Standing for Women - NZ tour discussion. (To prevent further derailing of the thread for centring the women)

I bet they get away with it

And "accused of throwing juice"? He is on film doing it and has been publicly boasting about it ever since. It's not in doubt that he threw juice or soup or whatever it was. I suppose his defence is that his action was not assault, but throwing liquid on someone is assault in many countries. Can anyone clarify whether it comes under the legal definition of assault in NZ?

Oh Stuff and most nz media are just embarrassing. Journalism isn’t something they’re good at.

"Parker, who calls herself a women’s rights supporter, was appearing to speak at Auckland’s Albert Park last month when she was doused in a bottle of tomato juice and had to be rushed away by security.
Her planned speech was cancelled amid scuffles and the rest of her New Zealand tour was aborted."

My bolding. Did I just read that above an advert claiming this outlet offers "New Zealand's best journalism"? Scuffles?! I can't believe anyone could think that was an appropriate word to describe what I saw. NZ journalism is in a sorry bloody state if that's the best.

Thanks, I won’t click on Stuff! They’ve already admitted it and said they’d do it again

Unfortunately I can't see any archives on the usual sites. Hopefully someone somewhere has a copy/download.

https://www.gov.scot/publications/wildlife-management-scotland-consultation/pages/5/

'Muirburn is a complex issue, with research suggesting that muirburn has both beneficial and adverse effects. If it is undertaken without due consideration of all the possible consequences, it undoubtedly has the potential to have a serious negative impact on wildlife and the wider environment. However, it can also have a positive impact, creating beneficial habitats for certain species or helping reduce fuel loads and lower the risk of wildfires.'

The station has now been shut down. The interview is no longer available. Is it archived somewhere?

Thanks for the further info on burning, @Helleofabore that stirred up more detailed memories of the article.

And the muirburb, @ArabellaScott - I knew about it, but didn't know the name. I'm not sure if they still do it in England, but it was the practice in Northumberland, Cumberland and York Moors. It's very bad for invertebrates and small animals.

'The station was abruptly taken off the air on 30 March 2023, just over a year after the station launched. During a broadcast of Duncan Garner Today, O'Brien and other Today FM staff came on the air to announce they were being shuttered, with O'Brien candidly quipping "They have fucked us."'

Crikey, that's a bit sudden.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/tv-radio/300843127/people-crying-and-shellshocked-today-fm-presenters-duncan-garner-tova-obrien-say-farewell-live-on-air

Oh! Today FM has been taken off air.

https://cdn.mediaworks.nz/todayfm/todayfm-msg.html

Funnily enough we have similar discussions in Scotland about the muirburn.

https://www.climatexchange.org.uk/research/projects/muirburn-peatland-and-peat-soils/

Of course the history and context is very different!

Thanks for info namity.
I wasn't aware of that protest.

Bush!

I’m not sure, maybe it depends who you talk to but firestick farming is better than the busy fires of recent years.

Fire is another issue, says Dr Ens. In the absence of traditional burning – characterised by regular controlled low-intensity fires – the unchecked growth of “above-ground biomass” has led to the large, high-intensity and incredibly destructive bushfires that have ravaged Australia in recent years.
This has resulted in change to the whole ecosystem,” says Dr Ens. “In some places, we’ve seen declines in rainforest-type species and other reductions in species that require longer intervals between fire or lower intensity fire.”
Recent years has seen a renewed appreciation for practices such as fire-stick farming. “In Northern Australia where I work,” says Dr Ens, “the reintroduction of traditional burning practices has reduced those big late dry season fires, so we have lower intensity burns.

When Europeans arrived in 1788, they brought with them an approach to land management that was in direct conflict with the long-established practices of the continent’s Aboriginal custodians. They seized and cleared land and built fences to demarcate property ownership, a concept unheard of in Aboriginal thinking.

They quickly prohibited the practice of traditional burning, which allowed ‘understorey’ vegetation to grow unchecked and crowd out previously productive grasslands.

www.sbs.com.au/topics/voices/culture/article/2021/03/17/firestick-farming-how-traditional-indigenous-burning-protected-bush

They were surplus and just got rid of.

No these children what not surplus. Many were loved babies that women were tricked into handing over for temporary care whilst they tried to find work and a home, having been abandoned by the father. Often as not those doing this were nuns, and social services were complicit.

These stolen babies where then sent to various part of the then UK "colonies" to not only be cheap labour, but help create a white majority in lands where white people were a minority trying to usurp and occupy the land of the native peoples.

I dont have time to find the links but there was a famoun film made about this, and it was only recently that apologies have been issued by current governments about this abuse and kidnapping.

Not sure that the UK itself has ever apologised.

I might be misremembering but I think part of the reason for shipping over British kids was demographics. Perhaps partly to swamp the indigenous people and partly to have a large population of people with a loyalty to a British motherland going forward.

And the massed shipping out of working class children was largely carried out by do-gooders making decisions about unfit parents Not Like Them, and about what a wonderful thing they were doing for those children, removing them from poor adults (and socially punishing said adults.) It was not properly investigated or thought about as to the appalling destruction of families and the appalling abuse many of those children were sent to.

And it escalated into this appalling mess from initial good intentions by those seeing children sent up chimneys and dying of starvation on the streets in London, who hoped that by funding these children in extremity to go to a country in desperate need of labour on the land, they stood more chance of living to adulthood.

So many parallels of escalation and snobbery/righteousness.

Children from the UK were sent to Australia and also Canada and were used as servants, mistreated, etc. They were surplus and just got rid of. This horror doesn't only affect indigenous people - though, of course, most of the children from the UK were indigenous (English DNA is mostly Celtic with a dash of Anglo-Saxon). Misery for many. Do not forget the those poor children.

@DameMaud I'd assumed the "whether its soup or a brick" comment was a reference to the Protests outside the parliament that began peacefully but ended in street fighting on 2nd March. Sort of a deliberate comparison between the really bad protesters (who threw bricks) and the better protesters (who only threw soup if you ignore everything else that happened). But I hadn't spotted its similarity to Eli and Musky's comments