Hard News: The Wall and the Paper
297 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 8 9 10 11 12 Newer→ Last
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
His views offend me, but having him up for not offering a more nuanced or compassionate opinion in this instance feels tantamount to kicking a kid with a learning disability.
It's more that the Star Times will print this tosh with a straight face.
Laws has simply pulled this column out of his arse. He's made up facts to suit himself-- notably the bizarre claim that "we won't fund any programme or treatments that might arrest the potential for future offending". Apart from the internationally-respected specialist child sex offender programmes that have been operating in prisons for 22 years, does he mean? The various community treatment programmes and specialist psychologists?
He's found a target group that no one's going to feel sorry for this week, but the journalistically worthless nature of the writing is quite intact. And this drivel is key content for the SST.
-
Heather Gaye, in reply to
He’s found a target group that no one’s going to feel sorry for this week, but the journalistically worthless nature of the writing is quite intact. And this drivel is key content for the SST.
Fair cop. FWIW I stopped reading at his wholly inexplicable definitions of paedophilia vs pederasty. It is quite perplexing that they continue to publish the weird rants of a guy that quite plainly doesn't know what he's talking about.
-
Simon Buckingham's piece is online here
Oops I think that's the wrong link. Anyhow it is on page A6 of the print copy and well worth reading.
-
Kumara Republic, in reply to
Combining forms of activism brought results with Henry, though that included prompt coordinated action (and some political and diplomatic complaint). I suspect we've already wasted too much time talking about it rather than doing it this time anyway.
Paul Henry was rightly held to account. Unfortunately, the damage has been done, if the number of gullibles who rushed to support him was anything to go by. If 1981 Part II erupts, Henry and Lhaws have laid the foundations for it.
He's found a target group that no one's going to feel sorry for this week, but the journalistically worthless nature of the writing is quite intact. And this drivel is key content for the SST.
Sounds like a Big Lie strategy on the part of Lhaws.
-
Laws is quite a different fish to Paul Henry. He's much nastier. He won't be got rid of so easily.
I predict his downfall will actually come from some stupid thing in his personal life. Take your pick what that will be.
-
If 1981 Part II erupts, Henry and Lhaws have laid the foundations for it.
In a PC wet liberal kind of way, you know, can connect more than a few dots, I earnestly believe this is true. There was commentary to this effect after the Giffords shooting about Palin's 'targets' etc. Lhaws is a spokesperson for intolerants - intolerants hardly in need of motivation.
-
The idea behind a column about child sex-offenders is that Laws' critics will attack its logic and Laws can shout: 'See! See! My liberal enemies even defend paedophilia!'
-
Can anybody confirm if perchance Mr. Lhaws has six fingers on his right hand? My name is …, never mind. Instead I came across this uplifting article today in the Irish Independent. No SST to read.
-
Islander, in reply to
That is a raw & intriguing article- because not least it mentions a non-autistic twin and elder siblings- well worth the read (and way better than anything I read in the SST this afternoon-)
-
My name is...
I just have one question. Who is your father? Mr Mantoya.
-
Hilary Stace, in reply to
Tony Kennedy of Wellington features on the letters page.
-
Tony Kennedy, in reply to
I think it was “Ino” who sent me off in the direction of the Princess Bride.
-
Tony Kennedy, in reply to
I am a little annoyed about that, although I haven’t seen what was printed. I never sent a “letter” as such just an email to the subscriptions email address requesting that the Lhaws column be removed from my copy of the paper, failing that they could cancel my subscription.
-
Mine wasn't for publication either. But perhaps short angry emails are more effective than well considered letters to the ed. Anyhow it all goes on line eventually.
-
Islander, in reply to
I was motivated to go grab my DVD of "The Princess Bride" - the final scenes. Viewed them with relish.
And it is MONTOYA! -
Craig Ranapia, in reply to
It’s more that the Star Times will print this tosh with a straight face.
And if David Kemeys is going to keep saying he doesn't bear any editorial responsibility for the content of any part of his newspaper, then it’s time for someone at head office in Sydney to ask what the hell they’re paying this numpty to do all day.
-
recordari, in reply to
Montoya. Not sure how that happened. Thumbs, not fingers.
Must be months since our last viewing. Time for another.
-
Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to
The only paedophile I’ve ever knowingly encountered was an extremely hard-working old man who came from a Scandanavian country, and who didnt speak very good English. When he shifted in with his relations, the man of the house went all round the neighbourhood visiting houses that homed little boys, warning them that his uncle had a history of cuddling & kissing kids. What he didnt mention at the time was that his uncle had a mental age of about 7…And what I vividly remember as a young adolescent was how he used to sit down in the road and cry after boys used to run away and throw things from a ‘safe’ distance at him.
Oh Islander, you do help me often, to like my own compassion which, many times, I question because of other disapproval. Thank-you, my temperature is fine.
-
Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to
Laws has simply pulled this column out of his arse.
I want to agree but I just cant bring myself to read it. I'm out on a limb backing you
%100 ;)
. -
Islander, in reply to
Dear Sof’ and Steve & Stella – despite all the dreadfulness, we are alive – and truly, compassion is what makes us human beings*…arohanui mai na K
*There are a lot of other compassionate animals – not just mammals…may all be well with us all- -
Wearing my elected rep hat...
Mr Brown asked the following question:
What powers does [Rob] Shields have, what policy was he acting under, what are the damn rules anyway?
I asked officers and got the following reply from Mr Sheilds:
Council contractors mistakenly painted over an aerosol art work on a wall in Poynton Tce after a complaint about it by a member of the public.
The authority of the property and business owners was not sought by council officers for the removal. Council is taking full responsibility to rectify the situation and install a new artwork as soon as possible. The relevant stakeholders including the property and business owners, the Karangahape Road Business association, and the original artist are being consulted during this process.
This incident is the first of its kind that we are aware of and has provided us with the opportunity to work more closely with business and property owners and our anti-graffiti volunteers to ensure murals painted with permission are not removed by council contractors.
What officers don't know is that I know the name of the member of public.
I'm aware that the reply doesn't actually address the questions ask. I'll try again.
Whipping off said hat...
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
What officers don’t know is that I know the name of the member of public.
Is that significant?
-
Christopher Dempsey, in reply to
Not that I'm aware, no. I think.
-
peter mclennan, in reply to
"This incident is the first of its kind that we are aware of..." Really? Heres another example of a mural that Rob Sheilds got painted out... From The Aucklander, August 2009...
http://www.theaucklander.co.nz/local/news/who-decides-what-looks-good/3902993/
And this is one of about 4 murals I've heard of being eradicated by Council. Rob Sheilds has a history of doing this.
Also, the Mayor said that "Council contractors mistakenly painted over this mural after a request by an Auckland Council anti-graffiti volunteer". So it was a complaint from a member of the public, or this anti grafftiti volunteer that resulted in the destruction of Askew's mural? Two different version sof what happened.
Mr Dempsey, could you please check this.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
Also, the Mayor said that “Council contractors mistakenly painted over this mural after a request by an Auckland Council anti-graffiti volunteer”. So it was a complaint from a member of the public, or this anti grafftiti volunteer that resulted in the destruction of Askew’s mural? Two different version sof what happened.
The mayor's is the correct one.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.