‘I Find That Offensive!’ – recommended by Patrik Schumacher · Mar 25

BOOK PROMO [by tweet]

‘I Find That Offensive!’ (Provocations Series)
By Claire Fox

When you hear that now ubiquitous phrase ‘I find that offensive’, you know you’re being told to shut up. While the terrible murder of the Charlie Hebdo cartoonists demonstrated that those who offend can face the most brutal form of censorship, it also served only to intensify the pre-existing climate that dictates we all have to walk on eggshells to avoid saying anything offensive – or else.

Indeed, competitive offence-claiming is ratcheting up well beyond religious sensibilities. So, while Islamists and feminists may seem to have little in common, they are both united in demanding retribution in the form of bans, penalties and censorship of those who hurt their feelings.

But how did we become so thin-skinned? In ‘I Find That Offensive!’ Claire Fox addresses the possible causes of what is fast becoming known as ‘Generation Snowflake’ head-on (no ‘safe spaces’ here) in a call to toughen up, become more robust and make a virtue of the right to be offensive.

PROVOCATIONS is a groundbreaking new series of short polemics composed by some of the most intriguing voices in contemporary culture and edited by Yasmin Alibhai-Brown. Sharp, intelligent and controversial, Provocations provides insightful contributions to the most vital discussions in society today.

“An ambitious new series that tackles the controversy of the topics explored with a mixture of intelligence and forthright argument from some excellent writers.” — The Observer

Bitebackpublishing.com

—

Related Posts and Comments:
26.3.16 New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 —Section 14

█ Enter the terms *post removed*, *removed*, *rephrased* or *video animation removed* in the search box at right.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

[Stuff] Citifleet: court proceeding

Updated (via Hamish McNeilly/Fairfax Media)
Wed, 18 Nov 2015 at 3:20 p.m.

█ Court date pushed back to February.

Civil proceedings against Maria Frances Smith were due to be heard at the High Court in Dunedin tomorrow morning, with the council listed as the plaintiff, but the case has been adjourned until February 4.

—

Link received from Fairfax Media.

### Stuff.co.nz Last updated 14:07, November 18 2015
Dunedin City Council to take widow of sole Citifleet suspect to court
By Hamish McNeilly
The Dunedin City Council has launched civil proceedings against the widow of the man believed to be responsible for the $1.5 million Citifleet fraud. The council lodged the proceedings against Maria Frances Smith, the widow of Brent Bachop, with the Dunedin High Court. A hearing, understood to be about Bachop’s estate, was originally set down for Thursday but will now happen in February.
Read more

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Citifleet investigation: Final police report 29.10.15

(via OIA) Copy of final report of the NZ Police investigation into Citifleet.
The information released is the same as given to media outlets on Thursday, 5 November.

[poor copy as supplied; heavily censored]

█ CITIFLEET POLICE REPORT Final 29.10.15 (PDF, 2 MB)

█ For more, enter the terms *citifleet*, *bachop*, *bidrose* or *vandervis* in the search box at right.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Stuff: Police release final Citifleet report

Updated.
Fri, 6 Nov 2015 at 2:40 p.m.

Over an 11-year period, 152 vehicles were unaccounted for, while more than $100,000 was misappropriated on a council fuel card.

### Stuff.co.nz Last updated 16:21 05/11/2015 | 11:34 05/11/2015
No-one charged with $1.5m Dunedin council fraud case
By Hamish McNeilly
No-one will be charged with the $1.5 million Dunedin City Council Citifleet fraud, a final police report reveals. Dunedin Police have released the final report into the fraud, involving the theft of more than 150 council vehicles and misused fuel cards, after the earlier release of an investigation report to Fairfax Media. That report was reviewed by Detective Senior Sergeant Malcolm Inglis, who concluded there was “insufficient evidence to charge any of the purchasers of the vehicles with the offence of receiving”.

“No other charges have been identified.” –Police report

Deloitte interviewed 62 people in relation to the theft of the vehicles from the council and the “majority of those persons were council employees”, the police report said.
● The council was expected to release a response to the police report on Thursday afternoon.
Read more

ODT: Police review backs Citifleet decision
No comments allowed.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

DCC Citifleet: Redactions redactions

—

Det Snr Sgt Inglis’ review (February 2015) stretched to four pages, but about half its contents were blacked out prior to being released.

### ODT Online Thu, 15 Oct 2015
Citifleet review findings blacked out
By Chris Morris on Thu, 15 Oct 2015
An internal review of the initial police investigation into the $1.5 million Citifleet fraud has made several findings, but exactly what they are remain under wraps. Months after the conclusion of the investigation Dunedin police last week released a heavily redacted copy of the review to the Otago Daily Times.
Read more

█ For more, enter the terms *citifleet*, *deloitte*, *bachop* or *bidrose* in the search box at right.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

*Image: eliseblaha.typepad.com – enJOY it by Elise Blaha Cripe [detail]

Pollution in Chinese cities

City pollution [ddmcdn.com]

### stuff.co.nz Last updated 12:20, March 7 2015
Film highlighting pollution woes vanishes from China’s Internet
By Dian Zhang
A 104-minute film lecture that outlines the serious pollution in China has been removed from the nation’s internet, after receiving millions of views and raising hopes that the country’s leadership might tackle China’s widespread smog problem. The film – by Chai Jing, one of the best-known journalists in China and a well-known former state television reporter – was released right before China’s two most important political events, the National People’s Congress and the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference. Before the movie was censored, a story from Xinhua News Agency, China’s official press agency, praising the film was deleted online the same night the article was posted, offering a hint of the government’s real attitude.

Released last Saturday, Under the Dome had received 42.9 million views on Youku, a video-sharing website like YouTube, by 5 pm Thursday (local time). It prompted 530,460 posts on Weibo.

In the film, Chai gives a speech and shows data and interviews with government officials and environmental experts from China and abroad. The film shows striking images of the extent of air pollution in a number of Chinese cities, as well as rivers fouled by chemicals and littered with flotsam and dead fish. Chai also travelled to Los Angeles and London to gauge their experiences dealing with smog.
Read more

—

█ Chai Jing’s documentary is well worth watching. Preamble via CNN.

CNN Published on Mar 3, 2015
China smog documentary goes viral
Director of China Environment Forum Jennifer Turner discusses a new documentary titled “Under the Dome” that discusses pollution in China.

Linghein Ho Published on Mar 1, 2015
Chai Jing’s review: Under the Dome – Investigating China’s Smog 柴静雾霾调查：穹顶之下 (full translation)
ENGLISH SUBTITLES ARE FULLY TRANSLATED
For more information: http://www.linghein.me/tr_u/
English Subtitles: FULLY UPDATED | Japanese Subtitles: update to 09:25 | French Subtitles: update to 31:06
Former celebrity TV anchor Chai Jing quit her job after her baby daughter was born with a lung tumor, and after a year of rigorous investigation, launched this 1 hour 40 minute documentary about China’s smog: what is smog? Where does it come from? What do we do from here? It is very powerful in many ways. English subtitles are now completely finished, and other languages are being added.
Music: “Brotherhood” by John Dreamer (Google Play • iTunes)

—

[click to enlarge]
3 photo comparatives (*gif) taken by NASA’s Aqua satellite via gizmodo.com

Related Post and Comments:
23.3.13 Chongqing, Southwest China

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Unhappy, ruined #overpoweredbythugs

Received from Anonymous
Sat, 19 Jul 2014 at 10:11 a.m.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Google crap destroys searchable record

Read this post at Cameron Slater’s blog Whale Oil Beef Hooked.

### whaleoil.co.nz July 5, 2014 at 7:30am
Google’s demise starts here, ctd
By Pete
Not only are Google changing history, they are effectively censoring you, and me, and journalism too. This morning the BBC received the following notification from Google:

Notice of removal from Google Search: we regret to inform you that we are no longer able to show the following pages from your website in response to certain searches on European versions of Google: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/legacy/thereporters/robertpeston/2007/10/merrills_mess.html

What it means is that a blog I wrote in 2007 will no longer be findable when searching on Google in Europe. Which means that to all intents and purposes the article has been removed from the public record, given that Google is the route to information and stories for most people. So why has Google killed this example of my journalism?
Read more

█ Whale Oil Beef Hooked

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Censorship!!!

The StS has been accused or many things over the course of this fiasco, and denial of freedoms of opinion or free and frank debate has been at the heart of it. Don’t ever be fooled into thinking that the StS has open debate at the heart of its intentions.

I can now confirm that the StS engages in full censorship. I have recently been silly enough to think that their website is in some way a forum to debate the issues that terrifies them so, but this indeed isn’t the case.

At the post http://www.stopthestadium.org.nz/index.php/2009/04/12/councillors-reject-stadium-meeting/ I made the following comment:

#2 Paul Says: Your comment is awaiting moderation.April 14th, 2009 at 9:37 pm

“it wasn’t a debate set up for that”
and that is the point exactly there never has been a debate about the stadium, there have been entrenched opinions with sod all consideration for the facts or considered opinion…

But go to the web site today and comment number 2 is indeed not mine but:

#2 matty_S Says:
April 14th, 2009 at 9:28 pm
Even I, as a stadium proponent, have to agree with you on this one Peter..

So the MtM show, decrying the death of democracy and freedom of speech are the height of hypocrisy, and as per usual unless you are singing from the same hymn book, your opinion is worthless and must be silenced. This is of course no foundation for a free and frank democracy. Unlike this site, in which a conscious decision was made to invite Elizabeth a prominent and intelligent Anti-Stadium campaigner, if you are madly following the ‘low-risk’ Bev Butler there is no way on god’s clean earth that you are getting a balanced and open view of the stadium development. The Media needs to wake up to her arrogant stupidity and expose her for the frothing mad confused thing she is.

Another sad consequence of this typically dreadful decision is that people can make bloody fools of themselves. Take for instance the comment by Ian Smith:

#8 Ian Smith Says:
April 1st, 2009 at 6:14 pm
Oh dear! ‘Just when we thought it was safe to go in the water again’, he’s back, with bells-on. Paul, you’ve surely inflicted your endless tedious semantics and voluminous…

Two things, my previous comments had been deleted, but not before Ian Smith attacked me (if you want to see voluminous try boring yourself to sleep with Ian Smith’s rants about how it was done in the good old days – great cure for insomnia). I of course could try and counter his bollocks, but then that too would be deleted. So Ian Smith ends up looking like a school bully calling names at people from the behind the back of mummy.

I wonder how the so called webmasters of the StS feel about their job description. I wonder how roots membership feels about it’s organisation partaking in Censorship? What was in the job description, “Editor and Censor of website”?

This isn’t something new for the StS, previously under Anne’s control I was even banned from their web site.

This is of course the height of hypocrisy, and every time Bev or any in the MtM decry the lack of debate on this issue, all we have to do from now on is come back with “but you delete views you don’t agree with“.

If like most agree that free and open debate is at the heart of democracy, then kiss good-bye to any thought that the StS wants to protect your democracy.

And if you ever hear bloody Bev Butler bleat on about the lack of debate on the stadium, tell her to SHUT UP!

When freedom of speech is not?

Quite simply when you are the owners of the Stop the Stadium blog site. Supposedly a site that was set up to engage the public and promote the ideas of the StS.

“To ensure that the views of the members of the Society are communicated effectively through all means at the Society’s disposal to the wider community”

From what I have experienced then, effective communication of the StS aim’s must include silencing dissenting opinion.

Banned!!!

This is truly pathetic and a very sad indictment on those conducting a campaign to destroy the hopes of many of us wanting a stadium built.

I have been actively engaged in presenting an alternate voice on their web site. It is of course their web site and they can do what they like, but as a blog inviting public opinion, I took up my democratic right to voice a free opinion.