Monday, April 10, 2006

ON NOTICE: Herald on Sunday

Herald on Sunday you are ON NOTICE! (note the bold font)
They have "outed" an alleged tinnie house in South Auckland that just happened to be next door to a Labour MP's office!

It's not right, Liberal MSM like the HoS should be saluting the courage of the Labour Government for steadfastly sticking to it's policy of doing sweet fuck all for poorer communities in NZ, which has led to record growth of small businesses like scam tertiary courses, quasi-casino bars and loan sharks and which is good for the economy™

Although a single Herald on Story story makes no real difference it could be the start of a trend that could impact the profitability of small businesses in the community and hurt the economy™™

I think it's grossly unfair to expect that a Labour MP be aware of what is going on in his own community. They won, they are the government, their way of doing things is best.

So back off Herald on Sunday and leave Labour alone!
By publishing the address you've got the tinnie house busted good and proper, be happy with that.
I hope that'll teach the bastards for giving that Herald staffer a crappy foil last time.

Friday, April 07, 2006

The Shitwind Blows

There's been a bit of heat generated from the earlier posting of the Louise Nicholas leaflet because it is arguably 'illegal' and could jeopardise the future possibility of a 'fair' trial for already convicted police rapists.

Indeed, a few gentlemen have emailed me with suppressed information explaining just why that image shouldn't be posted and that I am breaking the law. Of course they themselves broke the law by emailing me this information. One man even suggested I was as bad as the rapists themselves by publically revealing this information.

I think this comment from another blog shows the line in the sand for me on the issue of suppression orders and 'respect' for the law.

"The morality of such an order is irrelevant, it is the legality that counts."

I understand that point of view, in fact society would fall apart if immoral people had no fear of the law, but to me it seems like a robotic non-human way of thinking.
I would reverse that statement - morality is what counts - it is a far better guide to life than statute books for decent human beings.

Imagine being a homosexual man prior to 1984 -
"Well, the law states that homosexuality is illegal, so therefore, I will stop being gay because it's the law!"

On the few occasions my morality conflicts with the law a bit of risk/cost/benefit analysis begins, for instance smoking cannabis, it is illegal under the law, but to me it is not immoral, and as I have white skin the biggest punishment I would realistically face under NZ's legal system is police diversion. So I happily smoke cannabis.

However in this case of name suppression of the convicted rapists, the 'unintended consequences' could be far greater than a theoretical legal punishment I could suffer,

The spin is that these name suppression 'violations' on the internet and leaflets handed out on the street could cause the judiciary to declare the next rape 'show trial' a mistrial before it has even begun, and I have been told this 'will let the rapists get away with it' - er, newsflash, Clint Rickards already has.

Remember these 'show trials' came from the police decision to derail a potentially devastating and far-reaching Commission of Inquiry into Police Conduct by launching "investigations" into a few select historic rape cases that they had attempted to sweep under the carpet for nearly 2 decades.

In the unlikely event a mistrial was declared due to the publication of known facts there would be again be further 'unintended consequences' - mass public outrage even more intense then it is presently which in turn would force the Government to renew and strengthen the Commission of Inquiry into Police Conduct over the cover-ups of these historical rape allegations which far outnumber those currently awaiting trial. Focusing not only on the rapists but on those who have helped protect the rapists by destroying and "losing" evidence, intimidating victims and forging documents.

Of course, to get an inquiry into the police cover-up of her own case is why Louise Nicholas went public with her story in the first place.

This is a risk involved in handing out those leaflets, I believe the right for the public at large to know about what is happening in their legal system outweighs the tiny risk of a mistrial.
Morally, it's the right thing to do.

Legalities aside, I do find it apt that the same persons willing to publish highly offensive and derogatory pictures of religious figures engaged in sexual acts purely for the purpose of causing offence (what I would call a immoral act however not against 'the law') are the same persons condemning others for publishing suppressed and important facts about the identities of convicted rapists.

What a sad world we live in, where legal argument trumps morality at every turn.

Wednesday, April 05, 2006

It is illegal to view this post

We Believe Louise Nicholas - Bob Schollum and Brad Shipton are convicted rapists

It is against the law for us to allow NZ readers to view this image of the now infamous Louise Nicholas leaflet (hosted on an American server), so if you live in NZ please don't look at it!

ON NOTICE: Mark Sainsbury

Mark Sainsbury - On notice due to his continuing 'showing up' of Susan Wood

Susan Wood (and her lawyers) have worked unbelievably hard to get her into the postion she squats today. The #1 presenter on the #1 7pm Lifestyle infotainment show in the country.

It was decided in the Employment Court that she is worthy of the highest salary for a broadcaster at the state broadcaster and therefore by definition she has to be the best talent TVNZ have.

Mark Sainsbury may have his populist awards and rapport with the viewers at home,
He may indeed be both the eggman and the walrus but that doesn't matter where it counts in the news media, the bottom line, the $$$$, the cream, you Sainsbury, on the every third day and every third week Wood has off, you need to back off with the interesting interviews and 'analysing' things. Stop making the step-mother of the nation look bad!!!

So, Sainsbury get out from behind that desk, take off the shoes and the suit and interview your subjects while lying on a bed, and remember to ask the questions the people want answers to like "How did that feel" - The audience are not interested in trivial things like 'Facts'

And Sainsbury,
If Susan Wood yells or even raises her voice at her children at any point in 2006 you Mark Sainsbury will be held personally responsible and immediately become 'Dead to me' (or us)

ON NOTICE: Liberal Mainstream Media

Liberal Mainstream Media - The 'liberal MSM' are purveyors of everything negative in society, whenever I find out someone has died or something bad has happened inevitably I see, hear or read about it in 'the liberal media' so liberal media you are 'on notice' for reporting negative stories and anything and everythingthat challenges my world view,
I hear the Liberal MSM apologists cry

"But, we 'the liberal media' - a single monolithic entity, we are just the messengers!"

Well tell me this,
If a tree falls and no-one is around to hear it, did it make a sound?
Now imagine the tree is 'the liberal media'......
get it!
does that actually make sense?
it doesn't matter,
Liberal MSM you are on notice, as soon as you stop reporting things I don't like you'll be off the list.

You're ON NOTICE!!!!

I was pondering over the lack of activity here and I thought to myself why not use Blogger and all the power 134 unique visits a day gives me to try and make the world a better place.
And why not do it by singling out those who have earned our ire and adding their names to a concise list.

To the right are the recently installed "ON NOTICE" and "DEAD TO ME" boards which take a cue from Scientology and Bill O'Reilly and blatantly plagiarise Stephen Colbert.

Being 'On Notice' on the noticeboard means you need to step off that platform you're on, listen to some sense (that's us) and stop doing whatever you're doing. Hopefully the severity of being placed 'On notice' on will avoid you becoming "DEAD TO ME" (or us) which is the most severe punishment a man or woman could ever suffer (apart from being "non-existent to me" (or us))

Think of it as a burning torch for the blog-lynching of those we have arbiltraily decided to victimise.

Unfortunately for Stephen Colbert shortly after he put ABC News Anchor Bob Woodruff 'On Notice' (for being robot-like) Woodruff became almost dead to everyone in Iraq, as such Stephen hasn't bought out the big boards to name and shame the wrong-doers since.

But fear not Stephen here in what you call "Australia's Canada" there is no killer cyborg called Bob Woodruff so we will keep our small antipodean torch burning for the cause.