Not good enough
Helen Clark and Michael Cullen attacked the Chinese journalist who was evicted from covering a meeting with the Chinese Government, claiming he was disruptive.
The tapes showed this was a lie. The PM spin doctor has now clarified that maybe it was not the journalists fault, and that mistakes have been made by the Police.
Great to get this concession, but that’s not good enough frankly. She and Dr Cullen attacked and denigrated the journalist, and they should apologise to him. As should the Police also.
Stephen Franks sat on the select committee which looked into a similar incident in Christchurch in 1999. He blogs about how unsatisfactory the Police evidence to that Committee was, and this seems to be the case again.
No TweetBacks yet. (Be the first to Tweet this post)
No tag for this post.
March 30th, 2007 at 12:33 am
Aside from the fact that no New Zealand public servants ought to be taking orders, suggestions or threats from any foreign visiting officials, isn’t is rather sad how the police over the last few years have fallen from their former position of unimpeachable professionalism, neutrality and just general competence.
March 30th, 2007 at 6:15 am
Typical fascist Labour Party. But if George Bush came to NZ, they would not ban journalists known to be critical of Gitmo. Anything to grease up to the butchers of Beijing.
March 30th, 2007 at 6:27 am
This from Franks account is interesting…
“as the committee grew increasingly appalled at the untrustworthiness of Police witnesses. No MP on that committee was unaffected. Most shattering was the simple stupidity at senior levels, in sticking to incredible denials in the face of overwhelming evidence, including video footage.”
He means they lied through their teeth, much like any crim caught out would except they knew they would never have any consequences of their stupidity and subsequent lies.
March 30th, 2007 at 6:45 am
CHOGM – sadly yes.
March 30th, 2007 at 7:07 am
I’m afraid to say this is typical of the Labour party, and the Prime Minister in particular. They are NOT to be trusted.
March 30th, 2007 at 7:17 am
I’m afraid to say this is typical of the Labour party, and the Prime Minister in particular. They are NOT to be trusted.
March 30th, 2007 at 7:46 am
When I heard about this incident, I thought great, here is a incident that will make the press stand up and take notice and voice huge disapproval of their government master.
What happened? Not a lot really. Acceptance and publication of Cullan & Clark spin and lies. A visit to the speaker- big deal.
Unlike the Shipley incident, it won’t run on for weeks because the left wing media are happy to turn around and get shafted in the arse all the time
March 30th, 2007 at 8:18 am
The Parliamentary Mr Plod’s performance was bad and does not support the explanation now being given by the police. Worse, however, was the statements by the leader of the DPS who seemed to have a completely different explanation as to what happened. Not bad for someone who wasn’t even there. However, not be out done the police national director of operations steps in. He has an even more elaborate explanation.
Bottom line, the Chinese didn’t want Wang there. They told the local plods that and they obliged.
The thing that now astounds me is where are the truly outraged comments from Mr Wang’s journalist colleagues, the civil liberties brigade and all of the others who will give you reams about freedom on any other occasion?
What would have been the reaction if Holmes, Kim Hill, Mary Wilson, Sainsbury, Campbell Espiner had been treated this way.
March 30th, 2007 at 10:37 am
What would have been the reaction if Holmes, Kim Hill, Mary Wilson, Sainsbury, Campbell Espiner had been treated this way.
A big uproar, because they have much larger media organisations behind them. However, I doubt that the police would have acted in the same way if it had been them.
March 30th, 2007 at 4:33 pm
She and Dr Cullen attacked and denigrated the journalist, and they should apologise to him. As should the Police also.
Ah yes, because what the world needs is another grudging, transparently insincere, passive-aggressive “I regret you were offended” non-apology to add insult to injury.