Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 30/06/20 in all areas

  1. 1 point
    As I said KM. Read the book. The UN appear to have killed as many as they saved in parts of the world. Don't know how else to descibe thier actions.
  2. 1 point
    darkside

    Overwintering in the Northland

    BP what's this "buying bait" of which you speak? Whangaroa is alive with bait fish and a packet of sabiki's will secure more bait than you know what to do with.
  3. 1 point
    I would not let the UN anywhere near aid distribution. The entire outfit is run by incompitent fools. Read Sir Ray Averies book for evidence.
  4. 1 point
    A militarized oil tanker is not ideal for delivering emergency relief. Some charities do invaluable work with very low overheads (when I was in the game Oxfam was good), others are very thinly disguised religious proselytisers with high overheads, advertising and high executive salaries (World Vision). A better UN system would be ideal; significant reforms have been stymied by major powers. Most aid is needed in war situations (though the unfolding climate crisis will pose huge challenges) so peace keeping operations are vital. Tight logistical operations can be delivered by any competent organisation, not necessarily military at all.
  5. 1 point
    As mean as it sounds but I do not support those charities.Ever since the late 90s when aid was sent to such countries as Ethiopia where upon it was discovered warehouse full of rice/grain etc were not being handed out to those in need.Instead weapons were brought.Sounds mean I know. but those countries are looking for aid.This is where I believe the UN needs to enter and distribute food etc. I would have no issue to be taxed an extra $5/10 pw as long as the money aid was being properly supervised and gets to where it is needed. Not having a bunch of collectors roaming the street and making a living and handing over what is left after expenses.
  6. 1 point
    Surely there's a difference between "aid" and "emergency relief". Sending a well fitted out ship with specialist equipment id designed not to "better" people's lives, but to "save" them. There is a place for the military. They bring a structured approach, with clear lies of command, in situations where that is required - as in delivering urgent relief if times of natural emergencies. And - I'm poor. Send $$$. It will help.
  7. 1 point
    Nothing common or good happening for the victims of state funded injustice. The recent refusal to invest in attaching body cameras to the NZ police force sounds alarm bells for me. Having ready access to live evidence would be of such benefit to justice outcomes so why did the police not agree. I have whanau and employees that are regularly subject to race based interest to put it politely by the police usually whilst driving surely a body cam would simplify matters.
  8. 1 point
    Deep Purple

    On the bright side - Next project

    Happy to report the depth gauge works in its new position. Accurate too, reading 2.3m when we ran aground New fractional genny from Willis Sails worked magic at the weekend. 15.06 knots... Mast and mainsail fitting together like peas and carrots. All set for the Triple
  9. 1 point
    surely the point of a floating; desalination plant, hospital, helipad is for when helicopter dropping $5 notes is pointless because there's nothing to spend them on https://duckduckgo.com/?q=cyclone+damage+pacific&atb=v177-1&iax=images&ia=images
  10. 1 point
    Zozza

    The Sounds Murders back in the News

    All joking aside, the hair testing is not sophisticated enough to know 'blood lines" as anything more than a bit of a guess. I mean - blonde hairs are unlikely to be those of Maori woman, so its easy to say that therefore it is "250,000 times more likely that the hair was Olivia's than the Maori lady". And yeah, Ok, before any smart alec says anything, no that is not a verbatim quote from the case files, it is just an paraphrasing of something similar that the forensic hair lab lady said at the trial - if you want to know her exact words, go read Keith Hunters book. The jury were basically dumbo's eager to believe whatever some clown with a fancy sounding medical degree has, so when they hear "250,000" times more likely they get all impressed, when in reality it is pure junk science. And why only two hairs? For godsake - she would have shed hairs everywhere if she really were inside his boat, no matter how much cleaning he did, any forensic team worth their salt would know something is very fishy that the investigative team only found two hairs. The whole hair thing was / is bullsh*t, as is everything else the prosecution put together for this case.
  11. 1 point
    Kevin I am interested. Since you have first hand knowledge what is the most useful aid that we can give?
  12. 1 point
    bazzathemammoth

    3 kings

    Hey all. We are starting to plan a trip to the 3 kings next summer. Do you have any advice about this? When is the most settled weather? The plan is for some fishing/spearfishing/diving. I need to shoot me a 30+kg kinghy TIA
×
×
  • Create New...