Rosemary, yesterday our contrarian friend Psycho Milt took objection to my pointing out that Hollywood’s glittering heroines du jour, the “Me Too” women, had not uttered a word of solidarity with Ahed Tamimi.
His display of contempt for those who support Downs Syndrome children is of a similar character to his insistence that those rich women had no moral imperative to support a pretty little nobody from the Occupied Territories.
I support the Me Too movement. But I wonder how many of them actually do any reading, and have even heard of Ahed Tamimi. I’m sure some of them have—but they made a decision not to speak out in support of her and her family.
I am absolutely certain that one Harpo Winfrey was fully aware of Ahed’s plight, but she didn’t make a single reference to it during her Obama-like sermonizing at the Golden Globes.
Funny you should mention that thread, in which you got into trouble for responding to a reasonable argument with “Idiot. As I suspected, you are viciously prejudiced, not merely ignorant.” Laws isn’t the only one who lets his mouth run away with him.
Oh, I understand. I agree with you that they are not obliged to speak up for Ahed Tamimi. I’m just intrigued why they don’t.
Actually, you know and I know why they don’t. Uttering even a hint of solidarity for those untermenschen in that shithole would bring down a firestorm of abuse comparable to that which was unleashed on theHerald cartoonist Malcolm Evans in 2002.
The Israeli lobby is particularly strong in Hollywood
Harvey W. Einstein was, and no doubt still is, one of the loudest and most abusive thought vigilantes in Hollywood. Rob Reiner, who reallyis a meathead, is equally brutal.
The Simon Wiesenthal Center, far from hunting down Nazis as its name might suggest, routinely conflates Judaism with Israel. And its speakers are anything BUT anti-Nazi….
I’ll have a guess, Hollywood is traditionally bank-rolled on money provided by people with Jewish names. Wallets and sentiments with ties to the old country.
Morrisey, it’s true that you apologised (thanks again for that). I still think you’re way out of line to expect that every woman who speaks out against sexism and sexual predation will name-check the one young woman in the world that you think is worthy of special mention, though. That’s patently absurd. There are hundreds of thousands – probably millions – of women living in situations just a dire as Ahed’s, and for reasons just as unfair. There are (as I pointed out yesterday) women living under the hugely unjust system of shariah law – should they all get name-checked? What about the millions of women who have had their clitorises cut away – should each of them be named whenever a woman complains about sexism? There are women who are kidnapped and gang-raped, forced to bear children to the men who have plundered their villages and murdered their families. Should we make a list and name them all whenever the issue of sexism is discussed publicly?
The fact that I don’t know the names of each of these women doesn’t mean that I dismiss the seriousness of their situations, but if I was talking to an audience of NZers about sexism and sexual abuse in NZ, I wouldn’t feel obliged to name every woman in the world who was a victim of prejudice or injustice.
And, BTW, it seems to me that this young woman isn’t being held in custody because of her gender anyway (and remember that the focus of the speeches you are so unimpressed by was gender-related). She’s in custody because she hit a soldier. Yes, there’s a bigger story and a cultural and political context that helps us to understand her motivations, but the fact remains that her case has nothing whatsoever to do with the issues that women are addressing in public in the States right now. Nothing. Not a thing. Nada – zero – zilch.
Morrisey, it’s true that you apologised (thanks again for that).
You’re welcome, my friend.
I still think you’re way out of line to expect that every woman who speaks out against sexism and sexual predation will name-check the one young woman in the world that you think is worthy of special mention, though. That’s patently absurd.
I didn’t just pick her out of the blue. She was arrested just before the “Me Too” divas made their show of bravery at the Golden Globes.
There are hundreds of thousands – probably millions – of women living in situations just a dire as Ahed’s, and for reasons just as unfair. There are (as I pointed out yesterday) women living under the hugely unjust system of shariah law – should they all get name-checked? What about the millions of women who have had their clitorises cut away – should each of them be named whenever a woman complains about sexism? There are women who are kidnapped and gang-raped, forced to bear children to the men who have plundered their villages and murdered their families. Should we make a list and name them all whenever the issue of sexism is discussed publicly?
There have been many statements of support in Hollywood and in Congress for women victimised by Sharia law and by genital mutilation. Not one of those statements of support was ever met with savage denunciation and accusations of anti-Africanism—in stark contrast to what happens whenever anyone speaks against the depredations carried out by the Israeli regime.
The fact that I don’t know the names of each of these women doesn’t mean that I dismiss the seriousness of their situations, but if I was talking to an audience of NZers about sexism and sexual abuse in NZ, I wouldn’t feel obliged to name every woman in the world who was a victim of prejudice or injustice.
Fair comment, red-blooded. But the fact is, in this case we DO know, and so do the “Me Too” heroines, the name of the young woman being persecuted. That they all chose to be silent about it is because they know the consequences of speaking out.
And, BTW, it seems to me that this young woman isn’t being held in custody because of her gender anyway (and remember that the focus of the speeches you are so unimpressed by was gender-related).
I wasn’t unimpressed by them. I was just disappointed that they chose to ignore what the whole world could see was a young woman being brutalized by the rogue state noisily supported by Harvey Weinstein and his cronies.
She’s in custody because she hit a soldier.
Are you serious? That soldier was there illegally. He had no right to be there. He and his brave comrades were heavily armed—and one of them had just shot her cousin in the face.
Yes, there’s a bigger story and a cultural and political context that helps us to understand her motivations,
You’re reducing this to some dull formula that sounds about as compelling as a Wayne Mapp speech. “Helps us to understand her motivations”?!!??!? Do you have any understanding of what is happening every day in the Occupied West Bank?
—- but the fact remains that her case has nothing whatsoever to do with the issues that women are addressing in public in the States right now. Nothing. Not a thing. Nada – zero – zilch.
No, I’m not joking. I find it incredible that you cling to the concept that there was a moral obligation to speak out about one particular person that you care about, whose position is totally unrelated to the issue that was being discussed. It’s a ridiculous assertion. I think I’ve explained my reasoning thoroughly and hopefully people other than you understand it.
And yes, I do have an understanding of the awfulness of the day-to-day oppression of people in the West Bank. There are also people living in dreadful conditions in Syria, in North Korea and many other places. When you comment about Palestine should you automatically mention all those other people in other places? Name check every individual?Because that’s what you’re expecting of the women in Hollywood.
No, I’m not joking. I find it incredible that you cling to the concept that there was a moral obligation to speak out about one particular person that you care about,
A young girl is arrested by an illegal occupation force, just before the Me Too glitterati make their grand speeches at the Golden Globes—and not ONE of those diamond-encrusted “activists” mentions the girl’s name or condemns her oppressors. Of course you are correct that no one is obliged to speak out for her—but there’s something sinister and dispiriting about the fact that they maintained a uniform silence. This cowardice is nothing new of course—in 1940 Hattie McDaniel was forced to sit apart from her white Gone With The Windco-stars at the Academy Awards ceremony, and not one of her fellow Oscar winners supported her, or mentioned her plight in their acceptance speeches. So the blanket silence of these “brave women” about Ahed Tamimi’s plight—not one of them has mentioned her yet— is not a great surprise.
…whose position is totally unrelated to the issue that was being discussed. The arrest and the ongoing campaign against other young women like her is “totally unrelated” to the aims of the Me Too campaign? Really? So is it just for rich American and English women?
And yes, I do have an understanding of the awfulness of the day-to-day oppression of people in the West Bank. There are also people living in dreadful conditions in Syria, in North Korea and many other places. When you comment about Palestine should you automatically mention all those other people in other places? Name check every individual? Because that’s what you’re expecting of the women in Hollywood.
Hollywood celebrities and politicians routinely speak out against Syria and North Korea—that’s because it’s politically acceptable. Ahed Tamimi is one of the untermenschen—like Hattie McDaniels was in 1940—and is therefore not to be even mentioned by rich women who still want to work in Hollywood for militantly pro-Israel producers and directors like Harvey Weinstein and Rob “Meathead” Reiner.
Thanks Rosemary. I didn’t think my opinion of Laws could sink any lower, but there you are. I can’t even bear to imagine what goes on inside his heart and mind.
“I can’t even bear to imagine what goes on inside his heart and mind.”
The truly distressing and depressing thing is that we DO know what goes on in his mind because of what (shit) comes from his mouth, regularly.
And yet, although it speaks much about The NZ Rodeo Cowboys’ Assoc that they have him as their media filth spewer, the good folk of Dunstan elected this eugenicist as their representative on the Regional Council.
THIS makes me really, really sad.
That there are fellow New Zealanders who actually believe in what he stands for.
And we don’t know who these people are who believe Michael “Kill the Disabled” Laws is a good person…they could be anyone…
Honestly, I think most people don’t even think that much about disability unless they have to, and even then they’re not thinking about the politics (I’m guessing that that is not news to you)
Thing is…that my wheelchair -using man and I go out into the world and speak with literally shit loads of people with some association with disability. They mostly get it, and I’m hoping they would not vote for a miserable scrote like Our Friend. Or maybe they have short memories or can separate the man and his politics from his eugenicist opinions.
I’m sure everyone has noted the alacrity with which Laws turns to puerile name-calling. He did the same to me in 2012 when I objected to his behaviour on Radio Live. On that occasion the target of his dehumanizing animus was not disabled children but poor Māori….
I might do a little bit of it, but I haven’t got the heart to do the whole thing. Laws is a pretty impressive performer, I must admit. I think it’s because he has made a career out of being a contrarian—not in the good sense—and defending the indefensible. It began when he was a student at Otago, and was an implacable defender of the apartheid South African state. Chris Trotter was an opponent, but also an admirer, of Laws.
This morning he was utterly unflappable. At one point, Kim Hill asked him if he thought the SPCA was extremist, and he said, without demurring, that it was. Imagine if Labour Party people and representatives of decent organizations spoke so plainly and uncompromisingly.
No, Mike Hosking and Duncan Garner make outrageous statements every day, but nobody with an IQ above room temperature respects what they say. Laws doesn’t always speak effectively—he makes an ass of himself every time he comments about Israel/Palestine, for example. But this morning he spoke clearly and compellingly. I disagreed with most of what he said, but I found his performance impressive nonetheless.
He was upset Kim Hill asked him if he was paid to speak as he did. Crampton found he panellists questions on the same issue of funding awkward yesterday. Wasn’t the Panel an improvement without Mora?
I’m sorry to say I missed Eric Crampton on the Panel yesterday. But I enjoyed hearing Guy Williams asking similarly hard questions of Cameron Slater’s hapless offsider Jordan Williams.
I agree, when on his game, Laws is an impressive performer. Escoteric wit and an eye for a story or an angle.
Great talk-back host, can stir a hornets nest up out of a knitting circle.
Constructs compelling arguments – good speech-writer.
But the guy has no soul. It’s easy to imagine Chris Trotter bouncing grandkids on his knee. Just as easy as it is to imagine Law’s Grandies getting the ‘Grandad is busy now’ treatment.
I think Laws would be a sensational PR operative, a crisis generator for hire. He has the unfortunate skill of being able to write a brilliant speech for either Churchill or Hitler. Great wordsmith, shame about the heart.
I just listened to the podcast from afar. What a complete wanker. It was like his macho ego was being challenged. Nothing’s changed with the guy since he left politics. There goes a man destined to become a BOQ
Minister for Climate Change and Green party leader James Shaw said his party was seeking to repeal the 2013 Amendment to the Crown Minerals Act which prohibits protest activities that interfere with seismic-blasting vessels.
“The Green Party has always supported people’s right to non-violent protest,” he said on Thursday.
“We’re absolutely seeking to repeal what we call the ‘Anadarko Amendment’. At the time we argued strongly that the existing trespass law be adequate and we would argue that continues to hold.”
weka…thanks for posting this, takes me back to that proud time when Elvis Teddy took his wee boat out to protest, got arrested, went to court…and the Judge threw the charge OUT.
Then whiney little ‘I’ve just had major dental work done so I can speak proper’ responded with that little legislative pile.
Greens will get another two votes from me next time if they succeed.
And another couple from the whanau if they answer our letters about this…
As in most things, when Americans do things they do things big – especially when it comes to dirty politics.
Having read this infamous memo I was wondering what it would be like put into a New Zealand context.
Think of this scenario:
1: Leading up to the 2020 election, the Labour party reelection committee pay for ‘research’ that turns up unverified and unproven allegations that Bill English (or his successor) or his staff have been involved in group orgies and talking to members of the North Korean government.
2: This research is then passed on to the Police and the SIS.
3: The Police and the SIS then use this information to seek Surveillance Warrants (which are initially approved by the Police Commissioner and head of the SIS) without informing the issuing Judge that the information was prepared by the Labour party and aimed at National leading up to an election.
4: This results in secret surveillance being undertaken, the results of which end up back in the hands of the Labour party reelection committee.
If anything remotely like this occurred in New Zealand, the msm, commentators, the Courts, and the public would be up in arms shouting about corruption.
In the US it seems to be business as usual.
It certainly appears that Obama and the Democrats, despite their appearance of being holier than thou, were not above using coercive state powers to try and swing an election.
Maybe having a Bufoon as president is better than having a corrupt one.
You missed the bit where Carter Page was under investigation long before tRump hired him or the Steele memo existed and the bit about the Papadopoulos information triggering an FBI investigation in late July, again, before the Steele memo was written.
You also missed the bit where all of the investigators supposedly involved in getting warrants inappropriately would be National party members. And that the private research into the dodgy goings-on was initiated by National party rivals to English before they dropped and Labour took it over. And that the warrants got renewed three times at 90 day intervals on the basis of new evidence turned up by the surveillance.
You would also have to arrange that all the information formally released and leaked from the investigation was damaging to English’s opponent and that everything damaging to English was successfully kept under wraps.
Also in your scenario, the Labour re-election committee didn’t actually use any of the damaging information prior to the election.
The Nune’s Memo released by the Repugs is about as full of holes and alternative facts as a typical Trump speech. Researcher Seth Abramson (who’s been researching the Steele Dossier for a year) rebuts their main legal arguments and claims of bias on Twitter with a focused series of tweets (and a link to the text of the memo) over on Twitter.
And, BTW, are you REALLY claiming that Trump ISN’T corrupt (as well as being a buffoon)?
I would expect that before signing a new set of glittering figures will be produced to entice exporters to leap to the defence of CPTPP. However a brief look at the available data would clearly bring them little joy.
I don’t expect a large charm offensive or PR campaign to try and sell us the spoils of CPTPP. It seems the every neoliberal in NZ is already on board with it and the ‘argument’ largely centres on who deserves and gets the credit.
We have long ceded our sovereignty to businesses, corporatisation, and globalism and this Government is not aiming for a revolutionary reversal as is evident by how it panders to the business community.
This CPTPP is simply a formal confirmation, a symbolic stamp of approval and nothing more, of this ongoing process of erosion of sovereignty. As a result of globalism the fabric of our society is changing and with this our socio-cultural identity. As so-called global citizens we become an incohesive collection or mass of consumers in a selfish pursuit of material accumulation rather than being a collective of people held together by common (or overlapping or at least not mutually exclusive) goals & values.
I don’t consider myself a sentimental or nostalgic conservative with regressive ideals, far from it, but to close my eyes to what’s been happening for years and to what gain end is denying reality.
Our future as humans, as people, does not lie with privatisation of everything and trading & selling everything for (personal and economic) profit & growth. In my view, it lies with realising our place in the world that we inhabit, that feeds and sustains us, for now, and that we are not atomised god-like Übermenschen but part of something much bigger …
“A Tauranga mother of six fears the city’s unaffordable rental market will force her family into homelessness – again. Tangiwhetu Williams, 34, her six children aged 4 to 15, and her 25-year-old partner, Michael Sabbeth, live in one of Te Tuinga Whanau Social Services Trust’s emergency houses in Greerton. The eight family members share two bedrooms, and another family lives in the third.”
Germany has a much larger percentage of state owned properties than us. Enough to set trends. They’ve had 1000’s of years (interrupted by bombardments) to get themselves into this position. Savage carried the dining table into our first state home decades ago.
I think capping rents in the current climate will compound Tangiwhetu’s situation. Fewer rentals available.
When there is a broader choice, there is less pressure on pricing escalation and a range of rentals available. The young cop and his nurse wife used to apply for and get a groovy little flat in Westmere. These days they’re applying for the houses our Tangiwhetus used to apply for and get.
Right now, I think capping rents is a stink move Ed. I wonder if it’s not the right time to be promoting a Housing NZ initiative that creates compelling reasons for Mum and Dads to be investing in rental housing, not bailing out en masse.
Yeah = We’ve got cold and hungry people tonight, we need to act accordingly.
Nah = I think we should be aiming for next to no State Houses. All of us wallowing in pride of ownership. I don’t think there is any better catalyst for creating a sense of community.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/marvin-hier-says-hes-proud-to-be-trumps-inauguration-rabbi/
…
The man is a tool of big sugar.
Bur willfully ignorant.
The arrest and the ongoing campaign against other young women like her is “totally unrelated” to the aims of the Me Too campaign? Really? So is it just for rich American and English women?
And vice versa, except the Down syndrome activists are not deeply unpleasant.
Crampton found he panellists questions on the same issue of funding awkward yesterday. Wasn’t the Panel an improvement without Mora?
There goes a man destined to become a BOQ
gainend is denying reality.Tangiwhetu Williams, 34, her six children aged 4 to 15, and her 25-year-old partner, Michael Sabbeth, live in one of Te Tuinga Whanau Social Services Trust’s emergency houses in Greerton.
The eight family members share two bedrooms, and another family lives in the third.”
We should copy Germany.