https://www.newsroom.co.nz/2017/05/13/27104/national-unleashes-housing-man-against-the-doubters
This is of course entirely consistent with NAtional just happening to
remove funding from charities that darte to critice the government,
but is perhaps geetting a little explict . . .
Then: - >http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/05/mp-wants-labour-candidate-willie-jackson-to-stop-bagging-the-govt.html
But National are divided:
"Finance Minister Stephen Joyce told Newshub Mr Ngaro’s comments
weren’t damaging to National, just "a little bit of naivety from the
new guy".
"Alfred’s realised he’s overstepped the mark there," Mr Joyce said.
Political commentator Matthew Hooton said if Mr Ngaro has been quoted >correctly, he'd need to be fired for "almost boasting of corruption"."
An image is shown of Hootons message: "If report is true,
@pmbillenglish really should sack @AlfredNgaroMP immediately. He's
almost boasting of corruption. …"
Steven Joyce's comment is effectively an admission that Mgaro hasn'tNow Ngaro has apologised to the PM for his comments - not because they
yet learned to lie like an experienced Nat MP, but the charge of
corruption from a supporter of the right will be harder to shake . .
..
On Sun, 14 May 2017 17:40:07 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:
https://www.newsroom.co.nz/2017/05/13/27104/national-unleashes-housing-man-against-the-doubtersNow Ngaro has apologised to the PM for his comments - not because they
This is of course entirely consistent with NAtional just happening to
remove funding from charities that darte to critice the government,
but is perhaps geetting a little explict . . .
Then: -
http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/05/mp-wants-labour-candidate-willie-jackson-to-stop-bagging-the-govt.html
But National are divided:
"Finance Minister Stephen Joyce told Newshub Mr Ngaro’s comments
weren’t damaging to National, just "a little bit of naivety from the
new guy".
"Alfred’s realised he’s overstepped the mark there," Mr Joyce said.
Political commentator Matthew Hooton said if Mr Ngaro has been quoted
correctly, he'd need to be fired for "almost boasting of corruption"."
An image is shown of Hootons message: "If report is true,
@pmbillenglish really should sack @AlfredNgaroMP immediately. He's
almost boasting of corruption. …"
Steven Joyce's comment is effectively an admission that Mgaro hasn't
yet learned to lie like an experienced Nat MP, but the charge of
corruption from a supporter of the right will be harder to shake . .
..
are not what he believes (if that was teh case he would have
apologised to John Tamahere and to New Zealanders), but because he
embarassed the government. Weasel words again from the Nats.
On Sun, 14 May 2017 17:40:07 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:
https://www.newsroom.co.nz/2017/05/13/27104/national-unleashes-housing-man-against-the-doubtersNow Ngaro has apologised to the PM for his comments - not because they
This is of course entirely consistent with NAtional just happening to >>remove funding from charities that darte to critice the government,
but is perhaps geetting a little explict . . .
Then: - >>http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/05/mp-wants-labour-candidate-willie-jackson-to-stop-bagging-the-govt.html
But National are divided:
"Finance Minister Stephen Joyce told Newshub Mr Ngaro’s comments
weren’t damaging to National, just "a little bit of naivety from the
new guy".
"Alfred’s realised he’s overstepped the mark there," Mr Joyce said.
Political commentator Matthew Hooton said if Mr Ngaro has been quoted >>correctly, he'd need to be fired for "almost boasting of corruption"."
An image is shown of Hootons message: "If report is true,
@pmbillenglish really should sack @AlfredNgaroMP immediately. He's
almost boasting of corruption. …"
Steven Joyce's comment is effectively an admission that Mgaro hasn't
yet learned to lie like an experienced Nat MP, but the charge of
corruption from a supporter of the right will be harder to shake . .
..
are not what he believes (if that was teh case he would have
apologised to John Tamahere and to New Zealanders), but because he
embarassed the government. Weasel words again from the Nats.
https://www.newsroom.co.nz/2017/05/13/27104/national-unleashes-housing-man-against-the-doubters
This is of course entirely consistent with NAtional just happening to
remove funding from charities that darte to critice the government,
but is perhaps geetting a little explict . . .
Then: - >http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/05/mp-wants-labour-candidate-willie-jackson-to-stop-bagging-the-govt.html
But National are divided:
"Finance Minister Stephen Joyce told Newshub Mr Ngaro’s comments
weren’t damaging to National, just "a little bit of naivety from the
new guy".
"Alfred’s realised he’s overstepped the mark there," Mr Joyce said.
Political commentator Matthew Hooton said if Mr Ngaro has been quoted >correctly, he'd need to be fired for "almost boasting of corruption"."
An image is shown of Hootons message: "If report is true,
@pmbillenglish really should sack @AlfredNgaroMP immediately. He's
almost boasting of corruption. …"
Steven Joyce's comment is effectively an admission that Mgaro hasn;t
yet learned to lie like an experienced Nat MP, but the charge of
corruption from a supporter of the right will be harder to shake . .
..
On Sun, 14 May 2017 17:40:07 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>Indeed - he has undoubtledly been told that such bulying must never be
wrote:
https://www.newsroom.co.nz/2017/05/13/27104/national-unleashes-housing-man-against-the-doubters
This is of course entirely consistent with NAtional just happening to >>remove funding from charities that darte to critice the government,
but is perhaps geetting a little explict . . .
Then: - >>http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/05/mp-wants-labour-candidate-willie-jackson-to-stop-bagging-the-govt.html
But National are divided:
"Finance Minister Stephen Joyce told Newshub Mr Ngaro’s comments
weren’t damaging to National, just "a little bit of naivety from the
new guy".
"Alfred’s realised he’s overstepped the mark there," Mr Joyce said.
Political commentator Matthew Hooton said if Mr Ngaro has been quoted >>correctly, he'd need to be fired for "almost boasting of corruption"."
An image is shown of Hootons message: "If report is true,
@pmbillenglish really should sack @AlfredNgaroMP immediately. He's
almost boasting of corruption. …"
Steven Joyce's comment is effectively an admission that Mgaro hasn;t
yet learned to lie like an experienced Nat MP, but the charge of
corruption from a supporter of the right will be harder to shake . .
..
Ngaro was incredibly naive in saying what he said. Some would say he
was stupid. It seems very likely that he is in no doubt what his
colleagues think of it.
Where the Government uses external service providers it would be
totally unacceptable to tie Government spending to suppression of
political viewpoints critical of any political party. This episode is
now mostly absent from media coverage to it is fairly safe to conclude
that this has not actually happened.
Ngaro was incredibly naive in saying what he said. Some would say he
was stupid. It seems very likely that he is in no doubt what his
colleagues think of it.
Where the Government uses external service providers it would be
totally unacceptable to tie Government spending to suppression of
political viewpoints critical of any political party. This episode is
now mostly absent from media coverage to it is fairly safe to conclude
that this has not actually happened.
On 5/16/2017 8:54 PM, Crash wrote:Ngaro does.
Ngaro was incredibly naive in saying what he said. Some would say he
was stupid. It seems very likely that he is in no doubt what his
colleagues think of it.
Where the Government uses external service providers it would be
totally unacceptable to tie Government spending to suppression of
political viewpoints critical of any political party. This episode is
now mostly absent from media coverage to it is fairly safe to conclude
that this has not actually happened.
After the angry little mans attempts to describe immigration and
employables
I think the media are all lied out to.
Their credulity is so stretched that any polli could say anything now
without question...
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. >https://www.avast.com/antivirus
On Wed, 17 May 2017 08:07:56 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote:launches-attack-on-bill-english.html
On 5/16/2017 8:54 PM, Crash wrote:Ngaro does.
Ngaro was incredibly naive in saying what he said. Some would say heAfter the angry little mans attempts to describe immigration and >>employables I think the media are all lied out to.
was stupid. It seems very likely that he is in no doubt what his
colleagues think of it.
Where the Government uses external service providers it would be
totally unacceptable to tie Government spending to suppression of
political viewpoints critical of any political party. This episode is
now mostly absent from media coverage to it is fairly safe to conclude
that this has not actually happened.
Their credulity is so stretched that any polli could say anything now >>without question...
Perhaps you prefer credulous Mike,or even this: http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/entertainment/2017/05/john-oliver-
On Wed, 17 May 2017 08:37:44 +1200, Rich80105 wrote:As indeed I was - it was as relevant to the thread as george's
On Wed, 17 May 2017 08:07:56 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote:
On 5/16/2017 8:54 PM, Crash wrote:Ngaro does.
Ngaro was incredibly naive in saying what he said. Some would say heAfter the angry little mans attempts to describe immigration and >>>employables I think the media are all lied out to.
was stupid. It seems very likely that he is in no doubt what his
colleagues think of it.
Where the Government uses external service providers it would be
totally unacceptable to tie Government spending to suppression of
political viewpoints critical of any political party. This episode is >>>> now mostly absent from media coverage to it is fairly safe to conclude >>>> that this has not actually happened.
Their credulity is so stretched that any polli could say anything now >>>without question...
Perhaps you prefer credulous Mike,or even this:
http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/entertainment/2017/05/john-oliver- >launches-attack-on-bill-english.html
Are you serious? We should adjust our voting preferences on the strength
of a transplanted Brit comedian's fulminations on American TV?
Yagottabekidding.
On Wed, 17 May 2017 00:31:13 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKeyIf they cannot be proved (sic) then you cannot sustain your allegation.
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On Wed, 17 May 2017 08:37:44 +1200, Rich80105 wrote:As indeed I was - it was as relevant to the thread as george's
On Wed, 17 May 2017 08:07:56 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote:
On 5/16/2017 8:54 PM, Crash wrote:Ngaro does.
Ngaro was incredibly naive in saying what he said. Some would say he >>>>> was stupid. It seems very likely that he is in no doubt what hisAfter the angry little mans attempts to describe immigration and >>>>employables I think the media are all lied out to.
colleagues think of it.
Where the Government uses external service providers it would be
totally unacceptable to tie Government spending to suppression of
political viewpoints critical of any political party. This episode is >>>>> now mostly absent from media coverage to it is fairly safe to conclude >>>>> that this has not actually happened.
Their credulity is so stretched that any polli could say anything now >>>>without question...
Perhaps you prefer credulous Mike,or even this:
http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/entertainment/2017/05/john-oliver- >>launches-attack-on-bill-english.html
Are you serious? We should adjust our voting preferences on the strength >>of a transplanted Brit comedian's fulminations on American TV?
Yagottabekidding.
knee-jerk "blame the opposition - if you can't find anything relevant
blame them for something! anything!" post.
The reality is that we do need to be vigilant in ensuring that our
country deserves its reputation for lack of corruption - which
regretably has dropped slightly in recent years . . . perhaps due to
the reality behind Ngaro's stupid admission of his perception that
such illegal actions are acceptable - his colleagues know that they
are only OK to National if they are deniable and unable to be proved .
. .
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, 17 May 2017 00:31:13 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKeyIf they cannot be proved (sic) then you cannot sustain your allegation.
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On Wed, 17 May 2017 08:37:44 +1200, Rich80105 wrote:As indeed I was - it was as relevant to the thread as george's
On Wed, 17 May 2017 08:07:56 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote: >>>>
On 5/16/2017 8:54 PM, Crash wrote:Ngaro does.
Ngaro was incredibly naive in saying what he said. Some would say he >>>>>> was stupid. It seems very likely that he is in no doubt what hisAfter the angry little mans attempts to describe immigration and >>>>>employables I think the media are all lied out to.
colleagues think of it.
Where the Government uses external service providers it would be
totally unacceptable to tie Government spending to suppression of
political viewpoints critical of any political party. This episode is >>>>>> now mostly absent from media coverage to it is fairly safe to conclude >>>>>> that this has not actually happened.
Their credulity is so stretched that any polli could say anything now >>>>>without question...
Perhaps you prefer credulous Mike,or even this:
http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/entertainment/2017/05/john-oliver- >>>launches-attack-on-bill-english.html
Are you serious? We should adjust our voting preferences on the strength >>>of a transplanted Brit comedian's fulminations on American TV?
Yagottabekidding.
knee-jerk "blame the opposition - if you can't find anything relevant
blame them for something! anything!" post.
The reality is that we do need to be vigilant in ensuring that our
country deserves its reputation for lack of corruption - which
regretably has dropped slightly in recent years . . . perhaps due to
the reality behind Ngaro's stupid admission of his perception that
such illegal actions are acceptable - his colleagues know that they
are only OK to National if they are deniable and unable to be proved .
. .
Tony
On Tue, 16 May 2017 23:55:51 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot netI have every problem with the missuse of the word "proved", oh I know it is common usage and I know that some of us were not given the opportunity to learn the best of the English language but there you have it!
dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, 17 May 2017 00:31:13 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKeyIf they cannot be proved (sic) then you cannot sustain your allegation.
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On Wed, 17 May 2017 08:37:44 +1200, Rich80105 wrote:As indeed I was - it was as relevant to the thread as george's
On Wed, 17 May 2017 08:07:56 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote: >>>>>
On 5/16/2017 8:54 PM, Crash wrote:Ngaro does.
Ngaro was incredibly naive in saying what he said. Some would say he >>>>>>> was stupid. It seems very likely that he is in no doubt what his >>>>>>> colleagues think of it.After the angry little mans attempts to describe immigration and >>>>>>employables I think the media are all lied out to.
Where the Government uses external service providers it would be >>>>>>> totally unacceptable to tie Government spending to suppression of >>>>>>> political viewpoints critical of any political party. This episode is >>>>>>> now mostly absent from media coverage to it is fairly safe to conclude >>>>>>> that this has not actually happened.
Their credulity is so stretched that any polli could say anything now >>>>>>without question...
Perhaps you prefer credulous Mike,or even this:
http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/entertainment/2017/05/john-oliver- >>>>launches-attack-on-bill-english.html
Are you serious? We should adjust our voting preferences on the strength >>>>of a transplanted Brit comedian's fulminations on American TV?
Yagottabekidding.
knee-jerk "blame the opposition - if you can't find anything relevant >>>blame them for something! anything!" post.
The reality is that we do need to be vigilant in ensuring that our >>>country deserves its reputation for lack of corruption - which
regretably has dropped slightly in recent years . . . perhaps due to
the reality behind Ngaro's stupid admission of his perception that
such illegal actions are acceptable - his colleagues know that they
are only OK to National if they are deniable and unable to be proved .
. .
Tony
Perhaps we should give due credit to Ngaro for being honest about his >undersnading of standard government practice (as distinct from
officially recognised policy) in relation to those recipients of
giovernment funding who have different political views than National.
There you are credit to National for two actions in two posts! May we
be able to recognise them for complying with the law and being honest
more often!
As for proof of illegal actions (do you have a problem with the word >proved?), deniability has been a feature of government for a few years
now - at least seven by my reckoning - and of course I do not expect
them to be caught on this - unless of course a junior MP says the
wrong thing . . . All that will happen here is that if National do
retain government later this year they will need to be very careful
about any reduction in government funding for Willie Jacksons
organisations - after all perception can be nearly as effective as
legal proof on some matters. Overall, that's Willie Jackson 1, Ngaro
0.
On Wed, 17 May 2017 00:31:13 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKey <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On Wed, 17 May 2017 08:37:44 +1200, Rich80105 wrote:As indeed I was - it was as relevant to the thread as george's knee-jerk "blame the opposition - if you can't find anything relevant blame them
On Wed, 17 May 2017 08:07:56 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote:Are you serious? We should adjust our voting preferences on the
On 5/16/2017 8:54 PM, Crash wrote:Ngaro does.
Ngaro was incredibly naive in saying what he said. Some would sayAfter the angry little mans attempts to describe immigration and >>>>employables I think the media are all lied out to.
he was stupid. It seems very likely that he is in no doubt what his >>>>> colleagues think of it.
Where the Government uses external service providers it would be
totally unacceptable to tie Government spending to suppression of
political viewpoints critical of any political party. This episode
is now mostly absent from media coverage to it is fairly safe to
conclude that this has not actually happened.
Their credulity is so stretched that any polli could say anything now >>>>without question...
Perhaps you prefer credulous Mike,or even this:
http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/entertainment/2017/05/john-oliver- >>launches-attack-on-bill-english.html
strength of a transplanted Brit comedian's fulminations on American TV?
Yagottabekidding.
for something! anything!" post.
The reality is that we do need to be vigilant in ensuring that our
country deserves its reputation for lack of corruption - which
regretably has dropped slightly in recent years . . . perhaps due to the reality behind Ngaro's stupid admission of his perception that such
illegal actions are acceptable - his colleagues know that they are only
OK to National if they are deniable and unable to be proved .
. .
On Wed, 17 May 2017 08:37:44 +1200, Rich80105 wrote:
On Wed, 17 May 2017 08:07:56 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote:launches-attack-on-bill-english.html
On 5/16/2017 8:54 PM, Crash wrote:Ngaro does.
Ngaro was incredibly naive in saying what he said. Some would say heAfter the angry little mans attempts to describe immigration and
was stupid. It seems very likely that he is in no doubt what his
colleagues think of it.
Where the Government uses external service providers it would be
totally unacceptable to tie Government spending to suppression of
political viewpoints critical of any political party. This episode is >>>> now mostly absent from media coverage to it is fairly safe to conclude >>>> that this has not actually happened.
employables I think the media are all lied out to.
Their credulity is so stretched that any polli could say anything now
without question...
Perhaps you prefer credulous Mike,or even this:
http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/entertainment/2017/05/john-oliver-
Are you serious? We should adjust our voting preferences on the strength
of a transplanted Brit comedian's fulminations on American TV?
Yagottabekidding.
On Wed, 17 May 2017 00:31:13 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKey
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On Wed, 17 May 2017 08:37:44 +1200, Rich80105 wrote:As indeed I was - it was as relevant to the thread as george's
On Wed, 17 May 2017 08:07:56 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote:launches-attack-on-bill-english.html
On 5/16/2017 8:54 PM, Crash wrote:Ngaro does.
Ngaro was incredibly naive in saying what he said. Some would say he >>>>> was stupid. It seems very likely that he is in no doubt what hisAfter the angry little mans attempts to describe immigration and
colleagues think of it.
Where the Government uses external service providers it would be
totally unacceptable to tie Government spending to suppression of
political viewpoints critical of any political party. This episode is >>>>> now mostly absent from media coverage to it is fairly safe to conclude >>>>> that this has not actually happened.
employables I think the media are all lied out to.
Their credulity is so stretched that any polli could say anything now
without question...
Perhaps you prefer credulous Mike,or even this:
http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/entertainment/2017/05/john-oliver-
Are you serious? We should adjust our voting preferences on the strength
of a transplanted Brit comedian's fulminations on American TV?
Yagottabekidding.
knee-jerk "blame the opposition - if you can't find anything relevant
blame them for something! anything!" post.
The reality is that we do need to be vigilant in ensuring that our
country deserves its reputation for lack of corruption - which
regretably has dropped slightly in recent years . . . perhaps due to
the reality behind Ngaro's stupid admission of his perception that
such illegal actions are acceptable - his colleagues know that they
are only OK to National if they are deniable and unable to be proved .
. .
On Wed, 17 May 2017 16:13:48 +1200, Rich80105 wrote:
On Wed, 17 May 2017 00:31:13 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKey <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On Wed, 17 May 2017 08:37:44 +1200, Rich80105 wrote:As indeed I was - it was as relevant to the thread as george's knee-jerk
On Wed, 17 May 2017 08:07:56 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote: >>>>launches-attack-on-bill-english.html
On 5/16/2017 8:54 PM, Crash wrote:Ngaro does.
Ngaro was incredibly naive in saying what he said. Some would say >>>>>> he was stupid. It seems very likely that he is in no doubt what his >>>>>> colleagues think of it.After the angry little mans attempts to describe immigration and
Where the Government uses external service providers it would be
totally unacceptable to tie Government spending to suppression of
political viewpoints critical of any political party. This episode >>>>>> is now mostly absent from media coverage to it is fairly safe to
conclude that this has not actually happened.
employables I think the media are all lied out to.
Their credulity is so stretched that any polli could say anything now >>>>> without question...
Perhaps you prefer credulous Mike,or even this:
http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/entertainment/2017/05/john-oliver-
Are you serious? We should adjust our voting preferences on the
strength of a transplanted Brit comedian's fulminations on American TV?
Yagottabekidding.
"blame the opposition - if you can't find anything relevant blame them
for something! anything!" post.
The reality is that we do need to be vigilant in ensuring that our
country deserves its reputation for lack of corruption - which
regretably has dropped slightly in recent years . . . perhaps due to the
reality behind Ngaro's stupid admission of his perception that such
illegal actions are acceptable - his colleagues know that they are only
OK to National if they are deniable and unable to be proved .
. .
You can't possibly know if those things are true. So I assume you're attempting to out-Trump Trump in deploying opinion, assumption and unsupported assertion as if they were fact.
On Wed, 17 May 2017 16:13:48 +1200, Rich80105 wrote:
On Wed, 17 May 2017 00:31:13 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKey <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On Wed, 17 May 2017 08:37:44 +1200, Rich80105 wrote:As indeed I was - it was as relevant to the thread as george's knee-jerk
On Wed, 17 May 2017 08:07:56 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote: >>>>launches-attack-on-bill-english.html
On 5/16/2017 8:54 PM, Crash wrote:Ngaro does.
Ngaro was incredibly naive in saying what he said. Some would say >>>>>> he was stupid. It seems very likely that he is in no doubt what his >>>>>> colleagues think of it.After the angry little mans attempts to describe immigration and
Where the Government uses external service providers it would be
totally unacceptable to tie Government spending to suppression of
political viewpoints critical of any political party. This episode >>>>>> is now mostly absent from media coverage to it is fairly safe to
conclude that this has not actually happened.
employables I think the media are all lied out to.
Their credulity is so stretched that any polli could say anything now >>>>> without question...
Perhaps you prefer credulous Mike,or even this:
http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/entertainment/2017/05/john-oliver-
Are you serious? We should adjust our voting preferences on the
strength of a transplanted Brit comedian's fulminations on American TV?
Yagottabekidding.
"blame the opposition - if you can't find anything relevant blame them
for something! anything!" post.
The reality is that we do need to be vigilant in ensuring that our
country deserves its reputation for lack of corruption - which
regretably has dropped slightly in recent years . . . perhaps due to the
reality behind Ngaro's stupid admission of his perception that such
illegal actions are acceptable - his colleagues know that they are only
OK to National if they are deniable and unable to be proved .
. .
You can't possibly know if those things are true. So I assume you're attempting to out-Trump Trump in deploying opinion, assumption and unsupported assertion as if they were fact.
On Wed, 17 May 2017 16:13:48 +1200, Rich80105 wrote:
On Wed, 17 May 2017 00:31:13 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKey <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On Wed, 17 May 2017 08:37:44 +1200, Rich80105 wrote:As indeed I was - it was as relevant to the thread as george's knee-jerk
On Wed, 17 May 2017 08:07:56 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote: >>>>Are you serious? We should adjust our voting preferences on the
On 5/16/2017 8:54 PM, Crash wrote:Ngaro does.
Ngaro was incredibly naive in saying what he said. Some would say >>>>>> he was stupid. It seems very likely that he is in no doubt what his >>>>>> colleagues think of it.After the angry little mans attempts to describe immigration and >>>>>employables I think the media are all lied out to.
Where the Government uses external service providers it would be
totally unacceptable to tie Government spending to suppression of
political viewpoints critical of any political party. This episode >>>>>> is now mostly absent from media coverage to it is fairly safe to
conclude that this has not actually happened.
Their credulity is so stretched that any polli could say anything now >>>>>without question...
Perhaps you prefer credulous Mike,or even this:
http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/entertainment/2017/05/john-oliver- >>>launches-attack-on-bill-english.html
strength of a transplanted Brit comedian's fulminations on American TV?
Yagottabekidding.
"blame the opposition - if you can't find anything relevant blame them
for something! anything!" post.
The reality is that we do need to be vigilant in ensuring that our
country deserves its reputation for lack of corruption - which
regretably has dropped slightly in recent years . . . perhaps due to the
reality behind Ngaro's stupid admission of his perception that such
illegal actions are acceptable - his colleagues know that they are only
OK to National if they are deniable and unable to be proved .
. .
You can't possibly know if those things are true. So I assume you're >attempting to out-Trump Trump in deploying opinion, assumption and >unsupported assertion as if they were fact.
On Wed, 17 May 2017 10:17:29 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKey <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On Wed, 17 May 2017 16:13:48 +1200, Rich80105 wrote:
On Wed, 17 May 2017 00:31:13 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKey
<nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On Wed, 17 May 2017 08:37:44 +1200, Rich80105 wrote:As indeed I was - it was as relevant to the thread as george's
On Wed, 17 May 2017 08:07:56 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net>Are you serious? We should adjust our voting preferences on the >>>>strength of a transplanted Brit comedian's fulminations on American
wrote:
On 5/16/2017 8:54 PM, Crash wrote:Ngaro does.
Ngaro was incredibly naive in saying what he said. Some would say >>>>>>> he was stupid. It seems very likely that he is in no doubt what >>>>>>> his colleagues think of it.After the angry little mans attempts to describe immigration and >>>>>>employables I think the media are all lied out to.
Where the Government uses external service providers it would be >>>>>>> totally unacceptable to tie Government spending to suppression of >>>>>>> political viewpoints critical of any political party. This
episode is now mostly absent from media coverage to it is fairly >>>>>>> safe to conclude that this has not actually happened.
Their credulity is so stretched that any polli could say anything >>>>>>now without question...
Perhaps you prefer credulous Mike,or even this:
http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/entertainment/2017/05/john-oliver- >>>>launches-attack-on-bill-english.html
TV?
Yagottabekidding.
knee-jerk "blame the opposition - if you can't find anything relevant
blame them for something! anything!" post.
The reality is that we do need to be vigilant in ensuring that our
country deserves its reputation for lack of corruption - which
regretably has dropped slightly in recent years . . . perhaps due to
the reality behind Ngaro's stupid admission of his perception that
such illegal actions are acceptable - his colleagues know that they
are only OK to National if they are deniable and unable to be proved .
. .
You can't possibly know if those things are true. So I assume you're >>attempting to out-Trump Trump in deploying opinion, assumption and >>unsupported assertion as if they were fact.
Ngaro has not attempted to deny that he meant what he said - he just apologised to the prime minister for unsing the wrong words. As your
post demonstrates, there is general acceptance within National and its supporters that complying with the law is not necessary so long as there
is plausible deniability. And if that fails to stop criticism, deflect, attack, deny and if all else fails just lie.
My post demonstrates nothing of the sort. But yours demonstrates how distorted your little world really is. Just like Trump's.
On 5/18/2017 5:40 PM, HitAnyKey wrote:
My post demonstrates nothing of the sort. But yours demonstrates howIsn't there anything else in your world than an American President? You
distorted your little world really is. Just like Trump's.
cant and dont vote in the US.
Your opinion is just that it has as much or even less relevance than
that of the insane left who cannot bear to be in a democracy.
As for Ngaro... how about opposing him at the coming election and
showing him up????
On Wed, 17 May 2017 10:17:29 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKey
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On Wed, 17 May 2017 16:13:48 +1200, Rich80105 wrote:
On Wed, 17 May 2017 00:31:13 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKey <nobody@nowhere.com> >>> wrote:
On Wed, 17 May 2017 08:37:44 +1200, Rich80105 wrote:As indeed I was - it was as relevant to the thread as george's knee-jerk >>> "blame the opposition - if you can't find anything relevant blame them
On Wed, 17 May 2017 08:07:56 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote: >>>>>Are you serious? We should adjust our voting preferences on the >>>>strength of a transplanted Brit comedian's fulminations on American TV? >>>>
On 5/16/2017 8:54 PM, Crash wrote:Ngaro does.
Ngaro was incredibly naive in saying what he said. Some would say >>>>>>> he was stupid. It seems very likely that he is in no doubt what his >>>>>>> colleagues think of it.After the angry little mans attempts to describe immigration and >>>>>>employables I think the media are all lied out to.
Where the Government uses external service providers it would be >>>>>>> totally unacceptable to tie Government spending to suppression of >>>>>>> political viewpoints critical of any political party. This episode >>>>>>> is now mostly absent from media coverage to it is fairly safe to >>>>>>> conclude that this has not actually happened.
Their credulity is so stretched that any polli could say anything now >>>>>>without question...
Perhaps you prefer credulous Mike,or even this:
http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/entertainment/2017/05/john-oliver- >>>>launches-attack-on-bill-english.html
Yagottabekidding.
for something! anything!" post.
The reality is that we do need to be vigilant in ensuring that our
country deserves its reputation for lack of corruption - which
regretably has dropped slightly in recent years . . . perhaps due to the >>> reality behind Ngaro's stupid admission of his perception that such
illegal actions are acceptable - his colleagues know that they are only
OK to National if they are deniable and unable to be proved .
. .
You can't possibly know if those things are true. So I assume you're >>attempting to out-Trump Trump in deploying opinion, assumption and >>unsupported assertion as if they were fact.
Ngaro has not attempted to deny that he meant what he said - he just >apologised to the prime minister for unsing the wrong words.
As your
post demonstrates, there is general acceptance within National and its >supporters that complying with the law is not necessary so long as
there is plausible deniability. And if that fails to stop criticism, >deflect, attack, deny and if all else fails just lie.
On Thu, 18 May 2017 12:10:01 +1200, Rich80105 wrote:
On Wed, 17 May 2017 10:17:29 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKey <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On Wed, 17 May 2017 16:13:48 +1200, Rich80105 wrote:
On Wed, 17 May 2017 00:31:13 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKey
<nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On Wed, 17 May 2017 08:37:44 +1200, Rich80105 wrote:As indeed I was - it was as relevant to the thread as george's
On Wed, 17 May 2017 08:07:56 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net>launches-attack-on-bill-english.html
wrote:
On 5/16/2017 8:54 PM, Crash wrote:Ngaro does.
Ngaro was incredibly naive in saying what he said. Some would say >>>>>>>> he was stupid. It seems very likely that he is in no doubt what >>>>>>>> his colleagues think of it.After the angry little mans attempts to describe immigration and >>>>>>> employables I think the media are all lied out to.
Where the Government uses external service providers it would be >>>>>>>> totally unacceptable to tie Government spending to suppression of >>>>>>>> political viewpoints critical of any political party. This
episode is now mostly absent from media coverage to it is fairly >>>>>>>> safe to conclude that this has not actually happened.
Their credulity is so stretched that any polli could say anything >>>>>>> now without question...
Perhaps you prefer credulous Mike,or even this:
http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/entertainment/2017/05/john-oliver-
Are you serious? We should adjust our voting preferences on the
strength of a transplanted Brit comedian's fulminations on American
TV?
Yagottabekidding.
knee-jerk "blame the opposition - if you can't find anything relevant
blame them for something! anything!" post.
The reality is that we do need to be vigilant in ensuring that our
country deserves its reputation for lack of corruption - which
regretably has dropped slightly in recent years . . . perhaps due to
the reality behind Ngaro's stupid admission of his perception that
such illegal actions are acceptable - his colleagues know that they
are only OK to National if they are deniable and unable to be proved . >>>> . .
You can't possibly know if those things are true. So I assume you're
attempting to out-Trump Trump in deploying opinion, assumption and
unsupported assertion as if they were fact.
Ngaro has not attempted to deny that he meant what he said - he just
apologised to the prime minister for unsing the wrong words. As your
post demonstrates, there is general acceptance within National and its
supporters that complying with the law is not necessary so long as there
is plausible deniability. And if that fails to stop criticism, deflect,
attack, deny and if all else fails just lie.
My post demonstrates nothing of the sort. But yours demonstrates how distorted your little world really is. Just like Trump's.
| Sysop: | sneaky |
|---|---|
| Location: | Ashburton,NZ |
| Users: | 31 |
| Nodes: | 8 (0 / 8) |
| Uptime: | 17:32:31 |
| Calls: | 2,095 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 11,142 |
| Messages: | 949,473 |