Thursday, May 30, 2013

Fletch Islam and the Fear Of Offending

Two news stories drew my attention today and especially after the attack by two Muslims on a solider in the streets of London the other day in the UK.

The first, an attack by machete-wielding Muslims on two men in a barbershop which left the men seriously injured, and the second, a story about a student newspaper at an Australian university having to apologize and withdraw a satiric article about Islam after having previously made fun of other religions or beliefs in other issues with no consequence whatsoever.

MACHETE wielding thugs have left two men with ‘serious injuries’ after attacking them in an Accrington barber’s shop.
The two victims had been inside the shop in Ormerod Street when four masked men carrying machetes and knives forced their way inside.

Detectives investigating the incident said the gang attacked the pair before forcing them into the street.

Police said they were looking for a gang of Asian men in connection with the attack.

You see, in British 'media-speak', Muslims are now referred to as 'Asians'. To even refer to Muslims in a story that (rightly) describes who they are in relation to a crime is now to somehow cause offence.

In the second story -
An Australian university forced the editors of its student newspaper to retract a satirical piece about Islam, fearing violent reprisals from radical Muslims.

The Woroni, a student newspaper at The Australian National University, recently published a series of satirical infographics making fun of Catholicism, Scientology, Mormonism and Judaism.
But the final installment, which mocked the religion of Islam and derided the Islamic view of women as a “rape fantasy,” prompted a stern rebuke from university administrators and some students who claimed that the newspaper had offended Muslims.

The editors issued a broad apology to anyone who might have been offended. Later, when the infographic was published on the Woroni’s website and Facebook page, the university again intervened. The editors and writers were hauled before an administrative review board and threatened with expulsion unless they took down the infographic.

Administrators claimed the piece of satire violated the university code of conduct. They also feared it could inflame radical Muslims.

“In a world of social media, [there is] potential for material such as the article in question to gain attention and traction in the broader world and potentially harm the interests of the university and the university community,” said a statement from the Chancelry of the university.
Satirical depictions of Islam or its prophet, Muhammad, have been known to prompt violence among radical Muslims. In 2005, A Danish cartoonist was murdered after drawing Muhammad, and in 2010, the creators of the television show “South Park” received death threats.

The editors of the Woroni felt they had no choice but to comply, and took down the infographic. The incident left them worrying about the future of the freedom of the press on campus, however.

“Although the issue was eventually resolved, Woroni is concerned about the implications of these events for freedom of speech and, more generally, the role of student publications,” wrote the editors in a statement.

Maybe they are beginning to wake up to the fact that freedom of speech genuinely is being threatened?

It looks like it wasn’t even Muslims who said they were offended by the article – it was other people who were offended on their behalf. And why? Because that is what is being drilled into us – the fact that you can’t offend Muslims or Islam because there will be reprisals. That is part of Sharia law and it is becoming slowly ingrained into the universal consciousness that they are not to be offended. It is becoming taboo; becoming like bad manners, and that is what they want.

It has to do with FEAR, which reinforces the wishes of those who follow Islam. No one cared when any of those other faiths or beliefs were satirized. Even if there were Christians, Jews or Scientologists who were offended by previous articles, it didn’t seem to matter. Even if those groups had complained or said they were offended, it still wouldn’t have mattered and the university administration wouldn’t have taken any action.

It is the policing of thoughts by an ideology; so much so that it is we in the West who are censoring ourselves on behalf of Muslims. It is not looking good. Hopefully the West will wake up in time but the media and others who have influence have to realize that they are enablers.

Tuesday, May 28, 2013

Lucia Kitchen renovation update with floor installed

This is my kitchen with the bamboo floor installed as of Friday last week.

Today was electrical work, which included finding out that the kitchen cabinet designers didn't leave a proper void for the power cable coming up the end of the bench in the picture there, and they made a mistake on the size of the oven so that it wouldn't slide all the way in. Both these problems have been fixed now, so my oven fits and there is space for that power cable.

There's no light in there right now, so I can't take a photo which includes my newly fitted double oven.

So many other newsworthy items to post on, and my kitchen is taking up all of my brain space and time. That and coordinating everything else.

Fletch British Woman Arrested For Carrying Union Jack


This is unbelievable. A pregnant British woman, arrested for carrying the Union Jack - the flag of her own country - because a few Muslims take offence. How many police are there? Four? Five? All to come down and put her in a police van and drive her away. Britain is circling the bowl when the police arrest ordinary patriotic folk at the behest of the followers of an ideology who have declared war on the West.

Monday, May 27, 2013

ZenTiger Quiz night

1. What are leapers, riders, hoppers and locusts?

2. What is a chuman?

3. A person from Porlock is allegedly good at what?

4. What was the Cuban Missile Crisis known as in Russia?

5. and in Cuba?

6. You are participating in a race. You overtake the second. Where do you come in the race?

7. What could pull a person into a bowl of muesli?

Sunday, May 26, 2013

ZenTiger Liberals and Consent

Liberal freedom is founded on the concept of consent. It is a vital component of their arguments on how society determines what is "right" and what is "wrong". I don't think it is exaggerating to say consent underpins liberal morality.

So it should be used precisely, but liberals of course, will redefine even this word to suit their purposes. Take the recent case of an 18 year old starting a sexual relationship with a 14 year old. A 14 year old cannot technically consent. One adult starting a sexual relationship with a 14 year old is wrong, and there are penalties for this.

But in this case, the ACLU thinks otherwise:

The Florida ACLU has spoken out on her behalf, saying this is a harmless, consensual relationship.

There go the liberals, effectively seeking to lower the age of consent to 14, or ignoring the fact that 14 year olds cannot give consent. The ACLU makes out this is all "harmless" and moral (because there is consent).

Well no - if you read different news reports of adults seducing 14 year olds, they are normally described as "sexual abuse".

Friday, May 24, 2013

Lucia London Jihad murder whitewash and the conversation that needs to be had

I think they're right, I think there needs to be a conversation about what Islam actually teaches, and the media and leaders need to stop pretending the problem isn't Islam - the belief system - because it very much looks like it is. However, when Benedict XVI touched on Islam in his Regensburg Address, it sparked a bad reaction with Muslims around the world who rioted, burned down churches and killed people. Maybe that's why this conversation is so difficult to have, and that's why it's also essential. Related link: Robert Spencer and Michael Coren on the London jihad murder and the subsequent whitewash ~ JihadWatch

Lucia Another study showing that most cohabiting (unmarried) parents break up

Another study looking into family breakdown:

LONDON, May 23, 2013 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Half of all British children born this year will be living with only one parent by the time they reach their teens, a study has revealed.

The study, titled “The myth of long-term stable relationships outside of marriage” undertaken by the Marriage Foundation, found that 45 percent of British teenagers between the ages of 13-15 are not living with both parents and that 9 out of 10 children born to unmarried, cohabiting “partners” will be living in single-parent households by their teens.

The study examined the differing rates of “family breakdown” experienced by married and cohabiting couples using data from the Understanding Society national longitudinal survey of 40,000 British households.

The numbers indicate that half of all cohabiting couples will break up within a year of moving in together. Nearly one-fifth (17 percent) of babies under a year old do not live with both natural parents, and that number jumps to 47 percent by the time the child is 15.

Significantly, the numbers are radically different for the children born within marriage: 93 percent of parents who stayed together were married before they had a child.

“The relative scarcity of ‘long-term stable relationships’ outside of marriage confirms that it is disingenuous and untenable for government to keep airbrushing marriage from family policy papers,” the study’s author, Harry Benson, said. “This should be an important issue for government since the direct costs of family breakdown are estimated at £46 billion,” more than the entire budget for national defense.

Benson, the founder and director of the relationship education charity Bristol Community Family Trust, takes the government to task for papering over the link between marital status and family breakdown, saying that in nearly all government reports “overlook, disregard, or dismiss [it] altogether whilst talking glowingly of so-called ‘long-term stable relationships.’”

“The key variable in calculating family stability over time becomes marital status at birth. Fewer married parents means fewer relatively stable couples,” he emphasized.

This comparison between cohabitating parents, married parents and especially those who married before having children is nothing new. There have been studies of this type done before, one in particular that I remember showing that most cohabitating parents will split up by their child's 15th birthday. I think this something to do with the lack of intention to have a long-term relationship that cohabitors have - it's more of a wait and see how it works out attitude - which is deadly to a relationship in the long-term.

What studies like this need to do in addition to what they've already differentiated on is to compare the outcomes of married parents who cohabited before marriage. For cohabitation harms the marriage when it does eventuate. It might just be a formalisation of the relationship already entered into which doesn't have a strong level of commitment. Trying before buying reduces the chances of success, despite the popular mantra.

Related link: 90 percent of unmarried couples with babies will break up by baby's teens: Study ~ LifeSiteNews

Lucia A conversion story from atheism

I remember seeing somewhere that in America, of all the religions, atheism has the lowest retention rate. It's most likely the similar in other Western countries, though it would be interesting to know for sure. Anyway, here's a great story of young atheist woman who decided to better understand her opponents by reading them, and ended up converting.

Last Easter, when I was just beginning to explore the possibility that, despite what I had previously believed and been brought up to believe, there might be something to the Catholic faith, I read Letters to a Young Catholic by George Weigel. One passage in particular struck me.

Talking of the New Testament miracles and the meaning of faith, Weigel writes: “In the Catholic view of things, walking on water is an entirely sensible thing to do. It’s staying in the boat, hanging tightly to our own sad little securities, that’s rather mad.”

I totally get that quote about walking on water being sensible! Once you realise that there is far more to life than the material, and that there is this whole reality all around that you've never really known was there, but it requires you to let go of everything tying you to the boat and your own insecurities, then it would be crazy not to jump out onto the water and trust.

In the following months, that life outside the boat – the life of faith –would come to make increasing sense to me, until eventually I could no longer justify staying put. Last weekend I was baptised and confirmed into the Catholic Church.

Of course, this wasn’t supposed to happen. Faith is something my generation is meant to be casting aside, not taking up. I was raised without any religion and was eight when 9/11 took place. Religion was irrelevant in my personal life and had provided my formative years with a rolling-news backdrop of violence and extremism. I avidly read Dawkins, Harris and Hitchens, whose ideas were sufficiently similar to mine that I could push any uncertainties I had to the back of my mind. After all, what alternative was there to atheism?

This is where the danger is, that Islam will pick up these youngsters, because even if they don't know it, many of them are searching for something more.

As a teenager, I realised that I needed to read beyond my staple polemicists, as well as start researching the ideas of the most egregious enemies of reason, such as Catholics, to properly defend my world view. It was here, ironically, that the problems began.

I started by reading Pope Benedict’s Regensburg address, aware that it had generated controversy at the time and was some sort of attempt –futile, of course – to reconcile faith and reason. I also read the shortest book of his I could find, On Conscience. I expected – and wanted – to find bigotry and illogicality that would vindicate my atheism. Instead, I was presented with a God who was the Logos: not a supernatural dictator crushing human reason, but the self-expressing standard of goodness and objective truth towards which our reason is oriented, and in which it is fulfilled, an entity that does not robotically control our morality, but is rather the source of our capacity for moral perception, a perception that requires development and formation through the conscientious exercise of free will.

It was a far more subtle, humane and, yes, credible perception of faith than I had expected. It didn’t lead to any dramatic spiritual epiphany, but did spur me to look further into Catholicism, and to re-examine some of the problems I had with atheism with a more critical eye.

The book on conscience by Benedict XVI must have been this one: On Conscience (Bioethics & Culture). It's print length is only 100 pages, though I've linked to the Kindle edition. I might have to read it as well!

Read more at The Catholic Herald: The atheist orthodoxy that drove me to faith
Megan Hodder was a young, avid reader of the New Atheists, but her life changed when she read the work of their Catholic foes

Thursday, May 23, 2013

Lucia Brave woman confronts man who hacked soldier to death



Brave woman:
A mother-of-two described tonight how she put her own life on the line by trying to persuade the soldier’s murderers to hand over their weapons.

The cub scout leader selflessly engaged the terrorists in conversation and kept her nerve as one of them told her: “We want to start a war in London tonight.”

Mrs Loyau-Kennett, 48, from Cornwall, was one of the first people on the scene after the two Islamic extremists butchered a soldier in Woolwich, south east London.

“And then when I went up there was this black guy with a revolver and a kitchen knife, he had what looked like butcher’s tools and he had a little axe, to cut the bones, and two large knives and he said 'move off the body’.

“So I thought 'OK, I don’t know what is going on here’ and he was covered with blood. I thought I had better start talking to him before he starts attacking somebody else. I thought these people usually have a message so I said 'what do you want?’

“I asked him if he did it and he said yes and I said why? And he said because he has killed Muslim people in Muslim countries, he said he was a British solider and I said really and he said 'I killed him because he killed Muslims and I am fed up with people killing Muslims in Afghanistan they have nothing to do there.”

Given Britain's increasing Islamic population, an attack of this sort was only a matter of time.

Christian countries are should be the best place to convert these sorts of people, and yet countries such as England (and New Zealand) instead want to increasingly marginalise those who hold Christian beliefs.

It's insane.

Related links: Woolwich attacker told me he 'wanted to start a war', says woman who confronted knifeman ~ Telegraph
'We swear by almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you': What man holding bloody cleaver said after 'hacking soldier in Help For Heroes T-shirt to death just yards from Woolwich barracks' ~ Daily Mail

Wednesday, May 22, 2013

Lucia Suicide over same-sex marriage in Notre Dame Cathedral



A 78-year-old man has killed himself inside the cathedral of Notre-Dame de Paris in the French capital, police say, causing its evacuation.

The man pulled out a shot-gun and shot himself through the mouth beside the main altar shortly after 16:00 (14:00 GMT).

He has been named as Dominique Venner, an award-winning far-right historian.

Mr Venner had recently been involved in the campaign against the government's decision to legalise gay marriage.

On Saturday, President Francois Hollande signed the bill into law.

Police said Mr Venner had made no statement before killing himself, although a note was found next to his body. They did not disclose its contents.

Screengrab of Dominique Venner's blog (21 May 2013) Dominique Venner's latest blog entry condemned the government's decision to legalise gay marriage

Earlier on Tuesday, he had written on his blog a damning critique of the same-sex marriage bill.

"New spectacular and symbolic actions are needed to wake up the sleep walkers and shake the anaesthetised consciousness," he wrote.

"We are entering a time when acts must follow words."

Mr Venner is also a former member of the Secret Army Organisation (OAS), which opposed Algerian independence in the early 1960s and tried to assassinate Charles De Gaulle.

What can I say about this, except that whatever wrong that the poor man was protesting against, it was nothing in comparison to what he did to himself. Killing himself in a cathedral is like a direct protest against God as well.

Related link: Man kills himself inside Notre-Dame cathedral in Paris ~ BBC

Lucia Excitement over potential exorcism by the Pope



Yes, the devil is real.  That's probably why this video has caused so much excitement as we in the West (including New Zealand especially) really don't want him to exist. 

However, it's best not to be too interested in him, and go to regular Confession as your major protection from him.  He's not called The Accuser for nothing, and if a person has major unforgiven sins on their soul, they can be in real danger.

Hattip: LongKnives on KiwiBlog

Related link: Rumours swirl of papal exorcism ~ Stuff

Lucia It's all happening here this morning [UPDATE]


We're now up to installation of the kitchen cabinets.

UPDATE: 2pm, the same wall, now with cabinets to the ceiling.


And the opposite side to the wall shown above

Tuesday, May 21, 2013

Lucia Sort of a rant on lack of respect for mothers in New Zealand [UPDATE]

It doesn't take much to trigger vocal, full-on hatred of children and mothers given the right subject matter.

In this case, it was directed against a woman who is the mother of six children with two on the way (expecting twins), who lives in a state house with her husband, and who would like a bigger state house for her expanding family.

Que outrage that any woman who has a state house would dare to have give birth to any more children. Except, what is she supposed to do with the buns in the oven - abort them? Should she be like this mother, who decided to write a letter to the editor justifying her abortion of her third child because he or she didn't suit their lifestyle?

We certainly have a problem in New Zealand, and it's not women having children. The problem is our much too generous welfare system, the lack of jobs for low skilled men, and the high cost of living that means that if a family wants to have a better living that mere subsistence, both parents need to be working.

Children are a blessing and our future, and yet our society barely tolerates them. So many times I have heard people phone up the radio station to let loose with tirades that involve the idea that a woman should only have as many children as she can afford. Except, that is what is happening now.

Middle class women can generally only afford to have a few children, so they only have a few, and lower class women can afford as many as they like, so they have as many as they like. Trying to get middle class women to have more children, and lower class women to have less children is impossible unless you elevate the role of motherhood (for middle class women) and ensure lower class men can get jobs to support their families. Then there might very well be more of a balance.

Babies in Parliament is just a side show. There should be no babies in Parliament. Babies in Parliament means the mother isn't doing either job properly, for looking after a baby is a full-time job and so is being a Parliamentarian. Women can't have both work and family, that is a myth. One or both will suffer. That's certainly been my personal experience as I bought into the myth, until I realised it was a myth.

UPDATE: Yes, I'm going bonkers. I will now cook dinner in the lounge, again. And then wash up in the bathroom. Tomorrow the kitchen installer people will turn up at 7:30am, which is far too early, but they have to, because their "day is full". Whatever the heck that means.

Friday, May 17, 2013

Fletch Pope To Launch Mobile App

The Pope will be launching a new mobile app called Missio on Friday. It is available to be downloaded now, and Pope Francis will unlock it from his iPad at the launch.

On Friday Pope Francis will break new ground by becoming the first Pope to launch a mobile app for iPhone, iPad, and Android.  The Pontifical Mission Societies’ MISSIO app is a free app that features the latest news and video from around the world about the Catholic Church. This launch event marks a unique, historic moment for the Church and her use of digital technology to connect with the faithful.
This event will fall on the heels of World Communications Day when the Catholic Church reflects on the former pontiff, Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI’s invitation to Catholics to make better use of social media in sharing the Gospel. The Pope Emeritus, who opened the first papal Twitter account, challenged the Church to think about social networking sites as “new spaces for evangelization.” Pope Francis offers Catholics a new opportunity with the launch of MISSIO to reflect on ways their mobile devices can also be used as spaces for evangelization.

Catholics and non-Catholics alike are invited to participate in this event by downloading MISSIO today.  The app will remain locked until Pope Francis personally unlocks it with the tap of an iPad button from the Vatican. Users around the world will then receive a push notification that the app has been launched by the Pope and is ready for use. 
The app is free for iPhone and Android. iPhone link HERE
MORE INFO

Thursday, May 16, 2013

Lucia Cat fight between disabled woman and the woman whose seat she wanted

Does an eight minute delay in a plane flight justify trying to totally humiliate a person who wouldn't give up their seat next to their family? It seems so, when the person who wanted the seat is disabled.

If it weren't for the massive deal being made of this story in the media, I might have felt sorry for the disabled woman who had to wait for the airline to bring a special seat onto the plane so that she could be seated. But seriously, using her position in the media to try and humiliate the woman who wouldn't give up her seat for her has destroyed any sympathy I might have had for her.

This story is even on the news on TV, which I normally don't watch, but since my kitchen is in the lounge, well, one thing lead to another. I should be cooking.

UPDATE: Sorry, not the news. They advertised is as being on the news, but I suppose Seven Sharp just flows on from the news, so they consider it almost the same thing.

Related link: 'Elite' flyer refuses to give up seat ~ NZ Herald

Fletch U.S Lobby Group Wants Gay TV Marriage

Fictional gay TV couple that ACLU is lobbying
 to get "married" 
This is getting ridiculous now.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is a lobby group whose stated mission is "to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to every person in this country by the Constitution and laws of the United States." (Thanks WIKI).

And what do they want today? They are pushing for a gay fictional couple from the TV series Modern Family to get married because they think it will bring more acceptance of gay marriage. So they've started an online petition in the hopes that they can pressure the writers of the show to make it happen. In their own words -

"For many, Mitch and Cam are the gay couple with whom they interact with the most," the ACLU noted. "Inviting 13 million people to Mitch and Cam’s wedding will only bring more people into the push for marriage equality."
They and other homosexual advocacy groups bemoan the cancelling of TV shows that feature gay people so that there is a lack of "diversity" on screen. According to a GLAAD spokesman -

 "Following a season with the highest recorded number of LGBT characters, these cancellations mean networks have to make a concerted effort to ensure the 2013-2014 season truly reflects the diversity of their audience. With inclusive programs like Modern Family and Glee continuing to lead the ratings and collect praise from critics, it's in a network's best interest." 
How "diverse" does TV have to be when only a purported  3% of the country is homosexual? Do we/they have to have this pushed in our faces? And it's not just TV: two gay characters in the popular Archie comic book recently got married. Ditto in Marvel's X-Men, and DC's Batwoman.

So, is it really the "wedding America wants to see" as they proclaim in their poster? I have my doubts.

ZenTiger Daylight Savings Version II

Shifting the clocks back or forwards by an hour every six months yields very limited benefits.

It's time to move to Daylight Savings Version II.

I propose we move the week forward by two days, for a period of three years. This will have the effect of moving most wet weekends into sunny, fine days and having more rain instead towards the end of the week. After three years, we move the week backwards by four days, thus moving the majority of rainfall to Monday and Tuesdays. This should compensate for any counter-moves by mother nature and pretty much guarantee great weather for most weekends in NZ.

So I guess a better name for it is "Weekend Savings"

Sign off in the comments if you vote for this. If we get more than 3 comments, I can fake the other 330,000 or so by borrowing the list the Green Party uses for referendums and we can push that through to Peter Dunne for a sign-off before the next power company is floated (or sunk) depending upon your point of view.

Wednesday, May 15, 2013

Lucia My Kitchen Renovation


It's a week and a half into my kitchen renovation, and as of yesterday, here is the space where the cabinets and sink and oven and hob will go.  All those walls that you see there and the ceiling were ripped out and insulated and new walls and ceiling put in.  Today the kitchen is being painted. In a week, the cabinets will be installed. At some point the electrician will come back and reconnect our phone. That drawer under the window is to stop our cat from trying to get into the hole into the floor where the sink waste pipe will go.

I'm currently set up in the lounge with a microwave, portable double hob and a snack oven. Washing up happens in a bucket in the bath. We have no power for downstairs as the wiring was so old and horrible, the electrician just disconnected that part of it, so I do the washing by putting an extension cord out the window during the day.

I'd be more stressed out over all of this if my youngest son's illness hadn't distracted me.

Apologies for lack of blogging and responding to comments on my part, it's just been too hard most days.

UPDATE: Commenting has been disabled for this post due to spammers.

ZenTiger Thou shalt not tolerate

They know not, nor care what they do
When "Thou shalt not steal" and "Thou shalt not kill" become too scary for liberal atheists, they invoke "Thou Shalt Not Tolerate". 

They have demanded plaques of the 10 commandments be removed from classrooms.

"Thou Shalt Not Tolerate" is not something they want to put on a plaque on a school, but you need to believe it, respect it and bow down to it. Were these plaques really so scary to atheists? It would seem so.

Said the puller of the plaques: “People think I’m attacking their religion,” Pulliam told 5-News. “I’m really not. I’m trying to help others so they can feel equal in a world, in a town. I just want them to feel equal.”

Feeling equal by reducing everything to nothing. Which, ironically, is what the atheist believes in. Such people haven't learned that equality is not about striving to bring everyone down to the lowest denominator. A sad and pointless victory for the nihilists. And so it continues, step by step.


Oklahoma School District Removes Ten Commandments

Monday, May 13, 2013

ZenTiger Let It Be


Sunday, May 12, 2013

ZenTiger The NZ Constitution Charade

Karl du Fresne points out the so-called "debate" on the constitution (run by Radio NZ) is effectively a watered down version of a wet tea towel.

They are cosy consensus sessions featuring safe speakers who can be counted on to agree broadly on the key issues. While the participants are learned and articulate, it’s dishonest to pretend these affairs are a genuine contest of ideas.

They are a sham, creating the misleading impression that the highly contentious issues under discussion – such as the place of the Treaty of Waitangi in our constitutional arrangements – are largely settled....This charade closely follows a series of pretend “debates” on the Treaty...It is a misuse of power – nothing less.

 
Yep, this will not end well. And no doubt the masses will rest easy knowing that no matter what happens, John Key and Maurice Williamson will be there to assure us the sun will still rise tomorrow. As if that is somehow relevant to the political darkness descending upon us.

Read the whole article: Debasing Debate

ZenTiger Energy Companies To Be Given To Charity

My, how things have changed
[OK, the following is supposed to be satire, but unfortunately, it isn't quite.  Nick Smith really does want to give away 3 billion dollars worth of Tax Payer assets to charity.  Read the link if you don't believe me.]

 Nick Smith today announced that the remaining power companies would not be floated on the stock market as planned, but instead given away to charity.

Nick has confirmed that charities will make better use of New Zealand's assets and ensure the poor and destitute people of NZ are catered for. He was quick to add that the government was working tirelessly to ensure all New Zealanders would fit the criteria of "poor and destitute" so would not miss out.

"I was talking about wanting to shift from a state [owned] model to a social [owned] model," Smith said of his initial comments.

"Many community organisations with funding support are able to provide a better service for people needing [electricity]. New Zealand is behind the pace internationally. Europe, North America and Australia have far larger community sectors."

Community groups and charities could provide more than just [electricity] for people, he said, citing the Salvation Army's work with alcoholics and substance abusers, or other agencies who work with the intellectually disabled and the mentally unwell.

Nick was excited that giving up to 30 billion to charity would result in a huge tax rebate for the government. "We'll get 33% rebate back, which goes to show how financially responsible we are."

As well as giving our remaining energy companies to charity, Nick has found another 12,000 state homes that might be tossed into the deal - another few billion of tax payer assets to be given to a worthy cause.

"Basically, we are driving a hard bargain - have everything we've got, for free, and then after that we'll continue to use tax payer money to fund selected charities, as we've always done.

Saturday, May 11, 2013

Lucia Forcing people to accept sexual practices they don't agree with

It used to be that the sexual revolution's catch cry was to get Government out of the bedroom. Now, it seems, it's to get Government to force people to accept sexual practices they don't agree with under their roof. The approval of same-sex marriage has opened the door and now a NZ B&B couple could be in trouble for turning away lesbians who wanted to sleep together from staying at their house over-night.
A lesbian couple have been turned away from a Whangarei guesthouse that refused to let them share a bed.

Jane Collison, 30, and Paula Knight, 45, made an online booking for a room with a king-sized bed at the Pilgrim Planet Lodge.

But when they arrived on Tuesday, they were told only rooms with single beds were available.

When they queried the booking, the owner eventually told them the booking was correct, but she was offended by same-sex couples sleeping in the same bed. She would not even let them push two singles together.

They eventually found accommodation 50 kilometres away.

Ms Collison has filed a complaint with the Human Rights Commission. It is illegal under the Human Rights Act to discriminate against someone in the provision of goods and services because of their sexual orientation.
Yet another complaint of this nature since marriage was reundefined last month, and I don't think it will be the last.


Related link: Guesthouse refuses to let gay couple sleep together ~ Stuff

Essential Reading : The Strange, Strange Story of the Gay Fascists ~ Huffington Post

Friday, May 10, 2013

ZenTiger Support Government policy - or else

As I thought, the decision to terminate charity status for Family First is simply because they are perceived, by the government, to be against the government.

The Charities Board has made the decision to register the National Council of Women (NCWNZ) as a charity is because it aims to promote the status of women. Yet, Family First promote the status of the family, and get struck off for it.

Both organizations promote research, but the government doesn't agree with research promoted by Family First, and calls it propaganda.  In one case, the activity is deemed a charitable purpose, and in another, it is deemed propaganda.  I wonder if that means the peer reviewed academic studies they have cited will be rounded up and burned?  It would seem to be an appropriate next step.

From the Bob McCroskie blog: In the most bizarre argument, the Board argues that any lobbying or submissions done by the NCWNZ is not ‘political’ but rather ‘a means by which the NCWNZ advances it charitable purposes’ – the complete opposite measure than that which they applied to Family First NZ.

How's that for progressive thinking? Wake up NZ. We are being screwed over.



Link to Family First Website
Updated 10:50am Saturday 11 May to correct links to sources.

Thursday, May 9, 2013

ZenTiger Not an Aaron Gilmore Post

Aaron Gilmore
Aaron Gilmore
Aaron Gilmore
Aaron Gilmore
Aaron Gilmore
Aaron Gilmore
Aaron Gilmore
Aaron Gilmore
Aaron Gilmore
Constitutional
Review
Aaron Gilmore
Aaron Gilmore
Aaron Gilmore
Aaron Gilmore
Aaron Gilmore
Aaron Gilmore
Aaron Gilmore
Aaron Gilmore
Aaron Gilmore
Aaron Gilmore
Aaron Gilmore
Aaron Gilmore
Aaron Gilmore
Aaron Gilmore

Lucia Melanie Phillips on the Left hating families and fostering family breakdown

No wonder Family First's promotion of the traditional family is not considered by the New Zealand Government to be in the public interest. We are operating in a very leftist milieu here, and it affects how many individuals and therefore government departments view the world, and family, in a leftist mindset is just not that important. Only problem is this mindset is incredibly socially destructive, which then affects the economy and the safety of citizens, and yet rather than allowing an alternative point of view to try and make it's way here, it's firmly stomped on.

Here's Melanie Phillips, writing of her realisation that the Left hates families and actively seeks to destroy them.  She started out being a Leftist herself, thinking that it was the correct side to be on:

As a university-educated young woman with hippie-style hair and an attitude, I, too, generally toed the standard Leftist line in the late Seventies and early Eighties.

Poverty was bad, cuts in public spending were bad, prison was bad, the Tory government was bad.

The state was good, poor people were good, minorities were good, sexual freedom was good.
Melanie worked for the Guardian and became the 'perfect little Guardianista'. However, when Margaret Thatcher came on the scene, she started listening to what she was saying and the scales fell from her eyes.

The defining issue for me — the one that launched me on a personal trajectory of confrontation with the Left and with my colleagues and friends — was the persistent undermining of the family as an institution.

By the late Eighties, it was glaringly obvious that families were suffering a chronic crisis of identity and self-confidence.

There were more and more divorces and single parents — along with mounting evidence that family disintegration and the subsequent creation of step-families or households with no father figure at all did incalculable damage to children.

Too many children lack a consistent mother or father figure,’ researchers told me.

Poverty, the Left’s habitual excuse, could not be the culprit since middle-class children were also not receiving the parental attention they required.

For me, the traditional family is sacred because it embodies the idea that there is something beyond the selfish individual.

But it was being turned into a mere contract that either side could break more or less at will.

Here in New Zealand, this undermining of the family is more advanced than in Britain, for we have the State being able to interfere in a family where there is smacking for discipline. Something Family First have put a lot of effort and energy into opposing, educating people on and helping those who have been investigated by the government for smacking, of which there have been more than a few.

Their sanity was called into question. ‘What do these people want?’ one distinguished academic said to me.

‘Do they want unhappy parents to stay together?’

Eventually, he admitted that the authors’ research was correct. But he said it was impossible to turn back the clock and wondered why there was so much concern about the rights of the child rather than of the parents.

He turned out to be divorced — revealing a devastating pattern I was to encounter over and over again. Truth was being sacrificed to personal expediency. Evidence would be denied if the consequences were inconvenient.
Yep, happening here too.  Evidence is being denied if the consequences are inconvenient.  It is inconvenient to strengthen the traditional family unit because so many want to be able to leave it at will.  They think their responsibility to their spouse and children should only be fulfilled if they are personally happy, and if their spouse and children exist for their own personal satisfaction.  Not that people really think about the consequences of their own thinking to that level, but that's what happens when the sacrificial nature of family life is discarded.
The idea that a woman could be mother and father to her children — more, that it was her ‘right’ to choose such a lifestyle — led directly to the hopeless plight of often inadequate women struggling to raise children while the men who fathered them were, in effect, told they were free to do their own thing.

I was as perplexed by this as I was appalled. I had been brought up to believe the Left stood for altruism rather than selfishness, community rather than individualism, self- discipline rather than the law of the jungle and the survival of the fittest.

Instead, society was worshipping at the shrine of the self, and this was causing a rising tide of juvenile distress, crime, emotional disturbance, educational and relationship failure.

The fact that I continued to write along these lines regardless of all the abuse hurled to shut me up seemed to drive the Left nuts.

Yes, they espoused a doctrine of being tolerant and non-judgmental, but not when it came to me. I was branded a ‘moraliser’, which appeared to be a term of abuse.
Ah yes, this whole thing of talking morals to people, which is really calling them to a higher standard, does tend to drive people who disagree a little crazy.  I get it quite a lot, but I ignore it because it really doesn't bother me, and it just shows I'm effective. 

I would guess that the underlying moralising and effectiveness of Family First also bothers the Government, therefore it can only retaliate at this point by refusing to support them in any way by removing financial incentives for their supporters.

Fun and games.


Related link: Why the Left hates families: MELANIE PHIILLIPS reveals how the selfish sneers of Guardianistas made her see how the Left actively fosters – and revels in – family breakdown... ~ Daily Mail UK

Wednesday, May 8, 2013

ZenTiger Spock v Spock

Stolen shamelessly from CoNZervative, a new commercial where the old Spock squares off against the new Spock. At the end of it, you are supposed to buy an Audi. Or maybe a Mercedes. Or maybe watch The Hobbit. Can't remember, I was distracted by just how sneaky those Vulcans can be. LLAP:

Tuesday, May 7, 2013

Lucia Do you value diversity of thought and tolerance of dissent?

If you do value diversity of thought and tolerance of dissent, then you too, like Brendan O'Neill writer for Spiked, must be finding the sweeping consensus on gay marriage terrifying.

Amazingly enough, the Greens in NZ must be worried as well, having come out in support of Family First, who are being struck off as a charity for donation rebate purposes by the NZ Government.

John Stringer thinks the timing of Family First's deregistration is probably a coincidence.  Some how I doubt that it is, and in general I don't believe in coincidences.  The recent marriage debates have made Family First a target for people who vehemently disagree with them.  People must have complained about to Internal Affairs who then agreed with the complainant(s).   Had the marriage debates and subsequent escalation of profile of Family First not occurred, then I doubt they would have been noticed and complained about and deregistered at all.  Individuals in Internal Affairs have just decided in the same direction that Parliament voted.  Parliament really lead the way and the rest of Government will just continue to follow through.

To think that NZ is somehow immune from the same problems that other nations who have re(un)defined marriage have faced is to ascribe a moral superiority to us that I don't believe is justified.  Warnings made now about what is happening and what will continue to happen are better made in advance than in hindsight when more damage will have been done.  At least the Government can scramble to keep the semblance of non-discrimination and think about where this might all lead rather than pretending that everything's ok and that's not an ice berg on the horizon, which is a very human thing to do. 

Essential Reading : Gay marriage: a case study in conformism ~ Brendan O'Neill
Anyone who values diversity of thought and tolerance of dissent should find the sweeping consensus on gay marriage terrifying.

ZenTiger John Key unveils bold plan for NZ

Leadership - A street a long way from the PM's office
John Key announced yesterday that Wellington was a "dying city". Initially, he said that he had no idea how to save it, but then he realized he was the Prime Minster, and added "but if we push the euthanasia bill through, I promise it will be painless."

"Consider us bringing back Capital Punishment" John joked to an appreciative audience.

It looked like the entire conversation was going to stop there, but some-one yelled out "Hey Clint, what do you think" and a nameless National official took that as the perfect moment to unveil John Key's bold new plan for New Zealand:

"We'll move everyone under 80 years old to Auckland, declare the South Island a nature reserve and turn Wellington into a retirement village."

The media is abuzz with John Key's visionary leadership.



Wellington A Dying City says Prime Minister

Monday, May 6, 2013

Lucia First they came for the Anglicans

As CoNZervative points out, a mere 18 days after marriage was re(un)defined, there is a story of an Auckland man who has taken his Anglican Bishop to court because he was rejected for a priest training programme because he is in a relationship with a man.

Eugene Sisneros has described his hurt and humiliation after allegedly being rejected for a priest training programme because he was in a same-sex relationship.

A Human Rights Tribunal hearing into the alleged discrimination opened at Auckland District court today.

Mr Sisneros is taking the Anglican Bishop of Auckland to the tribunal, claiming he was barred because of his sexuality - a claim the bishop has denied, saying he was simply following the church's doctrines.

Here is where it gets silly:

Mr Sisneros said his rejection from the programme has had long-term effects.

"I am deeply affected by this discrimination as a human being. I am not equal.

"My feelings of humiliation and disappointment continue to this day,'' he told the hearing.

I can't really speak for the Anglican priesthood, but the Catholic priesthood is that of priest and VICTIM. A complaining victim who says he's being discriminated against, and as he was rejected because of his relationship, feels humiliation and disappointment, is not really the type of person you would want as a priest.

Mr Sisneros, a 38-year-old American who holds New Zealand residency, is an events coordinator for St Matthew in the City.

In 2006 he began a Bachelor of Theology degree and started signalling his desire to enter the Anglican Church's training programme for priests by writing to Bishop of Auckland John Paterson, who said there was opposition to the ordination of gay clergy.

In 2009 Mr Sisneros entered a "permanent, exclusive and stable relationship'' with his current same sex partner.

When existing Bishop of Auckland Ross Bay took over the role in 2010 he said there was no resolution over the ordination of unmarried clergy same sex relationships, so Ms Sisneros withdrew his application, he said.

If he really, really, really wanted to become an Anglican priest, why not sacrifice and live a celibate life so he could do so? Then he would have shown some of characteristics that I personally would expect in a priest.
M[r] Sisneros was rejected "by reason of the defendant not being chaste in terms of canons of the Anglican Church,'' Bishop Bay told ONE News.

That means anyone wanting to become ordained needs to be in what the Anglican Church deems to be a chaste relationship - a marriage between a man and a woman or committed to a life of celibacy.

M[r] Sisneros said he was "very disappointed'' by his exclusion from the programme and felt he had wasted six years of study towards his goal of becoming a priest.

He had "overwhelming'' support for his progress into the programme from St Matthew in the City, where ordained priests who were public about being in same-sex relationships had given sermons, he said.

St Matthew in the City again, that liberal hotbed of discord and foment.

Anyway, it will be interesting to see how this plays out. Given that the Anglicans can decide to go in any direction and they haven't done anything about St Matthew in the City where ordained priests are apparently public about being in same-sex relationships, then the case could easily go against the Anglican bishop. If St Matthew in the City priests can do it, why can't he?

Only problem is, it will set a precedent of state interference in the Church, and that is not good.

Related link: Homosexual rejected for priesthood speaks of humiliation ~ NZ Herald

Lucia Interesting reaction by Gay NZ writer to Family First losing charity status

Craig Young is very happy that Family First are losing their charity status. So happy in fact, that on his Face Book page, he's linked to an MSM NZ article on that very subject and added in a picture of a witch being burned alive to presumably symbolise Family First.

I'm not going to try and psychoanalyse that visual analogy, however it does indicate that Family First represents some sort of incredible evil that must be destroyed or an innocent victim of deranged religious fanatics who will stop at nothing to ensure some sort of burning occurs. I'm guessing the former, personally, but you never know.

ZenTiger The new 'public interest'

Un-charities Commission
Bob McCoskrie Blogs: “The [Charities] Commission argues that Family First’s efforts to represent the voice of 80%-plus of families on the anti-smacking law or half of New Zealanders on attempts to redefine marriage, for example, have no ‘public benefit’, and that it is in the ‘public interest’ for Family First to be deregistered.”

The work of Family First is to act as a highly important critique to government policy, advocating on family issues and providing a voice for families that have had injustice inflicted by the government. They are as much a charity as Barnardos [registration CC21844] whose website has a "Speaking Out" section and home page currently pushes for legislative changes to turn schools into restaurants.

It seems the Charities Commission is one of the new weapons to determine what the government deems to have public benefit, and what it doesn't. When the government starts making selective judgements like this, it is no longer "for the people, by the people". The public cannot determine what is in their interest says the government.

Welcome to the Nanny State.

Article: Family First Muzzled ~ McBlog

Related (Leading Edge Blog): Family First not the first, probably not the last ~ The Leading Edge

ZenTiger Serious Abuse Under NZ Government Care

Who watches the watchmen?
The Confidential Listening and Assistance Service was created in 2008 to hear stories about people abused under State Care before 1992. Why 1992? Some-one decided that the NZ Government has robust systems after that date to manage complaints of abuse. If this is the case, why limit the date - very few people should theoretically speak up about events after 1992 if they already have other channels that they feel will treat their story seriously. That's now 20 years ago - so the data should be in. Open the investigations wide open and let's test that assumption. Or is it harder to deflect blame when the historical abuse case is only a few years old? [Like this one]

Already, 702 people have stepped forward to detail sexual and physical abuse whilst under NZ state care. This panel makes it clear that it is not a legal forum, nor a forum for compensation, but rather a forum to listen and advise what the victims might be able to do to move forward.

This is interesting, and no doubt helpful. I applaud the initiative.  However, after hearing cases of criminal deeds, why are they not obliged to report the crime to the police? Why are they exempt from acting on the information? This effectively means that credible testimony may be presented that points to the tip of the iceberg, and yet the same people may still be in positions of power today, or there may be other victims that will come forward once the perpetrators are named. There seems to be no mechanism to hold people accountable. It sets the idea that criminal acts by people working with vulnerable children are fine if the victims don't have their complaints converted to meaningful action.  Maybe that is best done by a separate agency - like a special branch within police or DIA to follow up on these cases - but I haven't heard anything about linking these two processes together in the various websites and press releases I've seen.

An important part of the report released recently on their work suggests that many of these people stepping forward now claim they did register complaints, and did try to get heard but nothing was done about their victimization.

So, after this process, is nothing still going to be done?

I'd like to see what level of follow-up and investigation into the people, their direct managers, and the government departments are triggered and held accountable? If these people are encouraged to use other avenues to receive justice, then what is being done about following this up?  Arguably, there should be at least 702 active cases. Anonymity can be preserved whilst still indicating how many people responsible for (a) the criminal acts and (b) their management team and (c) the people that received the complaint, are all investigated further with possible charges to be laid.

But I'm not holding my breath.  It would seem more likely that these cases will focus on the victims, and thus let the perpetrators off the hook if there is no meaningful effort to link the two things together. An important part of democracy is ensuring there are checks on government power.  Or as the saying goes: Who watches the watchmen?


Source Article below break.

Sunday, May 5, 2013

ZenTiger Superhero or Supervillain?

If bloggers had more power
From invisibility to superhuman strength to telekinesis, a wave of emerging technologies promise to give people powers once reserved for comic-book characters. Which raises an important question: If humans become superhuman, will we turn out to be superheroes — or supervillains?

This has been something I've been thinking about, as we get closer and closer to bionic enhancements, genetic engineering and advanced technology options. Seems like some researchers were wondering the same, and decided to try a basic experiment. Interesting article, and if I get time I might come back to this post and throw down some more thoughts.

Superhero or Supervillain?

and this old post: ZenTiger's Super Powers

ZenTiger Turning a blind eye

Seems that once the Jimmy Savile story broke, the number of BBC stars accused of sex with 9-16 year olds during the 60's, 70s and 80s seem to be steadily climbing. The latest is on Stuart Hall, as told by an acquaintance of Eddie Waring, a colleague of Stuart (The old "friend of a friend" testimony):

Eddie’s friend thought ­nothing of the “blokey stories” until last week when Hall, now 83, ­admitted 14 ­indecent assaults on 13 girls aged between nine and 17 during nearly two ­decades between 1967 and 1986. The friend, who has asked not to be named, told the Sunday People: “Back then it was lads’ banter and we all laughed as Eddie told the stories.

“Hall’s behaviour seemed ­perfectly acceptable in those days. Eddie said he had been ­nicknamed ‘the randiest man at the Beeb’ for his exploits and ­revelled in his reputation despite having a family. “Eddie believed Stuart was addicted to sex and would take whatever risks he had to to ­satisfy his lust.

“Nobody ever tried to tell Stuart that his behaviour was wrong because he was the big star of It’s A Knockout and ­nobody wanted to lose their well-paid jobs. Everybody just turned a blind eye.”

Given this story is pushed by the Mirror, it quite possibly fact mixed with fiction. However, I think the attitudes are reflected accurately here. Basically, openly raping (by definition) under 16 year olds, perhaps abusing young children and the people around just turning a blind eye to it. So the justice system might punish the odd media star, but how will they go about punishing the entire organization and the culture that found it acceptable to laugh this off?


Stuart Hall's Blokey Stories

Saturday, May 4, 2013

ZenTiger Anders Breivik - A Christian Atheist

I've noted a few instances where people have assumed that Anders Breivik was a Christian. He wasn't, in the sense of what the word means to most people.

Anders himself described a category of Christian called "Christian-atheist". If that doesn't get your bat senses tingling, you probably aren't a bat. Anyway, here's a bit of background to this myth, and 5 other myths about Anders await beyond the link.

By Daniel Greenfield, Canada Free Press:

Myth 1: Anders Behring Breivik was a Fundamentalist Christian

Breivik described himself as not a religious person and mentions praying only once. His plans leading up to the attacks involved multiple visits to prostitutes. In one section of his manifesto he clarifies what he means by Christian.

Q: Do I have to believe in God or Jesus in order to become a Justiciar Knight?

A. No, you don’t need to have a personal relationship with God or Jesus to fight for our Christian cultural heritage. It is enough that you are a Christian-agnostic or a Christian-atheist (an atheist who wants to preserve at least the basics of the European Christian cultural legacy).

Breivik did call himself a Christian, but meant that in a cultural sense, rather than a theological one. He emphasized that he was not seeking a theocracy, but a secular society. His idea of a Christian Europe had nothing to do with religion.

[Source - Debunking 6 Myths About Anders Breivik]

ZenTiger Catholic Hospital uses ethical science

Hannah receives help from ethical science
Here's a great story about a little girl that was born without a wind pipe, having one grown for her. This was a result of a Catholic Hospital funding an operation that used adult stem cells, proving that we can achieve great results working ethically as well as scientifically. What is also very exciting is this technology may help us to provide kidneys and other organs grown by the patient, which would minimize the chance of rejection and end supply problems.
A 2-year-old girl born without a windpipe now has a new one grown from her own stem cells, the youngest patient in the world to benefit from the experimental treatment.

Hannah Warren has been unable to breathe, eat, drink or swallow on her own since she was born in South Korea in 2010. Until the operation at a central Illinois hospital, she had spent her entire life in a hospital in Seoul. Doctors there told her parents there was no hope and they expected her to die.

The stem cells came from Hannah's bone marrow, extracted with a special needle inserted into her hip bone. They were seeded in a lab onto a plastic scaffold, where it took less than a week for them to multiply and create a new windpipe.

The operation brought together an Italian surgeon based in Sweden who pioneered the technique, a pediatric surgeon at Children's Hospital of Illinois who met Hannah's family while on a business trip to South Korea, and Hannah — born to a Newfoundland man and Korean woman who married after he moved to that country to teach English.

Hannah's parents had read about Dr. Paolo Macchiarini's success using stem-cell based tracheas but couldn't afford to pay for the operation at his center, the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm. So Dr. Mark Holterman helped the family arrange to have the procedure at his hospital, bringing in Macchiarini to lead the operation. Children's Hospital waived the cost, likely hundreds of thousands of dollars, Holterman said.

The Roman Catholic hospital considers the operation part of their mission to provide charity care, but also views it as a way to champion a type of stem-cell therapy that doesn't involve human embryos, the surgeons said. The Catholic church opposes using stem cells derived from human embryos in research or treatment.


Source: 2 year old gets new wind pipe from adult stem cells

Source: New chance at life from adult stem cell operation funded by a Catholic Hospital


ZenTiger Food For Thought

An apple a day and a glass of milk builds a strong body
There's discussion about discussing if it is a good idea to feed kids in schools. On one hand, there seems to be credible evidence some kids go to school hungry (wouldn't mind having this validated and quantified though) and the easiest way therefore to fix this is to supply some kai (food). On the other hand, others will say this is the responsibility of the parents and this gives them the easy way out to be even lesser parents.

The problem with leaving this up to such types of parents is that they are clearly failing, for whatever reason. The problem with leaving it up to the government is that they will waste lots of money in their relentless pursuit of using resources in the most inefficient way possible whilst all the time talking about efficiency.

Many also point to this being a problem with race. Specifically the Maori race. This makes it easy to play the race card. (Anti-Race Card Kit available here). However, when people speak of Maori being disproportionately represented in these kinds of statistics, they may be talking about Maori culture.

Friday, May 3, 2013

ZenTiger Roache infestation [updated]

I'm listening on the radio to people phoning up, largely in support for William Roache, aka Ken Barlow (RIP, 2013) of Coronation Street. This is in reaction to being arrested on two counts of rape of a child (I use the common terminology here) 40 years ago. From what I gather, being arrested in the UK can just mean "we want to talk about a credible accusation", but the media certainly makes it sound more serious than that.

It may have been recent comments in defense of Jimmy Savile and colleagues on Coronation street that also have been recently accused of sex abuse: “But things were different in the Seventies. People were more tactile. You did things that today are regarded as wrong."

He's right in that regard, things were very different in the seventies, and we are now judging events by different standards and different attitudes, which is partly why so many people come forward years afterwards. However, even with different standards, such things have always been wrong.

The main themes that came up on the radio show were:

* Name suppression was not granted, and should have been
* Why was this women coming forward now after 46 years?
* Isn't 46 years a bit long - memories change, perceptions change?
* What a travesty of justice - his life is ruined now, especially if he is innocent.
* "I met him recently and 80 year old women were throwing themselves at him"
* It sounds like he might be the victim of some-one who threw himself at him, and later regretted it.
* "I've been falsely accused, and it is devastating and it affects everyone around you"

A very interesting reaction to pedophilia charges (I use the common terminology here), in that it is very gentle, very understanding and very concerned for the rights of the accused. How unlike the usual rabid baying for death of pedophile predators before the trial.  I guess there are two sets of rules.

If he is innocent, I guess it's a cock-up on the roache front.

Ken Barlow, RIP 2013
Coro fans support their high priest of TV


[Revised and republished 9:00am]

Thursday, May 2, 2013

ZenTiger Maurice for Mayor - Be ye not afraid

Maurice Williamson for Mayor?
Maybe he'll be knighted?
Because some pundits are predicting a Knight Mayor.

I have no opinion on that, but based on prior form, I can predict his his acceptance speech:

"I'm prepared to exercise foononcial risponsabile-tee"

No Maurice, it's pronounced "Financial Responsibility"

"Sorry, I've never tried it."

It remains to be seen if Maurice can gain enough gravitas to obey the laws of physics, although now that he has spoken in favour of redefining marriage and supporting gay adoption he is certainly fancied as a man person of the people.  Ellen Degeneres certainly fancies him, and the more he's fancied by others, the more he might fancy himself as Mayor.  It's called circular logic, which is his strong suit.

Maurice is currently popular with Greens and Labour supporters (aside from his politics) so many are saying the NZ right should be extremely happy because he is in the National party.  Trouble is, National and Socialist go together hand in glove nowadays so being in a National Socialist party is hardly a plus from the point of view of NZ's remaining Conservatives.

Maurice now knows that if you're willing to paint Christians as extremists and fundamentalists, you'll be popular with the left.  If you're willing to sneer at celibacy (a fine message for all our young teenagers) you'll be popular with the liberals (they tolerate all sexuality, providing it is rampant).

Maurice has only said what many liberals have been saying for years: Do what you are inclined to do.  They therefore think that our ability to overcome our base desires and exercise self control is something that separates man from freedom.  It used to be that such things separated us from animals,  but you can't fight Darwin without upsetting liberals. It's only the Conservatives that argue self control is what puts civil into civilization.  Weird ideas like that wont get you mayor.

So elect a man of the people, and be ye not afraid.

His election platform is clear.  With Maurice is as Mayor, your mortgage will not grow, your teenagers will still argue with you, he will not give you rashes and skin diseases, he will rid Auckland of toads and he personally guarantees the sun will still rise.

Those are promises Maurice feels qualified to make.  In a nutshell, a vote for Maurice is a vote for the continuance of the solar system.

There is only one choice to make if you want to be on the right side of history, so make it and be ye not afraid.


Fletch Shhhh... DADT, I'm Christian

According to reports on Fox News and Brietbart.com, and apparently confirmed by the Pentagon, soldiers in the U.S Army could be court marshalled for sharing their Christian faith, even in private with another soldier. The Pentagon has been consulting with Christian-hater Mikey Weinstein, founder of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF) to come up with their policy on religious tolerance.

The Pentagon has released a statement confirming that soldiers could be prosecuted for promoting their faith: "Religious proselytization is not permitted within the Department of Defense...Court martials and non-judicial punishments are decided on a case-by-case basis...”.

(From our earlier report: Weinstein is the head of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, and says Christians--including chaplains--sharing the gospel of Jesus Christ in the military are guilty of “treason,” and of committing an act of “spiritual rape” as serious a crime as “sexual assault.” He also asserted that Christians sharing their faith in the military are “enemies of the Constitution.”)
There has been quite a lot of talk recently about "intolerance" and "hate speech", especially as regards those who disagree with same sex marriage; however, if you want to hear real hate speech just read this bile and overblown rhetoric from Weinstein (I can almost see him standing up in front of a crowd, speaking in German and bashing his fist on a lectern) .

Regarding those who teach orthodox Christian beliefs from the Bible, Weinstein concludes, “Let’s call these ignoble actions what they are: the senseless and cowardly squallings of human monsters.”

[...]

 “We MUST vigorously support the continuing efforts to expose pathologically anti-gay, Islamaphobic, and rabidly intolerant agitators for what they are: die-hard enemies of the United States Constitution. Monsters, one and all. To do anything less would be to roll out a red carpet to those who would usher in a blood-drenched, draconian era of persecutions, nationalistic militarism, and superstitious theocracy.”
If these fundamentalist Christian monsters of human degradation, marginalization, humiliation and tyranny cannot broker or barter your acceptance of their putrid theology, then they crave for your universal silence in the face of their rapacious reign of theocratic terror. Indeed, they ceaselessly lust, ache, and pine for you to do absolutely nothing to thwart their oppression. Comply, my friends, and you, too, become as monstrously savage as are they. I beg you, do not feed these hideous monsters with your stoic lethargy, callousness and neutrality. Do not lubricate the path of their racism, bigotry, and prejudice. Doing so directly threatens the national security of our beautiful nation. 
Until 2011, the U.S Military had a policy called  Don't Ask Don't Tell which "prohibited military personnel from discriminating against or harassing closeted homosexual or bisexual service members or applicants, while barring openly gay, lesbian, or bisexual persons from military service." (thanks Wiki). That's all changed now, and it almost seems like Christians are the new 'homosexuals' in the forces. Only even worse.
Good truly is becoming evil and evil becoming good in the eyes of these leaders.


Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil;
  Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness;
  Who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!
~Isaiah 5:20