Posts by Joe Wylie
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
How about the kind of emoticons - for when we feel especially delighted or saddened - that some other sites (I am thinking of AVEN)
have?I'd award you three exquisitely-rendered teeny little kumera for that suggestion. Jackie, of course, would always have a sackful for unfailing niceness.
Just to balance things a bit, how about the ability to digitally place a lamington on someone's head.
-
I like being able to claim 6th generation illegal immigrant status in NZ. The founding ancestor was a shipjumper.
You seem to have a well-organised family tree. The last of my foreign-born male ancestors jumped ship in 1869, aged 13. More desperation than destiny.
-
This gloating piece of prison gossip is really the pits.
-
Only if they support people's retirement. We could compost them or something.
And only the retirement of at-least-4th-generation NZers whose ancestors were drawn to these shores by a genuine sense of destiny. Anyone in your family tree who arrived on an assisted passage, merely to "fuel economic growth", like those creeping wetback hordes currently eroding our social contract woven of a billion backbreaking beads of backblocks browsweat? Sorry, but you're dog tucker.
-
This trial and Weatherston's self-justifications reminded me of Crime and Punishment's Raskolnikov on more than one occasion.
Now that you've brought that up, I'm reminded of that old Dostoyevsky-fancier Howard DeVoto's song, Philadelphia:
I'd've been Raskolnikov
But mother nature ripped me off -
The judgement of the court in that case speaks far louder and longer than any missives and lies issued from a murderer's lips.
I hope you're right, though I'm not sure that it fully healed the damage done by the awful drawn-out farce that preceded the verdict.
-
Whether it will save lives is another issue.
Mark - the idea of removing the defence of provocation is to prevent the obscene farce of the law facilitating a killer attempting further damage to their victim.
-
Personally I'm boycotting any further news stories on the topic in the interests of good taste.
Well at least you've stopped short of actively offering yourself as a role model. Discussion of this case must - and will - be kept alive until the defence of provocation is dropped from the statute books. Never again.
-
But she instead commented on the grotesqueness of his use of the provocation defence to smear his victim, which is absolutely nothing to do with Women's Refuge.
A couple of years before my mother finally got it together and left my father, back in the days before women's refuges, we had dinner guests, none of whom commented on my mother's obvious black eye. Later, when she was in the kitchen, one of the younger male guests slipped in and gave her a supportive hug. "You really shouldn't provoke him you know," he said, and it was meant kindly.
Much later, when my mother worked as a refuge volunteer, she'd despair at the endless steam of women who shuttled between the refuge and their abusive home life with their traumatised kids in tow. Time and again they'd blame themselves for 'provoking' the situation.
-
I had a lift from an Auckland taxi driver who was one of the Tampa people... true to good old NZ recognition of overseas qualifications a high level financial/economic analyst in Afghanistan gets to drive a cab in Auckland
I guess that's better than being driven to self-mutilation in one of John Howard and Philip Ruddock's gulags in Woomera or Nauru, but hardly good enough. Great story Kim.