Silly, contrived pic, for sure. Winklemann's hand on thrust right thigh is pathetic and absurd for the head of a country's highest court. Weird egomaniacs. Kos appears to have cashed in his credibility
A line will have to be drawn by this Government, somewhere and sometime soon. This nonsense is so corrosive to our democracy it is almost unbelievable that it is spouted by a Supreme Court judge.
If these judges refuse to support our democratic principles and the rules of our democratically elected Government, they should go.
Given the nature of the characters involved, I would suggest that He Puapua was not historically dependent upon John Key. And perhaps not even dependent upon Pita Sharples. The authors of that rampant report would have come to it anyway, sooner or later. Key and Sharples merely provided them with an immediate pretext upon which to act...
Loved the piece. Especially appreciating your propensity for calling a spade a spade. (Oh crap, am I allowed to say that these days?…). These activist judges display such arrogance which is unfortunately not matched by general intelligence. Now I may not be a smart man, but I know BS when I hear it, and the cultural windmills they are tilting at are neither legally nor logically sound.
It used to be custom for Maori to eat their vanquished enemies, after murdering them, enslaving women and children survivors, raping them also, and shrinking their heads and using them in trade, and they weren't beyond throwing European toddlers into the air and impaling them on javelins after killing their families. Are these the customs Glazebrook wants incorporated into New Zealand law?
John … you forgot to mention that in addition to the photoshop portrait, you still can’t save her from looking like a front end loader! In the horizontal you could build a bridge out of her. At that point she would become potentially useful.
I'm quite interested in the pic of our esteemed Supremes.
Maybe you should get an opinion on it from a professional body language expert?
Firstly, what is betrayed by the stance of those holding their hands cupped together uncomfortably in front of their loins? Could this possibly be a sign of effective eunuchisation?
Then, what of those holding hands confidently by their sides?
And thirdly, what is the meaning of keeping one hand in pocket?
No-one's hand is low enough to be protecting their loinal region, unless I have to go back and revisit 5th form biology? But, now you mention it, it IS interesting what Steven Kos's right hand is doing...
On a more mundane note it probably says something about the wisdom of Judges writing and delivering papers extra judicially on contentious topics, especially if the issues are likely to come before them
Tikanga "law" is an invisible and indistinct figment of Maori and judicial imagination, incapable of clear definition and as varied in its manifestations as there are iwi and hapu. How can such a nebulous concept be pressed into the Rules of NZ law?
Silly, contrived pic, for sure. Winklemann's hand on thrust right thigh is pathetic and absurd for the head of a country's highest court. Weird egomaniacs. Kos appears to have cashed in his credibility
A line will have to be drawn by this Government, somewhere and sometime soon. This nonsense is so corrosive to our democracy it is almost unbelievable that it is spouted by a Supreme Court judge.
If these judges refuse to support our democratic principles and the rules of our democratically elected Government, they should go.
Rein them in, the sooner the better.
Given the nature of the characters involved, I would suggest that He Puapua was not historically dependent upon John Key. And perhaps not even dependent upon Pita Sharples. The authors of that rampant report would have come to it anyway, sooner or later. Key and Sharples merely provided them with an immediate pretext upon which to act...
Loved the piece. Especially appreciating your propensity for calling a spade a spade. (Oh crap, am I allowed to say that these days?…). These activist judges display such arrogance which is unfortunately not matched by general intelligence. Now I may not be a smart man, but I know BS when I hear it, and the cultural windmills they are tilting at are neither legally nor logically sound.
It used to be custom for Maori to eat their vanquished enemies, after murdering them, enslaving women and children survivors, raping them also, and shrinking their heads and using them in trade, and they weren't beyond throwing European toddlers into the air and impaling them on javelins after killing their families. Are these the customs Glazebrook wants incorporated into New Zealand law?
John … you forgot to mention that in addition to the photoshop portrait, you still can’t save her from looking like a front end loader! In the horizontal you could build a bridge out of her. At that point she would become potentially useful.
Thanks John an excellent afternoon read.
I'm quite interested in the pic of our esteemed Supremes.
Maybe you should get an opinion on it from a professional body language expert?
Firstly, what is betrayed by the stance of those holding their hands cupped together uncomfortably in front of their loins? Could this possibly be a sign of effective eunuchisation?
Then, what of those holding hands confidently by their sides?
And thirdly, what is the meaning of keeping one hand in pocket?
Be sure, 'the image betrayeth the man'...
No-one's hand is low enough to be protecting their loinal region, unless I have to go back and revisit 5th form biology? But, now you mention it, it IS interesting what Steven Kos's right hand is doing...
Interesting piece John - I sense the passion.
On a more mundane note it probably says something about the wisdom of Judges writing and delivering papers extra judicially on contentious topics, especially if the issues are likely to come before them
I strongly suspect Glazebrook regards herself as much more than simply a judge!
Tikanga "law" is an invisible and indistinct figment of Maori and judicial imagination, incapable of clear definition and as varied in its manifestations as there are iwi and hapu. How can such a nebulous concept be pressed into the Rules of NZ law?