Hopping up and down for your rights
The blogosphere has been running hot since the police raids on Monday. Speculation has been rife and all sort of theories seem to be floating around. The truth of what did or did not happen will one day become apparent, but for now there are more important issues at stake. Namely, the potential for the police to lay charges against New Zealand citizens under the Terrorism Suppression Act.
This Act was never intended to be used against New Zealanders, in fact the Justice Minister at the time Phil Goff gave that assurance when he said:
“The legislation gives the government greater ability to crack down on terrorism. It also however provides clear safeguards to ensure that the measures are directed to terrorist organisations rather than domestic dissident groups.”
Keith and Jeanette had this to say about it.
“The Greens are totally opposed to violence and firearms and firmly believe in using non-violent means to effect change. It has been part of New Zealand’s culture, nationhood even, to stand up for what we think is right. That’s why we were first to give women the vote and that’s why we are nuclear free. It is very concerning to think that New Zealanders may in future feel frightened to take part in non-violent protests and be seen to stand up for what they believe in because of the potential of being labelled, or worse charged with being, a terrorist.”
October 17th, 2007 at 4:48 pm
It is very concerning to think that New Zealanders may in future feel frightened to take part in non-violent protests and be seen to stand up for what they believe in because of the potential of being labelled, or worse charged with being, a terrorist.�
……………………………………………….
Are you saying they could be charged with being a terrorist for taking part in a non-violent demonstration? (or not returning a library book?)
Is this pacifism or paranoia???? I believe the latter.
October 17th, 2007 at 9:54 pm
Jh is right. Rather then making excuses for these guys and coming up with crazy anti-police conspiricy theories you should condemn them for using violent means of protest (i.e. buying guns). Because all you have done is make up excuses and anti-police conspiricy theories to cover for these people who bought guns i am not completely convince that you are as commited to non-violence as you claim.
If these people were planning to commit acts of terror (as the police have hinted at) then they are terrorists, stop trying to find loopholes!
October 18th, 2007 at 6:17 am
It would be nice if you people would hop up and down for our rights to freedom of speech in an election year, as well.
October 18th, 2007 at 6:25 am
Re Phil Goff on the Terrorism Suppression Act - “acts that are intended to . . . . devastate our economy.”
That says it all really.
And so much for “clear safeguards to ensure that the measures are directed to terrorist organisations rather than domestic dissident groups.”
October 18th, 2007 at 7:22 am
One of the reason a lot of people leave the police force is that they get sick of dealing with “scum bags”…. I just add tjhat because the “we need help,,, you can’t trust the police… look at Shipton and….(?)” idea is being bandied about.
Paul Buchanan doesn’t think it is terrorism but he doesn’t say it’s benign either…. maybe a rugby team but not the All Blacks..
There has been a political/ ideological head of steam between these people rightly or wrongly, (Ranganui Walker v’s Michael King…spot the difference) and we have been often warned that this sort of thing has a high probability of happening. (”there’ll be bloodshed”) Who can say when rhetoric will become action?
October 18th, 2007 at 11:11 am
Well (as a thought experiment), if it turns out that Tame Iti and his trained comic-opera chorus line can be proved to have been planning murder or any form of coercive violence, then I think that they should be locked up, for a couple of decades at least. I’m not sure why specific “terrorist” legislation is necessary or useful in doing that.
But, independently of that, it would be a good plan to allocate some money to clearing up old grievances, and/or promoting economic development in Tuhoe territory. It’s worth noting that an end to violence in Northern Ireland only became possible after government started addressing the legitimate grievances of the Catholic population. It’s not a matter of condoning violence, it’s a matter of justice. And pragmatism.
October 18th, 2007 at 12:32 pm
Hey Nick, can you answer this question?
Where did frog or Russel make up excuses for what the various arrestees are alleged to have done?
And where did they make up an anti-police conspiracy theory?
Or if you were not referring to frog or Russel, then who were you referring to?
I bet you can’t answer because you made it up that we have been making up excuses and conspiracy theories.
October 18th, 2007 at 6:51 pm
The news is full of Kieth Locke alleging Police over reaction. Police should phone first etc.
We need to get the balance right between police state and anarchy. The Greens are dominated by types who are too far at one end.
October 18th, 2007 at 6:58 pm
stuey Says:
October 18th, 2007 at 12:32 pm
Hey Nick, can you answer this question?
Where did frog or Russel make up excuses for what the various arrestees are alleged to have done?
And where did they make up an anti-police conspiracy theory?
Or if you were not referring to frog or Russel, then who were you referring to?
………………………………………………………………………..
Kieth Locke said something along the lines of it being a big over reaction… not excuses but more like “no substance” with implications of police bullying..
October 18th, 2007 at 8:01 pm
Question: re EF Bill - have the Greens done a deal with the devil (Labour) to get this bill through? It’s the only reason I can think of for their crashing silence on this issue. If so, when Labour go down at the next election they’ll take the Greens down with them. Please tell me I’m wrong.
October 18th, 2007 at 9:33 pm
buzz, no we haven’t, and what do you mean by “get this bill through”. we voted for it in first reading because we agree with some parts of it, to allow it to be scrutinised in select committee.
the time to complain will be if the bill remains shoddy and ill-definied (and hence overly restrictive) after select committee, which surely it won’t, and then if the Greens vote for it.
by saying “get this bill through” you seem to think that we are in the middle of second and third readings. You also seem to have bought into the hysterical scaremongering opposition to the bill, when a more sober and measured criticism of the bill is more appropriate at this stage, e.g. that of Russel Brown and Nicky Hager,
http://publicaddress.net/default,4533.sm#post4533
or Idiot Savant and Peter Dunne
http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2007/10/election-funding-dunne-on-efb. html
http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2007/10/election-funding-shaky.html
Can’t we all just wait until it is out of select committee and see what it contains before foaming at the mouth? I guess not unfortunately.
October 18th, 2007 at 9:52 pm
jh, can you please reference where Keith is reported and what he is actually supposed to have said? It is entirely unfair on anyone to have their words paraphrased, for all we readers here know, you could be saying what some angry old man on talkback radio said that Keith said.
also, it is laughable to suggest that the Greens are dominated by people who favour anarchy. I maintain we are the most family/community/society orientated party out there (as witnessed by our strong social justice and peace stance and policies that focus on education, personal health and civics and so on). By advocating for sustainable ecology and for action on peak oil we seek to maintain a strong society rather than to have it descend through the chaos of recession, petrol and food riots, into gun law or even feudal warlords.
I argue that the Grey parties, who by refusing to face up to a finite planet, are the ones who are likely to lead us into anarchy (in the negative sense).
I’m genuinely interested JH, you seem so sensible on most issues, why do you have to then keep posting the negative attacks on Greens? Are you being influenced by the views of others? Think for yourself!
October 19th, 2007 at 4:26 pm
I think everyone needs to calm down and see how things unfold. It would also be nice if jh would use this forum in the spirit it is intended, for debate about issues and the occasional rant. The rubbish and bile attacking and generalising about Green party members just shows your ignorance. I certainly don’t fit your stereotype.
But back to the issue at hand. Personally I suspect that the net has been cast far too wide and there is a lot of guilt-by-association going on. That doesn’t mean there are not genuine issues at the heart of it involving weapons training for a core of those arrested. Time will tell. But I do have a feeling (and I am not basing this on any particular knowledge, just an opinion) that the authorities may be drawing a long bow in the case of the searches in Taupo and Wellington in particular.
One thing I am 100% sure of, when all is said and done the media are going to come out looking the worst of it. You can already see from their creative use of the Police statements and absolute hysterics in terms of headlines (which then get repeated around the world, I almost choked on my cereal at breakfast in Hong Kong on Tuesday morning when I opened up The Standard and saw the article) that they have not been reporting in a responsible manner.
October 19th, 2007 at 6:26 pm
Great Letter Ben! I came home for a visit and went down to the spectators gallery, to watch MMP in action.
Well - what a Match - what a spectacle !
The then PM (national) had these enormous black wings on her shoulders and big big black hair. Power dressing I think you call it.
No one presided really - there was this ‘teacher’s away bun-fight going on - a little feller called Rodney, and another one called Winston.
The leader of the opposition was great - she held the floor with sheer gravitas. I thought she could’ve done Shakespeare.
Anyway, it took a while to look around - some of the most fascinating characters were those in the Press Gallery….if a picture says a thousand words - then what a study - I took up phrenology! keep on mark
October 20th, 2007 at 1:35 am
Do you mind if I ask, Mark52, which century was this ??!
October 20th, 2007 at 2:28 am
last one