Posts by Paul Williams
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Tony Veitch has fallen on his sword and done everything the Womens Refuge asked of him last night on TV.
I do respect this act of contrition, it follows 100K payment.
I don't entirely agree. He's possibly done the right thing now, but he didn't initially (and he certainly didn't when he assaulted the victim). He commited a serious crime and crimes, while offences against individuals, are offences for which the State is responsible. He did try to avoid prosecution and that's not something you can absolve by a media conference.
It's a tough one as he and his victim came to some arrangement, however is that fair? Can a person who's been hospitalised be expected to strike fair deal with the person who put them there? Even if it's true in this case, it's not likely to be true in all (many) cases which is probably why we have section 117 ~ it's a long time since I studied Crimes (where's that Legal Beagle) what's the Common Law definition of a 'bribe'?
-
True. I'd do it differently, put it that way. But, then, those guys would have been dismembered by the PA Women's XV if they'd tried that here. They're clearly not very bright.
Russell, as much as I respect as I have for the PA Women's XV I doubt that these guys are capable of understanding an alternative perspective. I also think it's encumbent on the blog owner to set the tone (which he does albeit at a low-standard... but there I go again).
-
I'd have put all comments in a moderation queue and weeded the psychos out. But, in the end, it's his house and his rules.
Weeding the psychos probably involves simply deleting every other comment I suspect but I still think he kinda likes the psychos; it gives him something to denounce and boosts his hit-rate.
-
__Even just a month ago, the brain-damaged woman in the LTSA ads simply turns out to be Australian…__
There's a poor taste joke going begging there...
I did wonder...
Do NZ cigarette packets have the luridly coloured photos of decaying feet and flesh? Tell me they're not real please? Were I a smoker, it'd put me off (don't nobody tell me where I can see images of my liver but...)
-
Yeah, well, more fool you. There's a reason why I decided to scroll past that thread (and pretty much everything else Veitch-related) entirely, and it's not my hitherto undisclosed pre-cognative abilities.
Them's some scarey folk at kiwiblog. Perhaps David could name and shame people who make such comments?
-
Partisan hackery is one thing, but dishonest partisan hacks who are (perhaps) being used by political parties to get around campaign finance rules? That should worry everyone.
Craig, I await the no8 response to I/S's criticism. I suspect, but don't know, that it'll deal with many of his/your concerns.
-
Andrew, I don't quite get it?
Anyway, I don't mean to turn this into a thread about kiwiblog, I've done my thing about that and appreciate that others don't see it in quite the same way I do (plus, if anyone asked me to bag-out my mates in public, I'd decline, even if I had private misgivings).
-
You can hold Farrar or Slater entirely to account for their actions (whether I agree with you or not), but I'd say think very carefully about exactly what you mean by that bland word "associates".
You've picked your words carefully, I'll do likewise. David is very keen to cultivate an image as that of a bipartisan expert. I think that merits a serious challenge but clearly he's no "winger".
Currently though, he's more than a little worked up about the "associates" of the 8wire and Standard mobs. Fair enough (not that he doesn't retread National Research Unit advice regularly) but why enable, indirectly and directly, Slater? Surely he realises it works against his more high-minded ambitions? The only reason that makes sense to me is that he wants Slater (and redbaiter et al) to be the oaf so that he does have to.
-
Agreed, but Craig I was wondering why David associates with him?
-
And yet, as you say, people are happy to buddy up with him. You may have noticed that Bridget Saunders is now channelling his "tips" in her gossip pages. Perhaps someone should ask her about the company she keeps.
If I were to speculate... I'd say it's 'cause Slater says stuff that others won't but want someone too.