General Debate Jan 9th

American motorcyclists fight back against police checkpoints-

Stilwell, joined by about 10 of his friends wearing black leather jackets, some with firearms resting in holsters on their hips, stood along the sidewalk waving signs that read “Police Checkpoint Ahead.”

But up ahead wasn’t a typical DUI checkpoint; the officers on Flamingo Road were pulling over drivers on cellphones.

What a stark difference to the submissive mentality that prevails in NZ.

Checkpoint draws protesters opposed to the method, but not the message

17 thoughts on “General Debate Jan 9th

  1. The public protest hear about serious criminal behaviour but the police ignore it. Well Len Brown is looking at the options. I wonder how long that will take? Below is my comment on KB. I will watch with interest for the response. I wonder when and if the Herald will publish my post on the issue.

    Chuck Bird (1,944) Says:
    January 9th, 2012 at 11:30 am

    Darrell Turner: Nudists folk-devils for moral panic
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10777482

    I see an apologist for the perverts as Ladies Bay has been given a right of response. I am not a naturist but have no problem with genuine naturists. This guy is claiming to be an expert on the subject but his views are not only contrary to the local residents but genuine naturists as well. I have made brief quote from two web sites as well as the Herald.

    What do the liberals on this blog think the locals should do – surrender a local beach to perverted, deviate and criminal behaviour?

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10777231

    “When I was 14 and my sister 18, we went to Ladies Bay for an afternoon swim and were followed up the stairway and along Cliff Rd by a man with an erection,” she said. “It was quite a lesson … and we have never gone back.”

    http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2012/01/general_debate_9_january_2012.html#comments

    Like

  2. There was not much traffic around in the blogosphere yesterday Chuck. Everybody getting back in the swing of work after the holidays. Even so, there seems to be a general lack of interest in doing anything about the Ladies Bay issues. How does it look from your perspective?

    Like

  3. Below is a comment published in Monday’s Herald. If locals are concerned I would be happy to help out. Sadly many people are apathetic. I am not suggesting a violent confrontation but following an initial course of complaining to the mayor. He has a FB page. I think it would be useful if people countered the spin that those objected are opposed to genuine naturists. Some people may be but I think the majority are opposed mainly to perverts. I will wait and see what happens.

    Chuck Bird (Ngaruawahia)
    02:28 PM Monday, 9 Jan 2012
    I applaud the often liberal Herald on its stance on this criminal behaviour at Ladies Bay. I heard a local resident call talkback on Friday evening. She told of her experience of seeing man and a woman copulating on the beach and four men watching.

    She confronted them and followed the couple to their car with a witness and got their licence number. She complained to the police but they fobbed her off. If what she said was accurate and I have no reason to doubt her this would an indecent act in public place punishable by 2 years jail.

    The caller named Isobel asked why will not men do anything? Well, if she or any local residents would like to text me at 021 452162 I would be happy to help coordinate some action. A sympathetic lawyer who would consider taking a private prosecution if the police will not now take this matter seriously would also be appreciated. I am presently waiting for Len Brown’s response on his Facebook wall.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10777210

    Like

  4. A very concerning and informative article. I suppose my posting this will confirm to Cam Salter my lack of understanding about homosexuality and family issues as well as empathy for his long time on the dole due to his depression.

    http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2012/01/cactus_kate_on_emotional_abuse.html#comment-921119

    I wonder if Cathy Odgers is still an ACT members as she seems to support his long time welfare dependency despite him having time to blog as well as challenge someone to a cycle race as well as a boxing match.

    I of course having nothing against homosexuals as Slater claims but very concerned about homosexual activism.

    Gay editor: ‘we will teach your kids the new norms’

    http://www.christian.org.uk/news/gay-editor-we-will-teach-your-kids-the-new-norms/?e130112

    Like

  5. Good on you for waving the flag over at KB, Chuck.
    These social liberals, like Slater and Odgers, really have no idea that they facilitate much of the erosion of social values and decency by their stance. And when someone like yourself challenges their worldview and highlights their moral relativism they go all self-righteous and start throwing around labels and pointing out what they perceive to be character flaws in their [in their mind] accusers.

    These two really are peas in the same pod along with David “Mr social liberal himself” Farrar.

    And don’t get me started on most of the other lost-cause commentaters at KB – it really is a left-wing sewer which I seldom visit even with my nose pinched.

    Like

  6. Slater, Farrar et al are what I’d call the “progressive right”. Like libertarians, they buy into the same culturally destructive nihilism that the left promote but foolishly do so thinking it’s all in the name of “freedom”. Apart from a handful of pointed monetary differences like taxation, industrial relations and welfare, they are in lockstep with the leftists on pretty much everything else.

    As for homosexual activism, that won’t abate once they get the “right” to “marry” and adopt, There will then be a push for asymmetrical laws and hate speech legislation designed to stop anyone from criticising or disagreeing publically with their lifestyle. Then the sexualization of everything will begin with all sorts of divergent sexual behaviours entering the mainstream – and there’ll be nothing to stop it. Polyamory is next, with progressive eggheads already openly talking about it in the newspapers, Labour’s Ruth Dyson even spoke about the need for the state to formally recognise a whole raft of relationships, including “triples”.

    Like

  7. Thanks for that Kris and Angus. However, I do not have a problem with David Farrar although I strongly disagree with his liberal policies. If could not speak civilly with social liberals I could not be an active ACT member. Some may not like me like Odgers, Wittington and Douglas for me speaking my mind but I will not lose sleep over it.

    I think Colin Craig made a mistake not joining ACT and talking to a good number of members. ACT does have policies on issues that would usually be considered a conscience issue. Labour and National decide that to make the smacking issue party policy so ACT did as well. But that is an exception. Cannabis legislation is not and has not ever been party of ACT policy.

    ACT used to have more conservatives when Muriel Newman, Stephen Franks and others were in the party were conservative on many issues. If a few conservatives joined ACT they could make a big difference.

    I would like to see social policy decided by some sort of referendum. I favour a voters veto. It would not always give the result I want but it would be better than social policy decided when the leaders of both major parties and the Greens are liberal.

    Getting back to Slater and Odgers I try only to attack people who first attack me. If someone attacks someone physically they have no right to expect to response to be proportionate.

    My response to Slater and Odgers was in my view restrained. I will stay off their blogs but if they have another go at me on KB I will not be so restrained.

    Like

  8. It’s a disease, Chuck, and one ‘created’ by the liberal left with their liberalisation of morality, and especially of homosexuality. These amoral enemies of everything that is/was decent have created this all permissive climate and then when accused of such have the gall to label conservatives who challenge such a world-view and its resultant fallout as ‘homophobes’ et al.

    Why are sodomites even permitted within the education system, let alone in sole charge of young boys in a boarding school type environment?! And why didn’t those hiring and the cops do a check of his on-line profile? – which would have alerted them to his sexual proclivities and this possible outcome. Beggars belief!

    And re: your previous comment about queer adoption/child-rearing: Just another natural by-product of the normalisation and decriminalisation of homosexuality within society; kids will be increasingly exposed to this sort of perversity. Similarly to above: Why are kids permitted to be raised/adopted by these sexual deviants in the first place?!

    The above are yet more examples that our increasingly permissive and liberal ‘elite’ in fact HATE children almost as much as those who expose the amoral liberal failed experiment.

    There’s a reckoning coming …

    Like

  9. Hi Kris, I could use a little support on Justice Hot Tub.

    http://www.facebook.com/groups/226075727414961/

    Chuck Bird ‎”And lets pick our game up chuck and not be such a sexiest twat!!!

    Ky, can you not see the hypocrisy in that comment?

    Ky Selket actually NO chuck all i see is a dinosaur using outdated language and ideology to perpetuate lies and misinformation

    Ky Selket and Gordene Tuhoro are nasty left wing feminizes and Tuhoro sounds like a dyke as well.

    Like

  10. Chuck. I wonder why the council is allowed to get away with duck shoving like this. They need resource consent to trim the trees? How’s about the local neighborhood watch use their damn chainsaws (on the trees, not the sodomites) and the RMA be damned? Is one of these filthy characters going to lodge an RMa objection? Likely not.

    And they want security cameras installed? My my, aren’t the Sheeple quick to give away their freedoms. Imagine the outcry if one of those cameras happened to record a young girl or boy using the facilities. And imagine if some nefarious character in concil happened to put that footage on the Internet (as has been done elsewhere). Again, the answer isn’t security cameras but the local neighborhood watch. Scare the sodomites away twice or thrice and word will get out that they should consider using the privacy of their own homes.

    Like

  11. Chuck,
    Forget about waiting for RMA approval to trim trees and installing cameras to catch these sodomites going about their sick sexual practices, time for a little community ‘justice’ to be meted out me thinks.

    If the ‘system’ won’t protect us from these sickos then we need to ensure our children are safe, and community standards are maintained, by taking appropriate action ourselves.

    Like

  12. One advantage of living in a small town is that locals would not put up with this sort of crap and would take appropriate action.

    Like

Comments are closed.