About
Contact
Advertise

Facebook
Twitter

June 12, 2013 8:00am by Kokila Patel

General Debate 12 June 2013

Email
Facebook
Twitter
Comment196

Uncategorized
General Debate

Comments (196)

Login to comment or vote

Kea

Redbaiter, no you have more than one enemy.

Radical Islam is informed by the same religious nonsense as Christianity. It is an overstated threat, but is still real. People can and do restrict our liberty on the basis of their religious beliefs, even in modern day NZ. Your fixation on the progressive left blinds you to rather a lot.

You defend religion in the mistaken belief it is somehow right wing to do so, while condeming any good idea the left may have. You are informed by singular ideology, not what works or is real.
4 6
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 11:47am
KiwiGreg

And Harriet if you’re such a burger expert open your own store and take down McDonald’s. But leave the market alone, you are not smarter than the collective wisdom of consumers.
5 1
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 11:48am
Manolo

What a cheek! The Stone Agers are the last ones to believe we are all equal.
12 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 11:48am
Kea

grumpyoldhori, Slavery was going on before the white man ever set foot in Africa and continues on today.

The Brits popularised the novel notion that slavery was some how wrong. It is not wrong in the African system of values. You are showing profound racial predjudice against the blacks in Africa by judging them on the basis of recently formed ideas in European countries.

The idea that “all men are born equal” is not taken seriously by 99% of the world, including by many of the white middle class who came up with this novel social experiment. Most of the world lives in China and India. In India they go beyond race to the dreadful caste system.

You better go thank the next “white” person you see for the freedoms you have. You would not have them under my ancestors 😉
9 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 11:55am
Weihana

KiwiGreg (2,832) Says:
June 12th, 2013 at 11:47 am

So those women at the rugby are pbasically saying their offence at someone else’s speech trumps the other person’s right to free speech?

And if they called the ref a nigger?

Since when did “free speech” become the right to hurl abuse in public?

And as I recall this lady simply argued that what these guys were doing was wrong. I don’t recall her asking for them to be brought before the courts. She was, rather, exercising her right to free speech to criticize a culture she thought needed to be criticized.
3 3
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 11:58am
Kea

She was, rather, exercising her right to free speech to criticize a culture she thought needed to be criticized.

So are people who scream NIGGER !

Why the double standard ? This is a no-brainer for me. There should be no restrictions on freedom of expression. None at all, not ever, no exceptions. If something is ignorant and unpopular, then people will regard it as such. Crying out “nigger” is not going to turn anyone against blacks.
4 2
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 12:11pm
kowtow

Fletch
sales of 1984 going up.

Obama’s decided it should be a Federal Govt training manual.
5 1
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 12:11pm
Weihana

Kea (5,016) Says:
June 12th, 2013 at 11:55 am

You better go thank the next “white” person you see for the freedoms you have.

And after that go and thank the next student at Harvard you see for Facebook. Or go and thank the next South Korean you see for the Galaxy S4. You see, credit is obtained by association… no matter how irrelevant the association. 🙂
4 2
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 12:14pm
kowtow

Ah the Brits and the end of slavery!

Those white Bronze Age desert religionists really do no good in the world!
5 2
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 12:17pm
Redbaiter

“You defend religion in the mistaken belief it is somehow right wing to do so,”

For Marxism to succeed, all competing social/ political influences must be defeated. There can only be one ideology and that is Progressivism.

Marxists work hard in western society to destroy the family and Christianity, so that in the end we ail all be unified in the pursuit of progressivism/ socialism.

Support the family and support Christianity and you will defeat the Marxists.
7 2
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 12:20pm
Kea

kowtow, I hope that was not an attempt to link the abolition of slavery with Christianity. Because that would make you look very very silly. The bible approves of slavery and set out various laws around it. (It does not approve of working on Sunday or eating a feed of Mussels though).

Note you can beat your slaves to death, just so long as they suffer a couple of days before dying.

What the Bible says about Slavery

Exodus 21:2
If thou buy an Hebrew servant….

Exodus 21:7
If a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant….

Exodus 21:20-21
And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money.

Exodus 22:3
If he have nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft.

Leviticus 22:11
If the priest buy any soul with his money….

Leviticus 25:39
And if thy brother that dwelleth by thee be waxen poor, and be sold unto thee….

Leviticus 25:44-46
Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids. Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession. And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever.

Ephesians 6:5
Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ.

Colossians 3:22
Servants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God.

1 Timothy 6:1
Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honour, that the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed.

Titus 2:9-10
Exhort servants to be obedient unto their own masters, and to please them well in all things; not answering again; Not purloining, but shewing all good fidelity; that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things.

1 Peter 2:18
Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward.
3 6
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 12:22pm
Weihana

Kea (5,017) Says:
June 12th, 2013 at 12:11 pm

So are people who scream NIGGER !

Why the double standard ? This is a no-brainer for me.

Because civil society entails rules of behaviour. I have no problem with reasonable time and place restrictions on particularly offensive forms of speech as public interaction will inevitably involve some level of trade-off between people of differing standards. For instance, consider public nudity. Why should someone not be able to walk around town nude if they are not doing anything to anyone else? On the other hand families also have a right to take their children into town. But given our social mores there is a clear conflict between those two activities. One must give way to the other. Similarly individuals have a right to free speech, even offensive speech. But families also have a right to take their children to a rugby match. Should their children have to be subject to racial abuse because such people have a right to their opinions? Someone has to give way. Either the racist reigns in his behaviour or families keep their children at home.

There should be no restrictions on freedom of expression. None at all, not ever, no exceptions. If something is ignorant and unpopular, then people will regard it as such. Crying out “nigger” is not going to turn anyone against blacks.

Your position is simply untenable. Child pornography is a form of expression (as is all pornography). Most would consider this justifiably restricted. Similarly, defamation is a form of expression, but again one that involves some level of harm and so again most consider it justifiably restricted.

Note, I don’t believe you are necessarily advocating for such expression to be permitted, but these are forms of expression and they are examples of why freedom of speech is not absolute.
3 2
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 12:24pm
ignant_immigant

grumpyoldhori

Ahhh the well known Maori racist and seperatist that thinks the sun shines out of his arse beacuse he belongs to a stone age tribe of some sort, but in reality has done little to nothing for NZ.
Aren’t you the guy that often says in open text that all whites should leave NZ because the country is not theirs and Maori are the only people that should have any say in what happens here?

I know who you are and will not engage with you because I frankly find it beneath me.
8 2
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 12:28pm
Ross12

I like this –Aussie state polis putting the Fed pollies in their place !!

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/labor_shocked_that_schools_are_for_teaching/
2 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 12:28pm
Kea

Redbaiter, bullshit. How stupid do you think people are ? The choices are not maxisim or Christianity !

We can reject marxist thought with no reference to imaginary beings. We can reject it simply because it does not work and is wrong. That is the real way forward. Referencing an ignorant desert cult is no way to build a decent society. There are some things worth keeping in the bible, but those things are common in the moral codes of non Christian societies too. Christianity is just another way to remove liberty, not provide it. Religion has a history of being used for politics not spritual enlightment. Not much has changed, as evidenced by your own comment.
2 9
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 12:28pm
Redbaiter

“freedom of speech is not absolute.”

Freedom of speech is a silly off the point distraction.

It is not the issue.

The issue is freedom of political expression.

That is why the example the tyrants always use of shouting fire in a picture theatre does not work. Like most ideas the left have it is simpleton rubbish. Its shouting (for example) Barack Obama is a totalitarian monster that is the issue.

However the reason we need to resist political correctness is because the intent of this despicable movement is so clear. In the first instance it seems innocent enough in that it is socially unacceptable to use denigrating language. (example nigger)

Soon though the definition of that language is subtly and slowly changed to include subjective political terms. Eventually, you’ll get jailed for calling someone a progressive or socialist or using those words as pejorative terms.

That is the intent of the PC left, and that is why they’re dangerous. They in the end seek to impose tyranny.
7 3
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 12:33pm
Kea

Weihana, you present a very weak and fundamentally flawed argument.

I do think people should be allowed to walk around naked, possibly shouting NIGGER, as they do so. How many people do you think would actually do that ? Give people some credit FFS. If you find the human body “offensive” then you have issues, and they are not minor ones either. I think claims of being “offended” should be subjected to the same level of proof as anything else. PROVE IT. The fact is you can not. It is purely subjective and is a (claimed) emotional state that says nothing about another persons behaviour.

Trying to drop child porn in there is just a red herring. It involves actual harm, not someone pretending to be “offended”.
5 1
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 12:35pm
Redbaiter

“Redbaiter, bullshit. How stupid do you think people are ?”

Some are pretty stupid its true, but not many as stupid as you thank God.

True Christians are no threat to anyone’s liberty and stand as a major part of the social bulwark we need to build against totalitarian Marxism.

You Progressives pull Christianity down and you have nothing so your sick religion of government fills that void. The Greens for example are only a reaction to the decline of Christianity. A poisonous and tyrannical movement that has stepped into the void left by the assault on our traditional faith. All driven by academic Marxists and their useful idiots. The stupid people.
10 4
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 12:42pm
Kea

Redbaiter, so the way forward is to put our faith in members of a bronze age desert cult who believe in imaginary beings !

It is not ok to tell lies about things that do not exist. It does not deserve our respect or our indulgence. Religion is a cancer on humanity and should be treated with contempt by any decent and right minded person.
2 5
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 12:45pm
Redbaiter

“Redbaiter, so the way forward is to put our faith in members of a bronze age desert cult who believe in imaginary beings !”

You can put your faith in anything or anybody you so choose. Or you can choose to have no faith at all. You can rant and rave about what the bible says or does not say. (as you so frequently do)

That is all completely off the issue.

The point is Christianity is no threat to my freedom.

Whereas Marxism is a huge threat.

That is all there is to it.
9 3
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 12:53pm
Jack5

Gay adoption is becoming a big issue in Germany.

We haven’t even really debated it in New Zealand.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/gay-adoption-debate-flusters-german-conservatives-a-904875.html#ref=nl-international
3 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 12:55pm
Ryan Sproull

The point is Christianity is no threat to my freedom.

Whereas Marxism is a huge threat.

That is all there is to it.

Potentially, they both are.
1 8
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 12:57pm
Kea

Rebaiter, you are now backing away from your original position that we should, embrace Christianity to defeat marxism.

It is a false dichotomy. We do not need Christanity to defeat marxism. That is simply replacing one silly destructive idea with another. Modern Christians may support many of the things you approve of. Same with me. I agree where I agree and disagree where I disagree. I do not need to buy into the whole package.

If Christians come up with good ideas, I support the IDEA, not the Christianity.
2 3
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 12:58pm
Redbaiter

“That is simply replacing one silly destructive idea with another.”

Leaving aside the idiocy of your reference to a “false dichotomy” (sic) there is no possible way anybody can regard Christanity today as destructive as Marxism. (unless they are an irrational obsessive loon) It is part of the bulwark we must build against Marxism. Any true Christian by dint of that truth must reject Marxism, and they do, and that is why Marxists seek so desperately to destroy them.
9 1
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 1:03pm
Redbaiter

“We haven’t even really debated it in New Zealand.”

And we will not be permitted to.

Just as the progressives here disallowed debate on redefining traditional marriage.
8 2
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 1:06pm
mikenmild

Seems to me there was plenty of debate on redefining marriage.
3 10
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 1:09pm
Harriet

Weihana #

“…..Note, I don’t believe you are necessarily advocating for such expression to be permitted, but these are forms of expression and they are examples of why freedom of speech is not absolute….”

Defamation you say?

It’s really an act of dishonesty rather than inappropriate speech. It’s a matter of fraud.

You’re still permitted to say what you like about people, but if it is proved to be ‘mostly incorrect’ then of course you have defamed them. It’s generally known as lying. Or being totally misinformed about someone – lied to in otherwords.

“….Child pornography is a form of expression…”

No it’s not!

It’s a form of exploitation.

And don’t say ‘drawings’ because they just exploit the ‘intent of the law’! Too Easy. 😎
0 6
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 1:09pm
Redbaiter

“Seems to me there was plenty of debate on redefining marriage.”

Being a card carrying communist propagandist Milky of course you would promote that lie.

In the blogosphere, a place the left do not yet fully control, there was debate. Unfortunately the views expressed in the blogosphere only minutely penetrate into the larger debate.

In the mainstream, the debate was shut down by progressives who appointed a corrupt Select Committee, by the mainstream media who pushed the lie it was about “equality” and would not allow any debate outside that fake paradigm, and by Progressives in general who cultivated a climate of hate against anyone who opposed it.

There was no debate, and traditional marriage was eventually redefined by a corrupt and cronyist exhibition of progressive tyranny that will ever be a stain upon our democracy.
7 3
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 1:16pm
Paulus

On the subject of the word “Nigger” Peter Jackson has some difficulty with his making of the film of the Dambusters because the radio code word for the success of this mission was “Nigger” being the name of Guy Gibson’s dog.

The dog “Nigger” was killed on the day of the action, run over in the road at the airfield.
4 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 1:18pm
Harriet

“….The point is Christianity is no threat to my freedom…..Where as Marxism is a huge threat…..”

“…..Potentially, they both are…..”

Make sure you wash all the germs of the Kalashnikovs and the Rosemary Beads before you touch them Ryan! 😎
2 4
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 1:18pm
Manolo

Love between pensioners: http://news.msn.co.nz/nationalnews/8673380/crowbar-attack-on-neighbour-admitted
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 1:22pm
mikenmild

Here’s just one of the debates on redefining marriage:
http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/PB/Debates/Debates/d/b/c/50HansD_20130417_00000020-Marriage-Definition-of-Marriage-Amendment.htm
Note there was quite a sizable minority opposed. I’m pretty sure all the pros and cons were well canvassed.
3 5
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 1:31pm
mikenmild

Paulus
Apparently the script for the fim (written by Stephen Fry) has the dog renamed ‘Digger’. Anyone know if the film is still going ahead?
0 4
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 1:33pm
kowtow

Funny old world.No problem washing hundreds of Gerry down the river ,but what do we call the dog?

It’s a bit like those birth certificates for sex changers. Born male,had an operation,now I want an historical document reissued to show the past was not as it was.

Equality is a strange thing. Even historical facts can be changed to suit the present.
5 1
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 1:37pm
Harriet

Yeah Milko – the select commitee would not discuss the issue of gays ‘changing’ so as to get Married.

That counted out all the testamony of people who were gay and then went on to change and get Married, and from the testimony that they ‘now had far superior lives’ from producing ‘their’ children within the ‘natural order’ Marriage.

With that important evidence being excluded – and on purpose – it demeaned the INDIVIDUAL gay person – passing them off as being IRRELEVENT to the gay marriage agenda!

LGBT is a sick joke when they talk about ‘equality’.

But at least I’m one who said so! 😎
4 2
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 1:38pm
b1gdaddynz

Remind me never to be nice to strangers in Porirua! I was in the checkout line at Pak N Save Porirua and the stereotype (PJs, Ugg Boots,iPhone in hand, baby in nappy and singlet) in front of me had her card decline buying some nappies; so not wanting the baby to suffer more and because I was in a hurry I paid for them! I didn’t expect anything in return maybe a thank-you would have been nice. No didn’t get that instead got a surly “doesn’t make you better than me” and she walked off! Check-out chick was gob smacked and all I could do was laugh it off.
11 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 1:56pm
thedavincimode

cha

You appear to have joined the dots quite successfully – all two of them.

But why does Bill post here under the pseudonym “Harriet”?
3 1
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 2:04pm
cha

But why does Bill post here under the pseudonym “Harriet”?

Urges .. the deeply uncomfortable itch that cannot be scratched…?.
5 1
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 2:11pm
Black with a Vengeance

Jeez you’re a fucking idiot, kowtow!
4 8
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 2:16pm
thedavincimode

cha

Of course. His cilice. That explains everything.
2 1
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 2:18pm
Black with a Vengeance

Nice one B1gdaddynz…it does make you better than her!
2 3
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 2:19pm
Weihana

Redbaiter (3,366) Says:
June 12th, 2013 at 12:33 pm

The issue is freedom of political expression.

Calling the players and refs faggots is an issue of political expression? Yeah right.
5 2
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 2:20pm
Kea

Weihana, can you post a list of all the “Allowed” things we can say when exercising our “freedom of expression” along with a list of the forbidden things we can not say when exercising our “freedom of expression” ?

Do not forget to include the name of who decided what was allowed or not allowed.

Thanks 🙂
5 2
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 2:32pm
kowtow

Stephen Fry writing the script ,the operation should be called “Bugger”.
3 3
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 2:32pm
Weihana

Kea (5,023) Says:
June 12th, 2013 at 12:35 pm

Weihana, you present a very weak and fundamentally flawed argument.

I do think people should be allowed to walk around naked, possibly shouting NIGGER, as they do so. How many people do you think would actually do that ? Give people some credit FFS.

I have not suggested that many people would engage in such behaviour. But that is no argument against instituting standards restricting it for the few that may choose to do so.

If you find the human body “offensive” then you have issues, and they are not minor ones either.

I don’t. You will note I referred to social mores, not personal ethics. The point is that in any public space people must compromise and there must be some overriding standards. You might argue that a father who wants to take his daughter to the mall has no right to expect that his daughter will not be subject to people walking around in the nude making obscenities. But why does the right to walk around nude making obscenities outweigh the right of others who think it is indecent exposure that they would not want to expose their families to? The fact is you cannot prove which group should get preference on objective facts alone. If the nudist wins, then others are forced to accept it if they go out in public. If the nudist loses, the nudist is forced to accept the standards of others if they go out in public. Arguably in such a situation the prevailing mores of society at large should prevail.

I think claims of being “offended” should be subjected to the same level of proof as anything else. PROVE IT. The fact is you can not. It is purely subjective and is a (claimed) emotional state that says nothing about another persons behaviour.

Which is no different to claiming that nudists have a right to walk around naked in public. That is also your subjective ethical standard.

Trying to drop child porn in there is just a red herring. It involves actual harm, not someone pretending to be “offended”.

Indeed it does involve actual harm. But it is speech nonetheless. Indeed a murder involves harm. That doesn’t make a publication depicting it illegal. Moreover, you did not limit your consideration of speech to that which is considered offensive. You said that there should be no restrictions. “none at all, not ever, no exceptions”.
5 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 2:35pm
Weihana

Harriet (1,908) Says:
June 12th, 2013 at 1:09 pm

Weihana #

“…..Note, I don’t believe you are necessarily advocating for such expression to be permitted, but these are forms of expression and they are examples of why freedom of speech is not absolute….”

Defamation you say?

It’s really an act of dishonesty rather than inappropriate speech. It’s a matter of fraud.

That it is dishonest does not imply that it is not speech.

“….Child pornography is a form of expression…”

No it’s not!

It’s a form of exploitation.

That it is exploitative does not imply that it is not expressive.

And don’t say ‘drawings’ because they just exploit the ‘intent of the law’! Too Easy.

I’m not referring to drawings, I’m referring to the real thing, which is just as much “speech” and “expression” as any other painting or movie etc. That it is exploitative and justifiably restricted does not diminish the fact that it is speech. Which is the point I am getting at: freedom of speech is not absolute.
3 2
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 2:41pm
Weihana

Kea (5,024) Says:
June 12th, 2013 at 2:32 pm

Weihana, can you post a list of all the “Allowed” things we can say when exercising our “freedom of expression” along with a list of the forbidden things we can not say when exercising our “freedom of expression” ?

Do not forget to include the name of who decided what was allowed or not allowed.

Thanks 🙂

The law isn’t prescriptive in that sense, it is conceptual. It could never comprehensively list all the things that are prohibited. For instance it could never possibly specifically identify the exact nature of every objectionable publication beforehand. For instance, when does an innocent family photo become a picture of exploitation? Similarly it could never possibly list every example of defamation that could ever be made as the list would be potentially infinite. It could also never precisely list all the ways in which a person might incite a crowd to violence or other disorder.

Similarly the law does not precisely define behaviour which might be considered abusive or obscene and so for you to ask for a list is pointless.
3 4
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 2:50pm
Left Right and Centre

kowtow 8:56 am You know I love you man but… that kind of comment there’s probably a certain amount of truth to it but also a certain amount of ‘really… you think so?’.

It’s a can of worms, isn’t it? People can make all kinds of claims about how hakas etc affect the likelihood of being or less prone to displaying violent behaviour…. where’s the evidence? There isn’t any, is there?

One line of thinking is that the brown people that understand their culture and celebrate it are more likely to respect themselves and others and feel pride in their identity etc. Your commonsense tells you that those people who learn about themselves are likely to care more. They care about their cultural identity. Complicated issue.

I used to find the full facial moko on brown blokes intimidating. There’s one guy that stands out in the Wellington CBD.. he’s got one… but you can see from the way the fella carries himself… he’s fully ‘normal’ as it were…. totally non-threatening… that’s just his culture and how he expresses his cultural identity. If you’ve got braincells it’s obvious he hasn’t done it to intimidate. It’s still intimidating on a gang member.. but that’s gang members.

I’m just saying I’d want to see strong evidence of a link. The biggest driver of propensity towards violence seems to be skin colour. I would guess that cultural awareness and education for brown folks would reduce rates of violence amongst them, not increase it. If you take out your aggression performing a haka… you’re less likely to be wound up in other scenarios? Again… conjecture…. but for it’s based on my own reading/ experiences… anecdotal evidence… such as young men that take out their frustrations on the rugby field. I’m a boxing fan, and boxers are very well trained to control their anger (with exceptions like Tyson who had all manner of dysfunctional background issues as do many top pro boxers… seems to go hand in hand that a lot of them reach the top).

So there you go… a seriousish little reply to a perhaps typically sweeping flippant KB comment? I could go on, but who including myself wants me to?
3 1
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 3:06pm
Griff

Playing parrot chess…
Attention deficit disorder?
Carry on
😆
0 1
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 3:10pm
Left Right and Centre

WineOh 8:16 am I’m curious… would all of this earthquake upgrading have been required with no 2011 Chch earthquake disaster? Seems to be too much of a coincidence. So… the authorities didn’t feel any great need or rush to push through upgrade regimes before Chch, but now it’s all on? These people are running our lives and are indefatigably incompetent to a fault.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 3:12pm
Kea

Weihana,

“I don’t. You will note I referred to social mores, not personal ethics.”,

Social mores do not need to be enforced by the armed state. You are avocating people be forced to comply with your views. What you are really saying, when all the bullshit is boiled away, is that people should not be banned by force of law from saying negative things about certain selected victim groups.
1 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 3:18pm
Weihana

Kea (5,025) Says:
June 12th, 2013 at 3:18 pm

What you are really saying, when all the bullshit is boiled away, is that people should not be banned by force of law from saying negative things about certain selected victim groups.

No, that sweeping statement is not justified from what I have written. I have no objection to, for instance, you coming onto an internet forum and expressing yourself in such a manner. But in a shared public space there is an inherent conflict of interest and conflict of rights. You have given no good reason why if a father takes his daughter out in public he must be forced to endure you waving your willy about shouting about niggers, and that if he doesn’t want his daughter to see such she must be kept at home.
3 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 3:29pm
Left Right and Centre

The helmets for children on scooters and skateboards.

Too hard basket for a number of reasons. Some kids potter along at zero km/h so it would seem a waste of time for them.

As I’ve witnessed on many occasions as I run at 10-13km/h, some kids can race at upwards of I would estimate 25-30km/h. At those speeds there’s more of a case to be made for wearing a helmet.

But ..they’re on the footpath, not the road. It’s hard to enforce. It won’t be popular. It’s another cost and hassle. For a kid it’s another personal possession to have to lug around at school. What practical difference will it make to the types of injuries caused by scooter use?

Ban scooters? Put a speed limit on them? What’s next… scooter licence for five year olds? When you turn ten years old you can ride at 20km/h instead of 10? Scooter lanes on footpaths? Posted speed limits? WOFs for scooters? Scooter must have ability to brake in an emergency stop and child to demonstrate task competence? Scooter courses in schools? Parent and child scootering ‘buses’? Police on footpaths pinging kids with no helmet, dishing out more notices than Ticketek on game day?

You can make all kinds of logical claims either way. If helmets save one life….. yeah, ok. Helmets aren’t made out of magic. They don’t prevent injuries altogether. There’s no way to eliminate potential harm on a scooter. There’s something irritating about making every child wear a helmet on them when only in very limited circumstances would a helmet be of any useful protection. You’re not going to bust your scone falling off. You’re far more likely to land on something else.

It’s interesting to see where society draws the line between inconveniencing the many to try and protect the few (for whom a helmet law or helmet would make a questionable difference) I see the same thing with breakfast in schools. A few rogue parents don’t look after their children. So… *every* pupil ‘needs’ to be provided breakfast in decile 1-4 schools. Seems to be the wrong way around. A very small minority of children ride scooters in a manner where it would make them safer to wear a helmet. So let’s legislate that *everyone* who rides a scooter must wear a helmet.

The logical progression would be to ban scooters as being unsafe because of the risk of injury. Why does it become ok to ride one with a helmet? On scooters… the benefits of wearing a helmet are contentious enough that people should be left to decide for themselves whether it’s a worthwhile safety measure. Certainly if day-to-day observation is anything to go by, the vast majority of parents don’t deem helmets on scooters as necessary. But then what do parents know?
3 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 3:42pm
kowtow

Anyone seen the university boys of Otago squaring up to the cops at riotous assemblies and doing a haka? Hilarious.

Shows the dumbfuck mentality that has been instilled in our confused but violent and aggressive young men by a politically correct education system.
3 1
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 3:48pm
Pauleastbay

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10890052

I’m sorry, someone had the courage to invest their money in 1995 and now wants to sell it at todays prices, the evil bastards.

That is how we get rid of our mortgages – gradual inflation -or is Nick Smith going to make a law that says you have to sell a house at the same price you bought it for.

Or something like rent controls ” a la” New York where people are murdered for a rent controlled apartment.
2 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 3:49pm
Kea

Weihana, If someone ran around naked in South Auckland yelling NIGGER ! at people, do your really think it will be the cops who sort him out ? 🙂

Similarly the law does not precisely define behaviour which might be considered abusive or obscene and so for you to ask for a list is pointless.

No the law does not. You just make it up as you go along.
1 1
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 3:51pm
Manolo

Imagine the awful possibilities if this is true: http://www.wtop.com/289/3354224/Mali-manual-suggests-al-Qaida-has-feared-weapon
2 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 4:10pm
Manolo

You ought to be kidding. Satire.
http://michellemalkin.com/2013/06/11/whos-your-daddy-bill-clinton-father-of-the-year/
1 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 4:13pm
Kea

“Manolo (10,129) Says:

June 12th, 2013 at 4:10 pm
Imagine the awful possibilities if this is true”

I can tell you what is true. The radical imported Islamists trying to take over Syria are sponsored by Obama. He is still talking of military assistance on top of the hundreds of millions of dollars in aid they already get. None of this is denied and is openly admitted.

He has sposored and aided all of the radical Muslim take overs during the absurdly named “Arab Sprig”. All the while killing thousands of other Muslims in other places. I have no idea what the plan behind this is. It looks like madness to me.

Mali has the same problem as Syria. Radical imported Jihadist Muslims. I am unsure if they get aid or drones from Obama. You can never tell what will happen with that man.
1 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 4:23pm
Colville

This is why the internet was invented….

http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/americas/8787686/Twitter-bust-up-Uni-v-boobs
0 1
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 4:25pm
Chuck Bird

I just got back from donating blood. I hope you homosexuals are appreciative. So called homophobia is not contagious unlike the many STDs that homosexuals are far more likely to have in their blood than those of us who have normal intercourse.
6 2
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 4:50pm
nickb

Speaking of literature, it is interesting to see that George Orwell’s book ’1984′ has surged in sales by 7031% in just the last 24 hours! It was ranked 8,914 in sales and it is now 125th.

Bought this a few weeks ago and it was a great read, want to move onto Brave New World next. Both aptly sum up the current state of Western “democracy”.
2 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 5:49pm
Viking2

HOW TO MAKE A MAN HAPPY

1. Feed him
2. Sleep with him
3. Leave him with peace
4. Don’t check his phone (Msgs)
5. Don’t bother him with his
movements
So whats so hard about that
?

HOW TO MAKE A WOMAN HAPPY

It’s really not too difficult but…. To make a
woman happy, a man only needs
to be:

1. a friend
2. a companion
3. a lover
4. a brother
5. a father
6. a master
7. a chef
8. an electrician
9. a plumber
10. a mechanic
11. a carpenter
12. a decorator
13. a stylist
14. a sexologist
15. a gynecologist
16. a psychologist
17. a pest exterminator
18. a psychiatrist
19. a healer
20. a good listener
21. an organizer
22. a good father
23. very clean
24. sympathetic
25. athletic
26. warm
27. attentive
28. gallant
29. intelligent
30. funny
31. creative
32. tender
33. strong
34. understanding
35. tolerant
36. prudent
37. ambitious
38. capable
39. courageous
40. determined
41. true
42. dependable
43. passionate

WITHOUT FORGETTING TO:
44. give her compliments
regularly
45. Go shopping with her
46. be honest
47. be very rich
48. not stress her out
49. not look at other girls
AND AT THE SAME TIME, YOU
MUST ALSO:
50. give her lots of attention
51. give her lots of time,
especially time for herself
52. give her lots of space, never
worrying about where she goes.

BUT MOST OF ALL IT IS VERY
IMPORTANT
53. never forget
*birthdays
*anniversaries
*valentine
*arrangements she makes.
7 2
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 6:03pm
Viking2

Chch city council could lose consenting powers

The Christchurch city council has been given until June 28 to improve its consenting process or it will lose the power to grant consents.

Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Minister Gerry Brownlee said in a statement today that the Christchurch City Council was sent a letter from International Accreditation (IANZ) on May 30.

IANZ gave the council until June 28 to improve its processes or it would lose accreditation as a building consent authority.

“This is, to say the very least, alarming and, in the circumstances of the massive rebuild we face in Christchurch, a crisis point,” Brownlee said.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/8787900/Chch-city-council-could-lose-consenting-powers

Apparently they need to consent 35 a day and that’s big and smal. Why anyone would expect then to be able to do is is a wonder to me.
Capacity is the issue and yet other authorities are sitting round with nothing to do. contract some of easy out to others that can help.

Dear me how hopleless some of these outfits are.
2 2
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 6:08pm
Viking2

160 blogs about shit all. Don’t some of you people have a life or a job?
0 3
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 6:10pm
nickb

9,582 comments about shit all. Don’t you have a life or a job?

🙂
3 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 6:16pm
Manolo

Ditto.
2 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 6:21pm
nickb

Viking is just cranky because his wife has broken him the news… she is allergic

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyle/news/article.cfm?c_id=6&objectid=10890001
0 1
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 6:59pm
Viking2

Nah, despise paying tax to prop up the hopleless. Get a job to fill in your days.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 7:12pm
Scott Chris

160 blogs about shit all.

Yeah maybe, but it’s rather an entertaining read. Kind of like a soap opera/reality TV hybrid.

Tune in tomorrow to find out how Dime’s visit to his Mom in jail went (fancifully referred to as a 5 million dollar apartment I think) and shock horror, Harriet is set to reveal his true identity…. (and by coincidence, he turns out to be Kea’s gay ex)
3 2
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 7:12pm
nasska

Scott Chris

I suspect Harriet may be a Vatican spy working deep cover as a Swiss train driver. 🙂

Ref: http://www.landoverbaptist.net/showthread.php?p=1007894
0 1
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 7:26pm
Redbaiter

“Scott Chris”

The bald headed toke smoking Dylan loving gorse cropper reaches out to yet another of his far left soul mates.
2 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 7:36pm
nasska

I’m a peaceful bloke Reddy….I’ve always strived for inclusiveness. 🙂
1 1
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 7:41pm
Viking2

On their way to get married, a young couple are involved in a fatal car accident. The couple find themselves sitting outside the Pearly Gates waiting for St. Peter to process them into Heaven. While they are waiting, they begin to wonder, could they possibly get married in Heaven?

When St. Peter shows up, they ask him. St. Peter says, “I don’t know, this is the first time anyone has asked. Let me go find out,” and he leaves.

The couple sits and waits for an answer. It takes a couple of months. While they are waiting, they discuss whether or not they should married, what with the eternal aspect of it all.

“What if it doesn’t work?” they wondered, are we stuck together forever?

After yet another month, St. Peter finally returns, looking somewhat bedraggled. “Yes,” he informs the couple, “you CAN get married in Heaven.”

Great!” said the couple, “But we were just wondering, what if things don’t work out? Could we also get a divorce in Heaven?”

St. Peter, red-faced, slams his clipboard onto the ground.

“What’s wrong?” asks the frightened couple.

“OH, COME ON!” St. Peter shouts, “It took me three months to find a priest up here! Do you have ANY idea how long it’ll take me to find a lawyer?!”
4 1
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 7:45pm
Viking2

Peace be with you.
I remain aloof to all this daytime, playtime.

http://screencast.com/t/Jnj6VOQpp

8) 🙂
0 1
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 7:49pm
Redbaiter

For the simple minded idiots who use this political forum to post jokes-

http://www.google.com/search?client=aff-maxthon-newtab&channel=t2&q=jokes

Ever thought you might be happier on Facebook, (or some other such social media more suited to such infantile offerings?)
0 2
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 7:51pm
nasska

“Paddy, I’ve noticed you pushing your bike to work the last two days?”

“I know, the chain’s snapped but I’ve got me sandwiches and flask in the basket!”

“Why don’t you just carry them?”

“Don’t be stupid, how could I then push me bike?”
5 1
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 8:00pm
Viking2

Not everybody is a sour faced bitch like you reddy. Ain’t it time for you to go to bed to get your strength up for tomorrows session of hate, bile and invective.
Sad bastard.

Its not a political forum , its DPF’s blog and he will tell us if he doesn’t like our jokes.
Thank Christ you don’t rule the world, or this blog.

:0 😯
3 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 8:03pm
nasska

Here you are Baity….as a demonstration of my policy of inclusiveness, I’ve got a new screensaver for you! 🙂

Ref: https://www.dropbox.com/s/mayx906642jmla9/Baiter%201.jpg
2 1
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 8:09pm
Pauleastbay

Jimmy MacDonald, a City Councillor from Glasgow, was asked on a local live radio talk show, just what he thought about the allegations of torture of suspected terrorists. His reply prompted his ejection from the studio, but to thunderous applause from the audience.

HIS STATEMENT:

‘If hooking up one rag-head terrorist’s testicles to a car battery gets the truth out of the lying little camel shagger to save just one Scottish soldiers life, then I have only three things to say; Red is positive, Black is negative and make sure his nuts are wet
7 1
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 8:25pm
Griff

True blue is parody blog is it not?
If your own blog is 100% a joke why try to stop us posting jokes on kb
remember if U run you will die in a paddok stoned listing tto masters of war being sodomized with the worm gun….
Something to dream of tonight reddy.
1 3
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 8:29pm
nasska

When he’s not counting his Karma Griff? 🙂
0 1
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 8:34pm
Scott Chris

Vatican spy working deep cover as a Swiss train driver

In other words Nasska, a train-spotter.
0 1
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 8:45pm
Viking2

Great advert, good music and a bloody good message for the idiots.

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/brookes-last-fatal-text-are-you-still-going-to-make-it-today-20130612-2o3tt.html
0 1
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 8:48pm
nasska

Scott Chris

‘Fraid so…..alas there’s no cure & no hope for improvement. 🙂
0 1
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 8:52pm
Griff

That’s how he gets to sleep
one browser window one click one karma.
Two browser window two click two……
Almost fifty times on whale.

Reddy I Forgot the wrinkly old men dancing around in nothing but waistcoats thrashing you with the ponytails dangling below their bald plates whilst chanting passages from the little book
Heads fm 106-4
Playing
its a hard rain
cover alister radell and the wonder ones.
Kiwi classic
2 3
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 8:56pm
Viking2

oh Dear, the libs get it right and worng.

‘‘This is Tony Abbott’s Liberals,’’ she said. ‘‘This is what they’re like.’’

The menu, used at an event in March, lists ‘‘Julia Gillard Kentucky Fried Quail’’ before going on to describe it as ‘‘Small breasts, huge thighs & a big red box’’.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/pm-demands-libs-dump-brough-over-offensive-menu-20130612-2o36d.html#ixzz2VzTUFLDS
2 1
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 8:57pm
nasska

….” the wrinkly old men dancing around in nothing but waistcoats thrashing you with the ponytails dangling below their bald plates whilst chanting passages from the little book”…..

Did you get video? 🙂
1 1
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 8:59pm
Reid

Talking about insults…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZYjIfKyinU
0 1
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 9:16pm
Kea

Reid, I look forward to him making a joke about her big box, next week. 🙂
1 1
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 9:31pm
nickb

What a start by the black caps, nicking out Aussies best batter with 5 on the board
0 1
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 9:40pm
Nostalgia-NZ

Reasonable start, very tight.
1 2
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2013 9:43pm
Manolo

Griff’s nefarious influence over the Messiah: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-12/tougher-regulations-seen-from-obama-change-in-carbon-cost.html
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 13, 2013 6:16am
Manolo

A crazy council led by a nutter: http://news.msn.co.nz/nationalnews/8673625/wellington-council-to-support-living-wage
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 13, 2013 6:59am
Viking2

Retrospective legislation from Dunne and the National socialists.

New tax rules target overseas super payments to Kiwi residents.

Under the new law, savers will no longer be able to treat foreign superannuation savings as foreign investment funds but will either pay tax on investment gains when they receive lump sum payments from those schemes or transfer them to New Zealand or Australia.

Any annuity or pension payments from foreign super funds will continue to be taxed under current rules.

The new legislation includes measures to allow those who haven’t been following (the new) , rules to come into line by paying appropriate penalties and interest or by paying tax on 15 per cent of a previous withdrawal from their foreign super scheme.

By Adam Bennett Email Adam
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10890194

More votes for Winston I’d reckon.

P.S. It doesn’t affect me but I despise retropective legislation. Its Bad law.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 13, 2013 7:10am
big bruv

nickb

“nicking out Aussies best batter with 5 on the board”

Please go outside right now and administer a vicious uppercut to yourself.

There is no such term as “batter” in Cricket. The term is batsmen. Please do not make the same mistake again.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 13, 2013 7:19am

More comments:

‹
1
2

Add a Comment Cancel reply

Login to comment or vote

« Drummond on fluoridation

Herald on National Standards »

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

Shock & Surprise: Lawyers oppose removal of lawyers' gravy train
Not PC
Ele Ludemann: Playing to the separatist gallery
Breaking Views
Schadenfreudeliciousness IV: US President Warmly Greets Hitler
No Minister
How come the new Ministry of Regulation has been taken over by career regulators, Mr Seymour?
Point of Order
Sowell says
Hompaddock
Bad week for democracy in NZ Parliament – banning investigative journalist and Naming young M?ori politician
The Daily Blog
Marsden Fund goes even more woke
Utopia
Justified outrage
The Standard
D-day for the government
No Right Turn
A NEW DEGREE COURSE FOR MASSEY
No Punches Pulled (Bob Jones)
A Day of Reckoning
NZCPR
“Trans & Pregnant” – Biology trumps gender ideology
Bob McCoskrie's McBlog
Media Link: “A View from Afar” on the US elections.
Kiwipolitico
This will not end well
Offsetting Behaviour
Top 14 Predictions for Round 10
Stats Chat
Pretty (il)legal
Croaking Cassandra
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