Posts by Marc C
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Quoted: "In this context, Plunket was started in 1907 to train mothers to grow healthy little citizens and soldiers for the empire. Founder Truby King, who had a physical impairment, later became Inspector General of Health.
He, his wife and supporters were positive eugenists who believed that teaching mothers the strict rules of scientific mothering would increase the fitness of the race."
"After World War Two the revelation of the extent of eugenic policies in Nazi Germany (including the death of hundreds of thousands of disabled people) dampened overt policy enthusiasm for eugenics."
Well, well, well, I thought that it was the Nazis that were blamed for all this kind of stuff, but New Zealand and other countries seem to have been doing the same, but did in the end not go quite as far as Germany did under Hitler and his criminal government.
While the past is something not to be that proud about, we have more acceptable conditions and better treatment for disabled these days. But mental illness is still something most do not like to talk that much about, that is at least my experience. Many are embarrassed if they suffer a form of it, and those that never do, have still nowadays little understanding of what it means, and how persons suffering various conditions should be treated, cared for and supported.
For many years disability groups supported the social model to assess, treat and support disabled, but now we have had certain UK "experts" come and tell our government and the medical professionals, that a perverted form of the so-called "bio psycho social model" needs to be used. The drive is now to not just "support" some disabled to live and work, the drive is now to pressure them into work, by not appropriately considering their conditions. Professor Mansel Aylward from the UK is talking about "illness belief" and "malingering", suggesting most that claim to have mental health conditions are not really sick, and that it is just something planted into their minds, that they suffer impairments and disabilities. He seems to dismiss much in the way of new scientific findings about various mental health conditions and their causes.
I wonder where we are going to head in future? Victim blaming cannot achieve anything positive, nor will it by going to extremes, past, present and future:
-
The most prominent “terrorist” I can recommend, if that, we do NOT want to go down that “islamist” angle do we:
Enjoy, if you can, or are allowed to, that excludes all public servants we have, no freedom allowed no more.
-
Yeah, much panic, but also:
I have seen much more, not to be taken easily, and then again, is this where we want to send our soldiers, it is more radical than what Hitler and the Nazis presented!
-
Hard News: Dirty Politics, in reply to Sacha,
That makes it even worse. It shows though is casual, yet cunning manner of doing things. The Smiling Assassin is still very much what he was like when he was the merchant banker and speculator.
-
I hear that John Roughan has made amendments to the biography of John Key, and it is quoted now, and has been confirmed by Key to the media, that he thinks he knows who the hacker "Rawshark" is. This is astonishing. If Key does indeed know, or thinks he knows who hacked his blogger mate's computer, why is he not informing the police?
This raises questions, same as why the media do not press him for more of an answer.
Could it be, that Key does not really want Rawshark to be exposed? Normally one would presume that Key would be one of the first rushing to tell the police who he suspects to have hacked Slater's computer, but why is he not doing so?
The only logical explanation seems to be, that Key is afraid of some truths to be revealed about his own involvement in "Dirty Politics", as described so well by Nicky Hager. The hacker only released some emails and related information, after the book came out, and he released even less to Hager. But it is reasonable to assume that he has much more information, that may to some degree involve Key, or at least more so people working directly under him.
I suspect that Key does not want the hacker to be put before a court, as that will likely ruin the Prime Ministers "career" rather soon, as all the dirty laundry would be aired in public, and it would finally come out to haunt Mr Key.
The media seems hesitant to get the truth to come out, because some of their main players themselves had more or less regular contacts with Cameron Slater from Whaleoil, so some information may implicate some of them, and hence they also rather see it all swept under the carpet.
Do not worry or hope that the police will "raid" John Key's house any time soon, few judges will dare issuing a warrant for this to be done, I think, and certainly the police will think more than twice, before asking for a search warrant. And as Key is the top man in charge of the security services, well now cushioned by Mr Finlayson, I doubt that his own underlings will dare surveilling his communications any time soon.
-
Hard News: Dirty Politics, in reply to Alfie,
So, so, so, there we have it then.
If it was worth editing and amending the text of the biography of our Honourable Leader Kim John Key, then there must be sufficient merit to the validity of the comments by Key, made towards Roughan. Key appears to have confirmed that comment, that he believes he knows who the hacker Rawshark is. But his comment that he could not bother telling the police, because he is not absolutely certain, that is BS of the highest order.
All that raises yet more questions. Such as, why does Key not tell the police? Could it be, that the person Key suspects to be the hacker who hacked his buddys computer (C. Slater), is likely to know stuff about Key’s involvement in “Dirty Politics”, that could cause serious harm to the reputation or more of our Beloved Leader? That seems to be the only logical conclusion. Key would usually rather have sound interest in informing the police about the suspect, one would think, if he had nothing to worry about his own past actions and involvements.
The fact he does not inform the police can only lead to the suspicion that Key has much to hide, and an interest in the hacker not being revealed, as he may reveal stuff about Key that could cost him his job, or worse.
So the mainstream media should actually be pressuring Key for answers, but are they? I again see little evidence of this. They do not have so much restraint with other persons. Perhaps also some in the media do not really want Rawshark to be exposed, as it may reveal more about the involvement of some in the media in "dirty politics". All this raises endless more questions, and justified suspicions, about Key and his own Office.
Is it not so that people who know a person being searched for having committed a crime, or who know of illegal actions, and who may have committed them, have some duty to report this? Mr Key will though not be having the police visit him I am sure, as those that may believe in the police being that “independent” would in my view be extremely naive.
-
Outsourcing, yeah, did Telecom not do this, did other large companies not shift some of their call centres and so off-shore? Maybe we will soon have Tangata Pasifica, Marae and other programs made at the other end of the Pacific, in Manila, or thereabouts?
That would save a lot of costs, I guess, just let the humble, hard working Filipinos and Filipinas do the shows, there are many desperate workers there, willing to work for a bowl of rice a day, yes with a topping, I guess.
Steven Joyce is encouraging tertiary education providers to move to Asia, so why not move NZ television production there also?
I may have just given TVNZ another "great" idea?!
And TV3 Mediawonks may just follow, and then they only need to step out the door, to interview former, disappointed staff of Dotcom, to interview them on their experiences and perceptions of that man.
Innovation, innovation, innovation, wonderful it is.
-
Legal Beagle: Terrorism is already illegal, in reply to Sacha,
Mentally disturbed according to some:
But not so sure in others' eyes:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/previous-assessment-described-ottawa-shooter-as-deeply-troubled-but-not-mentally-ill/article21277933/But surely, crack cocaine addiction is a form of mental illness, is it not?
-
Again, I come across this:
"The Covert Origins of Isis", a revealing report, and sadly it is not uplifting:
It is from a US person, obviously, so there is dissent and disagreement in the US, and we must not simply accept NZ and US government advice or "instruction" to put up with it all. This deserves more questions and answers. I fear we are ill advised. Best of Luck.
-
I would agree, that to a fair degree, what is described as "terrorism", is mostly declared illegal in most developed countries, and that may well include ISIS. But apart from that, while we know what terror they inflict, and what they stand for, I am still also extremely concerned about the "terror" we may face under the now almost totally unquestioned efforts by virtually all states we relate to, who bring in and expand mass surveillance and so.
I wonder, I wonder, if all this stuff we get by way of "news reporting", also about that incident where a mentally disturbed went into the Canadian Parliament building with a gun, shooting around, is not just rudely exploited by our government, to implement the same the NSA have been doing in the US for years.
It is all too convenient to have happened, and it is so convenient, to say, hey, we must now turn our Parliament into a fortress, or severely restrict access, perhaps have armed guards there.
I fear that Snowden, Greenwald and Assange have been "neutralised" by the forces that be, and we are now in irreversible Orwellian territory, where we have to expect the state agencies to listen in, observe, seize and store all our information, as the Australian government is about to do now. Five Eyes are a formidable "network", they seem to have it all worked out, and yes, freedom will never be the same again, if we can even utter that word, it has no more meaning, really.