|
Post by muzled on Jun 7, 2024 8:08:46 GMT 12
|
|
|
Post by eri on Jun 7, 2024 9:54:51 GMT 12
|
|
|
Post by ComfortZone on Jun 7, 2024 17:09:52 GMT 12
Mystery solved using the original link from the KB post, uses https//:twitter.com... leading the URL. Looks like X.com URL's are the problem
|
|
|
Post by muzled on Jun 24, 2024 7:54:15 GMT 12
This is the sort of shit that makes me despise MSM. www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2024/06/leave_david_bain_alone.htmlLeave David Bain alone As any long-term reader of this blog will know, I am no fan of David Bain. I am strongly in the “he did it” camp. However I was disappointed to read this article the Herald which: Reveals his new name
Names his daughter
Reveals the town where he lives by
States his wife is a teacher at a nearby school
I think this is rather cruel (no not as cruel as killing your family but two wrongs don”t make a right). It was very appropriate to report on the murders 30 years on. I don’t even have a problem with the Herald door knocking him and asking for comment. There is journalistic value in that.
But what is the value in revealing his new name, especially knowing he changed it specifically after his former (new) name was published. This doesn’t just affect him, but his wife and kids. His children may have friends who do not know their Dad is David Bain. Now everyone will know. His wife will now have everyone at her school knowing her as the wife of David Bain. The Herald could have not revealed his new name. They could have stated he had a new name, without using it. That would have protected his family.
|
|
|
Post by ComfortZone on Jun 24, 2024 8:45:23 GMT 12
Cameron Slater, like or loathe him, has had a pretty tough time of late having had a serious stroke, now this sad news about his wife Juana Atkins thebfd.co.nz/2024/06/24/so-whats-on-earth-is-happening-here/I thought it was time to update you on several things that are happening all at the same time. Many of you know that Juana has been ill; but in fact she is very ill and that has now necessitated her forced retirement as editor due to ill health. She did a fantastic job keeping everything running smoothly, but it is now time for her to take some rest.
Last year she was diagnosed with kidney cancer and after surgery it was thought she was cancer free. Sadly, this was not the case and the cancer has now spread alarmingly. There are no treatment options, sadly. We had planned a transition from one editor to the next, along with a transition plan. That has not been able to happen.
Muzled mentions in his above post about Bain's address being publicised, back in the days of the questionable "Dirty Politics" book, the MSM had no problem publicising the Slater family's home address which forced them to move home.
|
|
|
Post by muzled on Jul 2, 2024 17:54:49 GMT 12
harrold... Once a victim, always a victim... theplatform.kiwi/opinions/the-cancer-society-is-racist-reallyThe Cancer Society is racist? Really? The media’s mission to demonise NZ’s health system continues. Graham Adams Contributing Writer July 1st, 2024 Not long after I began treatment in 2015 for an aggressive leukaemia, I was phoned by a representative of the Cancer Society. A hospital oncology staffer had strongly recommended I give the organisation my name and contact details so I did. I had become aware — as most cancer sufferers do — that hospital doctors and nurses are highly dedicated, capable and sympathetic to patients’ needs but their primary focus is to keep you alive and return you to good health if possible. They work under immense pressure and don’t have much time to hold your hand if you’re not coping with your diagnosis or the rigours of treatment. They certainly don’t have the time to help you deal with practical concerns such as how you might get to and from hospital. That’s where the Cancer Society steps in. The person who rang me explained I could get free transport to appointments via its network of volunteer drivers and outlined the financial help available through government agencies if I couldn’t work. She also told me about other services the society offers, including home visits by specialised cancer nurses, free counselling and a helpline for advice and support. It is a registered charity funded largely by bequests, donations and sponsorships, and it depends on an army of volunteers (including more than 5000 drivers across New Zealand). Personally, I have never met a cancer patient who hasn’t praised the society’s work but there are always a few dissenting voices among those whom charitable enterprises serve. Reactions to a cancer diagnosis can include anger, resentment, panic attacks and a crippling fear of going anywhere near a hospital — emotions which unfortunately may be expressed sometimes in criticism and hostility towards those doing their best to help. Most patients will readily cut busy doctors, nurses and volunteers some slack and if they happen to be curt after a gruelling shift or a little insensitive to an overly demanding patient, who would blame them? However, a small minority won’t excuse any oversight, error or tetchiness by medical staff or carers. They will take every inconvenience or mistake very personally, and will complain about it loudly. Sometimes their complaints find their way into the media, even when they would seem to most people to be an overreaction or plainly vexatious. Last week, the NZ Herald republished a story from Te Ao Māori News that recounted how a young-ish Māori woman had felt that staff at the Cancer Society’s Domain Lodge had “discriminated” against her during her stay there and that they had shown a lack of cultural competency.
The Domain Lodge is a purpose-built facility a short stroll from Auckland Hospital that offers accommodation for patients who have to travel from out of town for cancer treatment. It is a modern, well-maintained building with a shared kitchen where patients can cook their own meals. It has expert cancer nurses on hand, who are in close contact with the staff at the hospital treatment centres, and there are free counselling services. The woman, Heeni Hoterene — a Northland advocate for traditional rongoā medicine and maramataka that incorporates the healing power of the moon — was apparently asked to vacate her room at 10am “because all the rooms were booked out”. She was told that she could, if she wanted, stay in the building and sit in the living area until another room was ready for her at 2pm. The terms and conditions make it clear that “Domain Lodge functions like a motel. It is not a health-care facility and is unsuitable for people who require a high level of care.” Nevertheless, Hoterene complained to Te Ao Māori News that she objected to having to vacate her room and that she didn’t want to feel exposed in a public area after receiving radiation treatment. She said: “Everyone else gets to recover privately in their room. Why am I the one that’s being moved out of my room?” She alleged it was because she was Māori, had a moko kauae and was younger than all the other guests.
The journalist who repeated her allegations did not critically examine them; it seemed sufficient to simply assert them. And that, perhaps, should not be surprising given the mainstream media has been on a mission for years now to interpret any adverse statistics in Māori health or perceived errors in diagnosis and treatment as a direct result of institutional racism.
Their aim can be best achieved, of course, by a very selective presentation of the facts. Certainly Hoterene’s complaints might have been viewed differently if the article had mentioned that she had stayed at The Lodge for five days — and that accommodation for cancer patients is provided free of charge.
The story in Te Ao Māori News and the Herald didn’t mention that many patients are able to continue to work while they are undergoing radiotherapy. Indeed, as Hoterene told her 55,000 Facebook followers in a video clip last Friday, she expected to be well enough after her final radiation session that morning to be driven the three hours to her home in Northland. In that context, a few hours snoozing in the lobby doesn’t seem like a particular hardship. She had also been well enough to go out dining and dancing (“kanikani”) on K’ Rd, a kilometre or so from The Lodge, the previous evening.
Of course, it’s always possible it was a mistake for the lodge staff to have asked her to vacate her room. Perhaps she was more fragile and fatigued than she appeared. Given she was younger than the other patients, perhaps she was mistakenly assessed as being more resilient. But why would media organisations so credulously repeat accusations of cultural insensitivity and discrimination as the reason she had to temporarily vacate her room? The answer, of course, is obvious. Without the allegation of “discrimination” — meaning racism — there would have been no story. There is nothing remarkable about a patient being inconvenienced. Hospitals are forced to juggle patients and beds constantly. Just last week, Auckland Hospital Maternity Services warned expectant mothers they may be discharged three to four hours after giving birth. Now that’s a story. When I collapsed after a day-long infusion at North Shore Hospital as I was leaving the building one winter’s evening I was told bluntly the hospital was full and there was no bed available. But thanks to a very kind nurse who stayed behind after the end of her shift to help me, I was eventually given a bed for the night in a consultants’ room which wasn’t normally available to patients. But it was made very clear I had to leave by 7am.
I could barely stand upright in the morning but I managed to vacate the room as requested and sat slumped in a chair in the foyer until someone arrived to drive me home. No journalist would have thought my experience was a story worth reporting, and nor should they have. Cancer Society spokesperson Michelle Gundersen-Reid issued the obligatory public apology to Hoterene: “The team and I are sorry that this week we haven’t maintained our usual high standard of support as we had to shuffle a resident between rooms so we could fit as many people in as possible. “As soon as we became aware of the issue, we booked a meeting in with the impacted person. Representatives from our board and senior management team met her yesterday to apologise directly and discuss what happened, so we can learn from this experience.”
It is obvious that once an organisation is accused of “cultural” failings or discrimination, it is pointless to try to explain its actions or defend itself. It will only invite more opprobrium — which the race-hustling mainstream media will gleefully amplify. The society’s only option was to apologise profusely. Hoterene claimed the senior managers she met lacked cultural competency. “Staff are still ignorant of how to interact with Māori,” she said. “How do we educate them on the best way to care for Māori within these places?”
The news story reported that when Hoterene had told staff, “Oh, my whānau are coming to stay,” one had replied, “There is a rule here that not a lot of whānau can stay.” Hoterene responded with: “Who are you to talk to me like that?”
Her Facebook video clips expanded on her view that the lodge’s policy mandating patients can have only one supporter stay with them was culturally inappropriate. Māori, she said, never turn up in “ones”. She reckoned 17 members of her whānau in two vans had intended to come to see her and asked: “Where do I go to host them?... Where’s the marae room?”
If Hoterene’s expectations about how many whānau members the lodge should welcome had made their way into Te Ao Māori News or the Herald story — or in a follow-up to the original piece — readers would have been much better equipped to judge the merits of her complaint about cultural insensitivity. The chances of that happening, however, are as remote as the media reporting the assessment on May 31 by a Māori family from Opononi who were full of praise for the lodge and their care. A whānau member posted on Facebook: “Beautiful stay at the Domain Lodge... Thank you so much to the surgeons, Dr Kei, Dr Lund, Dr Prasaad, nurses Vanessa, Lisa, Savita, SeKumar, Anna, Lynn, Sunita, Nesse. So grateful that we have top surgeons & staff at Cardiology Wards 42 & 48. Thank you for your love and care. Love & blessings xx.”
The names of the surgeons and nurses mentioned are indicative of just what a vast melting pot our health system has become. To claim that such dedicated staff representing a wide range of ethnicities are somehow particularly prejudiced against Māori not only strains credulity but is widely seen as offensive. Nevertheless, the mainstream media shows no signs of abandoning its mission to convince the public of New Zealand’s deep-seated racism wherever possible, no matter how flimsy the evidence. As one wag put it: “The demand from journalists for stories about racism vastly exceeds the supply.”
|
|
|
Post by Fogg on Jul 4, 2024 15:46:23 GMT 12
Anyone got access to the Herald's firewalled premium content?
|
|
|
Post by muzled on Jul 15, 2024 10:50:59 GMT 12
'we're tevee inzid and it's ok, coz we're shooting the right guy' How do these imbeciles still keep getting funded?
|
|
|
Post by muzled on Nov 21, 2024 10:34:45 GMT 12
The good thing is, the left wing parties still haven't figured out that their way is the only way. pointofordernz.wordpress.com/2024/11/08/the-sheer-lunacy-of-contemporary-progressive-politics-or-how-i-became-a-right-wing-extremist/Ananish Chaudhuri writes – With Kemi Badenoch taking over the leadership of Tories in the UK, newspapers have been replete with how this represents a radical turn to the right. Similar headlines appeared when Labour was booted from power in New Zealand.
There was a time when I would have thought: “Shame. Why can’t these people not be more progressive, more empathetic, more caring of the less well-off and the downtrodden?”
But over time I have come to realize that the progressive position has little to do with helping the average person; in fact, progressive positions are often detrimental to that goal. And it turns out that anyone who dares to question the current progressive orthodoxy no matter how asinine it is, automatically becomes a “right-wing extremist”. So, to borrow a line from Jeff Foxworthy,
You might be a right-wing extremist if you think sex is dichotomous, not a continuum.You might be a right-wing extremist if you think a woman is an adult human female.
You might be a right-wing extremist if you think women should not have to compete against men in sports.
You might be a right-wing extremist if you find terms like “chest-feeding” or “pregnant person” ridiculous.
You might be a right-wing extremist if you believe that we should be a country where everyone has equal rights rather than some having different rights based on ancestry.
You might be a right-wing extremist if you believe that science is universal, ever evolving and not bound to a place or time.
You might be a right-wing extremist if you believe that free markets are good things that have helped millions around the world escape dire poverty and that, despite limitations, capitalism is far superior to socialism for improving the well-being of humans.
You might be a right-wing extremist if you think that Jacinda Ardern was an authoritarian leader who took an axe to our civil liberties in the name of protecting public health.
You might be a right-wing extremist if you believe that universities should be about a quest for truth and should not be forcing political indoctrination on to students.
You might be a right-wing extremist if you believe that the media has an obligation to report news fairly.
Everyone talks about how polarized the US is. What they do not understand is that every country is polarised because different people believe in different things, have different values and espouse different policy priorities. The reason that the US appears polarized is that people with different views have similar access to media outlets.
This is not true for New Zealand where one set of views have no difficulty getting heard while another set struggle to find an outlet.
Absence of different views does not imply the absence of polarization.
Since 2020, when I was released from jail (oops, sorry; I meant to say stepped down from being department head) I have written nearly one hundred columns and done numerous interviews. Many of my columns and/or interviews have appeared in mainstream outlets like New Zealand Herald, Stuff, RNZ, Newsroom, NBR, The Conversation, and so on. (I even had a piece in the New York Times.)
Now if you look at these columns there is a discernible pattern.
When I wrote about non-political issues or things that were broadly supportive of the previous Labour government, these columns routinely appeared in mainstream outlets.
But when I wrote columns criticising progressive shibboleths, these columns appeared only in alternative outlets like The BFD or bassettbrashandhide.com.
Does that make sense? Clearly, I know how to write columns. Do I suddenly become stupid when I write columns that argue against the progressive consensus?
I have been highly critical of our government’s response to Covid; to an extent because these policies displayed little foresight, ignored much existing evidence and were used to circumscribe fundamental rights.
I have published a critically acclaimed book from a well-known international publisher on the topic. I wrote columns with leading scholars like John Gibson (FRSNZ) of Waikato who has published in scholarly journals highlighting many deficiencies in our Covid approach.
None of these columns ever made their way into a mainstream outlet here. Forget Gibson or me, media anointed local “experts” with questionable credentials were allowed to pontificate ad nauseum while world-renowned scholars from Stanford or Oxford were dismissed as cranks.
To an extent, this was an ongoing process with the increasing left-ward tilt in academia and media.
But I think the process became turbo-charged in New Zealand with the coopting of the media by the previous Labour government via the Public Interest Journalism Fund (PIJF). At heart, the PIJF is a good idea. It is in our social interest to have a vibrant media. But in accepting this money, the mainstream media agreed to endorse a particular political view to the exclusion of others. They have continued to express that allegiance even after that government was thrown out via the popular vote.
The current progressive movement has little progressive about it. These are left-wing authoritarians determined to foist their warped sense of priorities on the rest of us.
The Covid lockdowns were a boon to white-collar workers and wreaked havoc for blue-collar workers. They have had severe adverse consequences for children who lost out on their childhood vaccinations and their education. The negative effects were disproportionately pronounced for the less well-off. Shutting down small businesses while allowing big supermarkets to operate was a stupid idea. All of this will significantly exacerbate inequality in the years to come.
This was clear then as it is clear now. Any true progressive would have recognized that. But saying this during the pandemic would have earned you the sobriquet of being a right-wing extremist.
So, yeah, I am fine with being a right-wing extremist if that is the price for common sense; better than being what passes as progressive these days.
|
|
|
Post by muzled on Nov 28, 2024 17:00:53 GMT 12
$tuffed getting put in its place by Haimona Gray.
Can An Apology Also Be An Insult?
A Stuff column trades in, well-intentioned, bigotry.
Haimona Gray
Nov 28
The worst racism I have seen and experienced in my life has come from people who have believed themselves to be well-intentioned.
Honestly, the majority of the racism I have seen and experienced in my life has been from people who have believed themselves to be well-intentioned.
This is possibly due to a childhood in Wellington, or a decade in the public service, but that's my lived experience and I wouldn't ever lie about something I witnessed or experienced to illustrate a political point…
Stuff published a piece today (https://www.stuff.co.nz/nz-news/360501323/luxon-pm-because-theres-no-one-else) by one of their regular columnists today, Verity Johnson, that contains one line of any interest - one subtle in its bigotry, but insulting nonetheless.
She claims:
“I actually saw a pākehā lady turn around to a Māori guy behind her in the checkout line and apologise on behalf of the Government for what they were doing to Māoridom - and a Filipina grandma and a grizzled orange-clad tradie nodded in solemn agreement.”
This is a very brief anecdote, so in depth analysis of the context of this would lead to making implications that the writer didn't intend, even if they are so offensively glaring that one need to be unfathomably naive to miss them.
There is a deep narcissism to this story - one in which a complete stranger bothers someone trying to shop, because of the colour of their skin, and assumes this person's identity and views are exactly the same as they've decided every person with said skin tone are, they then proceed to rant at this stranger as if they are doing a great service.
To do this shows a disconnect from social norms and inability to ask ‘does this person want me to do this’ that points to something beyond political passion.
If that is indeed the case for the woman in this anecdote, then I hold no ill will towards them and hope only that they get the support they need to navigate life without coming into unintended conflict with others.
As a society, we don't love and protect our most vulnerable people, we just pity them or use them for anecdotes, and that is a tragedy.
If this is, as the author implies, a sign of an exuberant but emotionally stable person - one whose actions the author lauds - then we have a problem.
A problem that crosses lines no good intent could justify crossing, into the fetishisation of Maori people, and the historic (but still alive) use of non-whites as powerless and voiceless background characters to be exploited by point scoring authors across the West.
This 'Maori’ - how one could look at someone and know they are Maori with this level of absolute surety is… interesting - was used by this woman to make her, and the author, feel better about themselves.
This woman assumed this stranger's whole life story based on the colour of his skin.
Most people would understand this as textbook racism, but the author doesn't.
Stuff should be above publishing this, but they sadly aren't.
The mindset behind this person's outburst, that Maori have no agency, drags all Maori down because it doesn't reflect our intelligence, diversity of thought, or our ability to speak and organise for ourselves.
We are props for these peoples self-aggrandising outbursts.
We exist solely to make Pakeha feel better about themselves (often at our own expense).
We help fill column inches, off our 'struggle’, for columnists who have run out of ideas but who won't step aside and let an actual Maori speak.
Throughout my life well heeled Pakeha of a liberal persuasion, like the author, have told me what I am.
They herd us into these two dimensional stereotypes so they don’t have to learn anything new or have their preconceptions challenged.
The worst thing Pakeha have done to me personally is to consistently elevate voices like Verity Johnson's above those of my fellow Maori even when talking about Maori.
Maoridom exists for our media commentariat as a form of cat to be saved from a tree by the Pakeha protagonists. For the purpose of making the protagonist look ‘good’.
In reality, nothing about this is kind or good. It is sinister and ignorant.
I don't need an apology from Pakeha for the political machinations of my country, but I would accept an apology for the needy narcissism of people who think they're on my side without ever talking to me or allowing me to speak.
I'd take an apology from Stuff.
I'd call for an apology for the Pakeha who demand Maori women's undivided attention anywhere and everywhere just because they have Moko Kauae - ‘what does it mean? Please teach me your mystical ways?!’
Those apologies, meaningful ones not those given for the sole purpose of inflating the ego of the apologiser, are rare.
The supposedly ‘well-intentioned’ remain undefeated - both in our media, and allegedly in our supermarkets - in their domination of soft bigotry.
None of this heals us, but maybe that's the point.
|
|