The Herald have once again taken a knee and shown that they are nothing more than weak puppets. No winder MSM is no longer trusted by the vast majority of the population.
I was an irregular speaker at Speaker's Corner in te late 1960s. I soke for Hyde Park Torie. We claimed to be a lone, sane voice amongst all the socialists. It was great fun, much heckling and laughter. Then tea in the nearby Lions Corner House with many of the other speakers.
It is interesting that the various "offended" law bodies talk of Hobson's pledge "misleading" herald readers.
Setting aside the fact that readers of the herald are misled daily, on any number of topics they raise a specific point:
"Moreover, wāhi tapu are subject to statutory restrictions, and cannot, for example, prevent fishers from taking their lawful entitlement in a quota or fisheries management area.”
This is absolutely false.
During the recent summer my family and I went camping at Pakiri beach.
Arriving in the early evening, we went for a walk to the south end of the beach along the mid tide point of the beach near the waters edge.
About 500 metres south of the camp ground entrance a car suddenly drove up to us with two people inside and a lot of barking dogs. An extremely aggressive women asked us "can you not read". They then explained to us that it was forbidden to walk or fish on the south of the beach due to a rahui. We were forced to turn around.
In the morning we could see the signs at the high tide mark stating that the south part of the beach was closed to walking and fishing due to a rahui. The signs were hand painted, there was no evidence of any statutory notices. A car was often parked at the beach beside the signs with two or three people staring up the beach in what can be best described as a "staunch" manner.
Setting aside the obvious question of how closing about 10% of a beach from fishing, while anyone can fish on the other 90% of the beach, will help the fish recover, one could also observe that there were many dwellings at that end of the beach (almost solely at that end of the beach), and that many "acceptable" people were often walking on that part of the beach and on one day seemed to be fishing.
Now I will carefully separate "facts" from "opinion" here (although I find that a bizzare requirement for advertising given the nature of advertising generally and especially political advertising like the hobsons pledge advert - hyperbole being very much the current trend in political speech of all stripes).
Factually New Zelanders were not allowed access to the south end of piha beach, for any reason, due to a "rahui". This was factually enforced in an aggressive manner by two random people who had no offical capacity that I could discern.
In my opinion, this had nothing to do with protecting fish, or the beach and everything to do with the exclusive enjoyment of the beach by a very small group of people who were lucky enough to have houses mere metres away from one of New Zealands most spectacular beaches.
Yes it is. Thanks for this & good to hear about your very recent experience at Speakers' Cnr. 'Deep sigh' seems to be the current remark at such exasperating nonsense like the Herald wrap ad, the disgusting spectacle of male-bodied individuals boxing females in the Olympics because cross-dressing trannies must be indulged at the expense of women, the desertion of common sense in our lives generally. 'Beam me up Scotty' to our formerly sensible planet.
The Herald have once again taken a knee and shown that they are nothing more than weak puppets. No winder MSM is no longer trusted by the vast majority of the population.
I was an irregular speaker at Speaker's Corner in te late 1960s. I soke for Hyde Park Torie. We claimed to be a lone, sane voice amongst all the socialists. It was great fun, much heckling and laughter. Then tea in the nearby Lions Corner House with many of the other speakers.
Great post, thank you sir.
It is interesting that the various "offended" law bodies talk of Hobson's pledge "misleading" herald readers.
Setting aside the fact that readers of the herald are misled daily, on any number of topics they raise a specific point:
"Moreover, wāhi tapu are subject to statutory restrictions, and cannot, for example, prevent fishers from taking their lawful entitlement in a quota or fisheries management area.”
This is absolutely false.
During the recent summer my family and I went camping at Pakiri beach.
Arriving in the early evening, we went for a walk to the south end of the beach along the mid tide point of the beach near the waters edge.
About 500 metres south of the camp ground entrance a car suddenly drove up to us with two people inside and a lot of barking dogs. An extremely aggressive women asked us "can you not read". They then explained to us that it was forbidden to walk or fish on the south of the beach due to a rahui. We were forced to turn around.
In the morning we could see the signs at the high tide mark stating that the south part of the beach was closed to walking and fishing due to a rahui. The signs were hand painted, there was no evidence of any statutory notices. A car was often parked at the beach beside the signs with two or three people staring up the beach in what can be best described as a "staunch" manner.
Setting aside the obvious question of how closing about 10% of a beach from fishing, while anyone can fish on the other 90% of the beach, will help the fish recover, one could also observe that there were many dwellings at that end of the beach (almost solely at that end of the beach), and that many "acceptable" people were often walking on that part of the beach and on one day seemed to be fishing.
Now I will carefully separate "facts" from "opinion" here (although I find that a bizzare requirement for advertising given the nature of advertising generally and especially political advertising like the hobsons pledge advert - hyperbole being very much the current trend in political speech of all stripes).
Factually New Zelanders were not allowed access to the south end of piha beach, for any reason, due to a "rahui". This was factually enforced in an aggressive manner by two random people who had no offical capacity that I could discern.
In my opinion, this had nothing to do with protecting fish, or the beach and everything to do with the exclusive enjoyment of the beach by a very small group of people who were lucky enough to have houses mere metres away from one of New Zealands most spectacular beaches.
Yes it is. Thanks for this & good to hear about your very recent experience at Speakers' Cnr. 'Deep sigh' seems to be the current remark at such exasperating nonsense like the Herald wrap ad, the disgusting spectacle of male-bodied individuals boxing females in the Olympics because cross-dressing trannies must be indulged at the expense of women, the desertion of common sense in our lives generally. 'Beam me up Scotty' to our formerly sensible planet.