Hard News: Reporting Afghanistan
111 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 Newer→ Last
-
Avoidance, noun: tax evasion practiced by someone who can afford an accountant.
Noice
-
none of the accompanying journalists did their reporting beyond the arranged interview opportunities, or spoke to the locals.
Maggie talked to some of the locals - I don't think any of the stories she wrote about it got picked up by the papers. She also bought rugs off the locals. They're in our lounge.
-
We're just luck luck lucky Osama Bin Laden wasn't alledged to have been hiding out in New Zealand when 911 occurred, otherwise John Key wouldn't have even had to board a plane to make that visit to the war zone 8 years after the fact.
-
3410,
...
-
Oh, noes. I might get sued for libel by "the wealthy".
Oh noes -- making shit up is OK as long as I'm flinging it at people I don't like. What is this, Kiwibog?
Yes; well aware of that, thanks. In the real word, any accountant will tell you that it's not so black and white.
In the real world, words have meanings and facts aren't an optional extra. And I'm out...
-
How does an alliance of Military heavyweights ensure a campaign against a small time militia outfit lasts for 8 years?
http://blogs.reuters.com/global/2009/08/13/who-is-funding-the-afghan-taliban-you-dont-want-to-know/
http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/afghanistan/100119/afghanistan-corruption-us-investigation
Fund them.
-
Maggie talked to some of the locals - I don't think any of the stories she wrote about it got picked up by the papers. She also bought rugs off the locals. They're in our lounge.
Can you pass on my apologies, then? We've said that that there were no interviews conducted on the basis that none ever appeared.
She's welcome to email me if she likes.
The show itself is on at at 9.10pm tonight, TVNZ 7.
-
In the real world, words have meanings and facts aren't an optional extra. And I'm out...
Sure. Let's try this one, then, on evasion vs. avoidance: when people on lower incomes want to hide some of their money from the IRD, they need to resort to illegal means; when wealthy people want to do the same thing, they can resort to legal means. Why? Because most of our laws are designed not to promote justice and fairness, but to protect property and wealth.
And - here's the kicker - when we cut taxes to the highest earners, we call it "removing the loophole". Which is more or less like a bank fighting robberies by wiring the money directly to the robbers.
-
How does an alliance of Military heavyweights ensure a campaign against a small time militia outfit lasts for 8 years?
I heard this comment from a senior Navy NCO during a training course on how to keep safe if my humanitarian activities see me sent to any of the multitude of countries that have issues with IEDs and/or UXO. To the extreme outrage of a number of the other people on my course (kinda comes with the territory when you're in the humanitarian sphere, I guess), he said that a lot of these countries that have ridiculous arsenals, be they official or non-official, pay for them from humanitarian aid funds.
His solution was to stop aid funding. Cue more outrage (not voiced at the time, of course), but he has a point. The money gets siphoned off before it ever reaches the intended recipients, and ends up being used to purchase weapons.
-
I recall hearing many years ago (no refs sorry) that about 90% of the world's weapons were supplied by the 5 permanent members of the UN Security Council - who can veto any action that threatens their lucrative lil wars.
-
So John enjoyed his trip?
Post your response…
This topic is closed.