My Photo
Mobilise this Blog





New Zealand Conservative


AmCam News Tips

  • Have you got mobile camera pix of breaking news, or a first-hand account you've written?
    email Investigate now on publicity [at] and we'll get you online
Blog powered by Typepad

« New Badlands book shatters myths on NZ crime problems | Main | BBC caught financially supporting climate change lobby company »


Raymnod A Barrett

Yes but do you answer the allegations from the justic system on the Author's expertise? either he has been invilved actively or not! Why wasn't this clarified in your rebuttal????

Ian Wishart

Fraser studied Social Policy and Administration at the London School of Economics, before gaining a Masters in Philosophy from the University of Bristol.

He spent 26 years working for the Probation Service and most recently as a criminal intelligence analyst for the UK Government's National Criminal Intelligence Service.

I think it is fair to say he has been 'involved actively', just as much as his critics - who have not actually read the new book, by the way - have.

The critics argued he wasn't known amongst their clique - I suspect given the newspaper reviews out of England that the Brit who fed his NZ counterparts that line was being disingenuous...

I have previously mentioned Fraser's experience and it is on page two of the book, so didn't see a need to repeat it ad nauseum. Clearly he has relevant experience, and clearly his views carry weight.

How much weight is over to the reader to decide, not irritated defenders of the status quo to dictate.

Paul Norman

The Academic “peer review” process which is already today trying to shaft David Fraser, as a person, and not focussed on his work, is the justification that has been used to bring in the Laws and procedures that now exist in NZ that Fraser is reviewing!

This “peer review” thing of academics by each other, has come into severe disrepute ever since the falsified Man-Made side of any actual global warming that is happening.

The academic review of the peer review problems there, incredibly found that there was no problem even though very important data and presentation had been wrongly changed! When the peers doing the “peer review” are not truly in thought independent of each other, the process is bogus.

All "peer review", as it is now in many fields, often ends up saying is whether or not one person agrees with a received dogma and way of thinking or not.

Basing Parliamentary and Government action – and taxation! on such “peer review” procedures is doing no more than giving in to the philosophies of life of a special interest group of overpaid and now highly redundant trendy liberal academics.

Lets hear David Fraser’s data and let the truth fall where it does, without any insiders so-called “peer review” censoring of the true things of life!

I’d sooner follow God’s wisdom in life through Christ, than dead academia any day!

birkenstock outlet

So fun article is! I agree the idea!

The comments to this entry are closed.