The Daily Blog Open Mic – Saturday 23rd July 2016




Announce protest actions, general chit chat or give your opinion on issues we haven’t covered for the day.

Moderation rules are more lenient for this section, but try and play nicely.


TDB Recommends


  1. Latest Roy Morgan and any other political poster companies we think we should trust! – well don’t – read below.

    The Politicians are all under orders from the Bilderberg Group and are simply minion’s that carry out orders for the global elite and that is why you see a clear hard nosed similarity over every issue now, and the media is the same parrot for these cabals also as the pollsters are to!!!!

    Does anyone understand how flimsy and vulnerable and easily rigged results of Pollster’s polling data can occur where the companies cannot verify their results or edit them to see if they are changed?

    Was anyone surprised to see a dramatic swing back to the Nasty Nat’s of 10 points this week to 53% from 43% last poll shows clearly as it is just another phoney rigged poll again.

    As they all are prone to electronic manipulation today, so when Natz needed a lift they simply just hacked the pollster electronic base with vote rigging algorithm programming, and changed the results so don’t believe anything about the polls unless they confirmed the result’s were manually recorded and independently audited & re-counted!!!!!!

    So now you know why several countries are now throwing these “source code algorithm bug prone” electronic tabulation hacking polling company’s out of their countries, as they did prior to the last Indian elections including the pre-election pollsters who were also found hacked by this form of hacking alteration of results.

    India for just one such example!
    Here is another;

    Another expert Robert Epstein now believes Google is able to change election or polling as well now so don’t be surprised here.
    Robert Epstein, senior research psychologist at the American Institute for Behavioural Research and Technology.

    By manipulating its search results, Google could decide the next election.
    The world’s most-used search engine is so powerful and national elections are so tight, that even a tiny tweak in Google’s (GOOGL, Tech30) secret algorithm could swing the 2016 presidential election, according to Robert Epstein, senior research psychologist at the American Institute for Behavioural Research and Technology.
    In an op-ed on, Epstein said that he and a team of researchers studied behaviour in undecided voters who had been exposed to rigged search results. By displaying results that shone a more favourable light on a particular candidate the researchers could shift opinion towards that favoured candidate.
    The study boosted a candidate’s favourability rating by between 37% and 63% after just one 15-minute search session. The five double-blind, randomized studies included 4,500 undecided voters in the United States and India.
    A Google spokeswoman said that the company’s algorithm is designed to provide “relevant answers,” and rigging them to favour one view over another “would undermine the people’s trust in our results and company.”
    Epstein said Google’s response was “meaningless.”
    “How does providing ‘relevant answers’ to election-related questions rule out the possibility of favouring one candidate over another in search rankings? Epstein wrote in his op-ed. “Google’s statement seems far short of a blanket denial that it ever puts its finger on the scales.”
    The research suggested that swinging an election was “well within Google’s control,” considering that President Obama won the 2012 election by just 3.9% and the 2016 polling is similarly too close to call.
    Though Epstein falls short of saying that Google would rig an election, he points to historical precedent suggesting that Google wouldn’t be alone if it tried.
    Epstein pointed to Western Union’s attempt to swing the 1876 presidential election towards its favoured candidate, Rutherford B. Hayes. The election was the closest in U.S. history, and Western Union used its telegraph network monopoly and exclusive carriage contract with the Associated Press to ensure that only positive stories about Hayes made it on the wire. Hayes ultimately won by a hair.
    On average, Google adjusts its algorithm more than once a day. Epstein said it’s possible that even if the Alphabet triumvirate of Larry Page, Sergey Brin and Eric Schmidt didn’t get directly involved in tipping the scales on an election, a rogue employee could tweak the code without the leaders’ knowledge.
    “Google could easily be flipping elections worldwide as you read this,” Epstein said.
    CNN Money (New York) First published August 20, 2015: 9:23 AM ET

    “A well-funded adversary could construct a look-alike chip package containing both a radio receiver and a processor,” Prasad’s team writes in its paper. It is also possible to attack the source code and alter it to contain a vulnerability before it is written into the chip.

    The ECI denied claims of vulnerability for years, calling the EVMs “tamper-proof.” That is until Prasad and his team, which included a computer science professor from the University of Michigan and a technology activist from Holland, got their hands on an EVM and published their findings in early 2010. As a result of subsequent court filings, the Delhi High Court ruled in early 2012 that the EVMs are indeed not tamper-proof. Within days, the ECI ordered the implementation of a paper-trail system that would allow voters to see a printout of their vote after selecting their candidate on the EVM. The printout would display the voter’s choice for a few seconds and then fall into a secure box, providing a physical duplicate to the EVM’s digital count. Yet, for the 2014 election, only 20,600 EVM units have had this paper trail system implemented—just over 1% of the total electronic machines currently in use.

    The other critical defences touted by the ECI include the physical security surrounding the EVMs through polling until counting, unknown ballot order until a few weeks before polling, and the locked nature of the source code. This last one, though, is actually quite worrisome.

    Having the source code masked means that once the simple software that runs an EVM is burned into the microchip, it becomes both unalterable and cannot be read back out, even by the Election Commission. While viewed as a double blind way to ensure security, it is actually a double-edged sword. Today, if an ECI official wished to randomly inspect an EVM at a polling station to verify its source code were correct, he would be unable to do so. One cannot know if any given EVM is running genuine software.

    The problem with secrecy as a barrier to fraud is that it requires absolute infallibility—once compromised in any place, the entire system becomes vulnerable. Making a chip unreadable is also not iron-clad; given extreme patience, it can be overcome. Plus, if Prasad—a friend of Indian democracy—was able to steal an EVM, then the system is breachable. According to the ECI, there are 1,720,080 control units and 1,878,306 ballot units being used during this election—quite a large secret to keep.

      Roy Morgan Research 23/7/2016.
      Dear Director,
      We reside in NZ and wish to contact our NZ branch please as we seem to have been unsuccessful locating any contact details here on your website.

      Can you direct us to the Director of the NZ Research Polling Centre branch that according to your website is located in Manakau Auckland.
      See address listed for NZ below please with no contact details.

      Yours sincerely

  2. Helen Clark said in her speech to the UN that wars should be prevented and avoided at all costs

    …now honestly just think how popular that is in some quarters where the boys actively are seeking to extend their territories in the Middle East via war …or sell their armaments to keep the multi billion dollar armaments industry going

    …Helen Clark was going to be lobbied against right there on that speech (pity all the women in the world don’t have a vote on the next Secretary general of the UN)

    …does the UN seriously want a peace maker who looks at the root causes of war and tries to prevent it in the first place ?…or is it far easier to acquiesce and appease vested warmongering countries and appoint someone who has looked after the massive refugee crisis…no questions asked as to the causes and who is culpable ( the way Merkel is doing in Germany)

  3. Labour – 100 wasted years

    We are in the midst of celebrations surrounding the birth of the New Zealand Labour Party, but is there really anything to celebrate for the workers of New Zealand. The fact that the working class of New Zealand face many of the same problems today as they did 100 years ago, in terms of poor housing, low pay, unemployment, and inequality, is perhaps proof enough that the Labour Party has failed as the party of the working class. They never transformed society, and the gap between rich and poor still remains today with the richest 1 per cent of the population owning more than the combined cash and assets of the poorest 50 per cent

    Instead of being a party fighting for workers’ rights, the history of the Labour Party in New Zealand, in fact, has been one of a history of compromise with capitalism, and anti-working class action. Anarchist arguments of the conservative and corrupting pressures that are bought upon labour representatives within parliament have largely been observed to be true.

    Jim Edwards, the son of the leader of the Unemployed Workers Movement of the 1930s, described the excitement felt that accompanied the election of the first Labour Government in 1935, when he described how he believed that, “The revolution was happening.” The Labour Party immediately set about with plans designed to increase the lot of the working class. The unemployed received a Christmas bonus, wage cuts were restored and state housing and national health schemes were implemented. The excitement felt by Labour’s first electoral victory in 1935 didn’t last though, and the drift away from socialism can be viewed through one of its leading politicians, Peter Fraser.

    In 1913, Fraser, New Zealand Federation of Labor leader in 1912-13 and Labour prime minister 1940-49, wrote, “Industrial Unionism plus revolutionary political action, in my opinion, provide the most effective and expeditious means of reaching [socialism].” However by 1918 Fraser had begun to moderate his views. Instead of revolution he called for “the peaceful and legal transformation of society from private to public ownership and the increasing of democratic control over land and industry”. By the early 1930s Fraser had divested himself of any previous revolutionary ideals and saw Labour’s main objective as a simple one – “jobs for the unemployed.”

    Even on the night of their victory in 1935, Michael Joseph Savage, the then leader, assured the country that Labour was not going to represent any particular section but would govern in the interests of all the people. One of the co-founders of the New Zealand Communist Party, Alex Galbraith, later expressed his dismay at how the leaders of the Labour Party had become a pillar of the capitalist system and were being used by the ruling class to attack the working class. “From class against class to servile bootlicker of the bourgeoisie,” he wrote.

    The Labour Government struggled to control the workers, who, to the new managers of capitalism, seemed to have a never-ending list of demands. In 1945, with the party coming to the end of its first spell in power, a Labour Minister, Bill Parry, was driven to remark that he didn’t understand why people were asking for more when “everything has been done.”

    The movement of the Labour Party away from their roots culminated in the Rogernomics of Lange’s 1984 Labour Government. Nowadays, it is exceedingly rare to hear any member of the Labour Party talk of socialism, instead they adhere to the ideals of neo-liberalism, and the height of their political vision seems to be offering themselves up as “nicer” managers of capitalism than National.

    In its 100 years, the Labour party has, instead of holding a vision of the world’s wealth for the workers, settled merely for piece-meal reformism. Capitalism has been viewed as something to manage and work with, not overthrow. The result has been the collapse within the party of any sense of the class struggle that challenges the legitimacy and values of capitalism. The one thing we can take away from a waste of 100 years is that the interests of the working class cannot be protected by parliament. If we are to achieve meaningful and long lasting change we need to turn our backs on the ballot boxes and political parties and take action in our places of employment and our communities, with our weapons being strikes, demonstrations, and other forms of direct action, and not a voting paper.

    taken from here:

    • Very impressed with your right wing spin on this subject as your paymaster would be real proud of your spin there Sid;–SS Steven.
      You should request double pay for this piece of work.

      Trouble is we don’t have rose coloured spectacles with the name tag National on them, as we remember how this country was actually doing rather well eight years ago when your boss took over and in just eight short years of the 100 you refer to as labour Key and the NatZ have sold off most of our once asset rich country and placed them into the 1% of key’s inner circle so your argument just fell into the toilet mate so try again.

      By the 2020 at this rate we 99% will all be “tenants of a car or renters if lucky, and this takes the glam off Key’s 2009 pledge that quote; “I don’t want to see you as tenant’s in your own land” — GGGGGGRRRRRR

      Bloody lair, bloody liar. Did you get that Key!!!!!!!!!!

    • +100…and the way they set up Kelvin Davis to defeat Hone Harawira in order to stop Mana/Internet getting into Parliament says it all! ( Mana/Internet really is a working class party)

      ..nothing to celebrate!

    • So on RNZ Sunday morning at 8.45am on the week in politics with Guyon Espiner I heard that there is some evidence that PM Key’s father went to Spain as part of the “International brigade” and fought as a volunteer perhaps along with Americans and the incumbent Spanish Fascist Government who fought against the freedom fighters who wanted to separate from Fascist Spanish rule!!!!!!!!!!!

  4. Corporate State Corruption…does it happen here?…insider trading?..Corporates advising on State owned assets and profiting….YES

    “In this special episode of the 2016 Summer Solutions series of the Keiser Report, Max and Stacy talk first to former banker, now author, Nomi Prins, about a solution to the revolving door between Wall Street and DC. They discuss whether or not Hillary Clinton’s highly paid speeches to Goldman Sachs matter and whether or not Wall Street expects anything in return for its contributions to her campaign.

    In the second half, Max and Stacy talk to UK activist Tina Rothery about fracking being forced upon the people of North Yorkshire, who have overwhelmingly expressed their resistance to the ‘controversial’ natural gas and oil extraction method. They ask what the solution is going forward when elected officials choose corporations over populations.”

  5. @ cleangreen – YES investigate both polls and election results – as YOU know, both are easily rigged.
    Martyn, take up Cleangreen’s suggestion and discuss poll/election rigging on 5th estate.
    Polls are simply manipulation of the voting public – they should be banned.

    • Yes Kim Dandy,

      We need to ask Robert Epstein, senior research psychologist at the American Institute for Behavioural Research and Technology and the Indian researchers both to peer review our current investigations into these flimsy Electoral processes we have both during our various pollsters use of electronic process’s including algorithm use and electronic tablet use with “single code” recording of set polling practices here now because they have proven to be corrupted by electronic changes in the chips as the researchers state.

      Most of our democracy is under threat now with these electronic systems which are falsified and cannot be checked afterwards for tampering, so as the researcher’s say unanimously now a paper trail is required to audit the results in a second counting after these polls during pre election or post elections are recommended to stop tampering and manual counting and no transferring onto electronic counting devises may be used else again the results could be rigged again.

      Martyn could easily call the US and interview him at least by Skype as Robert Epstein, senior research psychologist at the American Institute for Behavioural Research and Technology must have all his contact detail’s on the web.

      Then after he can review our evidence we send and return to the TV show for a second response using our evidence?

Comments are closed.