Tuesday, 16 November 2010

“To Sir E. Hillary”

ToSirEd What’s yours isn’t yours as long as the government says it isn’t.

I speak of course of a letter to Lady Hillary, the wife of Sir Ed, to whom he left his watches when he died.

Read that: His watches. Watches owned by him. Watches which were given as gifts to him, over which he therefore had, quite legitimately, complete freedom of disposal.

This, however, is not the view of the meretricious, meddling arsehole from the Orwellianly-titled Ministry of Culture and Heritage who wrote the aforementioned letter.

That shiny-arsed arsehole stated in its letter the view that Sir Ed’s watches—specifically a Rolex Oyster Perpetual Oyster awarded to him after he climbed Mt Everest (I emphasis the appropriate words just to make it clear who was up Everest achieving heroism, and who therefore is the owner of the fruits of that feat)—belong not to the hero who climbed Everest and to whom the watch is actually engraved, Sir E. Hillary, but to all the non-climbers and seat-warmers who sat at home basking in his reflected glory.

The fact that Sir Ed achieved such a magnificent accomplishment is all the more reason, according to the arsehole, for confiscating the fruits therefrom.

What a disgusting perversion of morality.

This letter-writing arsehole would have found a fruitful home for itself in the places whereof Orwell often spoke. The sort of place in which heroes become public property, success becomes a reason for punishment, and the fruits of achievement become the object of confiscation—and the greater the achievement, the more virulent the confiscatory power.

I did not think New Zealand had got there yet.

But perhaps I am wrong.


  1. I'd have thought this was a straight dispute of ownership between his kids (who say Sir Ed left the watches to them) and the widow, who says he left them to her. What the hell does the govt have to do with that?

    Pack of weasels, the lot of them.

  2. I'd imagine the culprit is Peter Hillary, whose only lifetime achievement is to bear the title "Son of Ed" (indeed, I believe that title and occupation appear on his passport), and who, it's rumoured, asked Kafka to send a threatening letter on his behalf.

  3. Does make you wonder if some arbitrary private property such as a watch can be deemed to be of 'historical national significance' then what else could be? Shares in private companies?

    I also wonder what the criteria for such items are, where they are published or are they determined on a case by case basis by some meddling bureaucrat.

    Quite scary that laws like this even exist and are therefore open to abuse in other times and situations.

  4. My take on this:


    My summation:

    But what is my business is that someone in this process has decided to bring evil old Nanny State into the tale as well, and look at her. She’s got her knickers in a twist and is raised up on her hind legs making sure we can all see how impressive her power over us is.

    The Ministry of Culture and Heritage (and that department as it ends up could well have been used as a chapter heading in Orwell’s 1984), has come jack booting over the private property rights of all of us stating one of these watches belongs to the State please, and writing what must be the most intimidating and frightening of threats to the elderly lady at the centre of this. I have this image in my mind of poor old Lady Hillary, her eyes popping at the pain to her from this brutal regulatory wedgy she has found herself in: truculent children on one side of her - all too ready to play this sorry tale out in the public eye - and the brute menace of Nanny State on the other.

    Unfortunately the Ministry of Culture and Heritage is acting out the tale of the Gulag, so depressing as humanity has done this sick trip many times before, starting as it always has with the confiscation of private property and the destruction of property rights, as keepers of history should have understood. In supposedly protecting our heritage, this out of control Ministry is part of the process taking away a future lived in freedom for all of us.

    Needless to say, this meddling Ministry of Vultures and Highwaymen need to be disbanded forthwith. Something much more important than a recession demands this: I do, as does every freedom loving individual.

  5. Peter, I realise that this is completely off-topic.... but if you ever even slightly CONSIDER doing a Dim-Post and withdrawing from blogging then I will have on option but to hunt you down and kill you. Do you understand?

  6. If you really want to get mad at the fascists that rule us from the Department of Vultures, read the latest:



    Sir Edmund Hillary's widow will face a penalty fee of up to $200,000 if a prized collection of the explorer's watches are permanently removed from auction.

    And the Department of Vultures concern?

    The ministry said yesterday it was relieved the Rolex had been withdrawn from auction.

    Ministry chief executive Lewis Holden said he was delighted the sale did not go ahead.

    The ministry had contacted Lady Hillary's lawyers late last week to say it viewed the Oyster Perpetual watch as a protected New Zealand object and as such it should be returned here.

    It was still awaiting a formal response from Lady Hillary's lawyers.

    The ministry said last week Lady Hillary may not have known of the legal status of the watch when she sent it to Switzerland with the others in the collection to be sold.

    Holden said today its focus was on getting the watch back because of its heritage and historic importance to New Zealand.

    "We haven't given any consideration at this stage to any prosecution...

    Calling these fascists like Holden 'arseholes' don't even get close to what these dregs really are. Pure evil.

    My taxes pay for evil men like Holden: what a disgrace. Time for a revolution.

  7. Richard McGrath16 Nov 2010, 23:19:00

    This is shameless harassment and extortion of an elderly lady who could now face serious financial hardship. This is disgusting. The Libertarianz Party would never sanction this sort of bullying.

    Are you proud of your government, all you people who voted National in 2008?

  8. Richard McGrath16 Nov 2010, 23:20:00

    Could the ministry CEO be our very own Judge Holden?

  9. Ummmm, no. You guys sure get all het up though don't cha?

    Judge Holden

  10. One of the worst aspects of our 21st Century celebrity culture is the belief that we own the so-called celebrity and everything associated with that person. We see it when sporting or film stars are expected to apologise to society as a whole for any personal shortcomings, e.g. Tiger Woods apologising for his extramarital affairs. This belief that we all own Ed Hilary's watches is part of the same rich vein of collectivist arrogance.

  11. @Kiwiwit: That's an excellent point.

    @Judge Holden: Yes, theft tends to get me pissed off. You, obviously enough, are okay with it?


1. Comments are welcome and encouraged.
2. Comments are moderated. Gibberish, spam & off-topic grandstanding will be removed. Tu quoque will be moderated. Links to bogus news sites (and worse) will be deleted.
3. Read the post before you comment. Challenge facts, but don't simply ignore them.
4. Use a name. If it's important enough to say it, it's important enough to put a name to it.
5. Above all: Act with honour. Say what you mean, and mean what you say.