Top show, Hindsight.
Have a hankering to see some of Ron Walton's In the Nature of Things.
Couldn't drag me away from that when I was a child.
I remember it as black and white TV science. But, it was actually science, in black and white, on TV.
I also have a vague memory of Brian Edwards interviewing David Frost? Late sixties, early seventies? Or I'm imagining it.

Apologies for the earlier rush-of-blood out of order comment....

What I meant to say is that nothing I have heard or read has convinced me that the serious crime of identity theft isn't concealing an even more serious crime, the trades hall bombing was just the most high profile unsolved crime from 1984 that leapt into my head.

Not trying to cause trouble, just got those annoying nagging alarms on my bullshit detector going crazy when I try to get this story to add up.

Not convinced that identity theft is the end of it.

Did David Garrett murder Ernie Abbott?

Trades Hall bombing March 27 1984. UNSOLVED.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/334315

That would explain the false passport far more convicingly than the obvoius nonsense we are being presented with.

I remember the drop-off in interest in the 1994 World Cup occurred as soon as USA were named as host nation.
Only the USA and FIFA thought that was a good idea.

Cannabis is 100% non-toxic, the estimated lethal dose of THC is about 10-15 times the mass of the human body - how is it a poison?

Alcohol is not a drug, it is a solvent.

Peanuts and DIY are the real killers.
Ban them?

Prohibition doesn't make people criminals, prohibition makes people ILLEGAL.

Dimethyl-tryptamine (DMT) exists in the brain of every living creature with a central nervous system, it is a banned substance.
Therefore, we have prohibited all mammals, all reptiles, all birds, all fish, and quite a number of plants on this planet.
To quote the late Bill Hicks, "Isn't that a bit like saying god made a mistake?"

Which part of this outrageously insane nonsense am I supposed to take seriously?

Also, I'd be very curious to know how exactly the police think they are going to find detectable evidence of anybody tripping on LSD.
LSD is only detectable OUTSIDE the body, BEFORE it has been ingested.
I look forward to the NZ police submitting their amazing new detection technique for full peer review to the relevant scientific publications with baited breath.

Next they'll expect me to believe that a policeman with absolutely no formal qualifications as a pharmacologist, a toxicologist, or any type of medical training beyond basic first aid, is some kind of "drug expert". - Yeah right.

Regardless of the flavour of government, and despite contrary evidence, the Emperor's intense desire to remain naked was all that ever really mattered.

The evidence against cannabis prohibition has been around since before prohibition.
Sadly, generations of anti-cannabis propaganda has resulted in both non-smokers and smokers wallowing in confusion.

Cannabis is prohibited because it makes better quality fibres than the petro-chemical industry, and because cannabis makes better paper than the wood chip industry. Nothing to do with health.

W H R Hearst - otherwise known as Citizen Kane - invented the word "Marijuana" to enable the propaganda against cannabis to take hold - try to avoid using that ugly word. Both Hearst and DuPont chemicals had a huge commercial interest in removing any competition to synthetic fibres and Hearst inststed all his publications be printed on wood chip paper. Hearst owned the forests the wood chip came from. The word "Marijuana" was made to sound Mexican to harvest the blatant US racism of the day, for the propaganda to feed on.

Facts and evidence left the equation as soon as Hearst and DuPont decided that cannabis threatened their interests.

Today nothing changed.

It's like lusting over someone superficially attractive

..and waking up in bed with an ugly psychopathic mass-murderer.

Not prepared to accept the evidence?
Sounds like a policy based on "faith" to me.
Anybody making judgments or decisions based on "faith" is unfit to govern, and quite possibly insane.
National are not going to do anything that might threaten future income from future private prisons.
To be honest, I expect nothing less from people who think of the dark ages as "the good old days", and want to return us all to them.

I must admit, I was far more disappointed when Labour did the dirty on cannabis law reform in order to get the christian loonies onside for the coalition - that felt far more like being shafted that today's nonsense.

National wouldn't consider changing any of our drug laws unless they got permission from the yanks first.