About
Contact
Advertise

Facebook
Twitter

November 14, 2009 8:00am by David Farrar

General Debate 14 November 2009

Email
Facebook
Twitter
Comment206

Uncategorized
General Debate

Comments (206)

Login to comment or vote

Viking2

*_Let me see if I understand all this…_* IF YOU CROSS THE NORTH KOREAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU GET 12 YEARS HARD LABOR.

IF YOU CROSS THE IRANIAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU ARE DETAINED

INDEFINITELY.

IF YOU CROSS THE AFGHAN BORDER ILLEGALLY, YOU GET SHOT.

IF YOU CROSS THE SAUDI ARABIAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU WILL BE JAILED.

IF YOU CROSS THE CHINESE BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU MAY NEVER BE HEARD

FROM AGAIN.

IF YOU CROSS THE VENEZUELAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU WILL BE BRANDED A

SPY AND YOUR FATE WILL BE SEALED.

IF YOU CROSS THE CUBAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU WILL BE THROWN INTO

POLITICAL PRISON TO ROT.

IF YOU CROSS THE AUSTRALIAN OR EVEN THE NEW ZEALAND BOARDER ILLEGALLY YOU GET A JOB, A

DRIVERS LICENSE, PENSION CARD, WELFARE, CREDIT CARDS, SUBSIDIZED RENT

OR A LOAN TO BUY A HOUSE, FREE EDUCATION AND FREE HEALTH CARE.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 8:09am
Leonidas

Aye, something is rotten in the state of Denmark. (NZ)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 8:15am
Viking2

Plan to raise age for driving
By EMILY WATT – The Dominion Post
Last updated 05:00 14/11/2009

The Government is poised to raise the driving age and ban learners from driving powerful cars.

It wants to lift the driving age from 15 to either 16 or 17 and extend the compulsory duration of learner licences to a year.

Transport Minister Steven Joyce said yesterday that young drivers aged 15 to 24 were “seriously over-represented” in crash statistics and the road toll. Young people make up 16 per cent of licensed drivers but are responsible for 37% of accidents.

OK. as far as it goes. But what about the drinking age? and What about the voting age??
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 8:17am
Pete George

I think driving licenses have to toughen up. And somehow then policing of learner license conditions – if they are breached, automatically lose their license.

Drinking – put it back up to 20 for takeaways, leave it at 18 for licensed premises.

Voting – 18 year olds have as much clue about this as a lot of older people ie not much.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 8:27am
Banana Llama

You can be conscripted at the age of 16 and go die for your Politicians, can’t drive a fast car though that is a big no no!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 8:36am
Pete George

Armed forces here are voluntary. From 18? Anyway, I don’t care about them driving a tank around Waiuru, hooning around the streets pissed is more of a worry.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 8:45am
malcolm

*_Let me see if I understand all this…_* If you copy from the web a long-winded and utterly predictable American rant about illegal immigration, then capitalise it and superficially change it to a NZ context, it is still boring, unfunny, unreadable and factually incorrect.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 8:45am
malcolm

Pete, there are no tanks anymore.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 8:49am
Robert Black

I want to say I like good Maoris, that is the ones that don’t hate non-Maoris.

Jesus, the non-Maori haters must be like 2 or 3 percent?

Anyway, hi, all you great Maoris, hello from China, but hi to the one’s I have met in London and China and Australia, you rock.

Great sense of humour, open minded, tough, great drinkers,

Ya, I am drunk, but you know what I mean.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 8:51am
Pete George

Well, trucks, armoured personnel carriers, jeeps, whatever they use now, I don’t think they are down to bicycle yet.

Not that it hasn’t been done before, the Japanese took Singapore with bicycles, and:
http://dixiebiker.blogspot.com/2009/07/1942-tour-de-france.html
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 8:51am
Banana Llama

Conscription isnt voluntary. You can enlist at 16 and a half (think it is 17 now)

Damm those young folks and their new fangled automobiles /shakes fist!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 8:58am
malcolm

I agree Robert. In my experience, Hone Harawira is unrepresentative of Maori and is a throwback.

Why has no one in the media asked him about his dumb gang-land hand signs? They could ask: “Mr Harawira, why do you use these gang-land hang signs? Is this is a good example for a Maori MP to set, given the over-representation of Maori in criminal gangs and prison? Do you think this attitude helps Maori or could perhaps perpetuate a mindset of oppression and disadvantage?”
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 9:04am
MT_Tinman

More suggested (at this time) controls on freedom from the latest NZ quasi-communist govt.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 9:07am
Pete George

Sorry Tinman, I was too harsh. We should drop driving licenses altogether, no legal drinking restrictions, and politicians free to govern without having to bother with elections. And my mother should be able to be a helicopter pilot in the navy.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 9:14am
ephemera

@viking2

Are you saying NZ should be more like Iran, Cuba and Saudi Arabia?

You should be proud NZ has drivers licences and an education system.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 9:15am
getstaffed

ban learners from driving powerful cars

Will that be based on CC’s, number of cylinders, Kw rating or what? Will a special commission need to be establishing to monitor car models and classify ‘powerful’ or otherwise? Does high acceleration represents danger, and if so, should we monitor new-model electric cars while accelerate well from standing but have lower top speeds?

And finally, will those that having accidents in ‘powerful’ cars (ie the tiny tiny minority) still drive and crash them, while the vast majority have their mobility restricted?

My daughter would have to walk 15mins to catch a bus to work 7kms away rather than take our family car and would need to taxi home at 9:30pm.

More socialist control-freak nonsense from National.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 9:15am
Adolf Fiinkensein

I suspect Hone is doing a Saddam. He’s trying like hell to convince the world he has HUUUUUUUUGE electoral support and that his winning Te Tai Tokerau is a foregone conclusion.

He is all piss and wind. When push comes to shove, Hone’s electoral support will be as elusive as Saddam’s WMD. The poor black cock sucker (as distinct from a white mother fucker) might have do get out and do a decent day’s work.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 9:20am
starboard

..watch it..he’ll get his mama onto ya…
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 9:25am
malcolm

Getstaffed, despite all the calculation complications you mention, are you nonetheless classifying your car as “powerful”? :-). Make and model.

I agree. It’s easy enough to get into trouble by being a dickhead in a car which couldn’t pull the skin off a lightly cooked rice pudding. Vauxhall Viva, anyone? I slid right through a country road intersection. Fortunately there was a clear area on the other side. I was late for a School C exam. I also put my parents Telstar over a bank by being a dickhead on a gravel road. Amazingly no damage to me or the car and dad pulled it out with a truck. It was on such a slope that when I opened the door the weight of it pulled me out.

Trying to deal with idiots by adding more restrictions and laws is both a waste of time and is an infringement and inconvenience on the majority of sensible people.

Rather than trying to catch idiots and dickheads with multiple laws, why not just have one law: “You shall not be an idiot or a dickhead on the road.” Then give the police discretion to ensure that anyone being an “idiot or dickhead” can be stopped and given demerits. Give the police the authority to make the judgements.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 9:31am
getstaffed

malcolm, agreed. I had an accident at age 16 driving a sub 2-litre car. It has been my one and only accident and thankfully no one was injured. I was being a dumbass and with the benefit of hindsight I was probably not wise enough to be left in charge of a vehicle, or the lives of others. I was pretty accomplished driving a software compiler tho ;).

I’d probably support raising the age at which learners can first drive, and extend the period in which they’re not permitted to carry passengers or drive after dark. As the judge points out in the story, the ‘streams’ processing ability of teens isn’t developed particularly well at 15. There’d need to be some science around determining if 17 or 18 was any better.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 9:52am
Mr Noisy

Banana Llana you are totally misinformed. Young people can join the NZDF at a minimum age of 17, but only if they have parental/guardian consent or are married. Even then, they can’t be deployed on active service until they are at least 18. Conscription in NZ was phased out a long long time ago, the NZDF is now a totally voluntary organisation.

(edit: ditto what malcolm said.)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 9:58am
Adolf Fiinkensein

I think there is a lot of bullshit talked about the age at which people can drive. I got my driving license the day I turned fifteen. That was in 1961. I had been driving farm vehicles since the age of ten. I’ll bet the statistics for accidents involving 15 to 18 year olds do not bear out the proposition that the eligible age for driving should be increased.

Those who call for tougher controls on these younger drivers are closer to the mark. You see, I did not get my first car until I was twenty and my parents made damned sure I was not permitted to take liberties with their car. No booze, no passengers, no nonsense until I had my own vehicle. Just essential journeys.

It is those controls which have been lost.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 10:00am
Banana Llama

Thanks for the clarification Mr Noisy.

In turn i would like to say that when i looked at joining i was told 16 1/2 if you are an independent, furthermore conscription is always on the cards regardless of current policy.
The point i am making is that laws seem to be made out of convenience rather than responsibility’s as a citizen, if driving is going to be restricted due to age then one should apply that rule to all things rather than what is convenient.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 10:14am
Pete George

You have to have some different age rules. Like not getting the pension until you’re 65.

And most are advisable – like not giving ten year olds unrestricted access to any sort of firearms and drugs. It is always about trying to get to right balance.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 10:27am
andrei

Same old BS

Does anybody really believe that raising the age at which you can obtain a drivers license will have a major impact on the Road toll?

They can flash statistics around showing younger drivers are involved in more accidents than older ones to their hearts content but given “younger drivers” means under 25 in this context and that not all – probably not even the majority in this day and age obtained their license at 15 it is meaningless. Furthermore some of these “younger drivers” will not even be licensed when they have their accident.

Its just more knee jerk stuff from petty small minded authoritarians which are just as likely to be Nat MPs as Labour – sadly
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 10:30am
cha

Finally, how to use an apostrophe.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 10:30am
wynkie

Anyone who was disgusted by the Close Up programme last night about the tetraplegic who has his attendant care cut back by ACC, which resulted in him being forced to ask strangers to empty his urine bag can express their disgust directly to Liz Cairns, who fronted Close Up for ACC at this email address:

liz.cairns@acc.co.nz

The link to the clip is here:

http://tvnz.co.nz/close-up/acc-cuts-hurt-t…c-3143041/video
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 10:35am
starboard

well read this…what a sick fucked up country we are…

Double-murderer Graeme Burton received a free titanium artificial leg worth $10,000 from ACC to replace the right leg lost when he went on a lethal shooting rampage two years ago.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 10:41am
JeffW

Am I reading this morning’s Herald editorial correctly? To, summarise, “racism can only be against a minority”.

What nonsense.

We need major remedial work on our MSM.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 10:47am
Adolf Fiinkensein

Why does he need more than one leg?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 10:48am
starboard

Burton, 38, was this week convicted of trying to kill Head Hunter gang member Dwayne Marsh in Paremoremo maximum-security prison.

He stabbed Marsh seven times – including three times in the heart – with a sharpened steel rod.

The strongly built Burton, who spends most of his time lifting gym weights, has sparked prison riots and threatened guards while inside.

He will now spend 23 hours a day in solitary confinement.

…the man deserves to die…
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 10:50am
starboard

..” hey whore ya dumb arse…its sat 14th..I see ure a day behind….those drugs no good bruvva”…
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 10:55am
Redbaiter

“racism can only be against a minority”.

This is old news. I was told this by the HRC when I wrote to them about National Party pandering to Maori in 1998. Its only one of the many distorted and twisted viewpoints that have eased NZ’s slide into Progressivism.

It happens because NZers are 1) uninformed, 2) too cowed by PC to speak out when they do hear of such things, and 3) a bunch of politically apathetic easily manipulated losers anyway who deserve every damn thing that befalls them.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 10:57am
malcolm

All NZers?

Are you a NZer?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 11:01am
Redbaiter

Still with the interrogations I see Herr Hauptmann.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 11:04am
malcolm

RedBaiter, I was just wondering if you were anonymously including yourself in the “1) uninformed, 2) too cowed by PC to speak out when they do hear of such things, and 3) a bunch of politically apathetic easily manipulated losers anyway who deserve every damn thing that befalls them.” group?

Anyway, how are you getting on finding evidence to support your assertion that: “All over the blogosphere, the left are accelerating their efforts to shut down Kiwiblog.”?

Hauptmann? Very obscure. Distant relative?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 11:10am
side show bob

Given the rate of advancement in technology it is only a matter of time before cars will be able to drive themselves. New car manufacturers are now installing black boxes that can record driving speeds, braking, etc and are used in court cases involving car accidents. On a recent science show, tv, many of these boxes can also be control by satellite and the engine killed if car is nicked. It was also stated that the time is coming when vehicles will be able to be driven by themselves on major roads and speed limits can be control by GPS. Another 10 to 15 years who will need a licence and the car will drive itself home from the pub, cool.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 11:19am
Redbaiter

Hauptmann- Captain in the German Army.

Its a reference to the arrogant and ignorant nature of your posts, and your persistence with the idea that other posters whould volutarily submit to interrogation by lazy fuckwits.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 11:19am
malcolm

Oh, I see. What was Hauptmann’s first name? It’s a bit obscure. Why not just liken me to Himmler, them everyone would get the point?

Anyway, you dodged the questions.

1] The evidence?
2] Are you a NZer and therefore are you one of the “…easily manipulated losers anyway who deserve every damn thing that befalls them.”?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 11:26am
reid

“Hauptmann- Captain in the German Army.”

Yeah, haven’t you read war comics, malcolm?

Donner und Blitzen!

Edit: it’s not a name it’s a rank, dummy. Like Obersturmbannfuhrer.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 11:27am
Redbaiter

“What was Hauptmann’s first name?”

You sure are dumb. Hauptmann means Captain.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 11:29am
malcolm

whould volutarily

That’s what happens when you scurry to harden up your rhetoric with the edit timer ticking away 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 11:29am
Redbaiter

Yes, I see Reid managed to get a line in there in an attempt to save himself from displaying the same ignorance.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 11:31am
BlueDevil

The problem with driving is lack of experience. The first 2-3 years will have a higher accident rate, and it doesn’t matter if you start at 15 or 25. At least at 15 you are more under a parents control.
If it was raised to 17 there are several problems. It will be harder to get a licenced driver to learn with, so does this mean less supervised hours. After a year of supervision the 18 year old will be able to drive on their own and will have the resourses to buy their own car. A 16 yr old is more likely to be using a borrowed car.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 11:32am
malcolm

You sure are dumb. Hauptmann means Captain.

You learn something every day. Thanks RedBaiter.

Were you in Wehrmacht? Are you in fact Josef Mengele? He didn’t like progressives either.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 11:33am
reid

“Yes, I see Reid managed to get a line in there in an attempt to save himself from displaying the same ignorance.”

Fucking D’oh, RB, I marked it as an edit as a response to malcom’s 11:26 which I didn’t read until I’d posted my comment. I thought that that common practice was well understood by everyone, especially experienced bloggers. What’s the matter, having a bad hair day?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 11:36am
Redbaiter

“Were you in Wehrmacht?:

You’re a bit late with that one Herr Hauptmann. After all, its you doing the interrogations.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 11:38am
Ross Miller

Banana Llama … sorry to rain on your parade but New Zealand does not have conscription.

And as for serving o’seas at age 16 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

But never let the facts get in the way of a good story.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 11:41am
Adolf Fiinkensein

Malcom, do you live in Whanganui?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 11:42am
malcolm

Dr Mengele: Is it really an interrogation to ask for evidence to support a dodgy assertion which is presented as the main point of an argument?

And would it still be an interrogation if you provided the evidence you said you had, and thus proved me wrong?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 11:43am
malcolm

Malco[l]m, do you live in W[h]anganui?

No, but I would like to. Wellington.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 11:44am
Adolf Fiinkensein

I believe that not even during World War 2 did the NZ forces accept recruits under the age of eighteen. Of course, many lied about their age. Particularly young Maori from Ngati Porou but they were allowed to go by their families because they would be ‘looked after’ by older members of the whanau serving in the same battalion.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 11:45am
Redbaiter

” thus proved me wrong?”

You have not said anything worth proving wrong. Your technique is always to avoid the main issue- (in this case the apathy of NZers) and focus on some peripheal matter of no real import to the thrust. Hence six posts from you and not one of them deals with the claim that NZers are apathetic. So what’s to prove wrong?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 11:47am
Redbaiter

“having a bad hair day?”

Something you’ve not had to worry about for some years.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 11:51am
malcolm

You’re obfuscating again RedBaiter. You must stop doing that. My argument – as you know – was implicit in my repeated request for you to substantiate your baseless assertion. To translate, I was essentially saying:

“I do not accept you assertion that ‘All over the blogosphere, the left are accelerating their efforts to shut down Kiwiblog.’ I see no evidence of this and challenge you to support your assertion with the evidence you claim to have. If you can’t, I reserve the right to call you a bullshitter who makes baseless and patently false statements to advance your mysterious cause”.

Anyway, we’ve had that fun. You enjoyed it. Admit it. Otherwise you wouldn’t have kept coming back for more, despite claiming to be far too busy.

OK, if NZers are apathetic and deserve everything they get, why aren’t you in government, leading your revolution from the front, rather than anonymously in the comments of OPBs (Other Peoples’ Blogs)?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 11:57am
MikeNZ

viking2
Good point.

I’ve never understood our rational as we accept 750 a year from UN but could do more to integrate them better over 2 yr period.
but then we let them use family repatriation and on avg I was told by someone in IA that they bring 4 others with them within 7 yrs.

MFAT does a really good job at facilitating getting the other family members here if need be, with one family they organised (smoke and dagger like) to get travel docs from hostile country so it was all legal and above board as parents had been tortured and were persona non grata. That event brought in 8 kids and granny to two refugees.

So I can’t understand why we don’t send them back on next ship or plane and ban them from ever coming here so we can do the best job we can with those we let in on UN quote.
Maybe it will change under National but Im won’t hold my breath.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 11:57am
MikeNZ

interesting post.
http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/mesh/2009/11/how-the-saudis-radicalized-u-s-troops/
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 12:03pm
MikeNZ

shenanigins at the UN
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/israel-wants-answers-from-solomon-islands-over-un-vote/story-e6frg6so-1225796722884
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 12:04pm
MikeNZ

wonder if we could snow in summer in NZ as it’s not that hot here is it?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20091110/lf_afp/austriaisraeltourismski_20091110171637/
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 12:06pm
reid

“Something you’ve not had to worry about for some years.”

How would you know, RB? BTW, I don’t have that problem, myself. What’s the matter, are you bald? That might explain why you’re so uptight, something has to…
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 12:10pm
tom hunter

On a more lighthearted note. I began reading an article this morning on Obama the Heartthrob: The End of The Affair.

That piece expands on a comment from another article, which gets stuck into Obama’s lack of transparency, special interest group pandering, outright falsehoods and subtle ad hominem attacks on people who disagree with him, but then says:

None of this means Obama himself is something short of very smart and very charming. He is immensely likeable, whatever his performance.

The “Heartthrob” writer goes on to explore this strange paradox and concludes that Obama has the characteristics of an old fashioned con artist. The writer then links to a famous example from the UK – Ronnie Cornwell.

Ronnie Cornwell turns out to be none other than the father of John Le Carre. That, in turn, caused me to think of the character of Rick Pym, from Le Carre’s novel The Perfect Spy. Although he is a secondary character in the book to the prime actor – his son Magnus Pym, the so-named “perfect spy” (and traitor) – the father is the primary reason for Magnus’s betrayal. The reason being that only a society utterly corrupted by money and selfishness could have spawned such a rotter – and that vivid character is largely based on Le Carre’s own father!!!!

So, there you go, from Obama to Rick Pym in the space of a few hyperlinks. Learning in the age of the Web.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 12:14pm
Redbaiter

“My argument – as you know – was implicit in my repeated request for you to substantiate your baseless assertion.”

It was not implicit. In fact in one exchange (IIRC) you even stated you were asking out of curiosity.

My assertion is in no way baseless. I stand by it, as I do all my assertions, and I will defend it if it is challenged by anyone with a counter argument. I repeat, I am not here to meekly accept interrogation by smug arrogant no argument whining liberals without a POV.

Why don’t you state your POV, support it with your own argument, and I assure you I will take the greatest pleasure in ripping it to pieces.

You won’t do that of course because you don’t have a) the balls or 2) the information.

Now fuck off you obsessive lamer.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 12:28pm
Leg Break

I’d just like to interrupt for a minute and say…

Go the All Whites.

As you were.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 12:53pm
big bruv

I am with you on that one Leggie.

Go All Whites..

Oh, and for those of you who are going to the game (and to the team) it is a game of football so please….

NO FUCKING HAKA’s
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 12:57pm
malcolm

I stand by it, as I do all my assertions..

Even the baseless ones?

..and I will defend it if it is challenged by anyone with a counter argument. I repeat, I am not here to meekly accept interrogation by smug arrogant no argument whining liberals without a POV.

There is no counter-argument to a baseless assertion, other than the argument that there is no evidence. Which is the same as asking you to cite the evidence you claim to have. There’s no argument to prove the absence of something. It’s your dubious assertion, you substantiate it. But if you can’t? Well, in that case try a bit of huff and puff and throw in some abuse for good measure.

If you make a baseless assertion, then spend all day arguing and abusing as to why you won’t provide the evidence, despite having it, well….. you just look like a bullshitter. Plan and simple.

Anyway, I thought you wanted to make the point about NZer’s being apathetic. My argument is that we can’t be completely apathetic otherwise you’d be running the show, rather than anonymously ranting and making baseless assertions on OPBs.

I find that abuse is frequently used to cover a weak or non-existent argument. What do you think?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 12:57pm
Redbaiter

“I find that abuse is frequently used to cover a weak or non-existent argument. What do you think?”

I find that it is in your case that cover is more likely to be infantile questions and weak and off topic side issues. Witless attempts to be funny and other unimportant trivia. All underpinned by a narcissistic obsession with attention. Like an incessantly squealing child tugging at its mother’s dress.

If you merely say you do not believe my assertions, then fine. Don’t believe them. If you say they are wrong, then prove them wrong. Otherwise go away.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 1:02pm
Redbaiter

“NO FUCKING HAKA’s”

Too late I think Bruv. The All Whites are as a big a cultural cringe as the All Blacks.

http://nominister.blogspot.com/2009/11/world-cup-soccer-new-zealand-v-bahrain.html
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 1:07pm
Kris K

MikeNZ 12:03 pm,

interesting post.
http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/mesh/2009/11/how-the-saudis-radicalized-u-s-troops/

Good stuff, Mike.

From the article:

It would be inappropriate to malign or even question the loyalty of the hard-working Muslim men and women wearing the uniforms of the United States. But it would be equally irresponsible to ignore the amassing evidence that subversive and combustible elements with radical Islamic persuasion have infiltrated our military, often putting our personnel at bigger risk in their own bases than from their enemies on the battlefield.

As I have stated before; my personal belief is that while it is easy to identify so called ‘radical’ Muslims, the fact that they may be regarded as ‘moderates’ right up to the time they reveal their true intentions highlights the greater problem behind ALL Islamic belief and aims: Global Islamic hegemony and dominance.
On this basis ‘moderates’ are nothing more than sleeper ‘radicals’ awaiting their opportunity to further the ultimate aims of Islam.

The genesis of radical Islamic thinking within the military was in the 1990-91 Gulf War, when nearly half a million soldiers and marines were deployed in Saudi Arabia to liberate Kuwait and defend the oil kingdom from Saddam Hussein’s aggression. While the Saudis were adamantly opposed to any expression of religious practice by their guests, including a ban on Christmas carols, bible classes and Christian and Jewish prayers, they embarked on a well-orchestrated and generously funded effort sponsored by the Saudi government to convert as many American military members as possible to Islam.

I think the above highlights the fact that this is both an ideological and a spiritual battle for the hearts, minds, and souls of men. That without the spiritual protection from a Judeo-Christian perspective and belief system there is little protection against the preaching of Islam; and the resultant converting of some to that ideology. This results in, essentially, planting the seeds of our own destruction in our very midst.

Of course, our increasingly secular western societies are totally ignorant of this spiritual attack to the very foundation of what western democracy is founded upon – Judeo-Christian values, and the God behind those values.

We really are ‘lambs to the slaughter’.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 1:13pm
malcolm

Wilfully missing the point makes you look silly, RedBaiter. There is no counter-argument to a baseless assertion, other than the argument that there is no evidence.

So, where’s the evidence to support your assertion?

If you don’t have it, you’re a bullshitter. Plan and simple. And by carrying on this charade you look like a deluded bullshitter. One who believes his own bullshit.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 1:19pm
Kris K

Malcolm and Redbaiter – go get a room!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 1:21pm
malcolm

Kris, thanks again for your reply the other day. I got rather busy and didn’t get a chance to reply to your fulsome response.

Anyway the moment has past but I appreciate your reply. Also there seemed to a bit of anti-religion-discussion sentiment after that so we might have got in trouble. Perhaps RedBaiter would have told me to piss off or something.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 1:26pm
Murray

The New Zealand military is voluntary.

You can be a recurit from 18 a cadet in some cases from 16, but you cannot serve in a combat deployment untill 20 unless you have your parents permission.

But don’t let any of that stop the hysteria.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 1:27pm
tom hunter

The following link is perhaps not the thing to look at on a nice Saturday afternoon here in NZ, but it’s certainly worth keeping in mind when buying Chinese-made stuff or fretting about AGW.

While all developing countries seem to have to go through this stage (think 1830’s England), you would think that with 21st century technology it would be nowhere near as bad. Perhaps the only difference will be that the Chinese move through this stage faster than did previous developing nations.

Of course it could also be that and England in the 19th century, even with the supposed societal control of ‘robber barons’, was able to deal with this more effectively as a capitalist democracy than a one-party, state-capitalist nation in the 21st century?

Photos of Chinese pollution
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 1:30pm
Redbaiter

“Wilfully missing the point makes you look silly, RedBaiter.”

Why do you think I care what I look like to a dumbfuck like you? Why do you persist with these subjective assertions? What good do they do your case?

Those are rhetorical questions, so I’ll tell you the answers. No good, and all they do is prove you’re unable to come up with any objective reasoning.

“There is no counter-argument to a baseless assertion,”

You have maintained the assertions are baseless, but have offered no evidence to support this, such as examples of left wing bloggers providing unqualified expressions of support for the free exchange of ideas and the straight forward dialogue that characterizes Kiwiblog.

Without this supporting material, your assertion that my assertions are baseless is itself a baseless assertion.

You can see on the Garret Death Penalty thread that I countered Inky The Reds idiotic argument with references and reason. That was because at least he had the balls (if not the brains) to try and present a POV and back it up with argument.

So far all I’ve read from you is incessant whining because I refuse to participate in your jack booted interrogations.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 1:30pm
malcolm

Sorry RedBaiter, I meant to say “..you’re a bullshitter. Pla[i]n and simple”.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 1:31pm
Banana Llama

Hey Ross and Murray! sorry to rain on your parade but if shit hits the fan there will be conscription for all, but don’t let that get in the way of a good flame war.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 1:32pm
Redbaiter

“Malcolm and Redbaiter – go get a room!”

Why don’t you and Billy get one???
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 1:35pm
Redbaiter

“..you’re a bullshitter. Pla[i]n and simple”.

That’s OK. Can’t see how you reconcile that tho with your whining about abuse a few posts earlier.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 1:36pm
malcolm

RedBaiter, why do you persist with these increasingly convoluted, disingenuous and abusive replies, when you could simply produce the evidence you claim to have, and thus show that your assertion is not baseless?

Anyway, I’ll try to explain this one last time: It is not possible to prove that an assertion is baseless. Just like I can’t prove that Kris’s God does not exist. However, extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence. If you make an assertion which you can’t substantiate, yet you repeatedly say you can, but won’t, then you’re a bullshitter. Plain and simple.

So, where’s the evidence to show that you’re not a bullshitter?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 1:41pm
Kris K

Malcolm 1:26 pm,

Kris, thanks again for your reply the other day. I got rather busy and didn’t get a chance to reply to your fulsome response.
Anyway the moment has past …

Thought you must have – I checked for a couple of days after that in GD.
Thank the Lord for Firefox having word search facility, especially when GD tops over 100 comments.
Also, I’m always happy to respond to others questions, to justify my beliefs, when I feel they’re genuine.

If you wanted to pick it up again from where we left off then I’m more than happy to – your call.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 1:42pm
John B

Back to the Herald Editorial. I can not believe such a piece of relativistic yellow bellied excuse making has oozed forth from our dominant daily. Racism apparently does not mean what it says under that word in your Oxford dictionary but is dependent on who is being racist – if they are from a minority it is not ‘what racism really is’. Two massive fucking objections to this. First is not racism a moral failing and therefore not just reliant on social context? Hell, you could justify all sorts of evil to individuals based on their place in society – this is moral relativism and leads to Stalin’s Russia, Pol Pot’s Cambodia etc. Secondly even if the morality of racism does have a social dimension connected with power relationships this is a complex thing and not just ‘ok if you’re from a minority in the country’. Im a primary school teacher and this week I had a situation where a Maori kid called another kid a ‘little white bitch’. This kid was in no way in a minority (plenty of maori kids in class) and i came down on him as hard as i would on a ‘white’ kid if they had called him ‘nigger’. In this situation no one had the ‘power’.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 1:44pm
Redbaiter

“RedBaiter, why do you persist with these increasingly convoluted, disingenuous and abusive replies, when you could simply produce the evidence you claim to have, and thus show that your assertion is not baseless?”

Why do you persist in asking the same question over and over again when I’ve answered it so many times already? I’ll tell you the answer to that rhetorical question too.

Because you’re an insane narcissistic lamer who can’t think of any other way to get the attention that he is obsessed with.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 1:44pm
malcolm

“..you’re a bullshitter. Pla[i]n and simple”.

That’s OK. Can’t see how you reconcile that tho with your whining about abuse a few posts earlier.

I suppose the difference is I didn’t call you a bullshitter until there were 30+ posts from you to demonstrate that this is true. You OTOH are rather more unstinting with your abuse.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 1:47pm
Redbaiter

“You OTOH are rather more unstinting with your abuse.”

Oh, I get it. Abuse is OK as long as it isn’t “unstinting”.

Very good.

Another useful insight into the delusional mind of the Progressive.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 1:49pm
malcolm

Why do you persist in asking the same question over and over again when I’ve answered ti so many times already?

Dear oh dear. You haven’t answered it, RedBaiter. Remember, that’s what the whole conversation has been about. I’ll ask again though:

Where’s the evidence you claim to have to support your assertion that “All over the blogosphere, the left are accelerating their efforts to shut down Kiwiblog.”?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 1:51pm
Kris K

Redbaiter 1:35 pm,

“Malcolm and Redbaiter – go get a room!”

Why don’t you and Billy get one???

Fair enough up to a point.
Usually with Billy I give him the benefit of the doubt for about three comments. After that he usually moves into more stupid than usual territory and so I drop it as a bad cause.

But I will defend my faith (especially) when it is attacked, and allow the other person (eg Billy) to hang themselves by their increasingly idiotic assertions. Of course I’m happy to enter into genuine debate and discussion.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 1:51pm
Pete George

If you say they are wrong, then prove them wrong.

This is the GW WMD approach, aka the “intelligent” design approach – demand something that is unprovable be proved, otherwise a victory is claimed.

The boomerang boy is back:

“the arrogant and ignorant nature of your posts”
“Your technique is always to avoid the main issue-”
“Hence six posts from you and not one of them deals with the claim”
“focus on some peripheal matter of no real import to the thrust.”
“you obsessive lamer.”
“Witless attempts to be funny and other unimportant trivia.”
“All underpinned by a narcissistic obsession with attention. ”
“Without this supporting material”
“So far all I’ve read from you is incessant whining ”
“Because you’re an insane narcissistic lamer who can’t think of any other way to get the attention that he is obsessed with. ”
“Another useful insight into the delusional mind”

How many posts of avoidance?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 1:53pm
malcolm

Another useful insight into the delusional mind of the Progressive.

You’re doing that missing the point thing, again. Go back and re-read.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 1:54pm
Redbaiter

“Dear oh dear. You haven’t answered it, RedBaiter.”

Yes I have. If all you have are assertions like this, assertions you have made around fifty times, why the need to continue to make them? I’ll tell you. You’re an insane obsessive.

As for your claims as to what is true and what isn’t, its another behavioral process common to Progressives where they not only come here with dissent, but set themselves up as judge and jury as well, and they do this without the incongruity of such behaviour ever striking them as deranged nonsense it actually is.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 1:56pm
Redbaiter

“Go back and re-read.”

No thanks. Its hard enough to read your predictable infantile repetitive drivel the first time.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 1:59pm
Pete George

“All over the blogosphere, the left are accelerating their efforts to shut down Kiwiblog.”

All over the blogosphere – can’t be anything other than gross exaggeration

the left – a meaningless generalised label

accelerating their efforts – there is no evidence of any accelerating efforts, it is unmeasureable anyway

to shut down Kiwiblog – no evidence that anyone is trying to shut this blog down, Kiwiblog appears to continue to operate freely
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 2:01pm
Redbaiter

Oh Gawd, the cavalry has arrived. Listen to the bugles Mal, you’re saved at last.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 2:01pm
Pete George

Boomerang bullshit

they not only come here with dissent, but set themselves up as judge and jury as well, and they do this without the incongruity of such behaviour ever striking them as deranged nonsense it actually is.

You are really here as a deliberate piss take, aren’t you Red.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 2:04pm
Angus

Jeez, Red. Now you’ve got two randy Jack Russell’s humping both legs !
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 2:05pm
Pete George

Kris, how much do you think it’s just a case of the Muslims under the bed taking over from the reds under the bed?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 2:06pm
Redbaiter

“no evidence that anyone is trying to shut this blog down”

Another baseless assertion. The evidence is profuse.

Pity you suffer the usual blinkered reading abilities of Progressives, or you would have seen this covered some posts ago, when I requested your comrade to provide instances of left wing blogs providing “unqualified expressions of support for the free exchange of ideas and the straight forward dialogue that characterizes Kiwiblog”.

Never mind, I don’t mind helping the retarded left on the odd occasions. Its charitable you see.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 2:06pm
CharlieBrown

The national government is a bunch of knee jerk twits. Lets consider the following so we can wonder how changing from Labour to National has made no positive difference:
* Banning the most effective cold and flu pills
* Not removing the stupid stupid stupid law that is being brought in regarding child care people now need a 2 year diploma to look after children (what a bunch of national wankers)
* Now looking at raising the minimum driving age (no matter how high they raise it, there are going to be learner drivers, therefore the younger population are going to be over-represented in car crashes)
* Stopping the complete reduction on tarriffs (at least labour probably wasn’t going to do this)
* Borrowing $250 million a week whilst still keeping middle class welfare
* Not removing the maori seats (and lets be real, under spineless john key this will never happen)
* Ignoring the smacking referendum
* Pretending to get tougher on crime when in reality any changes they propose are going to be a variation of what we already have
* Removing the defense of provocation without coming up with an alternative
* NOT disbanding any unnecessary commission/board/tribunal that we currently have (eg, geographic board that wants to change the name of an NZ city despite the members of that city not wanting it changed, a childrens commission that is completely out of touch with NZ’ers, a biased waitangi tribunal that is stacked with maori activists etc)

These are just a few, but after reading how they are now looking at rising the minimum driving age, they really are showing that they are a bunch of conservative pratts with absolutely no principals. Especially when you consider the change in direction that the party has shown over the last 4 years, how can you trust anyone in that party to stand up for what they believe in.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 2:08pm
Kris K

John B 1:44 pm,

Back to the Herald Editorial. I can not believe such a piece of relativistic yellow bellied excuse making has oozed forth from our dominant daily. Racism apparently does not mean what it says under that word in your Oxford dictionary but is dependent on who is being racist – if they are from a minority it is not ‘what racism really is’. Two massive fucking objections to this. First is not racism a moral failing and therefore not just reliant on social context? Hell, you could justify all sorts of evil to individuals based on their place in society – this is moral relativism and leads to Stalin’s Russia, Pol Pot’s Cambodia etc. …

Indeed.
The pc (read that; socialist societal engineers) brigade always tend to side in favour with the so called minority. Not because thay are overly concerned for that ‘minority’, but because they view the majority as being the primary hindrance to their end aims. By siding with the ‘minority’ interest groups they are able to oppress the majority of the population, and thereby bring them increasingly into line.

So whether the ‘minority’ consists of ethnic groups (eg Maori), religious groups (eg Islam), alternative lifestyle groups (eg homosexuals), etc., by siding with these ‘oppressed’ minorities the majority are kept on the back foot.

If we (the majority) don’t stand against this one sided racism, for example, then the socialist/progressives ideologues will roll over the top of us and our rights. We must stand up for free speech while we still have it; else it too will be gone.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 2:10pm
malcolm

RedBaiter, I’ll leave it with you.

If you find the evidence, please post it here so everyone can judge it. Not just me. Oh hang on, you’ve already got the evidence, but won’t share it because you don’t want to encourage people to question your baseless assertions. Anyway just so you don’t forgot, your baseless assertion was:

“All over the blogosphere, the left are accelerating their efforts to shut down Kiwiblog.”

cheers

Malcolm
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 2:15pm
Redbaiter

“Jeez, Red. Now you’ve got two randy Jack Russell’s humping on both legs !”

Heh heh.. yapping little critters ain’t they?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2009 2:16pm

More comments:

1
2
3
›

Add a Comment Cancel reply

Login to comment or vote

« The Valley of the Kings

The train trip North »

Donations

You can now donate to Kiwiblog

Exclusive content from DPF on Patreon

Become a Patron!

Never miss a post

Email Address

Join 37.4K other subscribers

Highlights

Health Target 5 – elective treatments
Health Target 4 – Specialist appointments
Health Target 3 – Emergency Dept Waiting Times
Health Target 2 – Immunisations

Links

Its official: the Royal Society of NZ’s race-based funding is a constitutional requirement.
Point of Order
Electricity Companies screwing us again
The Daily Blog
No monopoly on stupid
Hompaddock
Band Aid at 40
Utopia
Open mike 23/11/2024
The Standard
The Working Class and The Classics
No Minister
Justice in Brazil
No Right Turn
"Seymour is only doing openly what M?ori nationalists and their Pakeha allies have been doing, quietly for the past 50 years."
Not PC
The transgender agenda sunk Kamala
Bob McCoskrie's McBlog
SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT
No Punches Pulled (Bob Jones)
What does “reciprocity” mean in New Zealand laws?
Croaking Cassandra
A Day of Reckoning
NZCPR
This will not end well
Offsetting Behaviour
Top 14 Predictions for Round 10
Stats Chat
Tory Whanau may have to sell Wellington mayoralty to make ends meet
The Civilian
The Accidental Engagement
Imperator Fish
Legal Beagle: Election '23: The Special Votes
Public Address
Making this movie might have been a mistake
Liam Hehir
Why I am retiring from political blogging
Kiwi FireWalker
Angie Warren-Clark: Meet the Newbies
Dan Moskovitz

editor@kiwiblog.co.nz

PO Box 12270, Thorndon, Wellington 6144

Facebook
Twitter
FourSquare
Instagram
LinkedIn
Google+

Archives
Disclosure Statement
Editorial Policy
Privacy Policy
Complaints Policy
Comments Policy

Design by cre8d