The Dim-Post theorizes on the possible reasons for the people of Auckland apparently keen and queuing to get a hold of Ian Wishart's recent book, Absolute Power. Are Aucklanders a bit crazy, and if so why? It's a condition that may come to be known as "Jafa Brain"
DIM-Post suggests two possibilities: an unreliable informant who often misleads the well-meaning but gullible Mr Wishart. Or maybe those DOC aerial sprays a few years back had a greater effect on the good people of Auckland than we were led to believe...
I’d go with the DOC aerial spray theory myself.
A large portion of those good people of Auckland readily believed the National Party is nothing but a front for the Exclusive Brethren, whose nefarious aims to accuse the Greens of wanting to halve defence spending were guided by policy written in Washington.
Policy that would see nuclear ships back in Waitemata harbour by lunchtime.
Luckily, journalist god Hager, whose very opinions are beacons of shining truth against the far, far, far, far, extreme right exposed all of this with a meritorious best seller to rival Mr Wishart’s book in what a neutral Hare Krishna devotee described as the Universal Reverse Karmic Balancing Factor. The universe knew Absolute Power would inevitably be published, and thus provided the Hollow Men as part of a preordained preventative strike. Ironically, the first time Keith Locke has ever supported first strike as a means of self-defence.
Throw in the fact Aucklanders believe a multi-billion dollar tunnel of around 300 metres on or near Helen Clark’s electorate will solve the major traffic issues of the day, and mental damage from either aerial sprays or petrol fumes are looking likelier and likelier.
I think I'll have to read the book.
Related Link: Revenge of the Painted Apple Moth
DIM-Post suggests two possibilities: an unreliable informant who often misleads the well-meaning but gullible Mr Wishart. Or maybe those DOC aerial sprays a few years back had a greater effect on the good people of Auckland than we were led to believe...
I’d go with the DOC aerial spray theory myself.
A large portion of those good people of Auckland readily believed the National Party is nothing but a front for the Exclusive Brethren, whose nefarious aims to accuse the Greens of wanting to halve defence spending were guided by policy written in Washington.
Policy that would see nuclear ships back in Waitemata harbour by lunchtime.
Luckily, journalist god Hager, whose very opinions are beacons of shining truth against the far, far, far, far, extreme right exposed all of this with a meritorious best seller to rival Mr Wishart’s book in what a neutral Hare Krishna devotee described as the Universal Reverse Karmic Balancing Factor. The universe knew Absolute Power would inevitably be published, and thus provided the Hollow Men as part of a preordained preventative strike. Ironically, the first time Keith Locke has ever supported first strike as a means of self-defence.
Throw in the fact Aucklanders believe a multi-billion dollar tunnel of around 300 metres on or near Helen Clark’s electorate will solve the major traffic issues of the day, and mental damage from either aerial sprays or petrol fumes are looking likelier and likelier.
I think I'll have to read the book.
Related Link: Revenge of the Painted Apple Moth
I remember reading a case with a Mr I Wishart challenging a fine for not showing his drivers licence on the grounds that his rights to religious freedom prevented him from carrying what he viewed as the first step towards the Devil's mark being printed on our foreheads. Poor mad soul
ReplyDeleteNo Fergus, what you remembered reading was some raving lefty halfwit's attempt to belittle me. My argument in the High Court was based on the Bill of Rights freedom of movement issues, along with the 1688 Bill and various constitutional court cases since then in NZ, Australia and Canada.
ReplyDeleteAh so it was actually you. I must admit it's been a while since I read the case so I probably have miscategorised the arguments. What I clearly remember was that it was an argument without a hope of success.
ReplyDeleteSounds like any self-defence case in NZ then :-)
ReplyDeleteFergus, in my dim distant memory I think someone else tried the argument you are thinking of.
ReplyDeleteIn fact, my argument was solid but was premature. I based it on the inherent human right of freedom of movement without undue interference from the state, as codified in various documents. This is because I was given a notice by police forbidding me to drive.
However, the High Court judge stated the police notice had no legal authority at that stage as far as the court was concerned and was not before the court as I had not been charged with breaching a forbidden to drive notice. Therefore, my carefully referenced cases were not relevant to the issue of driving without a licence.
I never got to revisit it.