Open mike 09/07/2016

Written By: notices and features - Date published: - 86 comments
Categories: open mike

openmikeOpen mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose. The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step up to the mike …

86 comments on “Open mike 09/07/2016”

Comment numbers have changed to permanent references. Older quoted numbers may no longer identify the same comment.

  1. 1

    John Key is the strongest argument I know for the reintroduction of the checks and balances of an upper house of traditional western democracy – removed not by popular vote but by national party members dubbed a ‘suicide squad’ in 1951.

    2. 1.2

      Why do people always think that an upper house works?

      There’s very clear evidence from around the world that an upper house is just as dysfunctional as the lower house and thus causes even more problems.

      It’s not an upper house that we need but more democracy with policies being set by the people and not by political parties. We need the people to be able to hold the politicians to account. John Key should have been in jail in 2007 for his lies and attempt at insider trading with his Transrail shares.

      1. 1.2.1

        +1 Draco – what sort of country are we, when you can have a ‘blind trust’ as a politician?

        We are still waiting for Key’s tax returns.

        And very suspicious that Key was so pro the NZ tax havens, has money in tax havens, his lawyer who is not a lawyer is a tax haven broker and IRD was not allowed to investigate tax havens. Then his white washed report, means he wants to wait a year or two before taking action on the NZ tax havens. Make them public immediately!

        Hmmm, Key never does anything for nothing, so we can pretty much guarantee what is in the NZ tax havens…

        It took 13 years to get some action on Blair so I guess Key will join his mates offshore once he’s fleeced the country to it’s brink.

        1. 1.2.1.1

          You are slipping save nz, you forgot to mention Key’s involvement in the human organ black market, the dungeon below his house where he keeps all his sex slaves!

          Don’t you also find it strange John Key is supporting Helen Clark in her UN bid? maybe they have some business dealings that will pay off once Clark is the UN bigwig? heck maybe I am onto something here…

            1. 1.2.1.1.1.1

              They are in cahoots. Clark endorsed Key’s presentation of the TPPA to the NZ public and Key endorsed Clark’s bid for UNSG.

              Not dodgy, just nauseating.

    1. 4.1

      Yep, that’s the kind of shit that really should have made Hillary unpopular with Democrats, but doesn’t. That will largely be viewed by a lot of Americans as rightfully getting something back out of Iraq in return for what it has cost them.

        2. 4.1.1.2

          http://watchingthewatchers.org/news/624/iraq-war-cost-little-and-iraq-oil

          http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Backchannels/2011/1222/Iraq-war-Predictions-made-and-results

          http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/12/leadup-iraq-war-timeline

          and lets not forget this little doozy by Condi Rice

          http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/23/opinion/why-we-know-iraq-is-lying.html

          “Last week’s finding by inspectors of 12 chemical warheads not included in Iraq’s declaration was particularly troubling. In the past, Iraq has filled this type of warhead with sarin — a deadly nerve agent used by Japanese terrorists in 1995 to kill 12 Tokyo subway passengers and sicken thousands of others. Richard Butler, the former chief United Nations arms inspector, estimates that if a larger type of warhead that Iraq has made and used in the past were filled with VX (an even deadlier nerve agent) and launched at a major city, it could kill up to one million people. Iraq has also failed to provide United Nations inspectors with documentation of its claim to have destroyed its VX stockpiles.

          Many questions remain about Iraq’s nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and arsenal — and it is Iraq’s obligation to provide answers. It is failing in spectacular fashion. By both its actions and its inactions, Iraq is proving not that it is a nation bent on disarmament, but that it is a nation with something to hide. Iraq is still treating inspections as a game. It should know that time is running out.

          Drawing (Bill Russell)
          Condoleezza Rice is the national security adviser.”

    1. 6.1

      +100 good article…but does not mention Cameron’s role in the NATO bombing of sovereign country Libya along with Sarkozy and Clinton…more war crimes!…

      (and more refugees fleeing to Europe…more strength to ISIS in Libya)

      http://www.globalresearch.ca/flashback-to-2011-libyas-liberators-sarkozy-cameron-and-erdogan-congratulate-nato/5477074

      http://www.france24.com/en/20160311-obama-cameron-sarkozy-libya-mess-gaddafi-france-uk

      http://www.mintpressnews.com/wikileaks-hillary-clinton-helped-topple-gadhafi-france-uk-fought-libyas-oil/215104/

    2. 7.2

      That post you link to ianmac is a very important one. Some years back I did the same research and concluded that John Key definitely has some serious questions to answer on this.

      I saw the same source evidence for myself and I’ve never seen anything remotely like a rational explanation. Also Traverev was onto it at the time as well. (OK not everyone here likes her, but she’s not always wrong either.)

      Full credit to Politically Corrected for writing this up.

      1. 7.2.1

        For Key it would be damaging even amongst his believers, if it was proven that he worked hard to amass millions by trading NZ dollars and nearly bankrupting NZ in 1987. He did work for Krieger who engineered the raid on NZ.
        And to lie to the SFO is a serious offence.

  8. 8

    Watkins column in today’s Press compares what John Key has but Andrew Little hasn’t got. ..”charisma”
    How shallow can journalists get? ….’Charisma’ is a PR generated myth, a trait held by Mugabe, Lassie the dog and Lady Gaga (although I must admit the latter can actually sing).

    I didn’t read the rest of her column but I’ll bet Watkins didn’t talk about integrity, sincerity or honesty.Can’t let facts upset a good argument.

    2. 8.2

      “’Charisma’ is a PR generated myth, a trait held by Mugabe, Lassie the dog and Lady Gaga (although I must admit the latter can actually sing).”

      What makes you think Mugabe can’t sing ?

    3. 8.3

      Tracy Watkins had the hatchet today out to write off Andrew Little, while saying everything about John Key is fine and dandy. Infuriating. What is charisma if there is no integrity and decency. Smiling and waving on the outside while being totally hollow and shallow on the inside – that is Key.

  11. 11

    Key is purely carrying on Roger Douglas’s work on the Neoliberal Experiment, soon we will all be serfs to the 1% percenters they have asset stripped the Nation’s assets which have been built up over the past 175 years paid for by the NZ Taxpayers, and we are still $120 Billion in the Red. Go Figure?

  12. 12

    Beware of people with charisma, firstly they are in love with themselves and preoccupied with the self, possibly psychopathic as well. The world has had many charismatic people who have used that trait to better their agenda. One comes to mind – Adolf Hitler, now he may not have won a beauty contest but he brought in the crowds, rallied a country to his bidding and dated pretty blondes – look what his legacy is. Mugabe is another, ugly as sin but he has that x-factor which bodes no goodwill towards his people. Mr Clinton bless his heart was sex on a stick (or so the females thought of him) but his Foundation along with his missus is very suspect for the health of the US. Heaps of people end up in positions of responsibility all because they have that x-factor. We keep being conned into their winning ways and will forever be conned. Our PM, now he’s another one with the supposed charisma gene – me personally, I never got it at all, but he still has traction and oddly enough I think its mainly males who think he is the bees knees, I may be wrong but none of my female acquaintances think he has it going for him at all.

    1. 12.1

      Beware of people with charisma, firstly they are in love with themselves and preoccupied with the self, possibly psychopathic as well.
      QFT

  14. 14

    The Key (C-T) strategy is :
    When there is good news..be seen….When there is bad news, hide in the shadows and don’t be seen ,(or hide in the sun in Hawaii)

    Redcliffs saga.
    Yesterday was posted, “Redcliffs voters might well remember who fought to keep their school open – Their Labour MP, Ruth Dyson or the wannabee hiding quietly in the shadows?”

    Q-Guess where the wannabe’s big advertising camper-van is now?
    A- No longer hiding in the shadows but parked triumphantly right outside the gates of Redcliffs School.

    (Key ( C-T) principles in action. Sadly, It’ll probably work..

  15. 15

    That’s a nice touch. On the Herald, Claire Trevett has written up the Labour plan. (sarc)Of course she does fish out an English rebuttal from the past.
    But no big headline on the Herald.

  16. 16

    Now the Chilcott report has found Blair guilt of lying to the British people over Iraq in 2003, isn’t it about time the left summoned up the courage to question the intial lie?
    9/11.

    If Bush and Cheney could lie about Iraq, why is it not considered possible the story we were told about 9/11 is also a lie?

    1. 16.1

      Of course the official story we were told about 9/11 is a lie. Several 9/11 Commissioners also said that they were either lied to or their investigation blocked by US Government officials.

      But some people cannot stomach the fact that the authorities may have significantly misled them. Even knowing that is what authorities have done over and over again in history.

      Easier to believe that the only 3 steel framed skyscrapers to fail due to fire all did so on the same day, and all did so within a couple of hundred metres from each other, at near free fall speeds, virtually on to their own building foot prints.

        1. 16.1.1.1

          Not hostile, just fixed on fact. Though why an evidence free conservative conspiracy theory should get any traction on a left wing site is also a bit of a puzzle. There’s usually a frothy debate from 9/11 denialists every six months or so here at the Standard, but the singular lack of evidence for any of their wacky ideas (holograms anyone?), tends to make the discussions a bit one sided.

        2. 16.1.1.2

          hi paul, without wanting to poke sticks at anyone, i think there seems to be a fondness for the status quo, in folk who accept the government line re 9/11.

          1. 16.1.1.2.1

            A big difference is that a lot of the 9/11 truther claims are about topics where anyone in the general public with the relevant technical expertise can evaluate whether there’s any merit to them. So when the likes of Paul or CV keep repeating truther claims that I personally have enough expertise to debunk, and those claims have been repeatedly debunked by experts elsewhere, the only conclusion I can come to is they are utter fuckwits clinging to their unreason.

            The only aspects about 9/11 that I still have questions about are how much the various agencies knew about the hijackers beforehand, and how much government involvement there was in spiriting politically sensitive possible associates out of the country immediately afterwards. But even then, the likelier explanation for the dodgier allegations seems cock-up rather than conspiracy.

            1. 16.1.1.2.1.1

              And the couple of thousand architects and engineers who believe that a full new investigation into 9/11 needs to be undertaken?

              You’re smarter than all of them right?

              The 9/11 Commission members who said they were actively lied to and their investigations blocked by the US GOV – a Commission that had originally given only a couple of million dollars budget – imagine that! Barely enough money to buy one or two Abrams tanks with – their comments don’t mean anything to you.

              And the nanothermite residues spread all around downtown New York City – irrelevant, right?

              The huge lumps of molten steel which have been identified from the Twin Towers, as well as the massive underground heat which lasted for a couple of months after the towers came down – you explained that too right?

              And this highly experienced European buildings demolition contractor – your expertise outweighs his, right?

            2. 16.1.1.2.1.2

              the only conclusion I can come to is they are utter fuckwits clinging to their unreason

              Pffft. Andre, you’re a smart professional. Obviously all the architects and engineers who disagree with your views on 9/11 aren’t “utter fuckwits.”

              All people are asking for is a thorough new investigation and review of what happened on 9/11. That’s not very much to ask when we know that the original NIST reports and the 9/11 Commission left many questions unasked.

              1. 16.1.1.2.1.2.1

                It would be good if Andre actually rebutted just one of your points, rather than name calling.
                Is the left scared to ask questions about 9/11?
                And if so, why ?

                1. 16.1.1.2.1.2.1.1

                  Multiple successful cellphone calls were made by passengers from fast moving airliners which were well over 10,000 feet altitude. Some of these calls lasted for over a minute. This was beyond the technology used at the time. How were these calls made?

                  1. 16.1.1.2.1.2.1.1.1

                    Air defences completely failed to intercept any of the 4 planes.
                    A beginner pilot flies an almost impossible flight path into the Pentagon
                    The BBC reports WTC 7 collapses before it happens.

                    1. 16.1.1.2.1.2.1.1.1.1

                      Supposed 9/11 hijackers who turned up alive and well in the weeks and months after the event.

                      The steel skyscrapers symmetrically brought down by totally asymmetric structural, kerosene or office furnishings fires is simply the crowning BS on top of it all.

            4. 16.1.1.2.1.4

              Charles Kennedy and George Galloway were insulted as mad and bad when they questioned the official story about Iraq in 2003.
              Now they are vindicated.
              History will show that 9/11 was a similar fabrication

        3. 16.1.1.3

          If Bush and Cheney could lie about Iraq, why is it not considered possible the story we were told about 9/11 is also a lie?

          Well, firstly because the false basis for the casus belli against Iraq was swiftly uncovered, which makes it unlikely a much more complicated and wide-ranging conspiracy involving the 9/11 attacks would have held up for long, and secondly, because, you know, science, evidence, plausibility, regular shit like that. But you already know this, because it has to be repeated on threads at this site on a regular basis.

          1. 16.2.1.1.1

            The Chilcot report didn’t use that L word, but it did say that Blair knowingly and deliberately sold the public a false story about Saddam. That’s lying.

            1. 16.2.1.1.1.1

              The Chilcott report didn’t say Blair lied, so did Paul in his original comment knowingly and deliberately sell the TS public a false story about Blair? I don’t know, but I think we should be told 😉

              1. 16.2.1.1.1.1.1

                The Chilcot report said that Blair knowingly and deliberately sold the public a false story about the danger that Saddam posed. That’s lying. Not sure why you have a problem with that.

    1. 18.1

      The craziness that would occur is that it might take enough votes from Hillary that the technicolor golem ends up winning the presidency. You’d think 8 years of Bush the lesser instead of Gore would have been enough to hammer that lesson into the Greens, but evidently not.

      Just to be clear, if there was any possibility that a vote for the Green candidate (Stein or Sanders) in November would deliver any actual influence to a Green representative, I would absolutely vote for them. But it won’t. It can’t. The only possibilities in November are Clinton wins (which I don’t like the idea of, but I’ll vote for since it’s the best on offer), Trump wins (lord help us all if that utter disaster happens), or neither gets an Electoral College majority and the choice goes to the House of representatives (holy fuck!!!).

        1. 18.1.1.1

          So a racist, misogynist, billionaire one percenter is better.
          That explains a lot about where you’re currently at.

          You don’t sound like a friend to progressive left wing politics.
          Have you tried Kiwiblog or yournz? They seem more up your alley.

          1. 18.1.1.1.1

            Hi Peter Swift. There is no greater friend to the 0.01% than Killary. She backs the banksters, and she backs the corporate TPPA.

            The big $$$ donations to her campaign and to her foundation show why very clearly.

            In comparison, Trump has barely received 1/30th the money that she has.

              1. 18.1.1.1.1.1.1

                Sure, I get that. His campaign is very short on funds and he needs money.

                What I am saying is that the big banks and big corporates (Lockheed Martin etc) will typically donate serious money to both sides just in case, even if they have a favourite candidate.

                Up to this point however, they can’t even be bothered to throw Trump a bone. They are 100% backing Hillary.

                1. 18.1.1.1.1.1.1.1

                  Picking winners…

                  It’s not like these corps don’t back the Republican party ahead of the Democrats
                  https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/index.php?party=R&cycle=2016

                  No telling why they’re not backing Trump. I’d like to think it’s because they know his policies are either vacant, or that he has not plans to make them work, or idiotic.

                  (mind you, as well as preferring the republicans has someone other than Trump, I’d also prefer the Democrats had someone other than Clinton so don’t tag me as a Clinton fan).

            2. 18.1.1.1.1.2

              “She backs the banksters, and she backs the corporate TPPA.”

              And trump’s a racist, misogynist billionaire. And you support him.

              If it’s a battle of evils, Trump is always going to be the worst of the worst.
              Defend him, if you must, but it’s not a good look for your credibility.

              1. 18.1.1.1.1.2.1

                Trump will be a far better US President than Killary, and certainly far better for NZ and for the Asia Pacific.

                As for your personal ratings of credibility, who gives a fuck.

                1. 18.1.1.1.1.2.1.1

                  Well at least Peter Swift can comment truthfully on Trump, and I guess his rating of who is a credible candidate for US president is as valid as yours CV

    2. 18.2

      I reckon the Greens game here is to keep pressure on the Democrats to adopt more of Sanders’ agenda.

      1. 18.2.1

        I like that.
        I like it a lot more than Sanders ungracefully holding out inside the Democrats.
        Sanders should accept Stein’s offer, perpetuate his little democratic earthquake.

        1. 18.2.1.1

          Well, the threat can stay live until August, well after the Democrat convention. But actually accepting the offer might be a bit too much explosives in the offal pit.

  20. 20

    The Metro has an interesting column. Hope it is true.
    “Is the age of denial over?By Graham Adams.
    “The latest uproar over homelessness, Auckland house prices and immigration marks the end of an era when voters looked the other way at the government’s behest.

    … But in 21st century New Zealand so much is denied by the National-led government and so many problems swept under the carpet it has been almost impossible for many people to know what to believe, what is true or even what matters any more.

    According to our current government and its Denier-in-Chief John Key, there is no housing bubble or crisis in Auckland; record immigration is not a problem; the steel in our roading projects is fine; plummeting milk prices are not a huge worry because dairy constitutes only six per cent of the economy even if it is 20 per cent of exports and so on and so on.

    The list of denials is long. The only pressing problem that the government has enthusiastically and straightforwardly acknowledged in the mainstream media this year seems to have been the possibility of sexist slogans on the sides of Wicked Campers vans corrupting the minds of the young…..”
    http://www.metromag.co.nz/current-affairs/is-the-age-of-denial-over/

Comments are closed.