Thursday, April 25, 2019


I have just returned from the Dawn service here in Paihia.   Beautiful day, cloudless, no wind, warm.    The old and bold tell me it was the biggest turn-out ever.   By my guess a crowd in excess of 500 including a contingent of of ex-servicemen from Oz who apparently make a point of attending a service somewhere in NZL every second ANZAC Day.      And nary a policeman in sight ... funny that.

Self and Mrs veteran off shortly along with another Vvet and his lady to attend the ANZAC Day service in Opononi.   Should be 'interesting'.    I suspect they do things a little different in the 'wild west'.

Lest we Forget.


George said...

Well done.
Now the cops can drop the armed act and get back to their day to day business.

Snowflake said...

Awww George, do you need assistance crossing the road?

Perhaps they can do that once you fact free, intelligence challenged armchair Robocops stop being wankers, but that’ll never happen will it George? Besides, “Veteran” knows it’s all a conspiracy to keep the PM’s poll numbers up. He has proof...

The Veteran said...

Flake ... no conspiracy ... just convenient. My opinion and I'm entitled to it just as you are entitled to post bile.

Snowflake said...

Slimey, slimey, slimey. What do you mean by “convenient”? Are you implying the threat level was manipulated for political purposes, yes or no?

Psycho Milt said...

... no conspiracy ... just convenient.

Internationally, police and security analysts agree that the risk of copycat or retaliatory attacks is highest in the weeks immediately following a terrorist attack, hence the threat level staying at high for several weeks. Any alleged "convenience" or "inconvenience" for the government has nothing to do with it.

David said...

Lest We Forget.

Frank Hughes

John Sweeney

John Braithwaite

Victor Spencer

John King

For King & Country.

David said...

Remembering Eliza Potter and her lost sons.

gravedodger said...

Big crowd at Burnham Camp, cool not cold, light fog, One bushmaster armed Cop to make it all safe though the Concert Party looked as though they could cope.

Very good remarks from Lt Colonel Marcus Lineham, CO 3rd Combat Service Support Battalion RNZALR, touching on recent events and including an Islamic call for peace phrase.

Two Burnham Primay school children addressed the service giving confidence for a future while remembering the past.

Lest we forget.

Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy said...

I would marched off Lt Col Lineham's parade loudly demanding that he go fuck himself.

It would have been backed up by a thunderous fart.

It is Anzac Day. Remembering the Christchurch Massacre is for another place and time.

Noel said...

What do you mean by “convenient”? Are you implying the threat level was manipulated for political purposes, yes or no?

You didn't get an answer last time you asked so I can safely bet you wont get anything this time round.

Absence of evidence in this case can be read as no evidence what so ever.

Pity he had to question those analysts who work their butts off along with the practitioners put their own lives at risk to obtain the data.

Psycho Milt said...

I would marched off Lt Col Lineham's parade loudly demanding that he go fuck himself.

After all, what did the Gallipoli landings have to do with Muslims, eh? Turkey's not even a Muslim... oh.

The Veteran said...

Flake/Noel ... I simply meant what I said. Convenient means convenient. No, not manipulated (your words) but convenient. And those that think otherwise must have their collective heads up their collective butts because at the two ceremonies I was at today there were many who said it all was a nonsense.

On one level I can understand the caution because NZL has never had to deal with an incident of this nature before. But, and in the absence of any intelligence pointing to an ongoing threat (Police statement) and the perpetrator in custody the threat level was maintained at High far too long.

Noel ... unnecessary hyperbole. Pray tell what lives were put at risk in order to obtain the 'no threat' data ... think about it.

Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy said...

Psycho. You make the mistake that others have of obfuscating my response as something to do with the Gallipoli landings. it is not.

My remarks are nothing to do with religion, nothing to do with Gallipoli, nothing to do with Muslims, nothing to do with race, nothing to do with who served where or with whom and when.

What offends me and many other Vets that I have spoken to today is the conflation of Anzac Day with the Mosque massacre. Neither event has anything to do with each other.

Anzac Day is to remember our war dead [and those who returned damaged] FULL BLOODY STOP.

A pox on the pricks who would steal this day.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...


Extremely well said.

Snowflake said...

So just “convenient” then “Veteran”. So the threat level was set independently based on the best judgment of the experts and with no political interference, but you’re just annoyed at that because for some reason you think it was good for the government? Shit you’re weird. Not as weird at TTSS or Adolt, but still really weird.

Lord Egbut Nobacon said...

Well bought this shitstorm down on your own head this time. It is supposed to be a day of remembrance not cheap political point scoring.

Tinker....what is it you dislike about inclusitivity of remembrance days, race, language religion.? It takes two sides to tango and so far in my life I have heard Armistice/Anzac day prayers in Maori, German, French, Urdu, Malay and Turkish.

My personal opinion would be to bin the lot as religion has proved not to be mankinds salvation but if you must have them at least show willing to admit that that the other participants suffered as grievously as us. The reservation of ANZAC day as an exclusive day just for us is wrong just as thinking that Armistice day is exclusively about the British Commonwealth is wrong. Back to the beginning now...ANZAC day was started in QLD 1916 as non denominational service to cross all divides, with the enthusiastic backing of Billy Hughes PM (Welsh...what is it with the Aussies and Welsh PM's) .

David said...

Anzac Day is to remember our war dead [and those who returned damaged] FULL BLOODY STOP.

A pox on the pricks who would steal this day.

Bullfucking shit!

Anzac Day has always, always, been about politics. It began as a way to gee up recruitment for The War To End All Wars.

It is now an arrogant display of Jingoism with marching bands, medals galore, and tales of heroic derring-do. It has been torn from the pages of "Boys' Own Annual" and the scribblings of Baden-Powell. It is a day to pretend that there is honour in attacking other nations that posed no threat, simply to please the colonial masters, be they the UK or latterly the USA.

The middle stanza is about Football, with the AFL and the ARL using it as a way to drag more mug punters through the gates under the pretence of "honouring the dead".

It finally collapses in to a parody of itself, with drunks lying in a combination of Uniforms, Urine, and Gutters. It is a celebration of the worst humanity can do.

Lord Egbut Nobacon said...

WTF......everything is about politics. War is man's natural state, it ever was and ever will be. If you wish for peace prepare for war has always been the watchword of civilisations throughout the ages and those that did not were not around for very long.

Agree that ANZAC day has been hijacked from it's original intention....who will rid me of these turbulent Priests?

Andrei said...

I see that the grotesque little gnome who infests this blog like a dose of antibiotic resistant gonorrhea has been spreading his feces over this thread.

Anzac day comemorates the soldiers from Australia and New Zealand who fought and sometimes gave their lives in wars in which these two nations participated - FULLSTOP

It is not about whether or not these wars were justified, it is not about woman's rights, it is not about the Christchurch atrocity - it is not even about remembering Elbe Day which falls on the same date co-incidentally which is something worth remembering but independantly of Anzac day.

Why do people want to dump over something that should be unifying?

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Some people seriously suffer from twisted bowel. Not our David. It's twisted bile, all the way.

Lord Egbut Nobacon said...

Nearly there Andrei.....that is how ANZAC day is perceived today when in fact it is NZ's Armistice day. Anzac day was started in Australia to commemorate Gallipoli landings before the end of hostilities so Anzac day is by default Armistice day which is all encompassing and takes in the remembrance of all, some or none depending on your point of view.

Politics and nation building have played a huge part in shaping what we have today. Billy Hughes in his 20 minute ANZAC day speech in London 1918/19 to Australian troops NZ was mentioned only once and he forbid British troops that served at Gallipoli to march with the Anzacs.

The New Zealanders who fought with and thought highly of the British 13th Division nearly mutinied but instead carried a huge wreath on behalf of the division much to the Welshman's chagrin.

Trying to enter the mindset of men long dead is impossible but certainly our ancestors were far more British than New Zealander and expressing anti British or anti monarchist feelings would have led to the perpetrator being attacked. Around 30% of 1914 enlistments were British born, not to mention Australian, Sth African Rhodesian and whoever else was passing including Americans.

I find it bizarre that you of all people espouse the fighting for freedom when you you keep banging Putin's drum.

Tom Hunter said...

It is now an arrogant display of Jingoism with marching bands, medals galore, and tales of heroic derring-do....

God you're a tiresome old bore.

Once again David shows how he's stuck in the aspic of his Baby Boomer glory days: the late 60's and all that. Maybe for you, growing up in 1950's Australia, all that was true, given the conservative nature of the country back then, and of course you Boomers reacted to all that.

But this is 2019 FFS: two generations of school kids have grown up being lectured with all the stuff you just unloaded. Consequently Anzac day is a very different beast now. I can't recall the last time the word "patriotism" was mentioned at one.

In fact one of my objections to it is that it has swung too far the other way thanks to your generation: with the old soldiers cast as just another victim group, wide-eyed innocents always, in all wars, which is just denigrating, patronising, bullshit.

The men of WWII in particular, had a bloody sight better view of why they were fighting than the lads of WWI. More than a few of the WWII lot would have known about Mein Kampf, probably some had read it, and almost all would have seen the newsreels through the 1930's as Hitler built up his military power. Naturally they were as innocent of knowing what war was really like as those earlier soldiers - but many of them were under no illusions that Hitler and the Nazis were a very much scarier bunch than the Kaiser and company and had to be stopped.

They also had just as little time for militarism and military pomp and ceremony - especally the British type - as you do, even as they joined the military.

Since we have Vietnam vets here on this forum I'd like to hear what they thought of their war. Were they innocent naifs, especially given that many would have had fathers who were WWII vets, or would have known such men. Was any wisdom passed on? Did those older men try and dissaude them from going, or even joining the military in that time? Did they have any idea of the bigger picture and the forces that drove the Vietnam War, and what do they think now, especially on Anzac Day?

I'd be more interested in hearing their thoughtful takes on that, than your rote, automatic, simplistic, Far Left boilerplate crap.

Lord Egbut Nobacon said...

Chunter.... you are in your sixties so you should know better than to speculate and calling David old is a bit pot and kettle as he is in the same age group as boomer.

Your post is patronising, speculative and wide of the mark. It has added nothing to the sum of knowledge.

Lord Egbut Nobacon said...

I suggest the kiwi wannabees read this. It pretty well describes the "sound and light"

Almost everything about Anzac is a myth.....except the dying.

Hughes along with Charles Bean and Murdoch turned a badly led badly fought campaign into a national treasure.

Famous painting showing Aussies storming the beach...didn't happen, hardly a shot fired. Charles Bean ordered the artist not to paint the British 1905 SD hat all the Australian infantry Bns were wearing but to give them slouch hats. History in the making.

Why the hell do we have to get up at four in the morning just because the Aussies landed at dawn? The New Zealand troops started landing at ten o'clock, a much more civilised hour.

And the bad news....had the Australians been more disciplined and better trained they could have won and held the heights on the first day......ever since then it's been a blame game.

Psycho Milt said...

But this is 2019 FFS: two generations of school kids have grown up being lectured with all the stuff you just unloaded.

Not so. I worked for the National Library's school services after I came back from Germany in the late 1990s, and it was disturbing even then how many of the new books coming out were of the "our brave lads and their fight for our freedom" ilk, and how eager the teachers were to present that view to their pupils. It's only become worse since then. You may be thinking of the generations who were at school in the 1970s and 80s.

Tom Hunter said...

"our brave lads and their fight for our freedom" i...

Well that's certainly not the Anzac history that my kids have been coming home from school with in the last decade, nor does it match the conversations I've heard them have about it with friends on the day concerned. It's more been those poor young soldiers... and sad faces. So much so that my oldest expressed surprise at the matter-of-fact tone of Peter Jackson's recent documentary, They Shall Not Grow Old. He'd been expecting - as he put it - "the usual weep-fest".

Having said that, I was surprised when my youngest informed me a few months ago that his history class, in a state high school, after a classic debate setup, voted in favour of dropping the atomic bomb on Hiroshima.

Psycho Milt said...

It's more been those poor young soldiers... and sad faces.

Er, good. If that's generally applicable across the country, I'm glad things are changing a bit. The ex-soldiers who contribute to this blog were (I assume) skilled professionals who were doing their day job when sent into combat, but the overwhelming majority of NZ military personnel killed in combat have been people who were suckered into volunteering by campaigns of lies, or were forcibly conscripted - those poor young soldiers is the best description for them.

...his history class ... voted in favour of dropping the atomic bomb on Hiroshima.

Well, duh. Few people have a problem with dropping a bomb on foreigners. That's one reason we have wars.

David said...

Egbut, and others, you may be interested, now the light show and hip hip hoorays are over, be interested in reading “What’s Wrong With ANZAC?”

Tom Hunter said...

You may be thinking of the generations who were at school in the 1970s and 80s.
True, since that's you and me.

But I can't reconcile that statement with your take on the schoolbooks and teachers of the late 1990's. It's implying that the kids of the 70's-80's accepted the "David" view of Anzac day, but then either failed to pass that on to their kids or even began to teach them the opposite, a turn back to the jingoistic days of their own parents and grandparents.

If it is true then it runs counter to how every other cultural issue has run in the conflict between the Boomers and the older generations, where the views of the former have prevailed.

Psycho Milt said...

That (late 1990s) was when I also started seeing stories about growing popularity of attending Anzac Day dawn services, and started again seeing "our brave lads" and "fought for our freedom" blather on the news. That's continued unabated. These days it's nothing unusual to see kids asserting unquestioningly that we have democracy thanks to returned servicemen, as though invading Turkey for an imperial overlord was a glorious blow for freedom.

RosscoWlg said...

Jeez Eggie what a load of crap you spout at times...and you put your ignorance on display for all to see with your so called military knowledge.

You must be English as the English run the same argument about was the Anzac failures that let Crete fall, it was the Anzac's that failed at Gallipoli!

It was the Anzac's that succeeded despite insuperable odds at both those locations.

If you don't know who cocked up both those campaigns then you don't know your history. To educate yourself start with Churchill, then down to the English Generals.

As for Physco Miltie.. you are a sick bastard, "suckered into Volunteering" put your head down your own toilet and flush 3 times, you'll feel heaps better and not quite so wrong in the head

David said...

Chunter, read the book I recommended above and you will see how, in Australia at least, the day was turned from a recruitment drive, to a solemn remembrance, to an almost irrelevance (post Vietnam), to a revived and glorified day of celebration of war. Today governments find it a useful tool to stop people questioning our entanglements in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Malaysia, and our readiness to follow Uncle Sam in to his next great disaster.

I was raised on the "heroics" of Galipoli, the "inventiveness" of the diggers as they made primitive auto weapons to convince the Turks they had not left, and regaled, by my WW2 soldier 6th grade teacher with stories of "Fuzzy Wuzzies". A growing interest in High School history, where we didn't rely purely on text books, but studied the actual documents that led the treaties and wars, saw an awakening that we had "been sold a pup" about the nation building by war.

As Australia's involvement in Vietnam deepened, my understanding of history grew. As a member of The Air Training Corps, I was exposed to the "my country, right or wrong" bullshit of the military. Slowly, almost imperceptibly at first, I turned from my aspiration to be an Air Force pilot and saw my calling was to be a Sky Pilot. But, to my dismay, I found that God and his Elders were also warmongers, hypocrites, and didn't like anyone who took Jesus at his word - Matt 5:39.

Two other books I would suggest you read, if you haven't already are Vietnam: An Epic Tragedy, 1945-1975 and My Lai: Vietnam, 1968, and the Descent into Darkness.

Psycho Milt said...

RosscoWlg: it's the clear reasoning and persuasive logic of your arguments that make your comments such a pleasure to read.

The Veteran said...

Tom H ... ref your 12.00 post ... really good question. Given the mores of that time I had no problem with Vietnam ... guess I saw that conflict as an extension of Malaya where the combined Commonwealth forces had defeated the CTs in a twelve year 'Emergency' that lasted from 1948 through to 1960 (officially) and beyond.

Now, in retrospect, I can acknowledge this was a war best left to the Vietnamese. The Diem regime was corrupt and comprised the Catholic elite lording over the mainly Buddhist majority. Those that followed were not much better. Left to themselves the Vietnamese would have probably ended up a pseudo-communist (but with a hard underbelly) capitalist state ... much as they are now ... but without much of the devastation caused by 'our' presence.

One of my heroes from that conflict was a New Zealand decorated (from Vietnam) mid ranking officer who marched in uniform in an anti-Vietnam war protest. That took real guts. But nothing I've said should detract from the fact that those who served there did their duty in a shitty war where there were no real winners.

The Vvets who post on No Minister will always have my respect even though we will, on occasions, agree to disagree and sometimes with real passion.

Unknown said...

Miltie when dealing with a mind so "off centre" its better to keep everything simple, including instructions on any proposed remedies.

"Suckered into Volunteering" is of course both an insult and supreme arrogance.

All those Germans soldiers killed in WW2 were all suckered into volunteering,and I guess as well as your beloved red hordes.

Noel said...

If the language in 27(2) had not been so restrained perhaps the outcome would have been different?

Andrei said...

"All those Germans soldiers killed in WW2 were all suckered into volunteering,and I guess as well as your beloved red hordes."

The "Red Hordes" Rosscoe were actually the forces that defeated the Facists in WW2.

Furthermore my ignorant friend their homeland was actually invaded by the Nazi Barbarians whose behaviour there was noted for its atrocities.

When your wives and daughters are being raped by foreign thugs and your homeland laid to waste it doesn't take much for a real man with his eggs intact to take up arms.

This might be difficult for you to grasp living in a culture where men have been emasculated and most of the women are self absorbed harridans for whom the important issues are things like the right to murder their inconvienant unborn babies while quoting the Holy Bible can get a testosterone rich man into trouble because the passage concerned hurts some delicate little flowers feelings , these overly sensitive souls being exemplars of modern western masculinity apparently

Tom Hunter said...

Thanks for that. The Hastings book I've read (bit of a fan of the guy), but not the other one. It would be good to see something in detail on the Hue massacres, but that will likely be decades away before any historian can see the records and after all the guilty Vietnamese Communists are dead.

Having mentioned Hastings, it seems appropriate to mention his book about the start of WWI - Catastrophe : Europe Goes to War 1914, which is part of the revision of revision WRT to that war. In other words, far from the 1960's/70's take on it as a meaningless slaughter, Hastings makes the case that a Europe dominated by the ultra-conservative Kaiser and German military, would have been bad and likely led to another major war on the continent anyway. In short, even not the Nazis, they had to be stopped. He also makes the case that rather than the whole "Lions led by donkeys" BS, the commanders on all sides struggled with the simple fact that weapons for defense had outpaced methods of attack.

And Hastings is far from the only historian taking such a revisionist view of that conflict.

Tom Hunter said...

Appreciate that. Would be interested to hear other Vietnam Vets on the subject as well.

BTW - during our recent visit to Wellington I was having lunch in the BackBencher with an old varsity mate, when DPF walked in. So I decided to bowl over and introduce myself. We couldn't talk for long, as I had Beloved Wife and Beloved Child waiting on me, but as he said, it's always good to put a face to the name!

Unknown said...

Andrei... dont know your history very well. Heard of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact.

Thats right for the first few years of WW2 Russia and Germany were virtually allies. Your beloved Russian hordes invaded Poland with the Germans, carved it up...then guess what happened...dont guess as you'll be wrong, a certain massacre of all captured Polish officers by the Russians in a (in)famous forest.

Oh before that your beloved Russians had had a crack at Finland and had their noses bloodied!

Germany didnt invade Russia, its ally, till 1942.

And while I'm busy turning ignorance into knowledge the Russians were only able to turn the Germans around because the Americans provided most of the tanks and I think 75% of all trucks used to transport their troops.

So the Russians defeating the Germans by themselves is a myth. Did you know that 75% of all 88mm tank killing guns were withdrawn from the Eastern Front to act as flak guns because of allied bombing in Germany ?

So Andrei more reading history for you my friend and less left wing emotion for you

Tom Hunter said...

1941. June.

Tom Hunter said...

... and less left wing emotion....
Yeah, Andrei.

You Leftie you.


That will be all.

Psycho Milt said...

And while I'm busy turning ignorance into knowledge...

...the Americans provided most of the tanks...

Er, you have "ignorance" and "knowledge" in the reverse order there. The USSR produced most of the tanks it used in WW2, and those tanks were vastly more effective than their American counterparts. It would have been better for the Yanks and Brits if the Russians had been sending them tanks, rather than vice versa.

Andrei said...

Poor old Rossco not only did Germany invade Russia in 1941 not '42 but the most manufactured tank and the most successsful tank of WW2 was the iconic T34 which was not made in the USA.

Over half the tanks supplied by lend lease never reached the Soviet Union but were lost at sea. There were in total about 8000 lend lease tanks shipped including those lost in transit - compared to 84,000+ T34s

What else is wrong with your post - you conveniently forget how Chamberlaine betrayed Czechsolvakia in 1938 and cannot conceive how that and the battle of Khalkhin Gol in spring 1939 (which you probably know nothing about) might have led to the Molotov-Ribbentof.

And you ignore how the USA immediately recognized the Vichey French Government and the consequences of that - Britain nearly sued for peace in 1940, it was only Churchill's determination that lead to Britain carrying on alone.

Every Nation makes pragmatic decisions based on what they think will serve their interests best.

We could discuss Finland's role in WW2 and the three distinct wars they fought during that conflict and why they engaged in them another time. It is an interesting tale

RosscoWlg said...

Miltoe, gosh my advice to you actually worked, put the head in the toilet and flush 3 times, because as much as I have to grind my teeth I am forced to agree with you !!
Only this once mind!
You are correct about the tanks, I knew that and threw it out there to see if anybody was awake.
I also agree with you that the Allies, now including Russia, should have specialised in what they were good at, and the T34 was probably the best tank, and it should have been exported to the West.
Unfortunately the Russkies treated their soldiers as expendable, and so their tanks too, the waste of both was incalculable. I suspect they couldn't spare any to export.
Of course the Americans helped the Russians win the air war in the East too..did you know the P39 Aircobra was their major front line fighter, and also ground attack aircraft?

RosscoWlg said...

Thanks to the pedants Tom and some emotional guy from the left, 2 is of course very close to 1 on the keyboard at the school I went too and I jabbed the wrong one.

I put it down to an excess of emotion from the left and the Russian women being raped, and babies killed and my finger must have slipped unnoticed by me.

You see, by invading Russia in 1941 England was saved from a renewed air war that would have destroyed its air force and enabled the Germans to invade.

But instead they turned on their ally who then needed the West to survive, and having survived tried to rewrite history to write out the American contribution!!

And a lot less emotional Andrei has moved on from the rape and baby killing of Russians to the old excuse of pragmitism of a treaty, oh and of course the pragmatism of invading Poland, and oh of course the pragmatism of dragging away half their population to displacement, death and starvation.

Lord Egbut Nobacon said...

Just wondering who is the straight man in the Wiggo twins duo....