Yesterday I related a little tale about what I saw as an obviously OTT anecdote without any verification.
The point I made, was how an action and its consequences when viewed through my simplistic vision of right and wrong, that was established in my formative years by reading examples of what I would generically describe as fodder writing, rang a little tinkle on a bell in my psyche.
I used the story to reflect on how that view of natural justice has been eroded in our National view of right and wrong to a point where victims become the oppressed and the perpetrators of wrongs are elevated to victim-hood.
Consequences are no longer to be suffered by the stupid.
Now a commenter, a member of the ubiquitous Anonymous family, has not suggested, not merely inferred or hinted but has branded me, a LIAR. My response was and still is DILLIGAF, and my regard for the brave soul who cant even master the comment facility for creating an individual identity for reasons that may be incompetence or ignorance but I suspect may just be simple cowardice makes the leap from my repeating an urban legend to liar, is phht
We have an acceptance, widely held, that the history of the so called Tangata Whenua who had no ability to record their version of history in a written form can promulgate that history as orally recorded and entities such as the Waitangi Tribunal now accept that version of events as being as accurate as written record by an eye witness. Sadly that standard of authenticity is not available to me.
So to you, Anonymous #7531 (estimated), I am not a liar, the anecdote I used may have not had a shred of truth to it, I don't freekin care. My use of it was still valid in my eyes, you however are quite insignificant and if you are one of the brigade of crim cuddling nonentities who have a higher regard for the perpetrator than what I see as a real victim you can just return to your hole in the ground and involve yourself in sex and travel.
How Australia dealt with the “It’s not OK” campaign
6 minutes ago