Posts by Don Christie
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Bob McCroskie's brain went into overdrive. His widely-reported analysis was that "sexual liberation" was the cause of this abuse.
There must be some confusion in the FF ranks because Garth George says the abuse just ain't so.
An interesting gameto play is to try and match up George works, which come only with his name, with press releases put out by similar organisations to FF.
This is a good place to start but I wonder if the Herald, that great defender of democracy, is getting value for money.
-
Why didn't they go in on the 12-13th? and catch them "red handed" and get real evidence of military training?
Maybe, just maybe, because that's when the boys were allegedly playing with SMGs and live rounds in the bush and a shoot out would have been likely and people might have been killed.
Did you listen to the SG talking about this being wrapped up without a shot being fired? Of course, it might have been much clearer cut if we had body bags to count but I suspect the "police brutality" and "racism" cries would have been much louder and more justified. Then the question would have been, "why didn't they wait a couple of days and avoid the bloodshed?"...
-
Excuse me? Has anyone around here is arguing that threats of that nature shouldn't have been responded to - and taken seriously?
Well, yes. That was the overall impression I was getting. Maybe, as others have said, growing up in a country where terrorism was a daily threat and the resulting corruption of the police response equally damaging makes me more suspicious of both sides of the debate.
I am also suspicious about these leaks. As I said yesterday, I wonder who benefits most from them.
But the most pertinent comment was from the article Russell linked to:
Tuhoe Waikaremoana Trust manager Tama Nikora said his people had been struggling for years to have their voices heard.
That's a story of dispossession and disenfranchisement that should be familiar to lots of Kiwis with Irish or Scottish roots.
-
Yesterday The Herald also claimed that the "Christian Businessmen" outed themselves during the last election.
Silly me, I thought it was the Greens that outed the EBs covert campaign. Did the Herald miss that action?
-
Is anyone asking the obvious follow-up: Because it sure seems beyond credibility that Police haven't been (selectively) leaking like the proverbial sieve.
Craig, is the obvious follow up "who benefits most from this latest leak"?
-
Heard the SG and Police Commissioner on the radio last night. I think this has been a reasonable outcome and due process for a serious issue been followed.
Our legislators should be ashamed, however. They seem to delight in creating unworkable law, c.f. the Copyright Amendment bill and EFB.
Mind you in the UK writing poems is now terrorism. Maybe woolly, unworkable is good after all.
-
Take the example of university science education. It has been cut to the bone
Right, so you need more money? Personally I am happy for you to have it, in fact, I may even argue that it would be better for you to have it to spend on science education than giving me the money as a tax cut (unfashionable though that position may be).
But I'll be damned if I let you have the money without some oversight and guarantee that you are teaching, you know, science.
I still fail to see where your opposition to the new curriculum comes from. One thing I am certain of is that there are bound to be problems with any curriculum, it's just that you and Mr. Minto have yet to enlighten us in any coherent way.
-
The problem is, Kevin, you seem to be letting blind ideology get in the way of reasoned debate.
If you are truly concerned about the individual and independence of thought I would expect you would be very supportive of the changes to the curriculum which seem to emphasise that approach.
However, your "get out of the way - but give us the money" argument seems a simplistic regurgitation of the cry from private schools to live off state subsidies without any democratic oversight.
(PS Should I concerned that we have an education system where a sociologist is able to give us more clarity and reason than a scientist?)
-
Kevin
So what did the other university lecturers think of the bollox, oops new curriculum?
Dunno, but I am hoping that they will apply a lot more rigour to their arguments for and against than you seem able to muster.
-
My intro to entrepreneurship 101 would be something along these lines:
Kids, if you want to make lots of filthy lucre, don't become an entrepreneur, join a corporate and clamber up that ladder. However, if you would like to try it, don't hold back.
Sorry to disabuse Mr. Minto of his cherished beliefs.
As an employer I am pretty happy with the calibre of students we see - problem solving, learning to learn, being able to assess the worth of different evidence are all critical skills and I am pleased to hear these will be propagated further.
I am concerned that KevinHicks describes himself as a university educator because his promotion of gut feel over evidence is the opposite of what I want. His arguments lack coherence - I thought at first that he was going to be a huge supporter of these curriculum changes but it appears not to be the case. It is not clear to me why.
That being said, most of my primary education was spent in class sizes of over 60 children, so what would I know?