General Debate 29 March 2014

March 29th, 2014 at 8:00 am by Kokila Patel
Tags:

170 Responses to “General Debate 29 March 2014”

  1. hj (7,166 comments) says:

    Immigration shill Professor Paul Spoonley sets the tone for NZ Geographics March/April Special Feature: Population

    DISTINGUISHED PROFESSOR PAUL Spoonley
    has brought me to Auck1and’s Long Bay Park, the city’s most visited park. Attracting around 1.5 million people every year, it’s a microcosm of our country in general and our biggest city in particular, great groups of us spread across its shaded grass everyweekend.
    Spoonley is a sociologist by profession, but a people—Watcher by choice. He steadily interrupts himself to comment on people we pass by; who they are, what they’re doing, what they look like: “Those are Iranis or Iraqis… Pasifika over there on your right… Look at the height of this guy… What’s he doing hitchhiking like that?”
    When he can’t figure out where a group of people are from, he stops to ask. “Philippines,” says a young man, swatting away a fly.
    “This is a gateway city,” says Spoonley, walking on. “Basically two—thirds of all migrants come in to Auckland and stay in Auckland. You’ve got the earlier waves, Pasifika next to us here, and more recent waves. Some of these will be refugees, some of these will be business and skilled migrants.”
    The catalyst for the new New Zealand was the 1987 Immigration Act. Under it, immigration selection criteria changed from a focus on ease of assimilation into a white, Anglo—centric culture to a policy that most prized capital and skills.
    Two hundred and thirteen different ethnic groups now live in New Zealand. One in eight New Zealanders is an Asian. As recently as 2006, it was one in 11.

    Paul Spoonley steers us out into the strange hinterland of Auckland’s north, the ravaged landscape of what was once the city’s urban fringe and is nowboth one of the country’s fastest-growing residential areas and a symptom of its change.
    We cross a short green buffer zone created by developers who have spent almost two years reshaping its contours and preparing it for the 2500 houses that will soonbe built there. Asian building crews— “Look at the gloves,” says Spoonley—work out the front of sections that will soon extend deep into what was so recently farmland.
    “There are some interesting things about these developments,” he says. “There are no dairies. There’s no shopping. Normally in a development like this you would have facilities, but there’s nothing.”
    Nearby, parts of the area around Oteha Valley Road are more developed, heavy with gated communities, often targeted at older residents. “This is intensive housingAuck1and-style in the 21st century,” says Spoonley. “You have got these very distinctive housing developments beginning to occur. But look for a dairy. Look for anything that provides a service function. There’s nothing.
    “These have all been built in the last three or four months,” he says, gesturing with his hands as we drive past an improbably large cluster of houses; “Choom— choom—choom—choom.”

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. hj (7,166 comments) says:

    Elites In Charge

    Projections suggest that the New Zealand population – which recently topped 4,444,444 – will hit five million by 2031. That number should not be seen as a certainty, however. Spoonley points out that previous projections have consistently fallen short of the reality. “Every time there has been a projection about population size – when New Zealand would reach one million, two million, etcetera – they have under-estimated. The population has reached the target earlier than estimated.” He believes that the historical forecasts reflected a conservatism over the attractions of New Zealand for migrants. Today, immigration continues to loom large in any view of New Zealand’s future – and in population projections. We have been close to the top of OECD rankings of immigration rates and, unlike some countries, have continued to attract high flows of newcomers since the Global Financial Crisis.
    New Zealand politicians have mostly chosen to take a softly-softly approach to population policy. Some business leaders, frustrated by the nation’s lack of scale, would like to see a major population increase. Most recently, the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research suggested that a population of 15 million by 2060 would be beneficial. That politicians haven’t typically been so gung ho probably reflects an ambivalence to the idea among voters. Our annual immigrant target of 45,000, attempting to meet certain skill shortages, effectively becomes our de facto population policy.
    … we’re building a population but we’re building it particularly in Auckland and we’re diversifying it – and nobody is calling it a population policy.
    Spoonley: “The idea of having some magic figure or some mix of the population is not something we’ve seemed enthusiastic about at all.” This is in contrast to Australia, where environmental pressures mean population numbers are the subject of intense politics. Here, “we’re building a population but we’re building it particularly in Auckland and we’re diversifying it – and nobody is calling it a population policy”.

    http://definingnz.com/demography/#sthash.p4ZBiTFw.dpuf

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Manolo (14,169 comments) says:

    A lucky escape: http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/9881727/Ancestral-land-escapes-bulldozers

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Jack5 (5,279 comments) says:

    HJ, a easy solution for population policy, now that the unmandated ethnic re-engineering is well down the track, would be the Singapore city-state model.

    Chinese-dominated Singapore was carved out of Malay-dominated Malaya, which became Malay-dominated Malaysia.

    We could make Auckland an Asian city-state of the South Pacific, sitting geographically in but politically separate from New Zealand.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. hj (7,166 comments) says:

    More From National Geographic

    Just inside the sliding doors of the Dahua supermarket in Northcote, Spoonley enthuses over the leafy greens. An estimated 80 per cent of the businesses in the precinct are Asian.
    “Have you been in one of these lately? Look at the variety,” he says, waving an arm across the expanse of the produce aisle. “You are getting all the choys. And see, it’s in Mandarin script as well as English.”
    We continue through the aisles, up into the meat section where a customer is chatting happily with one of the staff. “Have you heard English spoken so far?” says Spoonley. “Most of the language spoken here is Mandarin. Asia comes to Auckland. Asia comes to New Zealand.”
    A pile of Chinese newspapers sits on the floor near the exit. It’s with what sounds like wonder that Spoonley points out it’s just one of 28 Asian publications, most in foreign languages, printed in Auckland.
    Outside, in the carpark, he admires the surrounding strips of shops and businesses: “Look down here, look at all of this: Your hair studio, your video, your pharmacy, everything that you would want. And you can deal in Mandarin.
    “Countdown is about the only nonAsian business. There will be one or two others but I am struggling to pick any. Can you? So I think 80 per cent is probably conservative.”
    In the 1990s, Northcote was seen as a low— cost housing area with a drug problem. The centre was going through a slump. Rental rates took a dive and the Asian business communitybegan to move in. It wasn’t advertised as an Asian development.
    “It’s one of what we would call an ethnic precinct,” says Spoonley. “We haven’t seen this before in New Zealand.”

    Note Northcote isn’t the people of Northcote.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Keeping Stock (9,380 comments) says:

    John Armstrong puts the boot into the Internet Party this morning, and reckons that Dotcom has been totally played by Hone Harawira. He says that there’s no doubt that the Internet Party is a vehicle to prevent Dotcom being extradited, and says this:

    If it cannot do so, the party will be deemed to be nothing more than an expensive ego trip by a political neophyte who thinks he can buy his way into Parliament even if only on a surrogate basis. As it is, the Internet Party risks being viewed as little more than a personality cult. The onus is on its founder and high-powered staff members to prove otherwise.

    He’s right on the money. Fortunately, the average NZ voter has a better sense of humour than Dotcom, and sees his joke as particularly unfunny.

    http://keepingstock.blogspot.co.nz/2014/03/armstrong-blunt-on-dotcom.html

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. igm (1,413 comments) says:

    MSM are going out of their way to give the obese German criminal traction . . . a effen disgrace.
    They are also (especially Newstalkzb) giving perverted Lecher a real good ride.
    Makes one wonder where our country’s media is going!

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Pete George (23,804 comments) says:

    Armstrong, Fran O’Sullivan and Chris Trotter have been writing about Dotcom using the Internet Party to try and avoid extradition, but it would be extraordinary if Labour negotiated coalition agreements with Minister of Justice favours on extradition.

    Internet Party faces questions on extradition

    Vikram Kumar has been trying to distance the Internet Party from Dotcom. That didn’t work on launch day as it was almost all Dotcom. But while Dotcom was scheduled to appear on The Nation this morning the Internet Party announced yesterday that Kumar would do the interview instead.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Chuck Bird (4,906 comments) says:

    Does anyone think Taina Pora is likely to be guilty of murder? Many people including myself think it is highly unlikely he is guilty. If that is the case why could he not get bail? Let us hope he gets parole on Monday?

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. OneTrack (3,364 comments) says:

    “but it would be extraordinary if Labour negotiated coalition agreements with Minister of Justice favours on extradition.”

    What about the other coalition partners? The Greens seem to think a ministerial overuling of any extradition ruling is completely reasonable, and in this case definite.

    So, no, I dont think it would be unexpected that the darling if the left would be protected by a hard-left government. Rule of law – thats for the proletariat.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Viking2 (11,676 comments) says:

    So KS is now an Armstrong believer. amazing.

    The mans a lefty shill. shows you how far left the National followers have gone.
    Labour Lite ain’t no more.
    Probably better known now as Labour-nationalists in drag.

    Of course you will protest bit oh to see ourselves as others see us. eh.

    And to prove its not just me here’s the labour drag queens latest efforts to impose their selective communism.

    The National-led government is being pressured to impose state control on property investors through a warrant of fitness regime on privately-owned rental housing.

    The viability of your rental would then fall into the hands of a council bureaucrat with a clipboard and a timesheet as he inspects your property against a wide array of subjective criteria – including the imposition of new building code requirements on existing rentals.

    If you see this as an attack on private property rights, then please sign this petition urging the Minister of Housing to reject the proposal.

    You can read the background paper about the vested interest environmental and public health groups pushing for a rental housing warrant of fitness HERE.

    People power is the only way to fight this attack on landlords. Please spread the word to encourage private rental property owners throughout the country to become aware of the threat and join our campaign.

    No doubt KS you will run up the flag and give away more of your and our rights by supporting this.

    You could always go and sign the petition against this sedition at the link but I guess you won’t becuase its the National Party.

    http://www.nzcpr.com/nzcpr-campaigns/anti-wof-petition/

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Judith (8,534 comments) says:

    @ Chuck Bird (4,365 comments) says:
    March 29th, 2014 at 8:38 am

    I think it is highly unlikely he is guilty of murder, however I couldn’t say the same for some of his family members if they were being tried for treason, nor could I say the same for the detectives involved in his conviction, if they were being tried for gross incompetence and coercion.

    Personally the only reason I can see for him not getting bail is actually for his own protection. It is fairly obvious that once out of prison he is going to be hounded by not just the media, but family, and other interests who may attempt to influence him in some way. Clearly he is a man who has very few life skills that will enable him to cope with what he is now going to be subjected to.

    Having said that, prison is not a place to keep someone for that kind of protection, and he will eventually be released, and one day I believe without any restrictions. I really feel for the guy. He has no life skills, has been incarcerated for so long his coping abilities and maturity will be a challenge, and to boot, he will probably receive a great deal of money, making him an easy target. Sadly, our laws do not allow us to do what would be best for him, and ensure his well being is protected by trustees. Its a disaster waiting to happen, and I give it five years from his release before he is back in prison, if something else bad doesn’t happen to him before then.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. peterwn (3,334 comments) says:

    Chuck Bird:
    There was a two step process for Taina to get bail:
    1. Could the High Court grant bail to someone who has got leave to appeal to the Privy Council (as distinct from someone actually granted a re-trial)? The High Court ruled ‘no’ and IMO that ruling was quite wrong, especially as AFAIK bail can be granted to someone who has leave to pursue an appeal to the Appeal or Supreme Court. My reasoning is too complex to indicate in a couple of words.

    2. If so, should the offender be granted bail applying usual bail criteria. As his application failed at the first step, the judge did not even consider the second. The only practical test is how well the accused has behaved in prison, psychological tendencies which could indicate re-offending and the available support from family/ friends if granted bail. I have no idea about this, but the parole report may enlighten things.

    Judgment at:
    https://www.courtsofnz.govt.nz/cases/pora-v-r-1/at_download/fileDecision

    The Parole Board would consider the above together with whether the offender has expressed genuine remorse and accepted accountability for the offending. If an offender is genuinely innocent, the offender could find some difficulty with this. I have no idea of or have ‘brain fade’ with respect to previous parole hearings, but assuming a 17 year minimum sentence he would had at least 2 parole hearings and got the ‘thumbs down on each occasion’. At a guess his prognosis for a successful parole hearing on Monday appears bleak.

    This would signal that even if the judge considered that bail was possible, the judge would probably not have granted bail. This could in turn indicate that even if the Privy Council ordered a re-trial, that he would not get bail.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. fernglas (198 comments) says:

    He didn’t get bail because there is no legal basis for granting it to someone who has appealed to the Privy Council. Pora was convicted as a party to the offending of others. From memory he admitted holding Susan Burdett down while she was raped, and as to the killing, I think it was because he knew that a killing was a likely outcome of the rape. Whatever the basis, he was not alleged to have raped her himself, nor to have been the actual killer. As such, I can see why her brother thinks he should be out. He has done a longer lag than most people would had they been the actual perpetrator. The catch is that he is doing a life sentence, and if you don’t behave, life can mean exactly that.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. igm (1,413 comments) says:

    Are Aucklanders going to sit back and watch their rates going towards creating employment for South Auckland, Lecher’s non-ratepaying voter base? Time you guys took a look at this Labour Party pawn and took drastic action; not only is he a lying pervert, he is fiscally irresponsible and blinded by his filthy ego. MSM are no better, giving him space, most of it lead, every time he comes up with another socialist bludging idea.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. griffith (1,111 comments) says:

    http://wiseresponse.org.nz/?page_id=166

    Fatih Birol, the chief economist at the The International Energy Agency (IEA) has stated recently that: “If current trends continue, and we go on building high-carbon energy generation, then by 2015 at least 90% of the available “carbon budget” will be swallowed up by our energy and industrial infrastructure. By 2017, there will be no room to move at all”. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/nov/09/fossil-fuel-infrastructure-climate-change, IEA (2011) World Energy Outlook). A new report draws attention to the climate extremes already being experienced and the urgent need to prepare (IPCC. 2012. Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation. A Special Report of Working Groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Field, C.B., et al]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. 582 pp. Gruber,N. 2011. Warming up, turning sour, losing breath: ocean biogeochemistry under global change. Phil. Trans. Royal Soc. A 369: 1980–1996).
    International negotiations to combat human-induced climate change (Rio 1992, Kyoto 1997, Copenhagen 2009, Durban 2011) reveal that the course of climate diplomacy has increasingly lost touch with the scientific evidence (New Scientist 3843: p3. We can still avoid a ‘lost decade’ on climate change. Dec 2011). Not only is the widely used target, based on the 4th IPCC assessment report (450 ppm atmospheric CO2 equivalent) now very difficult to achieve, but this limit may be far too high. Scientists such as Jim Hansen argue that the maximum safe level for atmospheric CO2 concentration is 350 ppm (Hansen, J. 2012. Scientific Case for Avoiding Dangerous Climate Change to Protect Young People and Nature. http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/abs/ ha08510t.html).
    Fatih Birol from the IEA (2011) has also stated that maximum global conventional crude oil production (“peak oil”) occurred in 2006. This means that “all liquids” supply will likely steadily decline after an undulating plateau with a growing gap between demand and supply occurring from around 2015. The economic implications of this decline are likely to be serious. See Hirsch, R. L., Bezdek, R. & Wendling, R. 2005. Peaking of World Oil Production: Impacts, Mitigation, & Risk Management, US Department of Energy, and Hirsh R.L, ASPO presentation Vienna. 2012). Only by moving away from fossil fuels can we both ensure a more robust economic outlook and address the challenges of climate change. This process will be a “decades-long transformation that needs to start immediately” (see Murray, J. & King, D. 2012. Climate policy: oil’s tipping point has passed, Nature 481: 433–435.).
    Financial inequity is increasing and the world financial system is unable to deliver security; social cohesion is at risk both nationally and globally (see Jackson, T. 2009. Prosperity without Growth. Earthscan. London, UK). In 1998, more than 45% of the globe’s people had to live on incomes averaging US$2 a day or less while the richest one-fifth of the world’s population has 85% of the global GNP. The gap between rich and poor is widening (see Meadows, D., Randers, J., Meadows, D. 2004. Limits to Growth: the 30 Year Update, Chelsea Green, USA.).

    The perpetual growth myth is enthusiastically embraced by politicians and economists as an excuse to avoid tough decisions facing humanity

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. hj (7,166 comments) says:

    Our sense of community is gone
    CHRIS TROTTER

    Ms McGhee is not alone in identifying diversity as one of the most potent solvents of the social contract that underpins our welfare state. But, as a young African-American, she has a better appreciation than most of how all those “hostilities and anxieties” play out in a non-academic context.

    Because no matter how earnestly we are encouraged (by people like Ms McGhee) to think otherwise, the ordinary person’s understanding of “community” is generally reducible to just three words: “people like me”.

    not true Chris. People get absorbed and accepted over time , but their is a limit. Politically engineered diversity is an attempt to create something humans aren’t designed for.

    He is looking to recent history for a sense of community (not evolutionary history).

    He conflates the welfare state (political) with a sense of community (psychological) and sees it all coming from the agents of social change (sees human nature as plastic). These sort of attitudes make for narcissism amongst politicians and elites.
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/comment/columnists/chris-trotter/9876444/Our-sense-of-community-is-gone

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Southern Raider (1,777 comments) says:

    Article today about NZEI leading a protest march to an international conference of global education ministers and global union delegates. Bad look for NZ and also seems to be a conflict as the union also helped organise the event. One Maori Union is calling for a boycott of the protest, but has now come under attack by NZEI itself.

    Just watching first season of House of Cards and made me wonder won’t would happen if NZ had its own Senator Frank Underwood?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. twofish (108 comments) says:

    Another way of looking at things –
    Pam Corkery … and others, claims that John Key is auctioning our sovereignty to the highest bidder, while minor parties beat a trail to Coatsville to sell it for a much more base value.

    Selling traditional values down the river? Is that 49% of a power generator, or 49% of a political party to a Ngatzi sympathizer who wants to avoid extradition by influencing [corrution of] a Justice Minister?
    ___________________

    What the JFG wants – to spy on you …

    To install the Internet Party android app you need to grant permission for it to send SMS messages, record audio and take pictures

    Internet Party would like to
    access your public profile, friend
    list and email address as well as
    your friends’ personal
    descriptions
    Cancel | OK

    ___________________

    … there is no indication – as yet – that Harawira is abandoning any position that Mana holds dear, in his talks with the Internet Party.

    … except abandoning the truth to start with [March 19, 2014 MANA Press Release]
    oh. bugger
    ___________________

    Every day that Dotcom deprives Key’s other opponents of the oxygen of media coverage is one day closer to election day on September 20. It is one day less for the real election issues and priorities to take centre stage.

    Hopefully that may see Winston refrain from asking any further Parliamentary Questions on behalf of Dotcom
    While behind the JFG smokescreen, Shane Jones could replace David Cunliffe and no one would notice.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Longknives (4,956 comments) says:

    “Does anyone think Taina Pora is likely to be guilty of murder?”

    Sorry to upset the Crim-hugging/Police hating brigade but-
    The jury certainly thought he was guilty.
    So did the second one when he had his retrial.
    And I think he maybe thought he was guilty as well when he confessed to being involved in the murder..

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Judith (8,534 comments) says:

    The perpetual growth myth is enthusiastically embraced by politicians and economists as an excuse to avoid tough decisions facing humanity

    I think the time is well past even the toughest decisions making a difference unless we rid ourselves of half the population of the globe, do away with democracy and return to an agrarian based culture. But that would require me giving up my iphone, and why should I, if you are not going to. It would require selecting only the fittest to live, and why should I die, if you get to live, and it would require those with the intellectual ability and strength to lead, being able to make the decisions for the rest of us – and if I’m not allowed a say, why should you get one? Humanity’s propensity for greed will not allow anything that needs to be done, to happen.

    It’s too late, well, maybe, it does appear Mother Nature is fighting back a little by decreasing the male chromosomes, and will eventually reduce the ability for humans to reproduce at such a speedy rate, however, I think she may have left it a little too long.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Fletch (6,528 comments) says:

    Fiona O’Reilly from Catholic Voices defends traditional marriage over same-sex marriage in two minutes on BBC News. Well said!

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Gulag1917 (1,083 comments) says:

    Australian army officer sparks controversy with comments

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. dirty harry (527 comments) says:

    Poras scum and scum should be locked away. FFS he held the poor woman down while she was being raped..fuck him , rot in hell ya filthy shitbag.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Reid (16,702 comments) says:

    Hey guess what.

    There’s a leaked conversation on YouTube between Putin and his senior ministers planning a false flag attack in Ukraine. According to the tape they’re planning an attack on a famous tomb in Kiev that contains the body of one of the founders of the Russian Revolution. It’s considered Russian territory and Russian special forces troops guard it even though it’s in Ukraine but by attacking it they create a pretext to invade Ukraine. But that’s not the worst. Now that it’s been leaked they’ve shut down access to YouTube and other social media to stop the Russian people from learning about it. Isn’t that outrageous.

    This is going to be massive.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Chuck Bird (4,906 comments) says:

    “Sorry to upset the Crim-hugging/Police hating brigade but-
    The jury certainly thought he was guilty.
    So did the second one when he had his retrial.
    And I think he maybe thought he was guilty as well when he confessed to being involved in the murder.”

    @Longknives

    i would have expected a little better from you.

    Arthur Thomas was found guilty by two juries. Peter Ellis was convicted of serious sexual abuse of children. David Dougherty was convicted of rape.

    Do you believe that the police sometimes do things wrong to get a conviction?
    Do you believe that juries get things wrong occasionally?

    What evidence is there besides a confession that Teina Pora was involved in the murder of Susan Burdett?

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. stephieboy (3,525 comments) says:

    Reid, um could you tell us the origin and background of the video.?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. Fletch (6,528 comments) says:

    Oh dear. Poor movie studies. Despite piracy, they’ve had another year of record-breaking income.

    Once again, the “piracy-stricken” motion picture association has had a banner year, with box office revenue breaking all records (as they’ve done in most recent years). The biggest gains this year come from China — a market condemned by the studios as a hive of piracy.

    http://boingboing.net/2014/03/27/motion-picture-industry-contin.html

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. peterwn (3,334 comments) says:

    Re Taina Pora’s bail case:
    As I earlier mentioned, I consider the High Court probably erred by ruling bail was not legally available. My reasoning is:
    1. Legislation is silent on bail for an offender who has been given leave to appeal to the Privy Council (bail can be considered when leave has been granted for an Appeal or Supreme Court decision).
    2. This is arguably a ‘gap’ in the legislation. If so the High Court has an ‘inherent’ jurisdiction to deal with the matter as it sees fit. This ‘inherent’ jurisdiction is limited by legislative provisions and common law. Intrinsic jurisdiction gives the ability to add pieces to the (perpetually) incomplete legal jigsaw puzzle.
    3. It is worth noting that the High Court is the only one with inherent jurisdiction. Not even the Appeal or Supreme Courts has inherent jurisdiction, although they can rule upon whether the High Court has wrongfully exercised or declined to exercise inherent jurisdiction.
    4. Judges think carefully before exercising inherent jurisdiction as it could be effectively thumbing its nose at Parliament, or going against rulings of a higher court.
    5. The judge’s argument is that the matter could have been considered by Parliament on two occasions and Parliament chose to do nothing. Hence it was covered by legislation ‘in the negative’ and so he was not able to exercise inherent jurisdiction.
    6. It could be that officialdom (or MP’s if they had read the reports) considered that the matter was of no practical consequence and hence not worth the bother of a legislative provision – as it turns out there have been three occasions where it was a potential issue and there could be a few more (eg Scott-Watson).
    7. So it could be that MP’s were blissfully ignorant of the issue or if aware of it, thought that enacting legislation to deal with it was not worth the bother.
    8. My argument is basically that only if the MP’s had actually considered the matter at Select Committee level and decided not to legislate, should the judge decline to exercise inherent jurisdiction.
    9. In the old days of ‘black letter’ interpretation, courts (AFAIK) were not allowed to reference Parliamentary materials (except legislation) nor second guess Parliament. In that case the court may have recognised such a legislative gap as being a reason for exercising inherent jurisdiction.

    This first issue had to be settled regardless of Taina’s individual circumstances. It would be wrong to argue bail should not be available in the general case because Taina does not for example ‘deserve’ bail in his particular case.

    Whether bail should be granted is the second leg of the inquiry, and the court did not touch on this as there was no need.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Ross12 (1,485 comments) says:

    http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/22239774/norman-sets-sights-on-deputy-pm-role/

    Norman is just so arrogant . Shane Jones is right.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Chuck Bird (4,906 comments) says:

    peterwn:

    Thanks for your considered reply.

    I do not worry about the thumbs down I get particularly when it appears that they have nothing to do with a particular post. However, it worries that Longknives quickly got 4 thumbs ups for condoning the imprisonment of someone who is very likely innocent with no reason other than the police and juries do not make mistakes.

    The idea that a confession no matter how obtained should never be challenged is ridiculous. People should not be sentenced to life imprisonment because they have the misfortune to be born with far below average intelligence of some mental disability like Pora – fetal alcohol syndrome.

    Every country in the world wrongly convicts people of murder. New Zealand is no exception. Here is the problem. What is a person who wrongly convicted of murdered expected to do lie and say they are guilty to get parole?

    In the case of Pora I would like to see some credible evidence that he was guilty. All there was was his “confession” and testimony of relations who stood to gain financially and would hardly be pillars of society.

    I will be very surprised if he is not found to be judged not guilty by the PC or at a new trial.

    It is a real worry that people like Longknives could end up on a jury. I came across someone like that who quickly volunteered to be foremen and almost judged the guy to be guilty before hearing the defense case. I am certainly not one who believes in being soft on crims but I do believe in a fair trial for anyone.

    I was glad to see 4 guilty verdicts of those who took the law into their own hands and murdered someone accused of rape.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Reid (16,702 comments) says:

    Reid, um could you tell us the origin and background of the video.?

    stephie it’s massive international news as you’d expect it to be. Just drive google.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. Chuck Bird (4,906 comments) says:

    Peterwn:

    Thanks for that second well considered reply. I would have simply argued that he should be granted bail on plain common sense and natural justice. When one sees the number of really dangerous criminals with serious records granted bail where they commit serious crimes that common sense does not seem to be a prerequisite to becoming a judge.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Nookin (3,569 comments) says:

    Ross12

    I agree with you. Norman has never been in government let alone held a Cabinet position. He has no experience whatsoever in Cabinet and ministerial responsibility. He has also, in the past, claimed some entitlement to a financial portfolio yet his announcement over quantitative easing was universally panned.

    Of greater concern is his hidden agenda. I have a very clear recollection of his performance at the time of his attempt to sabotage the Mighty River Power share float. When explaining the proposed structure it was patiently obvious that he was going to use the pricing authority to impose a tax by stealth. He announced that the price of power might well vary from district to district. There is no doubt that he had in mind that power prices in South Auckland might not reach the same levels as power prices in Remuera.

    Tasmania has learned the hard way that Green Party politics must be avoided at all costs.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. peterwn (3,334 comments) says:

    Ross12 – agreed. The Deputy PM is just that and a major party must never give this position to a minor party. Labour is with Jim Anderton AFAIK so Helen had to appoint a Labour minister as acting PM when needed. If Labour did allow Russel to be Deputy PM and the Labour PM got hit by the legendary Lambton Quay tram, Labour would need to appoint an acting leader then have the deputy PM’s warrant removed – now, just who should the Guv listen to – remember Canberra 1975.

    But hey! is not Labour a minor party now……

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. Jack5 (5,279 comments) says:

    Another example of how politically correct the mainstream media has become.

    In today’s Christchurch Press, in a report on halal slaughtering of animals for meat exports to Muslim countries, the reporter says:

    …meat destined for Muslim countries must be slaughtered with their necks and stomachs pointed to the holy city of Mecca…

    When did the Christchurch Press ever talk of Rome or Jerusalem as the holy city?

    The MSM kicks Christianity, particularly when opposes measures such as gay marriage, but ignores Muslim opposition to the same measures. The reporterettes might as well all get into hijabs.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. dime (10,213 comments) says:

    i just heard that snivelling, lisping wanker norman on the zb news.

    he was whining about the govt only raising 4.5 billion from the share floats of the power companies…

    he reckons JK promised 10 billion? Dime has never heard that number. Ive heard JK say 5 billion many times.

    did the ginga make the number up and zb just ran with it? or was that a goal at some point?

    only answers from non-lefties please.

    also, zb should be shot for not adding after the sound bite “the share prices were greatly affected by the labour/greens sabotage which cost the country hundreds of millions of dollars”. that disclaimer should be played for life.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. Gulag1917 (1,083 comments) says:

    Wonder how many “New Zealanders” are fighting for the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant etc?

    Ex-soldier killed in Syria, Caner Temel, trained in arms and explosives
    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/policy/exsoldier-killed-in-syria-caner-temel-trained-in-arms-and-explosives/story-e6frg8yo-1226858851207

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Reid (16,702 comments) says:

    http://www.cracked.com/photoplasty_692_29-insane-pastimes-that-prove-history-was-terrifying_p29/#4

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Manolo (14,169 comments) says:

    Who doubts the strength of the Rainbow Branch of the Labour Party?
    http://news.msn.co.nz/nationalnews/8821799/coffey-selected-by-labour-for-rotorua

    Television celebrity Tamati Coffey has been selected as the Labour Party candidate for Rotorua in the 2014 general election. Mr Coffey is also a former weather presenter for TVNZ’s Breakfast programme.

    He and his partner Tim Smith own a property in Kawaha Point in Rotorua, which they have been busy renovating, the Rotorua Post newspaper has reported.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. ShawnLH (6,668 comments) says:

    Take a music break with one of the best neofolk groups: ROME – Querkraft.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. Rowan (2,605 comments) says:

    Chuck
    I agree with you, the Pora case is rotten, if you look at the interviews the cops literally spoon fed the so called ‘confession’ out of him, it is a joke! I believe he has already been denied parole by the courts again. There is no evidence other than the ‘confession’ yet he has been inside for twenty years! Lets hope that come the end of the year once his case is heard by the PC that the conviction is quashed with no retrial and then Teina is given decent compensation. Given the length of time served this would probably have to be $5m+.
    Maybe Longknives should present the crown case to the law lords including Malcolm Burgess’s argument that “two juries thought he was guilty, so he must be”

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. Rowan (2,605 comments) says:

    Chuck
    Have you seen Bryan Bruce’s doco on Michael October who was convicted of murdering a Christchurch women, along with two others based on a similar ‘confession’ to police? He didn’t even know the other two men, (who both pleaded guilty and said he wasn’t involved and they didn’t even know him). I believe it is still available on TVNZ, overall I don’t have a great opinion of Bruce based on some of his other episodes, such as the 2012 Crewe episode but he showed that there was no case against the accused in this one. Yes the guy was a criminal and had convictions elsewhere but the punishment should fit the crime and he shouldn’t be wrongly convicted of a murder based on previous crimes or that he was a maori.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. Rowan (2,605 comments) says:

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/christchurch-earthquake-2011/9879530/Anderton-slams-clerics-call-for-demo

    I am similarly not impressed or place much stock in Jim Andertons ‘opinions’. Jim what are your qualifications in structural engineering? The church has made their decisions based on the facts, Jim and the heritage campaigners are based on emotion, It is only bricks and mortar, time to get over it Jim.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. Nostalgia-NZ (5,320 comments) says:

    If Longknives is right that the 2nd Jury must have believed Pora’s confession, how does that explain that the 1st Jury didn’t – rejecting that members of the MM were involved and found them not guilty. On that 2nd Jury, they also believed that the serial, lone wolf, rapist Rewa raped Susan Burdette but didn’t kill herk but that a 15 year old boy did who couldn’t even find her house and who described her as ‘fat.’ It’s all good though except for the women who Rewa went onto rape when Rutherford or some other senior police officer parked up the hunt for a serial rapist (Rewa) during the Pora inquiry. But don’t worry that wasn’t because some information might be told to the jury that the rape of Susan Burdett fitted a pattern at that time of a serial rapist operating, alone and in South Auckland.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Chuck Bird (4,906 comments) says:

    Rowan

    I did watch the doco. I am unsure whether is is guilty or not. It is not a case I would put time into following. i think Pora’s case is different. Sort of in the class of Peter Ellis where very few people think he is guilty.

    People will disagree on individual cases but one has to be pretty dumb to think some people are not wrongly convicted of very serious crimes in NZ like everywhere else in the world.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. kowtow (8,939 comments) says:

    More cultural treachery from the academic enemies of the west.

    http://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/is-nothing-sacred-trinity-college-scraps-bible-from-its-crest-1.1742490

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. Chuck Bird (4,906 comments) says:

    Nos

    You say that the 1st Jury rejecting that members of the MM were involved and found them not guilty. Pora was found guilty so surely they accepted his confession. I cannot understand your point.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. ShawnLH (6,668 comments) says:

    Corruption probes hitting Dems across the country.

    “A wave of corruption arrests and investigations is roiling Democratic politicians, posing a potential image problem in an election year.

    The latest were a pair of arrests earlier this week, snagging Charlotte Mayor Patrick Cannon, who later resigned, and California state Sen. Leland Yee. The latter involved a tangled web of allegations including claims that the gun control-pushing lawmaker tried to connect an undercover agent with an international arms dealer. ”

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/03/28/corruption-probes-hitting-dems-across-country/?intcmp=latestnews

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. UglyTruth (4,554 comments) says:

    This is going to be massive.

    In spades. We now have three cases of wiretaps of high-level nefarium.

    The first was Victoria Nuland’s attempt to direct the political situation in the Ukraine.
    The second was the plan to conduct a false flag event to start a war with Syria. This resulted in Twitter & Youtube being blocked in Turkey. The MSM mostly skirted over the real issue here. Here’s the spin from Reuters:

    (Reuters) – Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan on Thursday denounced as “villainous” the leaking of a recording of top security officials discussing possible military action in Syria to the video-sharing site YouTube.

    Turkish authorities ordered the shutdown of the site.

    Erdogan’s foreign minister Ahmet Davutoglu called the posting a “declaration of war,” an apparent reference to an escalating power struggle between Erdogan and rivals.

    The third was Yulia Tymoshenko’s suggestion to “nuke” 8 million Ukrainian Russians.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. Lucia Maria (2,654 comments) says:

    Reid,

    There’s nothing obvious on your 11:20am assertion re Putin. A link would be good.

    I did find this, though: Russophobia, a Pretext for a War on Information

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. Rowan (2,605 comments) says:

    Chuck
    I think it highly unlikely he is guilty, It is not high profile hence it hasn’t gained the publicity of others ie Pora.

    Nos
    If as Longknives believes, the jury is always right snd thst there is no possibility of error then according to the second jury therefore what is DB? or does LK just pick and choose cases that he agrees with the verdict? I would suspect the latter hence his delusional opinions are not worth the time of day.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. Longknives (4,956 comments) says:

    Not even your hero David Bain confessed to his crimes Rowan!
    *But then maybe he was too preoccupied fantasising about what knickers he would bury his dead sister in….

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. Steve (North Shore) (4,537 comments) says:

    http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/22238489/flyers-pay-for-auck-airport-upgrade/

    Come on Len, we know who will pay.
    Prove that you are not telling more lies

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. srylands (438 comments) says:

    “Outing Nats Smear Machine”

    http://thestandard.org.nz/outing-nats-smear-machine/

    “The National Party has been feeding its pet bloggers, and some tame mainstream (MSM) journalists with its smear lines.”

    I have read this twice and it is unintelligible. It seems to be saying that the “media” is controlled by the National Party and that Kiwiblog is an instrument of the National Party. And the world is an evil place.

    Anyway it is the latest wind up toy at The Standard.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. Nostalgia-NZ (5,320 comments) says:

    Chuck the first jury didn’t accept Pora’s confession that he’d witnessed the rape and murder of Susan Burdett by mob members. That was the essence of his effort to gain the reward, he was however ‘lured’ into a ‘confession’ in which he mitigated his role of having, at worst, held Susan Burdett’s arms during the course of the sexual assault. The Jury didn’t buy that, perhaps primarily because the gang members had alibis and of course, as has become plain, because Pora made the whole story up – going further than he should have by implicating himself as a party to murder. So what I am saying is that the 1st Jury didn’t believe the confession (in total I suppose) because they discharged the mob members.

    After that the case came even more bizarre with the revelation of Rewa’s dna found on the body as investigators linked him as a serial rapist they had been looking for before Susan Burdett’s murder. An investigation that was ‘lulled’ during the inquiry into her death.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. Rowan (2,605 comments) says:

    Heres a good post from Chris Trotter on the daily blog last year after the PC quashed the Lundy conviction. I think it is excellent and could apply to several of our high profile ‘dodgy’ convictions here in NZ. I personally don’t have a strong view on Lundys guilt or innocence, but the conviction was in no way “safe” IMO

    http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2013/10/09/no-possibility-of-error-why-cant-our-judicial-system-correct-its-own-mistakes/

    No Possibility Of Error: Why Can’t Our Judicial System Correct Its Own Mistakes?

    Why is it, in those rare instances where a convicted person is lucky enough to have a family, or a benefactor, willing to spend many years (and many thousands of dollars) deconstructing the Crown’s case and the Police’s evidence, that so many eminent, learned and independent overseas jurists are so often convinced that New Zealand’s courts have wrongly convicted persons who, while they may not be innocent beyond reasonable doubt, are certainly – by that same crucial test – not guilty?

    ON 17 SEPTEMBER 1956 Marion Watt, Vivienne Watt and Marion’s sister, Margaret Brown, were found shot to death in the Watt family home in the Glasgow suburb of Burnside. At the time of his family’s murder, Marion’s husband, William Watt, had been on a fishing holiday in Ardrishaig, some 90 miles west by road of Scotland’s largest city.
    The Scottish police did not, however, accept William Watt’s alibi. By their reckoning, he’d had time enough to drive from Ardrishaig, stage a break-in to his own home, murder his wife, his daughter and his sister-in-law, and then drive all the way back to Ardrishaig. They were even able to produce witnesses: the operator of the Renfrew ferry and a passing motorist both picked Watt out of an identity parade.
    Scotland, in 1956, still imposed capital punishment for the crime of murder. Had Watt been found guilty, he would have hanged. That he was not found guilty is due to the fact that the investigation team was sent information which made it absolutely clear that the man they had arrested and charged with the Burnside killings could not possibly have committed the crime. Amazingly, the source of that information was the man whohad killed Marion, Vivienne and Margaret: Scotland’s most notorious serial killer, Peter Manuel.
    Displaying the narcissism so often associated with psychopathic killers, Manuel was outraged that “his” murders had been attributed to someone else, and so he carefully fed just enough information to the detectives investigating the crime to make sure that the “credit” for the Burnside killings was not given to the wrong man.
    Had Manuel not intervened, it is highly likely that William Watt would have gone to the gallows for a crime he did not commit.

    UPON HEARING THE DETAILS of the 1956 Burnside killings case, I felt a shiver run down my spine. Though separated by 44 years and 19,000 kilometres, the murder of Christine and Amber Lundy was distinguished (if that is the right word) by police work almost identical to that carried out in the Scottish case.
    Once again, the father, though out of town at the time of the killings, was assumed to be the killer. Once again, the case was held to hinge on the accused’s ability to make a 300 kilometre journey, pausing only to murder his wife and child, within the three hour period stipulated by the police “evidence”. And, once again, this Herculean feat was rendered plausible by dubious testimony supplied by dubious witnesses.
    In the Lundy case, however, there was no narcissistic psychopath desperate to preserve the purity of his “work”. This time the accused father was put on trial and found guilty of his family’s murder. Mark Lundy was sentenced in April 2002. Not (thank God!) to death by hanging, but to life imprisonment with a non-parole period of 17 years. The poor wretch has spent the past 11 years behind bars.
    I SAY “poor wretch” because the patient accumulation of new evidence by Lundy’s family and supporters was enough to persuade the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council that Lundy’s 2002 conviction was unsafe. Their judgement? That his conviction be quashed, and that he be tried again in the High Court of New Zealand.
    What is wrong with the legal system in this country? Why is it, in those rare instances where a convicted person is lucky enough to have a family, or a benefactor, willing to spend many years (and many thousands of dollars) deconstructing the Crown’s case and the Police’s evidence, that so many eminent, learned and independent overseas jurists are so often convinced that New Zealand’s courts have wrongly convicted persons who, while they may not be innocent beyond reasonable doubt, are certainly – by that same crucial test – not guilty?
    And why is it that our Court of Appeal has, over so many decades, demonstrated an almost wilful reluctance to allow the facts and the evidence speak with a decisive voice against what is manifestly (at least to the layperson’s eyes) a miscarriage of justice?

    How was it possible that the evidence produced by Pat Booth and Jim Sprott failed to secure Arthur Allan Thomas’s immediate release? How could intelligent and experienced jurists have permitted the fairy-tale evidence of children to convict Peter Ellis? (Especially following the damning revelations of coached child witnesses, bizarre evidence and moral panic swaying juries in remarkably similar cases in the USA and the UK?) What was it that prevented the Court of Appeal from calling the NZ Police to account for their botched handling of evidence in the David Bain case? How is it that foreigners see immediately what New Zealand judges and juries have, over and over again, simply refused to recognise?

    THE ANSWER, I believe, lies in the character of the New Zealand ruling-class. The narrow social strata from which New Zealand’s lawyers and judges are drawn is distinguished from the rest of the New Zealand population by two particularly obnoxious characteristics. The first is its unwavering belief in its own moral and intellectual superiority; and the second is its acute sense of vulnerability to what it regards as the democratic distempers of the vulgar masses.
    In a society where the egalitarian impulse has always been strong, the objectionable core beliefs of New Zealand’s ruling class leave it dangerously exposed, not only to populist reprimand, but also, in the worst possible scenario, to social and constitutional eclipse. Over the course of our history these fears have produced a ruling class in which the conviction is strong (to the point of being unchallengeable) that to concede error is to admit weakness. Better that a score of innocent individuals rot in jail, than the Powers-That-Be admit to making a serious mistake.
    Nowhere is this unwillingness to admit fault more tellingly on display than in the conduct of our present Minister of Justice, Judith Collins. Her treatment of the distinguished Canadian jurist, Justice Ian Binnie, revealed just how energetically she is willing to assert the impossibility of systemic error.
    Predictably, in the wake of the Privy Council’s quashing of the Lundy conviction there have been calls for New Zealand to follow the UK’s lead and establish a Criminal Cases Review Commission to which highly questionable and/or contentious convictions could be referred for investigation. Since the UK body was established in 1997 it has quashed more than 350 unsafe verdicts.

    The response of New Zealand’s Minister of Justice? “New Zealand has a robust appeal process and setting up any new independent body would not extinguish public debate.”
    A “robust appeal process”! Tell that to Arthur Allan Thomas, Peter Ellis, David Bain and Mark Lundy! Tell it to the unknown number of other New Zealanders who languish in prison because they do not have a Pat Booth or a Joe Karam willing to spend years fighting for their freedom.
    When I consider the adamant refusal of Judith Collins to concede the slightest error, I am seized by how very, very lucky we are in New Zealand to have had, roughly 50 years ago, a Parliament wise and liberal enough to abolish the death penalty. Because I am not at all convinced that our ruling class would rather admit to error than put an innocent man to death.
    I consider Judith Collins’ trashing of Justice Binnie’s report – and I am not convinced at all.

    Certainly, if New Zealand had still practiced capital punishment in 2002, then Mark Lundy would now be far beyond the Privy Council’s power to render him either justice or mercy.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. Rowan (2,605 comments) says:

    LK
    Small things amuse small minds.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. RightNow (7,014 comments) says:

    Meanwhile, in Te Kuiti
    https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10152338574100429&set=a.10150162547855429.346317.12635800428&type=1&theater

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. Judith (8,534 comments) says:

    @ RightNow (6,284 comments) says:
    March 29th, 2014 at 7:33 pm

    Well, goodness me … it must be election year! Next we’ll see Cunliffe doing the haka at the rugby.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. peterwn (3,334 comments) says:

    If National has been feeding smear lines to bloggers, etc, perhaps ‘Karol’ at The Standard might care to reflect that Labour and left wingers have been trying to smear John Key ever since he became National leader.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. Judith (8,534 comments) says:

    peterwn (2,900 comments) says:
    March 29th, 2014 at 7:40 pm
    If National has been feeding smear lines to bloggers, etc, perhaps ‘Karol’ at The Standard might care to reflect that Labour and left wingers have been trying to smear John Key ever since he became National leader.

    Yeah, they copied it from what National when they did the same to Helen. Just how far back does this argument have to go?

    They all do it. National is as bad as Labour, and this year even the Greens have joined in. Winston of course has always done it and isn’t particularly fussed about who he directs it at. It has become the sad side of politics for the past twenty years, at least. Trying to pretend that its one sided is really pathetic.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. Steve (North Shore) (4,537 comments) says:

    “Well, goodness me … it must be election year! Next we’ll see Cunliffe doing the haka at the rugby.”
    With you Judith, do you realy know the haka? or just go with the flow.
    Cunliffe and Judith, sounds good, a duet

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. Judith (8,534 comments) says:

    @ Steve (North Shore) (4,290 comments) says:
    March 29th, 2014 at 7:46 pm

    I don’t do the haka, it’s not culturally appropriate for me to even try, and I wouldn’t be seen with Cunliffe, I do not like him as a person. If I had to be seen with a Labour person, then Shearer would be my pick. Besides, I’m not sure if it has escaped your attention or not, but I’m not actually running for parliament? I have no need to impress the electorate in any way.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. nasska (12,101 comments) says:

    RightNow

    I wonder if there is any other country (or Prime Minister) in the world where it would be possible to take an unposed photo like this in a rural pub.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. griffith (1,111 comments) says:

    Iceland?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. Judith (8,534 comments) says:

    I wonder who took said photo? Obviously someone close enough to give him a copy for him to post on his on facebook page.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. nasska (12,101 comments) says:

    That’s rural NZ for you Judith…..strangers or not, we’re generous to a fault. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. nasska (12,101 comments) says:

    I’m telling you, Carol, I’ve never been happier, ” Betty told her friend. “I have two boyfriends. One is just fabulous…handsome, sensitive, caring and considerate.”
    What in the world do you need the second one for?” Carol asked?”
    “Oh,” Betty replied, “the second one is straight.”

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. UglyTruth (4,554 comments) says:

    What is wrong with the legal system in this country?

    It is fundamentally corrupt. The reason that people don’t want to address the problem is that the corruption is so much a part of the standard political process that a full and complete remedy would mean the end of the NZ civil state. The corruption is not something that is particular to this country, but is found anywhere that Roman law has usurped the role of the common law.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. Judith (8,534 comments) says:

    @ nasska (9,290 comments) says:
    March 29th, 2014 at 7:59 pm

    Yes, I agree. If you’re going to have a disaster, the further away from the city you get, the more assistance you will receive, and the less likely you are to be ripped off by ‘the locals’.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. mikenmild (12,390 comments) says:

    No Ugly, it isn’t corrupt. Imperfect, yes, but not corrupt.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. mikenmild (12,390 comments) says:

    Judith
    Probably taken by one of the bodyguards.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. Judith (8,534 comments) says:

    @ mikenmild (8,106 comments) says:
    March 29th, 2014 at 8:03 pm

    WHAT? Bodyguards that our taxpayer dollars pay for, are at the pub taking photos ! How can they guard the PM with a camera in their hands? There’s definitely a scandal in this!!! ;-) (just joking!!).

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. UglyTruth (4,554 comments) says:

    No Ugly, it isn’t corrput. Imperfect, yes, but not corrupt.

    It is corrupt because of the state’s perverted description of the law of the law. The state describes the common law as simply being case law, but the common law is inherently theistic. To make matters worse the head of state swore an oath to “uphold the laws of God”.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  76. mikenmild (12,390 comments) says:

    Aw Ugly, you well know that common law is just judge-made law. You’re just indulging your wishful thinking that a magic fairy blessed a whole code that should remain as is forever.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  77. UglyTruth (4,554 comments) says:

    Aw Ugly, you well know that common law is just judge-made law.

    lex terre: The law of the land. The common law, or the due course of the common law; the general law of the land. Equivalent to “due process of law”. In the strictest sense, trial by oath; the privilege of making oath. (Blacks 5th)

    common law: 1. As distinguished from the Roman law, the modern civil law, the canon law, and other systems, the common law is that body of law and juristic theory which was originated, developed, and formulated and is administered in England, and has obtained amongst most of the states and peoples of Anglo-Saxon stock. Lux v. Haggin, 69 Cal 255, 10 Pac. 674. 2. As distinguished from law created by the enactment of legislatures, the common law comprises the body of those principles and rules of action, relating to the government and security of persons and property, which derive their authority solely from usages and customs of immemorial antiquity, or from the judgments and decrees of the courts recognizing, affirming, and enforcing such usages and customs; and in this sense, particularly the ancient unwritten law of England. (Black’s 2nd)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  78. mikenmild (12,390 comments) says:

    ‘derive their authority solely from usages and customs of immemorial antiquity, or from the judgments and decrees of the courts’
    See, for once we can agree.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  79. griffith (1,111 comments) says:

    He is trying to pull one rabbit out of three thousand plus years of history and pin his argument on that.
    Looking at only what feeds his fantasys not at who is telling “the story”

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  80. UglyTruth (4,554 comments) says:

    ‘derive their authority solely from usages and customs of immemorial antiquity, or from the judgments and decrees of the courts’
    See, for once we can agree.

    There is no agreement when you refuse to acknowledge the first part: “derive their authority solely from usages and customs of immemorial antiquity”.

    The meaning of “immemorial anquity”, as far as English common law is concerned, can be found in the legal code of King Afred the Great, which begins with text from the 10 commandments, and text from other areas of Judaic law.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  81. mikenmild (12,390 comments) says:

    Usage as codified in statute and judgements. And where ‘customs of immemorial antiquity’ have outlived their usefulness they have been changed or abandoned according to the prevailing political process.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  82. Don the Kiwi (1,814 comments) says:

    griffith pours his wealth of knowledge and understanding onto those who are at infantile level of the working of the world, morality, and the cosmos.

    All Hail Griffith. :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  83. UglyTruth (4,554 comments) says:

    He is trying to pull one rabbit out of three thousand plus years of history and pin his argument on that.

    No, I’m trying to show you truth that you don’t want to accept.

    Looking at only what feeds his fantasys not at who is telling “the story”

    Same old same old, smear your opponent when you have no argument.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  84. RightNow (7,014 comments) says:

    Judith (5,407 comments) says:
    March 29th, 2014 at 7:39 pm

    @ RightNow (6,284 comments) says:
    March 29th, 2014 at 7:33 pm

    Well, goodness me … it must be election year! Next we’ll see Cunliffe doing the haka at the rugby.

    I got this image in my mind of you saying that…

    http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_DOY1U6HT7AM/S091BMkwxtI/AAAAAAAAABM/XIgNlGfrbf8/s1600/New+Image.JPG

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  85. mikenmild (12,390 comments) says:

    I miss her…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  86. nasska (12,101 comments) says:

    What has been seen cannot be unseen. :(

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  87. UglyTruth (4,554 comments) says:

    Usage as codified in statute and judgements.

    No, usage does not depend on statute or judgements.

    Usage: A reasonable and lawful public custom in a locality concerning particular transactions which is either known to the parties, or so well established, general, and uniform that they must be presumed to have acted with reference thereto. Practice in fact. Electrical Research Products v. Gross, .C.A.Alaska, 120 F.2d 30 1 , 305. Uniform practice or course of conduct followed in certain lines of business or pro­fessions or some procedure or phase thereof. Turner v. Donovan, 3 Cal.App.2d 485, 39 P.2d 858, 859. Usage cannot be proved by isolated instances, but must be certain, uniform and notorious. (Black’s 5th)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  88. Viking2 (11,676 comments) says:

    NEW SUNDAY MASS SERVICES

    PRIEST: “Praise the Lord!”
    CONGREGATION: “Hallelujah!”
    PRIEST: “Will everyone please turn on their tablet, PC, I Pad, smart phone, and Kindle Bibles to
    1 Cor. 13:13.
    Also, please switch on your Bluetooth to download the sermon.”

    P-a-u-s-e……

    “Now, Let us pray committing this week into God’s hands.
    Open your Apps, BBM, Twitter and Facebook, and chat with God”

    S-i-l-e-n-c-e

    “As we take our Sunday tithes and offerings, please have your credit and debit cards ready.”
    “You can log on to the church Wi-Fi using the password ‘Lord909887.’
    The ushers will circulate mobile card swipe machines among the worshipers:
    A.. Those who prefer to make electronic fund transfers are directed to computers and laptops at the rear of the church..
    b.Those who prefer to use iPads can open them.
    C.. Those who prefer telephone banking, take out your cell phones to transfer your contributions to the church account.”
    The holy atmosphere of the Church becomes truly electrified as ALL the smart phones, iPads, PCs and laptops beep and flicker!
    “Final Blessing and Closing Announcements..
    a.. This week’s ministry cell meetings will be held on the various Facebook group pages where the usual group chatting takes place. Please log in and don’t miss out.
    B. . Thursday’s Bible study will be held live on Skype at 1900hrs GMT. Please don’t miss out.
    c. You can follow your Priest on Twitter this weekend for counseling and prayers.
    God bless you, and have nice day!!!

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  89. mikenmild (12,390 comments) says:

    But, in Ugly’s world, the law would be unchanging from that which applied in the time of Alfred the Great. Why him by the way, why not just apply all the curious rules from the Old Testament?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  90. nasska (12,101 comments) says:

    Anyway RightNow….that image was airbrushed to make her look pretty…..this is more lifelike. :)

    Ref: https://www.dropbox.com/s/sgiwdqqc29r5xag/clarke-and-bush.jpg

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  91. griffith (1,111 comments) says:

    Unfortunately the state has ever widen influences on our daily lives.
    :shrug:
    Not often you see a serious effort to wind back the layers of successive tweaks that have eroded freedom. The erosion in liberty May be an unfortunate result of more complex demands on the system.
    Find me a better fully cohesive and cognate of humanity’s failings, future social structure and I would vote/fight for it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  92. UglyTruth (4,554 comments) says:

    But, in your world, the law would be unchanging from that which applied in the time of Alfred the Great.

    Wrong. The common law adapts to circumstance.

    Why him by the way, why not just apply all the curious rules from the Old Testament?

    Because English common law was more than just parts of the Judiac law. There were also customs particular to the day of King Alfred.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  93. mikenmild (12,390 comments) says:

    But if common law adapts to circumstances that can only be by the action of monarchs, judges and legislatures.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  94. UglyTruth (4,554 comments) says:

    Find me a better fully cohesive and cognate of humanity’s failings, future social structure and I would vote/fight for it.

    The failings are mostly protection mechanisms as a predatory response, from the Nimrod the hunter of Babylon.

    The future structure is suggested by prophetic symbolism.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  95. UglyTruth (4,554 comments) says:

    But if common law adapts to circumstances that can only be by the action of monarchs, judges and legislatures.

    Again with the atheism.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  96. mikenmild (12,390 comments) says:

    Unless you attribute changes in the law to divine intervention.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  97. griffith (1,111 comments) says:

    Don the Kiwi (1,290 comments) says:
    March 29th, 2014 at 8:30 pm

    griffith pours his wealth of knowledge and understanding onto those who are at infantile level of the working of the world, morality, and the cosmos.

    All Hail Griffith. :-)

    Gee thanks.
    Means far more to me deacon then the ever-increasing number of red ticking friends I generate.

    :lol:

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  98. ShawnLH (6,668 comments) says:

    Trust me, if I have established anything, it is that UT’s take on Scripture is batshit crazy. His whacky notion that one part of Revelations supports the 19th century Khazar theory that the Jews are not really Jews is one of the worst examples of abusing Scripture I have ever seen.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  99. ShawnLH (6,668 comments) says:

    Felt sorry for you Griff so I gave you a green tick. *hugz* :)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  100. nasska (12,101 comments) says:

    Settle down there Griff…..best to keep Don onside.

    If the worst comes to the worst he’s got the qualifications to do an exorcism on you. :)

    Edit: He’s offering a March special…..20% off for Kiwiblog clients….for cash.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  101. UglyTruth (4,554 comments) says:

    Trust me, if I have established anything, it is that UT’s take on Scripture is batshit crazy.

    Why would anyone trust you? Remember the Anglican involvement in the Canadian genocide?

    His whacky notion that one part of Revelations supports the 19th century Khazar theory that the Jews are not really Jews is one of the worst examples of abusing Scripture I have ever seen.

    Not my notion. Jews that are not really Jews is a contradiction in terms.
    What Rev 2 refers to is: “I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan”.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  102. ShawnLH (6,668 comments) says:

    “Why would anyone trust you?”

    I’m a trustworthy guy. :)

    “Remember the Anglican involvement in the Canadian genocide?”

    Assuming your take on that is correct, are you saying I was personally involved? They were your ancestors, not mine.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  103. griffith (1,111 comments) says:

    It would already be a four decades of anti church subversion too late.
    The memories of successive pastor, priest missionary JW morman and catholic daughters all keen to throw off the shackles of their closeted lifes and their virginity at this poor confused atheist will always make me grin.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  104. nasska (12,101 comments) says:

    What’s your secret Griff? :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  105. UglyTruth (4,554 comments) says:

    I’m a trustworthy guy.

    Why would anyone believe that, after your little excursion into deceit, ie “Jews are not really Jews”?

    Assuming your take on that is correct, are you saying I was personally involved?

    No. I’m simply questioning your integrity because of your history of deceit and your religious affiliation.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  106. ShawnLH (6,668 comments) says:

    Got another Lizard people video UT? Those are a hoot! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  107. griffith (1,111 comments) says:

    poor confused atheist

    nice puppy

    cute little confused atheist.

    pat..pat

    …..

    Committed, Atheist , Teen age,Over Sexed,Spawn from Hell.

    I think they were attracted to the mental freedom and alternative structure of morality I embodied.

    Long time ago nasska..

    Just a grin now….

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  108. Nostradamus (2,427 comments) says:

    UglyTruth:

    Just for those of us who don’t read the same websites as you, and who clearly aren’t as well informed, could you please rank the following in order of batshit craziness:

    – UFOs were <<< over here <<<
    – Lizard people walk amongst us
    – 9/11 was an inside job
    – Queen Elizabeth ate Canadian children
    – Moon landings were faked
    – JFK was an inside job

    Did I miss anything?

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  109. nasska (12,101 comments) says:

    Think of the poor respectable, God-fearing men they married Griff. :)

    Ref: https://www.dropbox.com/s/wsk9teahk8nfmex/married_man.JPG

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  110. Johnboy (17,051 comments) says:

    “Did I miss anything?”

    Maori love and cherish their children? :)

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  111. RichardX (330 comments) says:

    ShawnLH (764 comments) says:
    March 29th, 2014 at 12:01 am
    No Evidence of the Supernatural?
    Skeptics claim that there is no evidence that any kind of spiritual realm exists. However, scientific studies show the efficacy of intercessory prayer and the effects of religion on personal health. In addition, there is evidence of a spiritual realm that is devoted to the promulgation of evil.
    http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/evidence_of_the_supernatural.html

    The scientific evidence is against you on the efficacy of intercessory prayer and as far as the effects of religion on personal health, no one denies the placebo effect
    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/no-prayer-prescription/
    http://web.med.harvard.edu/sites/RELEASES/html/3_31STEP.html
    http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/the-power-of-faith-and-prayer/

    This last one is just for the balance against your apologetics website
    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2009/05/15/study-concludes-intercessory-prayer-doesnt-work-christians-twist-the-results/

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  112. Johnboy (17,051 comments) says:

    Hell your fast Minus! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  113. UglyTruth (4,554 comments) says:

    Got another Lizard people video UT? Those are a hoot!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  114. ShawnLH (6,668 comments) says:

    RichardX,

    I already checked those out this morning.

    “The placebo effect”

    Riiiiiiight :)

    Give it a rest. I’m trying to give the others a break from these debates.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  115. Johnboy (17,051 comments) says:

    Hell Minus has a buddy! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  116. SPC (5,665 comments) says:

    UT, the term “those who say they are Jews and are not” had a meaning nearly 2000 years ago. Thus this meaning is not specific to Khazars converting to Judaism centuries later.

    Do you think Jews have to be of the male line of Abraham? Thus those who are not and who convert to Judaism are not Jews? Are those who are born to Jewish women but also not of the male line of Abraham, not Jews? Do Jews have to obey the Torah law of the covenant nation to be Jews?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  117. UglyTruth (4,554 comments) says:

    Queen Elizabeth ate Canadian children

    What the witness said is that the children were never seen again, not that they has been eaten. The witness was one of the survivors of the genocide, and he died in suspicious circumstances after he had given testimony.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  118. Nostradamus (2,427 comments) says:

    UglyTruth:

    What the witness said is that the children were never seen again, not that they has been eaten.

    Are you saying that the entire case against Queen Elizabeth is based on one witness?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  119. ShawnLH (6,668 comments) says:

    “Are you saying that the entire case against Queen Elizabeth is based on one witness?”

    Of course not. There was a reptilian shapeshifter standing nearby on a grassy knoll as well. ;)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  120. griffith (1,111 comments) says:

    I helped cure most of the virus nasska. :lol:
    A few were already showing signs of neurosis that such a restrictive lifestyle and upbringing can bring about.
    Some now have normal and sane and successful life’s away from the shackles of superstition. My sig others religious faith has been strong enough to batter my onslaught of rationality to a comfortable truce as long as we keep our relationships agreed degree of separation intact.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  121. ShawnLH (6,668 comments) says:

    “Some now have normal and sane and successful life’s away from the shackles of superstition.”

    Atheism? ;)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  122. UglyTruth (4,554 comments) says:

    UT, the term “those who say they are Jews and are not” had a meaning nearly 2000 years ago. Thus this meaning is not specific to Khazars converting to
    Judaism centuries later.

    The Khazar angle was from ShawnLH, not from me.

    Do you think Jews have to be of the male line of Abraham?

    No, the house of Judah refers to a group of people, not just the males.
    Also the house of Israel is a separate house. The two houses make up the 12 tribes.

    Thus those who are not and who convert to Judaism are not Jews?

    No, there is provision with Judasim for strangers to join them.

    Are those who are born to Jewish women but also not of the male line of Abraham, not Jews?

    Bloodline is only important in relation to the inheritance of the land. Historically the bloodlines have been patriarchal, not matriarchal.

    Do Jews have to obey the Torah law of the covenant nation to be Jews?

    Hard to say. It seems to be the general idea according to old-school Judasim, but today it seems to be not so much.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  123. UglyTruth (4,554 comments) says:

    Are you saying that the entire case against Queen Elizabeth is based on one witness?

    No, there is the historical context of her role as “supreme governor” of the Anglican church during the religious genocide.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  124. griffith (1,111 comments) says:

    Nostradamus

    More credible still twelfth year of age at the time of witnessing her friends disappear with Q. lizzy.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  125. Nostradamus (2,427 comments) says:

    Ugly Truth:

    You say “historical context” and “religious genocide” – but neither assertion is substantiated. Merely saying it, or linking to a non-mainstream website, doesn’t make it true. So what I’m trying to ascertain from you is precisely how many people you say supposedly saw Queen Elizabeth spiriting away children. More than one person, surely?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  126. Don the Kiwi (1,814 comments) says:

    nasska (9,296 comments) says:
    March 29th, 2014 at 9:03 pm
    Settle down there Griff…..best to keep Don onside.

    If the worst comes to the worst he’s got the qualifications to do an exorcism on you. :)
    Edit: He’s offering a March special…..20% off for Kiwiblog clients….for cash.

    Gee nasska, thanks for the promotion.
    Sadly, nowadays there’s no money in exorcism – at least, not the catholic variety – and I’m not an exorcist – that requires a lot more qualification than I’ve got.

    But I can give a simple blessing, and there’s no fee attached to that.
    But I’m sure you’re are such good guy you really don’t need that – even if you believed in it. :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  127. Johnboy (17,051 comments) says:

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/nelson-mail/news/9883196/Drilling-rig-towed-to-gas-field-off-Taranaki

    You can really only laugh at this shite otherwise you would get very sad! :)

    “The drilling rig delivered to Admiralty Bay in the Marlborough Sounds on Wednesday was blessed by iwi before being taken under tow to its destination off Taranaki. “

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  128. Nostradamus (2,427 comments) says:

    Don the Kiwi:

    But I can give a simple blessing, and there’s no fee attached to that.

    You’re clearly a charitable guy. Now, does the simple blessing come with a guarantee of success, or is it a case of hope for the best?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  129. UglyTruth (4,554 comments) says:

    You say “historical context” and “religious genocide” – but neither assertion is substantiated. Merely saying it, or linking to a non-mainstream website, doesn’t make it true.

    The truth isn’t limited to mainstream websites.

    So what I’m trying to ascertain from you is precisely how many people you say supposedly saw Queen Elizabeth spiriting away children. More than one person, surely?

    Yes, the witness said that 10 were taken from the group. AFAIK he didn’t know of any other surviving witnesses.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  130. ShawnLH (6,668 comments) says:

    Boarding schools, both religious and secular during the 19th and early twentieth centuries were pretty appalling. UT is drawing a very long bow in claiming that the Queen is personally responsible for what happened in Canada, and is based on his confusion about the role of the Queen. The Queen is supreme governor only of the Church of England, not the Anglican Communion, and even then it is a ceremonial role only. The Anglican Church in Canada is not under the Queen, nor is any other Anglican province other than York and Canterbury (England).

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  131. Don the Kiwi (1,814 comments) says:

    tradamus (2,713 comments) says:
    March 29th, 2014 at 10:17 pm
    Don the Kiwi:

    Never any guarantees of success Nosti, simply a plea for divine assistance to remain on the straight and narrow – provided you live by the rules :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  132. UglyTruth (4,554 comments) says:

    Boarding schools, both religious and secular during the 19th and early twentieth centuries were pretty appalling.

    Yet the low survival rates and accounts of torture and murder of children paint a darker picture.

    UT is drawing a very long bow in claiming that the Queen is personally responsible for what happened in Canada

    And so the lying starts. I never claimed that Elizabeth was personally responsible, the genocide started long before her coronation.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  133. ShawnLH (6,668 comments) says:

    “And so the lying starts. I never claimed that Elizabeth was personally responsible”

    You have in fact claimed that the British Crown is responsible based on your mistaken notion that the Crown is supreme governor of the entire Anglican Communion. And you have claimed that the Queen kidnapped children.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  134. UglyTruth (4,554 comments) says:

    You have in fact claimed that the British Crown is responsible based on your mistaken notion that the Crown is supreme governor of the entire Anglican Communion.

    Wrong. Elizabeth was also the head of state of Canada during the latter part of the genocide, and the Canadian state was implicated.
    The responsibility is not hers alone, but it happened under her watch and within her dominion.

    And you have claimed that the Queen kidnapped children.

    Quote where I said it or you are lying.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  135. ShawnLH (6,668 comments) says:

    So what DID the Queen do then UT? Your story seems to be constantly changing.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  136. Nostradamus (2,427 comments) says:

    UglyTruth:

    I never claimed that Elizabeth was personally responsible, the genocide started long before her coronation.

    I’ve just looked up some of your previous comments on this issue.

    Exhibit A:

    UglyTruth (2,511 comments) says:
    March 24th, 2014 at 7:16 pm

    Suffice to say, Ugly, that you are as wrong about this as you are about Queen Elizabeth

    I wasn’t wrong about the involvement of the Anglican church in the Canadian genocide happening under her watch.

    Exhibit B:

    UglyTruth (2,511 comments) says:
    March 24th, 2014 at 9:04 pm

    But is she strong enough to personally strangle ten kids UT?

    Who said that they were strangled?

    Link

    In October, 1964 when I was 12 years old, I was an inmate at the Kamloops school and we were visited by the Queen of England and Prince Phillip. I remember it was strange because they came by themselves, no big fanfare or nothing. But I recognized them and the school principal told us it was the Queen and we all got given new clothes and good food for the first time in months the day before she arrived.

    The day the Queen got to the school, I was part of a group of kids that went on a picnic with her and her husband and some of the priests, down to a meadow near Dead Man’s Creek. I remember it was weird because we all had to bend down and kiss her foot, a white laced boot.

    After awhile, I saw the Queen leave the picnic with ten children from the school, and those kids never returned. We never heard anything more about them and never met them again even when we were older. They were all from around there but they all vanished.

    The group that disappeared was seven boys and three girls, in age from six to fourteen years old. They were all from the smart group in class. Two of the boys were brothers and they were Metis from Quesnel. Their last name was Arnuse or Arnold. I don’t remember the others, just an occasional first name like Cecilia and there was an Edward.

    And Exhibit C:

    UglyTruth (2,511 comments) says:
    March 9th, 2014 at 3:43 pm

    The fact that the house of Windsor had no involvement in the first place.

    If you’re head of an organisation which is involved in criminal activity and you don’t oppose it then you’re complicit. I don’t accept that they were ignorant of what was going on there.

    So, UglyTruth, you do seem to be saying (by endorsing the person quoted in your link) that Queen Elizabeth was directly responsible.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  137. ShawnLH (6,668 comments) says:

    Seems to be quite a lot of lying from you UT.

    “If you’re head of an organisation which is involved in criminal activity and you don’t oppose it then you’re complicit.”

    Oops.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  138. UglyTruth (4,554 comments) says:

    So, UglyTruth, you do seem to be saying (by endorsing the person quoted in your link) that Queen Elizabeth was directly responsible.

    I have no reason to endorse William Coombes, I don’t know his background.

    Like I said previously: Elizabeth was also the head of state of Canada during the latter part of the genocide, and the Canadian state was implicated.
    The responsibility is not hers alone, but it happened under her watch and within her dominion.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  139. ShawnLH (6,668 comments) says:

    So what is the whole picnic story about then?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  140. UglyTruth (4,554 comments) says:

    Seems to be quite a lot of lying from you UT.

    For example? Responsibility and complicity are different things.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  141. ShawnLH (6,668 comments) says:

    “Responsibility and complicity are different things.”

    Not really.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  142. UglyTruth (4,554 comments) says:

    The difference is that complicity acknowledges the involvement of others.

    Did you learn calumny as part of your religious education, ShawnLH?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  143. Nostradamus (2,427 comments) says:

    UglyTruth:

    I have no reason to endorse William Coombes, I don’t know his background.

    Your case against Queen Elizabeth is (at least in part) based on William Coombes’ evidence. You said above that “The witness [ie Coombes] was one of the survivors of the genocide, and he died in suspicious circumstances after he had given testimony”.

    Now, without Coombes’ evidence, what’s left to support your case against Queen Elizabeth?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  144. UglyTruth (4,554 comments) says:

    Now, without Coombes’ evidence, what’s left to support your case against Queen Elizabeth?

    Coombe’s evidence remains relevant without my endorsement.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  145. Sofia (858 comments) says:

    Kamloops School is between Vancouver and Calgary, western Canada.
    The Elizabeth II and The Duke of Edinburgh Tour 1964 was Ontario, Prince Edward Island and Quebec City in the East.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  146. ShawnLH (6,668 comments) says:

    “The difference is that complicity acknowledges the involvement of others.”

    It makes no moral difference. Complicity still means that those complicit in a crime are personally responsible.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  147. ShawnLH (6,668 comments) says:

    “Coombe’s evidence remains relevant without my endorsement.”

    You have posted it as part of your claims. That’s endorsing it.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  148. UglyTruth (4,554 comments) says:

    You have posted it as part of your claims.

    No, I have posted it in support of my claims.

    Still no comment on your predisposition towards making false accusations, ShawnLH?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  149. ShawnLH (6,668 comments) says:

    “”You have posted it as part of your claims.”

    No, I have posted it in support of my claims.”

    Your playing word games. Support/endorse, whatever. Your using it to make a claim about the Queen that looks every bit as kooky as your reptilian shapeshifter silliness.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  150. UglyTruth (4,554 comments) says:

    It makes no moral difference.

    The difference is a matter of degree. To hold someone personally responsible implies that the guilt isn’t shared with anyone else.

    Where is the “quite a lot of lying” that you were banging on about before, ShawnLH?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  151. ShawnLH (6,668 comments) says:

    UglyTruth (2,517 comments) says:
    March 15th, 2014 at 11:29 am

    “Technically the state is Anglican since the head of state is “supreme governor” of the Anglican Church.”

    These are your words. Which are totally false.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  152. ShawnLH (6,668 comments) says:

    I’m still wondering what the Queen was supposed to have done at this apparently mythical picnic.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  153. UglyTruth (4,554 comments) says:

    These are your words. Which are totally false.

    Wrong again.

    The Sovereign holds the title ‘Defender of the Faith and Supreme Governor of the Church of England’.
    http://www.royal.gov.uk/MonarchUK/QueenandChurch/QueenandtheChurchofEngland.aspx

    Anglican means “of England”.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  154. UglyTruth (4,554 comments) says:

    I’m still wondering what the Queen was supposed to have done at this apparently mythical picnic.

    I’m wondering if you think I’m stupid enough to let you off the hook for your false accusations.

    Speak volumes about the character of those who serve Liz.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  155. ShawnLH (6,668 comments) says:

    The Church of England is only two provinces in the Anglican Communion. The Queen is Supreme Governor only of those two provinces. All others, including the Canadian and NZ Anglican churches are independent. The Queen is not Supreme Governor of any other Anglican province, including NZ.

    You made that comment in reference to the New Zealand State, claiming that the NZ State is Anglican due to the Queen being, as you wrongly claim, Supreme Governor.

    Epic Fail.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  156. ShawnLH (6,668 comments) says:

    “I’m wondering if you think I’m stupid”

    Yes. I do. Seriously.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  157. ShawnLH (6,668 comments) says:

    Is the Queen a reptilian shapeshifter as well?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  158. griffith (1,111 comments) says:

    Both Just a little odd.

    Spawn
    He has obviously educamateted a lot since last term.

    Unfortunately the same whirring noise persists in being implicit in both of their logic down falls.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  159. ShawnLH (6,668 comments) says:

    Don’t forget to say your prayers before bed Griff. *hugz* :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  160. griffith (1,111 comments) says:

    Priestly overtures of a physical contact nature.

    culturally unacceptable out side of the vestry in todays modern church,

    Thank {insert one of -deity , fate , random chance} for the distance that the holy wireless networks give me.

    That and the two large trained dogs at my feet.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  161. UglyTruth (4,554 comments) says:

    You made that comment in reference to the New Zealand State, claiming that the NZ State is Anglican due to the Queen being, as you wrongly claim, Supreme Governor.

    Still misrepresenting what I said, I see, ShawnLH.

    Elizabeth is isn’t the “Supreme Governor” of the NZ state, she is the head of the NZ state.

    What I originally said was: “Technically the state is Anglican since the head of state is “supreme governor” of the Anglican Church.”

    Liars for Christ, is it, ShawnLH?

    The Sovereign holds the title ‘Defender of the Faith and Supreme Governor of the Church of England’.
    http://www.royal.gov.uk/MonarchUK/QueenandChurch/QueenandtheChurchofEngland.aspx

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  162. ShawnLH (6,668 comments) says:

    “What I originally said was: “Technically the state is Anglican since the head of state is “supreme governor” of the Anglican Church.”

    Which is what I said you said. ‘You made that comment in reference to the New Zealand State, claiming that the NZ State is Anglican due to the Queen being, as you wrongly claim, Supreme Governor’ of the Church of England, is what I meant, obviously.

    And it is still wrong, “technically” or otherwise.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  163. UglyTruth (4,554 comments) says:

    Which is what I said you said.

    In your 11:15, not in your 11:28

    In your 11:28 you said “… claiming that the NZ State is Anglican due to the Queen being, as you wrongly claim, Supreme Governor.”

    ‘You made that comment in reference to the New Zealand State, claiming that the NZ State is Anglican due to the Queen being, as you wrongly claim, Supreme Governor’ of the Church of England, is what I meant, obviously.

    No, it wasn’t obvious that you meant that. Your history of lying speaks volumes.

    8:59 “Trust me, if I have established anything, it is that UT’s take on Scripture is batshit crazy. His whacky notion that one part of Revelations supports the 19th century Khazar theory that the Jews are not really Jews is one of the worst examples of abusing Scripture I have ever seen.”

    Not my notion, liar.

    10:21 “UT is drawing a very long bow in claiming that the Queen is personally responsible for what happened in Canada, and is based on his confusion about the role of the Queen”

    I never claimed that she was personally responsible, liar. I said that she was complicit.

    10:31 “And you have claimed that the Queen kidnapped children.”

    You are a liar, ShawnLH. I never said that.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  164. ShawnLH (6,668 comments) says:

    “In your 11:28 you said “… claiming that the NZ State is Anglican due to the Queen being, as you wrongly claim, Supreme Governor.”

    Yes. Supreme Governor OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND.

    My use of the title Supreme Governor should have been obvious, even to you.

    As to ‘complicit’ your splitting hairs to cover you ass.

    “You are a liar, ShawnLH. I never said that.”

    Yet you are desperately avoiding telling us what you DO think the Queen did. You want to throw accusations about her around, but then whine like a child when anyone calls you on it.

    So, here is your chance. What exactly DO you think the Queen did at this picnic?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  165. UglyTruth (4,554 comments) says:

    My use of the title Supreme Governor should have been obvious, even to you.

    The only thing that is obvious here is your misrepresentation of what I have said.

    As to ‘complicit’ your splitting hairs to cover you ass.

    Fucking liar. She couldn’t be “personally responsible” for the murder of Canadian children when she wasn’t event in the same country, could she?

    Yet you are desperately avoiding telling us what you DO think the Queen did.

    No desperation here, liar. You don’t even deny it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  166. ShawnLH (6,668 comments) says:

    “She couldn’t be “personally responsible” for the murder of Canadian children when she wasn’t event in the same country, could she?”

    And yet you claim she was complicit. I get that you don’t seem to understand basic moral principles, but being complicit is certainly being personally responsible to at least some degree.

    And still, silence on your picnic myth. Your the only liar here UT.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  167. UglyTruth (4,554 comments) says:

    Like I said before, the difference between personal responsibility and complicity is a matter of degree.

    Your the only liar here UT.

    Put up or shut up, asshole.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  168. ShawnLH (6,668 comments) says:

    Getting a bit hot under the collar there UT?

    Queen? Mythical picnics? Ringing any bells? :)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  169. UglyTruth (4,554 comments) says:

    Getting a bit hot under the collar there UT?

    Not at all. Did they forget to tell you that devil means slanderer, dickweed?

    Here’s ShawnLH, defending his genocidal queen like a good Christian devil.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  170. ShawnLH (6,668 comments) says:

    Oh, now she IS responsible! :)

    Your story changes more times than your reptilian shapeshifters! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote