Having been away for some length of time I have just flicked through a series of NZ Herald cartoons as part of a catch up process.
Coming to them without any sense of context I have formed the following opinions. It seems to me that the individual cartoonist concerned is:
- Mildly sympathetic to Islamic terror.
- Anti police
- Strongly anti John Key and mildly hateful of the same
…with an obsessive hatred of the Whale Oil blog
Comment of the Day
cows4me, one of our stalwart supporters, reports in from rural New Plymouth
My spew today from the country, how this country is losing the plot and unless something is done by our piss weak city politicians and police there will be deaths.
At the present point in time there is a lot of stock rustling going on.
A local farmer lost three hundred sheep to rustlers the other night.
There were pictures, clear, of the rustlers but the cops will not act unless there are photos of rego numbers.
This is totally uneceptable, this from an organisation that is happy to steal money off people going more than one k over the limit.
Get your shit together police, politicians, we place our trust in you to protect us, you are failing our trust but I guess being richer is more important.
Philip Ross left this work of art in the comments yesterday – he picks apart master criminalÂ Phillip Smith’s escape plan
It is rather ironic that despite all the news articles about this criminal’s clever planning, he acted rather like Frank Spencer (for those under 30, of “Some Mothers Do Have Them”, a classic British comedy) once he departed our shores.
Mistake number one was travelling to his destination by air once he reached Santiago. It did not take long for the particulars of the onward travel to emerge once the Chilean authorities advised he had not entered Chile. If he entered Chile and almost immediately taken a bus across the Andes to Mendoza the trail would have been much more complex. Though there is a border crossing involved it is a land border. The Argentines would have accepted his passport and given him a tourist permit for 90 days. From Mendoza he could have travelled, again by road to the north of Argentina, possibly to a town such as Posadas.
To confuse the authorities again, he could have crossed to Paraguay. Even better as far as he would be concerned, a few crisp George Washingtons and the Paraguayan authorities would probably not care whether he had a passport or not. Land crossings are often far laxer than airports. I have seen a British girl cross from Peru into Bolivia without a passport as hers had been stolen the previous night. Apprised of the problem, the bus driver just kept her on the bus and drove across the border while the remainder of the passengers went in to have their passports stamped. Nobody seemed to notice. Finally, if his destination were Rio, he could cross a few days later from Ciudad del Este into Brazil and make his way overland to Rio. Read more »
From yesterday’s post on the statistical nature of child poverty, a super-annuitant runs his/her own numbers…
Reading the comments below made me think. So I checked what I’m getting from National Super. SORTED’s advice is that “The after-tax NZ Super rate for couples (who both qualify) is based on
66% of the â€˜average ordinary time wageâ€™ after tax. For single people,
the after-tax NZ Super rate is around 40% of that average wage.”
Does this mean that all we superannuitants are below the poverty line? A married couple certainly gets less ($29,000) than 60% of the median – which HunuaRanger has identified at being $41,000.
Talk about child poverty – if thats a problem, then ‘elder abuse’ is also rampant!!
But maybe there is, as has been said by several posters, only ‘statistical’ child poverty?
How did our national security become such a partisan issue?
In comparison, the opposition in Australia have just been quick to acknowledge that some things are more important than scoring political hits. Donâ€™t Cunliffe and Norman sit on the security committee?
Our PM isnâ€™t protecting a â€˜Nat Governmentâ€™, he is protecting THE Government, all 120 something politicians of all stripes, and rebutting the accusations that have been levelled against THE Government.
I agree that questions can and should be asked, but one of the ways we protect our national security is to ensure bipartisan consensus. If the incumbent government had to rush through some legislative changes to protect NZ then fine, now let the bipartisan security committee manage the issues over time.
People are letting their growing hatred of the incumbent leadership of NZ cloud their judgement, which appears to me to simply be an inevitable polarisation the longer one party stays in power. There is certainly an â€˜itâ€™s our turnâ€™ mentality built into the Westminster system, so this is almost
understandable. Read more »
MAWG wrote a pearler this morning
If a persons right to privacy in their communications is now to be predicated by their politics, and the concept of public interest, then we are at the precipice of a slippery slope.
Some will argue, what is the difference between what the news organisations are doing and what the SIS and GCSB does. Last time I checked, the SIS and GCSB do not run a daily newspaper or make news bulletins.
Others say, what is the difference to what Cameron did with the Labour Website and this hack. What Cameron did, is point out that Labours website was insecure, but he did not release any private information.
What was done to Cameron, was illegal. Some would argue that releasing the name of convicted sex offenders was in the public interest, yet Cameron was convicted of breaching the law. There is a double standard here. I restate my earlier point.
A person’s right to privacy should not be predicated by their politics.
Media organisation enjoy special protections in law.
A precedent has been set the last month or so.
Will this be a low to which we’ll not return for a long time? Â Or is this the new benchmark?
If the latter, politicians, business people and media people should all expect to be subject to this at some stage.
My only “complaint” about Whaleoil is how much time it takes out of my day, every day! I try to spend less time here, but cannot help it, it is so informative. My wife just rolls her eyes and says “not on there again ….”. Being enlightened with an alternative view from what is otherwise given by so called journalists has been quite illuminating.
Previously I may have considered voting further left, but now see how critical for NZ’s future that National do win and carry on their good work. Read more »
One thing about the debate that is starting to come out. During the ad breaks, Cunliffe conferred with his entourage. Apparently he came in with 5 minders, who kept giving him talking points, information and the like, while Key only came with a press secretary, who he didn’t run to every ad break.
I have been listening to Tim Foulkes on ZB, who has said that when Cunliffe comes in for an interview, he is always with a minder who feeds him information and lines.
Cunliffe is a puppet. Get him away from his minders, and watch him flounder. One on One, he would be toast. He needs his posse with him.
Whaleoil regular MAWG writes
I have a question for the MSM. In 2011, private info from the ACC were inadvertantly released due to a failure to secure private information. As a result, the ministry, and the minister concerned, Judith Collins, were castgated in the media for weeks, while the person who received the information, and used it to their own ends, got off scot free.
in 2012, Kieth Ng, a freelance journalist using MSD self service kiosks found ways to access unsecured private information. As a result, the ministry, and the minister and the PM were castigated in the media for the failure of the system, just as they were with the ACC. Ng was not challenged in any way by the media.
But when Labour fail to secure private data, and people who are aligned with the political right access information in the SAME WAY, the story line is slanted against the receipient of the information, and not the owner of the database. In each case, the political right is the bad guy. Why? This double standard needs to be explained.
Credit where it is due, I’ve seen Andrea Vance highly uncomfortable with this. Â Read more »