Liquor Store Owner Shot... Police need to review their procedures.

09 June 2008

Comments by juni0r

So, while you've got plenty of AOS bushmaster totting police officers strolling the streets, you have a man who is needlessly bleeding to death from a gunshot wound. 35 minutes the ambulance was held up during this situation in Auckland. The New Zealand Police need to take a good hard look at their SOPs, their reason for being, and how it equates to saving peoples' lives.

There is a thing called an "armed escort". To put it in plain English... you escort the ambulance officers to the scene. This is why you have weapons - to protect those you mean to serve. This includes permitting others to do their job - and if necessary, risk your own life for the sake of others. Yes... I said it.

Just to make it clear - the average criminal is not that bright. But... there is a reason why they have a get-away car - to get away from the scene of the crime.

The ambulance arrived 10 minutes after the call. It might as well have not turned up at all deeming the outcome. So, while the chances of the armed offenders being at the scene of the crime are highly remote due to the above mentioned logic, rather than ensuring they are permitted to leave the site and are followed by other officers, a cordon is set up and armed police serve no purpose whatsoever but to indirectly contribute to the death of an innocent man. There... I said that too.

This is not actually a go at the Police. This is a honest appraisal of their procedures and a voicing of concerns as a member of the public.

You don't serve the public good by setting up a cordon to hold in criminals who have already split, and keeping out those who are there to save lives. Sadly, I see this as being all about image, not practical reality. The Police have to look like they're working hard on behalf of the public. Instead it only serves to do exactly the opposite. They need to seriously reassess their priorities in these sorts of situations, and give their SOPs a good going over.

Top ^

 

Crap Food, Small Portions... and feminised streetlights.

20 May 2008

 

Comments by juni0r

Incredible how we get more and more of this business where basic commodities, conveniences most of them, lets face it, which are getting smaller and smaller well the prices slowly slip upwards. All as if we don't notice - or don't we? Chocolate bars, like Mars or Moro... these McCain's twin pack lasagna things are a good example - much like how they advertise a "Big" Mac... Is it meant for a pigmy? No offence to pigmies cause they rock, but you got the idea. A mate rocked up to Mickey D's the other morning for a "Kiwi big breakfast" and he promptly told them it wasn't no "Big" breakfast. Straight up. Yet, as I've said before, you need to really shop around if you want to find somewhere to buy the food groups you need that will be cheaper than some take away. No wonder more and more people are living off this highly processed rubbish. The powers that be have no intention of making eating properly cheap enough (which of course reduces health spending) because too many folks are making big dollars at the top end. Can't upset the apple cart eh. If you want to be rebellious I suggest the markets on Sunday. And boy to the vegatables last so much longer than the stuff you get from the supermarket. No surprises there eh.

Feminised Streetlights

There is this move to change the little green "man" or rather, one who has no anatomy on on that level at all, and once upon a time there were too many more important things to think about in the world to worry about such stupidity, blar blar...

I would like to know where our priorities lie. Haven't asked any of my female friends but, I am sure, only the most militant feminists actually give a stuff about something so ludicrous as giving the... mind my offensive language, ah, the little green man a rack. I would be more interested in, for example, my kids obeying the road rules and not getting run over. The limits of so called equality and of political correctness has reached new levels of idiocy.

So shouldn't we be more interested in traffic safety? I mean, people can't even read the signs put on every yellow poll here in Wellington. All ages do it, and kids watch, and consider jaywalking, going against the lights normal and acceptable. It isn't drivers who cause most of these accidents, but stupid pedestrians. So many times I see it, people unwilling to wait 10 seconds, 10 seconds for the lights to change colour. Great example we set for our kids eh. Late for work and 10 seconds really matters?

 

Top ^

 

Labour Party Sing-song, Discipline, Criminals... and basic human rights.

14 April 2008

 

Comments by juni0r

The Labour Party conference started off with a childish song being sung to attack National Party leader John Key. Are politicians so immature they should be in kindergarten? That's an insult to the children I know. And they're' supposed to be leading the country. No wonder its in such a mess. So long as they get their over-inflated salaries everything is fine.

We teach our children (least most of us do) not to behave this way. Here we have the supposedly highest level of our society behaving exactly the opposite. This from liberal Nanny State types who dare to tell us how we should live our lives and discipline our children. And they wonder why our communities are breaking down? To consider a smack on the bum "bashing" or "beating" our child is insanity in action.

All the while we have real criminals getting free accommodation, real predators being let back into our neighbourhoods, and serious crime on the increase despite well-to-do statistics. No one wants to take responsibility for their own actions and the government ensures this conditioning continues to perpetuate. Victims get jack, and potential victims become victims of crime because law abiding citizens are no longer allowed to defend themselves, their families or their property. Surely that is a basic human right. Evidently not.

The Police are over worked and under paid and you can't guarantee their rapid response to any potentially life threatening situation (for a variety of reasons) especially in rural areas. The criminals know this very well.

Top ^

 

Film Department Demise

 

01 March 2008

Comments by juni0r

It's quite a scary thing to come so close to something, digging yourself out a hole after almost twenty years, and to suddenly, out of the blue, discover that that opportunity could be abruptly smashed.

Okay, so Film isn't everything, but it is something, and something very substantial for the big picture, in me finding a new career. That is, a career that will properly pay the bills. I had been told constantly for years "you'll just have to use your brain instead of your brawn", after an accident in the military had a somewhat unexpected and major impact on my life.

Finally, after several attempts academically there has been success. I'm two thirds the way through a Film degree at the University of choice for the subject in the country, in the city of choice for the Arts. To have got so far and be told the Film Department could soon cease to exist is more than a bit on the nose. I'm not a kid, I shouldn't suddenly, yet again, be expected to go down (yet another) road for another career option.

The audacity is, they ran Film 101 this year. The cheek of that is quite astounding really. And the whole idea of merging Film papers into a new degree of Visual Culture is just rubbish. You have Media and Film, Film and English, Film and Theatre... how rare is Film and Art History...? Very. They did it all under-handed. All on the quiet like. I found out when a partition was going around. The students are the shareholders. They are the country's future... and errr... Wellywood? So much for that eh. Bastards.

We are left with a butchered path for anyone serious about film. What remains is a few token Film papers here and there in amongst some "Visual Arts" major, no real Film focus, like they do at other universities. But most likely, from what people have been saying, it will be a Post Graduate course only, so the above is a go, but you can't be starting out with a Film degree specifically from 100 level. Which, of course, means that it is, by default, no longer a career option in real terms. Anyone who has started or even completed a degree, its like its become irrelevant. Me irrelevant? I don't think so mate.Its all about the money and research grands and rubbish. Education eh. They don't care about peoples' futures, much less the potential of the country. They only care less about their own little world, which isn't part of the real one that's for sure.

I saw one of my lecturers today. Hadn't seen him since last year and he asked me kindly how it was going. I said,"good yeah, thanks. All going well, I should be finished this year." He replied,"Yeah, me too probably."

It took me a couple of moments to click. So, several bloody good teachers of this particular discipline will be on the road, replaced by Art History department dictated, somewhat restrictive "Cinema Studies" course lecturers. There were scant pickings for Film this year as it was. Now we know why. It will be even worse under this proposed regime. Any practical courses, like scriptwriting or production will be canned, and if at all, put under the Post Graduate courses. I'm still holding out hope to get onto the scriptwriting course... I've been writing seriously for the past decade and they're now telling me I can't diversify to earn a proper living. Great.

The document at the centre of this whole fiasco doesn't even say whether or not the degree will continue into next year. Interestingly, though the Dean of the Faculty of Humanities was rambling on about increasing post graduate studies... she seems to miss the point that one has to do the ground work before you can do the POST graduate stuff. Vague? No, its about not having a grasp on reality and understanding who really pays the bills.

The course options have been really good, flexible. Enough to suit those arty types who can speak French or Italian, and people like me who like and know action, adventure, Science Fiction... now this is just going to flush that all down the toilet. Idiots.

I've had to retrain several times in the last twenty years, bugger it if the power players of this institution are going to force me to do the same thing again. Like I say, its all about the money, and screw the people. Well see, its much the same as how Peter Jackson was treated until he made the big time. So so typical.

For me, personally, this is a serious kick in the guts. I don't have another twenty years to get on track. And I'm doing really well, with my first A- last semester. I'm a writer, taking my natural talents (so I've been told) and taking a degree to diversify and gain real world qualifications in a field I can seriously make use of. Visual Culture it is not. I don't want to know about the economics, the politics of film... I want to know about narrative, camera angles, mise-en-scene, genre... Up until now I've been learning this stuff.

The underhanded nature of this carry on shows just what sort of people we're dealing with. Most won't say anything, those who do talk utter rubbish.

Flashdance
"When you give up on your dream, you die."

 

Top ^

 

Student Debt, Airport Security, Recent Murders.

 

.07 February 2008

Comments by juni0r

Student Allowances

A key point in this (certainly no pun intended) is freedom is not free, and neither is education. In a generation it has become an elitist commodity. You are rich (not just middle class) and you have no need to worry about student loans. Many know they NEED the education for a decent job but get in huge debt as a result. This sort of debt did not exist 30 years ago.

The world has not changed that much - only that certain people and institutions are far more greedy - and it is put down to the costs of education. Relatively speaking costs have not changed that much. Does anyone in the Beehive have a student loan hanging over their heads? I don't think so.

Some former students, going off into the workforce, are unable to see their way clear of their loans given a average and typical income in their given working lives. How can that possibly be? Debt is the reason people are unable to save. As a result, the things taken for granted of yesteryear are dreams today. Owning your own home, much less being mortgage free sometime soon, is just one example.

Average wages are lower, cost of living is higher. And the powers that be belittle Kiwis going overseas for decent incomes? No its not about adventurous New Zealanders going on their OE. Its about practical realities. Many do not return. They are our future, our trained, skilled workforce.

Simple fact is student allowances have not been keeping up with inflation, the cost of living and the increases in rent. Neither have average wages. My rent is over half my income. When it went up last year I didn't get any increase in accommodation to reflect this. Still have to study no matter the financial woes. But then, some politician, who no longer lives in the real world, will be able to demonstrate to me how easy it is for students, how it hasn't got any harder at all, all through rhetoric and statistics.

Maximum points for avoiding the real issues.

 

Airport Security

Loved the one about the Air Marshall being hauled up because he was about to carry nail clippers onto a plane. No one ever thinks about how you've just put a loaded handgun onto a plane for the apt terrorist to acquire. Makes things so easy. There is no need to get into a cockpit in order to kill everyone on board. So you stop it ploughing into a high rise...

Have heard that the EU has now permitted knives, so long as they are no longer than 6cm long, on board flights. Yet 100ml of hand lotion is still not allowed? By the time I have written this, rules have probably changed again. Its total madness. DW-TV to thank for the update. Key here is, if you are travelling, just go bear minimum, and post home anything you really want to keep or gift that might be confiscated. Again though, heck you just can't tell from one day to the next. After all, you can strangle someone with a coat, or a power cable from your laptop.

http://www.dw-world.de

It is the training, the psychological aspects which are not so easy to counter. It is not an ability to think laterally that kills, but a desire, a willingness. Necessary, as we know, is the mother of invention - herego what might be construed as a surprise by the uninitiated. Training increases the chances of this, and the capability to do things correctly. But all that goes out the window if there is no will and determination to see it through. So, thereby making this element the most critical, it sadly is also the most difficult face. Extremist terrorists, the big time players, they have more of this than the average Westerner can possibly perceive.

There are so many ways to intimidate, to blood someone, to kill. It is the will to do it which is the clincher. Authorities don't seem to get this basic fact. Therefore it is not the physical means which you need to worry about. People worry on these things because they think they can control them by confiscation and laws.

A aircraft cabin is full of so many weapons its not funny. If you worried about such hard-faced truths the airlines would be out of business tomorrow through fear. As it stands the terrorists' acts from six years ago and manipulation sees through part the way with these idiotic controls in place. A terrorist will take off a perfectly good sock and strangle you to death with it.

Breathe easy though, it is unlikely that authorities will outlaw socks on planes, trains or cruise liners anytime soon.

 

Recent Murders

In the month of January, at the time of writing, the number of murders had reached 10. Police expect this at the time of year but of course, simply put, it is 10 too many. The age of offenders varies greatly, from very young to one man who was in his fifties, a businessman, willing to kill for the victim's intent to tag. Greed, frustration, drugs, jealousy... you can't put offenders or motives in a box, that is plain enough. Therefore it seems pointless to try and cure it by label.

We live in a violent, increasingly violent society. It appears that the majority of people though live with the view still that "it will never happen to me", it always happens to someone else. Perhaps, one would hope that this is steadily losing its appeal and people are behaving for cautiously, treating issues of self defence and instructions in streetwise behaviour and common sense precautions with the seriousness they deserve.

But no. It is quite evident that this is not the case. People would rather get totally blotto, having one last drink rather than using the money to take a taxi home. If you can't walk straight you can't defend yourself. If you walk you can't run. A phone call only ever lets someone know you're in trouble before its too late. If you can't organise a safe return home or safe companions to ensure your security through the night then don't go out. Assault, rape, grievous bodily harm or murder is simply not worth it.

So, it has nothing to do with age. We can easily establish that. It has to do with responsibility and personal accountability. It has to do with how we respect ourselves and how we respect other people. 90% of serious crimes of such natures can be avoided altogether by following basic rules and common sense. We have to wake up, smell the coffee and realise its not a safe world out there, and also ensure we are not going to be held ransom by it.

There are far better hobbies in this world than getting drunk. It is all about free will and using that will to make the right choices. This way you avoid either becoming the offender or the victim. Drinking doesn't mean you need to get drunk. Think first, have a good night - one that doesn't turn into a nightmare.

As for young offenders... here's one example of the key to curbing the trend.

http://www.projectk.org.nz

 

Top ^

 

Happy Smurf, Writers' Strike, Pistachio Nuts... and the price of butter.

 

15 January 2008

Comments by juni0r

First up Happy Birthday to the Smurfs, they're 50. Well, perhaps it was yesterday, not sure.

The impact of the writers' strike is being felt on the Golden Globe Awards (the 65th). What is usually three and a half hours ended up being just 30 odd minutes with very few appearances from the stars. The industry is going to have to stand up and take notice, finally after so long. Writers have been given a raw deal for too long. Amazing how they can not be recognised for the critical role they play. If it wasn't for their work, well, the industry wouldn't exist. You can see though, how compliance a public is when they think its the actors who are so clever and say such brilliant things on screen... Sure, they can have input and some of them are very talented, but to ignore the central role of writers is just arrogant. Wondering how the BAFTA or Oscars will fear? The massive marketing tool that these awards are each year has to be taking a beating as a result.

An argument about pistachio nuts between the US and Iran? What next? Well, the Brits are in rows with the Russians over the British Council, all stemming out of the recent assassination of a former KGB spy. On top of that one wonders if Israel will give Iran the same treatment they gave Iraq to stop them going nuclear. Wouldn't surprise me, and I wouldn't blame them. Least some countries understand the concept of standing up for themselves. Unlike what we've turned into... someone can make any sort of threat they like against New Zealand, all we can do is threaten to not give them some sort of produce they can get from somewhere else... Forgot, we tend to make enemies of our friends, and friends of countries that are anything but friendly unless they want something... like butter, that we now pay for through the teeth. Imagine that. Well, doesn't matter because politicians don't have to wonder where they're money is coming from for the next pound of butter or block of cheese or two litres of milk.

 

Top ^

 

Respect, Dignity, Superficiality ...and laziness.

 

04 December 2007

 

Comments by juni0r

I had written something up a couple of days back on the stealing of the medals from Waiouru. This included Charles Upham's VC and bar, the only combat soldier to be awarded the double VC, one of only three ever earned in history. A couple of days hence after my Iraqi mate had a few things to say.

I said yeah, had nearly twenty years of it. Snide remarks, "shut ups" foul looks and stares, "you're obsessed", anti-military (often mistakenly linked to anti-nuclear), anti-gun, whatever types of attitude. Anzac Day protests and letters to the editor. These people target ex-military people, in everyday conversation or whatever, they don't bother to roll up to the politicians who create the bloody wars in the first place.

In the main now, unless it is obviously okay to do so, I don't talk military things unless I am directly asked. Otherwise I do what most people prefer and shut up. Amazing how so many things can be talked about, so many interests and cultures and histories, but somehow, in this country the military is deemed by so many to be taboo. Most people would talk about stuff that doesn't really matter in the big picture, because it is so much easier.

The military was one year of my life, but I have spent years learning about it, technology and science, history, tactics, countries and cultures, writing about it, being a Defence advocate, etc. Someone goes to university and studies a topic for a few years, three or four, and they get their degree, their PhD. I have already spent far longer doing what I do and I get it in the neck three out of four times for mentioning my chosen field. I should have written my first novel about flowers and just how peaceful the world is.

The ironic thing is, the military, asides from my outstanding upbringing at home despite the challenges it inherently held, is where I learned respect, and what dedication and perseverance and loyalty really mean.Interesting how people are. They want you to get out of bed, work hard, be respectable, be well dressed, have good work ethics, be clean and talk properly, work well with others... the list goes on. Well, I got a great deal of that from military service.

History, I learned a great deal about history.

If you want an example about our society's regard for the military in general, then I think the stealing of these medals from Waiouru says it all. A mate told me today that an English guy had put up $200,000 reward for their return. No, money doesn't represent these bits of metal and ribbon, but it does work for most people who can't fathom what these things do represent - so that's how you get them back.

Once a soldier always a soldier. The single one time I knew who I really was, where I fitted into the big picture and felt sure about everything was when I was in uniform.

So no, I won't shut up. I will just pray that one day, this country will actually buck up its ideas, forget about all the superficial rubbish and learn some respect.

We live in a world willing to spend $8 million on some soccer player, than time and energy on embedding respect and dignity into our society. Then you find out that the restaurant where David Beckham ate is putting up his half empty Coke bottle, half eaten corn cob and dirty KFS for auction on TradeMe. See, we are more interested in how we look, image, than how we feel. Simple laziness, we can't make the effort.

Sad to say but it will take another (major) war of our direct involvement for these essential facets of reality to return to our shores, for us as a people to buck up our ideas. A major disaster perhaps. There goes that irony again...

And all this coming up to Christmas... Yeah, to be full of good cheer. A culture of love and compassion and sacrifice turned into one of greed, selfishness and one-up-man-ship.

I still struggle to relate to civilian life, and it is no wondering as to why.

So in closing, when you've finished sucking up those chemicals, please put your butts in the rubbish bins provided.

 

Medals Stolen

Okay, so who were these bastards? I'm pretty convinced it was an inside job, due to the ease with which they got in and out and knew exactly what they were after. It wouldn't surprise me it was also connected to some form of "protest". Particularly after the recent awarding of a VC to Corporal Willy Apiata for his actions under fire in Afghanistan. What is required in my opinion is some old fashioned barrack justice. It is obvious that whoever was involved was only interested in money, through trading on the black market. You don't sell these sorts of things over the counter, and if you do you need to take a seriously good look at yourself and what the recipient did to earn it. The only person who has that right is the recipient, period. The reason wars keep happening is because too many people put far little value on the actions which permit the medals to be bestowed. It is a simple physical representation of very significant acts of service and bravery. Those who serve get very little in return.

 

Top ^

 

Clean and Green? Iraq, Captain Matthew Ferrara... and real news.

 

23 November 2007

 

Comments by juni0r

 

Clean Green New Zealand?

 

New Zealand and the Kyoto protocols - we suck. It is official. The US is improving hands down, and we, good old clean green Kiwiland is only getting worse. Once more, my assessment of our self-righteous image totting carry on is shown to be correct. But that's all okay, because as long as the world is fill of idiots - people continue to believe the lies.

 

Was funny actually, I'd never thought of it this way until a friend remarked on the whole environmental thing and compared it to gun laws. The powers that be make a great deal more out of the industry which pertains to causing green house gases and so on. Controlling it costs a great deal more, more impact on so many big wig profiteer types. Compare this to the arms industry and you quickly understand why, for example, the rules of the game for Kyoto, for environmental issues are all drawn out way down the line, as gradual change as possible...

 

Whereas, they want to ban this rifle and that rifle, reduce magazine capacities and stuff (because as we know, a mass murdering scumbag really cares less how often they need to change out their magazines), classify your grandfather's old WWII Lee Enfield as a "sniper weapon" and so on, because these power brokers don't care. They don't stand to loose all so much. Plus, in this PC world, they're looking to (for the blind unthinking types out there) solve the world's crime problems.

 

Iraq

 

Casualties going way down in Iraq - yet just a little bit said on that - keep it as quiet as possible because that doesn't work well for the social construct and building and maintaining the drama. No one wants to report the good stuff. The surge is working, has been working and will continue to work. Belated realisation that more troops needed to be in place on the ground in the first place by those calling the shots is better late than never. Most in the know have appreciated this from the start but it is good to see things turning around for those in the thick of it.

There was a rambling about desertions though. Reckoning for nine soldiers in every 1000 bolting. Well, I would suppose that this is pretty low in actual fact considering how long the war has been going on, and that it is from people who have done repeat tours. The human body and mind is only capable of so much. This is why the military is not giving these people a hard time. They've done more than their fair share and it is understandable. They are not cowards, they are not people who signed up and then did the runner when a war came calling. Honestly, a section of guys out a couple of battalions is nothing. Normal retention problems are worse than this in most Armed Forces. It doesn't even rate as real news, but it sounds good to peaceniks who want to jump on the anti-military bandwagon.

 

Captain Matthew Ferrara

 

Phil Goff and his nephew. Most civilians miss the point that a soldier, particularly in the combat trades - at the end of the day - as hard as it is for any human being to absorb, is there to die. Forget the tactical situation, the bottom line is this very brutal fact. The job of the soldier is to do the greatest amount of damage to the enemy while sustaining the less possible in return - but one of the those consequences is death, or being wounded, physically or otherwise. Thereafter it is the job of the respective governments - and their people, to care for those who have served. Let's face it - they don't have a very good track record.

 

Everyone of right mind doesn't want to loss a loved one. We don't want to simply have the memories. Sure enough. But it is far better that, if a person die the way they lived that they be respected for that, especially as a serviceman, than there be some long winded standard issue line in the newspaper.

 

My qualm here is not that though, but that the article is done in the vain of this young man being the nephew of a New Zealand parliamentary minister, not a New Zealander. If there wasn't some connection here it wouldn't have rated news. But of course, if some no name Kiwi does die there tomorrow, because of this situation, it will make the news, just to prove me wrong.

 

To give you an idea - when was the last time you heard something substantial about Iraq or Afghanistan on New Zealand network news? A long long time. People are dying, getting gravely wounded there, everyday and we get nothing. We get all this sport rubbish, we get stuff that simply doesn't make it on the screen in most Western countries because we are so not in the real world in this sense. We like to just shut it all off, unless we want to make a big deal about something to show how we can be a player too. Image. Its really quite disgraceful and embarrassing.

 

In any case I would like extend my condolences to the family of Captain Matthew Ferrara and to everyone who has lost family in that war, physically and otherwise.

 

Top ^

 

PLA Haerbin in Wellington

 

12 October 2007

Comments by juni0r

Weapons have long since been tested and found to be effective. Exercises with the New Zealand and Australian navies goes beyond friendliness. That is but a small part of a rather extensive both practical and metaphorical journey which is more about producing personnel experience, learning and adapting logistical requirements, planning, and reconnaissance for this part of the world. All of this is done under the guise of closer relations, and of course, growing stronger economic ties, which the New Zealand government holds high on its agenda.

Armstrong disappearing guns were installed in New Zealand due to fears of the Russians pre-1900. I hardly think that anyone can hold to the idea that New Zealand's geographic isolation is any sort of protection from military aggression in the 21st century.

Name the number of countries who fought in the Korean War. Then tell me who those under the UN banner fought against primarily. This is not about scare mongering but about having an open mind based on prior experiences - which seem to be all too quickly forgotten for the sake of trade. Oh, no, most certainly one cannot deny China as a world power, economic or otherwise. But it is unwise to deny its potential for aggression and a reprehensible human rights record.

While Te Kaha is currently in China for similar reasons as Chinese warships are here, American warships are not allowed in our ports...

 

Top ^

 

Big Mugs, Moaning Kiwis... with no real problems.

 

11 October 2007

Comments by juni0r

Haven't seen anyone wearing any All Black apparel over the last couple of days... except me, and my training jersey from three seasons ago.

It seems Kiwis really have nothing particularly important to complain about when there can be a case of national morning as a result of loosing a chance at a big mug. Yes, the Rugby World Cup. Bring back the rugby of yesteryear. When players played to have a rest from real work... on farms and the likes. They got a meagre allowance, not thousands of dollars, corporate deals and big egos. Back before there was more in mind than image and looking good. I loved the game when I used to play as a kid. Love watching the provincial stuff. The more grassroots it is, the better. The less there is to do with money and branding the better. Once upon a time maybe I wanted to grow up and be an All Black. Now, if I was a kid, nope, no thank you.

Its a very different world we live in, and the prevailing attitude of New Zealand's having lost in the semi-finals really states it to a tee. This country has less to worry about than most, to complain about, to moan... And it seems we do far more than our fair share. As a nation we really need to take a pill and wake up.

So much for all those little maxims we used to tell kids eh. "Its not wether you win or loose..."
It is no longer "just a game", primarily due to our modernistic attitude. You can keep it.

Oh how unpatriotic I must sound.

Top ^

 

Police Shooting

 

28 September 2007

Comments by juni0r

Yesterday some guy was shot and killed by Police in Christchurch. Seems to be occurring with more frequency. My argument, primarily is, if someone hasn't been taking party pills, or whatever else it can be, they won't be going off their heads in the first instance, and second, not in the street smashing up property or threatening people or what have you. This idea totally negates the need for any sort of action by Police. For example, I have never seen the inside of a jail cell, never been to prison or been arrested. There is a simple reason for this... and no - before you jump on your high horse - my upbringing was not ideal, not perfect. I have made choices. One of them was not to get off my nut on drugs and go smashing stuff up.

The other side of the coin is very much about confidence and training, which the Police (often) lack. Thus, the feeling that an officer has no option but to use a handgun. You must make split decisions for sure, but unfortunately, once more, adequate training in the use of a baton (in this case to disarm a hammer-weilding assailant) is forgone for the use of a lethal weapon. batons allow for specific techniques and controlled amounts of force for the best possible outcome. Bullets, on the other hand, do damage independent of the shooter. Only bullet placement counts here, and in stressful circumstances idealism is not useful. Hits to the leg can kill from arterial bleeds. You are trained to hit centre mass for a reason.

A mate informed me that the taser trial was over and so this wasn't an option. The officer wasn't close enough for pepper spray. It has questionable impact on drug-induced frenzies anyway.
At the end of the day, most of the time, law abiding citizens don't get shot by the Police. Not in this country anyway. So, yeah, the moral of the story is a simple one. It may seem harsh, but a life is not worth a few days of supposed fun, surely.

Please give the Police more training, more confidence, in alternatives to using firearms. Evidently the officer in question did not have confidence in their issue stab proof vest. A smack in the side of the head with a hammer will kill you as dead as any pistol, but if no human being was being attacked... Its always a hard call, especially when you're on your own.

 

Man vs. Dog

04 October 2007

This situation occurred two days ago out in Porirua. Several Police officers were called to scene of which the initial circumstances are not in question. Their engagement of a dog with pistols and high velocity carbines are.

If soldiers or firearms holders moved and behaved in such ways with weapons, loaded or otherwise, I know what their respective law enforcements would be doing. It wouldn't be milk and cookies time I can tell you. There was absolutely no organisation in their movements. Hot weapons pointing at colleagues' backs. It was like children out playing in a playground. This is no game.

Rifles! 5.56mm Bushmasters. I'm sorry, but this weapon, though not the best of type, is nonetheless designed to engage targets at up to 400 metres in (more or less) ideal shooting conditions. The round it fires, likewise. If an operator of said Bushmaster (M4 carbine made by the firm US Bushmaster) can not hit a target with a certain amount of accuracy at 10-20 metres they shouldn't be allowed to carry much less discharge one in any area, much less a public one. I hope those behind their new Accuracy International sniper rifles get more tuition. There I was thinking initially that they just all carried pistols. Thirty round magazines only mean that a trigger happy individual will continue to fire rounds until the magazine is empty, not concentrating on the individual shots. This is a scary prospect for anyone who is happening by, say, inside any cordon that might have been set up. Or well beyond it, deeming the range the projectiles can travel.

These skill sets are based off nine days training, and 24 hours a year. That actually scares me. Well, I'm glad I won't likely be shot by accident even, but that much lead flying is concerning. Being professional and acting professional is about attitude and training. As I've mentioned several times elsewhere, something needs to be done about the quality and duration of training. When you give a man a rifle, or a pistol, and expect him to do his duty efficiently with such little time behind the butt, you are only asking for trouble. I actually feel sorry for these people. This is not fair on them, and not fair on those they are meant to serve and protect. These sorts of shortcomings cost lives.

At twelve years old I could shoot a rabbit (which is far smaller than a dog) at far greater ranges than 15-20 metres, on the fly with a .22 Magnum bolt action hunting rifle. It took me one shot. Not fourteen. And Police officers need to be more restrained, especially in a built up (or at least inhabited) area.

Now I don't envy the officer's job whose it was to speak on television and justify the Police actions in Porirua, but I'm sorry its no time for excuses. If there is a enquiry than that explicitly tells us something went wrong. Not just that firearms were discharged.

The guy from the UK talks from solid long experience. Saying he doesn't know about NZ conditions is like a Police officer from Wanaka trying to talk down a soldier who has just done a tour of duty in Iraq. The New Zealander officer knew he had nowhere to go with this. It got out and it is a professional embarrassment. If he is confident about those actions displayed then... well, I for one am at a loss. Treating a foreign officer of that calibre is not doing the image of the New Zealand Police any favours, especially now when it is the last thing they need.

 

Top ^

 

Air New Zealand Designation Iraq, UN Condemnation, Police Vests

 

22 August 2007

Comments by juni0r

Okay, so I haven't moaned (at least on THS) about anything for a while. There have been a few things that have griped me recently in the media. No wonder I'm studying it. Here we go then...

Tongan Troops to Iraq via Air New Zealand

So there has been this squabble over Air New Zealand being chartered to carry a mere 55 Tongan soldiers from point A to point B, and happen to be destined for Iraq. Oh... and this is the only thing the government has to debate as our representatives? Not forgetting how rarely we actually get to practically practice democracy. So we don't have even a platoon of recce troops over there (which would I'm sure be welcomed with open arms in any part of the country) and yet there are hundreds of Kiwis making a very good living (not discounting the risks of course) over there in PMCs, doing engineering work, driving trucks and all sorts... Its a wonder our self righteous parliament hasn't passed a bill preventing New Zealand citizens from doing such horrific things... such as saving lives, fixing stuff... and providing security for a fledgling government which has an incredibly difficult job on its hands.

Incredible how we in New Zealand can act so high and mighty on issues, and then judge each other while passing the buck. Business is business, and (was it Alexander Downer?) as the Aussie bloke said, well, we can soon get another carrier to take our money to transport troops to Iraq if Air New Zealand won't do it. Business is business. Who on earth thinks we'll change the course of the war based on this sort of issue? Any issue? Man alive. What are they going to do next when we buy our tickets, whether or not we are soldiers, whether or not we drive trucks in Iraq, or are over there in a private sector military company making $500 a day? Get a grip.

...of which Tom Scott did a very funny cartoon. Picture a air hostess (hey - that's un-PC - shouldn't that be air hostperson...) She's standing there giving her pre-flight demonstration and says:

**********

Okay, so apparently there was some Aussie troops moved by Air New Zealand. In addition to the Tongan troops I mentioned in the Rant. That's really funny. And then I read Letters to the Editor and people going on about how horrific it is. Man... I just dunno. Something about "guns", then something about the "people who use them". Hey, some taxpapers (deeming that Air NZ has been bailed out by the government) don't actually mind. I for one don't. But then, perhaps in this democracy, my opinion doesn't matter. Considering how few troops have found their way to Iraq helped out by the airliner, perhaps its just a fair reflection on behalf of those who don't mind, or, the majority who don't actually care one way or the other. At least its money in the pockets of Kiwis. And, Aussie soldiers are our equal. Just maybe time would be better spent debating how soldiers on the ground WHO ARE OVER THERE can be better treated and supported. Last I heard, they were human beings too. And by equal measure damn fine when compared to the majority of whiners out there who wouldn't know what service was it if jumped up and bit them on the arse.

 

UN Condemns Bombs

Are you jokers for real? More idealistic rubbish. Love the concept, and any sane human being supports it - yes, including me... but you're not dealing with people who think the same as the average bloke. Different stuff going on between the ears. You can condemn stuff like this all you like. Like mines. If we could stop the manufacturers to stop making them tomorrow, we'd still have a gizillion to clear in places like Afghanistan and Cambodia... Far too good for business I'm afraid. So cheap to make, so much profit, en masse. Reminding the forgetful this is but one (big) reason why war continues to happen in the first place. Bombings like the one in Northern Iraq - there are several reasons why it occurs, and is effective. Look at this case in point, the motives. Hey, they even warned - like the IRA used to do. This is al-Qaeda factions operating in Iraq, and against a group, the Yazidis, who they deem "anti-Islamic". Real simple.

 

Condemning this stuff doesn't make it go away, the people that effect it go away. Someone needs to tell these jokers that harsh language doesn't stop a bomb blast, or a rifle bullet, or a knife slashing for that matter. Neither do big fancy words.

Police Vests

I only got one response from my previous ramblings on the issue of vests to the Police. Was interesting to say the least. Now, Ron Mark, in my humble opinion is one of the few MPs worthy of a seat so it was good to see he had raised issue with these things. This time it is about their standard of manufacture. This is nothing unusual and if you've served in the Armed Forces of this country (or the US or the UK etc etc) then you might know what its like being a ground pounder and getting issued crap gear. Yet, they can spend billions and billions on laser guided this, heat seeking that, cruise missile... blah blah. So, in view of this, the Police are unlikely to be treated any different... until (like level crossings I hear you scream) an MPs son or daughter is stabbed in the line of duty. A few more hours (which they don't have) in unarmed combat might be more beneficial over a vest that doesn't protect a great many of the vitals anyway (which I have argued before).

So yeah they are saying that these vests are down on quality compared to the British bobby issue vests. Delays and errors have meant many officers still don't have their vests. Well, the military is the same. At least New Zealand Police aren't being shot at on a daily basis. And, according to stats (which can be made to say anything you want them to) they aren't getting stabbed very often either.

The armour is less protective than it should have been. Again though, for the money, make sure the personnel are taught how to handle situations properly. Just to clarify, I'm talking about situations which start out on a level playing field, and due to heavy handedness, power tripping young officers, it ends up messy. What could have been a fine example of serving the community ends up a day all involved would rather forget. I've seen it far too many times... all about attitude. Not about what you're wearing. If the Police minister's records are correct, 48 stabbing assaults against Police in 2003 is relatively few. Five in 2004 and six in 2005 is far far less. So, on that level, the money for inferior vests might have been better spent on confidence building self defence classes, self-disapline and ethics and professionalism sessions. But, if one vest saves a life, hey, its money well spent. Just saying, $4 million of tax payers money might have been better spent.

 

Top ^

 

NZSAS soldier awarded VC, first since World War Two

 

10 July 2007

 

Comments by juni0r

 

On 02 July we find out as a nation that Corporal Willy Apiata has won the Victoria Cross for actions in Afghanistan back in June of 04. This was not surprising but because of the media frenzy on it all towards a very humbled man, his career will be incredibly impaired from now on. I would suggest it wasn't his choosing. I regret the sense that it was more about kudos for the government than it was about bravery and a man simply taking care of his mates and doing his job. Politicians care little for those who serve unless it serves their own interests. They now put these very people at risk by making them public property. The Defence Minister's decision to manage the NZSAS is quite concerning and no, not all New Zealanders would be proud of this SAS man's efforts. The Labour party must have quickly forgotten its own roots and the nature of pacifism in this country. And the fact that military spending, time and time again, comes after the fact, leaving people like Corporal Apiata hanging out in the breeze. Still, like I say, his life, and those of his mates are worthwhile political capital for the politicans. These grave issues aside it is the first time since World War Two that the VC has been bestowed upon a Kiwi.

Congratulations Willy. All the best for your future. Kia Kaha.

 

Top ^

 

UAVs on a Budget, Dalai Lama, Fiji... and so much for free speech.

 

22 June 2007

Comments by juni0r

 

There was a little snippet in the paper concerning the use of a "model" plane, as it were a toy, to be used by the NZ Army as a UAV. That's a Unmanned Aerial Vehicle. The value of the thing is $15000, but you'd be needing to strap on quite expensive sensor suites for full-blown operational use, such as thermal imagining.

This is still way cheaper than typical US / UK models like Predator which go into... well, many more digits. But of course, its all about commercial viability, not really about saving lives. Wherever there is a buck to be made, or saved, for profit, let it be made.

My issue is not that we could develop this technology and sell it for other militaries or government departments world wide and still make some money off the products and the talents of Kiwis, but that for such a supposedly technologically innovative country, we've taken so long to come to these humble beginnings. Anything military seems to be ground to a halt, until, it is found there is no other way and some new technology - usually foreign and bloated in regards cost, is rushed into service with the associated and inflated technical issues not readily acceptable on any known hostile terrain around the globe.

Perhaps, since our soldiers now must go overseas and train with foreign militaries in essential skill-sets we might be able to put these machines to go use, but again, only going part the way to solving just a few pressing issues at hand.

And while I'm here, even in 2007 soldiers have to make do with outdated uniforms in the British pattern. Ironic that we couldn't, again for the above reasons, supply or troops with our own NZ pattern uniforms for service in Afghanistan and Iraq. You'd think such a government as Labour would be wanting to ditch those imperialist connections as quickly as possible.

I was going to say something about the Dalai Lama and commercialism, related to capitalism. Funny how Helen Clark dodged the man only to unofficially yak with him when he bumped into him at the airport. And Winston saw him as the leader of the NZ First Party, not as Foreign minister. Yes, China sure does hold sway. Kick out the US nuclear ships, but no guts to be too bold on the Chinese front. Human rights and all. What one does for trade is quite incredible. Wonder what the Dalai Lama thinks of that?

Ah, and the situation in Fiji, but I seem to have run out of steam. Something about, sure, have a country run by the military, but not much good if its just as corrupt as the civil government it replaces. Don't think New Zealand or Aussie should really butt their noses in another country's business, but when it starts have an affect on the people, you start to wonder. Still waiting for a viable reason for the expulsion of our ambassador there. So much for free speech and making your views known (regards the coup). Democracies eh.

 

Top ^

 

Letters to the Editor - Anzac Day Protesters

 

05 May 2007

 

Comments by juni0r

 

For a start Valerie Morse is certainly not keeping anyone's peace.

If the protest "was aimed at neither veterans nor monuments" you would surly have to wonder why it was done on this particular day, of all days - the most Anti-war day there is. Why were they not standing beside the veterans, remembering the cost? It would also be very helpful if she learned that George Bush didn't somehow dream up this whole War on Terror. That it is being waged all around the world, including the Pacific, places much closer to home. She is not so clever as to try and get away with subconsciously lumping it in with the war in Iraq. The government's views on this are quite different indeed.

The government do not call operations in Afghanistan peacekeeping and never have. But indeed, most of the operations she broadly speaks of are. Freedoms of speech unfortunately do not automatically enforce the notion that a speaker exacting their rights will know what they are actually talking about. As painful as such words would be to such a individual or group - the NZSAS are actually involved in what is termed Direct Action missions - that is, closing with, and killing the enemy. But mostly, they hide up in holes, most certainly not killing anyone, while, inches from ones face the enemy does lurk, providing battlefield intelligence, which actually allows for given conflict to be concluded much more decisively, with far fewer casualties. But that is something these groups will not, nor probably ever understand. Perhaps they would rather a conflict go on and on, massive amounts of death as a result of attrition warfare. For, asides a few more major battles, this war consists of numerous skirmishes rather than the overwhelming slaughters consistent with World War One, or even World War Two.

I have been to a (single) Peace Action Wellington meeting last year. It was dealing with the IDF / Hizbollah conflict. Interestingly I saw very little in our circle which related to peace. In fact, most of it was about generating hatred, or at the very least spite, towards Americans and Jews. I was targeted for making the comments you would expect an ex-Army fellow to say, while a Jewish couple there, and someone representing a local Jewish group copped more flak than me during the evening. I understand the art of diplomacy and sometimes wish I did not. Peace is a very easy word to throw about, putting the principles into action is a very different kettle of fish.

On the issue of the NZSAS being present - this is also a UN sanctioned operation. The Labour government has faced up to the realities of our current global climate, as I allude to below, I am sure Ms Morse would not be very happy to be the victim of a bomb blast in Island Bay simply because she lives in, what is deemed by extremists of this persuasion, to be a "Christian" country.

Would she prefer that the NZSAS had to be charged with CRW operations here in New Zealand?

 

Countless American lives were saved by the efforts of our Special Forces in the mountains of Afghanistan during Anaconda. I suggest she go over there and spend five minutes on the ground. American soldiers' lives might not mean much to her, but battlefield reconnaissance in some of the worst conditions imaginable are not to be rejected by a person who has no knowledge whatsoever of such things.

 

I am unsure why, but every time I have an encounter with such people, it is always made clear to me how they dismiss a soldier as human, how they somehow are a second class citizen. It is reinforced here, as you'll note the number of civilian lives lost (according to her research) but no numbers regarding military personnel. These people definitely live in a different world to my own. The irony is, when they wake up one morning to find their idealistic world shattered by sniper fire and broken glass the soldier still protects them.

 

I would wonder how mankind will miraculously stop engaging in war. At the risk of sounding realist, I'd like to know how this will happen. Do you think that everyone has the same values as you do? So, in the end, to prove the point, some people are willing to take up arms, to kill in order to make that point. Including attacks on innocent civilians. So, somehow we are to negotiate with armed bandits or militia, militaries without protection. In an ideal world this would be great. Everyone would lay down their arms and be all buddy buddy. If you want to be neutral and stay out of everyone else's arguments... well, you need to ask the Swiss exactly what needs to be done to promote and preserve that. You either ally yourself with strong partners, or you form your own very strong well organised Defence Force - which is exactly that, in the business of Defending your principles tooth and nail. World War Two showed this as far as the aforementioned country is concerned, from a military standpoint. Yet such groups dismiss the concept of having a standing Army at all. This is where the whole notion just falls flat.

On Saturday May 5, 2007 the following two letters were published in the Dominion Post:

I can see that perhaps, like my previous round of Letters to the Editor, I needn't actually contribute to the debate. Others are readily at hand to do same and are often somewhat more articulate than I. P Hills most certainly verifies the lack of forethought by some individuals making it so easy to counteract such behaviours and words. In any case, here goeth my words...

Concerning Protests on Anzac Day

Valerie Morse (Letters, 2 May) believes that militaries only exist to wage war. Peacekeepers are hardly equipped to wage war with anyone. Further more, the military is the sole institution in our society with complete logistical networking, equipments, personnel and training capable of dealing with major disasters. They constantly assist the Police, SAR efforts. They teach all manner of non-combat trades. They remind us how horrific war can be when it comes calling, that to be unprepared for it tempts fate.

Perhaps Peace Action Wellington could face a BM21 truck, just one, launching a single salvo of Katushya rockets on Island Bay – 760 kilograms of High Explosive. Their diplomacy skills would work wonders on the crew. I for one could not trust them to protect my family, those I love from such a threat.

Don’t insult the honour of our troops who will and have put their lives on the line to stop such things. No, this doesn’t happen in New Zealand. In many countries around the world, it sure does.

The same skills of diplomacy could have been put to good effect to persuade Hitler, Pol Pot or Idi Amin, I’m sure. They sure didn’t work on Anzac Day.

Leon T. Harrison

 

Top ^

 

Blacksburg Virginia, USA.

 

23 April 2007

Comments by juni0r

Yeah, some things do get under your skin, really piss you off. Of course this rampage in Blacksburg is going to get an emotional response. I really didn't want to say any more on it but... I promise to make this only one page (in Text program) long. I morn for a place I will probably never visit, for people I will never meet. I morn for a nation. Most of all there is a persistent concern within which irks me as to why some issues even need to be debated and where the sense of perception gets all so very distorted resulting in mans' inability to deal with the cold hard facts in the cold light of day.

It is quite amazing how so many people can blame an inanimate object for the deaths of fellow human beings. Amazing how businesses are being blamed for carrying out their job - conducting business. How they are meant to be psychologists and what not, that they're not going beyond the letter of the law makes them criminally liable.

If we allow ourselves the liberty to assume that the Police aren't there in an instant, have to deal with barricaded / chained doors and what not, and someone, a potential victim, draws a personal firearm and kills the attacker - how is this dealt with? I know in this country, New Zealand, you'd be seriously concerned for criminal liability no matter how many people this murderer had already slain. This is not the notion of taking the law into your own hands. It is about self defence, the defence of others, the preservation of live. That is - stopping more people dying. Despite the amount of firearms ownership and how that might be fashioned regards such an argument for self defence, civil liberties are under threat when a civilian has to even question their ability to deal with such a dire situation without fear of prosecution.

 

Perhaps the biggest problem here is often this issue of fuzzy lines and interpretation. After all, if a police officer killed the guy (say he was off-duty, visiting a mate who was at college that day), everyone would concur that he was simply doing his job. No - his job is to preserve life. Not to take it. But he HAD TO take the life of a mass murderer in order to save countless more lives from being lost. Understand? So, sorry, it comes down to one life, of a murderer, or many others. So the police officer is not present... a civilian acts in his place. Why is that any different? Crazy that a job description matters in such horrific circumstances. The civilian, worrying about legalities hesitates. Dies. And the cycle continues. And this, in the US Constitution leads us to the very reason why, in a contemporary world, the second amendment is still very very relevant.

On the angle of how many people reckon weapons should be outlawed, asides from the Police State mentality that provokes, if we look at other facets of our society we soon discover that, as it pertains to firearms this is pressed but anywhere else it seems simply ridiculous. One could, on the purist level speak again of agendas, but lets not. So, example, to outlaw cars or alcohol because a few people (on average) kill due to drunk driving. Additionally, a great many firearms used in the perpetrating of crime (on average again) are also criminally acquired. Therefore, to have a go at legitimate firearms owners for the sake of a few (any are too many obviously) whackos is the same rationale as harassing legitimate car owners / drivers for the aforementioned crimes. Worse still, for any crime which is aided or abetted by the utalising of a motor vehicle. Neither route for either case is going to help solve their relative criminal acts.

Amazing where free speech comes from, and so many people forget this point. Anti gun lobbyists are able to preach out hard against firearms ownership. It is your diplomatic right to do so. Yet in all the surveys ever conducted has anyone one of these outfits tried to find out how many lives have been saved, property kept secure by people who have exacted their right to bear arms, provided by the second amendment to assert the threat of violence, or even lethal force if you will - to prevent the death or injury of family members or self, carried out by a willful criminal? No. The scenario is that, if someone rocks in and wants to do you or your loved ones harm, you say no way buster in the most assertive manner possible - with the threat of lethal force. Just the threat mind you, and the knowledge of the offender that you are willing to carry out that threat if they persist.

 

These surveys don't happen because it doesn't suit the associated agenda. Look into it, its called crime prevention. Wishful idealists might think there is a Policeman on every street corner, 24/7 and that violent crime, grievous bodily harm can be curtailed by assertive language skills and the gentle art of diplomacy. For a crazed killer who will simply continue to kill if not stopped this is not possible. Such actions are not in the realms of sanity and therefore, such measures, such niceties don't work. On the grander scale of things, if you must ask why peacekeepers are armed this concept will be beyond comprehension. Its a mean nasty world out there, and sometimes difficult things need to be done to curb far more traumatic events.

 

Top ^

 

Iran, GPS Coordinates, Blatant Aggression... and disregard for those whom you rule.

 

03 April 2007

Comments by juni0r

Okay so by now we all know that the Iranian authorities are holding several Royal Marines and Royal Navy personnel. The media handles things as it always does, making mention of given established facts then never to repeat them again. Sounds like stores of chemical mortar rounds and such like in Iraq... But here we are talking the coordinates initially given out by the Iranians. Suddenly they changed their coordinates. Must be a dud GPS system eh. Convenient. This makes their whole argument for these "enemy" personnel entering their territory fall over dead. It is an act of defiance. It is an act of desperation. For a country supposedly not wanting to get into conflict they sure like antagonising things. Goes along the same road as nuclear development for peaceful purposes. Tui Breweries said it best... yeah right!

The powers that be in Iran know what they are doing. They know what sort of possible consequences could arise, and they quite simply don't care about their own people. While the big boys sit nice and cosy in their bunkers somewhere it is young Iranians and countless families that could (depending on methods of warfare taken on) and would suffer at the hands of prolonged conflict or even stand off bombing sorties. And, to the benefit of these scumbags, half the Western world will be in support of them for the aggressions of the West, even though what I have pointed out is pretty plain in the big scheme of things.

Confessions - confessions are not truths when done under circumstances of interrogation. Yes, in any side of any conflict... we know. We are talking about the current situation and its possible outcomes. One does not send a couple of RIBs into enemy territory, with female personnel to get up to no good, and "spy" on the "enemy". Geez. This is so painful to write but I know plenty of Westerners who are already blaming the British for such atrocious behaviour. There was a woman member of the Royal Navy there in order to search suspect smugglers. Yes, women are used to do this kind of illicit business for obvious enough reasons.

These two small boats were in the business of securing Iraqi waters. Iran knows this. The Marines are there to provide protection for RN boarding parties. One would simply suppose if Iran wasn't sending weapons and fighters over into Iraq to continue their "Jihad" (yes I use the word loosely, as indeed many of these fighters do), then these Brits wouldn't need to be there. So... again, Iran is indeed a master of its own destiny. The historical dispute of the Shatt al-Arab waterway is just a connivence for our Iranian warmonger. I believe, one way or another something like this was bound to happen. Ahmadinejad wants to prove his manhood and this is his starting point for doing it. One does not "invade" a country, nor bully it, by two small boats, as Ahmad Bakhshaysh of Allameh University in Tehran would have you believe.

 

Intelligence gathering? Ummm... man alive, people are conveniently inept. And perhaps that is the scariest thing of all. But again, Ahmadinejad knows this and he is working it the best way he knows how.

I feel myself writing slower as I go on for the benefit of the tactically inept who would, despite being Western and taking full advantage of what that means, while regarding the UK as the "Great Satan's little brother" or something. While several of my friends from other parts of the world can see the Iranian powers for what they are. They are feared in that part of the world.

In the end it seems that Iran is desiring war through acts of blatant aggression of which they know will have one of a number of results. All bad demonstrating a unconscionable disregard for those whom they rule over. To say you wish to wipe out a given nation, wipe it off the face of the map, well, that only means one thing regardless of the rhetoric you try to impose when questioned on it. You just don't say that sort of thing unless you are wanting a scrap.

So, the consequences we are yet to see. It will not be a good day out. Especially for the countless Iranian civilians and troops who are thrown into this due to a madman. No, it isn't about supremacy, dominance or resources, its about madness.

 

Top ^

 

Iran, Darfur, Serbia... and the benefits of arbitrary extermination

 

18 March 2006

Comments by juni0r

Iran Nuke Plans

14 March in the Dominion had a report on Russia forgoing its supply of fuel for the Bushehr nuclear plant in Iran because Tehran has yet to pay up. Nice to hear. Anything to slow them up is good. If it wasn't for anything untoward they wouldn't be so worried now would they? Maybe it will give Ahmadinejad and the boys a bit more time to think over things. Important things - like not threatening Israel, or anyone else... after all this whole nuclear thing is for peaceful purposes... Tui got it right - yeah right.

So, or though the power plant is meant to be up and running by September, Atomstroiexport, the Russian contractor has said progress will be indefinitely delayed, but officially it has been put at a few months. Perhaps this is a gentle way for Russian authorities to assert a bit of pressure on the Islamist state. It will be interesting to see what effect, if any, UN sanctions will have on Iran. They are certainly far from as backward as many Westerners would wish to believe, especially in military technologies.

UN Warned Over Darfur

And just below that lot was something on Sudan who decided to warn the all mighty UN on interfering in their affairs. That being their sovereign right to allow a territory under their rule to implode under gross acts of genocidal slaughter. Omar Hassan al-Bashir, the president of Sudan wants to impede the United Nations troop movements there and prevent further troops of the African Union being deployed. Well, I suppose he wouldn't want to stop any sort of slaughter when it went against his own agenda. The guy is probably keen to reach some sort of record, like 250,000 dead by the end of the year, since 2003. Yeah, another 50,000 in a few months, why not? Do these sorts have running bets going on who can allow the greatest amount of unnecessary death in their domain?

Serbia Cleared of Genocide

Oh, and low and behold, another citing of such affairs as the UN run International Court of Justice (a questionable name for such an outcome) lets Serbia off the hook for allowing the wholesale slaughter (there is that word again) of 8000 Muslim men and boys in Srebrenica. Somehow this court can tell you that, or though it is guilty of not preventing the genocide, the state is not guilty of committing this atrocity. Just one of many, but the most well known.

Though there is official statements to the effect of picking up the officers of the military units responsible for the massacre, such as Ratko Mladic, who is currently running around Serbia a free man, there is no sight of a government being responsible for the respective military forces, that they act on their behalf. So, or though this scumbag needs to be hung drawn and quartered, it is on such an individual's neck that this crime lies, and not that of the government.

Anyone who thinks the government had no knowledge of what was going down has got a hood over their head. Why is the government not held accountable for the actions of its troops on the ground? Why is it not plain enough to see that a policy of inaction against such horrific behaviour, the wanton extermination of a given people, creates a situation where a people, a given culture, will die out, is condoning such action?

No, see it doesn't work like that because we want to ensure that Serbia can be part of the European Community, mend its ways and be a good global citizen. This is more important than justice. As with the Darfur situation, it is far more about politics and forming a new global system than it is about right and wrong. And... just maybe, if a few peoples are arbitrarily eliminated from the equation, such a system would be a darned site less complicated to implement.

 

Top ^

 

Anti-smacking Bill, Sue Bradford, Reasonable Force... and the dictating of the few.

26 February 2007

Comments by juni0r

In this case I make no apologies for getting on the bandwagon. Our future as a nation is at stake and... for the moment, both the Internet and the law of the land dictate that I have free speech. So, with that in mind I better get into it while I still do.

What follows is a few ideas, a few opinions, a few thoughts on this whole anti-smacking bill proposed by MP Sue Bradford. I fear there is something seriously up when a single, or even a handful of people in our society can dictate a particular course of action by which the remaining four million must follow. Perhaps because this will effect people at the personal level, such proposals can't be made to stick. There also seems to be severe misunderstanding of what it is to discipline a child under reasonable domestic conditions physically, and to beat, therefore abuse a child. People have different ideas of what is required, what is reasonable. When something goes over the line this should be evident and obvious to most reasonably minded individuals.

Let us take a regular adult situation first, before we move onto the matters of children.

If someone was trying to kill you, right there and then, no questions, what are you going to do? Wait for the Police? Do we still have a inherent right to defend ourselves? To defend our family or friends or our property? Some would say that is already gone by the wayside. By Sue Bradford's logic, to do such a thing amounts to physical violence. Therefore it is illegal. Closed case. Thank you very much. I am now dead. Worse still, someone I love is dead. All because I had to act to the letter of the law which some MP with diplomatic protection doesn't have to concern themselves with, yet should know far better.

Smacking a kid is not the same as BEATING a child. Man alive, I'd rather smack my child on the backside once, let them know it was for running out on the road when they'd already been told not to, and had it explained to them verbally why they shouldn't - heck, even shown horrific photos of what happens to people hit by a tonne of metal - than have them run out on the road one more time and be hit by a car. Hit lightly by me, or hit, forever dead, by a car.

But that's okay, to Sue Bradford's mind, in her ideal world, a kid always does what they're told, always understands consequences first time, every time. Like adults, right? Look what we do to adults when they don't do what society deems appropriate. And so, when we loose our ability, and our will, to do what is necessary, we find ourselves paying a much higher price, instantly in the loose of a child's life as depicted above, or in an ongoing legal fashion.

So you see, any child I care about, they'll get a wee bit of pain now, to save tragedy later. Or they might get dragged to their room kicking and screaming maybe, all a tantrum... but in Ms Bradford's world, "man-handling" (what do you call it if you're a Mum? But that aside it sounds much more dramatic to be phrased so) would also be illegal because in her view it is physical violence. Yes, lets not mince words. Perhaps it is her wish, or those who share her views, wish to assert their will on others, who would prefer our kids who have gone NATO, for the shake of a few smacks on the backside, to be high on Ratelin. Hey, it would keep all those pharmacists and doctors happy, in the money. Like the politicians.

Remember there are other forms of violence, and so of them can be far more horrific than that manifested physical. But before we get there, just remember, to grab a kid is deemed assault when put under these policy conditions - much as if I was to grab a member of the public to restrain them from them attacking another member of the public. Sound absurd? Perhaps it is. Physically restrain a kid, its assault. But now... they're having a tantrum, throwing stuff off the shelves of a supermarket... they're running out on the road... Remember Sue Bradford's words on physical violence. So you can see where it's all heading.

Sadly this is like making drinking illegal, making the actions of a sober drinking person a criminal offence, rather than focusing on the issues of the drunk person, the excess drinking and any associated criminal activities they may delve into. You create criminals much like Prohibition created criminals or wealthier existing ones. You do not make it any easier to catch out the real abusers which should be the focus of any new policy. Their lives could even be made easier by being able to hide behind all the red tape and false realities of a better system while those in power pick on genuinely good parents. CYPS already has a bad enough record treating parents unjustly like criminals. More fuel to the fire? We shall see.

I have seen several listed reports on the connection between the physical disciplining of children making connections with actual abuse, but those that raise these connections are not about to raise cases of the far numerous comparisons between physical punishment and the the curbing of unacceptable behaviour. Who does studies like that? No one because its not getting the sort of results people like Sue Bradford want. But of course this doesn't suit their agenda so...

In any case in more extreme circumstances, if a kid doesn't want to learn the difference between right and wrong its not going to help either way. All I can say is, things like "time out" are fun times for kids. In their own space, in their room. There isn't any painful reminder. Banning TV... heck I didn't even have TV half the time when I was growing up.

There is a distinct lack of respect of elders, of parents, of societal norms in general which is somewhat more acute in these times. Because you see a parent hitting a kid 20 years ago, it meant they'd done something wrong and it was a sign you shouldn't do that thing either. Now, its a sign that, if its okay for a parent to hit a kid, then its okay for a kid to hit a kid, or worse, a kid to hit an adult. So, what has changed? You tell me.

And if, like some I've read can only remember the pain and the humiliation yet can't remember back to why they were punished this way, sorry, I can't help that. All I can say is - I knew every time why I got a hiding, and I never did committed the same offence twice I can tell you. Good example - swearing at primary school, said one of those big person words, I got the strap on the hand. Yes... Don't remember having sworn for at least five years after that. A solid dependable way in which to clean out a foul mouth. The other time, it was getting my mouth washed out with soapy water. Talk about punishment to fit the crime.

So Ms Bradford, don't be playing nanny to any parent I know please. Any adult responsible for children for that matter. Next step its called a Police State. Oh, don't like that term? Well, get a grip on your political history, understand human nature and think a bit more on what you're doing. Nothing gives any politician the right to press their personal opinions on those people they are meant to serve.

Make no bones, death threats are wrong, direct or otherwise, but when people are forced into a corner, thinking that their private lives, the rights to bring up their children are being threatened, well, it is the sort of thing that may just happen. Right or wrong, these are the consequences, and a sure warning sign something is not right. I'm not so sure Google would jump on any website where a poster had threatened me with death, or even a smack. No, all things are not equal.

Welcome to the brave new world of parenting. I know some mighty fine parents out there, doing the very best they can and raising top notch kids, the future of our country. The minute the government starts telling them how to do their job, I get very worried.

I find it ironic that a teenager can now howl abuse on a whim when a parent attempts some form of discipline, yet the same kid can go out on the town Friday, Saturday night and be trussed up and handcuffed and what have you by the Police into a paddy wagon for being a drunken hooligan out of control, street racing, brawling or whatever. Get the point?

Top ^

 

Jim Anderton, the War in Iraq, Vietnam? ...and expressing one's opinions.

 

15 January 2007

 

Comments by juni0r

 

Well, now that I've read what I've read on Jim Anderton's views of the war in Iraq it only serves to reinforce my initial opinions and my lack of faith, in general it must be emphasized, on the average Kiwis' ability to generate an informed point of view without falling into the pit of overwhelming political correctness and anti-Americanism throughout this once fine country.

Somehow we discover once more that, of a mere 3500 people surveyed, the 80% who supported mister Anderton, reflects a population in excess of 4 million people. Outstanding. And you know what they say about statistics don't you eh?

And so the attitudes of the people reflect the same attitudes as those who protested against Vietnam. Well I never. Perhaps a little less spitting upon those who served, a few less yells of "baby killer" and the likes. Yet still it be so easy for a My Lai to represent an entire institution as it was Haditha or Abu Ghraib forty odd years later. And in addition, somehow 58,000 American lives lost to a war still bitterly entrenched in so many equates to 3000 lives today.

And here we have a politician, like so many others, making huge claims but not breathing a word about the well-being of troops, thereby by default having a go at them for their "failure" to do their jobs properly. And yet it is the politicians who, rightly or wrongly, send these troops off to places like Iraq. And if you want to run the tired line of - its all about oil, I most certainly don't see such people like Anderton protesting so strongly as to stop driving, or at least getting around in, any car.

Somehow it is convenient to forget that Saddam killed thousands. Not just the handful he was eventually hung for. We went to war over sixty years ago to deal with a person bent on just the same sort of things as he was. And we even had some allies who had done some pretty horrific things besides. No, Stalin wasn't our ally, but he wasn't our enemy either, at least not for another couple of years when the Cold War began. And in those war years, there were thousands upon thousands of Americans who died in the Pacific, while most of our troops fought in Europe. I do wonder if people like Jim Anderton ever considered the monument to the US 2nd Marine Division on the Wellington waterfront. US Marines fought in Vietnam, and they sure as heck fight in Iraq today.

On top of all that it is these few in power who dictate, often through institutions like the United Nations, of whom our government is so fanatically proud, things like ROE (Rules of Engagement) often severely inhibiting the troops on the ground to do their job. Oh I am sure that line will be interpreted in interesting ways by many :) And the results so often is, a slap on the wrist at most for a politician while the soldier, the marine, the sailor, the airman dies. YES I know innocent people (civilians) die too. If that isn't already bluntly obvious.

And with these sorts of fundamental issues pulling away at the ineffectiveness of man how is it that politicians become military experts, experts on war, on internal security operations? It is quite disturbing how we can allow them to dictate policy which deals with such things, be allowed to disregard those military people with whom they decide they don't like, who do not share their own views. Where huge numbers of lives are on the line we permit this to go on... yet if some politician was about to tell your dentist what to do in regards your teeth, or your mechanic what to do in regards fixing your car... there'd be Hell to pay.

Someone should tell mister Anderton and whoever else must be told, that the war in Iraq was over some time ago. It was as decisive as it ever could have been, like 1990/1991 only more so. What is happening now is a Internal Security operation. This is substantially different and much more difficult to produce a positive outcome. Especially when the aforementioned is taking place. Winning the war is often very easy, it is the keeping of the peace that is hard. Easy to blame the Americans. Easier to do that than bother to look at history and understand that crippled militaries tend to have a difficult time of it indeed. There are age old rivalries which it seems are also conveniently forgotten. We'll just show ho