Ah, the phenom of over-used phrases in the news. Try Googling "bus plunge" for a giggle...
And virgins would be a no-no, at least in the volcanic fields of South Auckland; I believe they are now on the official list of endangered species out here...
Aaargh, can we get spell check on here? Or do I have to be more careful with my flying search and peck two finger typing? Prufe reedre wonterd...
But even Our Glorious Leader is not immune to the charms of the Chicken Little sound grab on this issue - (effects baritone, additional chest hair and stern look) "all you people who stupidly built on a flood plain at Kaeo 150 years ago may have to look at moving your town to higher ground"...
I'm on the side of the climate change brigade but really, Helen, what planet DO you occupy. Kaeo has always flooded, it is simply that now we have insurance companies who like to bleat about this stuff.
Back in the Good Old (Bad Old) days before 'civilisation" people just moved their stuff onto tables and went and sat in the attic or on a hill till the weater went down, because...newsflash to Helengrad...IT ALWAYS DOES.
Anyone been in the Karangahake Gorge and stopped for a beer at Waikino Hotel partway through? Lots of exciting pics of the gorge in flood, which is does every few years, showing the pub half submerged (it's a two storey structure). I bet they have a hard time getting any insurance at all down there. Life goes on though, doesn;t it?
Note: literal transmation of Waikino: Bad water. Funny that, maybe the floods happened before the white fella came and brought all his global warming shite with him...
You are all correct on a number of points.
1 The world according to Garth...Personally, when I see Garth George wade into an issue I KNOW the opposing faction is on the right track.
How that bird flies with only its right wing I just don't know, but it's an indication of how entranched the canker is at granny H that he has roles like gatekeeper of the letters - if the themes expressed don't support his weird antiquarian world view, they don't get in there. Hmmm...white, middle class, old...he must HATE the fact that Asians (Lincoln Tan) and females can now have their say in columns in the paper. Our only hope is that he's one of those with their necks on the block as granny tries to winkle its subs out of their roles...
2 I've been thinking of, and referring to, the likes of Augie Auer at "deniers" for some time, and just WAITING for PA to start in on this stuff, so it's lovely to see others share the same point of reference. It's unfortunate that the state media machine at TVNZ has sought to make rock stars out of the likes of Auer and Jim "can I infect you with my clap clap religion" Hickey - gives them far too much awareness of self and a skewed impression of their own importance/relevance.
3 Final point: when the Labour Government makes a 180 degree turn at full throttle and embraces climate change to the point that they even consider driving around in slightly smaller planet destroyers then it's true, the environment IS trendy. O hell, it's even reached Hollywood. Nice to see the Govt moving to "greener" cars at a rate slightly slower than the glaciers are melting...I do need afew constants in my world, and bureaucratic Sir Humphreyism is the most reassuring of all.
First, and just to be clear...that other Mark above is in no way aligned with this one, nor are opinions expressed necessarily shared by the management of this organic entity. So issuing of fatwah on my ass thanx.
RB, you have the winning format, we both know it. I've bought whiskey from the Whiskey Galore web site, loved to see Karajoz up there on your site, won't be buying a Vodafone contract and 3G phone - but the point is, that's my prerogative, just as it's my prerogative to view or not view the ads.
Subs don't work, as the Herald is finding out these days - people have to know/care what is on the web site and then they have to decide whether subs outweigh food on the table (or more usually the SKY sub or that Friday night out with mates).
These sites democratise knowledge. For that reason they are valued by the more media-savvy advertisers.
Nobody says we HAVE to look at the pretty pictures, but I'm with you - if they make the thing economically viable, then that's the way the world works.
The online community being notoriously tight-fisted about stuff like this I don't think it can work any other way.
And the wirdness of the God-botherer web sites? Hey, just say no! There's no ethereal hand guiding you mouse and cursor is there?
Simon, you da MAN!
Thanks for that.
I especially enjoyed the quoted piece:
"The Iraqi government is working on a new hydrocarbons law that will set the course for the country's oil sector and determine where its vast revenues will flow. The consequences for such a law in such a state are huge. Not only could it determine the future shape of the Iraqi federation -- as regional governments battle with Baghdad's central authority over rights to the riches -- but it could put much of Iraqi oil into the hands of foreign oil companies.
The draft law lays the ground work for private oil companies to take large stakes in Iraq's oil.
It would allow controversial partnerships known as 'production sharing agreements' (PSA). Oil companies favor PSAs, because they limit the risk of cost overruns while giving greater potential for profit. PSAs tend to be massive legal agreements, designed to replace a weak or missing legal framework -- which is helpful for a country like Iraq that lacks the laws needed to attract investment.
It's also dangerous. It means governments are legally committing themselves to oil deals that they've negotiated from a position of weakness. And, the contracts typically span decades. Companies argue they need long-term legal security to justify huge investments in risky countries; the current draft recommends 15 to 20 years.
Nevertheless, Iraq carries little exploratory risk -- OPEC estimates Iraq sits atop some 115 billion barrels of reserves and only a small fraction of its oil fields are in use. By signing oil deals with Iraq, oil companies could account for those reserves in their books without setting foot in the country -- that alone is enough to boost the company's stock. And, by negotiating deals while Iraq is unstable, companies could lock in a risk premium that may be much lower five or ten years from now."
...now, does any of that sound like the US has had some influence, and maybe the oil companies helping themselves to production volume under the PSA might have SOME ties to the good ol US of A?
Last time I saw any of this going on was when Aussie helped themselves to "agreements" with the new nation of East Timor once it became apparent their buddies the Indons weren't going to be in a position to "agree" any more.
Simon, WHERE in Indonesia are you, and what was the buzz on the street when all that went on? I bet Aussie was slightly unpopular with the man (and mullah) on the street...
James, your quote
<quote>Oh no, not the oil nonsense again. The US has been in Iraq for over 3 1/2 years now and how many barrels of oil have they expropriated? That would be none, zip, zero, nada. Iraq's oil is Iraq's oil, to do with as they please, and they are doing just that. The last time I saw some numbers, despite hopeless infrastructure the Iraqi national oil company is back close to or just above the pre 2003 production numbers and planning to greatly expand in the coming years, to sell to whomever they please. Good on them, now Iraqis can benefit from their natural resources."<quote>
Sorry, but of course it's about the oil. Bush is an oil finger-puppet, owes his election to the industry and had to show willing.
As for the US expropriating oil, that's a bit naive. Bush was only ever acting to ensure there was a puppet govt that would proect the "free" world's access to cheap and plentiful oil from that part of the world.
Nothing as crass as taking the oil himself.
Check out the companies "rebuilding" Iraq's oil industry, and the very American directors of those companies.
As for the Iraqis now benefitting from their own oil, if anyone believes that I have a big grey bridge I'm selling shares in and can let you all in on the ground floor...reeeeal cheap!
Oh, hey, just one thing: I wasn't bagging Russell in asking why we aren't talking the death of Saddam.
Far from it, he (Russell that is) and I are on the same wavelength on this, have been since 9/11 in fact.
Definitely the whole production of Saddam's exit was a bungle, but I can't find an ounce of regret for the fact that man is no longer poisoning Iraq's future.
And in the end, what part of Dubbya's "Wauh on Terra" hasn't been an almighty stuff-up?
It would be nice to think this stuff was about spreading peace and tolerance, but a republican neo-con Texan President ain't the right tool (yes, pun intended) to be putting that kind of karma about.
Everybody knew WMDs were a lame excuse to get into some ass-kicking in the desert, which presented us with the extraordinary and possibly historic moment where WE knew, Americans with half a brain knew, and the President knew the reason was a lie built on America's fossil-fuel economic interests.
I have no stunningly original snappy one-liners so will end by shamelessly stealing one: "it's the oil, stupid!"
So is that the extent of it?
Nobody has anything to say about Saddam then?
I'm a tad disappointed.
My two cents, as Kent Brockman has been known to offer:
Extraordinary that our TV channels blindly pick up the lead of overseas media and fret over the neck-lengthening of this tyrant and how it's destabilising the Arab world.
I wonder how the NZ Iraqi community feel about that.
I wonder how the Kurds feel about it, and how valued they feel when they compare this hand-wringing over the death of an elderly genocidal megalomaniac with the almost total lack of concern shown when Saddam ordered the gassing of thousands of their families and friends after Gulf War 1?
How do the raped and beaten survivors of Saddam's march into Kuwait feel, knowing they were pawns in a larger game and the "concern" shown was more about threats to oil lines than about flesh and blood and human dignity.
Do I give a toss about bloodshed in Iraq subsequent to the death of this broken old man? Of course. Do I think it would have happened anyway? Of course.
The choice of date on which to do this was deliberate and unfortunate, but neither you, I nor Phil Goff were consulted on that, so perhaps we should just zip it and let them get on.
Interesting to see if Bush does indeed order more troops into his own lil Vietnam.
Saw a cartoon recently of Bush sen and Jun talking at some public fiunction, capitoned in a speech bubble style: "Son, you are making the same mistake in Iraq that I made with your mother - you should have pulled out sooner". Heh.
Earlier in this topic:
..."Perhaps it's just me, but "moving everything to Auckland" and "purchased by Australians" seem to be harbingers of doom for many a company's quality"...
Those two phrases are a long way of saying: "it's f**ked".
Sorry, but I'm a ten eyar veteran of having "moved to Auckland"...irony intended!