Posts by Ross Mason
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: Key Questions, in reply to Chris Waugh,
Major bamboozling with (pseudo-)science, an alphabet soup of chemicals, and often the “100% pure, clean, green, pollution-free New Zealand-sourced milk”, and images of smart, healthy, happy, strong, pale-skinned (seriously!) babies.
And you wonder why there are strict rules on advertising formula here.
We do have a major major moral dilemma that has been around for years but has had been little spoken of. That is, we produce the milk, ship it overseas for others to make into formula. The Dairy Industry have taken the view along the lines of "We only make the guns". Admirable. But is seems that we are now allowing others to come in and make it here, using the Kiwi brand, and we can - again - morally bankrupt ourselves because "we" are not making the stuff.
What are we doing to our future generations? The WHO have very good reasons that convinced a damn big slice of the world to put in rules on advertising of formula.
"lack of breastfeeding—and especially lack of exclusive breastfeeding during the first half-year of life—are important risk factors for infant and childhood morbidity and mortality". In particular, the use of infant formula in less economically developed countries is linked to poorer health outcomes because of the prevalence of unsanitary preparation conditions, including lack of clean water and lack of sanitizing equipment.[
-
Has anyone discovered this gem? The Mention of Quantative Easing and a coworker showing me prompted this:
-
Quotes from lawmakers as the GCSB Act was brought into being may reveal their intent.
This Hansard stuff is extremely dangerous. Who allowed this to happen? Surely, if people want to know what is spoken in Parliament they should turn up and watch.
We can’t have this stuff dug out from some shitty old bit of paper that people think should be kept as “heritage”.
For gods sake, for an organisation set up to protect us, this sort of damaging information is dangerous to our democracy.
PS - Isn't Hansard a "backroom expense" anyway?
-
Hard News: Key Questions, in reply to Matthew Poole,
I think it was a case of a bloke ending up "god" in an organisation, everyone cowtowing to him on everything legal and he not exposing himself to the rest of lawnorder brigade of the country. Insular I think the word is.
From the report it does seem that Wolfensohn had an unhealthy hold over the place.
Did I hear right he even had a hand in writing the legislation???
-
Hard News: Thatcher, in reply to Graeme Edgeler,
Are the two really contradictory?
Just depends who is on which side.
Dict: terrorist
in the modern sense, 1947, especially in reference to Jewish tactics against the British in Palestine -- earlier it was used of extremist revolutionaries in Russia (1866); and Jacobins during the French Revolution (1795) -- from Fr. terroriste;Yes...that nice Israeli Prime Minister Begin.
Anyone who fires a gun at you when there has been no declaration of war. Otherwise they would be "the enemy".
Convenient description of anyone who is doing anything I don't like them partaking in.
-
Hard News: Thatcher, in reply to Rich Lock,
The Lady’s not for burning.
But she might rust.
-
G Edgeler: Terrorist? Patriot surely.
Islander:
Annnd, her handshake was boneless
Obviously not one of the bone people.
-
Korea 101. There was a wee war back in the 50s. NK headed off down south and the “Goodies” were left with a wee corner around Busan. Enter the big boys led by Nuke ’em McArthur who cut the peninsula in half and then headed north all the way to the border. In other words the UN / USA / “Goodies” had the whole freaking lot to themselves. Enter China. Down we go again back to the old demarcation line and lets sign a ceasefire. They are still technically at war.
Now. That is why it was not a good look from the PM – in China – talking about who we will back if the NK decided to head south again. Because I suspect the “Baddies” – and historically this means China – will give the NK a bit of a hand again.
Whoop Whoop – Pull Up Pull Up
-
Hard News: Key Questions, in reply to ChrisW,
Why is there still soft-pedalling this by the Opposition?
I never thought I would hear myself say: "Bring back Lockwood......"
-
Islander:
that piece of Danish womanshit is on my humour/horror board forever!
A real life Mrs Scum what don't like darkies.
The "power" of the Majority Makers: Danish Peoples Party
Jesus. With a couple of exceptions....where have I heard this before? Oh yes...Act 1 & First scene.
The party's expressed goals are to protect the freedom and cultural heritage of the Danish people, including the family, the Monarchy and the Church of Denmark, to enforce a strict rule of law, to work against Denmark becoming a multi-ethnic society by limiting immigration and promoting cultural assimilation of admitted immigrants, to maintain a strong welfare system for those in need, and to promote entrepreneurship and economic growth by strengthening education and encouraging people to work, and to protect the environment and natural resources.
and
Controversies
Throughout the history of the Danish People's Party, its leaders have sought popularity through controversial and polarising stances.