Wednesday, September 28, 2005
NZ Herald pretends drug talk is exotic, unusual
What a pitiful piece of piss-poor reporting in the Herald this morning:
And ecstacy can "act as a depressant after an initial high"? Goddam, no wonder it's illegal and we as a society are outraged over Ellis' consumption! As for depressive effects, have these people never drunk gin before?? (Err, of course they have, they're journalists).
The only newsworthy item here is that Ellis was taking the pills to a 60th birthday party ... what a champion, beats drinking Lion Red I guess. And he was in the company of two ladies with names that suggest they just might be strippers. Err, exotic dancers.
Then the Herald moves on to that other miscreant, Brent Todd:
Ellis asked if they were the same ones "as the other night" that were "smooth on the come down" - a reference to the after-effects of Ecstasy which can act as a depressant after an initial high.So, Ellis wanted a pleasant drug experience then, unlike ... say ... every other user of recreational drugs. There is really not a lot difference between this and saying you like a bottle of wine with a nice aftertaste and which is easy on the stomach. (And I'm not talking about that fine Columbian vintage).
The pair agreed to buy 10 tablets because, Ellis said, two female friends at the 60th birthday party they were going to, "Carla" and "Nicky", would both want one.
And ecstacy can "act as a depressant after an initial high"? Goddam, no wonder it's illegal and we as a society are outraged over Ellis' consumption! As for depressive effects, have these people never drunk gin before?? (Err, of course they have, they're journalists).
The only newsworthy item here is that Ellis was taking the pills to a 60th birthday party ... what a champion, beats drinking Lion Red I guess. And he was in the company of two ladies with names that suggest they just might be strippers. Err, exotic dancers.
Then the Herald moves on to that other miscreant, Brent Todd:
In June this year, former league player Todd, a regular guest on television's Celebrity Treasure Island, rang an unnamed man to ask if a friend who was coming to Auckland could buy some cannabis.Goddam! He did? Wow!
Later in the day, the unnamed man phoned Todd, telling him he had the "file" for Todd's friend and the pair arrived at the man's apartment that evening. Todd declined to buy any himself, saying he would take a small amount of his friend's supply if he wanted a "smoke" later.Why the fuck is the word smoke in speech marks? Is this some exotic drug talk with which the public is unfamiliar? I for one can't believe that a middle-aged person with a job might try to hook a friend up with the devil's weed, and then imply he may partake in the smoking of it at some later date. This man should be extradited from Australia, immediately!
Comments:
It's clear the Police are having a fielday releasing this information. It was the Police spokesperson that originally tipped off the media to, and coined the phrase, the "celebrity drug ring". Methinks the cops would have better things to do.
# posted by 
: 28 September 2005 at 11:48
: 28 September 2005 at 11:48
Derision of the police is deserved here. If there was no black market in drugs, what the hell would they do all day?
If everyone busted for possession of cannabis and other drugs pleaded not guilty it wouldn't take long for the system to cave in under the weight of its own shite.
When meeting with a police divisional commander I have been told they will change their tune only when they hear support for it from the community, ie. blaming the status quo on the shoulders of the recreational drug-taking public!
Do we only have ourselves to blame? Well there is a new parliament about to sit. How about dropping your local MP a line saying what you think.
GET OVER the fear - I've been doing it for years and haven't had a visit from unwelcome persons bearing search warrants.
If everyone busted for possession of cannabis and other drugs pleaded not guilty it wouldn't take long for the system to cave in under the weight of its own shite.
When meeting with a police divisional commander I have been told they will change their tune only when they hear support for it from the community, ie. blaming the status quo on the shoulders of the recreational drug-taking public!
Do we only have ourselves to blame? Well there is a new parliament about to sit. How about dropping your local MP a line saying what you think.
GET OVER the fear - I've been doing it for years and haven't had a visit from unwelcome persons bearing search warrants.
# posted by : 28 September 2005 at 19:50
: 28 September 2005 at 19:50
Ben, Brent Todd is currently 'holed up' in Australia and will face charges when he returns it seems. But the charges aren't serious enough for them to extradite him.
It's a waiting game so the police can get as much mileage out of them 'doing their job' as possible after PR disaster after PR disaster for the last year or more.
This Birgit Brauer case seems to be ticking along for them.
It's a waiting game so the police can get as much mileage out of them 'doing their job' as possible after PR disaster after PR disaster for the last year or more.
This Birgit Brauer case seems to be ticking along for them.
To clarify: the point is that journalists are pretending to know less about this issue than the general public (hence the faux schock in the article). Or, at the very least, they're pretending the public is a lot more ignorant than is actually the case.
Ah, intelligent discourse bundled with an appropriate ladle of sarcasm. Something which the print media often lacks.
# posted by : 29 September 2005 at 14:18
: 29 September 2005 at 14:18
I think the Herald missed some important subtext in Ellis comments. Most people I know are just happy enough to have actually located what they're looking for in this two-bit town, while Ellis is questioning their quality.
Does he perhaps have another supplier he can go to if Dealer A says "no, actually these ones are a pile of shit"? Just who is this shady Dealer B? Hmmmm...
I still can't understand why this is being called a "celebrity drug ring" - a couple of celebrities each trying to buy drugs doesn't sound like the narcotics syndicate of the century to me...
Does he perhaps have another supplier he can go to if Dealer A says "no, actually these ones are a pile of shit"? Just who is this shady Dealer B? Hmmmm...
I still can't understand why this is being called a "celebrity drug ring" - a couple of celebrities each trying to buy drugs doesn't sound like the narcotics syndicate of the century to me...
# posted by : 30 September 2005 at 15:12
: 30 September 2005 at 15:12
Post a Comment