The Daily Blog Open Mic – Friday 29th January 2016

ByThe Daily Blog

openmike

 

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

– Advertisement –

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

 

Similar Posts

Join the Discussion

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

10 Comments

  1. Really sad to say, Ian Wishart has become a sell-out. Firstly, his headline making exclamation of so called “new evidence” in the Scott Watson case is a lie in itself. The police had this “evidence” seventeen years ago and disregarded it as unhelpful to their case. Their case was pretty f***king weak so they must of had good reason! You have a witness saying on one hand they think they may have seen Watson and accomplice moving body-sized packages on to land, yet the jail-house snitch said Watson wrapped the bodies in sails and dumped them at sea. If you were to believe that Scott painted the exterior of his boat to cover up murder, then you would have to believe it was premeditated murder because he told several people of his intent to paint “Blade” prior. Remember, he painted the exterior, not the interior where the evidence would have been had he murdered people and you can’t change a ketch to a sloop with a paint job. The only thing this “new/old evidence” proves is that POSSIBLY, Scott Watson had a friend/family member help him paint his boat and he didn’t want to involve them in all the shit-storm. The very fact that he may have painted her at sea, in front of witnesses and didn’t dry-dock her to completely change Blade’s appearance puts EVEN MORE weight on his innocence when you think about it.

    Reply

  2. I’d like to ask Mathew Hooton a very simple question.
    Does he or does he not believe in the primacy and sovereignty of the democratic nation-state, or does he believe that the idea of the ‘free market’ (the idea because no such thing as free markets actually exist) and private corporate interests should Trump the 3 legged stool.
    Also – what is his definition of a mandate, and a basic description of legitimacy under democratic governments.
    Actually, it’d be noice if John Key or Stevie Ray Choice could answer, but someone purporting to represent their spin-meisters (plus GST) will of course have to do.
    I’m not sure whether Mathew has the cajones to taxi around this site – I notice he (and fellow Natzis are hard at it on The Standard – in force since they came back from holiday), but he really does practice his faith as though it were a religion. There’s probably even a 12 step programme that goes with it all (with Matty a 13th stepper).

    Reply

  3. TOPHAT, “What will the government do to replace lost tariffs on imports?”?
    Answer;
    The government will find new ways to extract more money out of the 99% to compensate for the loss of government revenue like they did with petrol taxes when they wanted more money as they view us as just a “cash cow”.

    Reply

  5. So why is the NZ Electrical industry intent to push toxic radiation emitting smart meters ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PktaaxPl7RI ) into all our properties as an excuse to save electricity & place us all in harms way with the toxic HF radiation to our bodies, and not placing solar energy or wind power as the answer?

    http://asiapacificreport.nz/2016/01/14/cop21-climate-insurgency-after-paris/

    · “Over the last six years solar panels have become 75 percent cheaper and the cost of installation is predicted to fall 40 percent in the next two years.

    · Denmark now gets 40 percent of its electricity from wind power;

    · Bangladesh plans to run entirely on solar energy by 2020.

    The climate protection movement combined with the new economics of energy are “reshaping the consensus view about how fast a clean energy future could come.”

    NZ is falling further behind with their dangerous moronic ideas.

    Reply

    1. Also resulting in job losses. With regards to technology society needs to be asking “just because we can do it, should we?”.

      Reply