Posts by Paul Williams
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
As I thought. Couple of people on Twitter seem less sure.
I think what's confusing is that the permanent name supression means he's breached the court's order by talking about it. However, he's said, in his statement, that he sought advice before making his statement that said the statement itself does not breach the order. If the statement is not in itself a breach, I would assume that any quoting or reporting of the statement is covered by qualified privilege. Your Legal Beagle might wish to comment further.
-
A scrap in Tonga, and a stolen ID? He's only got one more strike.
Thought crimes?
-
*I'm assuming I can report this to you as it's been aired in the House.
Yes, qualified privilege applies to statements made in parliament.
-
WTF?
I figured he was clown but now this is way-more-whacky than I expected (which was more like, he'd got into a fight in a rugby game or some such).
-
I think Ken Mair has matured, actually. His role in the story we're looking at on Media7 tonight seems to have been a very constructive one.
I'm not surprised at all.
And, for the record, I don't mean to be critical of Tim - quite the opposite, I have enormous regard for him having spent a few weeks in his company overseas circa 1995.
I certainly don't see Slater in the category of honest/earnest protester-cum-local-body-politicians. I still see him as a thug, albeit an unwell one.
-
Even today, he's bragging that the exposure will make him a shoo-in for the Albany local board seat he's standing for
I saw that. Fuck! Surely not, surely he's unelectable?
This is what troubles me most - he's a faux celebrity because he's a malevolent miscreant. He's no Tim Shadbolt or even Ken Mair. He seems entirely devoid of authenticity (whatever you think of Shadbolt or Mair, they appear sincere).
Why does NZ reward and not revile this kind of character?
-
Is it really a mystery why New Zealand has such a high suicide rate? Are these comments befitting adults? What desire do they satisfy? Judgement was handed down. Personalizing it too much seems to overlook the fact that his was after all, little more than a very poorly staged protest against a law that contravenes the ethos of freedom of speech, is limited to a tiny minority of countries and lacks significant evidence to back it up.
These are not unreasonable points Chris.
I'll explain my own motivation. I challenge Slater for his role and his legitimacy in much the same way I periodically challenge Mathew Hooton or Cactus Kate or a handful of other bloggers who behave in a hateful manner on a frequent basis.
Slater's engaged in some pretty disgusting activities on many occassions and though he has a right to protest this or any other issue, his track-record is of petty, mean bullying and he should be called out for that.
I acknowledge that he's struggling with ill-health and I don't want to worsen his situation but I don't want to enable it either. I'd encourage him to stop visiting his malignance on others as a way to begin sorting himself out.
-
Heh... deserved that I guess. But, you know something, I'm quite possibly not "more well" than Slater at all. I manage my mental illness and alcoholism (with a lot of unconditional love and support from angels in human guise) and don't use it as an excuse for being a shit. There's a lot of us out there.
Indeed. Alcohol's a very convenient and pleasant way to take a break.
And I think you've made my point better than I did initially. Slater is almost certainly an obnoxious prick regardless of his health.
-
I'd like to think I'm just better than that.
Certainly true, certainly. Though could it be because we're all more well (and not because you're more sensible and intelligent?)
-
Critical thinking is useful for about 10% of any constructive process. It should be the final gateway, not the initial one. Any more, and it's like getting the testing department to design software.
Ben, that's actually extremely quotable.
And isn't it sad that it's largely untrue when working in government...