Advertisement

If you believe The Herald's sensationalist bit of gutrot, you'll be disgusted that a good old Kiwi company which is currently the darling of the stockmarket, could actively be involved in the creation of weapons designed to kill women, children and cute little puppies.

But is this the truth -- or just a piece of bad journalism which represents yet another instance of our tragic "tall poppy syndrome" at work?

Now have your say Got something to say about today's column, or want to see what others think?  Visit The Forums While you're here, why not visit the Aardvark Hall of Shame and perhaps make your own nomination. 7

Perhaps the first clue is in the title of the piece. Any "news story" that starts with the word "Revealed" has to be taken with a grain of salt.

Clearly Phil Taylor or the editor responsible for coming up with such a tabloid eye-catcher was more interested in circulation figures than an objective presentation of the facts.

Then there's the ridiculous tone of the story and obviously biased perspective.

Yes, Rakon make crystals and/or oscillator modules that are used in GPS units and yes some of those modules are used in military applications -- the company has made no secret of that.

However, Taylor has tried to spin things quite wickedly by implying that this is a huge percentage of Rakon's total business and that it's virtually their raison d'etre -- the truth is that it accounts for less than 4% of the company's business.

What's more, does it really matter that a small percentage of Rakon's products are being used in the production of weaponry for the US military?

Haven't smart bombs and cruise missiles actually reduced the death toll and levels of collateral damage involved in war?

Ask yourself which is a better way to fight war... carpet bombing with high-explosive and incendiary devices as occurred during WW2 (resulting in millions of innocent deaths), or surgical strikes that can take out a military post in a suburban neighbourhood or even a single car filled with terrorists with little chance of innocent bystanders being killed?

Like most sane people, I abhor war and its ugliness. However, given a choice between using dumb ordinance and smart weapons, I'd much rather see NZ companies providing technology that protects the otherwise innocent victims of such conflicts. It seems that Mr Taylor and his peacenik friends disagree.

But should we ban all technologies with military application as appears to be another suggestion of this story?

Well if you say yes to this... where do you draw the line?

Conventional bombs are usually shrouded in a steel case -- do we ban the export of New Zealand-made steel to any country making bombs?

Do we ban the export of NZ's meat and dairy products to countries such as Iran and Iraq because this food could end up in the mouths of terrorists or people who are involved in the unauthorised development of nuclear technology?

The biased, poppy-knocking story that prompted today's column should be an embarrassment to the NZ Herald and would be better published in a rag like this.

Clearly the Herald has decided there's more money in tabloid content than in well-researched, objective, factual reporting.

That's a shame.

What do you think? Is the Rakon story just a beat-up designed to sell a few extra papers and designed to chop a tall poppy and satisfy the peaceniks, or have I got it wrong and maybe it's a great piece of investigative journalism?

Does it make sense to try and ankle-tap those Kiwi exporters whose products may be used in weapons technology? What about Bill Sharplin, the guy in Foxton who makes and exports practice grenades? They don't go bang but the are used to train soldiers in the art of killing people -- do we scuttle his business too?

As a footnote, I did business with Rakon back in the late 1970's early 1980s when they were importing and distributing the Sage microcomputer. They seemed like nice, ethical, very competent people and I have no reason to believe that anything's changed.

Did you notice
As eagle-eyed readers will have noticed, sponsorship of this fine blog/column is up for grabs.

Those who have already made enquiries about sponsoring Aardvark should hear back from me this week - and anyone else who might like to do so should drop me a line ASAP.

Tell us all and see what others have to say in The Aardvark Forums

If you feel that this is a good thing and/or you hold a "geniune affection" for yours truly -- then you are welcome to gift me some money using the buttons provided. In gifting this money you accept that no goods, service or other consideration is offered, provided, accepted or anticipated in return. Just click on the button to gift whatever you can afford. NOTE: PayPal bills in US dollars so don't accidentally gift more than what you were intending :-)

Contacting Aardvark
I'm always happy to hear from readers, whether they're delivering brickbats, bouquets or news tip-offs. If you'd like to contact me directly, please this form. If you're happy for me to republish your comments then please be sure and select For Publication.

Other media organisations seeking more information or republication rights are also invited to contact me.

Just add a couple of lines of JavaScript to your pages and you can get a free summary of Aardvark's daily commentary -- automatically updated each and every week-day.

Aardvark also makes a summary of this daily column available via XML using the RSS format. More details can be found here.

Contact me if you decide to use either of these feeds and have any problems.

Linking Policy
Want to link to this site? Check out Aardvark's Linking Policy.

Did you tell someone else about Aardvark today? If not then do it now!