 7:24 pm
Always one to seek enlightenment from the knowledgeable Kris Klux Klan -
Perhaps KK, you can tell me the difference between Mumtaz Qadri and Scott Roeder.
January 5th, 2011 at 7:35 pm
Tom, I see more threat to us here from wankers trying to talk up revolution and violence in NZ than Muslim terrorists – it’s possible NZ could be hit by Muslim terrorism but if so it’s more likely to be a one off if it happened. Local zealots trying to incite nutters are more of a potential ongoing threat.
January 5th, 2011 at 7:37 pm
gander,
I agree.
I find that savings from offshore purchases are generally 30% or more (in a number of cases around 50%) but I guess it does depend on the specifics of the goods. I have been charged GST on a number of purchases, but in every case it has still been significantly cheaper to purchase online and import than to buy locally.
Retailers have to wake up and accept that they may well be part of a “global” market now thanks to simplicity of online shopping. They have to realign their business (and probably margins) to compete.
January 5th, 2011 at 7:38 pm
“from wankers trying to talk up revolution and violence in NZ ”
Have you any particular wankers in mind Petty?
January 5th, 2011 at 7:39 pm
KK- is it compulsory to be a moron to be a bible believing xian, or does that come later?
It is possible, and common, to be both a secularist and a religious follower. Do invest in a quality dictionary, don;’t justb atke Jerry Falwell and redbaiter as fonts of wisdom.
Secularist does not equal atheist.
Bible believing xian does = stupidity.
January 5th, 2011 at 7:40 pm
I wouldn’t be at all surprised if the recent spate of fatalities resulting from fleeing drivers were covert ‘blue suicides’ (suicide by cop).
The same thing happened about 10 years ago with railway crossings.
January 5th, 2011 at 7:42 pm
Have you got my favourite yet, Ryan?
“In Diana Jones and the Temple of Poon”
Oh, how I wish I thought of that one.
January 5th, 2011 at 7:43 pm
The point Ryan has been trying to get across is that the vast majority of Muslims show no evidence of acting on the sleeper terrorist-in-waiting label that Fletch and Kris keep going on about.
January 5th, 2011 at 7:43 pm
Maybe more “Brown stupidicides”. adze.
“Meanwhile the family of the teenaged driver who died following a police pursuit in Auckland have remembered him as a ”nice kid”.
Timoti Mohi, 15, died this morning after crashing a stolen car into a power pole near the Market Road off-ramp on Auckland’s Southern Motorway.
A teenage passenger had to be cut free from the wreckage and is in Auckland Hospital with serious leg injuries.
Police had been in pursuit of the vehicle, and another stolen car, in the central city before abandoning the chase when speeds reached up to 180km/h. “
January 5th, 2011 at 7:53 pm
Johnboy, most of them have moved that crap off Kiwiblog although it has been here too. This sort of thing:
January 5th, 2011 at 7:58 pm
Ok I give up – how do you do the false-text hyperlink?
January 5th, 2011 at 8:01 pm
What he is talking about is a legitimate response to the moves by Progressives to make Conservatives an extinct species. And he’s talking about the US and their false President. You’re OK way down in NZ Pete. For now anyway.
January 5th, 2011 at 8:01 pm
Kris K:
“I have a certain amount of sympathy with Ann Coulter’s view:
‘We should invade their countries, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity.’”
The smorgasbord “christian” strikes again. You might regard JC as your “lord and saviour” KKK, but he certainly isn’t your role model. Somehow I sense that you wouldn’t ever have been his. I imagine he might consider you a bit of an embarassment.
A+ in Hypocrisy 101. Well done, yet again. You never fail to amuse.
January 5th, 2011 at 8:07 pm
We though get tired of your constant sneering false claims to be “amused” by everyone you don’t agree with. About time you found a new line you cheap little schoolboy wanker.
January 5th, 2011 at 8:09 pm
MyNameIsLegion (for we are many) 7:39 pm,
… not if you’re a Muslim, though. In Islam there is no separation between “Mosque and state” – which, of course, was the point I was making, and the same one which you missed.
Mind you, I can understand you missing it – all those competing voices in your head must be a real handicap …
January 5th, 2011 at 8:09 pm
Sorry Petty I thought you were talking serious stuff and had knowledge of internal revolution from the left or the Murris or whatever.
I never realised that you were just trying to make a point to emphasise your dislike of the right thinking people here.
My mistake.
January 5th, 2011 at 8:13 pm
Why? Is your revolution not getting much traction? Can’t you talk anyone into doing your dirty work?
Johnboy, Red has posted more than enough about wanting to string up politicians and journalists, to eliminate anyone he disagrees with. You like his campaign for revolution?
January 5th, 2011 at 8:13 pm
Perhaps KK, you can tell me the difference between Mumtaz Qadri and Scott Roeder.
Just. tell. The. Truth.
January 5th, 2011 at 8:14 pm
‘We should invade their countries, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity.’”
Why bother with the causalities and the selection process involved? Rephrase it to.
“We should nuke their countries and kill them all”.
January 5th, 2011 at 8:18 pm
Pete George 7:53 pm,
Good to see you expanding your horizons, Pete – if you read enough posts and comments at Crusader Rabbit & TrueBlueNZ you MAY even eventually improve your comprehension abilities … we live in hope and a belief that miracles are still possible even in this secular age.
January 5th, 2011 at 8:20 pm
If you weren’t totalitarian by nature Pete, you’d know that a bit of counter culture is no harm. We’re not to the hanging stage yet.
January 5th, 2011 at 8:22 pm
Perhaps KK, you can tell me the difference between Mumtaz Qadri and Scott Roeder.
Nope. Didn’t think so.
January 5th, 2011 at 8:24 pm
You know you are doing something right when the opposition (even if they are doddering old farts) read your blog Red.
January 5th, 2011 at 8:24 pm
Why don’t you tell us the difference between a cultural Marxist like you and a totalitarian?
January 5th, 2011 at 8:25 pm
Have you decided not to push that line at the moment Red? You have mentioned wanting to hang anyone you find disagreeable from lamp posts often enough in the past. And you have talked up armed insurrection, like KK. Entrenched religious intolerance of anyone you don’t like.
You accusing someone of having totalitarian traits is like Phil Goff accusing someone of having poll problems.
January 5th, 2011 at 8:26 pm
“You know you are doing something right when the opposition (even if they are doddering old farts) read your blog Red.”
You ought to see some of the hate messages they leave there. Old MNIJ is especially prolific.
January 5th, 2011 at 8:28 pm
Simple Red.
The cultural Marxist like Petty has fuck all money and is hoping to get shit loads once his mob take over become totalitarians and shoot the rich.
Ask me another.
January 5th, 2011 at 8:29 pm
Johnboy 8:14 pm,
Perhaps, Johnboy, Pete is volunteering for the role of ambassador to the Muslim world, and he’ll go and reason with the Islamists? While the result wouldn’t be quite as quick are your suggestion, I imagine after several months Pete would have bored them all to death.
January 5th, 2011 at 8:30 pm
Pete you wouldn’t have a fucking clue what anyone was saying you blabbering time wasting bandwidth wasting nitwit. 8582 posts of worthless shit in two years. Fucking hopeless.
January 5th, 2011 at 8:31 pm
” Shark sighted at Wellingtons Lyall Bay. That’s good news… the sewerage must have cleared.
So, if the coast is clear, should we ask Turiana and Hone to go swimming?
”
Nah if the sewerage has only just cleared, let’s not spoil it again.
January 5th, 2011 at 8:33 pm
I suspect after a few days of Petty’s doddering marxist rantings they would quietly behead him in his sleep and blame it on the SAS.
We would all grieve of course.
January 5th, 2011 at 8:38 pm
Redbaiter, you’re so predictable, always reverts to abuse when your your position is indefensible – which is most of the time.
Kris, are you volunteering to “invade their countries, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity”? There’s more Catholics than any other Christians, would you rather they did it for you?
January 5th, 2011 at 8:41 pm
Now your talking Petty. A bloody crusade turning into a world war.
Just what we need to get the wheels of industry turning again.
I like your thinking my man.
Very capitalistic for a leftie.
January 5th, 2011 at 8:49 pm
Really? Because the very next thing you write is…
Why that’s so disingenuous a slur as to be cute! Well played sir.
January 5th, 2011 at 8:49 pm
Redbaiter (12,618) Says:
January 5th, 2011 at 8:26 pm
“You know you are doing something right when the opposition (even if they are doddering old farts) read your blog Red.”
You ought to see some of the hate messages they leave there. Old MNIJ is especially prolific.
Once again, liar.
Post ‘em if you’ve got ‘em.
January 5th, 2011 at 8:50 pm
Johnboy 8:41 pm,
Given that the West is heading into possibly the worst depression in recent history, and that WWII followed on the heels of the Great Depression of the 30s, then perhaps we’re about due for WWIII. And especially when you start factoring in the Globalists’ and Islamists’ agendas …
Lock and load, boys!
January 5th, 2011 at 8:50 pm
Good ole Kris Klux Klan, running away from the question.
Unable, or unwuilling, to show the difference between Mumtaz Qadri and Scott Roeder.
why. KKK? Why?
Because Roeder is on your team and he is as big an arsehole as Qadri?
January 5th, 2011 at 8:59 pm
Detroit in decline:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/gallery/2011/jan/02/photography-detroit
January 5th, 2011 at 9:01 pm
“Lock and load, boys!”
To be honest Kris I suspect WW11 was really a continuation of unfinished business from 1918. The Versailles treaty created the sore and the depression just inflamed it.
The Marshall plan with help from the nuclear deterrent stopped that happening again for 65 years so far but it is in our nature to be combative.
Shortage of resources spurred by the madmen of the Asiatic races will start the next one.
As long as they keep it up north it may be to our advantage as long as we have a big friend, something that the lefties think we don’t need in the fools paradise they exist in.
January 5th, 2011 at 9:02 pm
Whenever MyNameIsLegion starts talking I’m never sure which personality I’m dealing with …
January 5th, 2011 at 9:11 pm
MyBrainOnCrack – “show the difference between Mumtaz Qadri and Scott Roeder.”
The main difference is that Roeder was a schizophrenic not taking meds, which requires a PC crim-cuddler such as yourself to feel sorry for the poor widdle darling and make him a nice cup of tea and tell him how it’s all somebody else’s fault. Rich pricks, probably. Or does the milk of human kindness not flow when the nutter has a loony mission you disagree with?
January 5th, 2011 at 9:12 pm
And the point I have been trying to get across is that concepts such as vast majority and tiny minority are ridiculous argumentative debating terms in the context of said tiny minority still being big enough to cause serious problems in the West. Given that it already has done so it’s amazing that this simple fact has to continue to be pointed out – but that’s cognitive dissonance for you. In short, accepting that point would make yours irrelevant – and you’re not about to let go of that warm feeling the words “vast majority” give you.
Still, I realise that as long as there is a vast majority vs. a tiny minority you’ll feel comfortable and unworried…
Wait! What?
January 5th, 2011 at 9:19 pm
Johnboy 9:01 pm,
You could be right, too.
Although the way China’s gearing up, and with its interest in buying up New Zealand farms, etc, and with Australia’s vast mineral wealth, I think they may also have eyes on Australasia being their southern hemisphere base in the event of a World War. When I mentioned the Globalists and the Islamists earlier I should probably have added the Communists – especially communist China, and likely some expression of interest from the old USSR.
Interesting times – times when a “big friend” never goes amiss.
January 5th, 2011 at 9:24 pm
Tom you’re quite right a very small cell could cause immense damage that’s absolutely the fact.
However what Fletch and Kris go on and on and on and on and (sorry) on and on and on and on and on about (imagine what it’s like being in the debate with them) is the general population dynamics of having Muslims in the community in the first place. Because they, apparently, see potential terrorists all over the place, everywhere. In the supermarket, in the dairy, in the butcher, particularly halal, on the bus, in the train, every single place you go there’s a Muslim just waiting to leap up and cut your throat as he loudly shouts ‘Allahu Akbar’ and his womenfolk do that ghastly ‘ulululuuing’ thing they do.
They don’t seem to understand you see, that not every single Muslim is in fact a terrorist and not even a potential terrorist and the terrible thing is they seem to have no recognition of the fact that the very best way to in fact bring about that outcome is for everyone to behave in exactly the way they are behaving. And aren’t they therefore just great big sillies is my private thought to myself about that.
January 5th, 2011 at 9:27 pm
I considered that, Adze, but wasn’t sure how to tone it down for a “less ambitious” title.
I had, for example, “Adequate Will Humping” and “Nineteen-Eating-Three (I Like Big Lover)”.
It’s a delicate balancing act.
January 5th, 2011 at 9:28 pm
In retrospect, I could have gone with “I Love Medium-sized Brother”.
January 5th, 2011 at 9:39 pm
Reid 9:24 pm,
Riiiight, so let me get this straight, Reid.
People like me and Fletch are obviously wrong about the vast bulk of Muslims … BUT … if we carry on the way we are we will invoke Islamic aggression/terror (presumably from the vast bulk of Muslims) … and therefore such acts of Islamic aggression will not be the fault of the perpetrators, but RATHER the fault of those who dared to incite them in the first place.
You remind me of the typical cry of the Islamists themselves:
“Islam is a religion of peace … and if you deny this truth we’ll kill you”.
I guess I better start apologising in advance for the next Islamist terror plot – it’s obviously my fault, afterall.
January 5th, 2011 at 9:43 pm
Perhaps if we all became Muslim then the peace loving Islamic people would stop killing us?
January 5th, 2011 at 9:44 pm
Reid, any comments on Muslims in Paris?
http://jbpaz101.blogspot.com/2010/09/islamization-of-paris-streets.html
January 5th, 2011 at 9:44 pm
Now shall we become Sunni or Shite?
Oh Shite!
January 5th, 2011 at 9:50 pm
Now Australia has a Muslim in its cricket team!
I guess the game is over, guys. Time to concede defeat and move on to the next challenge – like, how many wives can I afford?
January 5th, 2011 at 9:51 pm
Johnboy,
You reminded me of the Muslim weather report:
Partly sunni, but mainly shi’ite.
January 5th, 2011 at 9:54 pm
I suggest you marry Ewe’s Luc. They are cheaper to keep than Wimmin and fit in well with Islamic tradition when no Camels are available.
January 5th, 2011 at 9:57 pm
Johnboy 9:43 pm,
The trouble is, Johnboy, when they’re not killing the Jew, the Christian, or the infidel, they’re killing each other. So even if the entire world was Islamified, the violence and killing wouldn’t stop. Think Iran-Iraq war.
[Not that I need to tell you - for the benefit of the useful idiot appeasers]
January 5th, 2011 at 9:58 pm
Riiiight, so let me get this straight, Reid.
OK Kris. So the straight fact is that the Muslim population in NZ as far as I know hasn’t yet committed a terrorist act, it hasn’t yet demanded that Christians stop ringing their church bells on Sunday, it doesn’t broadcast the call to prayer however many times daily they have a wont to do, it doesn’t demand special political or social treatment in anyway whatsoever and has never done and I don’t know, what do you reckon, let’s say we have 100,000 here right here right now.
I’m just not seeing the problem Kris.
Or do I have to wait. OK, well while I’m waiting for critical mass to develop before they start introducing Sharia Law, perhaps sometimes between now and the time that happens, preferably before you retire tonight, you could answer this: if every one of us believed as you did toward Muslims and we had Muslims living amongst us, how would that sit with your values?
January 5th, 2011 at 10:00 pm
Yes Kris. As I said “Oh Shite”
Do you think Luc would like me to outfit his many wives in suitable wedding attire?
January 5th, 2011 at 10:02 pm
Reid, any comments on Muslims in Paris?
RB, my standard question on Muslims in Europe generally, is why have their own politicians allowed this to happen to their own citizens. And personally I have several answers for that but what do you think?
January 5th, 2011 at 10:03 pm
Maybe we have had a temporary reprieve on your scenario reid.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/4483453/Divisive-imam-leaves-NZ-denying-he-preached-jihad
January 5th, 2011 at 10:08 pm
You think this is a common thing Johnboy? You think its insidiiously creeping into the fabric? Seriously?
If so, what is the best possible strategy with which to attack it?
Is it not, tear the carpet up, and expose the bugs: i.e. isolate them, and kill them.
Way to do that, is to get the whole community on your side, in genuine, not bullshit, partnership, all the time. Then they expose the bad ones, for you.
Appreciate many Muslim people haven’t been bought up in NZ these days. So what? Neither have lots and lots and lots and lots of others.
January 5th, 2011 at 10:14 pm
Luc Hands-on – “I guess the game is over, guys. Time to concede defeat and move on to the next challenge – like, how many wives can I afford?”
Looking forward to the day that when you “accidentally” grope some girl on the bus, her testimony in court would be legally worth 1/4 of yours?
January 5th, 2011 at 10:14 pm
Sorry reid but the only way to kill a cancer is to cut it out and in doing so you have to take some of the healthy tissue around it as well.
We have to get rid of all Muslims in NZ simple as that. Deport them to countries that share their faith.
Why would a devout Muslim wish to come here and then complain that we should change our ways to suit his faith unless his aim was to eventually submit us all to Islam.
January 5th, 2011 at 10:17 pm
As I have said before, step one is to pull our armies out of Muslim lands.
Then just leave them alone to sort themselves out, and write cheques for their oil for as long as we need to buy it – hopefully, not much longer, if we want our civilisation to survive.
January 5th, 2011 at 10:18 pm
Red Reid, any comments on Muslims in Paris? http://jbpaz101.blogspot.com/2010/09/islamization-of-paris-streets.html
Now would be a good time to invent a “traditional” Parisian ceremony of driving a bulldozer down particular streets on a Friday.
January 5th, 2011 at 10:18 pm
Reid obviously won’t be happy until New Zealand has the same Muslim problems as Paris does (as outlined in Red’s 9:44 pm link).
You may as well say there’s no Muslim problem on the moon, Reid – but only because there are no Muslims there. You really do live in la la land.
And by the way, I think you’ll find that the FIRST hijacking of a plane in NZ was carried out by a Muslim woman. And Muslim MP Ashraf Choudery has already called for the cross atop a certain clock-tower to not be reinstated after routine maintenance.
January 5th, 2011 at 10:23 pm
How can the University of Auckland continue to employ Chris de Freitas? He must be a huge embarassment!
He calls himself a climate scientist, but his arguments are non-science and risible.
Will someone please point him to http://www.skepticalscience.com/
January 5th, 2011 at 10:29 pm
KK, the first hijacking was indeed carried out by a Muslim, but not because she was Muslim. So her religion is a red herring.
And I agreed with Ashraf Choudray about the cross.
We live in a secular society and religion is meant to be a private and personal business, right?
January 5th, 2011 at 10:35 pm
Ashraf Choudray actually called for something! He actually made a statement.
A miracle!
I wonder how his Skycity shares are doing.
Got a special dispensation from Allah to buy those I guess.
January 5th, 2011 at 10:36 pm
Why would a devout Muslim wish to come here and then complain that we should change our ways to suit his faith unless his aim was to eventually submit us all to Islam.
Johnboy I think you’re conflating a religious human being for a fanatic who is willing to die for a cause.
The fact people do things in the name of Islam and the fact the Koran and Islamic philosophy has strands in it which can be interpreted as encouraging that, is not significant and the reason is you could paint Christianity in exactly precisely the same way if you wished to – as a religion. Fact is, I could paint Paul, the greatest Christian Missionary who ever lived, as a murderous thug, were I Satan.
You can do it, to any religion.
Now, as to the people who worship that religion, that’s a different matter,
Christians aren’t Muslims, in terms of genetics and temperament because of the geography and gene pools. The Caucasian versus Asian versus Arabic genetic pools.
And that’s what they’ve done in the media, is conflate the religion with the temperament of a people, and melded them together into a story. For most Arabic and the more extreme Asian temperament is such as to be inflamed by the natural reaction of us, to stories of their religious zealotry.
BTW Kris, if every one of us believed as you did toward Muslims and we had Muslims living amongst us, how would that sit with your values?
January 5th, 2011 at 10:49 pm
Its a fine line between a religious human being and a fanatic reid. It doesn’t take much to turn one into the other whatever the religion (you don’t have to dig to deep to find it here).
I’m a realist. I don’t believe in fine words or ardent promises. If I perceive a threat I prefer to act rather than react.
You may make all the apologies you like for Muslims but I see them as a threat to our way of life and a risk we don’t need to tolerate.
As far as I am concerned they bring no good to this country and they should all be deported to whatever Islamic nation they choose where they can pursue their religion as and when they see fit without inconveniencing us.
January 5th, 2011 at 10:50 pm
Another example that Islam is the religion of peace:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-12116764
January 5th, 2011 at 10:51 pm
Reid 10:36 pm,
If everyone believed as I did … we wouldn’t have non-assimilating Muslims in NZ. The only way a Muslim would get into NZ would be if he fully renounced Islamism … that would sit very well with my values.
Night all – done my dash for the day in Kiwiblog land (or whatever alternative universe this is).
January 5th, 2011 at 10:55 pm
Oh and reid thats for the photo link, I find the decline of Detroit to be truly fascinating. I would love to go over there on a photography trip someday.
Have you watched the BBC documentary “Requiem for Detroit”?
January 5th, 2011 at 10:59 pm
Luc Hansen:
You seem to wear the “hands-on” label as a badge of honour.
Which begs the question: do you still stand by this comment?
Hmmm?
January 5th, 2011 at 11:00 pm
Night Kris. Likewise.
Night all.
Night Grandma.
January 5th, 2011 at 11:07 pm
Bitch, please. There weren’t any pre-2001. Didn’t satisfy your Resistance friends then, wouldn’t satisfy them now.
omfg Peter Williams said “nigger” on TV. SACK HIM NOW.
Nomestradamus: no wonder he’s got eight kids! He’s got something of the Assange about him.
January 5th, 2011 at 11:10 pm
Cheers nickb.
Johnboy and Kris and Fletch, goodnight and far thee well and would appreciate discussing more at a later time.
January 5th, 2011 at 11:14 pm
Nomestradamus
Absolutely I stand by that. It’s honest comment, in context.
And for true and honest debate, context is important.
You will notice, for example, that I have called for Assange to return to Sweden to face his accusers over a relatively minor charge (the penalty is a fine, at most).
Any chance that you can engage in substance, for a change?
January 5th, 2011 at 11:27 pm
More Hurf Durf crap:
You need to read a little bit of history instead of doing drugs, poor boy.
Our involvement with subjugating the ME began in 1916 with the Sykes-Picot agreement that divided up Arab/Muslim lands before they were even conquered, and never ended, whether through overt or covert operations.
Pull the troops, pay for the oil (even better, go post-oil real quick), and leave them alone.
What’s your problem with that?
January 5th, 2011 at 11:39 pm
Alright then, enlighten me. Tell me what divisions stationed in what countries and what commanders there were directing these occupations.
Unless you’re just being obtuse again.
Thought so.
Reality 87, Luc Hansen 0.
January 5th, 2011 at 11:51 pm
Luc Hansen:
Yes, context is important. I could easily have quoted you as saying “What man hasn’t “groped” sometime?” and left it at that, but I didn’t, did I? Instead, I quoted your comment in its surrounding context, and asked if you still stand by it six months later. I was curious to know if your position had changed, as the “hands-on” label seems to have, er, stuck ever since you made that comment.
Actually, I have a life outside of Kiwiblog, so I don’t read everything that you say. But I’ve just done a quick targeted google search and found this comment:
Read in its surrounding context, I think that’s a fairly qualified statement, which makes your characterisation of it above misleading. As you say, for true and honest debate, context is important.
By the way, I’m not sure if your position on criminality is consistent, as I’ve also seen another comment from you supporting Wikileaks supporters’ DOS attacks on Visa.com (“Bloody good job,” you said). Perhaps you could clarify when you think someone should be charged, if not a drunken groper, and if not a misguided computer nerd?
January 5th, 2011 at 11:58 pm
…I’ve just done a quick targeted google search and found this comment
Is this how the really good lawyers win their cases or is that just a simplified version for the audience at home?
January 6th, 2011 at 12:06 am
Reid:
Huh?
The purpose of doing a targeted Google search was to find a comment that Luc Hansen said he’d made. I initially was going to say “I haven’t seen that comment (which isn’t to say it doesn’t exist)” but then I decided to go looking for it.
I can assure you that the really good lawyers (your words) do Very Important Things, none of which have anything to do with targeted Google searches!
January 6th, 2011 at 12:14 am
Really? Bugger. It’s just I’m quite good with Google so was wondering how long it would take.. never mind.
January 6th, 2011 at 12:25 am
Reid:
Oh goodness, you sound so disappointed.
Perhaps this suggestion will help: you could invest in a caselaw database and put your Google skills to good use. Who knows what gold nuggets you might find and share with the Kiwiblog community?
January 6th, 2011 at 2:46 am
So, in the olden days when the Socialists were in Government in Italy, their leader Bettino Craxi went on a state visit to China. His aide pointed out that in China they were all Socialists. To whom he replied: “But if they’re all Socialists, who do they steal from?”
This joke cost the (left leaning) comedian who uttered it a 10-year ban from Italian TV.
January 6th, 2011 at 6:58 am
Mission impossible…
Was Coulter one of GW’s advisers?
Any obviously impossible aim anyway, but just say it was achievable, what then? If all the world were Christians, could anyone seriously believe that there would be no disputes, disagreements, rivalries? No crime, no fighting, no wars, no shite? Wan’t WW I mostly Christian versus Christian? And much of WW II.
KK has already stated he not only wants everyone to be Christians but not just any old Christian, he wants Christians to all be his version of “ideal” Christian. That’s a version that wants to kill off anyone who disagrees. If JC could see what was being suggested in his name he would turn in his grave.
January 6th, 2011 at 8:26 am
I wonder how many of the families of the dead Fort Hood soldiers would accept that sort of suspicion in a heartbeat if it meant their loved ones could be with them today:
But hey – maybe somebody finally did look at him sideways on that fateful day. I hope they’ve had time to reflect on their error – assuming they survived of course.
Ryan made the same argument some months ago during another tangle with Kris K – self-fulfilling prophecies and all that. The next thing you know people like me will be getting blamed for Darryl Harris committing crimes as a result of losing his benefit. Interesting that a right-winger would subscribe – only in this argument apparently – to such a leftist linkage of cause and effect.
The thing is I doubt that one person in a thousand in the West during the 1990′s ever gave a thought to Muslims or Islamist terrorism, let alone went around seeing potential terrorists everywhere. Yet that genial ignorance did not prevent the African embassy bombings in 1998 or the 9/11 attacks.
But then I also realize that my argument will be considered irrelevant to people who assign the responsibility for the 9/11 attacks not to Islamist terrorists but to….. other actors.
January 6th, 2011 at 10:18 am
Yeah, and look at the hoo-hah against Bill O’Reilly on “the View” wid Whoopi Goldburg walkin’ out SIMPLY because BO said “Muslims killed us in 9/11″ when he should have said (Lib-speak) “Extremists.” The BIG prob for the West in the immediate future is, how can we all tell? The real onus is on Moderate Muslims to fight back and reclaim the public arena. Where are their intellectuals and academics voicing protest?
If they don’t, we’ll reach a point politically in the West enacting ghastly generalised anti-Muslim laws and restrictions simply to protect Western culture (ala France anti-Burkha, and Germany expelling Turks).