Free speech.

[Katman]

Is free speech dead and buried in this country?

While I might not agree with everything Lauren Southern and Stephen Molyneux say, I absolutely support their right to say it.

The New Zealand media have done a great job of telling New Zealanders what they must believe.

[Honest Andy]

They are free to speak. Just as people have the right to protest against them and the managers of the venues have the right to refuse their custom.
Nobody was stopping them finding somewhere else, they're obviously just quitters, that's all :bleh:

[Katman]

They are free to speak. Just as people have the right to protest against them and the managers of the venues have the right to refuse their custom.
Nobody was stopping them finding somewhere else, they're obviously just quitters, that's all :bleh:

Do you not think there's been a concerted effort to shut down their ability to speak?

[Taxythingy]

Maybe the Powerstation got a call from their #1 user, who said they wouldn't be back if they hosted. That might make it a sensible business decision.

Still a shite decision though.

[Taxythingy]

they're obviously just quitters, that's all :bleh:

Careful now. That allegation arguably could be directed at the venue as well...

[Graystone]

Is free speech dead and buried in this country?

While I might not agree with everything Lauren Southern and Stephen Molyneux say, I absolutely support their right to say it.

The New Zealand media have done a great job of telling New Zealanders what they must believe.

Free speech is alive and well, and the people have spoken.

[Katman]

Free speech is alive and well, and the people have spoken.

Which 'people' would that be?

[oldrider]

Free speech is alive and well, and the people have spoken.

Some of the people have spoken - sounds like fractional free speech to me. :rolleyes:

[Graystone]

Some of the people have spoken - sounds like fractional free speech to me. :rolleyes:

Perhaps the concept is too difficult, free speech does not come with a soapbox. It is about being allowed to say what you wish, other people are free to tell you to fuck off and say it somewhere else.

[oldrider]

Perhaps the concept is too difficult, free speech does not come with a soapbox. It is about being allowed to say what you wish, other people are free to tell you to fuck off and say it somewhere else.

Fraction in action right there! :sleep:

[carbonhed]

The Powerstation, a small family owned venue, was intimidated by the regressive left into cancelling the event. This is the "thugs veto" in action. It had the same effect on the Auckland council who cancelled the previous event due to safety concerns.

Absolutely disgusting cowardice.

[jellywrestler]

the place is falling apart, commentators at events are being stopped using the term ladies and gentlemen, blokes can chop their womb brooms off and call themselves a woman, it's getting beyond a joke

[Viking01]

I have to admit that the first I knew their gig had been shut down
was when I was doing my usual morning scan of RT propaganda and
saw:

https://www.rt.com/news/435074-new-zealand-southern-cancelled/

I thought that they'd been identified as "Russian agents". But no,
that was not the case, which was quite surprising.

I did have to wonder from the photograph in the article just what
demographic they hoped to attract in NZ ( maybe it was BYO ),
and just what topics they intended to talk on. Guess that now we
will never know.

I see that Southern has also authored a publication "Barbarians:
How Baby Boomers, Immigrants and Islam Screwed my Generation".
That could be interesting reading.

Wonder if Amazon or GoodReads are stocking copies. Probably all
sold out. That would just be my luck. [ I can always just ignore the
parts on Baby Boomers. Likely just a marketing ploy, added in order
to boost sales within the younger generation ]

It does makes you wonder what all the fuss was about in the UK and
Australia, given their multi-cultural societies. No doubt there'll be more
about it in the press later.

[Voltaire]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUR9U6Srj7g

She seems nice....

[jasonu]

Is free speech dead and buried in this country?

While I might not agree with everything Lauren Southern and Stephen Molyneux say, I absolutely support their right to say it.

The New Zealand media have done a great job of telling New Zealanders what they must believe.

100% agree.

[jasonu]

If some black people from say South Africa came to NZ to bleat about white people I doubt they would have faced the same venue issues.

[FJRider]

Is free speech dead and buried in this country?

While I might not agree with everything Lauren Southern and Stephen Molyneux say, I absolutely support their right to say it.

The New Zealand media have done a great job of telling New Zealanders what they must believe.

Free speech isn't the issue ... it's (apparently) the "right" to not be offended by anything anyone says ...

Racial / anti-social statements are ok (sort of) ... but the intentional offence is the bit most find the problem with.

The more "News-time" these people get ... the bigger the issue gets, as those opposed to what that faction is saying ... then want their views aired in "News-time" as well. Fake news at it's best ... because it's not news that some in NZ hold those same views.

But the thing that bug's me is ... those that state "I know my rights" ... seldom do. And they bug me to the same extent as those that obey the road rules/laws that suit ... but ignore ones that don't ... but still claim "Their Rights" to do so.

[Honest Andy]

Do you not think there's been a concerted effort to shut down their ability to speak?

You need to clarify, i.e. a concerted effort by who?
You are intimating that the NZ media are the culprits, but surely the media is how we all know about them at all, not through an exclusive 700 buck dinner.
So obviously you can't be thinking the media. So... who?

[Swoop]

Is free speech dead and buried in this country?

While I might not agree with everything Lauren Southern and Stephen Molyneux say, I absolutely support their right to say it.

The New Zealand media have done a great job of telling New Zealanders what they must believe.
We agree on this.
The right to free speech is paramount.


The Powerstation, a small family owned venue, was intimidated by the regressive left into cancelling the event. This is the "thugs veto" in action. It had the same effect on the Auckland council who cancelled the previous event due to safety concerns.

Absolutely disgusting cowardice.
Quite correct.

[merv]

So it seems if you are not in a minority group and you are in fact a member of the majority group (while it lasts as the majority in this country or Canada) you are not allowed to express an opinion about your culture any more, else you are terrorised with hate speech and shut down from speaking. So how can those refusing the right for these people to speak even speak of racism or hate speech other than to say that it is coming from their own mouths and that it is what they believe in and are going to rant on about?

[Katman]

You need to clarify, i.e. a concerted effort by who?

That's the million dollar question.

I wonder who got to the owner of the Powerstation in that hour timeframe - between announcing the venue and the event being cancelled.

[nzspokes]

Its BS.

They can speak anywhere but choose to need a venue. Let me guess, they are charging to get in?

[Voltaire]

Its BS.

They can speak anywhere but choose to need a venue. Let me guess, they are charging to get in?

They were charging in Sydney:

VIP Meet & Greet

Only 10 people will get to spend an extra 15 minutes in the Meet & Greet, plus get a swag of personally signed, awesome merchandise. Ticket includes Early Admission ticket.
TICKETS @ $499 each.
Dinner with Stefan & Lauren

A once in a lifetime opportunity to break bread at an intimate function prior to the main event that evening with not one but two of the most influential Alt Media personalities of our generation. Ticket includes Early Admission ticket only.
TICKETS @ $749 each.

Oh and she was banned from entering the UK too.

More so called 'influencers"...... just making money out of being in the spotlight, worked here...look a the salivating media attention.

[Graystone]

That's the million dollar question.

I wonder who got to the owner of the Powerstation in that hour timeframe - between announcing the venue and the event being cancelled.

Common sense? Public opinion? Morality?

[Katman]

Common sense? Public opinion? Morality?

Are you guessing?

[carbonhed]

Common sense? Public opinion? Morality?

Common sense?

Public opinion?

Morality?

:rofl: Soy boy is clutching his pearls in horror.

[Honest Andy]

That's the million dollar question.

I wonder who got to the owner of the Powerstation in that hour timeframe - between announcing the venue and the event being cancelled.

Ah. Another of your conspiracy theories. I see now. Carry on...

[Katman]

Ah. Another of your conspiracy theories. I see now. Carry on...

Well someone (or something) got to them.

Unless you're suggesting they're just schizophrenic.

[Graystone]

Are you guessing?

Of course, same as you.

We could just ask the source though.

"they can say whatever they want, but personally, I don't want it in my venue" (https://www.nzherald.co.nz/national-video/news/video.cfm?c_id=1503075&gal_cid=1503075&gallery_id=196571)

Case closed, the people have spoken, as is their right. The two people with controversial opinion still have the right to speak, they are just choosing not to. I don't see what the fuss is about.

[Katman]

We could just ask the source though.

Yeah, nothing at all odd an out her demeanour. :rolleyes:

[carbonhed]

I don't see what the fuss is about.

Of course you don't. You are part of the "thugs veto".

[Graystone]

Of course you don't. You are part of the "thugs veto".

Is that how you seek to marginalise popular opinion? Oh, the irony :killingme

[carbonhed]

Is that how you seek to marginalise popular opinion? Oh, the irony :killingme

You mistake your opinion with "popular opinion". A trait common amongst morons throughout history. You are confusing your naivety with virtue.

The vast majority of New Zealanders value free speech because they know if you weaponise the hive mind of the collectivist drones.... well, resistance is futile.

[Graystone]

You mistake your opinion with "popular opinion". A trait common amongst morons throughout history. You are confusing your naivety with virtue.

The vast majority of New Zealanders value free speech because they know if you weaponise the hive mind of the collectivist drones.... well, resistance is futile.

Do I? Then why was there protests against those speakers? Where are the protests supporting them? and which are bigger...

Of course, I too value free speech. I've noted a number of times in this thread that free speech has been upheld.

[FJRider]

Of course, I too value free speech. I've noted a number of times in this thread that free speech has been upheld.

Kiwibiker has another freedom ... the freedom to issue you with a deduction of your reputation points ... if you post things we do not like. You are free to object and whinge about it ... but pointless to do so. But you are free to post whatever you like.

There are site rules you must follow ... with various repercussions if you don't.

Enjoy your freedoms ...

[carbonhed]

Kiwibiker has another freedom ... the freedom to issue you with a deduction of your reputation points ... if you post things we do not like. You are free to object and whinge about it ... but pointless to do so. But you are free to post whatever you like.

There are site rules you must follow ... with various repercussions if you don't.

Enjoy your freedoms ...

Cool! Do I get to keep his reputation points? Because ultimately I'd like to win his balls and keep them in a trophy thimble on my mantlepiece :rofl:

[Graystone]

Kiwibiker has another freedom ... the freedom to issue you with a deduction of your reputation points ... if you post things we do not like. You are free to object and whinge about it ... but pointless to do so. But you are free to post whatever you like.

There are site rules you must follow ... with various repercussions if you don't.

Enjoy your freedoms ...

100% agree, I too, remember Cassina. One of the freedoms is to collect green ones too, it's important to note both sides of the feedback.

[FJRider]

One of the freedoms is to collect green ones too

Good luck with that ...

[nzspokes]

They were charging in Sydney:


Oh and she was banned from entering the UK too.

More so called 'influencers"...... just making money out of being in the spotlight, worked here...look a the salivating media attention.

Cheers,

So its about making money then.

[Woodman]

Cheers,

So its about making money then.

Yes, that is all it is, a business idea with an audience that is willing to pay. If they were really serious about getting their message across they could have paid a shitload more for another venue, but i doubt that would look good on their balance sheet.

[husaberg]

Yes, that is all it is, a business idea with an audience that is willing to pay. If they were really serious about getting their message across they could have paid a shitload more for another venue, but i doubt that would look good on their balance sheet.

Point one shes not bad looking
Point two i have seen bigger tits on a Jersey bull.
Maybe she will influence the push up bra sales.....
https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/newpix/2018/07/27/12/4E956FFC00000578-5998743-In_the_video_titled_Thrown_Out_Of_Sydney_No_Go_Zon e_Southern_tra-a-19_1532690057465.jpg
Just an observation you know free speech and all.......
https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-L8yMNc7lXSo/WAtdkarMrYI/AAAAAAAAU9o/pgSVYGijKTQoBpuYAydmtdFQ6qFgvTbPACLcB/s1600/Mercenary%2BGarage%2BDesign%2BDublin%2B8%2BIreland %2BCustom%2BMotorcycle%2BWorkshop%2BCafe%2BRacer%2 BGirls%2BGIF.gifhttps://78.media.tumblr.com/ab17f9450c530bf024c7f52cfd7347a8/tumblr_o4dkrjeE7w1qahtq8o1_500.gif

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2lOD2T81_jM

[GazzaH]

The publicity they are getting is money in the bank.

And I'm ashamed to be adding to their pile.

[Katman]

Cool! Do I get to keep his reputation points? Because ultimately I'd like to win his balls and keep them in a trophy thimble on my mantlepiece :rofl:

That's why bogan disappeared.

[husaberg]

That's why bogan disappeared.

Oddly Bogan left not long after you keep wondering out loud what is penis would taste like.

[carbonhed]

That's why bogan disappeared.

Somebody got his balls?

[husaberg]

Somebody got his balls?

Katman is well versed in swallowing cock and ball stories...

[Katman]

Somebody got his balls?

I think he just lost them.

[AllanB]

Free speech left the building years ago.

And really it's a load of shit if the speech is bullshit.

I have free speech at work apparently. Provided I shut up and do what HR want.

[jasonu]

That's the million dollar question.

I wonder who got to the owner of the Powerstation in that hour timeframe - between announcing the venue and the event being cancelled.

Phil Goff maybe...

This old gem is still somewhat appropriate.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJ0-fm2mpRg

[yokel]

So I drove over 2 hours only to find out that it had been canned.

Fuck those PC fascists.

At least they made that talking head moron Patrick Gower look like a complete imbecile in his poor excuse of an interview.

Why do these deranged leftists keep changing the definition of words?
What a bunch of fucking liars.


https://youtu.be/C0CHWNIoJJU

[Woodman]

So according to yokel, it is everyone elses fault. :lol::lol::lol:

[oldrider]

[quote yokel] Why do these deranged leftists keep changing the definition of words? [unquote] https://twitter.com/LBF777/status/1025806538114510848/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Eembeddedtimeline% 7Ctwterm%5Eprofile%3AHenryMakow&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.henrymakow.com%2F Spot the difference? :scratch:

[pete376403]

Nothing stopping them standing on a street corner and talking. Put a hat on the ground if they want to be paid

[Woodman]

Nothing stopping them standing on a street corner and talking. Put a hat on the ground if they want to be paid

Exactly, they probably don't even believe what they preach. No different to how churches started out, find an audience of people that think they are hard done by and give them someone to blame, and charge them for it.:lol::lol:

[husaberg]

Nothing stopping them standing on a street corner and talking. Put a hat on the ground if they want to be paid

I think they missed the free part in free speech....

its a bit intersting that they believe in free speech but bitch and moan when the venue owners and councils decide they don't want them in their venues.

[pete376403]

Exactly, they probably don't even believe what they preach. No different to how churches started out, find an audience of people that think they are hard done by and give them someone to blame, and charge them for it.:lol::lol:

Worked for Brian Tamaki and Density

[SaferRides]

Freedom of speech is vastly overrated - look where it has got the US. Trump would never have been able to hire a venue for his rallies in NZ.

[Woodman]

Worked for Brian Tamaki and Density

And every other religion.

[Voltaire]

And every other religion.

At least Jesus did the catering too, loaves fishes and sometime even put the piss on.



https://www.amazon.com/Barbarians-Boomers-Immigration-Screwed-Generation-ebook/dp/B01MU30NB0#customerReviews

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51uBcpkBvBL.jpg

I wonder if she have ever done a hard days work other than blogging which really takes it out of you.:laugh:

[Katman]

I find it interesting that no-one has yet posted up an opinion from Southern/Molyneux that they find offensive.

[Woodman]

I find it interesting that no-one has yet posted up an opinion from Southern/Molyneux that they find offensive.

I would, but:

A) I haven't heard anything that they have said

and

B) I don't do "offended".

[Katman]

I haven't heard anything that they have said

I suspect that most of those who have recently been protesting their presence here haven't either.

[Graystone]

I find it interesting that no-one has yet posted up an opinion from Southern/Molyneux that they find offensive.

Perhaps because it is unworthy of discussion...

What is discussion worthy, is the demographics and perceived representation, the marginalisation and dogma espoused in their support, the intolerance and delusion surrounding them. Whom is controlling who?

[Katman]

Perhaps because it is unworthy of discussion...

There you go guessing again.

[husaberg]

It seems she is considering getting implants
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/c4/3d/d2/c43dd2a4176bc36939a06f198f3ff56c.jpg

[Graystone]

There you go guessing again.

no you


It seems she is considering getting implants

She seems rather young, it's getting a little creepy dude.

[husaberg]

no you



She seems rather young, it's getting a little creepy dude.
Shes in her mid twenties plus the reason for this thread, As its a free speech thread are you trying to stop my right to express free speech.

[Graystone]

Shes in her mid twenties, its a free speech thread are you trying to stop my right to express free speech.

How about you express yourself the fuck out of here...



...and before you get all pissy, see post #6 and #9

[husaberg]

How about you express yourself the fuck out of here...



...and before you get all pissy, see post #6 and #9

rather prickly response
But i choose not to so, so go calm your tits
Then rack of as it clear with regards to Breast puns you seriously suck at them...

[FJRider]

Perhaps the concept is too difficult, free speech does not come with a soapbox. It is about being allowed to say what you wish, other people are free to tell you to fuck off and say it somewhere else.


"Other People" have more rights than that ... ;)

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1981/0113/latest/whole.html#DLM53500

The very reason the two at the center of discussion in thread ... DO NOT want a "meeting" held in a public (ie: free) location is 1(b)

Offensive behaviour or language
(1)
Every person is liable to a fine not exceeding $1,000 who,—
(a)
in or within view of any public place, behaves in an offensive or disorderly manner; or
(b)
in any public place, addresses any words to any person intending to threaten, alarm, insult, or offend that person; or
(c)
in or within hearing of a public place,—
(i)
uses any threatening or insulting words and is reckless whether any person is alarmed or insulted by those words; or
(ii)
addresses any indecent or obscene words to any person.

[carbonhed]

Perhaps because it is unworthy of discussion...

What is discussion worthy, is the demographics and perceived representation, the marginalisation and dogma espoused in their support, the intolerance and delusion surrounding them. Whom is controlling who?

You've got to take your hat off to any cunt that loves the sound of his own voice that much! :clap:

[Graystone]

"Other People" have more rights than that ... ;)

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1981/0113/latest/whole.html#DLM53500

The very reason the two at the center of discussion in thread ... DO NOT want a "meeting" held in a public (ie: free) location is 1(b)

Offensive behaviour or language
(1)
Every person is liable to a fine not exceeding $1,000 who,—
(a)
in or within view of any public place, behaves in an offensive or disorderly manner; or
(b)
in any public place, addresses any words to any person intending to threaten, alarm, insult, or offend that person; or
(c)
in or within hearing of a public place,—
(i)
uses any threatening or insulting words and is reckless whether any person is alarmed or insulted by those words; or
(ii)
addresses any indecent or obscene words to any person.

Neat!


You've got to take your hat off to any cunt that loves the sound of his own voice that much! :clap:

This may come as a shock, some of us don't have to sound the words out as we type them...

[FJRider]

Neat!



This may come as a shock, some of us don't have to sound the words out as we type them...

......................................... ;) :bs: :whistle:

[yokel]

And every other religion.

Well it seems "hate speech" = blasphemy at the mo.

[merv]

So if at the last reported NZ census so far (2013) 74% of the people responding identified themselves as European with a 68% figure for NZ European, that seems like a great chunk of people that don't fit the other ethnicities reported on, so who is speaking for that chunk of people and trying to preserve their right to their culture?

Is that what Lauren Southern is trying to get across?

[skinman]

most comedians would fall under that definition of stuff not allowed to be said.
I think those 2 have got the best free advertising that money can buy
remains to be seen what they do with it

[caspernz]

Is free speech dead and buried in this country?

While I might not agree with everything Lauren Southern and Stephen Molyneux say, I absolutely support their right to say it.

The New Zealand media have done a great job of telling New Zealanders what they must believe.

Having listened to a bit of what Lauren & Stephen talk about, it sure as heck doesn't rate as hate speech in my book. Unless outlining what is plain to see qualifies as hate speech. Now I don't have to agree with their points verbatim, but if I have to listen to the ideas of minorities, then it's only fair that the majority views are also given some airtime. The drama around it all is good for publicity though aye...:wacko:


So if at the last reported NZ census so far (2013) 74% of the people responding identified themselves as European with a 68% figure for NZ European, that seems like a great chunk of people that don't fit the other ethnicities reported on, so who is speaking for that chunk of people and trying to preserve their right to their culture?

Is that what Lauren Southern is trying to get across?

Pretty much.

It's well and truly happened in western Europe, and to some extent it's in progress here. Instead of over running the country by force, it's as simple as the birth rate by a minority group being high enough to become the majority over time.

[TheDemonLord]

"Other People" have more rights than that ... ;)

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1981/0113/latest/whole.html#DLM53500

The very reason the two at the center of discussion in thread ... DO NOT want a "meeting" held in a public (ie: free) location is 1(b)

Offensive behaviour or language
(1)
Every person is liable to a fine not exceeding $1,000 who,—
(a)
in or within view of any public place, behaves in an offensive or disorderly manner; or
(b)
in any public place, addresses any words to any person intending to threaten, alarm, insult, or offend that person; or
(c)
in or within hearing of a public place,—
(i)
uses any threatening or insulting words and is reckless whether any person is alarmed or insulted by those words; or
(ii)
addresses any indecent or obscene words to any person.

Or.... There is a long history of radical left-wing activists/domestic terrorist groups using force to shut down speakers they don't like. A Venue gives some ability to exclude those who want to violently protest.

As opposed to peacefully protest and even come to the event to ask questions and challenge the speakers...

Also - what is the legal standard for offense or offended? Is there a threshold? Or is it simply a case of get enough people with tears streaming down their face, claiming PTSD from Twitter?

[TheDemonLord]

Lauren's responses to Comrade Cinda:


A blatant display of the limits of 'tolerance' and 'diversity'. You say you support multiculturalism/different views/ diversity but you can't even support different opinion


You stand for women's rights until that woman disagrees with your narrative,"

and in reference to MP Golriz Ghahraman


'Do you have a string on your back that we pull and you just repeat 'we love diversity'?

[Swoop]

And every other religion.
Destiny is a cult, not a religion.

[oldrider]

Ultimately:- Free speech is power dependent. :shifty:

[HenryDorsetCase]

It's well and truly happened in western Europe, and to some extent it's in progress here. Instead of over running the country by force, it's as simple as the birth rate by a minority group being high enough to become the majority over time.

FAr be it for me to invoke Godwin's Law, but what the fuck?

[Woodman]

Destiny is a cult, not a religion.

I didn't mention destiny, but yeah tomarto, tomato.

[Banditbandit]

I find it interesting that no-one has yet posted up an opinion from Southern/Molyneux that they find offensive.

Yeah - the idea that white people are more intelligent than any other ethnicity .. I find that offensive


You all do realize that lefties/humanitarians have been stopped by Immigration NZ? This wack job pair did get a visa - the private venue refused to rent them space.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/105660382/humanists-conference-organisers-shocked-at-immigration-nz-denials-for-hero-members

[TheDemonLord]

Yeah - the idea that white people are more intelligent than any other ethnicity .. I find that offensive

Are you offended that Ashkenazi Jews are (on average) more intelligent than everyone else?

[Banditbandit]

Are you offended that Ashkenazi Jews are (on average) more intelligent than everyone else?

Proof?

Maybe it was all those other genes they've picked up along the way ..

[caspernz]

FAr be it for me to invoke Godwin's Law, but what the fuck?

No mention of Nazis was made, we're at a very different end of the spectrum :Oi:

[husaberg]

Well someone (or something) got to them.

Unless you're suggesting they're just schizophrenic.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/national-video/news/video.cfm?c_id=1503075&gal_cid=1503075&gallery_id=196571

When approached for comment, The Powerstation’s owner and manager Peter Campbell told the Spinoff he was unaware of the views espoused by the pair.
“A couple of Canadians came in last night to make a booking” and he was simply “putting content through a venue”, said Campbell.
“The Powerstation is a blank canvas. The venue is the venue,” he said. “I own the Powerstation but do I have the right to decide what goes in the venue?
https://thespinoff.co.nz/music/03-08-2018/powerstation-owner-defends-hosting-southern-molyneux-show/

[HenryDorsetCase]

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/national-video/news/video.cfm?c_id=1503075&gal_cid=1503075&gallery_id=196571

When approached for comment, The Powerstation’s owner and manager Peter Campbell told the Spinoff he was unaware of the views espoused by the pair.
“A couple of Canadians came in last night to make a booking” and he was simply “putting content through a venue”, said Campbell.
“The Powerstation is a blank canvas. The venue is the venue,” he said. “I own the Powerstation but do I have the right to decide what goes in the venue?
https://thespinoff.co.nz/music/03-08-2018/powerstation-owner-defends-hosting-southern-molyneux-show/

well if he's the owner and manager then pretty clearly yes he does.

[HenryDorsetCase]

No mention of Nazis was made, we're at a very different end of the spectrum :Oi:

sorry I didnt express that very well. But that "they" are outbreeding "us" argument was one of the arguments advanced by the Nazis for the Final solution. Hence my reference to Godwin.

And I dont see that clunge Southern and/or Molyneux as being very different from Nazis personally. But I am a well known wet liberal socialist.

[oldrider]

This thread appears to be revealing more about NZ social ignorance than anything else. :whistle:

[TheDemonLord]

Proof?

Maybe it was all those other genes they've picked up along the way ..

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016028960600033X

http://web.mit.edu/fustflum/documents/papers/AshkenaziIQ.jbiosocsci.pdf

https://ieet.org/index.php/IEET2/more/pellissier20110719

There you go.

Now, I'm not going to make a claim as to the hows or the whys (but in the 2nd link, there are some interesting ideas) but it does seem to be conclusive that on average - they are 'the smartest'.

The inferred point I was making is suppose that a group is found to have the highest IQ - why is that offensive?

Now, I'll grant that data points like that are often used to bolster an argument of racial superiority (whilst I flirt with Godwin) - and I could agree on why that was offensive, but the data itself is just that - data.

[Moi]

I'm sorry that the Canadians were unable to speak to those who wished to pay to hear them. Those who wished to attend their presentation have as much right to do so as those who wish to peacefully protest their presence.

There appeared to be no reason to stop them entering the country.

However, I can understand the apprehension that a venue owner may well have if renting their venue to them. I doubt if those attending the presentation are the ones who would bring apprehension to the venue owner, I suspect that the protest that such a presentation draws would be reason for apprehension.

The venue owner must be responsible for the safety of their staff - doesn't OSH cover that aspect? - and with the possible protest not remaining peaceful, what guarantee can a venue owner give to their staff that they will be safe?

As an Auckland ratepayer I was disappointed in the way the council handled the non-hiring of a venue. If the reason given had been that the council could not guarantee the safety of their staff or that of those attending, then to not hold the presentation in a council controlled venue is acceptable. However, the message that appeared from council was not so much the safety issue as rather the issue that council doesn't like what the Canadians are saying.

As for the protesters, they were not portrayed as peaceful and responsible. They appeared to be more of the angry mob variety of protesters and no doubt this caused the police some concern. They appeared to be set upon disrupting the presentation rather than being prepared to put up a strong position against what is being said.

If those who are opposed to what the Canadians are saying are genuinely concerned that the message must be critiqued, then they should have invited the Canadians to a debate about their views. A debate that is controlled and tempered so that all get to present their views to an audience who are prepared to listen to both sides, even if some in the audience find what is presented by one side to be unpleasant.

Perhaps the offensive-ness that some said they felt towards what the Canadians are saying could also be felt towards the protesters who removed the lawful right for a citizens of this country to attend a meeting that they had paid to attend.

[Graystone]

sorry I didnt express that very well. But that "they" are outbreeding "us" argument was one of the arguments advanced by the Nazis for the Final solution. Hence my reference to Godwin.

And I dont see that clunge Southern and/or Molyneux as being very different from Nazis personally. But I am a well known wet liberal socialist.

While I wouldn't go so far as the Godwin's Law, birth rates tend towards distinction by ethnicity rather than culture. It seems a little strange they are from Canada complaining about preservation of culture as well, it's a country known for a strong culture derived from the culture of its immigrants.

[HenryDorsetCase]

I'm sorry that the Canadians were unable to speak to those who wished to pay to hear them. T

I'm not. fuck those clowns.

[carbonhed]

There you go.

Now, I'm not going to make a claim as to the hows or the whys (but in the 2nd link, there are some interesting ideas) but it does seem to be conclusive that on average - they are 'the smartest'.

The inferred point I was making is suppose that a group is found to have the highest IQ - why is that offensive?

Now, I'll grant that data points like that are often used to bolster an argument of racial superiority (whilst I flirt with Godwin) - and I could agree on why that was offensive, but the data itself is just that - data.

There's an interesting discussion on IQ and identity politics between Douglas Murray and Jordan Peterson here........... from 8:33.


https://youtu.be/cYgC9Zrp0ps

[husaberg]

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016028960600033X

http://web.mit.edu/fustflum/documents/papers/AshkenaziIQ.jbiosocsci.pdf

https://ieet.org/index.php/IEET2/more/pellissier20110719

There you go.

Now, I'm not going to make a claim as to the hows or the whys (but in the 2nd link, there are some interesting ideas) but it does seem to be conclusive that on average - they are 'the smartest'.

The inferred point I was making is suppose that a group is found to have the highest IQ - why is that offensive?

Now, I'll grant that data points like that are often used to bolster an argument of racial superiority (whilst I flirt with Godwin) - and I could agree on why that was offensive, but the data itself is just that - data.
its not offensive but it can be used in a way that it is, it also doesn't include the factors that effect the iq test results the fylnn effect for instance.
Nor does it show there is a great range of IQ in a group of random people then there is in a race
When the worlds IQ experts disagree with its use like that, who are you to say they know better than they do.

One of the world's leading experts on intelligence says no one should listen to anything Stefan Molyneux has to say on the topic.
But not necessarily because he's wrong.
Emeritus Professor James Flynn of the University of Otago has published a number of books and papers on intelligence, what it is, and what's behind it. He's best-known internationally for the 'Flynn effect' - the gradual improvement in intelligence - as measured in IQ tests - that occurred throughout the 20th century.
Most researchers now say the evidence strongly favours environmental factors - the Flynn effect itself has been linked to improved pre- and post-natal nutrition and better education, for example, as well as the growing complexity of life.Rather than give the pair publicity by opposing their presence - as some have accused Auckland Mayor Phil Goff of doing - Prof Flynn says we all should have just ignored them.
One of the world's leading experts on intelligence says no one should listen to anything Stefan Molyneux has to say on the topic.
But not necessarily because he's wrong.
Emeritus Professor James Flynn of the University of Otago has published a number of books and papers on intelligence, what it is, and what's behind it. He's best-known internationally for the 'Flynn effect' - the gradual improvement in intelligence - as measured in IQ tests - that occurred throughout the 20th century.
Mr Molyneux argues there is a racial link to intelligence, with a hierarchy that puts Ashkenazi Jews at the top, African-Americans, sub-Saharan Africans, pygmys and indigenous Australians at the bottom, and the rest of us somewhere in between.
Mr Molyneux says while he doesn't like that different races have different levels of intelligence, it's what the research says, citing work by the likes of Prof Flynn and Charles Murray. The latter published a book in 1994 called The Bell Curve, which presented evidence of IQ differences between the different races. While it didn't flat-out say the differences were the result of genetics, in promotion for the book Dr Murray said it was likely.
Prof Flynn was interviewed by Mr Molyneux in 2015 - the hour-long chat is on YouTube - but said if the Canadian called now, he wouldn't answer.
"I wouldn't think of going within a mile of him if he talked," Prof Flynn told Newshub, saying while he enjoyed debating the subject of race and IQ with academics he disagreed with, such as Dr Murray and the late Arthur Jensen, there was no point in listening to what Mr Molyneux has to say.
"These people are just coattail-hangers. They don't have anything new to contribute to the debate - they just try and make the debate spectacular. I've invested a huge amount of time on this issue, read all the best thinkers, and wouldn't think it would be worth my time."
In his 1980 book Race, IQ and Jensen, Prof Flynn called attempts to link IQ squarely to race "disturbing", expressing great scepticism.
Most researchers now say the evidence strongly favours environmental factors - the Flynn effect itself has been linked to improved pre- and post-natal nutrition and better education, for example, as well as the growing complexity of life.
Prof Flynn couldn't recall anything Mr Molyneux told him in 2015, but doubts the interview would be worth revisiting.
"I've never seen him in the literature as having made any supplementary points to the points Jensen made, and his reputation is such that one suspects he oversimplifies the debate. You have a limited amount of time in your life, and if you look at what every nut says about every issue, you'll never have time to do anything else."
But that doesn't mean he agrees with Mr Molyneux and Ms Southern being hounded out of the country.
"This clown is coming here and if he speaks in Auckland he'll get about 50 people, all of whom agree with him anyway, and best to ignore him. But no, all sorts of people become champions of anti-racism and they get huge publicity."

[carbonhed]

Professor Flynn said "This clown is coming here and if he speaks in Auckland he'll get about 50 people, all of whom agree with him anyway, and best to ignore him. But no, all sorts of people become champions of anti-racism and they get huge publicity."

This is the wonderful irony in the spectacle of the regressive left all lining up to pat each other on the back over the triumph of the cancellation of Southern and Molyneux's talk.

If they had done absolutely nothing... the talk would have gone ahead to a tiny handful of people and then they would have departed our shores.

Instead we get the spectacle of the mayor of Auckland lying about his actions and confirmation of that by his own council.

You get the Auckland city council banning the event due to "Elf and Safety" which will no doubt backfire on them.

You get rent a mob demonstrating their intolerance of free speech in front of the entire nation.

You get Southern and Molyneux making one of New Zealand's top journalists look like a complete muppet. Way to go Paddy Gower! And they seem pretty rational on national TV.

You get the cherry on top with our own fucking Prime Minister bobble head approving the cancellation of the speech.

Aaaaand you'll get the speech anyway on Youtube.

Way to fucking go Leftards :killingme:

This has already got about 150000 views. Bravo! Outstanding! May you have many such triumphs!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0pOONm-nW8

[Graystone]

You get rent a mob demonstrating their intolerance of free speech in front of the entire nation.

Ahem, actually we got a group demonstrating their right to free speech.

And a pair having a whinge cos they couldn't be arsed doing the same.

The people who think NZ looks bad due to these fool's (in)actions are unlikely to be the sort of people we would like to have come visit anyway. Win-win.

[FJRider]

Or.... There is a long history of radical left-wing activists/domestic terrorist groups using force to shut down speakers they don't like. A Venue gives some ability to exclude those who want to violently protest.

Preaching to the believers is the easiest option with "Public" speaking. Safer too ... if you know many oppose what you are preaching ...


As opposed to peacefully protest and even come to the event to ask questions and challenge the speakers...

BUT ... BOTH sides can't agree on the definition of peaceful ... and both groups can't/wont ... keep it peaceful.


Also - what is the legal standard for offense or offended? Is there a threshold? Or is it simply a case of get enough people with tears streaming down their face, claiming PTSD from Twitter?

For a start ... a complaint must be made to Police before any action can be taken. Proof of what actions caused the offence and (as I understand) reasonable cause and/or proof that any actual offence was taken. But I'm no Lawyer ... do your own research.

[AllanB]

We should have paid them to go to North Korea and spout off their opinions. Chances are they would not have come back.

[Katman]

Ahem, actually we got a group demonstrating their right to free speech.

Is that including the bomb threat?

[FJRider]

We should have paid them to go to North Korea and spout off their opinions. Chances are they would not have come back.

They would only need a one way ticket ... a cost effective plan ... :devil2:

[TheDemonLord]

Seeing as it's been referenced:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJ0W5Efp8N0

[Voltaire]

I was offended by Patrick Gower. He's got a face for radio.

[Graystone]

Is that including the bomb threat?

Nah, it'd be the protest. The right to protest being one of the cornerstones of free speech.

[carbonhed]

While the rest of NZ looks on in bemusement the Left begins to eat itself... somebody should step in to stop them :laugh:

https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2018/08/06/bomb-threats-social-media-pile-ons-and-miriama-kamos-race-betrayal-the-woke-left-just-dont-know-when-they-start-becoming-the-enemy-do-they/

If the deranged pommy bastard Martyn Bradbury thinks the left has scored a massive own goal.... who am I to disagree.

[TheDemonLord]

its not offensive but it can be used in a way that it is, it also doesn't include the factors that effect the iq test results the fylnn effect for instance.
Nor does it show there is a great range of IQ in a group of random people then there is in a race
When the worlds IQ experts disagree with its use like that, who are you to say they know better than they do.

Well, we do know that IQ is a heritable trait, so clearly there is a Genetic component, we know that certain genetic traits are more prevalent amongst certain groups of people and there is a strong correlation to suggest that a certain group of genetic traits (what we call 'race') may also include traits for higher or lower intelligence, there is also a large amount of ancillary data (such as scientific achievement, complex industry etc.) that aligns with this point of view.

All of which seems to be a Taboo subject in Academia - as if to ask the question is to call for eugenics and the gas chambers.

[husaberg]

Well, we do know that IQ is a heritable trait, so clearly there is a Genetic component, we know that certain genetic traits are more prevalent amongst certain groups of people and there is a strong correlation to suggest that a certain group of genetic traits (what we call 'race') may also include traits for higher or lower intelligence, there is also a large amount of ancillary data (such as scientific achievement, complex industry etc.) that aligns with this point of view.

All of which seems to be a Taboo subject in Academia - as if to ask the question is to call for eugenics and the gas chambers.

No its not taboo, what is taboo is for idiots to try and miss use information to push an agenda when they have no understanding of the economic, lifestyle and technological factors that influence the results. using the data to push an agenda without expalining or even undertstanding the whys just peddling propaganda.
As i have explained to you in the past the Irish used to test low due to economic and social factors relating to schooling once this changed the results changed overnight it was nothing to do with genetics or inteligence only how the subjects scored



Lynn had devoted many years of personal research in Ireland and eventually concluded that they were clearly a low-IQ race
The inescapable conclusion is that Irish IQs rose at an almost linear rate during the three or four decades after 1972.
96(1964) = 90
3466(1972) = 87
1361(1988) = 97
191(1990) = 87
2029(1991) = 96
1361(1993) = 93
2029(1993) = 91
10000(2000) = 95
3937(2009 PISA) = 10
Why this occurred is an entirely different matter. I find it extremely difficult to think of a plausible biological explanation, though others are welcome to try. During this exact period, Ireland was undergoing a very rapid rise in urbanization and affluence, and I’d suggest those factors. Perhaps there’s some other cause instead. But the empirical rise of Flynn-adjusted Irish IQ by nearly a full standard deviation in 37 years seems proven fact.

[carbonhed]

This is the wonderful irony in the spectacle of the regressive left all lining up to pat each other on the back over the triumph of the cancellation of Southern and Molyneux's talk.

If they had done absolutely nothing... the talk would have gone ahead to a tiny handful of people and then they would have departed our shores.

Instead we get the spectacle of the mayor of Auckland lying about his actions and confirmation of that by his own council.

You get the Auckland city council banning the event due to "Elf and Safety" which will no doubt backfire on them.

You get rent a mob demonstrating their intolerance of free speech in front of the entire nation.

You get Southern and Molyneux making one of New Zealand's top journalists look like a complete muppet. Way to go Paddy Gower! And they seem pretty rational on national TV.

You get the cherry on top with our own fucking Prime Minister bobble head approving the cancellation of the speech.

Aaaaand you'll get the speech anyway on Youtube.

Way to fucking go Leftards :killingme:




Chris Trotter shamelessly plagiarises my post... motherfucker!

https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2018/08/07/how-the-new-zealand-left-transformed-southern-and-molyneux-from-unknown-rightists-into-free-speech-heroes/

[yokel]

Looks like Infowars has been fascistised from YouTube and Facebook, who's next??
They must really be in a panic.

[yokel]

https://www.whaleoil.co.nz/2018/08/vice-chancellor-caves-bullies-get-don-brash-banned-from-speaking-at-massey-university/

[carbonhed]

https://www.whaleoil.co.nz/2018/08/vice-chancellor-caves-bullies-get-don-brash-banned-from-speaking-at-massey-university/

Holy fucking shit! The lunatics have taken over the asylum.

[jasonu]

https://www.whaleoil.co.nz/2018/08/vice-chancellor-caves-bullies-get-don-brash-banned-from-speaking-at-massey-university/

I didn't know that fat slater cunt was still around.

[merv]

So are the thugs involved in shutting down these speeches just rent a mob and actually secretly on the National Party's payroll manipulating things so their popularity will go up?

Way to go, as Whale Oil said mentioning how Trump got popularity from people fed up with the left's violence and lack of tolerance.

[oldrider]

So are the thugs involved in shutting down these speeches just rent a mob and actually secretly on the National Party's payroll manipulating things so their popularity will go up?

Way to go, as Whale Oil said mentioning how Trump got popularity from people fed up with the left's violence and lack of tolerance.

The (pointless) left or right political spectrum was set up especially to create the divisive political scenario that is right now being escalated to create division.

A and B fighting for the benefit of C - divide and conquer, oldest trick in the book always works because A & B are so fucking stupid. :facepalm:

[husaberg]

So are the thugs involved in shutting down these speeches just rent a mob and actually secretly on the National Party's payroll manipulating things so their popularity will go up?

Way to go, as Whale Oil said mentioning how Trump got popularity from people fed up with the left's violence and lack of tolerance.

It doesn't seem to be working for the popularity of the national party leader thus far 10% preferred PM. Oh dear.
Even with Crushers getting caught spreading of fake news today according to a stuff shes the national top pic for Nat party leader
338157

[carbonhed]

So are the thugs involved in shutting down these speeches just rent a mob and actually secretly on the National Party's payroll manipulating things so their popularity will go up?


Well if they're not they should be! They're doing a brilliant job.

PM bobble head endorses the "thugs veto" on Sunday and on Tuesday it's used against Don Brash. Who is going to be next?

Here's the dingbat in charge... Jan Thomas. Down at the job centre by weeks end hopefully.

https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/r/5/l/f/x/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349. 1r5f80.png/1533613527243.jpg

[yokel]

"I think we're quite hostile to their views"- some terrorist leader of Aotearoa


https://youtu.be/WGSfHIPnupY

[Graystone]

So are the thugs involved in shutting down these speeches just rent a mob and actually secretly on the National Party's payroll manipulating things so their popularity will go up?

Way to go, as Whale Oil said mentioning how Trump got popularity from people fed up with the left's violence and lack of tolerance.

Interesting to note the public reaction to Brash's ban is to organise a protest against the ban. As mentioned before, this is not some simple left/right shit, it is simply the public exercising their right to free speech, as shown by the two canuky fools being told to go fuck their hats, and woman blocking the old cunt from speaking being told to go fuck her hat; this is not partisan.

[carbonhed]

Interesting to note the public reaction to Brash's ban is to organise a protest against the ban. As mentioned before, this is not some simple left/right shit, it is simply the public exercising their right to free speech, as shown by the two canuky fools being told to go fuck their hats, and woman blocking the old cunt from speaking being told to go fuck her hat; this is not partisan.

Horseshit.

[Graystone]

Horseshit.

Nah, for realsies, 11am, on the concourse; protest your saggy white man-tits off!

[carbonhed]

And here's the fucking goober who made the complaint. A Bachelor of Social Work (Hons) no less... colour me absolutely fucking stunned! His letter is as incoherent as you'd expect.

https://www.facebook.com/notes/kardinal-karl-pearce/official-letter-to-vice-chancellor-and-pro-vcs-massey-university-manawtu/10160669364995301/

https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/r/5/s/n/5/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349. 1r5f80.png/1533620897174.jpg

[merv]

"I think we're quite hostile to their views"- some terrorist leader of Aotearoa



Crikey dick :pinch:

[merv]

It doesn't seem to be working for the popularity of the national party leader thus far 10% preferred PM. Oh dear.
Even with Crushers getting caught spreading of fake news today according to a stuff shes the national top pic for Nat party leader


That poll was before the fiasco with the Canadians and now the Don Brash thing wasn't it? Surely Labour will lose support over this?

[husaberg]

That poll was before the fiasco with the Canadians and now the Don Brash thing wasn't it? Surely Labour will lose support over this?

Yeah bound to result in a 30% shift in support for Simon

[FJRider]

Interesting to note the public reaction to Brash's ban is to organise a protest against the ban. As mentioned before, this is not some simple left/right shit, it is simply the public exercising their right to free speech

Freedom of speech and freedom to protest are closely linked – But they are not one and the same. Free speech would mean nothing if there was no right to use public spaces to make your views known (but private places can be ... ;)).

The rights to free speech and protest, along with the right to form and join associations or groups, are found in Articles 10 and 11 of the Human Rights Act.

These rights can be limited by law to protect the interests of others, but only when the limitation is proportionate and necessary in a Democratic society.

So, for example:

the right to free speech will not protect a person who tries to spread hateful lies against another but it will protect fair comment;

the right to protest won’t protect violent gatherings but it will protect peaceful protest.

In recent years we have seen a variety of measures introduced that undermine the right to protest and freedom of speech ...

1. Laws intended to combat anti-social behaviour, terrorism and serious crime are routinely used against legitimate protesters;

2. Broadly drafted anti-terrorism offences of 'encouragement' and 'glorification' of terrorism threaten to make careless talk a crime;

3. Membership of certain organisations can be banned under anti-terror laws even if the organisation is non-violent and political;

4. Hate speech laws have been extended in a piecemeal way to ban ever-expanding categories of speech;

5. Broad anti-terrorism powers of stop and search have been used to harass and stifle peaceful protesters;

6. Protest around Parliament has been severely restricted by laws limiting and overly regulating the right to assemble and protest around
Parliament.


Is this The New Zealand you want ... ??? and is there a (Democratic ??) party in NZ willing to (try to) change/better it ... ??

[Katman]

Is this The New Zealand you want ... ??? and is there a (Democratic ??) party in NZ willing to (try to) change/better it ... ??

And the vast majority have just sat around allowing it to happen.

And people wonder why the word sheeple gets thrown around.

:facepalm:

[Katman]

And here's the fucking goober who made the complaint. A Bachelor of Social Work (Hons) no less... colour me absolutely fucking stunned! His letter is as incoherent as you'd expect.

So it appears that all it takes to shut down an event that you don't like is to make some threats of violence.

Unless of course, it's a Weapons Expo.

Then the authorities will go to any length to protect the rights of the arms dealers.

[jasonu]

And here's the fucking goober who made the complaint. A Bachelor of Social Work (Hons) no less... colour me absolutely fucking stunned! His letter is as incoherent as you'd expect.

https://www.facebook.com/notes/kardinal-karl-pearce/official-letter-to-vice-chancellor-and-pro-vcs-massey-university-manawtu/10160669364995301/

https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/r/5/s/n/5/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349. 1r5f80.png/1533620897174.jpg

and I'll bet that cunt is first in line at any 'down with whitey' march, protest, poor me bitch session.

[TheDemonLord]

So it appears that all it takes to shut down an event that you don't like is to make some threats of violence.

Unless of course, it's a Weapons Expo.

Then the authorities will go to any length to protect the rights of the arms dealers.

Well, that's a bit of a different scenario

A bunch of mask wearing, middle class student activists may be able to bully organisations concerned with their image to get them to shut down an event.

But put them against a bunch of cold-blooded Killers with access to Military grade weaponary and suddenly the protest turns awfully peaceful...

Funny that...

[Voltaire]

And the vast majority have just sat around allowing it to happen.

And people wonder why the word sheeple gets thrown around.

:facepalm:

http://despensable.com.au/indespensable/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/sheeple-01.jpg

:niceone:

[oldrider]

Well if you are anti war you just gotta be blocked outa twitter it seems?

<iframe width="922" height="519" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/cF1VeiZ6Tuw" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[FJRider]

And the vast majority have just sat around allowing it to happen.

And people wonder why the word sheeple gets thrown around.

:facepalm:

More are just interested in getting their benefit increased ... whats the big deal about a few human rights lost ... eh .. !!! :shutup:

[merv]

http://despensable.com.au/indespensable/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/sheeple-01.jpg

:niceone:

Well isn't that just how East Germany described the Berlin wall and all the fencing around the rest of its borders back in the day?

[FJRider]

Well if you are anti war you just gotta be blocked outa twitter it seems?

Why would anybody be anti-war ... ??? a good war does wonders for the economy. Look at all the employment they create ... even for the ones at home ... :innocent:

[Voltaire]

Well isn't that just how East Germany described the Berlin wall and all the fencing around the rest of its borders back in the day?

I rode around the Eastern Bloc once, the first thing you notice is the lack of all the tasty American Food outlets, advertising and expensive anything. My then 17 year old BMW was like driving around in a Ferrari.
In 2004 driving my 1971 VW Kombi thru Romania the kids counted 100 horse drawn carts after crossing the Danube from Bulgaria, but lots of expensive European cars too, good to see the 1% doing nicely.

[Berries]

Well if you are anti war you just gotta be blocked outa twitter it seems?
Sure it's not the beards?

[Graystone]

Freedom of speech and freedom to protest are closely linked – But they are not one and the same. Free speech would mean nothing if there was no right to use public spaces to make your views known (but private places can be ... ;)).

The rights to free speech and protest, along with the right to form and join associations or groups, are found in Articles 10 and 11 of the Human Rights Act.

These rights can be limited by law to protect the interests of others, but only when the limitation is proportionate and necessary in a Democratic society.

So, for example:

the right to free speech will not protect a person who tries to spread hateful lies against another but it will protect fair comment;

the right to protest won’t protect violent gatherings but it will protect peaceful protest.

In recent years we have seen a variety of measures introduced that undermine the right to protest and freedom of speech ...

1. Laws intended to combat anti-social behaviour, terrorism and serious crime are routinely used against legitimate protesters;

2. Broadly drafted anti-terrorism offences of 'encouragement' and 'glorification' of terrorism threaten to make careless talk a crime;

3. Membership of certain organisations can be banned under anti-terror laws even if the organisation is non-violent and political;

4. Hate speech laws have been extended in a piecemeal way to ban ever-expanding categories of speech;

5. Broad anti-terrorism powers of stop and search have been used to harass and stifle peaceful protesters;

6. Protest around Parliament has been severely restricted by laws limiting and overly regulating the right to assemble and protest around
Parliament.


Is this The New Zealand you want ... ??? and is there a (Democratic ??) party in NZ willing to (try to) change/better it ... ??

Stop reading so many dystopian sci fi novels. Of those 6 things, how many are actually happening as you describe them?

[oldrider]

I rode around the Eastern Bloc once, the first thing you notice is the lack of all the tasty American Food outlets, advertising and expensive anything. My then 17 year old BMW was like driving around in a Ferrari.
In 2004 driving my 1971 VW Kombi thru Romania the kids counted 100 horse drawn carts after crossing the Danube from Bulgaria, but lots of expensive European cars too, good to see the 1% doing nicely.

Not that I am advocating anything but I would like you to do that same trip again now and see if there is actually any difference - it would be interesting. :yes:

[Swoop]

And here's the fucking goober who made the complaint. A Bachelor of Social Work (Hons) no less... colour me absolutely fucking stunned! His letter is as incoherent as you'd expect.

https://www.facebook.com/notes/kardinal-karl-pearce/official-letter-to-vice-chancellor-and-pro-vcs-massey-university-manawtu/10160669364995301/
A leading example of The Regressive Left.

[Voltaire]

Not that I am advocating anything but I would like you to do that same trip again now and see if there is actually any difference - it would be interesting. :yes:
The two trips were 15 years apart, the Soviet Era was gone( ish) and everyone was scoffing Maccers and Coke. Probably now deep in debt with crap they didn't really need. Even the town with Vlad the Impaler's castle had a Tesco's down the road.:wacko:

[FJRider]

Stop reading so many dystopian sci fi novels. Of those 6 things, how many are actually happening as you describe them?

Already happened. Not science fiction ... and more to come ... :mellow:

[FJRider]

Stop reading so many dystopian sci fi novels. Of those 6 things, how many are actually happening as you describe them?

ALL ... have happened. Legislation is already in place.

[Graystone]

Already happened. Not science fiction ... and more to come ... :mellow:


ALL ... have happened. Legislation is already in place.

Could I get a source for #2 then? preferably not from Hunger Games...

[FJRider]

Could I get a source for #2 then? preferably not from Hunger Games...

Don't you have access to google ??? ... easy to find the legislation.

Pick any of the six I gave you in Google (or your desired search engine) and see for yourself.

If you can't see the need to check for yourself ... then imagine the the millions in NZ that won't either ... :crazy:

[Graystone]

Don't you have access to google ??? ... easy to find the legislation.

Pick any of the six I gave you in Google (or your desired search engine) and see for yourself.

If you can't see the need to check for yourself ... then imagine the the millions in NZ that won't either ... :crazy:

Figured as much. If you can't even provide evidence for one, why should anyone take heed?

[FJRider]

Could I get a source for #2 then? preferably not from Hunger Games...

Heavy reading ... you can skip a few pages and read the titles for the gist of the page.

I dont think you will though ... lazy pricks never will. Why the legalization is already in place.

https://www.otago.ac.nz/law/otago636743.pdf

[FJRider]

Figured as much. If you can't even provide evidence for one, why should anyone take heed?

The attitude of around three million others ... <_<

[Graystone]

Heavy reading ... you can skip a few pages and read the titles for the gist of the page.

I dont think you will though ... lazy pricks never will. Why the legalization is already in place.

https://www.otago.ac.nz/law/otago636743.pdf

What in there, specifically backs up #2


The attitude of around three million others ... <_<

Of course, it would be irrational to give heed to every whiner bleating on about some bullshit. If you can't provide a modicum of evidence for your bleating, why should anyone listen?

[Katman]

Figured as much. If you can't even provide evidence for one, why should anyone take heed?

Bogan, it really is you.

[FJRider]

What in there, specifically backs up #2

Read it. Or is English your 2nd/3rd language ... ??? Thought so ... :doh:


Of course, it would be irrational to give heed to every whiner bleating on about some bullshit. If you can't provide a modicum of evidence for your bleating, why should anyone listen?

Not true ... I'm responding to YOUR whining ... :tugger:

[Katman]

Of course, it would be irrational to give heed to every whiner bleating on about some bullshit. If you can't provide a modicum of evidence for your bleating, why should anyone listen?

An enquiring mind would start looking for themselves.

[Graystone]

Read it. Or is English your 2nd/3rd language ... ??? Thought so ... :doh:



Not true ... I'm responding to YOUR whining ... :tugger:

So, nothing then, thought so. That was a word search btw, careless and talk appeared 0 times, with anti-terrorism appearing 6, 4 of which were references and 2 not in the context as you describe.

Not true, you were whinging about a dystopian future and I just pointed out such a thing is not grounded in reality.

Look somewhere else to find some sheeple to preach to, or wait for carbonhed and Katman to turn up perhaps...

[Drew]

You guys sound like any of that actually matters.

Have you forgotten that the planet is over populated? That the climate is changing and we can't survive the environment that is to come?

Personally, I'm more worried about a world war than anything else. It's possible it'll happen in my life, and I dont need that sort of thing killing my buzz.

[yokel]

Freedom of speech and freedom to protest are closely linked – But they are not one and the same. Free speech would mean nothing if there was no right to use public spaces to make your views known (but private places can be ... ;)).

The rights to free speech and protest, along with the right to form and join associations or groups, are found in Articles 10 and 11 of the Human Rights Act.

These rights can be limited by law to protect the interests of others, but only when the limitation is proportionate and necessary in a Democratic society.

So, for example:

the right to free speech will not protect a person who tries to spread hateful lies against another but it will protect fair comment;

the right to protest won’t protect violent gatherings but it will protect peaceful protest.

In recent years we have seen a variety of measures introduced that undermine the right to protest and freedom of speech ...

1. Laws intended to combat anti-social behaviour, terrorism and serious crime are routinely used against legitimate protesters;

2. Broadly drafted anti-terrorism offences of 'encouragement' and 'glorification' of terrorism threaten to make careless talk a crime;

3. Membership of certain organisations can be banned under anti-terror laws even if the organisation is non-violent and political;

4. Hate speech laws have been extended in a piecemeal way to ban ever-expanding categories of speech;

5. Broad anti-terrorism powers of stop and search have been used to harass and stifle peaceful protesters;

6. Protest around Parliament has been severely restricted by laws limiting and overly regulating the right to assemble and protest around
Parliament.


Is this The New Zealand you want ... ??? and is there a (Democratic ??) party in NZ willing to (try to) change/better it ... ??

How can laws be made around an emotional word like "hate"?
I don't fucking get it.

Who comes up with this bullshit?
Oh fucking Communists.
Hate speech laws = blasphemy laws


https://youtu.be/oXIsrDjPSAE

[Voltaire]

Could I get a source for #2 then? preferably not from Hunger Games...

I think he has Sleeping Dogs permanently in the Video Player.


https://www.nzonscreen.com/title/sleeping-dogs-1977

I could have been an extra in this had I started working at the Post Office 3 years earlier :woohoo:

[FJRider]

How can laws be made around an emotional word like "hate"?
I don't fucking get it.

Who comes up with this bullshit?
Oh fucking Communists.
Hate speech laws = blasphemy laws

Your old-fashioned unionist's ... usually well supported by your local Labour party ...

[mashman]

You guys sound like any of that actually matters.

Have you forgotten that the planet is over populated? That the climate is changing and we can't survive the environment that is to come?

Personally, I'm more worried about a world war than anything else. It's possible it'll happen in my life, and I dont need that sort of thing killing my buzz.

It kind of does matter unfortunately. When the Law can be interpreted to mean anything that those who are paying for the prosecution wish it to be, then peeps end up going to jail for no reason other than they disagree with the Law. Bit of a shit sammy like, but when its yer ecologists and yer various institutes are wanting to tell the truth, but they get lambasted for free speech as they have broken a contract that loosely binds them to silence, then wouldn't you want free speech without recriminations?

The planet is not overpopulated. Let's look at some facts (:killingme). We use 1.7 sustainable planets every year. There are 7.6 billion people on the planet. 20% of that 7.6 billion people consume 80% of that which is produced. 80% of the planet are living on 0.34 sustainable planets. Play with the numbers any way you like, but we produce enough food for 10 billion, we have more "shelter" than there are homeless, a train doesn't care how many people are using it but you need a ticket, we waste electricity producing goods and servies that serve absolutely no life purpose that could be used to heat unhealthy homes etc... No, we have abundance of the basics, and various other mod cons, to show that the planet isn't overpopulated. Overpopulation will become a problem, but we'll likely all be dead before we test the true carrying capacity of this little blue dot. NOW then, BAU doesn't come out so well. It is the primary reason for destroying those abundant conditions for life on the planet... but hey, facing that would mean a change in lifestyle... much better to kill the other 80% of the population so that we can keep on chuggin' the way we are. Although that 20% of the population will still be consuming 1.36 planets to maintain that lifestyle. Not so much a population problem, more a case of how and why we do things... but hey, there are Oceans to cross on that path. Dumb ignorant ones.

They cannot have war, for war would render the Earths surface a nuclear wasteland that not even they will survive... unless they fancy living underground and spending time on the surface in a hazmat suit of some form. War can only ever be "localised", or again, they all die.

On a more positive note. So long as society stays afloat enough to maintain the 450+ active nuclear reactors, dump sites and various radioactive weaponry and sites that are dotted around the globe, then everything that can't handle several thousands of years of nuclear radiation will survive :wari:

[mashman]

Bogan, it really is you.

No no. Bogan became Enlightened. Bogan no longer exists.

[Viking01]

Good to see that all is fine "outside the fence".

https://www.rt.com/op-ed/435466-alex-jones-ban-internet-censorship/

[carbonhed]

"I think we're quite hostile to their views"- some terrorist leader of Aotearoa


https://youtu.be/WGSfHIPnupY

Wow! There's a wonderful eviseration of Paddy Gower on that clip. Starts around 7.30.

Yay we're on the world stage!

[Graystone]

An enquiring mind would start looking for themselves.

Are you in the sin bin or something? Your posts seem to be delayed in showing up. It's like some sort of impairment to 'free speech' almost...

[WALRUS]

Personally, I'm more worried about a world war than anything else. It's possible it'll happen in my life, and I dont need that sort of thing killing my buzz.

Unfortunately I fear that if/when such a thing does eventuate, it will be largely because of/contributed to by stuff like this. The left/right divide is pretty intense right now with both sides acting like prats. The rise of a certain comb-overed Tangerine has brought out a lot of extreme right wing views into the public eye. Unfortunately, instead of having a debate and discussion to try and explain their point, the far left are just as horrid as the right when it comes to shouting down their opponents and turning everything into some bipartisan shit fight. It's only a matter of time before either side takes things too far and shit gets out of hand.

[Voltaire]

Great Reporting from AU......

" With a Rebel yell she cried Pat, Pat, Pat"

https://www.news.com.au/finance/business/media/kiwi-tv-host-left-speechless-by-lauren-southern/news-story/a33b8564b5f75db9279744e632cd7f13

[Laava]

Wow! There's a wonderful eviseration of Paddy Gower on that clip. Starts around 7.30.

Yay we're on the world stage!

Fuck, he must be embarrased of that performance...he got on the back foot within seconds and it got worse from there...

[carbonhed]

Fuck, he must be embarrased of that performance...he got on the back foot within seconds and it got worse from there...

Oh fuck no. He doesn't think it went that badly. :rofl:

To quote him "I hadn't spent much time preparing, I hadn't read their stuff thoroughly and I am happy to admit I don't spend any time thinking about whether different races have different IQs and the like. I was not ready for their intellectual nit-picking - and I never will be. It's not the way I roll." Certainly isn't Paddy. Throw a few facts your way and it's.............................. crickets.

https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2018/08/patrick-gower-was-not-destroyed-by-lauren-southern-and-stefan-molyneux.html

[eldog]

Your old-fashioned unionist's ... usually well supported by your local Labour party ...
Are you sure you have it the right way round?

[yokel]

"But Don Brash is more dangerous to New Zealand than the two visitors. He lives here, was a public and political leader."

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/106108505/when-a-person-with-extreme-views-defends-free-speech-someone-gets-hurt

"Now that the media has legitimized and weaponized far left attack groups, they have become the mafia/media complex. The media paints the target with hateful adjectives; the attack groups move in with threats and weapons."

Check out @StefanMolyneux’s Tweet: https://twitter.com/StefanMolyneux/status/1027328534556098561?s=09

[oldrider]

Just following along from all the TV media shit flowing out of America - it has always been when not if? :facepalm:

[FJRider]

Are you sure you have it the right way round?

Who's hand is in who's pocket ... :devil2:

[eldog]

Who's hand is in who's pocket ... :devil2:
2 lefts don’t make a right:yeah:

[jasonu]

Just following along from all the TV media shit flowing out of America - it has always been when not if? :facepalm:

Monkey see monkey do, as usual.

[carbonhed]

Yay! Jordan Peterson is coming to NZ. Another priceless opportunity for the woke left to make utter cunts of themselves.... aaaand here's the first hit piece written by this charming wide eyed twelve year old intern.


https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/835786813218275329/8T9wLruO_400x400.jpg



https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/world/2018/08/who-is-jordan-peterson-a-guide-to-the-next-controversial-canadian-to-grace-our-shores.html

If you'd prefer something written by an adult with an IQ somewhere over double figures....

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/08/why-the-left-is-so-afraid-of-jordan-peterson/567110/

[Voltaire]

Does the Herald practice self censorship as not seen this here.

Probably too much competition with cat and dog stories.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/aug/09/new-zealand-mp-uses-c-word-at-rally-in-call-to-reclaim-it-from-abusers

[Katman]

Does the Herald practice self censorship as not seen this here.

Probably too much competition with cat and dog stories.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/aug/09/new-zealand-mp-uses-c-word-at-rally-in-call-to-reclaim-it-from-abusers

I've been a Green Party supporter for a lot of years now, but Marama Davidson is the worst thing to ever happen to them.

[TheDemonLord]

Yay! Jordan Peterson is coming to NZ. Another priceless opportunity for the woke left to make utter cunts of themselves.... aaaand here's the first hit piece written by this charming wide eyed twelve year old intern.

Yep, In Feb - I asked him on one of his recent vids about no NZ tour - and then he confirmed - I'll be going.

And if any of you lot are going - I'm not opposed to meeting at a Bar beforehand and saying hi.

[merv]

I've been a Green Party supporter for a lot of years now, but Marama Davidson is the worst thing to ever happen to them.

Agreed and I thought they were doomed when they chose her as co-leader.

[oldrider]

Does the Herald practice self censorship as not seen this here.

Probably too much competition with cat and dog stories.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/aug/09/new-zealand-mp-uses-c-word-at-rally-in-call-to-reclaim-it-from-abusers

The first and probably the last time I ever agreed with her message however there is always a time and place for everything - she seems to need to work on that? :shifty:

The Oxford English Dictionary [5th edition, 2002] defines cunt as: “the female genitals, the vulva” as well as “a very unpleasant or stupid person”. - Two birds with one stone? :msn-wink:

Did she take into account "size"? - very relevant when considering cunts - micro defeats macro every time. :wait:

[TheDemonLord]

I've been a Green Party supporter for a lot of years now, but Marama Davidson is the worst thing to ever happen to them.

The funny thing is - if they got rid of all the Marxists, they could be a really good party.

[pritch]

Does the Herald practice self censorship as not seen this here.

Probably too much competition with cat and dog stories.


Reclaiming the c word was the subject of Emmerson's cartoon today so somebody is aware of the story.

[Swoop]

Yay! Jordan Peterson is coming to NZ. Another priceless opportunity for the woke left to make utter cunts of themselves....
Most excellent indeed.
A dose of intelligence which should upset the whiney-arsed retards until they froth at the mouth.


I've been a Green Party supporter for a lot of years now, but Marama Davidson is the worst thing to ever happen to them.
That explains a lot, but there must be a race-to-the-bottom in the lunatic fringe party. Is Davidson trying to out-dumb Meteria Turei?

[Ocean1]

The funny thing is - if they got rid of all the Marxists, they could be a really good party.

Aye, if they were tinged even slightly green they would have supported national's plans for a massive Kermadec marine sanctuary rather than leaping aboard labour's multi-party mashup waka.

They're far more about marxism than environmentalism, to the point where their environmental policy is a complete joke.

[Berries]

Reclaiming the c word was the subject of Emmerson's cartoon today so somebody is aware of the story.
Was on the TV news a day or two ago.

Cunt remember which channel.

[Graystone]

Aye, if they were tinged even slightly green they would have supported national's plans for a massive Kermadec marine sanctuary rather than leaping aboard labour's multi-party mashup waka.

They're far more about marxism than environmentalism, to the point where their environmental policy is a complete joke.

+1 to that, it's a sad indictment of our nations approach to environmentalism that those fuckwits are our go-to 'good for environment' party.

[husaberg]

Aye, if they were tinged even slightly green they would have supported national's plans for a massive Kermadec marine sanctuary rather than leaping aboard labour's multi-party mashup waka.

They're far more about marxism than environmentalism, to the point where their environmental policy is a complete joke.


Pardon..... Nationals plans...National didn't support it when the greens introduced it as a private members bill a few years before that. Prior to that is was introduced by Labour. So to suggest it was national plans is a little bit shit and a lot of a fabrication.

A sanctuary was the subject of a Green Party member's bill and a Government bill under the previous Government, but it was put on ice to try to resolve objections and a legal challenge by Te Ohu Kaimoana, the Maori Fisheries Commission.
A solution to a sanctuary issue is included in Labour-NZ First agreement as well as the Labour-Greens one, but this morning NZ First MP Shane Jones said the parties were no closer to a solution.

[Graystone]

Yay! Jordan Peterson is coming to NZ. Another priceless opportunity for the woke left to make utter cunts of themselves.... aaaand here's the first hit piece written by this charming wide eyed twelve year old intern.

https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/world/2018/08/who-is-jordan-peterson-a-guide-to-the-next-controversial-canadian-to-grace-our-shores.html

If you'd prefer something written by an adult with an IQ somewhere over double figures....

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/08/why-the-left-is-so-afraid-of-jordan-peterson/567110/

Hit piece indeed, nobody would be so stupid as to:

"proposed a system of 'enforced monogamy' in which women are given to men as sexual partners in order to prevent such acts of violence." after a "a member of the 'incel' community drove a van into a crowd in Toronto and killed 10 people".

Lets hope he learns the lesson from them other fuckwits and books a street corner worthy of his views.

[carbonhed]

Hit piece indeed, nobody would be so stupid as to:

"proposed a system of 'enforced monogamy' in which women are given to men as sexual partners in order to prevent such acts of violence." after a "a member of the 'incel' community drove a van into a crowd in Toronto and killed 10 people".

Lets hope he learns the lesson from them other fuckwits and books a street corner worthy of his views.

You get more retarded with every breath.

[Laava]

Was on the TV news a day or two ago.

Cunt remember which channel.

Fallopian. It was the fallopian tube...

[Ocean1]

Pardon..... Nationals plans...National didn't support it when the greens introduced it as a private members bill a few years before that. Prior to that is was introduced by Labour. So to suggest it was national plans is a little bit shit and a lot of a fabrication.

Yep, the sanctuary was initially proposed by Green MP Gareth Hughes. And it looks very like National was the only party with concrete plans to commit to the creation of the sanctuary. So you'd have to be a very special sort of environmental advocacy organisation to decide to flag all that in favour of supporting labour/winston first. Perhaps, as I suggested; one infected and parasitised by marxists....

https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/98122008/kermadec-ocean-sanctuary-put-on-ice-by-nz-first-catching-greens-unaware

"The 620,000 sq km Kermadec Ocean Sanctuary, announced by John Key at the United Nations in 2015, was hailed around the world and passed its first reading in Parliament unopposed.
But fishing companies and iwi bodies filed legal action opposing it, saying the sanctuary would deny them fishing rights agreed in Treaty settlements."

"NZ First, whose senior MPs are close to the fishing industry and whose campaign was partly bankrolled by players in the fishing industry, demanded Labour stop the sanctuary."

"The Kermadec sanctuary was one of the dealbreakers that swung negotiations in Labour's favour."

"fishing industry spokesman Charles Hufflett, a shareholder in family fishing company Solander, said the industry had lobbied NZ First to stop the sanctuary."

"NZ First leader Winston Peters and senior MP Shane Jones are intimately involved with the fishing industry. Fishing industry players associated with Talley's, Sealord, Simunovich and Vela Fishing have all donated to their campaigns, either this election or previously."

And just to prove the greens have absolutely zero credibility in... pretty much anything, they claim not to have been aware that their support of labour would be at the sacrifice of the biggest marine reserve ever created, in the largest oceanic economic zone on the planet. :laugh::laugh::laugh:

[Graystone]

You get more retarded with every breath.

I feel like that post went over your head.

[carbonhed]

I feel like that post went over your head.

Yeah don't worry this is not partisan.

[husaberg]

Yep, the sanctuary was initially proposed by Green MP Gareth Hughes.

Prior to that it introduced as a bill by labour do you not understand that?

but it was put on ice to try to resolve objections and a legal challenge by Te Ohu Kaimoana, the Maori Fisheries Commission.

[Ocean1]

Prior to that it introduced as a bill by labour do you not understand that?

but it was put on ice to try to resolve objections and a legal challenge by Te Ohu Kaimoana, the Maori Fisheries Commission.

News to me, last I heard labour were against it...

https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/kermadec-ocean-sanctuary-bill-introduced

I seem to recall that everyone thought it was a damned fine idea, though. Except the iwi fishing quota owners... Who heavied Winston. Who bought labour.

Is any of this actually unclear to you? 'Cause nobody else has the slightest doubt it was a popular policy, sold on the block in exchange for Winston's blessing.

[husaberg]

News to me, last I heard labour were against it...

https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/kermadec-ocean-sanctuary-bill-introduced

I seem to recall that everyone thought it was a damned fine idea, though. Except the iwi fishing quota owners... Who heavied Winston. Who bought labour.

Is any of this actually unclear to you? 'Cause nobody else has the slightest doubt it was a popular policy, sold on the block in exchange for Winston's blessing.

have look again the original bills by both Labour and the greens and lastly National were never able to proceed due to a legal challenge.
You are the one still trying to sell it as Nationals idea, Do you now finally understand and concede it was not and was never Nationals original idea.

[Ocean1]

have look again the original bills by both Labour and the greens and lastly National were never able to proceed due to a legal challenge.
You are the one still trying to sell it as Nationals idea, Do you now finally understand and concede it was not and was never Nationals original idea.

I showed you the only bill google had on it's first page of results relating to a kermadec reserve bill, and it was Nick Smith's.

Not, as I've already said, that I give a flying fuck who thought it was a good idea first, what, with not being a political party apologist an' all. I'm more interested, as I said, in how an obviously popular bill got sold for minority votes.

[husaberg]

I showed you the only bill google had on it's first page of results relating to a kermadec reserve bill, and it was Nick Smith's.

Not, as I've already said, that I give a flying fuck who thought it was a good idea first, what, with not being a political party apologist an' all. I'm more interested, as I said, in how an obviously popular bill got sold for minority votes.

thats the only current bill.
You dont now give a fuck whos idea it was now because you now know it was never Nationals original idea.

News to me, last I heard labour were against it...

https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/kermadec-ocean-sanctuary-bill-introduced

I seem to recall that everyone thought it was a damned fine idea, though. Except the iwi fishing quota owners... Who heavied Winston. Who bought labour.
Is any of this actually unclear to you? 'Cause nobody else has the slightest doubt it was a popular policy, sold on the block in exchange for Winston's blessing.

Nationals initial attempt to put the bill through was stymied by ACT not by NZ first so at least try to get one your facts straight.
https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/te-manu-korihi/313303/govt-to-delay-kermadec-ocean-sanctuary-bill

The Kermadec Ocean Sanctuary Bill is being delayed, after talks with Māori fishing representatives broke down and the ACT Party pulled its support. Te Ohu Kaimoana, which represents iwi fishing interests, said the government had rejected compromises to the bill creating the huge marine sanctuary around the Kermadec Islands.
The Kermadec Ocean Sanctuary, pictured along with other large marine protected areas in the Pacific.A map showing the planned Kermadec Ocean Sanctuary, along with other large marine protected areas in the Pacific.
After days of negotiations, it had walked away from the table - and would continue legal action in the High Court and Waitangi Tribunal on behalf of iwi.
Prime Minister John Key said the government still had the numbers to pass the legislation, but would delay the bill's passage until a solution was found.

[BuzzardNZ]

have look again the original bills by both Labour and the greens and lastly National were never able to proceed due to a legal challenge.
You are the one still trying to sell it as Nationals idea, Do you now finally understand and concede it was not and was never Nationals original idea.

I saw Crasher today, he says hi :) !

[carbonhed]

I saw Crasher today, he says hi :) !

WTF is up with him? Why isn't he on the MotoGP thread? It's just not the same.

[Ocean1]

thats the only current bill.
You dont now give a fuck whos idea it was now because you now know it was never Nationals original idea.


Nationals initial attempt to put the bill through was stymied by ACT not by NZ first so at least try to get one your facts straight.
https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/te-manu-korihi/313303/govt-to-delay-kermadec-ocean-sanctuary-bill




I'm glad you're so well informed as to what I think, in spite of my posts to the contrary.

It sort of makes up for the obvious lack of thinking on your own part wrt policy implementation in favour of blind partisanship.

[husaberg]

I'm glad you're so well informed as to what I think, in spite of my posts to the contrary.

It sort of makes up for the obvious lack of thinking on your own part wrt policy implementation in favour of blind partisanship.
so are you saying it wasnt ACT who stymied national bill in the first place.
Because thats what national said.

The Kermadec Ocean Sanctuary Bill is being delayed, after talks with Māori fishing representatives broke down and the ACT Party pulled its support.
Notice how you are pouring scorn on Winston peters but none on ACT for withdrawing support on Nationals first attempt when they were last in government.

[BuzzardNZ]

WTF is up with him? Why isn't he on the MotoGP thread? It's just not the same.

was banned with no explanation, more than likely due to some random complaint by that Husaburg arsehole.

[husaberg]

was banned with no explanation, more than likely due to some random complaint by that Husaburg arsehole.
That's horseshit,Its news to me that i can have people removed........

Crasher is doing just fine. He asked for his KB profile to be deleted after being put in the sinbin for reasons not apparent to him.

[BuzzardNZ]

That's horseshit,Its news to me that i can have people could be removed........

He is doing just fine! We discussed you for a bit and decided that you weren't worth talking about.:rolleyes:

[husaberg]

He is doing just fine! We discussed you for a bit and decided that you weren't worth talking about.:rolleyes:
but only two posts about me though awe...............

[Ocean1]

so are you saying it wasnt ACT who stymied national bill in the first place.
Because thats what national said.

Notice how you are pouring scorn on Winston peters but none on ACT for withdrawing support on Nationals first attempt when they were last in government.

Nope. You could tell if I was saying that, I'd be, like "it wasnt ACT who stymied national bill".

But you go right ahead and interpret what I say however makes you feel less insecure about labour's shady back room deals with Winston.

[husaberg]

Nope. You could tell if I was saying that, I'd be, like "it wasnt ACT who stymied national bill".

But you go right ahead and interpret what I say however makes you feel less insecure about labour's shady back room deals with Winston.


https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/kermadec-ocean-sanctuary-bill-introduced
everyone thought it was a damned fine idea, though. Except the iwi fishing quota owners... Who heavied Winston. Who bought labour.
Is any of this actually unclear to you? 'Cause nobody else has the slightest doubt it was a popular policy, sold on the block in exchange for Winston's blessing.

The Kermadec Ocean Sanctuary Bill is being delayed, after talks with Māori fishing representatives broke down and the ACT Party pulled its support.


ACT has pulled its support for the Kermadec Ocean Sanctuary Bill due to the Government’s failure to acknowledge the existing property rights of fishing operators.
“This Bill amounts to an uncompensated regulatory taking, likely to cause real harm to the livelihoods of those in the fishing industry,” says ACT Leader David Seymour. “Existing operators, both Maori and non-Maori, should be compensated for their losses at the very least, if not consulted before the fact.
“The Prime Minister has even admitted that the bill won’t protect fish as most commercial species are migratory – they can be caught once they leave the sanctuary. What it will do is cause enormous logistical difficulty for fishers.
“Nick Smith argues it’s okay because fishing in the area has been on a small scale. ACT disagrees. It’s not okay to pick on the little guys just because they’re the little guys.
“ACT is not opposed to marine sanctuaries – we just expect acknowledgement of existing property rights. Property rights used to be in National’s party principles. Now, the party’s website doesn’t mention them.”http://act.org.nz/act-pulls-support-for-kermadecs-bill/


I look forward to your post about how ACT is all owned by "Big Fishing"
You know just so you dont seem to be a massive hypocrite............
Then we should then have a conversation about Nationals little "partnership" with Fletchers


Aye, if they were tinged even slightly green they would have supported national's plans for a massive Kermadec marine sanctuary rather than leaping aboard labour's multi-party mashup waka.
They're far more about marxism than environmentalism, to the point where their environmental policy is a complete joke.


Pardon..... Nationals plans...National didn't support it when the greens introduced it as a private members bill a few years before that. Prior to that is was introduced by Labour. So to suggest it was national plans is a little bit shit and a lot of a fabrication.


Yep, the sanctuary was initially proposed by Green MP Gareth Hughes.
................ Nice one

[BuzzardNZ]

but only two posts about me though awe...............

There are plenty about you, all of them get down to one point, you're scum. Most of KB would agree.

[husaberg]

There are plenty about you, all of them get down to one point, you're scum. Most of KB would agree.
Three.........

[Ocean1]

I look forward to your post about how ACT is all owned by "Big Fishing"
You know just so you dont seem to be a massive hypocrite............
Then we should then have a conversation about Nationals little "partnership" with Fletchers






................ Nice one

Do try to keep up, ACT went the same way every other single-issue party went: they thought they could do compromise and not get burned. The current topic, however, is the green's choice to support labour, (in spite of the fact that national's environmental policies matched theirs more closely) and labour's willingness to sell their pre-election support of the sanctuary in order to become the govt. Wouldn't you say that was a particularly ironic slap in the face to anyone that voted for them based on the environmental portfolio of either party? Isn't that a pretty accurate and damning indictment of the current shape of MMP?

Is it too much to expect that you address the issue? Or will you continue to troll through your obviously extensive list of "historical national insults to your feelings" in order to attempt to prove that national is worse than labour? Here's an idea, how about you apply the same inane, interminable drivel about "big business's" support of national to the current "government" and see if it sticks there any better.

Or I guess you could continue to pretend I'm the national bogeyman, frantically try to put words in my mouth and then desperately defend "your team", no matter the cost to your credibility. It's a good thing you're in full straw man production, there's obviously no shortage of straws to grasp.

[carbonhed]

Do try to keep up, ACT went the same way every other single-issue party went: they thought they could do compromise and not get burned. The current topic, however, is the green's choice to support labour, (in spite of the fact that national's environmental policies matched theirs more closely) and labour's willingness to sell their pre-election support of the sanctuary in order to become the govt. Wouldn't you say that was a particularly ironic slap in the face to anyone that voted for them based on the environmental portfolio of either party? Isn't that a pretty accurate and damning indictment of the current shape of MMP?

Is it too much to expect that you address the issue? Or will you continue to troll through your obviously extensive list of "historical national insults to your feelings" in order to attempt to prove that national is worse than labour? Here's an idea, how about you apply the same inane, interminable drivel about "big business's" support of national to the current "government" and see if it sticks there any better.

Or I guess you could continue to pretend I'm the national bogeyman, frantically try to put words in my mouth and then desperately defend "your team", no matter the cost to your credibility. It's a good thing you're in full straw man production, there's obviously no shortage of straws to grasp.

I salute your patience :-)

Ideological possession is a destroyer of souls.

"Fortunately, the epistemic immune system of most mentally healthy people protects them from ideological possession. The core of the immune response—and indeed an effective cure—is Love of Truth, specifically the holding of Truth as the highest moral value."

https://fee.org/articles/the-diagnosis-and-treatment-of-ideological-possession/

[Drew]

That's horseshit,Its news to me that i can have people could be removed........

I didn't even know the site was still moderated, let alone people being sin binned.

However Pete's sanctimony was grating on me something fierce, cock that he is.

[Ocean1]

I salute your patience :-)

Ideological possession is a destroyer of souls.

"Fortunately, the epistemic immune system of most mentally healthy people protects them from ideological possession. The core of the immune response—and indeed an effective cure—is Love of Truth, specifically the holding of Truth as the highest moral value."

https://fee.org/articles/the-diagnosis-and-treatment-of-ideological-possession/

Very relevant: https://fee.org/articles/the-ideology-behind-so-what-you-re-saying-is/

"It is tempting for both sides to just dismiss the other as “wrong” or “stupid,” but what we have to understand is that, in conversations on topics like this, the ideological divide has become so deep that, in a sense, both sides are speaking a different language. Thus, when someone like Cathy Newman hears someone like Dr. Peterson speak, she’s not just trying to manipulate the conversation by putting words in his mouth; her ideology actually leads her to hear what she claims he is saying."

[husaberg]

Do try to keep up, ACT went the same way every other single-issue party went: they thought they could do compromise and not get burned. The current topic, however, is the green's choice to support labour, (in spite of the fact that national's environmental policies matched theirs more closely) and labour's willingness to sell their pre-election support of the sanctuary in order to become the govt. Wouldn't you say that was a particularly ironic slap in the face to anyone that voted for them based on the environmental portfolio of either party? Isn't that a pretty accurate and damning indictment of the current shape of MMP?

Is it too much to expect that you address the issue? Or will you continue to troll through your obviously extensive list of "historical national insults to your feelings" in order to attempt to prove that national is worse than labour? Here's an idea, how about you apply the same inane, interminable drivel about "big business's" support of national to the current "government" and see if it sticks there any better.

Or I guess you could continue to pretend I'm the national bogeyman, frantically try to put words in my mouth and then desperately defend "your team", no matter the cost to your credibility. It's a good thing you're in full straw man production, there's obviously no shortage of straws to grasp.
defend my team you are confusing your view with mine. the only reason this was even brought up by you in the first place was "your team"had another loss.
you never brought it up when the green party failed to pass the essentually same bill and national was in power now did you.
In fact the whole 9 years National was in power i dont recall you saying anything but purely positive things about how great national was.
But since National lost the electection, NZ first votes against a bill intoduced by National in your mind its purely because its beholding to the Fishing lobby you state it as being a fact.
Something i bet you would never say in a paper for fear of being sued.
Act votes the exact same way gives the exact same reason on essentially the same bill previously, yet they dont get accused of the same by you. in fact far from it. you now defend it as being a different mater entirely.
You are a hypocrite.

[carbonhed]

Very relevant: https://fee.org/articles/the-ideology-behind-so-what-you-re-saying-is/

"It is tempting for both sides to just dismiss the other as “wrong” or “stupid,” but what we have to understand is that, in conversations on topics like this, the ideological divide has become so deep that, in a sense, both sides are speaking a different language. Thus, when someone like Cathy Newman hears someone like Dr. Peterson speak, she’s not just trying to manipulate the conversation by putting words in his mouth; her ideology actually leads her to hear what she claims he is saying."

It's an alarming rabbit hole that I keep skimming past without crossing the event horizon. The humanities have a lot to answer for.

[Ocean1]

Lets See NZ first votes against a bill in your mind its purely because its beholding to the Fishing lobby you state it as being a fact.
Act votes the exact same way gives the exact same reason on esentually the same bill previously yet they dont get accused of the same by you. in fact far from it.
You are a hypocrite.

Yeah, about that "let's see"... You don't. Ever. You fabricate something that suits your narrative. Badly.

As in: me straight up reporting what the article said, (you can go ahead and read it any time you like, or you could just read my comments on it, same thing) and you immediately launching into "must attack bogyman" mode. I didn't comment on ACT because they weren't mentioned in the article, their votes on the matter were ancient history and it had nothing to do with either the green's incompetence, labours back door deal with Winston in the recent "election" or the utter failure of MMP to provide anything resembling what's written on the lablel.

But fuck national just as hard as you can, by all means. :laugh::laugh::laugh:

[Ocean1]

It's an alarming rabbit hole that I keep skimming past without crossing the event horizon. The humanities have a lot to answer for.

We could always stop subsidising them, it's not as if the average BA grad is capable of actually convincing anyone to pay them for anything they produce.

Must make sure the daughter gets to accidentally see above...

[husaberg]

Yeah, about that "let's see"... You don't. Ever. You fabricate something that suits your narrative. Badly.

As in: me straight up reporting what the article said, (you can go ahead and read it any time you like, or you could just read my comments on it, same thing) and you immediately launching into "must attack bogyman" mode. I didn't comment on ACT because they weren't mentioned in the article, their votes on the matter were ancient history and it had nothing to do with either the green's incompetence, labours back door deal with Winston in the recent "election" or the utter failure of MMP to provide anything resembling what's written on the lablel.

But fuck national just as hard as you can, by all means. :laugh::laugh::laugh:
Okay show me a post you made that was critical of National then. If i am fabricating your narrative you should have hundreds of them.
Your whining about Peters now is sour grapes. I say this as you never moaned about him when he was in coalition with National.
As for your claim of Labours pre election promise of support go ahead and show me it.
Because the only thing i can find is one from 2011 and one from Andrew Little
where he clearly said
he Labour Party has joined the Maori Party in reconsidering its support for a law change which will establish a massive marine sanctuary in the Kermadec Islands.

Labour leader Andrew Little said his party was "very concerned" about a legal challenge by Maori fisheries group Te Ohu Kaimoana, which said the Kermadec Ocean Sanctuary breached a historic fisheries agreement between iwi and the Crown.

"We haven't got to the point of withdrawing our support but we certainly ... share those concerns," Mr Little said at Parliament today.

"We'll have a reconsideration in due course about what our stance on the bill is."
Jacinta said this
“Our intention is to work alongside Māori and use our best endeavours to achieve the Kermadec Sanctuary. We will be seeking consensus and agreement with our support parties to find a resolution,” .
Acts vote was against the same bill for the same reason given by NZF yet despite me pointing this out to you you claim now its ancient history how come you cant bring yourself to accuse ACT of the same crime. Until i pointed it out you claimed the Reserve was all nationas idea when it clearly was introduced as a bill first by labour and then by the Green party.
As for backroom deals National couldn't form a government Labour did. National attempted to enter a deal with NZF they couldn't.
Get over it or at the very least stop posting such hypocritical commentary ever time national loses face. Because there is at least a few more years to come of more national party failures in store.
The reason National couldn't get the bill passed is pretty clear they dont have the votes or the support needed to pass a bill into law.
Personally i would like the reserve established but you have to sort out the other issues first to make sure it is not challenged in the courts and results in years more compensation challenges, but don't let that fact get in the way. Because thats why act never voted in favour of it last time and why NZF didn't this time either.
PS i am not fucking National they are doing it all by themselves. the only reason they are grandstanding on this one is they cant even get a mention on the telly now and their leader is struggling in the polls.

but not when it comes to raising campaign funds though.



Simon Bridges has sent a strong message to the party about his popularity amongst deep-pocketed supporters after hauling in $120,000 in donations.
Companies connected to Bay of Plenty rich lister Paul Adams, who last year had an estimated worth of $135 million, donated $31,000 to Bridges to contest the safe Tauranga seat, and $50,000 to the National Party. Regional roading concerns were top of mind for Adams when he made his decision to donate.
"As the Minister of Transport we wanted to make sure he was doing his bit for our region," Adams said.
Bridges said his donation haul was a reflection of how hard he had worked and lobbied for his home turf.
"The value that [the community has] gotten out of the last government, that they have put their money where their mouth is."The value that [the community has] gotten out of the last government, that they have put their money where their mouth is.




National Party received three times more money in donations than Labour in 2017
The National Party received almost $4.6 million in donations in the lead up to the last election – three times more money than it was allowed to spend in the campaign.
It received a one-off $150,000 donation from a company called Inner Mongolia Rider Horse Industry. The company, founded by fast food mogul Lang Lin,
National also received a $100,000 donation from Auckland-based company Alpha Laboratories, and four separate donations totalling $19,770 from Alpha health care, which is also an Auckland-based company but with different shareholders.
ong-time ACT and National Party donor Lianna Hagaman donated a total of $28,765.75, spread across four donations. Lianna (Lani) Hagaman is the wife and business partner of the late-Christchurch rich-lister Earl Hagaman.
Business media rich-lister Barry Colman also gave a healthy sum, along with property investor Philip Hong, Heartland Bank, Gibbston Valley Winery, and alcohol lobby group Spirits NZ.
The party received two donations over $1500 from overseas, which it had to disclose. One was a $4000 donation from someone called Xinyuan Zhang; the other was almost $50,000 from Australian company Go-Airlie.
Meanwhile, a group called Timaru Nationalist Trust also donated $20,000 to National. There is no trust by this name listed in New Zealand's trusts and societies register.

[Ocean1]

Okay show me a post you made that was critical of National then. If i am fabricating your narrative you should have hundreds of them.
Your whining about Peters now is sour grapes. I say this as you never moaned about him when he was in coalition with National.
As for your claim of Labours pre election promise of support go ahead and show me it.
Because the only thing i can find is one from 2011 and one from Andrew Little
where he clearly said
Jacinta said this
Acts vote was against the same bill for the same reason given by NZF yet despite me pointing this out to you you claim now its ancient history how come you cant bring yourself to accuse ACT of the same crime. Until i pointed it out you claimed the Reserve was all nationas idea when it clearly was introduced as a bill first by labour and then by the Green party.
As for backroom deals National couldn't form a government Labour did. National attempted to enter a deal with NZF they couldn't.
Get over it or at the very least stop posting such hypocritical commentary ever time national loses face. Because there is at least a few more years to come of more national party failures in store.
The reason National couldn't get the bill passed is pretty clear they dont have the votes or the support needed to pass a bill into law.
Personally i would like the reserve established but you have to sort out the other issues first to make sure it is not challenged in the courts and results in years more compensation challenges, but don't let that fact get in the way. Because thats why act never voted in favour of it last time and why NZF didn't this time either.
PS i am not fucking National they are doing it all by themselves. the only reason they are grandstanding on this one is they cant even get a mention on the telly now and their leader is struggling in the polls.

Be fucked, if you want proof I'm the bogyman you can find it yourself.

In the meantime, I'll point out that I'm not the one representing political ideologies, I'm pointing to any policy changes immediately after any election that's as fraudulent as any shyster's handshake, no matter who perpetrated it.

Now why is it seemingly impossible to have you comment on the latest, most historically egregious example, where major POST ELECTION policy changes were implemented by three of the lower polling parties in exchange for the corner office? Ohyeah, I forgot, you're ideologically blind to anything that threatens your marxist world view.

The fact remains: had the greens done a deal with national they'd have their kermadec reserve. The voters would have what they voted for. That the political influence behind the bill's failure is iwi owned fisheries business interests is obvious to everyone, except, apparently you. If that doesn't at least raise a few red flags about the political accountability to the voting public the current incarnation of MMP represents then you're beyond all hope, comrade.

[husaberg]

Be fucked, if you want proof I'm the bogyman you can find it yourself.

In the meantime, I'll point out that I'm not the one representing political ideologies, I'm pointing to any policy changes immediately after any election that's as fraudulent as any shyster's handshake, no matter who perpetrated it.

Now why is it seemingly impossible to have you comment on the latest, most historically egregious example, where major POST ELECTION policy changes were implemented by three of the lower polling parties in exchange for the corner office? Ohyeah, I forgot, you're ideologically blind to anything that threatens your marxist world view.

The fact remains: had the greens done a deal with national they'd have their kermadec reserve. The voters would have what they voted for. That the political influence behind the bill's failure is iwi owned fisheries business interests is obvious to everyone, except, apparently you. If that doesn't at least raise a few red flags about the political accountability to the voting public the current incarnation of MMP represents then you're beyond all hope, comrade.

You wont provide proof as you dont have post where you have criticised National
There was no policy change after the election. Labours reticence until it was cleared up legally was signaled prior to the election.
Provide proof if you have some because i have shown what was Labours Stance prior to the election.

The Labour Party has joined the Maori Party in reconsidering its support for a law change which will establish a massive marine sanctuary in the Kermadec Islands.

Labour leader Andrew Little said his party was "very concerned" about a legal challenge by Maori fisheries group Te Ohu Kaimoana, which said the Kermadec Ocean Sanctuary breached a historic fisheries agreement between iwi and the Crown.
"We haven't got to the point of withdrawing our support but we certainly ... share those concerns," Mr Little said at Parliament today.

In the past both Labour and the Green supported the sanctuary, which would be the biggest in New Zealand waters. It was part of Labour's policy in 2014.
However, Labour put its support under review after Te Ohu Kaimoana - the Maori Fisheries Commission - mounted a legal challenge to the sanctuary in the High Court, arguing the legislation stripped fishing quota without consultation or compensation. That legal action is still underway.
Labour's support is likely to be conditional on the outcome of that.

The greens said this

National MP Nick Smith has lodged a member's bill banning all mining and fishing over 620,000 sq/km around the Kermadec Islands.
Dr Smith said he was confident the proposed law would have the support to pass, with National's 56 votes and the Green Party's eight.
"The Greens have indicated to me their support for any bill that would put the sanctuary in place," he said.
But a Green Party spokesperson said its MPs had yet to consider how they would vote on Dr Smith's bill.
The spokesperson said the party's priority was for the government to progress the scheme, as noted in its confidence and supply deal with Labour.
That agreement included a commitment to "use best endeavours and work alongside Māori" to establish the Kermadec Ocean Sanctuary.
"We'll have a reconsideration in due course about what our stance on the bill is."the government has put any legislation on hold until a resolution can be found that is satisfactory to all parties.
Dr Smith denied he was stirring up trouble and trying to drive a wedge between the government support parties.


The Green Party has continued to support the Kermadec Ocean Sanctuary, but said the failure to consult was unsatisfactory and fell short of what was expected under the Treaty of Waitangi. In a minority view on the select committee report into the bill, the Green Party said it was the up to either the courts or negotiations between iwi and the Te Ohu Kaimoana to resolve the claims that the bill breached Treaty rights and quota rights under the Fisheries Settlement legislation.

the only person arround here that is ideology blind is you.
The voters never voted for a kermadec reserve.
Here is a fact National never got enough votes to govern the country nor it seems do thay have the ability to even get the Green party to vote with them.
I note you constantly avoid the hypocrisy of your comments about NZF that don't apply to ACT.
As i said you have got to come to terms with your grief over National losing the election put it aside and realise in the real world people don't rush through laws that will be the subject of a legal challenge and in likely compensation in the future.

[oldrider]

The left and right have all been vaccinated with same needle - same game viewed from opposite sides of the same park - even if you all agree nothing much will change! :rolleyes:

[Ocean1]

You wont provide proof as you dont have post where you have criticised National
There was no policy change after the election. Labours reticence until it was cleared up legally was signaled prior to the election.
Provide proof if you have some because i have shown what was Labours Stance prior to the election.



The greens said this

the only person arround here that is ideology blind is you.
The voters never voted for a kermadec reserve.
Here is a fact National never got enough votes to govern the country nor it seems do thay have the ability to even get the Green party to vote with them.
I note you constantly avoid the hypocrisy of your comments about NZF that don't apply to ACT.
As i said you have got to come to terms with your grief over National losing the election put it aside and realise in the real world people don't rush through laws that will be the subject of a legal challenge and in likely compensation in the future.

So leme see, the bill, introduced by staunch labour stalwart Nick Smith, (:laugh:) was initially supported by teh green party, in line with their secondary environmental mantra, until fishing quota owners pulled the treaty card, at which point their justice warrior primary portfolio pulled rank and stomped all over it. But there was never any policy change. Oh, and at some point labour also bailed on their own bill. :laugh: But there wasn't any policy change there either. That about cover it?

You can tell NZ ideological indoctrination, it uses an exclusively partisan narrative. I, on the other hand, am simply pointing to odious behaviour and condemning it. I'd do the same of any half baked post election policy mash up, but, yet again: the latest back room deal is the most egregious example to date, how come you're happy that wasn't what was voted on?

I mean, obviously it wouldn't be simply 'cause "your team won", 'cause when it comes to ideologically driven narratives that'd be a bit of a giveaway, wouldn't it?

I'm about done here dude, but if you can get your story straight about shit and have anything intelligent to say about how elections should work by deciding what we voted on after the fact then I'm all ears. :niceone:

[husaberg]

So leme see, the bill, introduced by staunch labour stalwart Nick Smith, (:laugh:) was initially supported by teh green party, in line with their secondary environmental mantra, until fishing quota owners pulled the treaty card, at which point their justice warrior primary portfolio pulled rank and stomped all over it. But there was never any policy change. Oh, and at some point labour also bailed on their own bill. :laugh: But there wasn't any policy change there either. That about cover it?

You can tell NZ ideological indoctrination, it uses an exclusively partisan narrative. I, on the other hand, am simply pointing to odious behaviour and condemning it. I'd do the same of any half baked post election policy mash up, but, yet again: the latest back room deal is the most egregious example to date, how come you're happy that wasn't what was voted on?

I mean, obviously it wouldn't be simply 'cause "your team won", 'cause when it comes to ideologically driven narratives that'd be a bit of a giveaway, wouldn't it?

I'm about done here dude, but if you can get your story straight about shit and have anything intelligent to say about how elections should work by deciding what we voted on after the fact then I'm all ears. :niceone:
Labours and the Greens reticence was prior to the election. the reticence was over the legal issues that National bill has not addressed.

The Green Party supports the Kermadec Ocean Sanctuary Bill (the Bill). It has long supported and campaigned for more extensive marine protection in the Kermadec region, including through a private member’s bill lodged in the ballot by Green MP, Gareth Hughes (https://www.greens.org.nz/ourpeople/gareth-hughes-mp). The geological and biodiversity values of the Kermadec region are extraordinary and internationally significant.

Sep 29 2015
Green Party environment spokeswoman Eugeanie Sage welcomed the announcement.
"We're delighted the Government has picked up the Kermadec ocean sanctuary concept that has been in a Green private member's Bill drafted by Gareth Hughes several years ago."
But it did not make up for the Government's "poor track record" on other environmental issues.

"We've still got the Maui's Dolphins to protect, water quality to improve, and National is taking an embarrassingly weak proposal on limiting New Zealand's greenhouse gas emissions to the Paris Climate Change Conference."
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/72497269/john-key-announces-one-of-the-worlds-largest-ocean-sanctuaries



This latest bill was introduced by National the previous two bills that were essentially the same were not.

All Nick smith has done is introduced a bill again in the vain hope it could cause trouble in a coalition government, it didn't.
All your ever post is national rhetoric not backed by facts.
If there was a mandate for the bill the bill would have gone through in the 9 years national was in government.
It didn't as the legal issues and court action were not settled.

[Katman]

Thank fuck he's found someone else to fixate on.

[Woodman]

Thank fuck he's found someone else to fixate on.

So you don't even try to disguise your attention seeking posts now?

[Graystone]

Very relevant: https://fee.org/articles/the-ideology-behind-so-what-you-re-saying-is/

"It is tempting for both sides to just dismiss the other as “wrong” or “stupid,” but what we have to understand is that, in conversations on topics like this, the ideological divide has become so deep that, in a sense, both sides are speaking a different language. Thus, when someone like Cathy Newman hears someone like Dr. Peterson speak, she’s not just trying to manipulate the conversation by putting words in his mouth; her ideology actually leads her to hear what she claims he is saying."

Exactly, we see it again and again with partisan politics and topics. It can be useful to question the policy/topic in detail to find the premise where things differ, it also exposes those opinions which are founded on irrational beliefs. The difference in premise can sometimes be used as a Rosetta Stone to translate discussions back into something meaningful. More often it seems this is not desired, as disagreement is seen to be more desirable, ala husaberg's blithering about red vs blue, and katman.

[carbonhed]

Some more interesting speakers coming to D'auckland. Douglas Murray and Dr Cornel West... what will "molotov" Morse and her cronies do?????????????

https://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/douglas-murray-heads-to-australia-alongside-dr-cornel-west/news-story/92f0ddad1a2e5d0516aa302e5d549485

[oldrider]

JTA report https://www.jta.org/2018/08/16/top-headlines/australian-lawmaker-calls-for-final-solution-to-muslim-immigration?utm_content=buffer39df1&JTA report utm_medium=social&utm_source=jtafacebook&utm_campaign=social

<iframe width="880" height="495" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/gHMR6l66DW4" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[Ocean1]

What do I need to do to vote for Don Brash as Kiwi of the year? :laugh:

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/106349066/weaver-may-throw-tv-out-the-window-if-don-brash-wins-nzer-of-the-year

[oldrider]

Here is an excellent 2003 BBC documentary on Israel’s nukes and WMDs, and its persecution of Mordechai Vanunu. This is an example of mainstream media actually doing real journalism instead of propaganda. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dk_6CCZ0gCY … We hear a lot about Iranian nuclear ambitions! - What about Israel - the constant accuser? :shutup:

<iframe width="280" height="210" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/dk_6CCZ0gCY" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Googled Where is Vanunu now?:- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mordechai_Vanunu

[carbonhed]

What do I need to do to vote for Don Brash as Kiwi of the year? :laugh:

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/106349066/weaver-may-throw-tv-out-the-window-if-don-brash-wins-nzer-of-the-year

Execute everybody on the various panels and take over as dictator probably. The sight of woke heads exploding throughout the country would definitely make all the trouble worthwhile though :banana:

ETA "Anyone could be nominated for an award and every year at least one nominee was popularising, he said." Yeah... I seriously fucking doubt he said that asshole.

[Drew]

What do I need to do to vote for Don Brash as Kiwi of the year? :laugh:

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/106349066/weaver-may-throw-tv-out-the-window-if-don-brash-wins-nzer-of-the-year

I agree that things look separatist now in the name of inclusion. Yes, that sentence is really contradictory. But if we dont all make special effort to get minorities involved, the outcome is worse.

I truly believe in total equality. I think the world would be a better place with no borders, acceptance should be unequivocal for all walks of life....and then I get stuck.

Both sides of the coin on which I'm stuck:

Alcohol is a mainstream addictive substance. Accepted by nearly all as a right of choice.

Meth on the other hand, is widely referred to with the same reaction as Hitler supporting.

I like meth. Had a few good shindigs with like minded folk who 'light a bowl' every now and again, to enhance the experience of enjoying each other's company and dropping inhibition.

So why cant I do it legally? We make up the majority of people who have imbibed. We dont hurt anyone, and we certainly don't do it when we have responsibilities in the next 48 hours.

Flip side to that, kiddy fiddlers prolly feel the same way. If we can accept LBGQT (I think the acronym is correct there), then they quite like think that one day they should be accepted also.

So universal acceptance isnt a reality...and my utopian civilization has just fallen entirely apart.

[Drew]

Execute everybody on the various panels and take over as dictator probably. The sight of woke heads exploding throughout the country would definitely make all the trouble worthwhile though :banana:

ETA "Anyone could be nominated for an award and every year at least one nominee was popularising, he said." Yeah... I seriously fucking doubt he said that asshole.

Are you speaking purely as an antagonist, or do you feel strongly enough about that to believe it?

PS, I'm just enough Heineken in, to be woke as fuck right now....it'll pass.

[BuzzardNZ]

I agree that things look separatist now in the name of inclusion. Yes, that sentence is really contradictory. But if we dont all make special effort to get minorities involved, the outcome is worse.

I truly believe in total equality. I think the world would be a better place with no borders, acceptance should be unequivocal for all walks of life....and then I get stuck.

Both sides of the coin on which I'm stuck:

Alcohol is a mainstream addictive substance. Accepted by nearly all as a right of choice.

Meth on the other hand, is widely referred to with the same reaction as Hitler supporting.

I like meth. Had a few good shindigs with like minded folk who 'light a bowl' every now and again, to enhance the experience of enjoying each other's company and dropping inhibition.


So why cant I do it legally? We make up the majority of people who have imbibed. We dont hurt anyone, and we certainly don't do it when we have responsibilities in the next 48 hours.

Flip side to that, kiddy fiddlers prolly feel the same way. If we can accept LBGQT (I think the acronym is correct there), then they quite like think that one day they should be accepted also.

So universal acceptance isnt a reality...and my utopian civilization has just fallen entirely apart.

seems like you're more than a little more messesd up than the things you mention :mellow::confused:

[carbonhed]

Are you speaking purely as an antagonist, or do you feel strongly enough about that to believe it?

PS, I'm just enough Heineken in, to be woke as fuck right now....it'll pass.

Was ironic dude. Of course I don't think we should execute everybody so Ocean can take over... I'd be waaay fucking better as dictator.

[Ocean1]

I agree that things look separatist now in the name of inclusion. Yes, that sentence is really contradictory. But if we dont all make special effort to get minorities involved, the outcome is worse.

It's called affirmative action, was all the rage in the US a generation ago.

Didn't work there either.

So here's the thing: almost everyone can agree that equal opportunities to advance your quality of life, and that of your family is a good thing. Almost the antitheses of slavery; the absolute right to make whatever you can of your life, AND the responsibility to accept whatever costs and benefits that entails.

But soooo many people conflate that with the argument that (insert minority group of your choice here) don't have quite as good a life as (insert designated capitalist meme here) and therefore shit ain't fair. They want equality of outcomes, regardless of personal choices.

They often point to certain Kiwi sub-cultures as being "disadvantaged" across generations. And insofar as some cultures teach their kids how to put themselves in an "advantaged" position better than others, they're right. But I sorta think the difference is mostly around the cultural perception of what money is. Unless you're actually taught that money is the result of personal productivity then you're always going to have this cargo cult style belief that you're entitled to your fair share, but that some rich prick's got yours.

So in all of the redistribution of wealth, all of the contemporary justifications in favour of one social welfare scheme or targeted subsidy or another, no matter what you personally think about it, one thing remains true: for everything received without having earned it there's someone that earned it that had it taken from them.

No matter how acceptable you find that, you have to ask yourself whether just the most productive 10% or so of the country are quite as happy to have had that much of their earnings taken from them. Beyond a certain point democracy devolves into the majority voting themselves advantages at a direct cost to a minority. And the further we go down that rabbit hole the more it's presented by those on the taking side as the fair thing to do. It's just "the system" that allows rich pricks to accumulate wealth at the expense of the poor.

And the outcome? Read the news, those rich pricks simply either work less hard, or work elsewhere. Which pretty much defines the limit to how "progressive" you can get before the positive feedback effect of discouraging productivity results in less money for everyone. It's cyclic. And it's disappointing, because if we simply focused on teaching everyone the best way they can be as productive as they want or need to be and that they're responsible for their own shit we'd all be a fucking sight better off.

TLDR? Stop expecting others to be responsible for the cost of choices you made.

[Ocean1]

Was ironic dude. Of course I don't think we should execute everybody so Ocean can take over... I'd be waaay fucking better as dictator.

Oh fuck yeah, I keep expecting people to behave in their own best interest, in spite of decades of evidence to the contrary.

Edit: There's scope for some executions though. And maybe some decent smacks around the head here and there...

[jasonu]

What do I need to do to vote for Don Brash as Kiwi of the year? :laugh:

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/106349066/weaver-may-throw-tv-out-the-window-if-don-brash-wins-nzer-of-the-year

That lady looks as maori as the Queen of Englands tits.

[Berries]

I'd tap it.

[jasonu]

I'd tap it.

I wouldn't even use yours...

[carbonhed]

I agree that things look separatist now in the name of inclusion. Yes, that sentence is really contradictory. But if we dont all make special effort to get minorities involved, the outcome is worse.

I truly believe in total equality. I think the world would be a better place with no borders, acceptance should be unequivocal for all walks of life....and then I get stuck.

Both sides of the coin on which I'm stuck:

Alcohol is a mainstream addictive substance. Accepted by nearly all as a right of choice.

Meth on the other hand, is widely referred to with the same reaction as Hitler supporting.

I like meth. Had a few good shindigs with like minded folk who 'light a bowl' every now and again, to enhance the experience of enjoying each other's company and dropping inhibition.

So why cant I do it legally? We make up the majority of people who have imbibed. We dont hurt anyone, and we certainly don't do it when we have responsibilities in the next 48 hours.

Flip side to that, kiddy fiddlers prolly feel the same way. If we can accept LBGQT (I think the acronym is correct there), then they quite like think that one day they should be accepted also.

So universal acceptance isnt a reality...and my utopian civilization has just fallen entirely apart.

Well it's probably a good thing your utopian vision fell apart at the planning stage because the implementation and realisation phases usually involve tens of millions of corpses piling up and stinking the place out. Check out the 20thC.

No borders... aaand you really think you and yours will be better off under that system???????????????? I don't really know your situation but being part of the global 1% income and asset wise is almost certainly within your reach. Here and now.

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/050615/are-you-top-one-percent-world.asp

I'm sorry our society frowns on your meth use but the West has evolved with alcohol being our drug of choice... shitty drug of choice TBH... but meth doesn't strike me as being much superior. Legalising cannabis? Prolly get behind that... there's still costs and benefits to be weighed though.

[oldrider]

Bill Cooper:- What he said. http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=174920 - was he right? :rolleyes:

[Katman]

www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/tv-radio/106407948/tvnz-doco-claiming-celts-were-here-before-mori-has-been-removed-from-ondemand-service

[Woodman]

www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/tv-radio/106407948/tvnz-doco-claiming-celts-were-here-before-mori-has-been-removed-from-ondemand-service

They put it on demand under the heading "documentary" where it should have been under the heading "For fuckwits".

[Ocean1]

They put it on demand under the heading "documentary" where it should have been under the heading "For fuckwits".

It's probably got as much credibility as any other contemporary "documentary" not involving Attenborough.

Journalists, they can't help themselves, they just have to sensationalise shit, and fuck the facts.

[Drew]

www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/tv-radio/106407948/tvnz-doco-claiming-celts-were-here-before-mori-has-been-removed-from-ondemand-service

It's your belief that this piece of shit being removed is somehow an infringement of free speech?

[Katman]

It's your belief that this piece of shit being removed is somehow an infringement of free speech?

Have you watched any of the documentary Drew?

[husaberg]

Have you watched any of the documentary Drew?
Why don't you Give us all a synopsis of the facts contained in the "documentary"

[Drew]

Have you watched any of the documentary Drew?

Short bits.

Have you avoided my question for any reason?

I'm not commenting on the program at all.

[eldog]

Short bits.

Have you avoided my question for any reason?

I'm not commenting on the program at all.

He hasn’t watched it, just wants somebody else to summarise it for him.
or he will slowly drip feed husa or TDL et al arguments
why bother?