The Stuffers’ Joel Maxwell, described as “a senior writer with Stuff’s Pou Tiaki team” who for some years was a staff writer for the Kapiti Observer (and actually did quite a good job of it) doesn’t mean to be entertaining, he just writes such weird nonsense that you have to wonder what he smokes. The lastest from him is a piece headed “Rednecks in for surprise when they spot new traffic signs”. Here is how it starts:

Our public square in Aotearoa/New Zealand isn’t actually a square – it’s a set of long lines, intersecting and converging.

It is on our roads that we discover our fellow citizens’ deepest thoughts and feelings.

Now Waka Kotahi has launched consultation on a set of new bilingual traffic signs, which include reo Māori.

There are 94 proposed signs, covering everything from destination signs, to motorway and expressway advisory signs.

It is quaintly charming that this commitment to our indigenous language will happen on our highways – like finding an artery-spangled ‘Hang in there’ kitten poster pinned inside the Thunderdome.

New Zealanders drive like we’re working out some really deep-seated psychological hang-ups while travelling at 80kph-plus in armoured kill-machines.

Parents worry about kids playing that popular online murder game, Fortnite. After driving from Taupō to Ōtaki, I personally think of it as solid licence swot.

Read the rest (if you feel like it)

(ACT media release)

ACT New Zealand Housing spokesperson Brooke van Velden welcomed National Party Leader Christopher Luxon’s admission that National ’got MDRS (housing density) wrong’.

Ms van Velden said, “These comments, made at a meeting in Birkenhead today, are a welcome change from just six weeks ago when National’s housing spokesperson Chris Bishop told TVNZ’s Q+A “I’m not backing away from it”.

ACT has always known that the right answer is not to go over the head of local councils and allow increased density willy-nilly, but to support councils to build up density where they know it makes sense.

“We know there is a housing shortage, but ACT has said from the get-go that National and Labour’s housing deal was not the solution. It won’t deliver the houses it promised.

“That’s because it focused on changing our planning laws when we know it’s not the planning laws that are the issue. If it was a matter of zoning, the problem would already be solved.

“The Auckland Unitary Plan, that came into effect in 2016 has zoning for up to 900,000 more homes. Now, the Council acting on Labour and National’s new rules is rezoning streets for development. That won’t be more homes; they’ll just be in a different place to where the councils had expected them to be when they were planning for communities.

“ACT has a real solution to the housing crisis:

• Share GST from construction projects with councils so they have more resources to build the infrastructure needed to facilitate new housing development.
• Replace, the Medium Density Residential Standard with Auckland’s Mixed Housing Suburban zone. The MHS allows more intensification, but with design standards that are sympathetic to existing neighbourhoods and property owners.
• Allow Councils to unilaterally exempt areas from intensification where they face infrastructure challenges, so we don’t get sewage in the streets and other problems.

“These simple changes would put us in a much better place to go forward as a more united, less divided community, with more housing built for the next generation. We welcome National backing down on their previous position.

Only ACT opposed the misguided “townhouse bill” at the time, and without ACT pointing out the truth there would be no difference between left and right. ACT is clear and consistent on good policy, that’s the real change NZ needs.

And that’s not only the case in Jacindaland with its MSM weirdos.

from Summit News

Independent investigative journalist Glenn Greenwald succinctly summarises how ‘regime media narratives’ are formed and disseminated, and that any journalist who questions the process ends up a target for destruction by the establishment.

During his “System Update” broadcast on Rumble, Greenwald noted how “Journalists who spread conspiracy theories that the CIA wants them to spread get promoted, and the journalists who question the conspiracy theories of the CIA get destroyed.”

Glenn Greenwald highlights the irony of the editor-in-chief of The Atlantic being the journalist primarily responsible for deceiving the American public into the Iraq War:

"Let's remember that the journalist who did the most to convince Americans of the vital lie that Saddam… https://t.co/NzCOx584DT pic.twitter.com/sEXY59inmJ

— KanekoaTheGreat (@KanekoaTheGreat) May 23, 2023

“It’s not prohibited in American corporate journalism to spread false stories and conspiracy theories,” Greenwald asserted, adding “In fact, that’s the only way you can thrive in journalism.”

“The people who have lied the most, and who spread the most conspiracy theories, are the ones who have been promoted and enriched most within corporate journalism,” he further urged.

“The difference is, the way to advance in journalism is to tell lies and spread conspiracy theories on behalf of the CIA, and that advance the interests of the U.S. government. That is not only permitted. That is required to be promoted,” Greenwald emphasised.

He continued, “What you can’t do, the thing that [Seymour] Hersh did that got him expelled from journalism, is he spread what are called conspiracy theories that are against the narrative of the U.S. security state, that undermined U.S. foreign policy. That is the only thing that is prohibited. That’s what gets you kicked out of journalism.”

Greenwald was referring to Hersh’s reporting on the destruction of Russia’s Nord Stream pipeline, which the veteran journalist is adamant was a coordinated operation by U.S. intelligence.

Read the rest

National does not support bilingual traffic signs in Maori and English says its transport spokesperson, Simeon Brown. “Signs need to be clear. We all speak English, and they should be in English. Place names are okay, but when it comes to important signs saying things like ‘Expressway’, they should be in English, as it’s going to be confusing if you add more words,” he said.

The person responsible for the plan at NZTA is Katie Mayes designated as National Manager Policy & System Planning.

The announcement was put on her LinkedIn CV, naturally putting Maori text first as under this government they are not equal but superior to everyone else.

“Te Mātāwai and Waka Kotahi are launching a consultation on bilingual traffic signs. E whakarewa tahi ana a Te Mātāwai me Waka Kotahi i tētahi uiuinga e pā ana ki ngā tohu huarahi reorua. Mā te reoruatanga o ngā tohu huarahi, ka whai hua a Aotearoa whānui inarā ka māhorahora kē atu te reo Māori ki ngā tamariki, ka whakapūmautia te mana o te reo, ka mārama ngā karere whakahaumaru ki te katoa, ā, ka whai wheako motuhake te hunga taetae mai i te ao whānui. Ka tīmata te whakaputanga o ngā tohu nei i ngā tohu me whakahou, pēnei i tohu i pākatukaru kei ngā wāhi i haukerekerehia e te huripari, ā, me whai tohu hou ērā wāhi. E hāngai ana tēnei ki tā mātou rautaki whakaputa i ngā tohu reorua kia māmā ai nga utu, kia whakatūria ngā tohu hou nei ina whakahoungia ētahi tohu, ina pīrangihia ētahi tohu hou hoki. Anei ētahi tauira o ngā momo tohu ka whakamāoritia pea. E kore e whai wāhi mai ngā kōrero ka utaina ki ngā pae pāpori pāpāho, heoi anō whakatakotohia ō whakaaro ki konei. Hei te 5 karaka, Paraire 30 June 2023 kati ai tēnei uiuinga.”

“Using more te reo Māori on traffic signs will contribute to an Aotearoa New Zealand where te reo Māori is normalised for tamariki, where we recognise the mana of te reo, we make safety messages available for all people, and provide a local experience for overseas visitors. The rollout of this package will begin with signs that need to be replaced, particularly in hard-hit regions where signs were damaged during the cyclone and new signs are needed. This also reflects our low-cost implementation approach for bilingual signs, which will be introduced as existing signs are replaced or new signs are needed on the network. This graphic shows you some signs that could be made bilingual. We’d love your feedback—to make an official submission, visit our website: https://lnkd.in/gRUkaP8k Consultation closes at 5pm, Friday 30 June 2023.”

We received the following comments from Deborah Alexander

The purpose of signs is communication and safety.  But NZTA admits that their objective in cluttering up these signs is not to communicate more effectively with road users and therefore, enhance safety.  It’s to ‘normalise the use of te reo for our tamariki [children]’.  They admit to using the signage for a dual purpose, the second purpose having no relationship to NZTA’s function. Thus, our taxes will be re-directed to new signage instead of road maintenance, and Waikato District Council will find themselves with a new directive as to how they spend their limited FAR budget.

I feel this is a safety issue!

As I looked at the signs (with Te Reo on top) I, being one of the 97% of New Zealanders that do not speak Te Reo, was initially confused and then had to look twice to figure out there were word below in English.

If I was driving along I would not have time to process this.

Add in tourists from overseas not having any idea as well.

A total safety issue! PLUS a low priority use of taxpayers’ money.

Communication is the key and this ideological addition of a policy to normalise Te Reo is outside NZ Transport Agency’s job description.

Another example of this normalisation of Te Reo was the replacement of a sign on a Gisborne beach that warned about the danger of playing on the logs/slash that was on the beach and in the water. Two children were injured, one fatally and they were visitors to Gisborne.

The signs in place after these tragic events were initially in English and have since been replaced with one in Te Reo only. My mother walks the beach regularly and told me about this — so the source is 100% credible.

Motorists need to be able to read signs quickly — even at 50 km/h you’re travelling at 14 metres per second, there isn’t time to read a lot of words, particularly when the ones at the top are in an unfamilar language. —Eds

These paintings are by Cy Twombly (1928-2011), one of the most expensive contemporary artists. His paintings range from $2 million up to $70 million.

One of our readers suggests an explanation:

As a supporter of the Free Speech Union, it’s a pleasure to have been asked to introduce their most recent research on speech in universities, the second Annual Academic Freedom Survey Report, 2023. 

I have spent my whole professional life working in academia. Two years ago, I co-authored a letter to the editor of The Listener (the group of us who wrote it became known as The Listener 7.)

The outcry at our opinions, which were basic concerns about calling mātauranga Māori the same thing as science, was overwhelming. The experience has raised concerns about academic freedom for many across Kiwi universities. 

---

A well-functioning university is the product of an inquisitive society that is open to change. Our society faces challenges on so many fronts today: economic, environmental, educational, democratic, social, and more. While the university is not the only party that has a role in addressing these challenges, academics are supposed to help us understand the problems we are facing, and test and develop the potential solutions.  

Yet, this cannot happen if the experts in their fields are not free to voice solutions which are unpopular or controversial. Academic freedom means that we are supposed to be able to do our jobs, to serve New Zealand by understanding the true facts of these issues, not just what we assume them to be. Today, I believe we have less academic freedom to truly research and address the biggest issues facing our country than we have had at any point in my academic career. 

As the Free Speech Union’s Annual Academic Freedom Report claims: Foremost amongst these themes, is what can only be described as a climate of fear in academic settings. Multiple respondents told us about their fear of speaking up on certain topics, the penalties they felt would result in terms of job loss or barriers to promotion if they did, and their constant self-censorship. Even filling in this survey was perceived as risky by some.

<<Read the full Academic Freedom Survey 2023 Report now>>

A majority of academics who responded at five of our eight universities disagreed that they were free to state controversial or unpopular opinions, even though this is one of the specific features of academic freedom as defined in the Education and Training Act 2020. Across all eight universities, only 46% of academics agreed they felt free to question received wisdom and state controversial and unpopular opinions. The rest disagreed. Men in particular, (59%), believed they were not free to voice these views.

When asked about how comfortable they felt discussing certain topics in their institution, over one-third said they didn’t feel comfortable discussing religion (63% were comfortable), half were not comfortable discussing sex and gender (50%), and over half were not comfortable discussing race (45% were comfortable). Only 41% said they felt comfortable discussing the Treaty of Waitangi/colonisation. 

When one sector of society feels they are free to participate and contribute to a discussion while another does not feel free at all, we all lose. No matter who it is that is included/excluded, we will not develop the answers we need to address complex questions if major stakeholders are not free to participate. Time and again in our past, important voices in our communities have not been free to contribute. To knowingly repeat this error again is folly. 

---

But the question occurs to me ‘Why is the Free Speech Union having to conduct this work and advocate on behalf of academics and their freedom?’ Where are the Tertiary Education Commission, the Minister of  Education, the Vice-Chancellors of universities, and the Tertiary Education Union? 

Surely, each of these parties is well placed to assess whether academics are, in fact operating with freedom, and if not, consider the causes and implement policies to address this. 

These results are concerning, but the lack of engagement with research like this, and the problem they point to, is even more concerning. Results last year indicated many academics do not feel they have adequate academic freedom.

Each Vice-Chancellor was invited to participate in the research this year and learn from the responses of their own academics. Not a single one agreed. Likewise, where is the Minister of Education on this issue? Where is the Tertiary Education Union or the Tertiary Education Commission? 

---

Freedom in the university sector is stagnating, and its leaders either don’t know or don’t care. We need to pay attention and do something- our future is far more bleak if we cannot voices solutions that move us forward, as disruptive or unexpected as they may be.  

The Free Speech Union fight across a number of sectors, but I believe their work with the university is the most important.

I know that to produce a report like this costs thousands of dollars (this report cost $10,000) [which is actually cheap compared to what government departments and councils spend on reports —Eds], but I believe its value is exceedingly greater.

Two years ago, when 2,000 academics turned on my colleagues and me for daring to co-author the famed Listener 7 letter (we certainly were willing to voice controversial and unpopular views — and it came with a big cost), the Free Speech Union spent months fighting our case. I am grateful for their support and believe their work is needed now more than ever. 

Together, I’m sure the best days for Kiwi academic freedom, and our best solutions and ideas, can be in front of us. 

http://www.fsu.nz/

Utah.

Ukraine Sent Poor, Untrained Men Into Bakhmut Meat Grinder to Save Better Forces for Counteroffensive

One man told The Wall Street Journal that he had never held a gun before he was sent into the battle

Wagner chief Yevgeny Prigozhin estimated that 50,000 Ukrainians lost their lives fighting for the city, but the number is not confirmed. Prigozhin also said that he recruited 50,000 people from prison to fight in Bakhmut and about 20% of them were killed.

Ukraine sent untrained recruits into the battle of Bakhmut to save its professional soldiers for an expected counteroffensive, The Wall Street Journal reported Thursday.

The Journal spoke with men who were part of a small group that was sent into Bakhmut, which became known as the meat grinder, just a few days after being mobilized.

Out of 16 men in the group of draftees, 11 were either killed or captured. The Journal described them as “mostly poor men from villages in the northeastern Kharkiv region, many of them unemployed, doing odd jobs as handymen or shift work at factories in the regional capital.”

Some of the men had military training years or decades ago, but none had combat experience. A few of them threatened to refuse orders when they were told they were being sent to the frontlines on February 21, citing a lack of training, but they ultimately went.

One man, Vladyslav Yudin, told the Journal that he told a sergeant major that he had never fired or even held a gun before. “Bakhmut will teach you,” Yudin was told.

The men participated in brutal house-to-house combat in Bakhmut. Many of them are presumed dead, but their families are still holding out hope that they were captured by the Russians and are still alive.

The men’s accounts match what Ukrainians fighting on the frontlines had been telling the media while the battle was still raging. They told stories of troops being sent in with little support, training, or ammunition.

The Washington Post spoke to a Ukrainian battalion commander in March who said he was being sent fresh recruits who didn’t want to fire their guns because they were afraid of the sound.

Despite Kyiv’s Western backers advising against expending resources on Bakhmut, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky tried to hold onto the city for as long as he could, but it was fully captured by the Wagner Group and Russian forces this past weekend.

Original article

De-Nazification was one of Moscow’s original aims with its invasion and at this kill ratio of 5:1 (at least, probably 7:1) it should be successful, although from the above description those sacrificed by Gauleiter Zelensky weren’t the Nazis, rather those ‘pressganged’ into the battle. RIP.