General Debate 26 October 2011

Email
Facebook
Twitter
Comment157

Uncategorized
General Debate

Comments (157)

Login to comment or vote

Mick Mac

Falafulu Fisi (1,279) Says:
October 26th, 2011 at 10:20 am

he’s also away!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 1:31pm
Lee01

People must choose to live, and if they do then a rational ethics will tell them how

Reason alone is insufficient.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 1:31pm
Weihana

Lee,

I don’t think this proves the point your trying to make. The suicide bomber, regardless of how self-deluded he/she is, still believes that their actions are about survival in some sense. In this case the survival of the group. So a suicide bomber really has not abandoned the need for survival in the way you think.

I’m not so sure it’s about survival. To quote Osama – “we love death”.

The point is that moral principles are derived from one’s values and while you can say that the suicide bomber still values survival in some sense, be it the survival of the group or the survival and advancement of their religion, it is nevertheless in a different sense to most ordinary people and so different principles of action are derived which ultimately justify suicide bombing.

The problem is that as soon as someone, like Osama, embraces the concept of death as a value and something that’s okay then it’s difficult to reason with such a person and to find common ground. For such a person there is nothing we can say that would appeal to them to change their actions. And this is not simply a consequence of Osama being irrational, although I’m sure he was, it’s that his core values are different to ours and so it’s logically impossible, given such values, to give Osama a rational explanation of why he shouldn’t have done what he did.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 1:35pm
Weihana

# Lee01 (1,529) Says:
October 26th, 2011 at 1:31 pm

People must choose to live, and if they do then a rational ethics will tell them how

Reason alone is insufficient.

What is there but reason? Make believe? Fairies and hob-goblins? Reason is our only absolute and it is our only means of survival.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 1:38pm
Mick Mac

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/sharia-law-declaration-raises-concerns-libya-164347382.html

catherine Ashton clearly has no brains or hasn’t read the Koran, Sira and a Hadith.
Sharia cannot by definition respect the Human rights of non Muslims or women as Muslim men are all that count.

Western leaders also responded swiftly to Abdel Jalil’s comments, with EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton saying on Monday Libya’s introduction of sharia law must respect human rights and democratic principles.

Abdel Jalil, a respected former justice minister of Kadhafi who distanced himself from the old regime, is seen as a pious man and a Sufi follower of Islam who is at odds with extremism.

He has already said that the new Libya would not adopt any extremist ideology, and sought to reassure the international community by stating on Monday that Libyans were moderate Muslims.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 1:39pm
Weihana

Mick Mac,

I’m not convinced ownership is a basic right.

Life and Liberty maybe but not things or places.
The right to work/scheme/trade for things maybe is a 2ndary right.

Given that property is the means by which we sustain our lives it is hard to see how it shouldn’t be a right. I think the problem is that people assume that a basic right implies an unfettered right. I think we are constrained by our language and our desire to express things in simple terms despite the fact that in practice they are not so simple.

Freedom of speech for instance is often considered a basic right yet it is clearly restricted and regulated in a number of ways and justifiably so when the exercise of such a freedom infringes upon the rights or freedoms of someone else.

Similarly property is a basic right but not unfettered. To the extent that it limits the prosperity of others is the extent to which it should be regulated (if you accept that prosperity is something to value).
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 1:45pm
Scott Chris

Hell, if I were an illiterate Muslim sitting on a hill somewhere practicing my Koran verses watching an Israeli fighter jet buzz the town where just recently, my father and older brother had been killed by an Israeli air raid, I’d be the first in line to blow myself up if I could take out some of the enemy, especially if I was promised eternal happiness after I died.

It’s not hard to see out of another’s eyes if you have the courage to actually look.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 1:48pm
Weihana

# Lee01 (1,529) Says:
October 26th, 2011 at 12:15 pm

Natural Law is Law. Moral relativism is a fantasy invented by liberals.

I think the truth is in the middle. In practice Natural Law makes sense and the vast majority of people certainly act as if it was an actual thing rather than an abstract concept. But logically it is not absolutely true. It’s truth is conditional on certain moral premises, premises that individuals can, and unfortunately do, reject.

Also don’t assume that liberals are all moral relativists. For instance talk of “gay rights” echoes the sentiments of natural law far more than that of moral relativism.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 1:52pm
Weihana

Scott Chris,

It’s not hard to see out of another’s eyes if you have the courage to actually look.

Indeed and it doesn’t require one to agree with the action to understand why it happened.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 1:53pm
Falafulu Fisi

That’s a good philosophy link that I posted in my previous message.

Weihana said…
People must choose to live, and if they do then a rational ethics will tell them how.

Well, here is a short guide to ethics. So, ethics can be traced all the way back to rights (an irreducible primary – axiomatic) from the same website. There is no contradiction.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 2:00pm
Ryan Sproull

Moral relatvism is the liberal fantasy that morals are simply a matter of personal opinion.

“Personal opinion” implies that people can choose to have different morals. If that’s what you’re saying, you have a misconception of moral relativism. If it’s not what you’re saying, I’m not sure I’d call the vast complex structure of biological, social, religious and psychological factors that give rise to people’s and peoples’ moralities “simple”.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 2:05pm
Weihana

# Falafulu Fisi (1,279) Says:
October 26th, 2011 at 12:08 pm

Weihana said…
The notion of rights, grounded in our need to survive, has no meaning to such a person.

Irrelevant. Given that he’s (bomber) violated others rights via his action (even too late to ask afterwards) is not an argument about rights. Its an observation about rights violations.The fact is, the suicide bomber had just violated others rights (to life) when he’s exploding that bomb.

So, what’s your axiom about rights? Does one exist? If not then why not? How about this? Rights. Can you show if the definition given is a secondary or a primary? If it is a primary then you’ve just found an axiom for what rights is.

Interesting that your reference cites Ayn Rand despite the fact that she, as I do, made a distinction between absolute morality and objective morality. My favourite quote of hers is:

“If [man] chooses to live, a rational ethics will tell him what principles of action are required to implement his choice. If he does not choose to live, nature will take its course. Reality confronts a man with a great many ‘must’s’, but all of them are conditional: the formula of realistic necessity is: ‘you must, if -‘ and the if stands for man’s choice: ‘if you want to achieve a certain goal”

However, having said that Ayn Rand did believe that because reason is necessary to survive then freedom from the initiation of force was likewise necessary. I dispute this. It assumes men are rational, which they are often not. It assumes people will do things freely which are necessary for their survival and for the survival of the group in which they live. This is often not the case, even if it is true most of the time. Indeed the latest financial crisis demonstrated this quite cleary where people like Alan Greenspan (an Objectivist) have acknowledged their surprise as they expected the self-interest of lending institutions to protect shareholders equity.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 2:06pm
Weihana

# Falafulu Fisi (1,280) Says:
October 26th, 2011 at 2:00 pm

That’s a good philosophy link that I posted in my previous message.

Weihana said…
People must choose to live, and if they do then a rational ethics will tell them how.

Well, here is a short guide to ethics. So, ethics can be traced all the way back to rights (an irreducible primary – axiomatic) from the same website. There is no contradiction.

And taken from your link:

A proper foundation of ethics requires a standard of value to which all goals and actions can be compared to. This standard is our own lives, and the happiness which makes them livable. This is our ultimate standard of value, the goal in which an ethical man must always aim.

I’m not sure you are properly understanding the links you are citing.

Ethics, or meta-ethics, is the study of what it means for something to be right or wrong. “Rights” in this context means principles of action in a particular context and is derived from an understanding of what it means for something to be right or wrong. Applied ethics in other words.

As you can see from the quote I lifted from your reference, they are describing ethics in objective terms – i.e. the ability of moral principles to uphold certain values. The problem however is that the quote above is a form of begging the question. They have defined “our own lives” as the standard of value but have not justified why man “must always aim” to uphold this value.

To argue it’s axiomatic is a philosophically weak argument in my view. It’s not obvious why it should be considered axiomatic other than the fact that you simply assert that it is. On the other hand true axioms, such as the Law of Identity, can be argued as such because one cannot contradict such principles without assuming the truth of the principle in the first place. However this is not true of the principle that “we must value our own lives”. It’s a choice we can either choose to make or not.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 2:20pm
Pete George

Life isn’t a right. It’s a privilege.

Right from conception life is a series of hazards. Some of us are lucky enough to live in this day and age and country and live long enough to debate via cyberspace. But if I have a heart attack and die right now it demonstr
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 3:05pm
Lee01

@ Weihana

What is there but reason? Make believe? Fairies and hob-goblins? Reason is our only absolute and it is our only means of survival.

Reason is a tool, and there is nothing absolute about it. On its own its prone to delusion. The Communists killed one hundred million in the name of “Reason Alone”. Philophies in the twentieth century based on autonomous reason have been the most genocidal and dangerous.

Reason must be balanced with compassion, tradition and faith.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 3:06pm
Johnboy

“But if I have a heart attack and die right now it demonstr”

Fuck someone call an ambulance. Poor old PG has collapsed at his keyboard and may be dying!! 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 3:07pm
Lee01

Also don’t assume that liberals are all moral relativists.

Its not an assumption, its a fact. Liberals will lie about it of course, and claim they are not, but Liberalism in reality is a form of nihilism.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 3:09pm
Lee01

It’s not hard to see out of another’s eyes if you have the courage to actually look.

Its easy to understand and sympathise with any moral evil when you have no absolute moral center.

Liberals are good at “looking out of the eyes” of evil people, because they are moral nihilists who believe in nothing.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 3:13pm
Weihana

# Pete George (11,579) Says:
October 26th, 2011 at 3:05 pm

Life isn’t a right. It’s a privilege.

Right from conception life is a series of hazards. Some of us are lucky enough to live in this day and age and country and live long enough to debate via cyberspace. But if I have a heart attack and die right now it demonstr

Though “rights” are designed to govern human behaviour, not protect us from the hazards of nature.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 4:43pm
Ryan Sproull

Liberals are good at “looking out of the eyes” of evil people, because they are moral nihilists who believe in nothing.

Moral relativism is not moral nihilism. Moral nihilists would say that nothing is good or evil.

People who think that morality is relative do not say that nothing is good or evil.

People who think that taste in food is relative do not say that nothing tastes good or bad.

People who think that morality is relative do not say that people can pick and choose their morals on a whim.

People who think that taste in food is relative do not say that people can pick and choose their tastes in food on a whim.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 4:46pm
Weihana

# Lee01 (1,537) Says:
October 26th, 2011 at 3:06 pm

@ Weihana

What is there but reason? Make believe? Fairies and hob-goblins? Reason is our only absolute and it is our only means of survival.

Reason is a tool, and there is nothing absolute about it. On its own its prone to delusion. The Communists killed one hundred million in the name of “Reason Alone”. Philophies in the twentieth century based on autonomous reason have been the most genocidal and dangerous.

Reason must be balanced with compassion, tradition and faith.

I would say the brain is a tool which can produce reason or delusion but the two are not the same. Reason is the process of non-contradictory identification which is based on the law of identity.

I do not see why communism can be blamed on “reason” any more than it can be blamed on atheism or any other scapegoat that one might like to use. Communism is simply an ideology based on false principles and indeed reason is the process by which we understand its faults.

Faith on the other hand is of no use. It does not tell us anything about the world and indeed faith can be used to justify any proposition hence rendering it useless. It is the tool of conmen who want to control sheep who don’t want to think for themselves.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 5:05pm
Joseph Carpenter

Manolo @ 8.27am Billy English says NZ “on track” to achieve surplus by 2015 barring further disasters.

Cue Tui:
Compare Bill’s own budget projection of 19/5/2011 and the actual results in PREFU of 25/10/2011 = $7.8 BILLION unplanned extra cash deficit in only FIVE months ($1815 per citizen/$8,900 more debt per nett taxpayer in only 156 days). Yeah Bill you’re really credible. ANYONE in the private sector who was this bad would be booted and the company would have serious solvency issues if not heading towards bankruptcy. Wake up people.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 5:11pm
bereal

Quite a lot of verbiage going here today. From the intelligencia.
A lot of dancing around the head of a pin regarding “rights and priveledge”
Palestinians watching Israeli planes. Rights of lions and prey etc
Interesting but academic bullshit.

230 odd years ago Thomas Jefferson put it down on paper for you. He cut to the chase no bull.
A paraphrase.

“We hold these truths to be self evident that all men are created equal and endowed by
their creator with certain unalianable rights among which are the right to life, liberty and
the pursuit of happiness.”

It goes on but that kind of cuts through the shit and gets to the point.

Arguing now about what is a right and what is a privelidge, earnest as you maybe is kinda
academic crap. It’s already been done.

Anyone care to argue with Jefferson ?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 6:49pm
nickb

The problem with the Occupy Auckland protesters is that they simply have zero credibility.

At a time when a lot of kiwis are working 50-60 hour weeks to get by, a smelly bunch of unemployed hippies making a complete eyesore out of the nicest part of the CBD with their “legalise cannabis” and “Confederation of the United Tribes” banners are not going to gain a lot of traction.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 7:17pm
philu

(look to history..for quite startling parrallels..)

http://whoar.co.nz/2011/the-class-war-has-begun/

“…And the very classlessness of our society makes the conflict more volatile, not less.

During the death throes of Herbert Hoover’s presidency in June 1932 – desperate bands of men traveled to Washington and set up camp within view of the Capitol.

The first contingent journeyed all the way from Portland, Oregon, but others soon converged from all over—alone, in groups, with families—until their main Hooverville on the Anacostia River’s fetid mudflats swelled to a population as high as 20,000.

The men, World War I veterans who could not find jobs, became known as the Bonus Army—for the modest government bonus they were owed for their service.

Under a law passed in 1924, they had been awarded roughly $1,000 each – to be collected in 1945 or at death, whichever came first.

But they didn’t want to wait any longer for their pre–New Deal entitlement—

– especially given that Congress had bailed out big business with the creation of a Reconstruction Finance Corporation earlier in its session.

Father Charles Coughlin, the populist “Radio Priest” who became a phenomenon for railing against “greedy bankers and financiers,”-

– framed Washington’s double standard this way: “If the government can pay $2 billion to the bankers and the railroads – why cannot it pay the $2 billion to the soldiers?”

The echoes of our own Great Recession do not end there.

Both parties were alarmed by this motley assemblage and its political rallies; –

– the Secret Service infiltrated its ranks to root out radicals.

But a good Communist was hard to find.

The men were mostly middle-class, patriotic Americans.

They kept their improvised hovels clean and maintained small gardens.

Even so, good behavior by the Bonus Army did not prevent the U.S. Army’s hotheaded chief of staff, General Douglas MacArthur – from summoning an overwhelming force to evict it from Pennsylvania Avenue late that July.

After assaulting the veterans and thousands of onlookers with tear gas – MacArthur’s troops crossed the bridge and burned down the encampment.

The general had acted against Hoover’s wishes – but the president expressed satisfaction afterward that the government had dispatched “a mob” —

– albeit at the cost of killing two of the demonstrators.

The public had another take.

When graphic newsreels of the riotous mêlée fanned out to the nation’s movie theaters – audiences booed MacArthur and his troops –

– not the men down on their luck.

Even the mining heiress Evalyn Walsh McLean, the owner of the Hope diamond and wife of the proprietor of the Washington Post –

– professed solidarity with the “mob” that had occupied the nation’s capital…”

(cont…)

phil(whoar.co.nz)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 7:23pm
philu

still a tax-lawyer there nickb…?

still earning yr grubby money helping the 1% screw the rest of us over..?

..you are really in a position to pass judgement on people working on/driven by ideals..eh..?

..given that you are a craven trout for the 1%..

phil(whoar.co.nz)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 7:30pm
bereal

philu 7.23
Never before, in the field of human endevour has so much shit been sprouted by one
moron in a truly risable effort to prove something. What ? no one could fathom.

You should go back to your ………………eh !!!! etc.
……..duh…. whoar ??? ……..? eh……………. contd…etc ..eh…..

It makes much more sense.
You know its true.
Boofhead.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 7:37pm
bereal

and now philu you have excelled even your gormless puke.
You include yourself with genuine people who you feel tax lawyers are cheating.

How on earth can a bludging parasite like you be dissadvantaged by a tax lawyer ?

You insult everybody when you suggest he is screwing the rest of “US”

your not ‘ US ‘ you bludger.
You are a parasite who doesn’t work. Doesn’t contribute. Sucks off your fellows.
How can you be US. ? you cheeky bastard.
You deluded leech.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 7:47pm
Johnboy

Hard to see how a layabout who has been a net recipient of taxpayers largesse all his fucking useless existence can be whinging about the system or have I missed something?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 7:52pm
nasska

A tough old cowboy once counselled his grandson that if he
wanted to live a long life, the secret was to sprinkle a pinch
of gunpowder on his oatmeal every morning.

The grandson did this religiously and lived to the age of 110.

He left behind 4 children, 20 grandchildren, 30 great-
grandchildren, 10 great-great grandchildren,
– and a fifty foot crater where the crematorium used to be.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 8:03pm
bereal

Johnboy
The really breathtaking thing about a leech like philu is that he can accuse a worker
and producer and taxpayer of earning ‘grubby money’ and screwing the rest of ‘US’
He sucks off his fellows all his pathetic disgracefull existence and STILL feels hard done by.
He really thinks he is one of US
Have you ever struck such a self delusioned, screwed up nonce ?
Actually he is a good joke.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 8:04pm
Johnboy

None of you spot this then.

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/middle-east/111024/gaddafi-sodomized-video-gaddafi-sodomy

GrumpyOldHori going in with the bayonet. Using the traditional murri attack from the rear when the man is already down technique. 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 8:04pm
nickb

Yes still a tax lawyer, I noticed you have no compelling rebuttal from my statement.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 8:07pm
bereal

Confucius, he say, man who makes love with woman on top is fucking up.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 8:07pm
Johnboy

I changed to IMR 4064 on my porridge years ago nasska, when the bastards try to burn me the whole shooting match will reach escape velocity. 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 8:09pm
Johnboy

SOME lawyers are good guys nickb. 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 8:10pm
philu

i posted that on whoar @ about 7.00 am..this morning..johnboy…

..that whoar..eh..?..

..always first with the best..and the worst..

..and that one is one of the worst..

..i’m not really surprised that you find that sodomising of gaddafi with a knife..

..so amusing..

phil(whoar.co.nz)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 8:10pm
Hurf Durf

Remember that wonderful New START treaty that was supposed to bring the world away from those tewwible noocleor weapons?

Kristensen said the Obama administration shouldn’t boast too much about dismantling the B53 when its arsenal of active nuclear warheads has been reduced by only 10 in the past seven months and Russia’s arsenal has grown by 29.

Go on, anti-nukers, what do you have to say for yourself? Other than “Gee, Hurf, I guess you were right! As usual!”
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 8:13pm
Johnboy

Never needed to consort with a whoar, magpie my natural charm and good looks have got me everything for free. 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 8:13pm
nasska

The lady at WINZ looked at him & said, “Mr Ure… A few of us are beginning to question whether you are actually seriously seeking employment.”

“What?”, he responded, “That’s absurd! Why would you suggest such a thing?”

“Well.. It’s just most people will make the effort of changing out of their pyjamas before coming to an interview.”
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 8:13pm
bereal

Whaleoil had the still photo with the brilliant caption,
‘Gaddafi cops one up the chook.’

philu… fuck off.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 8:14pm
Johnboy

Bet you never picked that it was Grumpy with his granddads old Turkish toothpick though did yuh magpie?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 8:15pm
Steve

Phool has been absent since before lunchtime and the comes back at about 7.30. Where have you been parasite?
Looking for a job? No way.
You have been telling lies to WINZ about attempting to get a job, just so as you can have an income c/- TAXPAYER
You self centered miserable shitbag, bleeding on the TAXPAYER.
Think of all the money that could go those who need WELFARE instead of you and the arseholes like you.
FUCKING LEECH
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 8:25pm
Steve

getting the messege Phool? Nobody is talking to you, just talking about you.
Eat shit
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 8:31pm
Johnboy

Phools been at the protest, pecking among the discarded roaches, scrabbling thru the rubbish they dropped and squawking out his vegan/armed revolution message to the stoned.

Where the fuck else would he get a bigger audience that listens to him?

What? What the fuck do you mean, Kiwiblog?? 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 8:32pm
bereal

Well said Steve except that the bludging leech doesn’t even need to look for a job yet
because his sprog (mealticket) isn’t 16 yet,
When he does need to shift from the DPB to the unemployable bene you can bet that the
crafty bludger will have all the reasons why he cant work.
Too light for heavy work, Too heavy for light work. Cant see for night work. etc etc …eh …..!!!!!! whoar……contd…
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 8:33pm
philu

‘gramps’-steve..!

..had a bad-hair day..?..(if you have any..)

..feeling a bit dyspeptic there…?

..go on..!..get out your coro-tapes…

..lose yrslf in the ‘by-gum!’s..

..eh..?

..an old fella like you shouldn’t be getting so agitated..

..a man of yr age.!

..whatever are you thinking..?

..(have you tried talkback..?..does that help..?..or just agitate you further..?

..are you florid of face..?

phil(whoar.co.nz)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 8:40pm
philu

but seeing as you asked/care there..gramps-steve…

..i went occupying..(have to plan the revolution..eh..?..)

..and then o cooked dinner for me and the young fella..

..(his favourite..my pasta tour-de-force..)

..and..awww..!..didya miss me..?..

phil(whoar.co.nz)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 8:43pm
philu

we don’t need no ‘armed-revolution’ there johnboy…

..we are the 99%..

..and democracy-rules..

..so we will always beat you..

..and our weapon of choice is the ballot-box..

..we don’t need anything else…

..phil(whoar.co.nz)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 8:58pm
Johnboy

Not what you told the poor old Chemist all those years ago Magpie! 🙂

Are Magpies like Leopards?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 9:02pm
Johnboy

Shit I just realised not an “eh” or a “?” anywhere in the above.

Amazing! 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 9:05pm
philu

“..all those years ago..”

..quite…!

..35 yrs ago…actually…

..am i free of the recidivist-label yet..?

phil(whoar.co.nz)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 9:08pm
Johnboy

Almost, except you whacked in an ‘?’ after the ‘i’ instead of the ‘I’ in the above (but no ‘eh’) 🙂

Shows improvement. 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 9:14pm
bereal

philu 7.30
‘helping screw the rest of us over’
Do you actually believe you are part of, ‘the rest of us .’
after reading the above comments from your contemporaries.

You are so far removed from the rest of us that you are incapable of understanding
what. ‘the rest of us’ are even on about.

Get this, and get it good.
You are a parasite bludger with no humanity, totally unaware,
you are a disgrace, no self awareness, a self important nothing. A joke.
The biggest joke of all is that you are the only the only one who doesn’t get it,
you are so up yourself you have no idea what i am talking about.
you dont do you ?

………………..eh !!!!!!!!!!!! what…………..duh……….????????
whoar………………
contd……………
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 10:53pm
bereal

G’nite all.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 26, 2011 10:57pm
Viking2

No work today. The gas mans gone away!

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10761960

http://screencast.com/t/AocfjTPHJc
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 27, 2011 6:51am
Viking2

Who?

Tamaki Selection

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10761854
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 27, 2011 6:54am

More comments:

‹
1
2

Add a Comment Cancel reply

Login to comment or vote

« The NZ Institute Scorecard

Bringing the SAS home – a week early »

Donations

You can now donate to Kiwiblog

Exclusive content from DPF on Patreon

Become a Patron!

Highlights

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

Never miss a post

Email Address

Links

Clive Bibby: Deterrent or Paper Tiger
Breaking Views
Who Watered Down The New 3Strikes Legislation
No Minister
#ANZAC: "year after year, the numbers grow fewer, who remember what we're not forgetting"
Not PC
Climate Models Not Scientific
Utopia
Word of the day
Hompaddock
Maori Party (with “disgust”) draws attention to Chhour’s race after the High Court rules on Waitangi Tribunal’s summons
Point of Order
Die In for Palestine Marks ANZAC day – Peace Action Wellington
The Daily Blog
"Comity" versus the rule of law
No Right Turn
New Zealand Needs a Security Alliance Fast
The Standard
Jacinda’s legacy – Increasing number of abortions
Bob McCoskrie's McBlog
REEFTON – THE NEW PARIS
No Punches Pulled (Bob Jones)
United Rugby Championship Predictions for Week 15
Stats Chat
Again, hate crimes are not necessarily terrorism.
Kiwipolitico
Despair - construction consenting edition
Offsetting Behaviour
Coalition Promises
NZCPR
Tougher than that
Croaking Cassandra
ABs stripped of 2011 title after try disallowed
Imperator Fish
Legal Beagle: Election '23: The Special Votes
Public Address
Making this movie might have been a mistake
Liam Hehir
Why I am retiring from political blogging
Kiwi FireWalker
Angie Warren-Clark: Meet the Newbies
Dan Moskovitz