Politics 🗳️ NZ Politics

[defensivebomb]

I can indeed do my own googling! It is pretty obvious why you want to disengage on the topic now. Even her most controversial takes are 100% reasonable.

View attachment 16352

Good searching! I didnt mean to sound disengaging. I have been using AI this morning, hence the request for quotes etc I think can just be done by anyone. At the end of the day, we're all just posting opinions on here as all the facts and quotes are searchable

Clark:
“In the absence of an imminent threat to the security of the United States and Israel, their armed attacks on Iran are illegal under international law. They have no legitimate claim to invoking a right of self defence,” she wrote.
“The statement on the attacks on Iran by the New Zealand Government therefore is a disgrace. It knows full well that international law has been breached even though negotiations on Iran’s nuclear capability were underway. It knows that [the US] walked away from the last nuclear agreement with Iran. Why the servility? I guess we know.”
“The Iranian regime is a vicious theocracy which has caused huge trauma to its people. But that isn’t a reason for a breach of Iran’s sovereignty.”

My views of her are based on her living in an ivory tower, providing her 20/20 hindsight on things from a position of comfort. It's all good and well talking about a breach of international law, and castigating the US (and NZ for not describing it such). If it did not happen, then all the sorts of bad things that were previously happening under the previous regime (legalised rape, etc etc) would still be occurring.

So, what does she want? Based on her comments, she would prefer the slow and ineffective process of tut-tutting the naughty Ayotolla via twitter, maintenance of status quo, which includes oppression of the sort of people she supports. The Iranians loved that the US invaded legally/illegally. But not Helen. She wanted things done strictly by the book and will criticise anyone that doesn't follow the rules.

A similar opinion by her of the Colombian president extraction. The Colombians loved it. But Helen Clark pointed out how it was legally questionable.

Do I support the war and what happened in Colombia? Not by themselves. But I am happy for those freed from oppression, even if it means someone did something questionable to achieve it

She's out of touch with reality and the greater good. Impotent and irrelevant.

Once a good leader though!

It's like stealing a loaf of bread if you are starving. Helen Clark would say "hey, that's illegal!"

 

[defensivebomb]

I guess this sums it up for me. I think the removal of brutality is a greater good than the maintenance of sovereignty, if a regime is brutal

What's the value of sovereignty, if the country's leaders undertake a brutal regime? Placing sovereignty over brutality implies that the leaders have greater value than the population

 

[Tokyo Warrior]

OK, without delving into the very obvious problems with that view of international affairs, you seem to have particular disdain for Clark for a position enshrined in international law that a great many people hold.

 

[Canonball]

I try to keep out of this thread and other similar ones - but just caught the government's announcement on latest fuel supply stocks and have to ask how did we go from have a 49 day supply to a '41.3' day stock in around a day and a half?? Are we really that fucked ??

 

[Po11um]

Sadly NZ is an American puppet under this government

Stuff: Latest breaking news | New Zealand

www.stuff.co.nz

I rather be a American puppet than a Chinese puppet

 

[defensivebomb]

OK, without delving into the very obvious problems with that view of international affairs, you seem to have particular disdain for Clark for a position enshrined in international law that a great many people hold.

Yeah I wouldn't argue with that. Often dictators hide behind international laws and get away with murder. And people, like Clark, condone it as, in their view, international laws are more valuable than the lives of the oppressed

TL/DR - I'm not a fan of Helen Clark (...anymore). She should rename her twitter account "Hot takes from Aunty Helen"

 

[Tokyo Warrior]

Yeah I wouldn't argue with that. Often dictators hide behind international laws and get away with murder. And people, like Clark, condone it as, in their view, international laws are more valuable than the lives of the oppressed

TL/DR - I'm not a fan of Helen Clark (...anymore). She should rename her twitter account "Hot takes from Aunty Helen"

Fair do's. Just as a little thought scenario, would you be happy if I suggested that Israel should be the next country to be invaded?

 

[Rick O’Shay]

What I’ve provided is my opinion on her. An opinion doesn’t require quotes and reference sources

Good summation of an open forum

 

[Rick O’Shay]

Still haven't forgiven her for trying to tell me how much water flow my shower should have.

As for International Law and the Sovereignty of Nations I think that went out the door in 1840.

 

[snake77]

I try to keep out of this thread and other similar ones - but just caught the government's announcement on latest fuel supply stocks and have to ask how did we go from have a 49 day supply to a '41.3' day stock in around a day and a half?? Are we really that fucked ??

Similar to the pandemic, when we were wanting updates on supplies or vaccines. We are beholden to politicians who often exaggerate how well things are going. Or speak without knowing all of the details.

I'm not sure whether the figure you quoted includes what is being sucked out of the pumps or not. Panic has probably helped reduce what is available.

My desk and work I look out at a petrol station. Over the day it doesn't look different to any other day. Not like the queues I've seen reported in the news. I also have a petrol station close to home. That one is new and has typically been quiet. It is also one of the cheaper ones. The last few days it has been a lot busier.


I used to joke in high school that my economics teacher would no matter what the topic. He would start by writing on the board - The 1973 oil crisis .............................

Now it looks like I could live through a repeat.

 

[miket12]

Fair do's. Just as a little thought scenario, would you be happy if I suggested that Israel should be the next country to be invaded?

Already tried it.... 1948 Arab-Israeli War, 1956 Suez Crisis / Sinai War, 1967 Six-Day War, 1973 Yom Kippur War and 1982 Lebanon War. Maybe it might work a sixth time?

 

[MaybeTop8]

I honestly don't have an opinion on the decision. Good / bad / indifferent. Like many NZers, I have pandemic fatigue, so don't tend to read much about planning for the next one

However, I do have an opinion on Helen Clarke. She was once a great leader. One that I even voted for! Now, she's a 76 year old woman living in a leafy suburb near a stadium and opposes hearing people enjoy using it. And who provides her opinions on topics from an ivory tower.

She lost a bit of credibility recently by providing an opinion on NZ's reaction to Iran being freed from a tyrannical dictator that removed women's rights (legalised spousal rape, allowed husbands to detain their wives), persecuted LGBQ and minorities, etc. She preferred to live a world where the US did not kill him like they did

So yeah, she's impotent and irrelevant nowadays

Wow. There's a lot going on here, and in following comments, so bear with me, it will take a while to catch up.

To address the decision by the NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT to ignore world health organisation advice and align with RFK jr, who is an anti vax, anti science crackpot is utterly appalling.

"I honestly don't have an opinion on the decision. Good / bad / indifferent. Like many NZers, I have pandemic fatigue, so don't tend to read much about planning for the next one" - good for you, I'm glad your conscience is clear, but the rest of us will be put in severe danger by this decision.

"However, I do have an opinion on Helen Clarke" Ah, this makes sense. Someone closely named to a former prime minister, but not the actual former prime minister.

Just kidding.

Honestly, a psychologist would have a field day on here with you right wingers.

"Now, she's a 76 year old woman living in a leafy suburb near a stadium and opposes hearing people enjoy using it. And who provides her opinions on topics from an ivory tower." The gist of this and other comments since your original one is that you basically have a hatred of Helen Clark, possibly strong women leaders, and you definitely don't like people speaking out against the wrongs in the world, so I will surmise you're suffering from tall poppy syndrome, not uncommon amongst all New Zealanders, but very common over there on the right. Maybe there's a vaccine for it.

"She lost a bit of credibility recently by providing an opinion on NZ's reaction to Iran being freed from a tyrannical dictator that removed women's rights (legalised spousal rape, allowed husbands to detain their wives), persecuted LGBQ and minorities, etc. She preferred to live a world where the US did not kill him like they did"

Helen Clark's statement on the US and Israel invading Iran:

"In the absence of an imminent threat to the security of the United States and Israel, their armed attacks on Iran are illegal under international law. They have no legitimate claim to invoking a right of self defence. It goes without saying that the Iranian regime is a vicious theocracy which has caused huge trauma to its people. But that isn’t a reason for a breach of Iran’s sovereignty."


View: https://www.instagram.com/p/DVUa8bQE18e/?img_index=1

You're basically fact free in this, just sounding bitter.

Helen Clark's current roles:

 

[MaybeTop8]

Good searching! I didnt mean to sound disengaging. I have been using AI this morning, hence the request for quotes etc I think can just be done by anyone. At the end of the day, we're all just posting opinions on here as all the facts and quotes are searchable

Clark:
“In the absence of an imminent threat to the security of the United States and Israel, their armed attacks on Iran are illegal under international law. They have no legitimate claim to invoking a right of self defence,” she wrote.
“The statement on the attacks on Iran by the New Zealand Government therefore is a disgrace. It knows full well that international law has been breached even though negotiations on Iran’s nuclear capability were underway. It knows that [the US] walked away from the last nuclear agreement with Iran. Why the servility? I guess we know.”
“The Iranian regime is a vicious theocracy which has caused huge trauma to its people. But that isn’t a reason for a breach of Iran’s sovereignty.”

My views of her are based on her living in an ivory tower, providing her 20/20 hindsight on things from a position of comfort. It's all good and well talking about a breach of international law, and castigating the US (and NZ for not describing it such). If it did not happen, then all the sorts of bad things that were previously happening under the previous regime (legalised rape, etc etc) would still be occurring.

So, what does she want? Based on her comments, she would prefer the slow and ineffective process of tut-tutting the naughty Ayotolla via twitter, maintenance of status quo, which includes oppression of the sort of people she supports. The Iranians loved that the US invaded legally/illegally. But not Helen. She wanted things done strictly by the book and will criticise anyone that doesn't follow the rules.

A similar opinion by her of the Colombian president extraction. The Colombians loved it. But Helen Clark pointed out how it was legally questionable.

Do I support the war and what happened in Colombia? Not by themselves. But I am happy for those freed from oppression, even if it means someone did something questionable to achieve it

She's out of touch with reality and the greater good. Impotent and irrelevant.

Once a good leader though!

It's like stealing a loaf of bread if you are starving. Helen Clark would say "hey, that's illegal!"

"If it did not happen, then all the sorts of bad things that were previously happening under the previous regime (legalised rape, etc etc) would still be occurring."
Question then: What is America and Israel's plans then? Because it's certainly not emancipation. There's been no public certainty due to the idiot in charge of America, but you can bet there's a whole heap of objectives on behalf of Israel and the Trump family.

And who is now in charge? Probably still the same regime. The same oppressive regime. It's a regime. Not one person. It's a theocracy.

"
She's out of touch with reality and the greater good. Impotent and irrelevant." Seriously. Stop. You're embarrassing yourself.

Do you support international law? The rights of countries to have their own sovereignty and determination? The right not to be invaded?

"A similar opinion by her of the Colombian president extraction. The Colombians loved it. But Helen Clark pointed out how it was legally questionable." Venezuela, but hey, what's a South American country amongst friends. Except that one has OIL. And that's not Colombia

And who's still in charge there? The same party, with American oil companies now in line to extract the resources.

It's stunning and weirdly touching that you think this is about freeing the people

 

[defensivebomb]

Fair do's. Just as a little thought scenario, would you be happy if I suggested that Israel should be the next country to be invaded?

Not at all. I personally think Donald and Israel have opened up a Pandora’s box they have no hope in closing. That’s on them. It’s a complete cluster

 

[MaybeTop8]

Good summation of an open forum

Except if I'm doing the talking right Rick?

Jaysis this place is a comedy sometimes.

 

[MaybeTop8]

Yeah I wouldn't argue with that. Often dictators hide behind international laws and get away with murder. And people, like Clark, condone it as, in their view, international laws are more valuable than the lives of the oppressed

TL/DR - I'm not a fan of Helen Clark (...anymore). She should rename her twitter account "Hot takes from Aunty Helen"

Cut the bullshit Wiz. Nowhere has Helen Clark condoned anything.

 

[MaybeTop8]

I try to keep out of this thread and other similar ones - but just caught the government's announcement on latest fuel supply stocks and have to ask how did we go from have a 49 day supply to a '41.3' day stock in around a day and a half?? Are we really that fucked ??

AND WHY AREN'T THEY DOING ANYTHING????

What a shit government.

 

[defensivebomb]

that one has OIL. And that's not Colombia

And who's still in charge there? The same party, with American oil companies now in line to extract the resources.

It's stunning and weirdly touching that you think this is about freeing the people

I do not profess to know the reasons for the US military actions, nor will I hypothesise. You might have a direct line to Trump and co, and good for you if you do

I can, however, see through my own eyes and hear with my own ears that the dictatorial regimes were oppressing large populations, and those populations are happy with the change

My view is that those people would not agree with Helen Clark spilling the tea over what rules the US breaks. So I therefore don’t place any weight on her hot takes from her mt Albert tower. She has a bit of a hard on for the US

 

[MaybeTop8]

I do not profess to know the reasons for the US military actions, nor will I hypothesise. You might have a direct line to Trump and co, and good for you if you do

I can, however, see through my own eyes and hear with my own ears that the dictatorial regimes were oppressing large populations, and those populations are happy with the change

My view is that those people would not agree with Helen Clark spilling the tea over what rules the US breaks. So I therefore don’t place any weight on her hot takes from her mt Albert tower. She has a bit of a hard on for the US

A lot less of a hard on than you have for her. Between you and Wiz stalking Ardern there's a rather disturbing pattern.

 

[MaybeTop8]

No shit. Do something.

Fuel situation could get worse before better, says Christopher Luxon

Prime Minister warns that "things could get worse before they actually get better".

www.rnz.co.nz