Posts by Kyle Matthews
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I have very little respect for Cunliffe's actions in outing the details of this guy's case. In my lay-person's reading, it's a breach of the immigration act:
(1) Subject to this section, confidentiality as to the identity of the claimant or other person whose status is being considered under this Part, and as to the particulars of their case, must at all times, both during and subsequent to the determination of the claim or other matter, be maintained by refugee status officers, the Authority, other persons involved in the administration of this Act, and persons to whom particulars are disclosed under subsection (3)(a) or (b).
Clearly the guy's supporters have got the wrong end of the stick a bit, but this isn't a battle to be fought in the arena of public opinion either way.
The guys just spent 53 days starving himself trying to stay in NZ. What a gutless act in response to breach his right to privacy by the Minister by making vague pointings at supposedly confidential case studies. How low can you get?
-
I think some ex-Prime Ministers should be listened to. My memory of Mike Moore is that he took over Labour about 6 weeks out from the election, kept it in freefall, and was about as unsuccessful as a PM or leader can be. I'm not even sure if he was PM long enough to warm the seat.
And he went off to the WTO, where he had to job share. Can't remember if he got the mornings or the afternoons, but whatever.
It's not exactly a stirring resume, and I can't see how it all qualifies him to comment on a third term, first-elected female, prime minister who's recognised as an international leader of some stature. Like her or loathe her, Mike Moore's about 2 foot tall in her shadow.
-
As a special treat they provided jugs of Emerson's Bookbinder from the keg downstairs as a palate cleanser between drams.
Christ, screw whatever they're trying to sell. Emerson's Bookbinder is like nectar from heaven. Heaven I tell ya.
-
Come now Kyle, a little consistency will go a long way here.
You aknowledged Chavez rearming was due to an Armerica threat.
We're with America and so have rearmed also....
Labour stood valiently to the side when Indo annexed Timor & USA gave the Solomons a hostipal pass during WWII - It's their fault!
I was comparing Helen with Olly Cromwell. To my knowledge Chavez is ahead on the score board in ethnic laws/cleansing.
You seem to have lost track of the origins of this discussion. Here's where you started:
Is he doing anything different than Helen Clark has actually achieved (& wants to continue)?
Half the stuff you're putting out contradicts this. So I'll leave it there.
And, rightly or wrongly, the articles of the Treaty don't govern law in this country.
-
To rearm is to rearm. That Helen rearmed NZ is the same as Chavez rearming his nation.
That's nonsense. See my point about Helen Clark not handing out AK47s. Upgrading military equipment for a standing army which largely engages in peacekeeping activities under the banner of the UN, is completely different than importing large numbers of weapons for military death squads and counter-insurgency units.
That USA has invaded oil rich nations for their oil is really without doubt, and is about defending the american way of life = cheap oil. This is a form of self defense to neocons.
I'm not sure what the relationship with this is, and Chavez and Helen Clark being the same.
I take it Vietnam wasn't a war either?
Helen Clark wasn't in government when NZ got involved in Vietnam. In fact, I think she was a university student protesting against it.
Kyle, come now. Foreshore and Seabed legislation is racist law to stop Maori testing rights in a court of law.
Has Chavez passed a similar piece of legislation? I again don't see how this makes them the same.
-
Aunty Helen has led the rearming of the NZDF.
Exactly which invasion has Chavez been party to?
Closing a TV station & banning coverage of MPs in parliment, a matter of degree but all going the same way.
And which ethnic group has Chavez made illegal to have legal representation in a court of law?I don't think the NZDF was ever 'un-armed' for Helen Clark to 're-arm' them. If you mean, modernised and getting rid of 50 year old bits of equipment, then yes, NZ has done some of that, rightly so, given the bad state that it had fallen into. Chavez is apparently preparing (rightly or wrongly) for an American-led insurgency, which he will fend off by supplying local militia with small arms. Helen Clark hasn't been out on the streets handing out AK47s.
The sentence 'And led NZ into more fights since WWII' doesn't make sense to me. But Helen Clark has got NZ troops involved in one war - Afghanistan. Everything else in the past fifteen years has been peacekeeping (East Timor, Solomons), or reconstruction (Iraq) that I can think of. I'm not sure what is the exactly the same between Clark and Chavez about that.
I didn't mention invasion.
Well, coverage of MPs in parliament isn't banned, and hasn't ever been banned. Coverage of MPs for a certain purpose is now (still) banned. I don't agree with the legislation, but in actual fact it opened up coverage of MPs in parliament, because they can now use footage of MPs who aren't standing and speaking. The equivalent of Chavez would be closing down TV3 because they broadcast Ron Marks giving the finger. Again, planets apart.
And I'm not sure what track you're on about ethnic groups not having legal representation in law. -
Storm in a teacup, Howard is misunderstood - he said he watched Oprah once.
On that basis Rudd is also in the clear.
It wasn't stripping in New York City, it was trippin' in New... oh, nevermind.
-
Is he doing anything different than Helen Clark has actually achieved (& wants to continue)?
Umm, yup.
I have mixed feelings about Chavez, as do probably a fair few people on the left.
I also have mixed feelings about Helen Clark, again, ditto.
But the difference between them and what they're doing, is quite a bit really.
Helen Clark, for example, isn't importing thousands of AK47s into her country to prepare for an American led insurgency. Or going on six hour long socialist rants (with a whiteboard I saw on the Daily Show). Or standing up at the UN ranting about how bad the US is. Or shutting down media outlets, persecuting her opposition with death squads, etc etc etc.
She's also not as popular as Chavez I see!
-
Squee! Also, anyone want to post a link to Stephen Colbert editing his own wikipedia entry live on air?
The elephants one?
http://onegoodmove.org/1gm/1gmarchive/2006/08/wikiality.html
-
Do they make oscillators specifically for smart bomb GPS units, or do they make oscillators for GPS units, some of which are used by the military, some for smart bombs?
Its the difference between making a weapon and making something that can be used as (or in) a weapon.Yes they do:
Herald broke the story last year:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&ObjectID=10383752
Rakon denied that they knew what end users were doing with their units. Herald exposed that as a lie:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&ObjectID=10383768
There's lots of good questions to be asked about why Rakon is allowed to export some of their products. Herald indicates that they've started to sell a product which is linked to nuclear defence, which is starting to push the NZ Nuclear Free Zone, Disarmament and Arms Control Act to its limit too.
All I'm saying, if you're going to jump on AirNZ for providing troop transport, then how about asking questions of some of the other companies that the government is actively encouraging to get involved in the military complex boots and all.