Hard News: The Disingenuous Press
366 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 9 10 11 12 13 … 15 Newer→ Last
-
What compounded Collins for me was the "I'm not going to comment on that but [reasserts comments about Norman as attempted hypothetical]".
Mind you, Judith Collins is known to become quite cheerful when people talk about government human rights breaches.
-
Is it possible to even evaluate Norman's actions at all without being damned to hell as an apologist for dictatorship?
What happened was unacceptable, and the apologies embarrassing.
But ... did Norman gain his up-close-and-personal position there by virtue of being a Member of Parliament? Is there any protocol traditionally associated with that privileged access? I'm interested.
But frankly, it seems perilous to even discuss that. Craig contributed this on the Dim-Post thread:
Oh, yes The Goff Doctrine (aka Rapist Defence Diplomacy): It shouldn’t have happened, but that dirty little bitch was being all provocative and shit…
Far out. Really? You really wanted to compare what Goff actually said to excusing a rapist, Craig? What OTT metaphor do you have left for Key now?
-
What compounded Collins for me
"Compounded Collins" would be a great name for a cocktail.
As you were.
-
Spooky. Brian Rudman writes this morning:
Of course Dr Norman has the right to protest. Indeed, once he regained his flag, he followed the official party inside the Beehive corridor, his cries of "you might suppress freedom and democracy in China but you can't do it here" echoing around the official party. But in this case, he exploited his special position of privilege as a parliamentarian to get up close and abuse an invited guest to Parliament.
And for what? Some fairytale fantasy about freedom for Tibet.
Having a lame argument does not, in my view, void the right to protest. There's more of a discussion to be had about whether Norman abused his privileged access, or not.
-
"Compounded Collins" would be a great name for a cocktail.
Three parts ignorance, one part authoritarianism, with a twist of malice.
Grind down, repress, then lock in a shipping container of ice. -
Three parts ignorance, one part authoritarianism, with a twist of malice.
Grind down, repress, then lock in a shipping container of ice.In Australia, the Componded Collins is known as the Sir Joh.
-
Far out. Really? You really wanted to compare what Goff actually said to excusing a rapist, Craig?
Well, yes I think I do, but will grant the turn of phrase was unhelpful. (And a self-inflicted dip in the Kiwibog and Your Views sewer didn't help.) I'm glad that we've become less tolerant of the presumption that victims of sexual abuse or domestic violence must have done something to bring it on themselves; think Goff, Key, McCully and Collins would care to extend Norman the same courtesy?
If Norman assaulted anyone he should be arrested, charged and get his day in court. Not be subjected to that kind of casual drive-by smear from people who just don't like him very much.
There's more of a discussion to be had about whether Norman abused his privileged access, or not.
Ah, yes... perhaps we could grant The Speaker has more authority (and access to informed advice) on that question than Messer Rudman and Espiner Major? Then again, Smith's authority over Parliament's grounds appears to have already been deemed irrelevant here.
-
But frankly, it seems perilous to even discuss that.
Oh please do, Russell, but since you brought up that Dim-Post thread could the discussion also involve those of us who don't regard invoking the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations as a discussion-ending trump card?
And I'm personally getting tired of having the mere suggestion the Chinese Government has a somewhat troubling definition of "dignity" that New Zealand shouldn't be indulging, with cat-calls of "well, you're an anti-trade, extreme left-wing China-hater who doesn't care if thousands of Kiwi families are left to starve in the streets". (You figure out that last part, tell me. Please.)
-
Well, yes I think I do, but will grant the turn of phrase was unhelpful. (And a self-inflicted dip in the Kiwibog and Your Views sewer didn't help.)
Phew, glad to see that. Because I was going to point out that you recently teed off on someone here who used "lynching" in a political sense. And for that matter, when Chris Trotter made his bizarre "gang rape" plea for Winson Peters.
Oh please do, Russell, but since you brought up that Dim-Post thread could the discussion also involve those of us who don't regard invoking the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations as a discussion-ending trump card?
I just think an absolute position is an easy one to take here. I see Danyl's now twice put up counterfactuals for discussion (eg: how would we feel if a right-wing MP stood and shouted "go back to Kenya" at a visiting Obama?) and no one's had a serious bite at it.
Although, I have to say that that example is faulty. I've seen US Presidential security guards at work -- when Clinton attended APEC. They would not have let anyone that close to their guy.
-
Although, I have to say that that example is faulty
That example is faulty because "go back to Kenya" is not to the right wing what "Tibet independence" is to the left, I would hope. I don't know what a right winger could shout at Obama - I try not to think about that sort of stuff - but it would have to be better than a racial slur to incite our sympathies surely.
-
Personally I think all heads of state and their next echelon down should be protested at on regular basis by someone about something.
The chances of any of them making everyone happy at a particular time are pretty slim, and people popping up to protest about issues are the sign of a healthy democracy. Particularly when it comes to relationships with China, which isn't a particularly healthy democracy.
Norman may have broken one of parliament's rules or ettiquettes. I don't have a problem with that, protesters should push boundaries and break rules, it's about challenging systems. If he's broken a rule or law he should be sanctioned for that. Was he a danger to anyone there apart from some egos on both the Chinese and NZ side? Nope. Could he have done worse? Sure, imagine him sitting down in the doorway at the last moment and blocking entry.
I also don't have a big problem with the Chinese security guard not being very well assessed for an arrest. The issue has got good coverage, if it was an assault it was pretty minor, I thought Norman did pretty well in terms of his issue.
-
"go back to Kenya"
And I'll repeat here that a 'Don't Tread on Me' flag was spotted at yesterday's ETS protest.
-
I don't know what a right winger could shout at Obama
Stop stealing 20 billion from BP? Something about communism taking over health care? I'm guessing it would sound silly.
-
Has anyone (publicly) asked how the VP ended up going past a guy with a when they just went round the back previously? I'd have thought if you wanted to a void your diplomatic incident that would be the ticket.
-
Whilst we're on the subject, could I ask a linguistic question to you all? The Herald is asking its readers if Key did the right thing in apologising to the Chinese, in an article entitled Should John Key have apologised to the Chinese delegation?. But if you read that headline without knowing the story, wouldn't you assume that he hadn't in fact apologised?
-
That's the likely reading Giovanni. "Was John Key right to apologise to the Chinese Delegation?" would be the other side?
-
China, which isn't a particularly healthy democracy.
But they're not even pretending to be one.
From what I saw, Rod Donald's 'protest' was wholly more dignified, and probably more respected (and respectful) than these theatrics.
Anyway, here's some John Cale. It's page 9, and Wednesday is the new Friday. "The Chinese envoy was here, but left."
Sorry for the high-jack, but in finding the song above, I found this from the Hillsborro in Christchurch in 1983. Probably my favourite love song of all time. And this rendition had to be shared. I keep a close watch.
-
Gio:
I would hope. I don't know what a right winger could shout at Obama
"Taxation is theft!"
Lyndon:
And I'll repeat here that a 'Don't Tread on Me' flag was spotted at yesterday's ETS protest.
Who says the Teabaggers are unique to America?
-
Norman may have broken one of parliament's rules or ettiquettes. I don't have a problem with that, protesters should push boundaries and break rules, it's about challenging systems. If he's broken a rule or law he should be sanctioned for that.
I wouldn't be keen to see that, especially given the grovelling nature of the apology already offered. But Idiot/Savant shouted this on Twitter this morning:
Anyone who says "sure, Norman had the right to protest, but..." doesn't mean the first part
Which just seems like rhetorical bullying to me. You take the absolutist view, or you are a lamentable quisling toad.
I also don't have a big problem with the Chinese security guard not being very well assessed for an arrest. The issue has got good coverage, if it was an assault it was pretty minor, I thought Norman did pretty well in terms of his issue.
I'm not so sure. I've been surprised by how many people I'd have expected to be somewhat sympathetic have bluntly scorned Norman when the subject comes up in conversation. And I don't agree with that either.
-
Anyway, here's some John Cale. It's page 9, and Wednesday is the new Friday. "The Chinese envoy was here, but left."
Okay, Friday will really be free-for-all Friday this week.
And yeah, what a lovely performance. I was just listening this weekend to the bootleg of Cale at the Gluepot in 1983, which still sounds compelling.
-
Anyway, here's some John Cale. It's page 9, and Wednesday is the new Friday. "The Chinese envoy was here, but left."
Would that make it a Chinese envoi, then?
-
I was just listening this weekend to the bootleg of Cale at the Gluepot in 1983, which still sounds compelling.
Hmm, I might have to check with my friendly bootlegger on that one. He was good at the Bruce Mason last year (or was it 2008?)* but didn't play my favourites. Venus in Furs was special though.
Carry on with the Norman Conquest.
* Bloody hell, it was 2007! Where? What? How?
-
I like ScottY's take on it
This attempt to fly the New Zealand flag has not been the first attempt by terrorists to challenge the One-China policy. Foreign forces are thought to be behind the incident, because New Zealand has always been a part of China, and because its people are peaceful and content under China's benevolent rule.
-
Hmm, I might have to check with my friendly bootlegger on that one.
Look here.
-
Look here.
Thanks. Heaps.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.