Police Affidavit

Adolf has a copy of the Police affidavit submitted to the Manukau District Court to obtain search warrants for the operation which netted the Urawera 16. I have blogged before on some of the snippets from this affidavit. (BTW the originating website has been taken down.)

What is amusing is the ranting from radical lawyers and their fellow travelers to the effect that somehow the publication of this affidavit will prevent the guilty bastards from getting a fair trial. They say lawyers engage in theatrics most of the time and in this case there should be some Oscars handed out.

The affidavit is essentially a summary of the reasons why police think they have good reason to carry out further aggressive action against certain parties to get the evidence they need to launch a prosecution. A jury will bring in a verdict depending on the evidence which is put before them. The fact that the evidence is made public in no way detracts from the quality of the evidence. Moana Jackson simply is grand standing and playing the race card as hard as he can go.

When you have people playing around in the bush with armour piercing ammunition, .223 assault rifles, silenced weapons, grenade launchers, napalm, vehicle ambushes, sniper rifles, and other assorted goodies then you have a very serious problem indeed on your hands.

Adolf presently occupies an office in the same building as a well known Auckland law firm. He has noticed various suit attired dour and mournful characters in the lift muttering about contempt of court. Well , all I can say is, the legal fraternity needs to back off a little and stop showing contempt for the common sense of the average New Zealander who, if he read the 155 pages of evidence, would agree whole heartedly that the police acted correctly in EVERYTHING they did on the day they rounded up these dangerous lunatics.

Here's just one example.

Some of our darky commentators were criticising the police for including no Maori officers in the personell for the raids. Well, the evidence suggests there was a risk that such personell might have tipped of the plotters. They were being fed information from members of DOC staff so why would you take the risk of one sympathiser within the police force blowing the whole operation?

Smiling Assassin Outflanks Queen of Text

The hapless Labour Party is so obsessed with the stealing next election that it has failed to guard it's flanks and bingo, John Key slips through the gap and strikes another body blow to the flailing, failing socialists.

Not for nothing is he called 'The Smiling Assassin.'

(Pic stolen from The Herald)

John Key is taking 'National' to the Indian community which hitherto has been regarded as solid Labour territory. Clark and Co don't seem to have realised that the majority of tghe burgeoning Indian community in New Zealand are from Fiji. They think Cmdre Bainimarama is a hero and Clark and Peters are villains, supporting the corrupt and venal Qarase regime.There is no way these people will vote Labour this time round and John Key knows it.

Yet another sector of the community alienated by Clark.

The perfect holiday tenant

Our good friend Whale Oil believes Trevor Mallard is in need of a holiday.

Being the helpful chappie he is, Whale oil has posted an entry featuring a story that Ana Samways of Sideswipe ran a year ago in the NZ Herald.

But Christmas is approaching again and after a stressful and eventful year, Ducky is obviously more in need of a break than ever.

What with leaving the wife, and snuggling up to new love Brenda, though we're not sure in which order, it's been a tough year for Trev.

Then we have the mysterious Sharon, another alleged love, whose outing led to fisticuffs in parliament with Tau Henare.

So, if you have a bach to rent out over the holidays, should you give Trevor a ring?

Remember, you would need sturdy beds.

There could well be fighting and the "likeable larrikin has become a bully."

And if Pete Hodgson turns up, dancing too, as seen here on You Tube.

There may also be Heineken bottles left behind, or rammed in someone's behind.

Though judging by the picture above, Mallard is good at dealing with rubbish.

He is a Liarbour MP after all!

Hat Tip: Whale Oil

Key campaign works without National leadership

There has been some debate on this blog and elsewhere about the role of National in the campaign against the Electoral Finance Bill.

The Gnats have been accused of lacking leadership and John Boy has been singled out for criticism.

I admit to giving him some stick too.

But maybe, for now, National are playing it right. By keeping some distance they are showing that "Kill The Bill" is not some National-Act front organisation, but something more apolitical and cross-party, even if some of its leading lights are on the right.

Now, Dear Leader likes cuddling up to old soldiers, especially for media photo ops, even as she strips our armed forces and abolishes our air force.

I'm sure she won't be happy with the opposition from this war vet, whose story is detailed here and here, which shows how widespread support for the Kill The Bill campaign really is.

Thus, National could well be right in holding their fire for now. There is still time for them to get active when parliament resumes once more, or maybe over the holidays when the media will be starved of news, especially if Liarbour has passed the bill.

Thus, John Boy can quite happily go tootling around the South Island meeting the people, though as well as showing what an all-round nice guy he is, John Boy you might want to throw in a bit of politics. Try and get the message across on the EFB and others issues.

PS Here's a reminder of Saturday's March in Auckland. I'll be there.

International Disgrace

The rudeness of our 'so far up herself' bilious bitch prime minister knows no bounds.

This morning the headline story around the whole world is the crass rudeness of our piss ant PM who was seen text messaging during the Queen's opening address at the CHOGM conference.


(pic stolen from Stuff)

There is nothing to admire in this crude, humourless, harridan who seems to specialise in insulting people and nations who could be our friends as she cuddles up to nations and movements which potentially may be our enemies.

Civil War and the protection of your own culture

Last weekend I was in Queenstown and I read this thought provoking scenario for a future civil war in Denmark, caused by rampant immigration and Islamic extremism.
Of course such a scenario could happen in many a European country, perhaps even in Australia and New Zealand one day.
There has been some debate on a few of the blogs about where you draw the line in opposing Islamism and allowing ‘racist’ organizations to join the fightback.
Aurora over at The Midnight Sun has even posted commentary from Nick Griffin, head of the British National Party on his blog.
Normally, I would share the horror of many on the left in giving the BNP a platform, but perhaps the BNP is reforming and finally has ditched its old racist and anti-semitic ways and now offers a constructive contribution to the debate.
Certainly more needs to be done to highlight the horrors of Islamism.
Some blogs have mentioned this horrific case of the Saudi rape victim, yes, rape VICTIM, being sentenced to extra lashes because she sought media attention to her plight.
Where are the left here? Are they too stupid and blind to the religion they unwittingly promote?
Fortunately, I saw this piece from UK liberal Joan Bakewell, which made it into this Monday’s New Zealand Herald.
But I heard no call from the New Zealand government to halt such Saudi Sharia brutality, apart from this Canberra story quoting our own Dear Leader, so a rare Goodonya Helen!.
So what can we do to stop the growing rise of this barbaric Islamist culture?
I see no alternative to raising the drawbridge against such immigrants.
I am calling for methods no worse than used by such organizations as liberal as the Department of Conservation.
Where there is a predator species causing harm to native plants and animals Doc typically wants the vector removed.
Thus, like conservationists calling for the removal for stoats and weasels, so the protection of native cultures in Europe and elsewhere demands the removal of the Islamist menace.
Not so much spraying the lands with 1080 poison, more a case of trap and release back in their native homelands, via Boeing 767 or Airbus 320.
I guess that makes me the ultimate conservationist, wanting to protect the indigenous cultures of Western Europe from Islamist aggressors.
As I walked down into Queenstown that fine Saturday evening, I noted a happy scene in our own GodZone.
It was a multicultural scene of people enjoying the warm sun, Belgian beer, Danish ice cream, Belgian chocolate, Thai and Indian restaurants, and there was some Kiwiana too- all being lapped up by Asian tourists.
Who could threaten the semi-rural Arcadia that we have created here in Aotorea?
Well, the Islamists might if we let them, as they are in Europe.
Far fetched you think? Well, the number one source of immigrants Britain is from the largely Muslim Indian subcontinent. Immigration could more than double the UK population to over 100 million within a generation or two, leaving the native British a minority in their own land.
And as for that Danish ‘civil war’ , well those ‘youths’ of ‘North African origin’ have been rioting - some of them armed- in Paris for three days now ( see picture above).

Thus, the French ‘antifada’ continues.

How soon before it spreads?

Hilary's hot ho! Rumours rife over carpetmunching Clinton

Is Hilary Clinton a Lesbian?

Of course, one questions is, "does it matter?"

Either way, the rumour mill has gone into overdrive, though I have yet to see any such reports in the New Zealand media.

However, after months, if not years of gossip, the much respected Times of London has repeated the scuttlebut about Hilary's glamorous muslim aide Huma Abedin (pictured right).

UK Blogger Guido Fawkes covers the scandal, which has blown-up following an article in The Village Voice.

This, then led to further coverage in Drudge and a variety of blogs, not to mention the Times making the story mainstream, with the story also convered in South Africa and in Russia's Pravda.

Guido recalls a comment from Bill Clinton mistress Gennifer Flowers who says Bill once told her Hilary "has probably eaten more pussy than I have."

Hilary's campaign says "it is not even a tabloid trash story", which is hardly a denial and pretty much what they said about Bill and Gennifer and Bill and Monica.

The American Thinker sees the story as a self-inflicted smear made to detract attention from Hillary's shortcomings.

Of course, I recall how the Sunday Star-Times once ran a front page story about Helen Clark's own alleged lesbianism. Did that come straight from the Beehive as it poked fingers at National?

And how much of the Hilary story might come from rivals in the Democrat Party?

In New Zealand, it was after all, Mike Moore, whom Clark defeated to be Liarbour leader, who did recently refer to Judith Tizard as Clark's "consort."

Well, if all the rumours are true, and we still don't know for sure, it could mean that if Helen hangs on next year, and Hilary heads to the White House, relations between New Zealand and the United States might reach a new level. I wonder if Judith and Huma would approve?

Though of course, much as we love gossip, what really matters is that both are nannying, dictatorial tax and spend, money-grabbing, power-crazed socialists!

Juvenile Dementia

New Zealand's left wing has exposed a hitherto unknown epidemic which is set to engulf the land. An outbreak of Juvenile Dementia has occured over at Farrar's place, with the first victims being Tane, Sam Dixon and some poor sod called Bardomu.

These poor little fellows have got themselves all into a lather because the National Party has spent some of IT'S OWN MONEY producing a somnolent DVD extolling the party leader John Key.

These folk don't realise that the only known cure for Juvenile Demenitia is 'irony' which can only be administered to those who can see it. These same clueless clots support the EFB and the Labour Wants Your Tax Money bill. Now THAT'S IRONY but of course the poor saps can't see it.

Yet Another Grim Milestone

The Democrat mouthpiece and anti Bush rag specialised in publishing so called 'grim milestones' from Iraq. Now it has its very own grim milestone as the NYT continues to tank, illuminating the same sorry path on which the Democrats have set their feet.

At a dollar a week, it seems they have only only sixteen weeks left before the world can attend the funeral of the once proud Newspaper of Record.

Powered by NYSE MarkeTrac | as of 17:13 ET 27 Nov 2007 | Market data delayed 20 min.

Name	Symbol	$ Last Trade	Volume	$ Change	% Change
New York Times Co.	NYT	16.83	1,563,700	0.35	2.03
<> 1 Next >

The Sleeping Giant Awakes

Admiral Yamamoto said on the afternoon of December 7th 1941 "I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant."

The latest Herald opinion poll shows the sleeping giant of ordinary New Zealanders is awakening to the machinations of those who think the EFB and its cohort election spend as much of our money as you like bill will steal them the next election.

Audrey Young noted the poll coincides with John Key's anniversary as leader. That's nonsense. John Key has largely been out of the public eye and that's why he has not gained in the preferred PM rating. She misses the real story which is that the poll wipes out ALL THE PARTIES which support the Electoral Finance Bill.

Cougars on prowl in Kenya

My how liberated we have become.

The left need to change their view of evil men picking on vulnerable women in the 'sex trade'.

It takes two to tango!

And as we see in the Stuff article, women are at it as well.

Heading off to Kenya to pick up young black guys - a reversal of the traditional old guy gets young girl scene.

"It's not love, obviously. I didn't come here looking for a husband," Bethan said over a pounding beat from the speakers.
"It's a social arrangement. I buy him a nice shirt and we go out for dinner. For as long as he stays with me he doesn't pay for anything, and I get what I want – a good time. How is that different from a man buying a young girl dinner?"

More biting satire about Dear Leader

Clark Lash’s Out at ‘Cannibal Bill’ Critics.

Monday November 26, 2007

Prime Minister Helen Clark has delivered a stinging attack on opponents of the Electoral Voter Consumption Bill. The controversial legislation that would allow Cabinet Members to kill and eat members of the public has been opposed by opposition parties and human rights organisations.
‘The critics of this bill are the usual hollow men that want big business and religious creeps to be able to buy and sell our democracy to the highest bidder,’ Clark announced at her post-cabinet press conference.

‘We intend to address the shocking corruption and anti-democratic practices showed by some groups and parties by devouring our enemies alive. This will act as a strong deterrent to future election buying attempts and it will also endow us with the strength and power of those we kill.’
The Labour Party introduced the legislation in response to a police investigation into the activities of senior Labour MP’s Trevor Mallard and Parekura Horomia.

Both politicians have eaten numerous members of the public over recent months, but despite police raids on their offices and homes that uncovered human skeletons, frozen meat and rotting offal the police have refused to press charges, citing legal uncertainties and insisting that bringing charges would not be in the public interest.
‘The law around whether cabinet members can smash peoples skulls open and feast open the contents is unclear,’ Clark announced today. ‘All that this bill does is clarify the confusion surrounding this issue.’
National leader John Key has announced his attention to repeal the bill should National come to power in the next election. But in a rare display of disunity, former National Deputy leader Gerry Brownlee will be crossing the floor to vote in favour of the bill.

Mr Brownlee is currently under investigation by the police for his suspected involvement in the disappearance of political journalist Barry Soper.

The Dim-Post

Hat Tip Danyl Mclauchlan , well done! Hilarious!!

"A decade of John Howard has left a country of timidity, fear and shame"

Those of our readers who don't share my fellow bloggers' enthusiasm for Howard may enjoy the Guardian's assessment.

Heartwarming news from Britain

After the upset in Australia with the defeat of John Howard's coaliation government, I can cheer up our regulars with some good news.

Gordon Brown in Britain is stuffing it up big time and his UK Labour government is lagging in the polls.

After a series of disasters, Brown must wonder 'why me?'.

The opposition Conservatioves have even regained their poll leads for competence, something they haven't had since the early 90s.

They even seem to have the zeigiest for the times.

Brown claims not to look at polls, even though he has his own pollster , and he cancelled a UK general election recently when they turned against him.

Anyway, more importantly, Tory leader Dave Cameron, whom I have sometimes slagged off as a wet, just like I have similarly (wrongfully, it seems) branded our own National Leader John Key, has found some philosophical differences, suggesting he may be a decent, free-market right-winger after all.

Last week, Cameron was in Prague spelling out some philosophy which UK blogger Guido Fawkes likens to Libertarianism.

Here is Dave's speech in full- well worth the read.

“So there are many battles we must fight together, and my message to you today is a simple one - a message that I know you will understand more than most. The battle for freedom and opportunity is never finally won.

In each generation, those of us who believe in freedom, in human potential, in the idea that the strength of our society comes from the energy and industry and creativity of our people; those of us who believe in these things must be ready to fight for them because the enemies of freedom are never finally vanquished. They always live to fight another day.

Today we can see the enemies of freedom preparing a renewed assault on our liberty. They do not mean to harm us. In fact, they mean to help us. But their ideas are out of date, their methods have failed and their advance must be derailed.

I am speaking of the politicians and public officials who believe that they know best how to organise our lives. That they are the experts, so they must have the power.

You can find them everywhere – in my country, in your country and in the EU itself. They are the last defenders of the bureaucratic age, an age before the information revolution and our new world of freedom that makes it possible to put real power in people’s hands.

But in their desire to control, to regulate, to direct, the defenders of the bureaucratic age have over-reached themselves. They have gone too far. They have tried to do too much. And it has exposed the historic error of their ways.
In Britain, bureaucratic over-reach has seen the Labour Government creeping further and further into the lives of British people.

Millions of families sucked into a complex system of tax credits. An army of tax collectors that is now almost as big as our actual army. Fingerprinting children at school.

And this week we saw a shocking consequence of this bureaucratic over-reach: a scandal where the government has lost the names, addresses and bank details of almost every family in the country.

Are they learning the lesson? Do they accept that bureaucracy has gone too far? Of course not. They are stuck in the bureaucratic age. So they now want to take personal information about everyone in the country and store it on a national identity register.

We are seeing this bureaucratic over-reach in the EU too. The desire for harmonisation and homogenisation – on tax, on regulation, on so many aspects of public and private life.

It is the last gasp of an outdated ideology, a philosophy that has no place in our new world of freedom, a world which demands that we fight this bureaucratic over-reach and lead Europe into the hope and potential of a new, post-bureaucratic age.”

Goodonya Dave! Let us enjoy you taking your beliefs to their logical conclusion when you become British Prime Minister.

UPDATE: Independent has UK Tories 13% ahead as Labour drops below 30%.

The Cops Were Right.

Adolf has just read the first sixty-five pages of the 155 page police affidavit submitted to the Manukau District Court. (Thanks to Kiwiblog for the tip.)

If the police had not acted as they did in rounding up the 'Urawera 16' they would have been done for criminal negligence. There can be no doubt the activities of these idiots were well and truly over the boundary of 'just a few loudmouths running around playing games in the bush.' This was much more than that. Silenced weapons, substantial quantities of ammunition, organised training for what can only be described as 'terrorist activities.'

The real scandal in all of this is that when the chips were down, Helen Clark's Labour government failed dismally in protecting us from these fools. Her legislation was incoherent and they've all been let go to continue on. Now that they have been enlightened as to the authorities eaves dropping methods, they will simply change the way they do things.

Contrast the dismal incompetent failure of Labour in New Zealand with the efficient and no nonsense actions of Fiji's Cmdr Bainimarama and I'll tell you who I'd rather have looking after the interests of ordinary people.

Can NZ National find its own Maxine McKew?

Still no confirmation of celebrity candidate Maxine Mckew (poictured right with Kevin Rudd) taking John Howard's seat in Bennelong, as predicted, but the thought got me thinking.

Cannot National in New Zealand come up with its own celebrity, perhaps one who may even give Dear Leader a good run in Mt Albert?

Of course, our MMP system, with its party lists means that Dear Leader is safe, no matter how bad Liarbour perform. Well, does one seriously expect them to fall below 5%?

So who could National find? Do we have our own equivalent of the ABC journalist that has taken Bennelong by storm? Is there anyone whom National could attract?

Looking at our media girls and boys, they all seem pretty much left of centre.

The only one with any political experience is former breakfast telly presenter and weather girl Kay Gregory, now a member of Hamilton City Council, and a potential mayor.

However, or because of her appearing with Paul Henry, a former National Party candidate, I don't ever recall Kay saying anything remotely political.

I don't even recall words like 'climate change' in any of her weather forecasts. She truly appears immune to any of his charms , influences or opinions.

So, perhaps we can discount Kay from our search.

Then, today in the New Zealand Herald, I see a stinging piece on the Electoral Finance Bill from David Cochrane of lawyers Chapman trip along with legal consultant Linda Clark, which reveal how the unworkable nature of the bill will see much election wrangling happening in the courts.

The article stresses these are 'personal' opinions but it got me thinking, assuming this is the right Linda Clark as she did leave TVNZ and trained in law.

Is Linda Clark, now appearing on TV3's Sunrise breakfast show, a potential celebrity politician? Just the kind of figure to add spice to the National Party list in 2008?

I always marked Linda Clark down as a Liarbour sympathiser, but after this, who knows?

Come on John Boy, see if National can offer her a 'key' place on the list? Get Linda to battle her namesake. Two tough women battling it out will be fun.

Liarbour: The Nasty Party!

Not sure if I've blogged on this before, but yet another incident confirms my belief that Liarbour is the 'nasty' party.

Forget about talk of caring socialism, our government is ridden with petty vindictiveness, from ministers all to eager to smear anyone to get their way.

Today's example concerns a young lad who wrote to MPs about the Electoral Finance bill and received a response from Minsiter Chris Carter asking if he was a member of the Exclusive Bretheren.

So much for Liarbour talk of diversity and tolerance is hitting out at a religious group and a lad for taking a contrary view to his own. The 16 year-old in question is a Baptist, by the way.

Apart from this incident exposing yet another case of Liarbour hypocracy, it shoies shows how nasty its members are.

Trevor Mallard showed more nastiness with his recent attacks over whistelblower Erin Leigh, whose competency he doubted. Yet, as David Farrar at Kiwiblog notes, there are many springing to her defence.

Will Trevor makes his comments outside parliament where they can be tested in the courts? Perhaps not. Showing Mallard is more a chicken than a duck.

Of course, it was Mallard who made those 'whose Diane' comments in Parliament against Don Brash a year ago. But he could't take it when similar words were used a gainst him.

I recall Clark for her 'cancerous and corrosive' comments about Don Brash, showing what a nasty, vindictive woman she can be.

And she never refers to John Key by name in any of her public pronoucements.

I am sure there are many other examples of Liarbour nastiness we can also mention.

But either way, Liarbour well and truly are the nasty party.

Farewell, Dear John, Dear Friend of freedom and Good Luck mate!

So Labor's Kevin Rudd did it.
And now John Howard is no longer PM of Australia and probably no longer the member for Bennelong.
Can't say I'd be too upset now if Howard did lose his seat.
After such a dignified speech last night , I feel John Howard can walk straight off the stage with huge amounts of respect and honour and with all our thanks.
He can take a much earned break with his family till he prepares for his next chapter in life.
Despite the scale of the defeat- emphatic but not a landslide- the Great Aussie Battler still has much dignity, or much mana, as we kiwis also say.
John Howard has a record to be proud of and it is indeed that record of economic stewardship that Kevin Rudd appears determined not to destroy.
Howard and Costello have delivered a much richer country, a more secure country, along with better public services.
Of course, Australians expect more from their politicians than we do. They are so easy to complain. And I guess the time for a change factor was strong.
Despite lefty talk of ending discrimination, ageism remains rife, dressed up in talk of the future, fresh starts, and change.
Change will obviously have to be a mantra for National here too in 2008, with a fresh, young and dynamic John Key contrasting against an old, tired and failing Helen Clark.
But even the greatest of leaders can outstay their welcome.
As a Pom, I recall the great service and the good things done to Britain by former UK prime minister Margaret Thatcher, who resigned 17 years ago this week after a simialr 11.5 years in office.
Yet, her previous victories perhaps gave Margaret Thatcher too much courage or confidence to go too far, or at least further than what the people wanted.
This is where the matter of Work Choices will have contributed to Howards defeat.
With freedom comes responsibility. Giving employers the upper hand, more freedom to dictate the workplace, can lead to trouble.
In Australia, earlier this year, I recall one bar charging customers a surcharge for it being open on Anzac Day but the bar staff were not getting paid extra for working the public holiday.
The media hyped up this story for all it is worth and I don't know how common such cases were. But if employers were abusing Work Choices too much to their own advantage, it is inevitable that the 'workers' would get their own back by electing a government that will replace Work Choices with something more akin to the old-style Awards.
I have often argued with unionists that 'market forces work both ways' benefitting the worker too, but if the employer or employers seek to grab all the benefit themselves then it is likely workers will support a more collectivist solution.
Now, how the union dominated Labor Party will respond to Work Changes remains to be seen.
Kevin Rudd has created the image of a moderate, a social conservative even, Howard-Lite maybe, with so many 'me too' polices, such as taxcuts.
I have even heard of some comparisons with an Australian Tony Blair.
The right, upset as we are at Howard's end, can take some comfort.
Extreme leftism, which may well be lurking within Labor from the likes of deputy-PM Julia Gillard and Peter Garrett, has been defeated somewhat.
Rudd has had to slay many Labor dragons to help him gain office. But now he is safely elected PM, will he continue to keep them at bay, or will they rise up and burn him?
This is the challenge Rudd has in the years ahead. Labor has to maintain and enhance the economic success of the Howard and Costello years. He has to show he is worthy of the trust Australia has invested in him.
True, there will be calls from the left for extra state spending- and he has pledged to sign Kyoto- but if Rudd can maintain a moderate stance that allows Austraia to carry on with its correct and prosperous course, he has the makings of a successful and good prime minister.
In Britain, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown managed to maintain a steady, safe and prudent course, until the temptation to spend became too much. We saw something similar happen with Clark and Cullen in New Zealand.
The real radicalism didn't happen until the second term. And this is the prize that awaits Rudd, if he and Labor don't upset the apple cart too much.
For the Coalition, Australia and the world can and should offer the best wishes to the devotion to Australia shown by John Howard.
Let us hope something exciting and of value awaits him in future, something more worthy of Howard's talents than being a mere backbencher. Something on the world stage, perhaps.
Peter Costello, Howard's anointed successor, faces a tough task ahead as he must rebuild a Liberal party, which doesn't even control any states either.
I am sure Costello is up to the task. But judging by the support won by Malcolm Turnbull, it might well be him who leads the Liberals to future victory.
Finally, as we hope for a new and successful chapter for John Howard, let us leave with the concession speech of Dick Tuck who, upon losing a California state senate primary, said simply, "The people have spoken…the bastards."
I can't see John Howard saying anything like that, can you?

UPDATE: Here's an editorial from the Sunday Star-Times noting the 'tweedledee-tweedledum' nature of Rudd and Howard. And here's David Farrar kicking off the debate at kiwiblog.
UPDATE2: Costello says he's not standing for the leadership or deputy leadership, so a new generation can lead. Looks like Turnbull for leader but like some at kiwiblog, I rate Tony Abbott highly too.

Who is the worst employer? kiwi publishers or government?

I'm considering taking legal action against one of my employers.

The publishing company concerned has appointed a new editor who has decided not to run a major feature commissioned by her predecessor because she felt it was not up to scratch.

Now, neither of the two editors before her ever had issues over the quality of my work and an email I have since received from her which talks about her taking the publication in a 'new direction' suggests other motives.

I have no issue with this. I am more concerned about being recompensed fairly for services rendered and expenses incurred in delivering them. The company fulfilling its end of the bargain, even if there was no formal contract, it was all done by email and talking over the phone. We operated on trust.

I was never given a chance to rewrite the piece, written to the specifications outlined by the former editor, which the new editor said she could not edit/rewrite effectively in time.

But as a former newspaper editor myself, I believe if you cannot knock copy into shape, no matter how rough, you should not be an editor.

The new editor also commented that she was not bound by agreements made by the predecessor, though I'm sure when I signed an agreement allowing the company to on-sell my work, it was an agreement affecting my work for the whole company, not just the individual editor.

Now, this has happened before. Some years ago, one new editor at the same company decided to stop using me, citing quality over one article. Now this particular editor's magazine is a co-production with an Australian company, having both a New Zealand editor and an Australian editor.

Guess what? I now write for several titles produced by that Australian company, including the very same magazine I was earlier kicked out of by its New Zealand editor.

For several years, I have written for its Australian editor, writing about the Australian market, though I am now based just north of Auckland. And no comments concerning 'quality' there.

This case is just the latest of several shoddy dealings I have personally experienced in the New Zealand media market, which I feel explains some/much of the leftiness from the country's journalists. And for me, it makes me more moderate on employment matters than other issues.

Many kiwi publishers are bad employers, though the Australian-owned multinational I perform the bulk of my work for, conducts itself with the utmost integrity.

Which bring me on to the "Attack on Erin Leigh".

David Farrar over at Kiwiblog highlights how the whistleblower over the Clare Curran/ Medallaine Setchell controversy has been branded 'incompetent' in parliament, though it is arguable whether we should believe Trevor Mallard.

Now, there is much we can say about the ethical nature of Lairbour in this and other matters where it has pilloried staff when it should take the blame for its own wrong doing. The Air NZ flights to Iraq fiasco was but another, as well as Mark Prebble and the other guy in Setchellgate.

While Liarbour has shown it to be truly lacking in ethics, how much stems from a kiwi desire to cover ones back, to pass the buck and smear others if possible?

I have worked in several countries- the UK, Australia and New Zealand. Kiwis seem to be leaders at backstabbing, sticking the knife in when they wish, suggesting Employment laws are necessary to some extent, when all most staff simply want is fair play and contracts honoured, however they might be defined.

Liarbour's shoddy treatment of government employees, who do not act as they would like, just emphasises the kind of backstabbing that seems commonplace in the New Zealand workplace.

Not only that, it hypocritically shows the Liarbour government to be the kind of bad employer they supposedly despise. I wonder what their union paymasters think of this?

What about our own 'Little Johnnie" ?- John Key !

As Australia goes to the polls and decides the fate of Little Johnnie Howard, what about our own Little Johnnie, or 'John Boy' as he is more commonly called?

John Key has been National Party leader for a year now, so John Armstrong in today's Weekend Herald notes the anniversary and presents a scorecard on Key's first year.

The assessment seems fair enough, though Key has led Dear leader as preferred PM in some polls.

Then, John Armstrong presents an analysys of the past year, saying its "Time for Key to grab the spotlight again."

Apparantly, Key plans a whistle-stop tour of New Zealand as a trial run for the election campaign.

This sounds good, but like John Armstrong says, Key needs to raise his profile.

I am inclinced to believe that it is time John Key stepped into the row over Election Finance Bill directly and go straight for Dear Leader's throat over Liarbour's corruption and rorting of electoral processes, as some of the commenters are advising over at Kiwiblog.

Don Brash certainly showed strength and earned a poll boost for National, as Liarbour's corruption was exposed for all to see. Indeed, being branded 'cancerous and corrosive' by Dear Leader reflected how Brash hit the mark with this policy.

I have been somewhat harsh at times in calling John Key 'wet' in shifting to the centre a little more than I would like. But his policy has paid off, National still have a decent and winnable lead in the polls.

Of course, moving left and being 'wobbly' on issues is tricky too. The media will lambast you if you do throw out the baby with the bathwater in ditching party principles. You still need these principless to keep your own side on board and to rally your own troops for the battle ahead.

John Armstrong notes the tightrope Key must walk- a walk he has done pretty well.

Just carry on John Key, but try and be tougher, show some/ more leadership . You need not sell-out on National policy, now you just have to win people over. Use your powers of persuasion.

As for that 2-week whistle stop tour, fuggedabout it. I don't know what your Summer Holiday plans are, but two weeks ain't enough. By all means have your two week official tour but how about something more widespread.

Take yourself and the missus for a tiki tour of both the North and South Islands.

You don't have to slum it on campsites. Using websites like wotif.com will reveal nice places for you and your good lady for $100-$150pn. I'm sure you will have friends and supporters who will have nice luxury lodges but try and resist the temptation. Middle New Zealand maybe found at the Copthorne, Bella Vista motels, the Kingsgate; though the Heritage, the Holiday Inn, and Rydges might be preferable. We can't have you slumming it too much and going too mid-market might look a little fishy.

Meet the locals, be seen, be approachable, ring up the editor of the local rag, especially in the little places where they would be excited and honoured to have lunch with the country's next PM. A full page glowing profile of you will help them fill a quiet news period. Winning them over will lead to better coverage for the Election Campaign.

Summer won't be a time for rest, though such a trip will allow some time for rest as well. We don't want you to wear yourself out. You need not stick to a timetable.

On the other hand, Key might need to learn in depth how the UK Tories ressurected themselves or how John Howard won/lost today, which will means busy months ahead, and perhaps overseas travel.

Either way, National will have to keep themselves in the spotlight and not let Liarbour gain the Christmas/Summer agenda/initiative.

One thing we do know, is Liarbour knows how to manipulate the media. They are good campaigners. The challenge for Key and National, is to do and be the same.

Will Australia party like its 1969?

It's looking a little grim but Little Johnnie ain't going down without a fight.

There's even a last minute post on You Tube from Australia's best Prime Minister in decades.

Already the tributes are pouring in, even if they have a somewhat funeral feel about them.

Fran O'Sullivan in today's Weekend Herald calls Howard the 'best PM New Zealand never had.'

Audrey Young blogs today saying Howard has been looking 'indominatable' these past few days, while Rudd looks and sounds like a robot.

However, the polls are closing, with both Galaxy and Newspoll showing there are just four points between Howard's Coalition and Rudd's Labor Party.

Thus, lefty celebration's might be somewhat premature, with echoes of a similar poll in the 1969 when Labor was supposed to win, but they were kept out by a last minute tide of public opinion.

I'm not going to predict this will happen, much as I want a Howard victory. All I will say, is I think it will be close.

When I was in Australia early this year, Kevin Rudd came across as an ordinary sort, hardly threatening. A younger version of John Howard even. I detected a feeling from many it was time to move on, even if Howard and his treasurer Costello had delivered unprecedented prosperity.

Their economic record is perhaps their downfall. People feel they can 'afford' Labour, they can take the risk, take the gamble and roll the dice.

Of course, Rudd has sought to minimise the risk with a raft of 'me-too' measures like taxcuts as big as those proposed by the coalition. Howard has responded with various pork barrel spending initiatives.

No wonder, Liberty Scott is nonpplussed by the election, seeing nothing there for believers of a smaller state as both try and buy their way to power using taxpayers' money.

There is not the ideological divide we see here and while Rudd has been dishonest over his upbringing, his party is still dominated by the unions and his deputy Julia Gillard comes across as a hard lefty, Rudd has not sought to frighten the horses.

Whether the reality of a Labor government will be frightening remains to be seen. At least it will show our own Dear Leader that people do tire of leader after a while regardless of how successful they have been at delivering prosperity- not that I'm saying NZ Labour has delivered any. Perhaps she too might be praying for a Howard victory. But if she truly wants one, why doesn't she fly over to Queensland and lend Kevin Rudd a bit of last-minute support.

In the meantime, see how the Australian party animals are preparing for their election parties. But what if Howard delivers that 1969-style last minute upset?

Update: Videos from Laborsux and the Aussie Liberals.

UPDATE2: Fortress Australia warns the effects of a Rudd victory will be 'significant.'

UPDATE3: Aurora at the Midnight Sun tips a Howard win, highlights the media support for Rudd, notes the union influence, and wall-to-wall Labor control of the states.

Assume the position

I've come to a depressing conclusion watching The Standard act as apologists for S59 and the EFB the last week or so: the sad sacks of shit on the govt benches have to be given a severe and memorable electoral kicking next year, if the Left isn't to become a sorry joke.

Twice in the last year (with the repeal of S59 and now the EFB), Labour have criminalised a large swathe of the population and fobbed us off with the claim that we can trust the organs of the state to exercise discretion in choosing which of these newly-minted criminals to prosecute. "The Rule of Common Sense will prevail!" cries Annette King. Er, maybe - this week. Who knows what will prevail next week? In any case, wouldn't it be preferable for the Rule of Common Sense to prevail at the point where these grossly-overpaid f*ckwits are drafting the law, as well as when their lowly-paid minions are enforcing it?

Even assuming we really could trust them not to prosecute us for the crimes they just invented, they add insult to injury by throwing into the mix an amendment to the Suppression of Terrorism Act, which secures our freedom by defining a "terrorist" as anyone the govt declares to be one. Unfortunately, the people going on about authoritarianism, creeping fascism and an encroaching Police state now have a very good case.

Sure, I can see plenty of counter-arguments to the above: the guy just convicted of assault on his kid was charged for treating him roughly enough to bruise him, not for smacking him; the EFB is intended to keep rich wankers from making up their parties' lack of popular support with bottomless and anonymous financial support; and above all, there's the fact that giving Labour a savage and merciless electoral beating would essentially put National into power - ie, we'd replace one authoritarian pack of scumbags with a worse one. Nevertheless, I think the Left has to do it to have any self-respect , for this basic reason:

If we're going to suffer creeping authoritarianism, I'd rather the left was opposing it, not writing apologia for it.

Right now, the govt's new laws all seem to amount to a directive to bend over and spread 'em. We can assume the position, or give their arses a thorough kicking. Which one's it to be, Standard?

A World without Islam

A few days ago, I said we should give our thanks to America, for it as a force for good in the world.

Today, is the US holiday of Thanksgiving and it gave me an idea.

Last Sunday, I posted a link to a UK video which postulated a 'A World Without America.'

But taking a look at the greatest threat today, and that only America seems steadfast against its threat, what about "A World Without Islam?"

I am sure that it would be a better place. There would have been no 9-11 or any of the countless number of religious killings committed in the name of the Religion of Peace, by the website of the same name.

This, has led to some other suggestions, alternative histories even.

A world where Mohammed was never born. The entire middle east would still be Christian. Christianity probably would have taken the Indian subcontinent as well. Africans would probably be equally advanced as the rest of the world, since it was the Muslims in close proximity to Africa and the Islamic appetite for slavery which persecuted an entire continent. NW European countries probably wouldn't have been able to compete with the Christian middle east. England, France, Germany, all those countries would not be G8. The G8 countries would be in the middle east.

And Yiab has this to say.

Not sure if either is cirrect, but an interesting view all the same.

What do you think?

Have They Woken Up?

During the last week, for the first time, The New York Times has dragged itself to commence reporting good news from Iraq, namely the recent and sustained reduction in violence and consequent return from Syria and Jordan of tens of thousands of Iraqis who fled from the depredations of Al Qaeda.

$17.14 at today's close on the NYSE


Adolf wonders whether this about turn in editorial policy might have something to do with the steady decline in the paper's share price since in 2003 it mounted its aggressive campaign against the Bush administration and its War Against Terror centred in the Iraq theatre.

Just last week, the share price broke through (downward trend) the $18 barrier and now hovers dangerously close to the $17 mark, after declining steadily from a healthy $47 in April 2003 to a dreadful $19 before last week's plunge. Readers will see the share price was relatively stable up until the April 2003 invasion of Iraq.

The price trend since early 2004 seems more than coincidental.

HISTORICAL PERFORMANCE

Period:

1 Month 3 Months 6 Months 1 Year 3 Years 5 Years

Moving Avg 1:

Moving Avg 2:

Stochastic:

MACD

Juvenile Troll Alert

Readers should be aware some idiot is commenting over at Farrar's place using the pseudonym 'dadsforjustice.'

From the comments it is obviously a lefty and no doubt the real dadforjustice will be displeased.

Apparently this sort of carry on is what passes for wit and flair amongst many of the left.

Auckland Bloggers drinks Xmas drinks

Thursday 29 November. Venue TBA. Time about 5pm ish.

More 2 come. Book it into your diary now.

Exporting unemployment to Aus

Interesting story on net population loss to Australia on Stuff this morning.

A few points:

1. We're now losing 40,000 per year. Those socialist Liarbore bastards!!! This figure is the highest in a decade. Er, hang on - a decade? It was this bad 10 years ago? Surely the "socialists" weren't running things back then. Shit, who are we going to blame now?

2. Net loss is 26,500, due to 13,500 immigrants from Aus. Our Aussies tend to be skilled professionals, and the people we're shipping over there tend to be unskilled. Sounds rather like we're making on the deal to me.

3. 53% of NZers would consider a job overseas, according to an international survey. What, only 53%? What's wrong with you people? I've lived overseas twice and both were great experiences. NZ's none too flash on a world scale, certainly not so flash you wouldn't consider living anywhere else.

4. Apparently NZers are moving to Aus for the "lifestyle." Excuse me? I just came back from spending several days there for work - it was unpleasantly hot, swarming with flies, paranoid about where the next litre of water is coming from, and the grocery prices were eye-watering. I'd consider living in quite a few countries, but that one's low on the list.

Krudd Runs Out Of Wheels

Just when Ackers was getting ready to pop his cork, another dil in the APL helped the Libs hold onto one of those ever receding sixteen marginal seats.

Putting up an anit-Zionist campaign manager in a significantly Jewish electorate is not a strategy for winning the prize for best bar mitzvah. However, the ALP figures it's a good scheme.

It ain't over til the fat lady sings and the young Kruddy seems unable to stay in tune for the Grande Finale.

A just and fair election in 2008

A lot of the shrill from the Left over the Electoral Finance Bill has been directed towards fairness in elections. The hate espoused towards 'big money' politics is evident for all to see.

If the Left truly want a 'fair' election in 2008, and beyond, here's how it can happen:

• State fund every political party to the tune of $3,000.000.00 to be used for the 2008 campaign. That amount is each party's cap and covers everything, including broadcasting. No private fundraising is permitted.
  
• The penalty for exceeding the cap is deregistration of your party, and imprisonment for the party leader and the party secretary.
• Parties have until next Friday, 30 November 2007, to register for the election. This gives the current parties enough time to sort their shit out, and allows legitimate organisations wishing to contest the election just enough time to sort out a name, find 500 members and register. It is also just enough of too short a timeframe so as to prohibit 'wacky' organisations to partake.
• Parties currently in Parliament are allowed no extra funding, whether through Parliamentary Services or their own funds. Current Parliamentary Services funds for parliamentary parties are extinguished six months prior to polling day which is announced on Waitangi day - February 6th.
• The Electoral Finance Act/Bill or any electoral law whatsoever is repealed. There are no election laws for spending, save for the $3,000,00.00 cap.
• I reiterate, the $3,000,000.00 can be spent by the parties as they like.
• The above process would allow parties as even a playing field as you could get and a balanced contest of ideas.
• After the 2008 election, all parties who were successful at the election must partake in multilateral, bipartisan talks to enact electoral laws that are representative and equitable in accordance with the voters choices after the fairest election in monetary terms this country has ever seen.

If the above took place we would certainly know what support Act, Greens, NZ First, United Future, Progressives and all the minor parties had when they are allowed to compete with the 'big boys' which, let's face it, practically have a state funded duopoly election after election.

Roy Morgan Kneecaps Clark

Labour hits the wall as the highly intelligent Kiwi voter registers his displeasure at the extraordinary incompetence demonstrated by Labour via its 'incoherent' terrorism legislation.

National is back out to a 14% lead but regrettably the Baubolic Plague has snuck up over 5%.

Just wait until the public realises that the EFB and its sister rort are a devious con job by Labour to steal not $800k but closer to $50 million to deceive and lie their way back into office

A bill board might well read 'This Time They'll Take Eight Million'

Little Johnny Kneecaps Krudd

Adolf's ribs are aching. Thirteen Labor candidates appear to be ineligible to stand because, like good little socialists, they failed to resign from their gummint jobs before they were selected by their infinitely incompetent party. They needed the money, don't you know?

George Newhouse has previously insisted his legal advice shows his candidacy is valid. (AAP Image: Amos Aikman)

Guess what the lead story in ALL the media will be leading up to the forty eight hour black out?

I can write the script.

'How the hell do these people think they can run Australia if they can't even manage a piddly little process like selecting their candidates?'

Suddenly those sixteen marginals are looking bloody marginal for the little blonde wax dummy.

There was always going to be a rabbit out of the hat.

And Continuing On Down The Gurgler

The Paper of Record glides below $18.00 as the shareholders reap the rewards of owning a left wing daily paper whose prime mission in life is to divulge state secrets.

NYT

New York Times Company (the) [NYSE]

19 Nov 2007 12:00

LAST: 17.98	CHANGE: -0.83	OPEN: 18.75	HIGH: 18.85	ASK: 45.55	VOLUME: 1,404,800
	CHANGE(%): -4.41%	PREV: 18.81	LOW: 17.85	BID: 43.23	OPEN INT: N/A

HISTORICAL PERFORMANCE

Period:

1 Month 3 Months 6 Months 1 Year 3 Years 5 Years

Moving Avg 1:

Moving Avg 2:

Stochastic:

MACD

Add this Symbol to a Portfolio:

Default

Electoral Finance Bill

Here's my take on a controversial aspect of the Bill: whether the loud hailer protestor is caught by the Bill. I'll simply copy and paste my comment on KiwiBlog here (with some edits).

Currently if you wish to erect a billboard in Mt Albert, for example, during the 3 month period prior to an election that says “vote Helen Clark”, because that billboard asks for a vote for a candidate it has to be included as an election expense and the cost declared in the candidates return. Moreover, the billboard must carry an authorisation of a name and address.

Clause 5 of the Bill redefines election advertisement (the vote part described above) and now includes in that definition “…words or graphics, or both, that can reasonably be regarded as doing 1 or more of the following:” - it then lists the items.

Subclause (i) is not so scary - “encouraging or persuading voters to vote, or not to vote, for 1 or more specified parties or for 1 or more candidates or for any combination of such parties and candidates”.

So words encouraging a vote for Clark would be prima facie an election advertisment. What Pete over at KiwiBlog has argued is that walking down Mt Albert Rd shouting “VOTE HELEN CLARK” on a megaphone is not an advertisement as it is ordinarily thought of (in fact, some may think you’re a raving nutter if you did that!).

It is always useful to see what the purpose of the Bill is in order to ascertain what the words in the Bill might mean and I don’t have a copy of the Bill so don’t know what the Bill’s stated purpose is.

But if you assume the purpose of the EFB is to restrict *money* speech then unless the nutter mentioned above is paid by the National Party to walk down Mt Albert doing what he is doing I doubt the definition would cover that circumstance. However, don’t be fooled by the words “reasonably regarded”. From the definition above it is only the *words or graphics* themselves that can be reasonably regarded as advertising (by encouraging people to vote Helen Clark), and not the way in which they are spoken or indeed in what manner they are delivered.

But, subclause (ii) of Clause 5 is very scary: “encouraging or persuading voters to vote, or not to vote, for a type of party or for a type of candidate that is described or indicated by reference to views, positions, or policies that are or are not held, taken, or pursued (whether or not the name of a party or the name of a candidate is stated)…”.

This captures the issue position that the previous version of the Bill adopted. Now, let’s say our resident nutter above then went and stood outside Sue Bradford’s electorate office chanting “bring back section 59, smacking is not a crime”. Much would depend on either a liberal or strict interpretation of the Bill. Again, without seeing the purpose I can’t judge but the whole point is that this should never even be debated. Our poor soul above should never be in the position during an election year where he may have broken the law for expressing his views on section 59, for example.

Clause 53 bans election advertisements as defined in Clause 5 unless they meet certain criteria which I will come to. What is interesting is that it starts with a negative “Election advertisements not to be published in regulated period unless certain conditions met”.

By casting off this way, by importing a negative and prohibitive statement on election advertising, it is basically saying that ranting and raving about s 59 is illegal unless you follow the procedures.

My view is that this should be the opposite: it should positively encourage it rather than actively discourage it. But I think I have found a curious thing.

If we assume the nutter above has published an election advertisement then under Clause 59 he cannot do that unless the name and address of the promoter is mentioned and the promoter is entitled to promote the advertisement.

Under Clause 5, the promoter is entitled to promote in the usual ways (secretary of political party/candidate etc) but now also includes the financial agent of a third party - let’s say the Exclusive Brethren.

But our resident nutter is none of these: he is just an individual with a bee in his bonnet - much like D4J! So how is he captured then?

To do so he has to be a “promoter who promotes election advertisements during the regulated period…”.

Now put to the side for one moment the $12,000.00 limit, if our nutter is not a “promoter who promotes election advertisements” but is merely Joe Citizen (i.e. not a political operative at all and never has been) then he isn’t captured! He is simply not a promoter. He is just a guy with a loud voice!

I think it’s that easy. I think (pray) the Bill’s intent is geared around the professional political operatives and associates. My feeling then is that the guy in the street has nothing to fear.