It is many months since -

Post by Tony
- I read anything in the BFD.
Oh, says the faithful few - he is talking about that trashy blog.
Those few will immediately assess this article based on the blogger and will
openly ignore the content but I live in hope - there are open minded people in
this newsgroup.
So here you are -
https://thebfd.co.nz/2021/09/17/hope-dies-last-the-politics-of-fear/
Here is an important extract for those that refuse to open anything by Cam
Slater.
"Hard and early was a lie; short and sharp was definitely a lie as we are now
still under the longest lockdown so far. ‘Front of the queue’ was a big lie,
and one the media have hardly touched on. All we ever hear is how the vaccine
rollout is going to plan."
And another one -
"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually
come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State
can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences
of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its
powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and
thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State."
- Joseph Goebbels

To which one might equally respond with: "Since aeons before Goebbels, which or what state of any kind or anywhere in history has not and does not to some degree and in some way lie and withhold truth from its people?"

Not that this is to excuse or condone such behaviour, but the fact of the matter is that for as long as there are such things as human ambition and fallibility, truth and politics will always be to some degree strangers to each other. Promises, forecasts, policies, plans: all come under the two universal rubrics, "Don't believe half of what you read or hear" and, "Believe it when you see it".

That way lies realism and philosophical contentment, both of which give us not only the moral strength and realism to cope with the bastards, but also a good night's sleep. Together, these are what make for a life worth living for those born with the quintessential nous to put this commonsense approach into practice.

Tony

2021-09-18 23:42:03 UTC

Post by Tony
- I read anything in the BFD.
Oh, says the faithful few - he is talking about that trashy blog.
Those few will immediately assess this article based on the blogger and will
openly ignore the content but I live in hope - there are open minded people in
this newsgroup.
So here you are -
https://thebfd.co.nz/2021/09/17/hope-dies-last-the-politics-of-fear/
Here is an important extract for those that refuse to open anything by Cam
Slater.
"Hard and early was a lie; short and sharp was definitely a lie as we are now
still under the longest lockdown so far. âFront of the queueâ was a big
lie,
and one the media have hardly touched on. All we ever hear is how the vaccine
rollout is going to plan."
And another one -
"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually
come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State
can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences
of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its
powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and
thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State."
- Joseph Goebbels

To which one might equally respond with: "Since aeons before Goebbels, which
or what state of any kind or anywhere in history has not and does not to some
degree and in some way lie and withhold truth from its people?"
Not that this is to excuse or condone such behaviour, but the fact of the
matter is that for as long as there are such things as human ambition and
fallibility, truth and politics will always be to some degree strangers to each
other. Promises, forecasts, policies, plans: all come under the two universal
rubrics, "Don't believe half of what you read or hear" and, "Believe it when
you see it".
That way lies realism and philosophical contentment, both of which give us not
only the moral strength and realism to cope with the bastards, but also a good
night's sleep. Together, these are what make for a life worth living for those
born with the quintessential nous to put this commonsense approach into
practice.

Philosophical distraction apart.
Maybe somebody will be keen to address the issues raised?
If not that might speak volumes.

James Christophers

2021-09-19 01:12:10 UTC

To which one might equally respond with: "Since aeons before Goebbels, which
or what state of any kind or anywhere in history has not and does not to some
degree and in some way lie and withhold truth from its people?"
Not that this is to excuse or condone such behaviour, but the fact of the
matter is that for as long as there are such things as human ambition and
fallibility, truth and politics will always be to some degree strangers to each
other. Promises, forecasts, policies, plans: all come under the two universal
rubrics, "Don't believe half of what you read or hear" and, "Believe it when
you see it".
That way lies realism and philosophical contentment, both of which give us not
only the moral strength and realism to cope with the bastards, but also a good
night's sleep. Together, these are what make for a life worth living for those
born with the quintessential nous to put this commonsense approach into
practice.

Philosophical distraction apart.
Maybe somebody will be keen to address the issues raised?
If not that might speak volumes.

There is nothing whatever new to be learned from Slater except by those select few near or beyond retirement age who have plainly not been paying attention to the extraordinary course of world history since before WW2, an egregious learning gap on their and Cameron Rip Van Winkel's part that itself speaks volumes, and then some.

Such **issues** as elucidated by their arch-practitioner Goebbels and rote re-iterated for the 10 millionth time above, have been universally acknowledged and addressed in some form or other ever since the day he uttered them. So much so that from that very moment they have formed a significant part of the lexicon and fabric of all discourse and debate on the fundamentals of nationhood and democratic freedoms, from early adolescent schooldays and beyond.

Which is why I hold to my view previously given and the historically informed and rich life-experience rationale for doing so.

Tony

2021-09-19 01:26:05 UTC

Post by Tony
- I read anything in the BFD.
Oh, says the faithful few - he is talking about that trashy blog.
Those few will immediately assess this article based on the blogger and will
openly ignore the content but I live in hope - there are open minded
people
in
this newsgroup.
So here you are -
https://thebfd.co.nz/2021/09/17/hope-dies-last-the-politics-of-fear/
Here is an important extract for those that refuse to open anything by Cam
Slater.
"Hard and early was a lie; short and sharp was definitely a lie as we are now
still under the longest lockdown so far. âFront of the queueâ was a big
lie,
and one the media have hardly touched on. All we ever hear is how the vaccine
rollout is going to plan."
And another one -
"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually
come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State
can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences
of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its
powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and
thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State."
- Joseph Goebbels

To which one might equally respond with: "Since aeons before Goebbels, which
or what state of any kind or anywhere in history has not and does not to some
degree and in some way lie and withhold truth from its people?"
Not that this is to excuse or condone such behaviour, but the fact of the
matter is that for as long as there are such things as human ambition and
fallibility, truth and politics will always be to some degree strangers to each
other. Promises, forecasts, policies, plans: all come under the two universal
rubrics, "Don't believe half of what you read or hear" and, "Believe it when
you see it".
That way lies realism and philosophical contentment, both of which give us not
only the moral strength and realism to cope with the bastards, but also a good
night's sleep. Together, these are what make for a life worth living for those
born with the quintessential nous to put this commonsense approach into
practice.

Philosophical distraction apart.
Maybe somebody will be keen to address the issues raised?
If not that might speak volumes.

Nonsense, every word of it. I note you have sunk to the low level of
criticising the man and not addressing the content as is often your tendency.

Post by James Christophers
Such **issues** as elucidated by their arch-practitioner Goebbels and rote
re-iterated for the 10 millionth time above, have been universally acknowledged
and addressed in some form or other ever since the day he uttered them. So
much so that from that very moment they have formed a significant part of the
lexicon and fabric of all discourse and debate on the fundamentals of
nationhood and democratic freedoms, from early adolescent schooldays and beyond.
Which is why I hold to my view previously given and the historically informed
and rich life-experience rationale for doing so.

What Slater has written is a set of accusations against the government.
Those who wish to ignore them are of course entitled to do so. Ostrich like or
deliberately political, whatever their motivation.
Those who care about our democracy will not ignore them and in that sense the
accusations can and should be considered with care.
You do what you want, those of us who actually care about New Zealand will
continue to be watchful which for the moment is all we can do.

James Christophers

2021-09-19 04:29:40 UTC

Post by Tony
- I read anything in the BFD.
Oh, says the faithful few - he is talking about that trashy blog.
Those few will immediately assess this article based on the blogger and will
openly ignore the content but I live in hope - there are open minded
people
in
this newsgroup.
So here you are -
https://thebfd.co.nz/2021/09/17/hope-dies-last-the-politics-of-fear/
Here is an important extract for those that refuse to open anything by Cam
Slater.
"Hard and early was a lie; short and sharp was definitely a lie as we are now
still under the longest lockdown so far. ‘Front of the queue’ was a
big
lie,
and one the media have hardly touched on. All we ever hear is how the vaccine
rollout is going to plan."
And another one -
"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually
come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State
can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences
of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its
powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and
thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State."
- Joseph Goebbels

To which one might equally respond with: "Since aeons before Goebbels, which
or what state of any kind or anywhere in history has not and does not to some
degree and in some way lie and withhold truth from its people?"
Not that this is to excuse or condone such behaviour, but the fact of the
matter is that for as long as there are such things as human ambition and
fallibility, truth and politics will always be to some degree strangers to each
other. Promises, forecasts, policies, plans: all come under the two universal
rubrics, "Don't believe half of what you read or hear" and, "Believe it when
you see it".
That way lies realism and philosophical contentment, both of which give us not
only the moral strength and realism to cope with the bastards, but also a good
night's sleep. Together, these are what make for a life worth living for those
born with the quintessential nous to put this commonsense approach into
practice.

Philosophical distraction apart.
Maybe somebody will be keen to address the issues raised?
If not that might speak volumes.

Nonsense, every word of it. I note you have sunk to the low level of
criticising the man and not addressing the content as is often your tendency.

Slater tells no one anything that is not previously known and long-since established, no matter which or what kind of government of the day happens currently to be in the driving seat; this last, in essence, being the way the world wags. IOW, his message lacks what he himself lacks: original thinking of the kind that can be inspired only by a higher consciousness and the deeper inner resources and experiences that must go with it. Hence he appeals most to those who, likewise, share in his lacklustre, casuistic approach to polemic for lack of any original inspiration of their own. Coat-tailing. Think, then, perhaps, of Judith Collins and how much good her same coat-tailing of Slater has ever done for her as the skids slide inexorably beneath her dairymaid bulk to bear her off into well-earned obscurity plus a first-class window seat for life!

What Slater has written is a set of accusations against the government.

These have been catalogued by others countless times previously and in considerably more worthwhile and helpful and constructive detail; and, you should note, by those also far more mature and inclined to informed and balanced views than Slater has ever been capable of, however slavishly you may cleave to his insubstantial rhetoric.

Post by Tony
Those who wish to ignore them are of course entitled to do so. Ostrich like or
deliberately political, whatever their motivation.

The ostriches, political or otherwise, are those who fear that essential, realistic approach to all human existence and endeavour. Their motive, if one can call it that, is to flee both the mis-perceived threat and that essential, realistic approach to life's vagaries. Morally weak if not totally deprived.

Post by Tony
Those who care about our democracy will not ignore them and in that sense the
accusations can and should be considered with care.
You do what you want, those of us who actually care about New Zealand will
continue to be watchful which for the moment is all we can do.

It is all you have ever been able to do over your entire life, and it is all you will ever be able to do until your Day of Judgement. But the world will still continue to wag as it always has, watched over and cared for by those with the power to control and/or at least beneficially influence, moderate and/or mitigate its worst excesses. Which is precisely the duty of care all democratically elected governments are charged with and by which they are eventually judged by those who elect them to power and keep them there.

In my view, then, you therefore at least owe it to yourself to be thankful for these seemingly small yet highly significant mercies, insufficient though they may sometimes appear. Otherwise expect to be seen as an over-judgemental Jeremiah whose sole preoccupation is seemingly to indulge an unhealthy taste for hand-me-down, lowest-common-denominator polemic, this for lack of any original positive and constructive vision of his own of a future worth anyone's having.

Tony

2021-09-19 05:09:14 UTC

Post by Tony
- I read anything in the BFD.
Oh, says the faithful few - he is talking about that trashy blog.
Those few will immediately assess this article based on the blogger
and
will
openly ignore the content but I live in hope - there are open minded
people
in
this newsgroup.
So here you are -
https://thebfd.co.nz/2021/09/17/hope-dies-last-the-politics-of-fear/
Here is an important extract for those that refuse to open anything by Cam
Slater.
"Hard and early was a lie; short and sharp was definitely a lie as we
are
now
still under the longest lockdown so far. âFront of the queueâ was
a
big
lie,
and one the media have hardly touched on. All we ever hear is how the vaccine
rollout is going to plan."
And another one -
"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually
come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as
the
State
can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military
consequences
of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all
of
its
powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the
lie,
and
thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State."
- Joseph Goebbels

To which one might equally respond with: "Since aeons before Goebbels, which
or what state of any kind or anywhere in history has not and does not to some
degree and in some way lie and withhold truth from its people?"
Not that this is to excuse or condone such behaviour, but the fact of the
matter is that for as long as there are such things as human ambition and
fallibility, truth and politics will always be to some degree strangers
to
each
other. Promises, forecasts, policies, plans: all come under the two universal
rubrics, "Don't believe half of what you read or hear" and, "Believe it when
you see it".
That way lies realism and philosophical contentment, both of which give
us
not
only the moral strength and realism to cope with the bastards, but also
a
good
night's sleep. Together, these are what make for a life worth living for those
born with the quintessential nous to put this commonsense approach into
practice.

Philosophical distraction apart.
Maybe somebody will be keen to address the issues raised?
If not that might speak volumes.

Nonsense, every word of it. I note you have sunk to the low level of
criticising the man and not addressing the content as is often your tendency.

Slater tells no one anything that is not previously known and long-since
established, no matter which or what kind of government of the day happens
currently to be in the driving seat; this last, in essence, being the way the
world wags. IOW, his message lacks what he himself lacks: original thinking of
the kind that can be inspired only by a higher consciousness and the deeper
inner resources and experiences that must go with it. Hence he appeals most to
those who, likewise, share in his lacklustre, casuistic approach to polemic for
lack of any original inspiration of their own. Coat-tailing. Think, then,
perhaps, of Judith Collins and how much good her same coat-tailing of Slater
has ever done for her as the skids slide inexorably beneath her dairymaid bulk
to bear her off into well-earned obscurity plus a first-class window seat for
life!

What Slater has written is a set of accusations against the government.

These have been catalogued by others countless times previously and in
considerably more worthwhile and helpful and constructive detail; and, you
should note, by those also far more mature and inclined to informed and
balanced views than Slater has ever been capable of, however slavishly you may
cleave to his insubstantial rhetoric.

Post by Tony
Those who wish to ignore them are of course entitled to do so. Ostrich like or
deliberately political, whatever their motivation.

The ostriches, political or otherwise, are those who fear that essential,
realistic approach to all human existence and endeavour. Their motive, if one
can call it that, is to flee both the mis-perceived threat and that essential,
realistic approach to life's vagaries. Morally weak if not totally deprived.

It is all you have ever been able to do over your entire life, and it is all
you will ever be able to do until your Day of Judgement. But the world will
still continue to wag as it always has, watched over and cared for by those
with the power to control and/or at least beneficially influence, moderate
and/or mitigate its worst excesses. Which is precisely the duty of care all
democratically elected governments are charged with and by which they are
eventually judged by those who elect them to power and keep them there.
In my view, then, you therefore at least owe it to yourself to be thankful for
these seemingly small yet highly significant mercies, insufficient though they
may sometimes appear. Otherwise expect to be seen as an over-judgemental
Jeremiah whose sole preoccupation is seemingly to indulge an unhealthy taste
for hand-me-down, lowest-common-denominator polemic, this for lack of any
original positive and constructive vision of his own of a future worth anyone's
having.

Well Keith, all that pontificating is for naught.
I care and you do not. It is that simple.
Fact is, the blog raises issues of competence by Ardern and co and not once in
your several boring replies have you addressed the content of those issues.
Why is that? Oh do answer please.
And please don't go back to your amateur philosophy, it was tedious to start
with and can only become worse.

James Christophers

2021-09-19 05:48:15 UTC

Post by Tony
- I read anything in the BFD.
Oh, says the faithful few - he is talking about that trashy blog.
Those few will immediately assess this article based on the blogger
and
will
openly ignore the content but I live in hope - there are open minded
people
in
this newsgroup.
So here you are -
https://thebfd.co.nz/2021/09/17/hope-dies-last-the-politics-of-fear/
Here is an important extract for those that refuse to open anything by Cam
Slater.
"Hard and early was a lie; short and sharp was definitely a lie as we
are
now
still under the longest lockdown so far. ‘Front of the queue’ was a
big
lie,
and one the media have hardly touched on. All we ever hear is how the
vaccine
rollout is going to plan."
And another one -
"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will
eventually
come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as
the
State
can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military
consequences
of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all
of
its
powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the
lie,
and
thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State."
- Joseph Goebbels

To which one might equally respond with: "Since aeons before Goebbels, which
or what state of any kind or anywhere in history has not and does not to some
degree and in some way lie and withhold truth from its people?"
Not that this is to excuse or condone such behaviour, but the fact of the
matter is that for as long as there are such things as human ambition and
fallibility, truth and politics will always be to some degree strangers
to
each
other. Promises, forecasts, policies, plans: all come under the two universal
rubrics, "Don't believe half of what you read or hear" and, "Believe it when
you see it".
That way lies realism and philosophical contentment, both of which give
us
not
only the moral strength and realism to cope with the bastards, but also
a
good
night's sleep. Together, these are what make for a life worth living for
those
born with the quintessential nous to put this commonsense approach into
practice.

Philosophical distraction apart.
Maybe somebody will be keen to address the issues raised?
If not that might speak volumes.

Nonsense, every word of it. I note you have sunk to the low level of
criticising the man and not addressing the content as is often your tendency.

Slater tells no one anything that is not previously known and long-since
established, no matter which or what kind of government of the day happens
currently to be in the driving seat; this last, in essence, being the way the
world wags. IOW, his message lacks what he himself lacks: original thinking of
the kind that can be inspired only by a higher consciousness and the deeper
inner resources and experiences that must go with it. Hence he appeals most to
those who, likewise, share in his lacklustre, casuistic approach to polemic for
lack of any original inspiration of their own. Coat-tailing. Think, then,
perhaps, of Judith Collins and how much good her same coat-tailing of Slater
has ever done for her as the skids slide inexorably beneath her dairymaid bulk
to bear her off into well-earned obscurity plus a first-class window seat for
life!

What Slater has written is a set of accusations against the government.

These have been catalogued by others countless times previously and in
considerably more worthwhile and helpful and constructive detail; and, you
should note, by those also far more mature and inclined to informed and
balanced views than Slater has ever been capable of, however slavishly you may
cleave to his insubstantial rhetoric.

Post by Tony
Those who wish to ignore them are of course entitled to do so. Ostrich like or
deliberately political, whatever their motivation.

The ostriches, political or otherwise, are those who fear that essential,
realistic approach to all human existence and endeavour. Their motive, if one
can call it that, is to flee both the mis-perceived threat and that essential,
realistic approach to life's vagaries. Morally weak if not totally deprived.

It is all you have ever been able to do over your entire life, and it is all
you will ever be able to do until your Day of Judgement. But the world will
still continue to wag as it always has, watched over and cared for by those
with the power to control and/or at least beneficially influence, moderate
and/or mitigate its worst excesses. Which is precisely the duty of care all
democratically elected governments are charged with and by which they are
eventually judged by those who elect them to power and keep them there.
In my view, then, you therefore at least owe it to yourself to be thankful for
these seemingly small yet highly significant mercies, insufficient though they
may sometimes appear. Otherwise expect to be seen as an over-judgemental
Jeremiah whose sole preoccupation is seemingly to indulge an unhealthy taste
for hand-me-down, lowest-common-denominator polemic, this for lack of any
original positive and constructive vision of his own of a future worth anyone's
having.

Since you have introduced the topic with no more than your usual hit-and-run pro-forma endorsement, it is for you now to explain why you yourself have failed otherwise to usefully advance your topic to get it under way.

It is also for you to explain to this group what point there could be in my doing so instead of you when every point Slater raises has been previously addressed to exhaustion more times and in more quarters than you or Slater could ever hope to identify.

Tony

2021-09-19 05:53:09 UTC

Post by Tony
- I read anything in the BFD.
Oh, says the faithful few - he is talking about that trashy blog.
Those few will immediately assess this article based on the blogger
and
will
openly ignore the content but I live in hope - there are open minded
people
in
this newsgroup.
So here you are -
https://thebfd.co.nz/2021/09/17/hope-dies-last-the-politics-of-fear/
Here is an important extract for those that refuse to open anything
by
Cam
Slater.
"Hard and early was a lie; short and sharp was definitely a lie as we
are
now
still under the longest lockdown so far. âFront of the queueâ
was
a
big
lie,
and one the media have hardly touched on. All we ever hear is how the
vaccine
rollout is going to plan."
And another one -
"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will
eventually
come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as
the
State
can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military
consequences
of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all
of
its
powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the
lie,
and
thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State."
- Joseph Goebbels

To which one might equally respond with: "Since aeons before
Goebbels,
which
or what state of any kind or anywhere in history has not and does not
to
some
degree and in some way lie and withhold truth from its people?"
Not that this is to excuse or condone such behaviour, but the fact of the
matter is that for as long as there are such things as human ambition and
fallibility, truth and politics will always be to some degree strangers
to
each
other. Promises, forecasts, policies, plans: all come under the two
universal
rubrics, "Don't believe half of what you read or hear" and, "Believe
it
when
you see it".
That way lies realism and philosophical contentment, both of which give
us
not
only the moral strength and realism to cope with the bastards, but also
a
good
night's sleep. Together, these are what make for a life worth living for
those
born with the quintessential nous to put this commonsense approach into
practice.

Philosophical distraction apart.
Maybe somebody will be keen to address the issues raised?
If not that might speak volumes.

Nonsense, every word of it. I note you have sunk to the low level of
criticising the man and not addressing the content as is often your tendency.

Slater tells no one anything that is not previously known and long-since
established, no matter which or what kind of government of the day happens
currently to be in the driving seat; this last, in essence, being the way the
world wags. IOW, his message lacks what he himself lacks: original thinking of
the kind that can be inspired only by a higher consciousness and the deeper
inner resources and experiences that must go with it. Hence he appeals most to
those who, likewise, share in his lacklustre, casuistic approach to polemic for
lack of any original inspiration of their own. Coat-tailing. Think, then,
perhaps, of Judith Collins and how much good her same coat-tailing of Slater
has ever done for her as the skids slide inexorably beneath her dairymaid bulk
to bear her off into well-earned obscurity plus a first-class window seat for
life!

Post by James Christophers
Such **issues** as elucidated by their arch-practitioner Goebbels and rote
re-iterated for the 10 millionth time above, have been universally acknowledged
and addressed in some form or other ever since the day he uttered them. So
much so that from that very moment they have formed a significant part
of
the
lexicon and fabric of all discourse and debate on the fundamentals of
nationhood and democratic freedoms, from early adolescent schooldays and beyond.
Which is why I hold to my view previously given and the historically informed
and rich life-experience rationale for doing so.

What Slater has written is a set of accusations against the government.

These have been catalogued by others countless times previously and in
considerably more worthwhile and helpful and constructive detail; and, you
should note, by those also far more mature and inclined to informed and
balanced views than Slater has ever been capable of, however slavishly you may
cleave to his insubstantial rhetoric.

Post by Tony
Those who wish to ignore them are of course entitled to do so. Ostrich
like
or
deliberately political, whatever their motivation.

The ostriches, political or otherwise, are those who fear that essential,
realistic approach to all human existence and endeavour. Their motive, if one
can call it that, is to flee both the mis-perceived threat and that essential,
realistic approach to life's vagaries. Morally weak if not totally deprived.

It is all you have ever been able to do over your entire life, and it is all
you will ever be able to do until your Day of Judgement. But the world will
still continue to wag as it always has, watched over and cared for by those
with the power to control and/or at least beneficially influence, moderate
and/or mitigate its worst excesses. Which is precisely the duty of care all
democratically elected governments are charged with and by which they are
eventually judged by those who elect them to power and keep them there.
In my view, then, you therefore at least owe it to yourself to be thankful for
these seemingly small yet highly significant mercies, insufficient though they
may sometimes appear. Otherwise expect to be seen as an over-judgemental
Jeremiah whose sole preoccupation is seemingly to indulge an unhealthy taste
for hand-me-down, lowest-common-denominator polemic, this for lack of any
original positive and constructive vision of his own of a future worth anyone's
having.

Since you have introduced the topic with no more than your usual hit-and-run
pro-forma endorsement, it is for you now to explain why you yourself have
failed otherwise to usefully advance your topic to get it under way.
It is also for you to explain to this group what point there could be in my
doing so instead of you when every point Slater raises has been previously
addressed to exhaustion more times and in more quarters than you or Slater
could ever hope to identify.

I have no duty here.
Other than to point out that you have not once addressed the content. Why is
that?
Over to you Mr. Warren of Kingsbridge.

James Christophers

2021-09-19 06:03:26 UTC

Post by Tony
- I read anything in the BFD.
Oh, says the faithful few - he is talking about that trashy blog.
Those few will immediately assess this article based on the blogger
and
will
openly ignore the content but I live in hope - there are open minded
people
in
this newsgroup.
So here you are -
https://thebfd.co.nz/2021/09/17/hope-dies-last-the-politics-of-fear/
Here is an important extract for those that refuse to open anything
by
Cam
Slater.
"Hard and early was a lie; short and sharp was definitely a lie as
we
are
now
still under the longest lockdown so far. ‘Front of the queue’
was
a
big
lie,
and one the media have hardly touched on. All we ever hear is how
the
vaccine
rollout is going to plan."
And another one -
"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will
eventually
come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as
the
State
can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military
consequences
of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use
all
of
its
powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the
lie,
and
thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State."
- Joseph Goebbels

To which one might equally respond with: "Since aeons before
Goebbels,
which
or what state of any kind or anywhere in history has not and does not
to
some
degree and in some way lie and withhold truth from its people?"
Not that this is to excuse or condone such behaviour, but the fact of
the
matter is that for as long as there are such things as human ambition
and
fallibility, truth and politics will always be to some degree strangers
to
each
other. Promises, forecasts, policies, plans: all come under the two
universal
rubrics, "Don't believe half of what you read or hear" and, "Believe
it
when
you see it".
That way lies realism and philosophical contentment, both of which give
us
not
only the moral strength and realism to cope with the bastards, but also
a
good
night's sleep. Together, these are what make for a life worth living
for
those
born with the quintessential nous to put this commonsense approach into
practice.

Philosophical distraction apart.
Maybe somebody will be keen to address the issues raised?
If not that might speak volumes.

Nonsense, every word of it. I note you have sunk to the low level of
criticising the man and not addressing the content as is often your tendency.

Slater tells no one anything that is not previously known and long-since
established, no matter which or what kind of government of the day happens
currently to be in the driving seat; this last, in essence, being the way the
world wags. IOW, his message lacks what he himself lacks: original thinking of
the kind that can be inspired only by a higher consciousness and the deeper
inner resources and experiences that must go with it. Hence he appeals most to
those who, likewise, share in his lacklustre, casuistic approach to polemic for
lack of any original inspiration of their own. Coat-tailing. Think, then,
perhaps, of Judith Collins and how much good her same coat-tailing of Slater
has ever done for her as the skids slide inexorably beneath her dairymaid bulk
to bear her off into well-earned obscurity plus a first-class window seat for
life!

Post by James Christophers
Such **issues** as elucidated by their arch-practitioner Goebbels and rote
re-iterated for the 10 millionth time above, have been universally
acknowledged
and addressed in some form or other ever since the day he uttered them. So
much so that from that very moment they have formed a significant part
of
the
lexicon and fabric of all discourse and debate on the fundamentals of
nationhood and democratic freedoms, from early adolescent schooldays and
beyond.
Which is why I hold to my view previously given and the historically informed
and rich life-experience rationale for doing so.

What Slater has written is a set of accusations against the government.

These have been catalogued by others countless times previously and in
considerably more worthwhile and helpful and constructive detail; and, you
should note, by those also far more mature and inclined to informed and
balanced views than Slater has ever been capable of, however slavishly you may
cleave to his insubstantial rhetoric.

Post by Tony
Those who wish to ignore them are of course entitled to do so. Ostrich
like
or
deliberately political, whatever their motivation.

The ostriches, political or otherwise, are those who fear that essential,
realistic approach to all human existence and endeavour. Their motive, if one
can call it that, is to flee both the mis-perceived threat and that essential,
realistic approach to life's vagaries. Morally weak if not totally deprived.

It is all you have ever been able to do over your entire life, and it is all
you will ever be able to do until your Day of Judgement. But the world will
still continue to wag as it always has, watched over and cared for by those
with the power to control and/or at least beneficially influence, moderate
and/or mitigate its worst excesses. Which is precisely the duty of care all
democratically elected governments are charged with and by which they are
eventually judged by those who elect them to power and keep them there.
In my view, then, you therefore at least owe it to yourself to be thankful for
these seemingly small yet highly significant mercies, insufficient though they
may sometimes appear. Otherwise expect to be seen as an over-judgemental
Jeremiah whose sole preoccupation is seemingly to indulge an unhealthy taste
for hand-me-down, lowest-common-denominator polemic, this for lack of any
original positive and constructive vision of his own of a future worth anyone's
having.

Since you have introduced the topic with no more than your usual hit-and-run
pro-forma endorsement, it is for you now to explain why you yourself have
failed otherwise to usefully advance your topic to get it under way.
It is also for you to explain to this group what point there could be in my
doing so instead of you when every point Slater raises has been previously
addressed to exhaustion more times and in more quarters than you or Slater
could ever hope to identify.

I have no duty here.
Other than to point out that you have not once addressed the content. Why is
that?

You have been told why along with the perfectly sound and logical reason for not doing so.

IOW, I will not indulge your silly and unoproductive, attention-seeking behaviour over a matter that has already been satisfactorily and exhaustively dealt with elsewhere.

Capice?

Tony

2021-09-19 07:01:47 UTC

Post by Tony
https://thebfd.co.nz/2021/09/17/hope-dies-last-the-politics-of-fear/

Here is an important extract for those that refuse to open
anything
by
Cam
Slater.
"Hard and early was a lie; short and sharp was definitely a lie as
we
are
now
still under the longest lockdown so far. âFront of the
queueâ
was
a
big
lie,
and one the media have hardly touched on. All we ever hear is how
the
vaccine
rollout is going to plan."
And another one -
"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will
eventually
come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time
as
the
State
can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military
consequences
of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use
all
of
its
powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of
the
lie,
and
thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State."
- Joseph Goebbels

To which one might equally respond with: "Since aeons before
Goebbels,
which
or what state of any kind or anywhere in history has not and does not
to
some
degree and in some way lie and withhold truth from its people?"
Not that this is to excuse or condone such behaviour, but the fact of
the
matter is that for as long as there are such things as human ambition
and
fallibility, truth and politics will always be to some degree
strangers
to
each
other. Promises, forecasts, policies, plans: all come under the two
universal
rubrics, "Don't believe half of what you read or hear" and, "Believe
it
when
you see it".
That way lies realism and philosophical contentment, both of which
give
us
not
only the moral strength and realism to cope with the bastards, but
also
a
good
night's sleep. Together, these are what make for a life worth living
for
those
born with the quintessential nous to put this commonsense approach
into
practice.

Philosophical distraction apart.
Maybe somebody will be keen to address the issues raised?
If not that might speak volumes.

Nonsense, every word of it. I note you have sunk to the low level of
criticising the man and not addressing the content as is often your tendency.

Slater tells no one anything that is not previously known and long-since
established, no matter which or what kind of government of the day happens
currently to be in the driving seat; this last, in essence, being the
way
the
world wags. IOW, his message lacks what he himself lacks: original
thinking
of
the kind that can be inspired only by a higher consciousness and the deeper
inner resources and experiences that must go with it. Hence he appeals
most
to
those who, likewise, share in his lacklustre, casuistic approach to
polemic
for
lack of any original inspiration of their own. Coat-tailing. Think, then,
perhaps, of Judith Collins and how much good her same coat-tailing of Slater
has ever done for her as the skids slide inexorably beneath her
dairymaid
bulk
to bear her off into well-earned obscurity plus a first-class window
seat
for
life!

Post by James Christophers
Such **issues** as elucidated by their arch-practitioner Goebbels and rote
re-iterated for the 10 millionth time above, have been universally
acknowledged
and addressed in some form or other ever since the day he uttered
them.
So
much so that from that very moment they have formed a significant part
of
the
lexicon and fabric of all discourse and debate on the fundamentals of
nationhood and democratic freedoms, from early adolescent schooldays and
beyond.
Which is why I hold to my view previously given and the historically
informed
and rich life-experience rationale for doing so.

What Slater has written is a set of accusations against the government.

These have been catalogued by others countless times previously and in
considerably more worthwhile and helpful and constructive detail; and, you
should note, by those also far more mature and inclined to informed and
balanced views than Slater has ever been capable of, however slavishly
you
may
cleave to his insubstantial rhetoric.

Post by Tony
Those who wish to ignore them are of course entitled to do so. Ostrich
like
or
deliberately political, whatever their motivation.

The ostriches, political or otherwise, are those who fear that essential,
realistic approach to all human existence and endeavour. Their motive,
if
one
can call it that, is to flee both the mis-perceived threat and that essential,
realistic approach to life's vagaries. Morally weak if not totally deprived.

Post by Tony
Those who care about our democracy will not ignore them and in that
sense
the
accusations can and should be considered with care.
You do what you want, those of us who actually care about New Zealand will
continue to be watchful which for the moment is all we can do.

It is all you have ever been able to do over your entire life, and it is all
you will ever be able to do until your Day of Judgement. But the world will
still continue to wag as it always has, watched over and cared for by those
with the power to control and/or at least beneficially influence, moderate
and/or mitigate its worst excesses. Which is precisely the duty of care all
democratically elected governments are charged with and by which they are
eventually judged by those who elect them to power and keep them there.
In my view, then, you therefore at least owe it to yourself to be
thankful
for
these seemingly small yet highly significant mercies, insufficient
though
they
may sometimes appear. Otherwise expect to be seen as an over-judgemental
Jeremiah whose sole preoccupation is seemingly to indulge an unhealthy taste
for hand-me-down, lowest-common-denominator polemic, this for lack of any
original positive and constructive vision of his own of a future worth anyone's
having.

Well Keith, all that pontificating is for naught.
I care and you do not. It is that simple.
Fact is, the blog raises issues of competence by Ardern and co and not
once
in
your several boring replies have you addressed the content of those issues.
Why is that? Oh do answer please.

Since you have introduced the topic with no more than your usual hit-and-run
pro-forma endorsement, it is for you now to explain why you yourself have
failed otherwise to usefully advance your topic to get it under way.
It is also for you to explain to this group what point there could be in my
doing so instead of you when every point Slater raises has been previously
addressed to exhaustion more times and in more quarters than you or Slater
could ever hope to identify.

I have no duty here.
Other than to point out that you have not once addressed the content. Why is
that?

You have been told why along with the perfectly sound and logical reason for not doing so.
IOW, I will not indulge your silly and unoproductive, attention-seeking
behaviour over a matter that has already been satisfactorily and exhaustively
dealt with elsewhere.
Capice?

Cross are you Keith?
Not surprising - you fucked this thread up right royally. Go boil your
undrerbred head.

John Bowes

2021-09-19 08:51:14 UTC

Post by Tony
- I read anything in the BFD.
Oh, says the faithful few - he is talking about that trashy blog.
Those few will immediately assess this article based on the blogger
and
will
openly ignore the content but I live in hope - there are open
minded
people
in
this newsgroup.
So here you are -
https://thebfd.co.nz/2021/09/17/hope-dies-last-the-politics-of-fear/
Here is an important extract for those that refuse to open anything
by
Cam
Slater.
"Hard and early was a lie; short and sharp was definitely a lie as
we
are
now
still under the longest lockdown so far. ‘Front of the queue’
was
a
big
lie,
and one the media have hardly touched on. All we ever hear is how
the
vaccine
rollout is going to plan."
And another one -
"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will
eventually
come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as
the
State
can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military
consequences
of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use
all
of
its
powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the
lie,
and
thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State."
- Joseph Goebbels

To which one might equally respond with: "Since aeons before
Goebbels,
which
or what state of any kind or anywhere in history has not and does not
to
some
degree and in some way lie and withhold truth from its people?"
Not that this is to excuse or condone such behaviour, but the fact of
the
matter is that for as long as there are such things as human ambition
and
fallibility, truth and politics will always be to some degree
strangers
to
each
other. Promises, forecasts, policies, plans: all come under the two
universal
rubrics, "Don't believe half of what you read or hear" and, "Believe
it
when
you see it".
That way lies realism and philosophical contentment, both of which
give
us
not
only the moral strength and realism to cope with the bastards, but
also
a
good
night's sleep. Together, these are what make for a life worth living
for
those
born with the quintessential nous to put this commonsense approach
into
practice.

Philosophical distraction apart.
Maybe somebody will be keen to address the issues raised?
If not that might speak volumes.

Nonsense, every word of it. I note you have sunk to the low level of
criticising the man and not addressing the content as is often your
tendency.

Slater tells no one anything that is not previously known and long-since
established, no matter which or what kind of government of the day happens
currently to be in the driving seat; this last, in essence, being the way the
world wags. IOW, his message lacks what he himself lacks: original thinking of
the kind that can be inspired only by a higher consciousness and the deeper
inner resources and experiences that must go with it. Hence he appeals most to
those who, likewise, share in his lacklustre, casuistic approach to polemic for
lack of any original inspiration of their own. Coat-tailing. Think, then,
perhaps, of Judith Collins and how much good her same coat-tailing of Slater
has ever done for her as the skids slide inexorably beneath her dairymaid bulk
to bear her off into well-earned obscurity plus a first-class window seat for
life!