Lit­tle else to be said about this com­pletely inap­pro­pri­ate boy-racer stunt. Looks Crusher has found her first vic­tims. Posted on Youtube by @joegreenz

Looks like they were try­ing to find the school and got lost.

UPDATE: Omg! It is worse than I thought, read the com­men­tary in the side­bar at Youtube.

I shot these clips with my cell phone while at a school fair on Auckland’s North Shore. Two police patrol cars careened around a play­ing field for a con­sid­er­able period of time. They were dri­ven by uni­formed offi­cers, pre­sum­ably on duty. On board the vehi­cles were mem­bers of the pub­lic, mostly chil­dren – I did not see any adult pas­sen­gers. A fee was charged for the joy-ride (given to the school as part of their fundraising).

There were no safety pre­cau­tions taken. Had the even been a sanc­tioned motor­sport event or dis­play then safety bar­ri­ers would have been used between the pub­lic and the vehi­cles, hay bales, tyres or armco rails. Mar­shals would also have been present to inform the pub­lic about safety and to pre­vent inci­dent or accident.

The video clearly shows the close prox­im­ity of the vehi­cles to enter­tain­ments at the fair. Both cars pass extremely close to the inflat­able ‘bouncey cas­tle’ – chil­dren are play­ing on the cas­tle while the event took place. Nearby is also an ice-cream vend­ing vehi­cle. Lines of chil­dren and their par­ents can be seen wait­ing for ser­vice while the police vehi­cles sweep past at speed.

The con­di­tions were dry, dust can be seen being thrown up by the vehi­cles. Trac­tion on the grassy sur­face was appar­ently neg­li­gi­ble as the cars drift eas­ily on the surface.

Aside from the pro­pri­ety of police cars being used for this kind of pur­pose, seri­ous ques­tions should be asked about the judg­ment of the offi­cers involved, their com­man­ders who (pre­sum­ably) autho­rised the event and the organ­is­ers of the school fair.

In New Zealand mil­lions of dol­lars are spent on road safety mes­sages. This kind of activ­ity sends a mixed sig­nal to chil­dren and the pub­lic. Min­is­ter Judith Collins would demand that these vehi­cles be con­fis­cated and crushed if they were dri­ven by pri­vate cit­i­zens, amongst other seri­ous penalties.

Pop­u­lar­ity: 13% [?]

Related Posts:

• Give the Clown A Raspberry
• The two stu­pid­est bur­glars in the World
• D’oh! Sun­day Star-Times has HoS moment
• I guess that was Game Over?
• Pre­ma­ture Speculation

MP of the Month

Well it is, if you will excuse the pun, that time of the month. We have run through Jan­u­ary with lit­tle news save some guy going on about name sup­pres­sion. I have gone back through my posts and checked out the nom­i­na­tions for MP of the Month.

The nom­i­nees are:

• “Pub­lic” Eric Roy for his call to review sup­pres­sion laws.
• Clare “Slayer” Cur­ran for her slap down of “Tiger” Mallard
• Simon “Just-in” Bridges for being the only Gov­ern­ment MP to raise his head dur­ing the sum­mer slum­ber break to pro­pose a law, and then get it adopted by the Prime Min­is­ter.
• Shane “Five Chins” Jones for stand­ing up for pri­vate prop­erty rights in the far north
• Kelvin “Lit­tle School” Davis for going against the Labour party offi­cial line on the fore­shore and seabed dis­as­ter.

[drumroll]….Sorry we have to go to an ad break, we will be right back soon.

[drumroll]…And the win­ner is Simon Bridges. Not only was he the only Gov­ern­ment MP who got a front­page in between all my ones, but he has man­aged to get John Key to pick up his pri­vate mem­bers bill before the bill even gets to the ballot.

There was one hon­ourable men­tion: Jeanette “Compo” Fitzsi­mons for finally drag­ging her use­less sorry ass out of th house and skulk­ing off to retirement.

Simon, please let me know your shirt size so a WOBH Polo Shirt can be sent to you.

Because this is right wing blog it is only fit­ting if we have Win­ners that there also are Losers.

MP Loser of the Month: Plenty to choose from here, it was like they were all com­pet­ing for this award but there can only be one and so the MP loser of the Month Award goes to Trevor “Tiger” Mal­lard for con­duct unbe­com­ing an MP. He get’s the award for con­stantly abus­ing any­one who moves in front of his nose. He did a post on me call­ing me an idiot and then promptly got smacked by Clare Cur­ran and he also gave Metiria Turei a serve, which she responded to and then when he lost the bat­tle he de-friended her on Face­book and then petu­lantly wrote a pathetic excuse mak­ing him­self look mis­er­able and a onanist. I get the feel­ing that “Tiger” is try­ing for a clean sweep of this award. “Tiger, let me know your shirt size so you can receive a Polo Shirt too, and no, Puffed up isn’t a valid size.

Min­is­ter of the Month: -  for the Minister/Opposition Front­bencher that has per­formed the best/achieved the most in the month. Again there can only be one and the only Min­is­ter or Oppo­si­tion Front­bencher who per­formed well this month was none other than Judith “Crusher” Collins by get­ting the Three Strike Law under­way, over the top of squeals of indig­na­tion by Simon “FIGJAM” Power. Hon­ourable men­tion to Rod­ney “Tango” Hide too for putting this together with Crusher.

Min­is­te­r­ial Loser of the Month – for the Minister/Opposition Front­bencher that has made the biggest cock-up in the month. So many choices…who to pick? who to pick? It has to be Phil “Seat Warmer” Goff. He has been in the job for over a year and watched his party slide ever back­wards. He goes on a motor­cy­cle tour around East Cape and no-one noticed and then he makes his key-note speech and announces that his big plan to to attack rich pricks and peo­ple who legally struc­ture their affairs to mim­imise the theft by the state tax that they pay, but in par­tic­u­lar Senior Civil Ser­vants and one third of his cau­cus. On top of that he either can’t or won’t reign in “Tiger” Mal­lard lead­ing to con­stant spec­u­la­tion that he isn’t in con­trol of any­thing except his bow­els. Phil, again, let me know your shirt size so I can send you a WOBH Polo shirt.

Pop­u­lar­ity: 13% [?]

Related Posts:

• No Related Posts

The School at the cen­tre of the storm around all male teach­ers on the North Shore being branded vic­ar­i­ously through the action of a judge grant­ing name sup­pres­sion for a kiddy-fiddling teacher want the man named so that they can inform parents.

There is sig­nif­i­cant New Zealand and over­seas research that says that by nam­ing the offender it is likely to bring more vic­tims for­ward enabling a slam dunk pros­e­cu­tion. For some­one to reach the age this offender is he will have form at pre­vi­ous schools. Unfor­tu­nately the way the Teach­ing fra­ter­nity oper­ates is that any­time some unsavoury details emerge they qui­etly resign and move with a glow­ing ref­er­ence tucked in the pocket from a relieved prin­ci­pal who doesn’t have to deal with it.

Luck­ily the Prin­ci­pal of the school in this case is not pre­pared to stay quiet and nei­ther is the BOT. Good on them. They should name him, they should post a let­ter to all stu­dent, not just for their peace of mind but for the 100’s of other par­ents who right now are con­tem­plat­ing whether to send their kids to school.

I have already fielded dozens of calls from wor­ried par­ents. Name this man, he will have com­mit­ted other offences, other vic­tims may come for­ward. Give the par­ents of the North Shore peace of mind.

The Gov­ern­ment must act. If they can change under urgency the defence of provo­ca­tion because of one case and adopt a pri­vate mem­bers bill about ani­mals (Well done Simon) then they sure as hell can move on this. The Pub­lic aren’t going to tol­er­ate much more of this and I would bet I can find a suit­able story every week from now till the elec­tion about inap­pro­pri­ate name suppression.

My sug­ges­tion to North Shore res­i­dents con­cerned about the safety of their child at school on Tues­day is call their local MP and lobby them to change the law so more vic­tims aren’t cre­ated. If Simon “Just-in” Bridges, a newby back­bencher, can get the ear of the PM about hor­ri­ble treat­ment of ani­mals to get an urgent law change then why can’t Simon “FIGJAM” Power do the same.

Right now it appears that the gov­ern­ment cares more about ani­mals and the rights of pae­dos than they do about poten­tial vic­tims of kiddy-fiddling teacher sickos.

Pop­u­lar­ity: 18% [?]

Related Posts:

• Another Busy week for Judges hid­ing identities
• I have a new Defense
• Kick­boxer named, Why not the Olympian?
• Name Sup­pres­sion silli­ness just keeps on Coming
• Here’s how you report cases with­out name suppression

The Cli­mate­gate deba­cle and Glac­i­er­gate fol­lowup look set to destroy the IPCC and the Chair­man Dr. Pachauri who has just been proven a liar.

The chair­man of the lead­ing cli­mate change watch­dog was informed that claims about melt­ing Himalayan glac­i­ers were false before the Copen­hagen sum­mit, The Times has learnt.

Rajen­dra Pachauri was told that the Inter­gov­ern­men­tal Panel on Cli­mate Change assess­ment that the glac­i­ers would dis­ap­pear by 2035 was wrong, but he waited two months to cor­rect it. He failed to act despite learn­ing that the claim had been refuted by sev­eral lead­ing glaciologists.

The IPCC’s report under­pinned the pro­pos­als at Copen­hagen for dras­tic cuts in global emissions.

Dr Pachauri, who played a lead­ing role at the sum­mit, cor­rected the error last week after com­ing under media pres­sure. He told The Times on Jan­u­ary 22 that he had only known about the error for a few days. He said: “I became aware of this when it was reported in the media about ten days ago. Before that, it was really not made known. Nobody brought it to my atten­tion. There were state­ments, but we never looked at this 2035 number.”

Asked whether he had delib­er­ately kept silent about the error to avoid embar­rass­ment at Copen­hagen, he said: “That’s ridicu­lous. It never came to my atten­tion before the Copen­hagen sum­mit. It wasn’t in the pub­lic sphere.”

How­ever, a promi­nent sci­ence jour­nal­ist said that he had asked Dr Pachauri about the 2035 error last Novem­ber. Pallava Bagla, who writes for Sci­ence jour­nal, said he had asked Dr Pachauri about the error. He said that Dr Pachauri had replied: “I don’t have any­thing to add on glaciers.”

I won­der when the Nobel Insti­tute are going to pull the Peace Prize awarded because of the glac­ier work? He directly lied, just like when he called the Indian Government’s researcher a prac­ti­tioner of voodoo sci­ence despite the researcher being 100% right. Time for the whole shoot­ing match to be wrapped up in fraud charges.

Pop­u­lar­ity: 13% [?]

Related Posts:

• Oh F**k!
• Rain in Spain Falls mainly on the Plain…
• Scep­tics vs. Non-Sceptics
• Cli­mate Change Roundup
• Ques­tions that need answers

Michael Dob­byn

Pop­u­lar­ity: 18% [?]

Related Posts:

• Not just the party is down the bog
• Inter­est­ing Names
• Inter­est­ing Names
• Inter­est­ing Names

In a case more like the TV show Footballer’s Wives:

Eng­land cap­tain John Terry was pub­licly dis­graced last night for cheat­ing on his wife with a team-mate’s girl­friend after los­ing a court bat­tle to keep it secret.

The £170,000-a-week foot­baller had an affair with French under­wear model Vanessa Per­ron­cel – his wife’s best friend and the part­ner of fel­low Eng­land defender Wayne Bridge.

He tried to keep every­thing on the down-low and tried to use a judge to do it under the law.

Within min­utes of the story break­ing, the inter­net was awash with angry calls for Terry to be stripped of the captaincy.

The Chelsea star had ini­tially used human rights laws to obtain a gag­ging order against the press, claim­ing his right to a ‘pri­vate and fam­ily life’.

But the judge who threw out the order said he thought Terry was more con­cerned about the threat to his lucra­tive spon­sor­ship deals. Even the exis­tence of the so-called ’super-injunction’ was sup­posed to be a secret. But in a land­mark rul­ing for press free­dom, Mr Jus­tice Tugend­hat ruled that the pub­lic had a right to know.

He told the High Court that peo­ple should have the right to crit­i­cise ’socially harm­ful’ behav­iour because free­dom of speech is as impor­tant as the right to privacy.

Oh that our Judges and MPs believed in free­dom of speech like Jus­tice Tugend­hat. We have a duty as cit­i­zens to crit­i­cise, just as the Jus­tice says, socially harm­ful behaviour.

Pop­u­lar­ity: 13% [?]

Related Posts:

• Another Busy week for Judges hid­ing identities
• I have a new Defense
• Kick­boxer named, Why not the Olympian?
• Name Sup­pres­sion silli­ness just keeps on Coming
• Here’s how you report cases with­out name suppression

Her­man Rock­e­feller is dead.

The Police found the charred of remain of what they believe to be a body.

Hmmm…Melbourne, two arrested, one called Mario, and burned body….efinately a drug related murder.

The neigh­bours thought they smelled a BBQ. I call bull­shit on that, the smell of burn­ing flesh could not ever be described as the smell of a BBQ.

Pop­u­lar­ity: 13% [?]

Related Posts:

• No Related Posts

Tiger Mal­lard is upset about there being no pies in Taranaki.

Well per­haps he should have got there before Parekura “Big Ben” Horomia.

Parekura at all the pies

Pop­u­lar­ity: 12% [?]

Related Posts:

• Tiger­pig Lit­er­acy Fail
• Tiger­pig, Tiger­pig, does what­ever a Tiger­pig does….
• Is Steven Joyce going to be a spine­less jellyfish?
• Oh how funny
• Tiger can’t spell and now he can’t add

Pop­u­lar­ity: 12% [?]

Related Posts:

• Oh F**k!
• Rain in Spain Falls mainly on the Plain…
• Scep­tics vs. Non-Sceptics
• Cli­mate Change Roundup
• Ques­tions that need answers

The utter hypocrisy of the Labour party and Phil Goff has been laid bare, not by a repeater, but by a blog­ger. While Pinko Far­rar, Mr Taupe, did a once over lightly includ­ing the oblig­a­tory cut and paste of Phil Goff’s brain fart it is Cac­tus Kate that tears apart the cen­tral tenet of the brain fart.

Seat Warmer has defined in this speech all trusts and com­pany struc­tures from an indi­vid­ual as avoid­ance. Yet Par­lia­ment intended for com­pa­nies, trusts and indi­vid­u­als to be taxed at dif­fer­ent rates. So how can any action to set up a com­pany or trust even if for tax rea­sons be one of tax avoidance?

Which is a silly premise to base you speech upon espe­cially when the details of every MPs pecu­niary inter­ests are pub­licly available.

Why a repeater could have done what Cac­tus has done is beyond me as she tells me that she wrote her post while excep­tion­ally drunk stone cold sober [Good God, she is going to gut me like a trout, per­son­ally I blame the drugs]

And let’s look at all the priv­i­leged few of the Labour party as Phil Goff describes any­one who use “Loop­holes that allow high income earn­ers to avoid tax have to be closed. Too many peo­ple on good incomes avoid and evade pay­ing taxes. It’s not right that some top earn­ers pay a lower per­cent­age of their income in tax than those on the aver­age wage”.

Rick Barker
Barker Fam­ily Trust
Upton Fam­ily Trust

Bren­don Burns
BP and PL Burns Fam­ily Trust
PL and BP Burns Fam­ily Trust

Steve Chad­wick
Gonzo Fam­ily Trust

Charles Chau­vel
Kit­tery Trust
Pep­per­rell Trust
Vic­tory Trust

Helen Clark
Burke Trust
FG Clark Fam­ily Trust

Clay­ton Cos­grove
Eagle Bay Fam­ily Trust
Sep­tem­ber Trust (blind trust)

David Cun­liffe
Bozzie Fam­ily Trust

Kelvin Davis
Davis Fam­ily Trust

Parekura Horo­mia
Panikau A2
Man­gatuna 3, 4, 5, 7 and 8
Man­ga­heia 1B3Y and 2G1
Toko­maru K4A and K4B1 – trustee
Tua­tini Maori Town­ship sec­tion 1 block vi lot 2
Ros­aleen Aorangi Smith Whanau Trust

Ray­mond Huo
Chester­fields Trust (fam­ily trust)

Shane Jones
Vic­to­ria & Bene­cia Lim­ited – prop­erty own­er­ship
Ngaku­raiti Enter­prises Lim­ited – pro­fes­sional ser­vices
Cast­lerigg Lim­ited – prop­erty devel­op­ment
Jon­dal Prop­er­ties – prop­erty invest­ment
Te Puna o Te Anaru Trust
Cast­lerigg Trust

Annette King
King-Lind Fam­ily Trust

Nanaia Mahuta
Mahuta Whā­nau Trust

Trevor Mal­lard
Tomorrow’s Trees Lim­ited – forestry, com­mu­nity company

Sue Moroney
SR Vugler and SM Moroney Farm Partnership

Stu­art Nash
Agin­court Invest­ments Lim­ited – invest­ment, con­sul­tancy
Nash Fam­ily Trust

David Parker
Kar­i­tane Trust
Sue Woot­ton Fam­ily Trust
FD Parker Children’s Trust
Tar­ras Trust

Lynne Pil­lay
The Pil­lay Trust

Mita Rir­inui
Ririnui-Calhoun Fam­ily Trust
Te Aomihi Anne Ririnui-Horne Fam­ily Trust
Ririp­iti Timi Waati Lands Trust
Te Arawa Lakes Trust
Ngati Awa Māori Trust Board
Pukeroa Oru­awhata Lands Trust

Ross Robert­son
The Robert­son Fam­ily Trust

Su’a William Sio
Win-Win Invest­ments Lim­ited – property

Whoopsy, own goal. Is Phil Goff seri­ously going to ask his own MPs to refrain from legit­i­mately struc­tur­ing their affairs to mit­i­gate uncon­scionable rates of tax­a­tion? Well is he? Every half decent repeater should be ask­ing that question.

Cac­tus has lit­er­ally torn apart all of Goff’s “soak the rich” rhetoric and jammed back into his throat via his arsehole.

I’ll leave the last words to Cac­tus Kate.

These Labour MP’s are all taxed on their MP salaries at the top tax rate of 38 cents in the dol­lar, they are how­ever accord­ing to Seat Warmer, using loop­holes (legit­i­mate tax struc­tur­ing) just like the top 100 “rich pricks” in New Zealand to avoid pay­ing 38 cents in the dol­lar on other income.

Seat Warmer has defined in this speech all trusts and com­pany struc­tures from an indi­vid­ual as avoid­ance. Yet Par­lia­ment intended for com­pa­nies, trusts and indi­vid­u­als to be taxed at dif­fer­ent rates. So how can any action to set up a com­pany or trust even if for tax rea­sons be one of tax avoidance?

Seat Warmer will have to either equalise the rates, or the IRD will be a hell of a lot busier under his regime. He has mis-used the word “avoid” in this speech relat­ing to tax. Avoid­ance is defined in NZ law and not legit­i­mate behaviour.

When you realise how­ever that only 10% of tax­pay­ers are pay­ing 76% of the tax, and your Party is on the centre-left, I guess it was a good speech appeal­ing to your bludg­ing sup­port­ers and their envy of your “rich prick” opponent.

Pop­u­lar­ity: 12% [?]

Related Posts:

• Dear Leader in Beijing
• The trough­ing of Labour
• Wednes­day Weird­ness – Noth­ing I say will make this any better
• Goff’s Law
• Where is Tiger stay­ing tonight?

Lisa Lewis is going to stand for Hamil­ton City Mayor. I sup­port her attempt. Good on her.

She wants Hamil­ton to be a des­ti­na­tion, some­where memorable.Previously Hamil­ton has had the dubi­ous recog­ni­tion of being the Chlamy­dia Cap­i­tal of New Zealand.

Per­haps one of her slo­gans should be “Make Hamil­ton more mem­o­rable than Chlamydia”.

The money line in the whole arti­cle though is the last and a com­ment we should expect from a Veuve Clic­quot Busineswoman of the Year nominee.

She said Hamil­ton needed to become a hol­i­day des­ti­na­tion. Her bid was not a pub­lic­ity stunt, and she was not in it for the money. “Cur­rently with my pro­fes­sion I am on more than what a Hamil­ton city coun­cil­lor is on.”

Yeah. Spot on Lisa. Hook­ers get paid more than city coun­cil­lors because they work harder and keep their cus­tomers sat­is­fied. If Lisa brings that cus­tomer ser­vice ethic to the May­oralty then it can only be good for the Tron.

Pop­u­lar­ity: 11% [?]

Related Posts:

• No Related Posts

A North-Shore pri­mary school teacher appeared in court yes­ter­day accused of the sex­ual groom­ing of two young boys.

He has been given name suppression.

So now all North Shore mid­dle aged male pri­mary school teach­ers are smeared with these heinous accu­sa­tions. If you think that isn’t bad then just con­sider how few male teach­ers there are on the North Shore, then con­sider how many are mid­dle aged.

If I was an inno­cent middle-aged Pri­mary School teacher on the North-Shore I would be rope-able. Not only that, given the nature of the offend­ing I would almost guar­an­tee that this teacher has been told to stay away from chil­dren. Though with his name sup­pres­sion no-one can pos­si­bly know who he is in order to report him if he is seen hang­ing around play­grounds or schools.

Worse still the Teach­ers Coun­cil said nei­ther the man nor his school had informed it of the charges, and only became aware of the charges after they were con­tacted by repeaters from The Herald.

Chil­dren are at risk here from a sex­ual preda­tor and the Judge thinks his name should be suppressed.

THE PROSECUTION ALLEGES …
(involv­ing two male victims)

* Two charges of inde­cent assault on a boy aged under 16.
* Two charges of enter­ing a mon­e­tary arrange­ment with a boy aged 16 to allow the teacher to per­form sex­ual acts on him.
* Two charges that he arranged for a boy under 16 to travel with him with the inten­tion of com­mit­ting an inde­cent act on the boy.

So not only was he molest­ing them him­self, he was also pimp­ing them out to other sickos. It dis­gusts me that the judi­ciary is pro­tect­ing the name of this man and at the same time mak­ing every other male teacher on the North Shore sus­pect as well.

Pop­u­lar­ity: 13% [?]

Related Posts:

• Another Busy week for Judges hid­ing identities
• I have a new Defense
• Kick­boxer named, Why not the Olympian?
• Name Sup­pres­sion silli­ness just keeps on Coming
• Here’s how you report cases with­out name suppression

Some­one sug­gested via email an Offi­cial Wha­le­oil Army Shirt, well here it is.

Offi­cial Wha­le­oil Army Shirt

Pop­u­lar­ity: 11% [?]

Related Posts:

• New Blog Policy
• Could the Her­ald please watch what they are doing?
• In court again tomorrow
• Weird searches
• A ques­tion

Ryan Yates

Pop­u­lar­ity: 14% [?]

Related Posts:

• Not just the party is down the bog
• Inter­est­ing Names
• Inter­est­ing Names
• Inter­est­ing Names

The Aus­tralian Cen­sor has banned:

small breasted women in adult pub­li­ca­tions has been made by the Aus­tralian Clas­si­fi­ca­tion Board allegedly on the grounds that such images could be con­strued as child pornog­ra­phy, even where those pub­li­ca­tions com­ply with Amer­i­can law and keep cer­ti­fi­ca­tion that per­form­ers are over 18.

Female ejac­u­la­tion has been banned on the incred­i­ble grounds that “the depic­tions are a form of uri­na­tion which is banned under the label of ‘golden show­ers’ in the Clas­si­fi­ca­tion Guide­lines” and/or “Female ejac­u­la­tion is an ‘abhor­rent’ depic­tion.” Notably here male ejac­u­la­tion is com­pletely legal under the same guide­lines, attract­ing an X rat­ing in Australia.

It’s an out­rage, what the hell am I sup­posed to jerk off to now?

Clearly any pre­tense from the Aus­tralian Gov­ern­ment that its pro­posed inter­net fil­ter will not extend to mil­lions of sites has died with news that the Gov­ern­ment has banned small breasts and female ejac­u­la­tion in adult material.

It is dra­con­ian and ill-informed censorship.

Pop­u­lar­ity: 10% [?]

Related Posts:

• Has Rudd’s flower wilted?
• Cool nick­name
• Dear Nathan Guy
• Want to be in par­lia­ment? Porn Star? No problem
• Name Sup­pres­sion silli­ness just keeps on Coming