A post at The Standard that’s bizarre even by their standards appeared yesterday – Late night Twitter. It may have been more of a late night post – except it wasn’t very late anyway, the original post was at 7.20 pm and the responses and reply were just before and after 9 pm.
It appears to be an attempt to diss Peter Dunne but it’s more of an own goal by what appears to be a pothead attacking alcohol, even though the reference to ‘end of year drinks’ would be normally be expected to include non-alcoholic options plus food.
One comment, by ‘higherstandard’:
Indeed the phrase ‘sanctimonious cock’ comes to mind….. and surprisingly not in relation to Peter Dunne
It hasn’t been attributed to an author so must have been contributed, but a site author or administrator must have accepted and posted it. One author, ‘karol’, commented on it soon after it was posted which may suggest a connection.
The screen shot was taken immediately after the last tweet (2 minutes after) which suggests the post was initiated by the person tweeting Dunne. The whole thing may have been a setup.
There’s some other odd and interesting things about this post. The screen shot image of the Twitter exchange has been altered to deliberately remove the name and Twitter ID of the person attacking Dunne. But the ID has been left in Dunne’s reply – @KappaMuTheta.
That would have been easily found by searching anyway.@KappaMuTheta – calling themselves Mu – follows one and has five followers. They have only tweeted twice before, both in May this year, and with one follow up tweet has a total of five. So it’s a virtually inactive account. To have seen Dunne’s tweet they must have been following him using another Twitter account.
This is a very odd and weak attempt at an attack by The Standard.
Alcohol is involved in many problems but it is most often harmless – and end of year drinks for a few ministry officials is hardly the biggest story of the year.
UPDATE: there were two virtually unused Twitter accounts attacking Dunne – one of these accounts had a link to a site promoting the use of drugs – legal highs and party pills. So the motives are obvious.
Another person joined in the Twitter attack:
@PeterDunneMP You as a Health Minister happily parade “end of year drinks”. Mr Dunne, how can you expect to be taken seriously?
It’s easy to not take this one seriously too. @TripMe more than hints at the motives, this Twitter account has only one other tweet, also yesterday, which links to a party pill and legal high site Trip Me. Included on this site are ‘reviews’ of party pills that link to sales.
Party Pill Review: Hypnotic
Written by Drael
Okay, this is my first time on a pill with Glaucine. Glaucine is a yellow horned poppy extract said to be very mildly psychedelic and quite sedative. I dropped two of these hypnotics (which is the recommended dose for a bigger person).
Starts off more relaxed, with some stimulation. Little urge to do anything. As it first starts, I’m thinking, this is nice, smooth relaxed, and have high hopes this is smoother feeling.
As it kicks in more fully, I feel kinda spacey, waves of relaxation and stimulation, quite strong and light headed….Kinda giddy relaxed feeling hit me like a wall, couldn’t keep writing the reveiw for a bit, mangled, spacey, sedated & had to just sit! So the come up is very quick…
Click Here to Buy Online or …
Almost cant be bothered with doing things, even with the stimulated feeling, although some energy picks up later in the peice, its still very lethargic in waves. Seems to tail off even slower than some other pills. Did perhaps notice slight colour or perceptual differences, but nothing concrete.
Definately different, far more sedative, which makes some parts of the relaxed stimulation of dmaa feel quite nice, though not really more euphoric, just more at ease. But also made me yawn a lot, and I didn’t really know where to put myself, relaxing or moving or what?
Would be useless for a rave, not enough energy for dancing, not really ideal at home either, I think. Maybe a concert or similar? Party? Interesting pill, but I’m not sure if id have much use for it. Perhaps with a little less glaucine, and more stimulants it would be better. Before the relaxation became super strong, it did feel smoother.
You can Buy Hypnotic Party Pill Online from our Sponsor
Reviews that have multiple links to sponsors selling the products are not impartial reviews.
Darryl
/ December 15, 2012Lets face it Pete George, idiots like this attacking Peter Dunne and hiding there identity are not worth even commenting on.
Jack
/ December 15, 2012I dont believe that hiding there identity was the aim of the game since these people are smart enough to know how to do that successfully. The problem here is that people are brushing this kind of thing off as a joke, alcohol is no joke and never has been one, yet our health minister proudly promotes it, no doubt somewhere along the line big Alcohol has ‘gifted’ dunne some money somewhere.
Pete George
/ December 15, 2012Why would anyone have bothered to erase the names? That was very strange.
Dunne isn’t health minister, he’s a deputy minister. And he didn’t promote alcohol, he didn’t mention alcohol and he didn’t promote anything. He announced an event, that’s all.
No doubt somewhere along the line you are making up accusations with absolutely no evidence.
Do you make money out of legal highs/party pills?
Jack
/ December 15, 2012I don’t remember seeing any where any kind of positive advertisement for legal highs/party pills in any replies. In fact all i have seen is concern been shown over a statement made by a politician about the use of alcohol over a very popular and widely used social network in our country.
Pete George
/ December 15, 2012You didn’t answer “Do you make money out of legal highs/party pills?”
No statement was made about the use of alcohol, you’re making making a mountain claim out of a molehill term.
One of the repliers had @TripMe in their name and their profile had a link to the TripMe website that promotes legal highs/party pills, is sponsored by sellers of legal highs/party pills and has reviews that include sales links for legal highs/party pills.
John Key
/ December 15, 2012I dont make money off legal highs/party pills and i believe dunne is a moron, how can he continue to ignore scientific proof that was given to him in posts further down that you have failed to report on. well done on your propaganda
Pete George
/ December 15, 2012What’s your point?
Everyone knows that too much alcohol is bad for you. And to much coke, and too many hamburgers. And too much water.
This was all prompted by a mention of ‘end of year drinks’ that involves much more than just alcohol, and where in the vast majority of cases alcohol causes no problems.
I presume you favour alternative drugs, but dissing established social drugs is an odd way to promote your own preferences.
John Key
/ December 15, 2012My point is NZ has a massive binge drinking problem so we don’t need a member of parliament promoting “drinks” which most people would take as alcohol consumption. You can’t say any different or you have massive blinkers on.
And why does it matter if these people’s twitter accounts havn’t been that active, not everyone uses twitter to tell the world their thoughts
Where is your proof that alcohol is “most often harmless” ?
Pete George
/ December 15, 2012A member of parliament was not promoting alocohol consumption. ‘Drinks’ usually includes non-alcoholic drinks and food and social events. Yes, it would also include alcohol but there was no implicxation that it would be irresponsible use of alcohol. You’ve picked a very weak example to try and attack Dunne.
There is substantial and widespread proof that not only is the majority of people using alcohol the majority of the time harmless, there can also be siginificant benefits from regular consumption of modest amounts of alcohol. If you are not aware of any of this then perhaps you’re the one with blinkers.
There are major problems caused by binge drinking and excess use of alcohol, but that doesn’t mean all alcohol is bad. There are major problems caused by poor driving and all driving is potentially harmful, but that isn’t a reason to ban all driving. There are major problems caused by excessive eating, but as even you may be able to figure out, eating is still ok.
Pete George
/ December 15, 2012In case you don’t know how to use Google:
More Evidence of Cardiovascular Benefit of Alcohol
http://www.medpagetoday.com/Cardiology/CHF/25034
Long-term effects of alcohol
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-term_effects_of_alcohol
An update of evidence of the specific benefits of alcohol
http://www.aim-digest.com/gateway/pages/moderate/articles/evidence.htm
Alcohol consumption: the benefit is in the dose — Evidence Based Living
http://evidencebasedliving.human.cornell.edu/2012/06/alcohol-consumption-the-benefit-is-in-the-dose/
Hone Harawera
/ December 15, 2012Peter Dunne is a massive twat, a hypocritical twat at that.
You call these people attackers? How are they attackers when they are expressing there right to freedom of speech? Scientific proof was provided by the first “attacker” clarifying that alcohol IS more dangerous than most of the legal highs dunne has banned. In fact more dangerous than most of the “alternative substances” already banned.
Tell me again how these people are attackers? No one defamed him, no one said anything ill about him, they just disagreed with his choice of words over a public social network.
You pete george are more of an attacker in the way you worded this who article.
Pete George
/ December 15, 2012There is no way of knowing if alcohol is more dangerous than banned legals highs and “alternative substances”.
Alcohol has been used extensively by humans for thousands of years, and there has been a huge amount of research over a long time. The risks and benefits are very well known.
Designer drugs that have been used for a year or two and have been barely or never tested or researched are an unknown.
If Kronic or Hypnotic were used as extensively and for as long as alcohol its highly likely there will be a number of adverse effects, some probably considerable.
You’re deluded if you think new untested shit will be better for you than alcohol. You’re playing synthetic roulette.
Jack
/ December 15, 2012If the risks are well known why are there still study’s coming out covering the dangerous of drinking? Why is it still a big national problem? And if that is the case what about the decriminalization and legalization of marijuana? That has been used for just as long as alcohol and shows less risk yet this is not allowed?
Pete George
/ December 15, 2012“Why is it still a big national problem? “?
Because there is extensive misuse of it. Society as a whole, and especially communities and families, have to take responsibility, radically change many attitudes and confront the problems.
There are also risks with marijuana but I think the decriminalization and legalization are valid issues that should be given more consideration. No legal and social situation with the extensive use of any drugs will be perfect but I think the current cannabis situation is less than ideal.
Attacking the misuse and dangers of alcohol seems an odd way of trying to promoting alternative drugs. They are all drugs.
Hone Harawira
/ December 15, 2012[deleted duplicate]
Jack
/ December 15, 2012I am not attempting to promote any type of drug. I do understand that as a whole drugs will not disappear from our or anyone’s society as they are actively viewed by a majority of the population as necessary ‘crutches’. I personally think however it is how drugs are viewed by the public is the most important thing, which is why i believe promoting such a thing over such a widely viewed and followed twitter account of a respected [by some] minister was not such a good idea.
Pete George
/ December 15, 2012I repeat, I think you are grossly overexaggerating the “promotion” aspect of this, he was simply mentioning having a few drinks. You weren’t invited. Neither was I.
It sounded very mundane, it certainly didn’t sound anything like the ‘senior IRD, Health and Conservation officials’ were indulging in drunken orgies or anything.
It would be sad if society gets to the stage of hounding people for saying things like ‘a few drinks’.
Would you have been happy if Dunne had stated explicitly that all those attending drank responsibly and no one exceeded x number of standard drinks? Or should politicians avoid all contact with the public in case someone might pick up on some benign phrase and try and make an issue about it?
Jack
/ December 15, 2012I don’t see what invitations have anything to do with this, neither drunken orgies. A politician avoiding the public doesn’t do much good does it? In fact it seems like a stupid thing to say in the first place.
Hounding was never taking place, in fact most replies were to replies made by Mr Dunne. Expecting to call people who are simply talking about the dangers of a drug that can be dangerous pathetic and silly and not expecting any kind of rebuttal is wrong
Mu
/ December 15, 2012@Peter George
I am KappaMuTheta and if you were paying more attention, you would have noticed that I backed ALL my claims with scientific data in this pastebin
pastebin.com/3f0G7kGB
Peter Dunne is responding to my claims which I backed with evidence from credible sources like the IARC and WHO with simply an ad hominem fallacy of “party pills and I suspect cannabis users”. The evidence for my claims comes from peer reviewed science, and whether or not I take substances does not change the science that was known since before I was born.
I have no agenda to party pills, I am simply a concerned citizen exercising my freedom of speech to point out the utter hypocrisy that a minister who wants to pass a law giving a carte blanche on government regulation of legal highs assuming them to be dangerous prima facie, himself uses a dangerous legal high (alcohol)
Tripme.co.nz is not a forum set out to encourage drug use of any kind, it is simply a forum in which people can discuss substances in order to be educated on how to use them safely.
I am choosing to be anonymous because the merit of an argument is from the argument itself, not the person promoting it, and also, it is my freedom to do so. I am not defaming or attacking anyone, I am simply voicing my opinion.
Pete George
/ December 15, 2012I have noticed you trying to back your claims, I didn’t bother to check them because I (and just about everyone) am well aware that there are problems with alcohol and it’s use.
But you don’t seem to have taken any notice of what I’ve said. Alcohol use can also be very safe and even beneficial if used moderately and responsibly. So whether Dunne uses alcohol or not is irrelevant (are you certain he does?). Whether senior employees of his ministries have a few end of year drinks is irrelevant. Whether he mentions that they have had end of year drinks is irrelevant.
The issue that is widely acknowledged is not whether alcohol use can be harmful or not, but how the problems associated with alcohol use can best be addressed. It’s a very complex and difficult issue.
Yes, it is your freedom to be anonymous, but like it or not that does affect how seriously what you say is viewed, especially if you use social media accounts that are unused. You could be anyone with any sort of vested interest in politics or the drug market, and associations like that can make a lot of difference.
You came across as if you were attacking Dunne, making much of something that didn’t seem to come close to justifying your stance. That raises suspicions.
So you anonymously made made over the top claims using a previously virtually unused Twitter account. You shouldn’t be surprised that people will regard that as very suspicious.
And a website that is sponsored by drug sellers, and has supposed reviews that have sales links to the products being reviewed, does not give the appearance of being a neutral drug educator. Far from it.
Pete George
/ December 15, 2012“Tripme.co.nz is not a forum set out to encourage drug use of any kind, it is simply a forum in which people can discuss substances in order to be educated on how to use them safely. ”
Does that include discussion on how to use alcoholic substances safely?
Mu
/ December 15, 2012“Does that include discussion on how to use alcoholic substances safely?”
Yes, there is a whole section on Alcohol
Yes, if used very conservatively Alcohol can be used without extreme harm, however it is an intrinsically harmful drug, and more often than not results in damage to the body and mind to varying degrees.
The point I am trying to make is that it is hypocritical that Peter Dunne is passing such a hysterical legislation on newer psychoactive materials, banning all of them de facto unless the government approves them, when he himself uses a drug that is among the top of the scale for drug harm.
I am not trying to push synthetic drugs,there is no denying new synthetic drugs have significant intrinsic risk due to their unknown nature, a drug isn’t something that is innocent until proven guilty in terms of risk, alcohol by the way is guilty beyond any shadow of a reasonable doubt. People need to take extreme caution, and level headed regulation such as requiring purity testing and proper labeling would rational. What Peter Dunne’s law though is de facto bans all substances ,unless the government approves them.
Something should only be banned if its ascertained with certainty its public menace is so extreme it far outweighs the loss of people’s liberty. People have a right to enjoy-themselves unless they are violating other people’s rights in doing so
If you believe that Alcohol which is at the top of the drug harm scales can be used responsibly, then logically the same must be true for drugs below it on the harm scale, which on a balance of probabilities most of these synthetic drugs are
In regards to your suspicion about my twitter, I’ve never been in to tweeting. A friend of mine mentioned Peter Dunne’s tweet to me and suggested I point out the hypocrisy.
I don’t see how my claims are over the top, they are all backed with evidence.
Alcohol is highly neurotoxic, this was for one discussed in a well referenced report to the US congress about Alcohol harm
http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/10report/chap02e.pdf
Alcohol is a group I confirmed carcinogen with a strong causal link to many kinds of cancers according to the international agency on cancer research (IARC)
http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol44/volume44.pdf
And so forth…
These dangers are not limited to the homeless man drinking two bottles of spirits a day, this is very much real to those who make a habit of drinking multiple glasses of wine at dinner parties. One small of glass of wine a day with dinner probably won’t do any harm, not two, not three…
It is ridiculous that Peter Dunne who admits on his twitter to using a dangerous drug and supplying it to his peers is such a rabid supporter of criminalizing people for using safer drugs like Cannabis and attacks anyone who criticizes his blind stance as ‘gutless wimps’.
My advice for Peter Dunne, is to think twice before you attack all cannabis and other users as a single entirety; invariably a pack of losers. Remember that you too are a drug user, you on what is likely a regular basis consume a dangerous and addictive intoxicant and supply it to those around you without qualms
Pete George
/ December 16, 2012You keep exaggerating the toxicity of alcohol and downplaying the potential harm of unkown synthetic drugs.
Your first link, “The Neurotoxicity of Alcohol”, talks about the toxicity of alcohol for alcoholics and extreme drisnkers. Most people who drink alcohol are not in that category.
Your second link failed to load, but I searched and found that indeed alcohol is a known carcinogen…
The International Agency for Research on Cancer (Centre International de Recherche sur le Cancer) of the World Health Organization has classified alcohol as a Group 1 carcinogen. Its evaluation states, “There is sufficient evidence for the carcinogenicity of alcoholic beverages in humans. …Alcoholic beverages are carcinogenic to humans (Group 1).”
…along with many other thinks including physical activity and sunshine, both of which are essential and no one suggests that ministers shouldn’t talk about them.
Carcinogens do not cause cancer in every case, all the time. Substances labeled as carcinogens may have different levels of cancer-causing potential. Some may cause cancer only after prolonged, high levels of exposure. And for any particular person, the risk of developing cancer depends on many factors, including how they are exposed to a carcinogen, the length and intensity of the exposure, and the person’s genetic makeup.”
- from Known and Probable Human Carcinogens on ther American Cancer Society website.
The degree of exposure is an important factor that you seem to ignore in your campaign against alcohol.
Most of the risk factors are small increases in risk for moderate to heavy consumption.
World Cancer Research Fund recommends that people aim to limit consumption to two drinks a day for a man and one for a woman. It defines a “drink” as containing about 10–15 grams of ethanol.
And you need to balance against this the known health benefits of modest alcohol consumption.
Many substances can be carcinogens but it isn’t suggested they are eliminated, just minimised if possible. For example stored grains and nuts are a risk, also cooking at high heats as in frying and grilling.
Will you campaign against eating steak and chips?
I hope Dunne’s end of year drinks didn’t include a BBQ while the sun was shining.
HighContrast
/ December 15, 2012You, Pete George, are starting to sound like a buffoon. You say he has made irrelevant claim, but you have made even more irrelevant claims.
“And a website that is sponsored by drug sellers, and has supposed reviews that have sales links to the products being reviewed, does not give the appearance of being a neutral drug educator. Far from it.”
Do you know how ridiculous this sounds? Drug sellers? First off, TripMe uses product reports for the safety and understanding for both first time uses and long time users. A place for people to discuss this without social bias.
It is better to provide information for the safe use of drugs rather than prevent access to that information and put a person at risk. Most of TM’s pill reports include reagent tests, and promoting the use of drugs and selling illicit drugs is forbidden.
You say he came across attacking Dunne, well Dunne has done a good job (so far) at attacking the freedom of peoples choice and making outlandish statements like that of testing on dogs (upsetting many).
“Does that include discussion on how to use alcoholic substances safely?”
Of course, as does the use of catnip and sage.
In fact, I’m so confused about your posts, I’m gonna pull a real fat cone right now just to get my head around it. Yes, I’m one of those so-called potheads.
Pete George
/ December 16, 2012“TripMe uses product reports for the safety and understanding for both first time uses and long time users.”
That’s good.
“A place for people to discuss this without social bias.”
But that’s nonsense. The banner on Trip Me is hardly without social bias, it promotes “Party Pill Highs”. If as MU says safe alcohol use is also discussed it would be like having a “Party Alcohol Intoxication’ banner, or ‘Get Pissed at the Pub”.
And Trip Me has drug sponsors and advertisers. That would be like DB or Lion Breweries advertising on the ALAC website.
Mu
/ December 16, 201285 percent of New Zealanders aged 16 to 64 drank alcohol in the past year (Ministry of Health, 2009).
Three in five (61.6%) past-year drinkers consumed more than ALAC recommends (a maximum of six standard drinks for males and four for females on a drinking occasion) at least once during the last year (Ministry of Health, 2009).
One in eight (12.6%) past-year drinkers consumed more than the recommended guidelines more than once a week during the last year (Ministry of Health, 2009).
The MOH guidelines are slightly more liberal than that of the WHO, allowing 3 standard drinks (30g ethanol) for a male, and two (20g ethanol) for a male.
The fact of the matter is that a majority (61.6%) of Alcohol users used the drug in an acutely dangerous manner and 12.6% of them are habitually consuming harmful amounts. This 12.6% translates to 10.71% of the adult population. This is a significant problem
Risk and dangers are different things. Synthetic drugs have significant intrinsic risk as the dangers of many are not known, unlike Alcohol a drug which is known to have many dangers if you consume more than one beer a day.
A significant proportion of the substances Peter Dunne is de facto banning currently have no known significant dangers (that is not the same as being safe) unlike Alcohol which is known to cause significant harm to many who consume it
These synthetic drugs are not one single entirety, some are reasonable well studied and not likely to be of significant danger, others are very new with unknown danger. Many of these “legal highs” are plants with thousands of years of human use. My point has always been the hypocrisy of banning all “new” substances regardless of whether or not they have any proven danger, while being extreme liberal to a drug with extreme danger.
If he has no problem with people consuming one harmful drug, why can’t they consume other drugs?
PoliticallyCorrect (@PoliticallyCoNZ)
/ December 23, 2012“If he has no problem with people consuming one harmful drug, why can’t they consume other drugs?”
@MU
I found your comments via the Standard and couldn’t agree more. We’ve tried to get a straight answer (read peer reviewed research) from Dunne on cannabis and failed. The studies he cites in his boiler plate replies to this question are laughable and have been debunked numerous times it’s not worth it anymore – but they’re given by the UN…
http://www.politicallycorrect.co.nz/2012/04/25/cannabis-policy-an-open-letter-to-the-new-zealand-government/
Our other ‘discussions’ with Dunne have left us completely bamboozled by his abject hypocrisy pretty much as soon as he opens his mouth. e.g. http://www.politicallycorrect.co.nz/2012/10/10/the-term-tax-haven-is-an-exaggeration-until-you-read-the-brochure-economicsnz-peterdunnemp/
The man is all that is wrong with politics (and humanity).