Martin Devlin your a cunt, and a bad one at that

Your post is shit.

He was a great Player, and not all great players get into the All Blacks, It’s who knows who for that team. And they were lucky not to lose more games this year. More good players don’t get a chance.

As Sean Fitzpatrick said “it’s harder to get out of the all blacks, than to get in”.

Martin Devlin: What does Jimmy Gopperth’s UK player of the year award say for the British and Irish Lions?

18 May, 2017 10:50am

 2 minutes to read

Jimmy Gopperth … nice guy but what does his selection as player of the year mean for the Lions tour? Photo / File
NZ Herald
By: Martin Devlin

Knock knock.

Who’s there?


Jimmy who?

Jimmy Gopperth, England club rugby player of the year.

Yep, you read that right.

Little Jimmy Gopperth is officially the best player in the English club premiership.

The players decided that last week when they named him Players’ Player of the Year. And just today he won the overall gong for English Premiership Player of the Year.

Now I don’t know Jimmy from a bar of soap. He’s probably a decent guy.

But I do know that he wasn’t exactly eagerly sought after by New Zealand rugby at Super Rugby level.

And I don’t recall the All Blacks selectors showing much interest either.

So Gopperth headed for greener financial pastures in England – and who can blame him.
But the fact he was won both premier individual awards in English club rugby says a lot about that competition.

It also says something about the British and Irish Lions.

If Gopperth has been able to poll more votes than influential Lions players like so-called match-winning No. 10 Owen Farrell and his Saracens team-mate Maro Itoje (another guy being massively talked up ahead of the New Zealand tour) then what chance are the touring party of winning?

Would Jimmy even get a Super Rugby guernsey anywhere in any of our teams right now?
Well, maybe the Blues.

In fact, I’d like a dollar for every Lions player who would make the cut in a NZ Super Rugby franchise. I’d be lucky to get enough to buy my lunch.

Mind you, most of them would make the Aussie teams …

Eight inconvenient questions for our PM and our Foreign Minister

by SB on December 29, 2017 at 5:00pm

Our PM and her Foreign Minister Winston Peters both supported the decision to go against President Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital despite the fact that past American Presidents have also recognised Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. Jacinda Ardern attempted to spin New Zealand’s betrayal of both America and Israel as her standing up to bullies but closer examination will show that it was nothing of the sort.

There are eight inconvenient questions that she and her Foreign Minister need to answer if we are to get to the real reasons behind their actions.

1) How does recognition of the location of Israel’s Parliament, Supreme Court and national institutions damage negotiations for a two-state solution?

Mr Peters said “The resolution reflects New Zealand’s long-held support for a two-state solution to the conflict”. […] unlike previous presidents, Trump’s statement on the recognition was clear that the final status of disputed territories and borders still needed to be negotiated. The recognition, therefore, does nothing to harm prospects of a two-state solution if the Arab Palestinians ultimately agree to negotiate for their independence. The territory to which the United States will move its embassy is clearly west of the 1949 armistice line (commonly referred to as the “Green line”). It is unclear how acknowledging this land, which has been part of Israel since 1948, as Israel’s capital, should hinder negotiations any more than if Israel declared Tel Aviv its capital.


2) Why did NZ not speak out against Russia earlier this year for a similar statement or condemn Iran for claiming Jerusalem as the ‘capital of Palestine’?

In April this year, Russia said it considers West Jerusalem to be Israel’s capital […] Furthermore, following the UN resolution, Iran has voted to recognise Jerusalem as the ‘capital of Palestine’. Why is the New Zealand government critical of the United States announcement but has been silent on that of Russia and Iran?

3) Why is it acceptable to call the Old City and East Jerusalem “Palestinian territory” but unacceptable to call parts of Israel West of the Green Line “Israel”?

If we accept that calling West Jerusalem the capital of Israel is damaging to prospects of a two-state solution, we must also accept that calling the Old City and East Jerusalem “Palestinian territory” and labeling any Israeli presence “illegal” is at least equally damaging. That is exactly what UNSC 2334 did and New Zealand co-sponsored that resolution with Malaysia, Senegal, and Venezuela.

4) Why does the NZ government no longer condemn Palestinian terrorism?

Leaders who call for “days of rage”, incite violence, pay terrorists, promote suicide bombers, and teach children to hate Jews do not have peaceful intent. The New Zealand government used to condemn Palestinian terrorism but has not done so in recent years.

5) Does the NZ government condemn Obama for saying “undivided Jerusalem…”? If so, why did it not do so at the time?

Presidents Clinton, Bush, and Obama have all made statements that Jerusalem must remain the “undivided” capital of Israel. This phrasing, which was not used by Trump, indicates their intent that the Old City and East Jerusalem belong to Israel and could be considered to be prejudging negotiations. However, there was no condemnation from the New Zealand government when these leaders made their comments.

6) Did the resolution go to cabinet?

After New Zealand co-sponsored UNSC resolution 2334 with Malaysia, Senegal, and Venezuela, MP Peters was outraged that Minister McCully had not consulted cabinet with regard to the controversial resolution – even asking questions in parliament and submitting an OIA request. The Labour-NZ First coalition agreement also recorded a Cabinet minute “regarding the lack of process followed prior to the National-led government sponsorship of UNSC 2334”. Surely, the government would have followed due process and approached cabinet with this latest controversial resolution which condemns another sovereign nation and traditional ally.

7) Does New Zealand oppose the special US consulate in East Jerusalem?

The United States has a consulate in East Jerusalem that handles relations with the West Bank and Gaza. However, this consulate is more like an embassy, being one of only two US consulates that reports directly to the State Department rather than the local embassy. If New Zealand is happy for the United States to have this arrangement, there should be no problem with the United States having an Embassy in West Jerusalem, as they intend.

8) Will the New Zealand government acknowledge anti-Israel bias at the United Nations?

There were 21 resolutions that singled out Israel for condemnation at the United Nations this year. There were only 6 other resolutions that specifically singled out a nation and no country was targeted more than once, except Israel. There was not a single UNGA resolution on the human rights situation in China, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia, Belarus, Cuba, Turkey, Pakistan, Vietnam, Algeria, or any of 175 other countries.

Turkey and Yemen called the emergency session of the UN general assembly to vote on what all other sovereign nations can do without controversy, yet there hasn’t been even one resolution on the 8.5m people starving in Yemen or the lack of freedoms in Turkey. Furthermore, 83 of the 97 UN resolutions targeting a single country from 2012 to 2015 targeted Israel and between 2009-2014, UNESCO adopted 46 resolutions against Israel; one on Syria; and none on Iran, Sudan, North Korea, or any other country in the world. UNESCO has also denied Jewish and Christian ties to Jerusalem. By continuing to vote for the anti-Israel resolutions and remaining silent in the face of discrimination, New Zealand encourages the anti-Israel bias.

About them Maori: and Prison

by Cameron Slater on December 30, 2017 at 9:30am

Guest Post

To follow up on commenter George’s interesting post Thursday on the prickliness of confronting Maori under-achievement in our society (it’s real, and particularly sharply pointed in imprisonment statistics) and the uncomfortable aspersions cast upon those with whom we choose to disagree with, inter-alia, those who don’t hold our identical world-view. It is a polarising debate, and becoming more polarising.

In order to find answers in a neutral setting I summoned my two daughters to me; both entirely beautiful part-Maori maidens, it must be said, and proud of it. Let’s call the older one Mother because she has produced two of the most wonderful grandchildren ever to grace Christendom, while the other we shall call Troubles because she has produced, uhm…never mind.

I advanced them a question, asking if either of them had ever been colonised; both looked slightly shocked. Mother insisted it wasn’t so, while Troubles announced that although she had never been colonised, she had been tattooed, and offered to show me the artwork. I declined the invitation.

Because colonisation of these wonderful islands by the British has been offered as a reason for the decline in mauri and mana, the life-force and respect, of the existing inhabitants subjected to the new pressure from overseas and the waves of alien people thence, a whole new species. A whole new world.

Certainly; it is completely true that the leadership of the colony were extremely concerned at massive loss in numbers and morale of these, their fellow British subjects, and instituted an inquiry as early as 1856 in order to advance both reasons for the decline and counter-measures to inoculate the native people from further destruction.

Counter-measures, some of which were already taking place before the inquiry, included land ownership reformation, political representation, education in the new languages and sciences, provision of health services and sanitation, and, recognising the native bent for horticulture as evidenced by the very first British and European voyagers here, expansion of existing crop varieties and the introduction of mills and other machinery to improve farmed produce and yield.

Another thing happened in 1856; Charles Darwin was penning his masterpiece “On the Origin of Species”, his theory of natural selection that would prove revolutionary and, literally, re-shape world-views. Within fifty years both the dwindling Maori and ‘science’ would reach new lows. Science spun off into fields unsuited to empiricism, especially the fields of eugenics and phrenology, and philosophically into theories of racial superiority and the inevitable replacement of ‘lower’ genes by the ‘higher’.

By the early part of the 20th Century it can be said, with complete honesty, that our people and society were the most institutionally-racist they would ever be, not at all as bad as some of the other colonies; no way. But we were convinced of the superiority of the new sciences and introduced way-of-life in these lands, and the almost inevitable erasure of Maori.

Concerned for racial and social indicators of criminality, a stain our fore-fathers struggled to comprehend in the land of milk-and-honey, officials experimented with statistics to find trends which may alert to the likelihood of social precursors pointing to later imprisonment, and they found an alarming co-relation: There was one group of subjects who, though numbering just 15% of the population represented an unhealthy 33% of the prison muster. Those people were Roman Catholics: No other cohort came close to the unsatisfactory statistic, including Maori, whose numbers incarcerated were wholly in keeping with the general ratio of the non-Maori non-Catholic populace.

A short period later almost the entire world experienced a cataclysmic wrench from the old philosophies, the destruction of the last vestiges of feudalism and monarchal alliances which threw their subjects against each other in hatred and war, and the emergence of new social and political orders. Within a decade the continuing repercussions of war and the false hope of endless gains from imagined wealth culminated in financial calamity when banks collapsed, taking their depositor’s money with them, and ordinary folk; business owners and mortgage-holders found it impossible to re-finance loans resulting in some of the most serious financial hardships seen in the 20th Century. Who would have believed, twenty years before, that Cuba St in Wellington, our capital city, would witness a food riot in 1932?

Dominion Newspaper 1932, a photo of the riots in Wellington


The pains of hunger, the scars of real poverty never left many who experienced the sensations. My own mother would discard neither a newspaper, a potato sack, nor an ice-cream stick, while a sometimes-visitor to our home, an American woman, would not waste an envelope, preferring to steam it open, turn it inside-out and re-use it for new mail. They were proud penny-pinchers whose capability for austerity was astonishing by our modern standards but which asset was honed into them in the bleakness of those years. The penal statistics went steadily along recording, not in total disregard to the social circumstances which produced rioting, stealing, destruction of property and other ‘crimes’, but in attempting to find anomalies, of which there were no particular stand-outs. By 1934 neither Maori nor the previously troubling Catholics were over-represented in prison cells.

Those years of hunger and going-without produced new politicians and causes, and the shaping of a new working-class family; one who would never suffer the indignity, the utter, burning, shame of Want with no means to quench it. Social Welfare was born, it was generous when required to be, and benevolent, non-denominational and ‘universal’ although, by modern standards, slightly racist and sexist.

Another terrible conflict passed and New Zealand suffered in parallel with our partners, but on returning to peace there was much to do, work for all, progress to be made as well as money from shipping exports to a re-building world. Wool prices went so high many youthful immigrants found gainful employment on local farms gleaning strands of the golden fleece from fence-posts and gates. Maori too, embraced and exploited the opportunities available, becoming staples of the wool-sheds and freezing-works, many moved into cities to be closer to high-paying jobs in local ‘manufacturers’ production facilities.

New Zealanders embraced under the Fifties-follies fortunate rainbow. We loved Maori; they loved us. We schooled together, played footy together, partied together, and searched the endless rows of “Situations Vacant” columns in the newspapers together to find the highest-paying jobs. It continued for years and years, right through the sixties, and then it all went pear-shaped.

Mother Britain, who had given us birth, who we had suffered for and stood with, kicked us out of home. We had to stand on our own two feet, she said. And we were not well-placed to do so.

Years of austerity had produced flinty thrift, years of excess has produced trifle smugness. No more could we walk from school to a job as effortlessly as going to bed. The numbers collecting Unemployment benefits, which had been paid to about 450-odd souls in 1974, doubled, then re-doubled then re-doubled then re-doubled, and within ten short years had reached 53,000, but even that number was a facade. Muldoon, a socialist fool masquerading as anti-communist, a financial peon fighting a formidable array of ravaging circumstances, had convinced an eager parliament to lower the retirement age to 60 as panacea to the growing number of dole-seekers, affording a minor explosion in numbers of those giving up work to receive the relatively generous pension. Others opted out of work altogether, years without employment had made even more attractive the low-hanging fruit of the Domestic Purposes Benefit, the Invalids Benefit and the Sickness Benefit, all of which numbers more than doubled.

God’s Own Country was in Deep Schtuk. By 1984 our GDP was $34B, but our yearly financial deficit was $2.7B thanks to huge ‘welfare’ bills, a shortfall entirely ‘sustained’ by endless borrowing to fund our ‘egalitarian, equitable’ society. It was the equivalent of borrowing $22B every year, year-in year-out, indefinitely, in modern-day terms and was a seriously dysfunctional and stupid illusion. It had to stop.

Nobody can say, with a straight face, that David Lange intended to hurt Maori; it is impossible to believe that charismatic man harboured ill-will towards any group of people except his political opponents. Very few though estimated his inner courage correctly, believing him soft and corruptible was a major error.  He stood by his man as Roger Douglas, from a communist upbringing, took the shambolic Kiwi shack apart and rebuilt the structure in a much superior way, with hugely improved foundations; but when he was finished there was a lot of the original material left over, and a new word swept the land: Redundant.

That it was Maori upon whom the cuts fell deepest is an undeniable fact. Ill-equipped to progress, mainly through lack of educational achievement, many were bewildered: A punishment employed by those masters of torture, the Romans, where victims were led blind-folded deep into remote forest areas, the ‘wilderness’, and left bound, abandoned to their own devices.

Unemployment hurts. Not like the sharp pain and adrenaline burst of accidentally hitting your own thumb with a hammer, when your blood boils and your eyes focus bright and angry; the pain of unemployment is much worse because it sucks your self-respect and dines on your own dignity, sometimes to the point of debilitation. It can make you hardened and angry; it can arouse violence within you. It is a hateful thing to give, but worse to receive. The shattered storefronts of Featherston St and Queen St during the 1930’s riots remind us of that.

The new generations watched their parents grow disillusioned, some became angry, others indifferent and keen to exploit the veins of welfare to fund alternative life-styles and, in turn, produce their own disillusioned little-ones convinced of neither the value of education, or work. Some Maori leaders took to new means to lift up their people, a Maori ‘revivalist’ or renaissance movement was born, several traditions almost lost were re-cast, some traditions were even invented; the most obvious being the performing, by the Mighty All Blacks, of the ‘Haka’ at home games, a spectacle never observed in this country before 1987. Many of the Maori revivalists were, and remain, widely respected.

Other Maori ‘leaders’ became agitators, belligerent and spiteful and contemptuous. That’s all right. There have been such people since civilisation year-dot; whether in Memphis, Babylon, Rome, London, Munich or Waitangi. They seek to feed off their own imagined infamy, they spurt hyperbole and misinformation; reacting to such rhetoric is an exercise in futility.

But there is still a problem, and it appears to be getting worse.

To recap: During the time of most ingrained and institutionalised, subconscious, racism in this country no more Maori than anybody else were incarcerated. Therefore, can we say, neither racism, nor colonisation attributed to imprisonment numbers? During the era of the most wide-spread unemployment, unrest and grueling poverty in this country no more Maori than anybody else were incarcerated. Therefore, can we say, that financial hardship did not lead Maori to prison in higher numbers? But during the time of greatest access to welfare assistance Maori prisoner numbers have exploded?

Because of low educational achievement, a self-perpetuating millstone around the neck, a veritable and formidable shackle to the ground that restricts sufferers to reaching only the lowest-hanging fruit, and it’s got to stop, along with the acceptance that Maori require a welfare lifeline, and special treatment.

When Cook and his cohort of scientists came to this land they found an intelligent and resourceful people; they were in the business of documenting strangers and were not new to the task. Many on board were veterans of the oceans, and new lands, and had described Aboriginals from many places, Tierra Del Fuego, Japan, Alaska, the Pacific Islands, Australia, America and many more. They didn’t find under-achievers here in any sense except when judged against Christian moral standards.

The Catholic community determined to deal with criminality a century ago and linked the causes directly to illiteracy. They determined that they were as capable as other citizens of conquering the written word and set about it assiduously in the Marist schools, in the churches, and in the homes. Bought up in Wellington’s eastern suburbs, home to many Catholic families, a friend told me of a story in his family about how his grandfather had taught his father-before-him to read while aged about twelve, at home, and that on completing his first sentence, the older man had wept. With pride.

Our educators, but more importantly, our Maori leaders, the real leaders, the political leaders, the team leaders, even the gang leaders, not self-appointed ‘spokespeople’, need to rise up and hammer this message home: That they are equals here, and that every single Maori child in this entire country will read and write by the age of twelve, with no exceptions whatsoever. Just as the Catholic community did.

That will end this unfortunate imprisonment cycle, it will bring more prosperity than any Treaty-settlement or endless welfare can bring and enrich their lives, and ours. This was achieved by the good people of The Society of Saint Mary within twenty years, it can be achieved by Maoridom within the same time-frame.



Spot on Lewis, but why did you apologise?

by Cameron Slater on December 29, 2017 at 9:00am

Lewis Hamilton has courted controversy again…as some snowflakes and whoopsies got upset:

Lewis Hamilton has apologised for making “inappropriate comments” about his young nephew wearing a dress.

The Formula One world champion was accused of humiliating his nephew online after he posted a video in which he disapproved of his relative’s choice of Christmas attire, telling him: “Boys don’t wear princess dresses.”

Hamilton has since deleted the Instagram post, which showed his nephew wearing a purple and pink outfit and carrying a pink wand with a heart on it.

He was heavily criticised for negatively stereotyping his nephew on the basis of his gender.

On Tuesday Hamilton told his 5.2 million followers on Twitter that he regretted his “unacceptable” post.

In the video he posted on Instagram, he said: “I’m so sad right now. Look at my nephew,” , as the camera focuses on the boy.

“Why are you wearing a princess dress? Is this what you got for Christmas?” he asks, as the boy nods delightedly.

“Why did you ask for a princess dress for Christmas?” he goes on.

“Because it’s pretty,” the boy replies enthusiastically, waving the pink wand.

“Boys don’t wear princess dresses!” says Hamilton.

The 32-year-old was abroad celebrating Christmas with his family when he posted the video.

In response, Travis Alabanza, a performance artist, had said: “I hope Lewis Hamilton properly thinks and apologises to his nephew for that video.”

Lewis Hamilton did nothing wrong, he was spot on, so why did he apologise?

These whoopsies are precious, proving the point ironically.

Boys don’t wear princess dresses…he was spot on.


-The Guardian

Double the Refugee Quota Double the Fun

by SB on December 29, 2017 at 9:30am

Guest Post:

Did you hear the great news? New Zealand has just agreed to double their refugee quota in 2018 and also radically expand refugee family reunification.

Kiwis Urged to Extend Hand to Refugees as NZ Quota Set to Double

Funny how an announcement as important as this would be buried on Boxing Day and barely reported anywhere. I only saw one article on TVNZ and nothing anywhere else.

Along with a portion of the 600 extra emergency places for refugees fleeing the Syrian crisis New Zealand’s 2016 intake was just 0.02% of the current 4.6 million population.

And Japan’s was only 26 in 2016 and around 3 in 2017. By a strange coincidence, Japan also has had exactly zero bomb attacks, no mysterious outbreaks in rapes, beatings, assaults, stabbings, and no people being run over by trucks making a wrong turn down a busy sidewalk full of children. Going from 26 to 3 is the kind of refugee quota I can get behind. Domo arigato.


We’re really pleased the government has confirmed its policy to double the quota, we’d like to see that policy implemented as quickly as possible,” National Migration Programmes Manager for the Red Cross, Rachel O’Connor told 1 NEWS.

The Red Cross’s business model has become an extremely simple two-step process of late:

  1.  Flood Western countries with third-world refugees and guilt people into donating.
  2. Wait for imported third-world refugees to cause acts of terror and other violence against the native population and then go out and raise money to help the victims.

Also, don’t forget to donate blood because the Red Cross will need it after the first bomb goes off. Touché, bigots.

Credit: Luke

But don’t worry, our lazy eyed lawyer Golriz Ghahraman is here to make sure she gloats about what a gift she is giving us this Christmas. And I promise you, dear readers, this gift will be giving us nothing but great things for many generations.

Green Party MP and refugee, Golriz Ghahraman says her party will continue to work with the government on their policy to increase the quota to 4000 over six years.

Golriz, first of all, wants to make sure, yet again, that we all know she’s a refugee. She is above reproach as to her motives.

Her background is a gripping tale of her parents reacting to the imminent threat of a war that ended years earlier and took place over 1000km away from where she actually lived. Her parents country shopped until they found some people that were suckers compassionate and got on a plane and graced New Zealand with their presence.

As they were desperate and poor, the Ghahramans could only afford a coach ticket to fly half-way around the world instead of a First Class ticket to a much closer safe country like Jordan or Turkey. Even worse, I bet they couldn’t even rent the headphones to watch the in-flight entertainment for the long arduous air-conditioned and well-fed journey. Golriz’s suffering knows no bounds.

The article continues:

The good news is refugees actually quite quickly do move on after receiving that initial wraparound service, they do integrate; they do end up over-achieving in things like education and health.

Yes, they are all overachievers. That’s why their countries were such remarkable places and they decided to slum it for a while in Western nations to see how the other half live. Sweden reports that 494 of the 163,000 asylum seekers since 2015 are actually employed now. The other 162,506 living on benefits are simply overachievers you see.

As the quota doubles this coming year, the Family Reunification Category will also be increased. ’So that’s something that is one of the wins we got,’ said Ms Ghahraman.”

And really, how else can we describe a massive increase in reunification (aka. chain migration) for refugees other than a win for everyone? Germany, Sweden, France, U.K. and the United States have hit the diversity lottery with their reunification strategies. We should be so lucky.

I wonder though why this win wasn’t discussed more openly? Where is NZ First on this win? Surely, they’d be the ones to celebrate the loudest based on their past statements. I hear Winston loves a good party.

In any event, we are about to win bigly. You see, family reunification means that each refugee could bring many family members with them. Instead of just being 1500 people a year under the new quota, it could actually be 10 times this number over time. Each year. Talk about winning. And since we know already from the U.S. and Europe that many of these family reunification applications are fraudulent, we’ll be winning good and hard.

We were, however, only able to confirm all claimed biological relationships in fewer than 20% of cases (family units).

-U.S State Department

80% fraud rates on family reunification for refugees. You see, they are overachievers! (Note to self: Invest in DNA testing companies in New Zealand for a potential business spike.)

Ms. Ghahraman continues:

And no one deserves to be in a war, to raise their kids under rubble.

Indeed. And Western nations do not deserve to have to raise their children by having war, poverty and dysfunction brought to them. We do not want our countries turned into police states, our towns locked down during our celebrations, our culture insulted and told to change, and our wives, sisters and daughters preyed upon by hostile foreigners that want us to pay for their existence. But it’s not about us, now is it?

Yet, it can’t be anything but about us. We do not owe these people a living. We do not owe them an existence at our expense. We do not owe them our culture, our spirit, or our lives. It is not the West’s responsibility to adopt the planet, and if we try we will cease to exist as a unique culture that has given the world so much. Like moths in the wardrobe, Golriz Ghahraman and her open border nut-job supporters are eating holes in the cultural fabric of the West.

Our countries are not the radical left’s to give away. Nor are they the property of people like Golriz Ghahraman, Jacinda Ardern, Helen Clark, or Angela Merkel’s. Nobody gave these people New Zealand, nor Australia, nor Europe, nor America. They are not theirs to give.

Our countries were carved from the wilderness into what they are today. They did not just appear out of thin air, and they were not created to be given away to third-world people that hate us and victimise us. We should not allow the work of our ancestors to be squandered for virtue signalling leaders and their globalist schemes.

New Zealand should not be doubling any refugee resettlement quota. We should be following Japan, Hungary, Poland, and now Austria’s example and reclaim our borders for ourselves by lowering or eliminating all refugee resettlement from the third-world. Doing that is what true leadership looks like.

Leadership is not following other countries off the cliff and begging to be the first to arrive at the plunge to our collective deaths. Doubling the quota in the face of what we see around the world is not the mark of doing good, it’s the mark of a suicide cult.

Hey NZTA, you might have deleted the tweet but we still got the screenshot

by Cameron Slater on December 24, 2017 at 8:30am

Our resident hawk eye, Sally, grabbed that screenshot of a tweet from NZTA.

It beggars belief that someone in such a role would even get into the debate, let alone take such an anti-American stance. They are civil servants.

As Sally commented:

Since when did a government traffic agency comment on NZ Foreign Affairs. So wrong in many ways.

Deleting the tweet shows they know it was wrong, too bad we’ve got it.

My longest friend in National’s caucus, Scott Simpson grabbed it too:

For those who missed it before it was deleted…. it looked like the Ministerial holiday roster was in full swing with Assoc Transport Minister @JulieAnneGenter covering Twitter and Foreign Affairs.


This is unacceptable, but obviously the new standards we can expect under this government.

I wonder what Julie Anne Genter is going to say about it.

As for the sentiment about getting nothing from the US…

For those who missed it before it was deleted…. it looked like the Ministerial holiday roster was in full swing with Assoc Transport Minister @JulieAnneGenter covering Twitter and Foreign Affairs.

Ask the pple of Kaikoura abt the aid they got from the US Navy



-WOBH, Research by Sally, Twitter


The PM cares about the needy and deprived but…

by SB on December 23, 2017 at 10:00am

Happy school children whose school is not under threat of closure by the Ardern led Labour government because it is a teacher union-backed state school

Our PM has made a big deal about her passion for children in poverddy


if they attend a Partnership school and benefit from free uniforms, free stationery and free breakfasts she is going to close it.

West Auckland Middle School

Our PM says that she cares passionately about a quality education to help priority learners such as Decile 1-3 pupils



even though according to their contracts Partnership schools have to have at least 75% priority learners she is going to close all their schools.

Students from Vanguard Military School.
PHOTO- Vanguard facebook page

Our PM claims to care passionately about minorities and their needs


She is going to close Partnership schools that are doing such a great job catering to Maori and Pasifika students that they have long waiting lists.

Photo-Facebook South Auckland Middle School

Our PM claims to care passionately about beneficiaries and the working class


she is going to close the Partnership schools that are full of their children despitepassionate letters from their parents begging her and Chris Hipkins to keep them openbecause of the wonderful things they have done for their children.

Display wall at South Auckland Middle School.

Partnership Schools were established to serve New Zealand’s priority learners who often come from deprived families. These are students that mainstream education has failed, and Jacinda Ardern and Chris Hipkins are now telling priority learners and deprived families that they are going to close the schools that are leading them to success.

Our PM claims to be intent on addressing social and economic deprivation yet she is determined to force these students and their families back to mainstream education which is the education system that failed them in the first place.

Jacinda Ardern only passionately cares about deprived children in poverddy when they are in a union controlled environment. Her message to Partnership schools this Christmas is a very simple one.

Credit: Luke