Lessons for Ghahraman (and others)

Golriz Ghahraman and the Greens have taken a hammering this week. Some of the criticism has been justified and fair, some has been way over the top and unfair.

Lessons should have been learned – but there is no sign of that yet as far as I’m aware.

Duncan Garner writes in Prosecuting evil but quietly defending the indefensible:

Green MP and human rights lawyer Golriz Ghahraman and her party learned a tough lesson this week about truth, honesty and spin.

Be upfront. Tell the truth. Don’t massage and carefully manipulate your image and public reputation when it ain’t entirely true.

The Greens thought they had stumbled across an angel on the side of good,  sending bad men away. Not quite.

And what did we, the public, learn?

We learned these Greens are no better than the rest of the buggers despite an at times holier than thou outlook.

Truth is Ghahraman was happy to let it spread that she was a crusading international prosecutor. Sounded great, looked even better.

There was nothing wrong with what she did as a lawyer. Her problem was how some of what she did, defending people accused of horrendous crimes against humanity, was glossed over in her and her Green party spin.

No wonder her leader James Shaw said sorry this week for getting it wrong twice. Shaw, like the rest of us, assumed she was doing god’s work. You can’t blame him.

When he got it wrong, why didn’t Ghahraman fix it? Why didn’t she put The Guardian right three weeks ago when it made the same mistake? Why would she?

Truth is Ghahraman looks embarrassed to be defending those responsible for genocide. She looks embarrassed to have been on the side of defending some of the most evil war criminals this world has seen.

She wanted her role minimised because Rwanda was ugly.

It’s normal for people to downplay ugly things from their past, but it was handled poorly this week.

With all the ferrets and weasels trying to trip you up in Wellington it pays to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

But, no, she should not resign as an MP.

No, this is not about defence lawyers.

Yes, this is about the truth. And her wrestling match with it.

Sadly she has shown a serious lack of contrition. She should have said sorry rather than been so offended by the expose.

If she learns anything from this we should see a better response from her.

One emailer told me this week I was attacking her because she’s a “woman with lovely brown Persian skin”.

What?

What indeed. Being attacked because the target of criticism is female or non-European or an immigrant or whatever has become common in New Zealand political forums, and it’s crap.

This is a simple little story. A very basic one. This is about being economical with the truth. This is about minimising the unsavoury and seemingly indefensible.

It’s a rookie mistake, not telling the full story. Let it be a lesson – and stop taking us for fools. We see bull…. a mile away.

It’s been a tough week for Ghahraman. If she learns well from it she will become a stronger politician and a better MP.

I haven’t seen much sign of lessons learnt yet from her or her supporters.

134 Comments

  1. lurcher1948

     /  December 2, 2017

    REPOSTED from elsewhere earlier
    As i posted yesterday Golriz Ghahraman is the latest target of the right but i stated the average Joe Blog in the street doesn’t care that she was on the defense team in Rwanda.They look at her, BRIGHT, articulate a young lawyer, an MP and then they look at the howling loons on the right baying for her blood(Farrar and Cam Slater ETC) or at least her resignation, NAH shes going on to be the co-leader of the greens i would say. but don’t quote me.

    • wackAmole

       /  December 2, 2017

      “Joe Blog in the street doesn’t care that she was on the defense team in Rwanda.”

      So why the sustained concealment?

      “Joe Blog…look[s] at her, BRIGHT, articulate a young lawyer, an MP”

      Joe Blog hates politicians and lawyers: “What do you call 200 lawyers at the bottom of the ocean? A good start.”

      She is only reinforcing the stereotype of these particularly despised people.

    • What a lot of spin. She’s at best loose with the truth, self promoting and vainglorious. At worst she a liar by omission.

      She’s lost a hell of a lot of respect and they’ll be very cool within that very small Green caucus also. Keep her head low, show she’s learned a lesson, stop swinging from the trees shooting look at me and just get some work done.

  2. artcroft

     /  December 2, 2017

    I still think the whole story is much a do about nothing.

    • Missy

       /  December 2, 2017

      In general I would agree. This would not have dragged on if they put their hand up on day 1, said ‘yeah we worded the bio badly and can see how people think it was fudged, we will fix it’ then fixed it. It would have been a one day story if they had done that.

      The big problem was how all the lefty activists etc piled in to social media making excuses for her, and deflecting the issue from a perceived cover up in her official bio information to something it is not (i.e.: the idea that the critics don’t believe in a war criminal being allowed a defence).

      It was a basic error by the Greens, and it became a storm in a teacup.

      • Not the half truth – the cover up. And isn’t it interesting that as soon as anyone questions a politician of the Left the trolls emerge from everywhere and resort to attacking the messenger with all the “-isms”: race, gender etc etc… been an interesting exercise in watching a cover up go wrong…

        • Missy

           /  December 2, 2017

          Agree. They don’t understand it is the cover up that is the problem, not the truth – or (as you put it, and relevant in this case) – the half truth.

          The left are very good at deflection from the issue, either through whataboutary or through throwing the ‘-ism’ words about. I thought NZ was bad at it, but they are basically amateurs in comparison to the UK when it comes to the deflection when criticising/questioning of the shining stars.

          • Blazer

             /  December 2, 2017

            oh the irony..the U.K has squirrels,none here in NZ.Well Missy…keep looking for this ‘cover up’…yesterday you couldn’t find it…some solace..even a blind squirrel trips over a… nut..now and…then.

            • Missy

               /  December 2, 2017

              Blazer if you go back and read what I wrote previously you will perhaps comprehend on a further reading I was talking about the perceived Cover up.

              In this case I was talking more generally, and I concede I was perhaps not specific enough.

              However, there certainly was something that can be seen as a cover up, her work was misrepresented & the Greens and the left spent several days spinning and deflecting before James Shaw finally came out and admitted that they had not been completely honest. At best that is incompetence, but to many it looks like a cover up when it was not admitted to immediately.

        • Blazer

           /  December 2, 2017

          speaking of cover ups…how’s the Mike Sabin case going these days?

          • Indeed Blazer – you have just demonstrated the typical Leftie response to Golriz little issues of the last week or so – LOOOK SQUIRREL!!!!

            Sabin never faced charges….. I understand

            And interestingly when you google charges dismissed you get some interesting hits… TDB one is about where the average leftie activist intelligence level sits – slogans and labelling…https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=mike+sabin+charges+dismissed&oq=mike+sabin+charges+dismissed&aqs=chrome..69i57.5223j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

            • Blazer

               /  December 2, 2017

              thanks for the link…
              ‘Whangarei lawyer and local Labour party candidate Kelly Ellis knew Sabin was under investigation, accused of child abuse, as did almost every Kiwi journalist and yet no one was game to call it for what it was; a coverup!’

            • Gee a local Labour candidate running down a National MP – what a surprise Blazer…. was he found guilty? Ahhh that would be no…. Anyway this thread is about Golriz not Sabin, so put your squirrel back where it belongs…

            • Missy

               /  December 2, 2017

              dave, I believe Blazer is practicing those well known tactics of deflection and whataboutary…….

              Known to be practiced by Lefty’s when one of their anointed ones screw up and are called out for it. A common thing to see here in the UK.

            • Indeed Missy….. the squirrels have been let lose all over the shop: distract, divert, deny is what he has got

        • Blazer

           /  December 2, 2017

          what did we learn about the Todd Barclay….’affair’?

        • Blazer

           /  December 2, 2017

          where’s Jason Ede..these days?

        • chrism56

           /  December 2, 2017

          GG is responsible for her own statements like these:
          https://impolitikal.com/2017/02/01/golriz-ghahraman-on-identity-democracy-i-cant-shed-my-skin/
          She can’t blame this on others. People with some semblance of integrity that get caught out doing this type of stuff resign. She won’t and will still be there until the next election.

          • Blazer

             /  December 2, 2017

            Lets hope…so.

            • chrism56

               /  December 2, 2017

              For once I agree with you Blazer. GG staying there will be a continuous demonstration of how tainted the Green brand has become. In the eyes of her acolytes, she can do no wrong – what the actual voters think is a different matter. Being caught out telling deliberate untruths like “prosecuting heads of state for the United Nations” makes Cunliffe’s creating Fonterra insignificant and look how that hounded him. beer. It will also be an easy meme to rubbish all and any statement she makes. That might not be fair, but it is politics.

            • Blazer

               /  December 2, 2017

              @chrism56…Key the absolute star offendor managed to last 8 years.And look on the brightside,National wanted the Greens to give them a majority…what a ..narrow escape .

            • Gezza

               /  December 2, 2017

              From her career trajectory, selfies, grandiose & cunningly misrepresented career role claims, ever-changing backstory, slick talking, & PR puff pieces, GG strikes me as someone who some considerable time ago decided she wants to a celebrity & has been simoly following one plan, then another, then politics as the best way to finally make it. Becoming a celebrity usually comes at a cost – intense & even hostile media scrutiny – & she’s not as clever as she thought she was – she didn’t figure on this.

            • chrism56

               /  December 2, 2017

              I see you still are sliming Blazer – you can’t stop it, can you. That could be why almost every one of your comments is nett downticked.

      • artcroft

         /  December 2, 2017

        The Greens are going to find working with Peters and being Govt big challenges to their principles. Compromise, misrepresentation, fudging, they’ll engage in all of it, and I suspect do it without any sense of compunction because “well … we’re the Greens and the ends justify the means”.

        This is just a taster of the whoppers they are going to be selling so I’ll hold my ammo until then to make it really count.

        • Corky

           /  December 2, 2017

          Good for you, Arty. A full magazine, a full stomach and a shiny Colt are hard to trump. The Greens will eventually have to bend over for Labour and Winston.
          That’s when you can draw on the bulls-eye.

    • adamsmith1922

       /  December 2, 2017

      No it was not. Being a defence lawyer is an honourable thing.
      That was not the issue, the issue was the obfuscation, the way in which she was parsimonious with the facts and the embellishment of her role. In essence she big noted, was found our and then doubled down, thereby digging herself an even bigger hole. This is compounded by her role as the Greens justice spokesperson. Because her credibility is severely tarnished.

      • Kitty Catkin

         /  December 2, 2017

        If she had been honest and not tried to make her role in all those trials out to be something that it wasn’t. then it would indeed be ‘much ado about nothing,’

        The hoohah has been, I think, because she wasn’t honest about it and tried to make herself seem like something that she is not.

        Lawyers come in for a lot of undeserved flak, but in this case I think that it was deserved.

        As an intern-which I believe that she was-surely she would do what she was ordered to do.So her boasting about what she did is meaningless-it would be like me implying that I was headhunted to be the researcher and ministerial document writer for the then Minister of Education when I was a clerk and did what I was told to do. Yes, I did research and wrote ministerials, but at a low level !

        • Blazer

           /  December 2, 2017

          a fine one to talk about…honesty…eclairs..remember!

          • Oh, will you let that drop ? Just as the people in the shop would have let the damned things drop into the nearest bin. Would you hand in a packet of chewing gum that someone had left in the packing area, or hand in a cigarette lighter that you found in the street ? Both of these were worth more than the eclairs-and are not perishable. Shops don’t & can’t put perishable things back.

            You can be an awful bore.

            • Blazer

               /  December 2, 2017

              you are trying to justify your immoral…behaviour.

  3. The other big fault of GG and the Greens in general is hypocrisy. They have criticized for behavior and actions that they themselves have done. Look at GG’s tweet against Mr Plunket.
    If you want to set yourselves up as saints, you need a clean backstory.

    • lurcher1948

       /  December 2, 2017

      Sean Plunket was supporting a sexual predator, She was a defense lawyer, whats the connection? and as i said its a “lets get GG shes our first target” it’s going to be a long 9 years for the rabid right.

      • Missy

         /  December 2, 2017

        Lurcher a defence lawyer should be the first to acknowledge that someone is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. As Harvey Weinstein has not been found guilty in a court of law he remains an alleged sexual predator, so therefore she should have been more circumspect in her criticism of him. However, she took the lefty view that all men are guilty before proven innocent, in direct contradiction to our legal system.

        Also, you should refer to him as an alleged sexual predator, so far there are only allegations against him, no proven case.

        • lurcher1948

           /  December 2, 2017

          Missy is he still working ,NAH he’s lost EVERYTHING, all his awards, and achievements and will be charged with rape soon,

          • Missy

             /  December 2, 2017

            Lurcher, have he been found guilty in a court of law (not on social media)? NAH he therefore remains INNOCENT until PROVEN Guilty. To think anything else goes against the fundamentals of our justice system.

            Losing a job, and losing everything, and being charged is still not guilt until he is found guilty in a court of law.

            If anything the Westminster sex scandal – and the wider investigation into politicians – has shown, vilifying someone on social media and in the MSM based on allegations that aren’t proven in a court of law can have devastating consequences.

            Interesting that you think someone losing a job and possibly about to be charged is equal to guilt, though pretty typical of today’s modern lefty who chooses certain groups and takes all opportunities to demonise and ruin them – or those they see as their representatives – on social media, and eventually ruin their life, often with no conviction and no true justice.

    • PartisanZ

       /  December 2, 2017

      Hypocritical politicians? … Oh no! My lifelong illusion is shattered …

  4. Ray

     /  December 2, 2017

    It seems Golriz Ghahraman has a problem with admitting to making mistakes, something most of us share but something she should work on if she hopes to succeed in politics.
    I say this after scanning the “related” stories which show this is her third strike.

    • PartisanZ

       /  December 2, 2017

      I disagree Ray. By NOT admitting to making mistakes, unless circumstances force it beyond question, Ghahraman is emulating every other politician who hopes to or does succeed in politics. There’s plenty of wriggle-room left in this one, so she’s ‘on track’ so to speak …

      Why would we expect higher standards from The Greens?

      How many strikes did John Key accumulate again? I lost count …

      • Gezza

         /  December 2, 2017

        Why would we expect higher standards from The Greens?
        Because they regularly publicly professed to have them.

        Not a problem though. Now we know they don’t, so we can ignore that claim as demonstrably false already & treat them as no different from the other political parties.

        • Blazer

           /  December 2, 2017

          can you point me to your evidence of them proclaiming …that?

          • Gezza

             /  December 2, 2017

            Details later. Probably some questions for you too.

        • robertguyton

           /  December 2, 2017

          The Greens demonstrably do have and keep to higher standards than do, for example, National. Declaring that they don’t is just blowin’, Gezza.

          • Gezza

             /  December 2, 2017

            That’s just a relativity argument. Expected, but cuts no ice with me. Not since Metiria’s crash n burn. Early days. They haven’t been in government long enuff to have a track record relevant for comparison.

  5. Missy

     /  December 2, 2017

    “Golriz Ghahraman and the Greens have taken a hammering this week. Some of the criticism has been justified and fair, some has been way over the top and unfair.

    ……..

    There was nothing wrong with what she did as a lawyer. Her problem was how some of what she did, defending people accused of horrendous crimes against humanity, was glossed over in her and her Green party spin.”

    I agree with this. I have very little time for Golriz Ghahraman from what little I have seen of her, but in this instance some of the criticism has been unjustified and unfair.

    I have no issue with her defending a war criminal, or someone accused of genocide, I do have a problem with her – and her party – glossing over it and looking like they are fudging her previous employment.

    I agree with you that this has been handled poorly this week, the Greens have got to up their game.

    “One emailer told me this week I was attacking her because she’s a “woman with lovely brown Persian skin”.

    What?”

    “What indeed. Being attacked because the target of criticism is female or non-European or an immigrant or whatever has become common in New Zealand political forums, and it’s crap.”

    This is not just common in NZ, around the world any criticism of a woman is labelled sexist or misogynistic, any criticism of a non-white person is labelled racism, any criticism of a Muslim or of Islam is labelled Islamaphobic and a lot of it is BS. It shuts down debate, and makes many too afraid to voice genuine criticism. If some of our MPs – or even the PM – are unable to be criticised without those doing the criticism being called sexist, or racist or whatever, then this will dilute the ability of anyone to hold them to account. To say that the criticism of Golriz Ghahraman is because she is a woman or Iranian is a form of censorship, it is a way of saying that she cannot be criticised as an MP, and it is not good for democracy.

    I noticed the Standard post a couple of days ago on this (by Weka) was tagged with sexism and racism – clearly showing that Weka, as the author, felt that the criticism of her was not because she deserved criticism, but rather because she was an Iranian Woman.

    • sorethumb

       /  December 2, 2017

      She didn’t exactly come across as humble, almost as though she was a higher person from a higher place? Ethnically superior – and a princess?

  6. “We learned these Greens are no better than the rest of the buggers despite an at times holier than thou outlook.”
    Bullsh*t. There’s absolutely no comparing the mendacious, despicable behaviour from the likes of Key et al with anything The Green MPs have ever done. The Green Way is quite different from the appalling , murky, dirty rubbish we witnessed from National for 9 long, disgraceful years.
    Cheers!

    • PartisanZ

       /  December 2, 2017

      The Green viciousness on many different levels that I and numerous others experienced during the election campaign doesn’t entirely support your contention IMHO Robert.

      Example: Numerous quite unseemly “Vote Labour/Green” ‘hammerings’ on social media, along with shamelessly promoting the “wasted vote” fallacy while espousing ‘values’ and integrity as well. The Greens hatred for TOP was palpable.

      The Green Party has become a political party machine in much the same way Greenpeace has become a Green/Peace Global Corporate … sometimes seen as more involved in hounding people for donations than doing anything much or anything new …

      Don’t get me wrong, I did say “doesn’t entirely support” (above). It is as much an image problem as anything else. Consistency … and avoiding getting dragged into the quagmire of Westminster … which I note they don’t seem interested in reforming …?

      • phantom snowflake

         /  December 2, 2017

        My (jaundiced) view is that the Green Party are neoliberal capitalist urban cafe-dwellers who have rinsed all the hippies except…Robert! that having been said; some of their MPs might be cool to hang out with in an aforementioned urban cafe!

  7. lurcher1948

     /  December 2, 2017

    Don’t worry the left have got rid of Garretts (3 strikes)law, she’s sweet…she has a clean slate

  8. Tipene

     /  December 2, 2017

    A common trait of narcissistic personality disorder is an inability to recognise or admit ones own fault in a matter.

    Gharamen is a textbook case of the disorder:

    https://www.psychologytoday.com/conditions/narcissistic-personality-disorder

    • lurcher1948

       /  December 2, 2017

      That’s a bit harsh, you could be describing everyone around here….just saying

    • Probably everyone fails to recognise one’s own fault in matters at times, and I think it’s very normal to not admit fault fully and every time.

      Online psychiatric diagnosing is strongly discouraged. It can be too easily used as a thinly disguised attack, and attacking someone on mental health or illness grounds is a very slippery slope.

    • PartisanZ

       /  December 2, 2017

      Tipene, if Ghahraman is a textbook case, so is every other politician …

      A notable textbook case would be our former Prime Minister, John Key.

      Lurcher is quite correct. Narcissism, like other so-called psychological disorders, is actually a narcissism-altruism spectrum or gradient upon which we all sit … Everybody is more or less narcissistic …

      • Kitty Catkin

         /  December 2, 2017

        Not in the psychological sense-look this up. Society couldn’t function if you were right,

        • PartisanZ

           /  December 2, 2017

          One might argue that society is already not dysfunctional because of increased degrees of narcissism Miss Kitty? Leastwise in the sense of community spirit, belonging, connection to place etc etc?

          • Kitty Catkin

             /  December 3, 2017

            Have you ever known a narcissist/sociopath who fits the clinical criteria ? I have.

  9. Blazer

     /  December 2, 2017

    how much more can the right wring out of this …non story?

    • The story could have stopped days earlier if it had been handled differently at the start. You can’t blame the right – or the media – for that.

    • PartisanZ

       /  December 2, 2017

      Oh Blazer, they’re going to flog this dead horse for all they ‘think’ its worth …

      And simultaneously expose their desperation and viciousness all along the way, like a trail of scat …

      Perhaps what we need is a sort of political SPCA?

  10. PartisanZ

     /  December 2, 2017

    Garner’s even more of a bombastic windbag than I thought …right

    “Contrition” FFS!

    Hands up those who honestly thought the Greens were any different from the other *Parties*? I didn’t, and I’m supposedly a Radical Lefty …

    Yes, its dead simple. It might be “unsavoury” but it certainly isn’t indefensible. Compared to other politician’s ‘scandals’, all the way down to ponytails and a bar of soap, at the very root of all this – the actions taken in her former profession – Ghahraman did right, whereas the others did wrong.

    They’ll learn from it, rest assured. And like all other Pollies, they will not admit to having learned from it … Gosh …

    • Ray

       /  December 2, 2017

      Well Robert thinks the Greens are very different which I guess just proves where he and you come from. The rest of us see a party that loves to take the high ground but can be just as mendacious as any other when push comes to shove.

      • PartisanZ

         /  December 2, 2017

        Yes Ray, Robert and I come from a ‘state of Being’ named ‘independent emotellect’ which I suspect you have never visited … or more correctly were born into and acculturated out of.

        I’d still prefer a Party that takes the Moral high ground over one that ‘takes’ the Fiscal high ground and calls it moral …

      • Mendacious the Greens ain’t, Ray, no matter how much you and others here wish it to be so; not even approaching the league of National’s hideous crew, peresent and past. It would suit you and your ilk, to believe The Greens are politicians cut from the same cloth as Bennett, English, Key and Bridges, but they are not – it’s always been the defining characteristic of The Greens that they don’t indulge in that nasty side of politics and it is still true. I can see that liars and confidence tricksters benefit from convincing the general public that “all politicians are the same” but they are not.

        • PartisanZ

           /  December 2, 2017

          Fair comment at the end there Robert, not all politicians are the same …

          It must be f**ken hard not to become tainted by the contagion of that Westminster environment though …?

          • robertguyton

             /  December 2, 2017

            It is, PartizanZ, unless you enter the fray well-armed against the taint and well supported by others whose mission it is to resist. The Greens are such people. Naturally, there will be mistakes and slip-ups made, but in my view, of all parties, The Greens have managed the issue best. The National Party MP’s on the whole, have shown the converse.

            • PartisanZ

               /  December 2, 2017

              robertguyton – The fray which doesn’t need to be a fray? We could reform and recreate the whole damned thing!? The Swiss Parliament is a coalition of ALL the major parties, representing about 98% of voters.

              I’d call ours something other than ‘Parliament’ too, eg Marae Ture/Legislative Assembly, to distinguish our Republic from the common herd …

              As ‘Matike Mai Aotearoa’ says, “the Westminster constitutional system as it has been implemented since 1840 does not, indeed CANNOT, adequately give effect to the terms of Te Tiriti o Waitangi”.

            • robertguyton

               /  December 2, 2017

              True enough, PZ.

        • Alan Wilkinson

           /  December 2, 2017

          they don’t indulge in that nasty side of politics

          Their supporters most certainly do. From defacing billboards to abusive posts on social media they are up there with the worst.

          • robertguyton

             /  December 2, 2017

            Petal! You’kay?

            • Trevors_elbow

               /  December 2, 2017

              Annnnd Robbie proves Als point….

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  December 2, 2017

              Sufficiently to refute your party political messages.

            • Gezza

               /  December 2, 2017

              If you think Al’s a petal you obviously can’t recognise a flaming cactus when he’s just inserted one.

            • robertguyton

               /  December 2, 2017

              “Petal” is “up there with the worst”?

              Petals!

  11. phantom snowflake

     /  December 2, 2017

    An interesting little exchange on twitter; take from it what you will…

    Lew‏ @LewSOS
    Nov 29
    Righty blokes hounded Metiria out of office on trumped-up outrage about historical indiscretions that she did a poor job of explaining. Righty blokes tried to hound Golriz out of office for same. Coincidence or trend? One more will tell us.

    Tat Loo‏ @Tat_Loo
    Replying to @LewSOS @GregAFC and

    Metiria told half the story to the public and was found out. Gloriz told half the story to the public and was found out. Coincidence or trend? One more will tell us.
    ,

    • PartisanZ

       /  December 2, 2017

      Shit p_s … I don’t need one more to tell me!

  12. sorethumb

     /  December 2, 2017

    Being attacked because the target of criticism is female or non-European or an immigrant or whatever has become common in New Zealand political forums, and it’s crap.
    …..
    People are ethnocentric by nature. It has been shown to be moderated by oxytocin. Therefore, when they attack us for racism how do we know they aren’t racist/ethnocentric.
    Gloriz complained she was made to feel she wasn’t Kiwi enough, meaning she isn’t happy being adopted she wants the old identity wiped out (in our own country) and it’s crap.

    • phantom snowflake

       /  December 2, 2017

      “People are ethnocentric by nature. It has been shown to be moderated by oxytocin” Bullshit pseudoscientific justification for the racial segregation you have always promoted. My community includes at least a dozen ethnicities; many of us intermingle happily and share aspects of our culture, languages and food. And yes some of them are Mooooslims! Your “White Nationalism” is a complete non-starter here in Aotearoa, the southern tip of the Polynesian Triangle.

      • sorethumb

         /  December 2, 2017

        Oxytocin promotes human ethnocentrism
        http://www.pnas.org/content/108/4/1262.full

        • sorethumb

           /  December 2, 2017

          2017
          Weighing up the value of ethnic diversity alongside the volume of immigration to Auckland’s character and its future prosperity is a vexed and complex issue – one that is top of mind for many who dwell in the country’s sprawling metropolis, according to a new report by Massey University sociologists.
          http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1705/S00470/immigration-and-the-future-in-super-diverse-auckland.htm
          The attitudes of New Zealanders in the mid-1990s towards immigration may not have reflected the positive perspective on the value of diversity in our society that is contained in the Review of
          Immigration Policy August 1986. But this does not mean that the globalisation of immigration to New Zealand was an “unintended consequence of policy changes in 1986”. It was a deliberate strategy, based on a premise that the “infusion of new elements to New Zealand life has been of immense value to the development of this country to date and will, as a result of this Government’s review of immigration policy, become even more important in the future” (Burke 1986:330).

          Immense value to vexed and complex issue.

        • phantom snowflake

           /  December 2, 2017

          What next? Not Guilty of racially motivated violence: “It was the hormones made me do it Your Honour.”

          • sorethumb

             /  December 2, 2017

            Ethnocentrism is not a White disorder and evidence is emerging that immigrant communities harbour invidious attitude towards Anglo Australians, disparaging their culture and the legitimacy of their central place in national identity.
            https://quadrant.org.au/magazine/2010/06/the-misguided-advocates-of-open-borders/

            Young women of Latin and Turkish origin living in Melbourne find it hard to see any Australian culture. Some see a vacuum; others see a bland milieu populated with ‘average-looking’ people. In contrast, they feel that their own migrant cultures are strong. They ‘get through more’. If there is any Australian culture it is, in their opinion, losing ground to migrant cultures.
            https://zuleykazevallos.com/2012/10/06/its-like-were-their-culture/

            Vahed and Vahed’s paper indicates that advocates for Muslim communities are taking advantage of Western multiculturalism, in which the state licenses minority interests while ignoring those of the majority. According to multicultural ideology, only minorities have legitimate interests, while the majority is portrayed as in need of policing due to its alleged aggression against minorities.14
            State licensing includes indoctrination of the majority in the legitimacy of minority preferences,
            without balancing instruction in majority interests

            • sorethumb

               /  December 2, 2017

              I know this pisses Pete George off but policy today has been built on exclusion. Evolutionary psychology is on the up. The thing is adopting people who aren’t like you into NZ “your country” is one thing – everyone loves the smiling mecanic from Zimbabwe, but a society based on equal mixes of a variety of ethnicities is another, unless you can show the benefits at all levels of society.

            • It’s not clear what you mean by that, I have no idea what you are claiming pisses me off, but I suspect you’re off target.

              But one thing that does piss me off is people making claims about what other people might think without anything to substantiate it.

          • PartisanZ

             /  December 2, 2017

            #commentoftheday so far …

            • PartisanZ

               /  December 2, 2017

              @phantom_snowflake – “What next? Not Guilty of racially motivated violence: “It was the hormones made me do it Your Honour.”

              #commentoftheday so far …

            • phantom snowflake

               /  December 2, 2017

              Cheers. To be outdone By PZ in 3…..2…..1…..

            • PartisanZ

               /  December 2, 2017

              Nah, I’m outta here shortly … experiencing the old OCD addiction tendencies again …

              Gotta choose your battles eh?

              I was a volunteer during the election, and the forum my ‘Party’ created was generally so positive it makes even this ‘moderate’ one look kinda *sick* by comparison … Sorry if I offend.

              “How long before we take it back … you and me? … Think Fast …”

              – BVT&theCN or Jefferson Starship? … “Fast Buck Freddie”

            • PDB

               /  December 2, 2017

              Far better off in your safe space PZ – that way you don’t get to hear the other side of the debate.

            • PartisanZ

               /  December 2, 2017

              You are unbelievable PDB … When was the last time you ‘changed your mind’ about something? I cited an example of my doing so the other day.

              At least my safe place isn’t a mind closed like a steel trap.

              To paraphrase phantom_snowflake’s awesome writer Laurie Penny,

              “I’ve got no time for YOUR sort of strength. Not now, not ever. Give me courage instead, the courage to remain permeable, to remain open, the potential for empathy and learning. Make me brave—I don’t care about strong”.

      • sorethumb

         /  December 2, 2017

        “Social cohesion expert” Professor Paul Spoonley says the key to social cohesion is contact but the opposite is competition for resources. On Smart Talk at the Auckland Museum he asks (regarding migrants with lots of wealth arriving): “but how do they loose from that. How is anyone loosing?” [hint- housing – hand going up at auction]. So where are the benefits? Real wage rates in tourism and hospitality have fallen 24.5% between 1979 and 2006. “It’s our second largest pie” -Mike Hosking.

    • phantom snowflake

       /  December 2, 2017

      And while I’m on the subject of Bullshit Pseudoscience; you posted a link last night to an article which used ideas from Evolutionary Biology to explain/justify rape:

      https://areomagazine.com/2017/11/29/evolution-rape-and-power-why-understanding-human-nature-matters/

      Evolutionary Biology is a crock; it’s mechanistic and reductive and sucks meaning from any topic it considers, thereby subtracting from rather than adding to our human “body of knowledge.”

      • PartisanZ

         /  December 2, 2017

        Wow, p_s, that last is like such a perfect description of the pseudo-history peddled at Kiwi FrontLine, Hobson’s Pledge, NZCPR et al … Thanks … you’ve added to my “body of knowledge” …

      • sorethumb

         /  December 2, 2017

        phantom snowflake
        Evolutionary Biology is a crock; it’s mechanistic and reductive and sucks meaning from any topic it considers, thereby subtracting from rather than adding to our human “body of knowledge.”

        http://www.psy.cmu.edu/~rakison/Problems%20with%20SSSM%202011.pdf

      • sorethumb

         /  December 2, 2017

        Evolutionary Biology is a crock; it’s mechanistic and reductive and sucks meaning from any topic it considers, thereby subtracting from rather than adding to our human “body of knowledge.”
        …………..
        That depends on whether we are born with a blank slate or with software on the harddrive

  13. sorethumb

     /  December 2, 2017

    Metiria told half the story to the public and was found out. Gloriz told half the story to the public and was found out. Coincidence or trend? One more will tell us
    ….
    Gareth Hughes unfurled a protest banner at Tiananmen Square (but didn’t get a photo?)
    Keeth Locke grinned with pleasure as Anette Sykes spoke of her joy at the World Trade centre collapsing “until she remembered the bell boys etc” Keith Locke denies it some libertarians in the audience reported it. His words against theirs.

    • Blazer

       /  December 2, 2017

      no wonder you’ve got a sorethumb…you can’t nail…anything..down.

      • sorethumb

         /  December 2, 2017

        That depends on who is reading. I don’t feel my ideas have had a challenging rebuttal?

        • Blazer

           /  December 2, 2017

          you rebutted them yourself in effect by mentioning….hearsay.

          • sorethumb

             /  December 2, 2017

            That is true about Gareth Hughes. The fact that I can’t locate it on the web means nothing. I can’t locate Catherine Delahunty’s maiden speech either.
            …………….
            Frog, I agree the slur on your drug law reform plocy is as inaccurate as it is stupid, but you said. “Which terrorist groups are the Greens in favour of? Go on. Name just one.” Very well, let me open the batting. How about this, Frog:
            Remember soon after September 11 Keith Locke spoke at a meeting in Rotorua on a platform with Annette Sykes. This was a meeting to protest the liberation of Afghanistan.
            As Keith sat there smiling and nodding his head in agreement, Sykes told the audience: “I will never forget that morning turning on my TV and seeing those planes fly into those two towers, I jumped for joy, I was so excited to see that at long last capitalism was
            under attack. I was laughing, I was so happy, but then I saw those people
            jumping out of the windows and it suddenly hit me, oh those poor waiters, the poor cleaners, those poor lift operators, who the greedy capitalists had employed to do all the dirty jobs were probably the people jumping out of the windows.”
            Keith neither challenged nor questioned Sykes’ rant, he sat there and smiled and nodded and then led the applause when she finished.
            http://blog.greens.org.nz/index.php/2005/05/31/united-in-terrorism/

  14. lurcher1948

     /  December 2, 2017

    Another day Saturday,another keyblog post,maybe Farrar has a fixation with GG, [deleted speculation] maybe in a few more days he will have wringed as much water as he can out of the story…
    https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2017/12/garner_on_ghahraman.html

    • wackAmole

       /  December 2, 2017

      “maybe Farrar has a fixation with GG”

      GG is damaged goods now. A grinning selfie with a psycho mass murderer is in the public minds eye every time she opens her mouth about victims rights etc.

      Mission accomplished.

      • lurcher1948

         /  December 2, 2017

        UTU from the losers

        • PartisanZ

           /  December 2, 2017

          Correction Lurcher … utu means reciprocity or balance … This is straight-out, adulterated, Pakeha, defeated and thwarted power-broker, sore-loser, infantile, vicious, OTT, desperate, perverse, grotesque REVENGE …

          • Gezza

             /  December 2, 2017

            Well, there are certainly a few of them & a bit of that, but it’s also about her being caught out bullshitting quite a lot.

  15. lurcher1948

     /  December 2, 2017

    I don’t think Duncan Garner will be getting a xmas card from GG or another interview and why we are at it Jack Tame will not be getting a card or interview from our PM Jacinda Adern, after months of requesting contact for a chat they will wonder what they did wrong, Blackballed before.getting started with a new govt.

    • Gezza

       /  December 2, 2017

      Not being interviewed by Jack Tame imo is much the same as not being interviewed by a 5 year old at a kids birthday party who’s watching a clown make sausage dogs out of tube balloons at the same time. It’s like missing something unimportant that never even happened. I’m open to being persuaded otherwise, but I reckon you’ll struggle.

    • PDB

       /  December 2, 2017

      At the rate this useless govt is going they’ll have to ban any media from interviewing them.

  16. PDB

     /  December 2, 2017

    I note Ghahraman has had little support from the female contingent of the Green Party on this issue…………maybe something to do with the upcoming leadership vote for Shaw’s female counterpart?

    When it comes to self interest the left always eat their own.

  17. PDB

     /  December 2, 2017

    Below: Green MP Ghahraman Golriz beaming from ear to ear whilst volunteering to defend alleged perpetrators & inciters of genocide, mass rape, torture, massacre of children & the mutilation of the vagina with machetes, knives, sharpened sticks, boiling water, and acid.

    • robertguyton

       /  December 2, 2017

      You can seem a nasty fellow at times, PDB (all times). Just sayin’

      • PDB

         /  December 2, 2017

        Is the photo description not factual?
        What are your alternate facts?
        Why is no one else smiling in the photo?
        Is it something to do with the seriousness of the subject matter at hand?
        Why is Ghahraman Golriz smiling?

        • lurcher1948

           /  December 2, 2017

          Every picture i have seen of GG, she is smiling PRETTY females tend do that as they have nice teeth and nice features, if you have it flaunt it…

      • PartisanZ

         /  December 2, 2017

        To paraphrase Hamlet robertguyton, “Seems Robert, nay, he IS, I know not seems”

    • Blazer

       /  December 2, 2017

      don’t get excited..pants…you’re over egging this..pudding.

      • PDB

         /  December 2, 2017

        Feel free to answer any of my questions above rather than deflect.

        • Blazer

           /  December 2, 2017

          just for context…name the other people sitting next to her.

          • PDB

             /  December 2, 2017

            Why does it matter who the other members of the defense are?

            • Blazer

               /  December 2, 2017

              I want to be sure about their roles and the exact case…we need to be 100% accurate when you are impugning someones character .

            • PDB

               /  December 2, 2017

              Photo taken from her 2008 facebook page which also confirms she was on the internship at the time.

            • Blazer

               /  December 2, 2017

              your statement is incorrect..’ Green MP Ghahraman Golriz beaming from ear to ear whilst volunteering to defend alleged perpetrators & inciters of genocide, mass rape, torture, massacre of children & the mutilation of the vagina with machetes, …’ this is not an accurate description of that…photo…

            • lurcher1948

               /  December 2, 2017

              Dosnt matter who the others are,shes the target of the rabid RIGHT, SHES THEIR TARGET,as if she gives a stuff.I dont think GG is hiding under her bed 🙂

            • PDB

               /  December 2, 2017

              Why not? She’s smiling, she’s volunteering for the defense, she’s defending alleged perpetrators & inciters of those crimes.

            • chrism56

               /  December 2, 2017

              That unusual for you isn’t it Blazer “we need to be 100% accurate when you are impugning someones character” You are quite happy to make stuff up and libel people with false quotes (remember Ms Bennett’s shoes) with reckless abandon if you think they are on the other side.

            • Blazer

               /  December 2, 2017

              what do you think these are…earmuffs…

    • Gezza

       /  December 2, 2017

      Someone has to defend them PDB. In a fair trial. Going down the path that she shouldn’t be ever have been a defending attorney isn’t really a valid criticism of a lawyer. How do you know she isn’t smiling because she’s just hacked into the prosecutions defence strategy document?

      Strikes me as someone who likes to smile at any camera, and ask for a copy. Like a celebrity does.

      • PDB

         /  December 2, 2017

        “Strikes me as someone who likes to smile at any camera, and ask for a copy. Like a celebrity does.”

        With that last sentence I think you are onto something…

        • Gezza

           /  December 2, 2017

          Expanded on that elsewhere earlier.

          • PartisanZ

             /  December 2, 2017

            PDB, have you ever heard of healthy ego development? GG is not what she does. She is not her job, her employment, her career. Are you?

            I am what I earn money at doing … I am what I eat …

            I am what I think … I am what I believe …

            I am what I self-actualize …

  18. lurcher1948

     /  December 2, 2017

    Cameron Slater is having a brain fart, claiming GG is an illegal MP, tell me how many people are suing slater…please
    https://www.whaleoil.co.nz/2017/12/things-make-go-hmmmm-2/

    • It was a reader comment posted by SB.

      If it is a crime to gain “pecuniary advantage” by falsifying facts, surely obtaining an MP’s pay is pecuniary advantage?

      That’s pathetic.

      If an MP could be dumped because an opposing party or Whale Oil or The Daily Blog found something in their bio or on line utterings or campaign claptrap that wasn’t 100% accurate or complete we wouldn’t have a Parliament

      • Gezza

         /  December 2, 2017

        I expect if the same were true of what they post on their blogs we wouldn’t have WO or TDB either. Claims on most blogs are sometimes very selective, lacking full context, & open to more interpretations just than the particular one presented by the biased writer.

  19. lurcher1948

     /  December 2, 2017

    I’m proud that my post set off today’s excitement and heaps of posts with some help from PG so,we should all welcome GG to NZ and thank her for enriching our GENE POOL…just saying