Growing concern over arrests
Chris Trotter did a strong column yesterday backing Police Commissioner Howard Broad, calling him a man of integrity. I can’t find an online version to link to – but it should give sceptics some pause for thought.
It goes without saying that I don’t think there is anything beyond coincidence that Parliament was due to be debating a terrorism bill this week. That bill already had overwhelming support, and the events of this week probably make it harder not easier to progress it.
But my concerns is growing that there may have been some over-reaching by Police. I got a call yesterday letting me know that one of those arrested in Auckland was someone I have met socially. Now he is an anarchist (and that’s no crime) but I find it very difficult to believe he was part of some planned violent action.
He’s a fairly young guy, and locked up in prison until November. Now if he has broken the law, he will face consequences in court. But the part that is concerning me more and more is the refusal of bail. Sure that is reasonable to do if they really were part of some violent conspiracy. But if they merely broke firearms laws at a camp a few months ago, why treat them differently to anyone else who is charged with firearm offences?
October 20th, 2007 at 8:03 am
The Trotter piece is here.
This morning’s NZ Herald has a series of opinion pieces on why the police need to front up with evidence.
October 20th, 2007 at 8:05 am
Chris Trotter did a strong column yesterday backing Police Commissioner Howard Broad, calling him a man of integrity.
If you can’t trust the investigative mastermind behind the Peter Ellis case, who can we trust?
October 20th, 2007 at 8:12 am
i agree that it can’t be politically motivated in asociation w the terrorism bill. The Bill was going through anyway, there was no significant public opposition, no party is going to change its position now because of the arrests, if anything the arrests brought neagtive attention to the Bill, the poliicans can’t direct the Police on such issues, the public backlash if political interference became known would be devastating…
Its important whenever imagining some conspiracy theory or any supposed behaviour to ask ‘well, what’s in it for them to do that?’ Just like we can see its not in the Government’s interest to have these arrests made for the purpose of passing the Bill we can also dismiss the argument that the Government recklessly wastes our tax dollars – there’s obviously a huge motivation to not be wasteful: more services for less tax = votes, and, indeed, the lack of evidence of specific waste affirms that finding.
October 20th, 2007 at 8:20 am
“Chris Trotter did a strong column yesterday backing Police Commissioner Howard Broad, calling him a man of integrity.”
What a load of old rubbish? Integrity? Broad, the man that covered up allegations of misappropriation of public funds (Pledge Card) lodged with the Commissioner’s Office, and wouldn’t investigate allegations against Taito Phillip Field.
Get real Chris Trotter!
October 20th, 2007 at 8:21 am
Sam Dixon: Hahahahahahhahahahaha
You have no understanding of bureacracy whatsoever. As a primer you should read Peter and Hull’s “The Peter Principle”. Your naive statement is a classic example of the triumph of hope over experience.
And so twilight golf courses, sing-a-long to the radio, hip-hop tours, and funding training camps in the Urereweras are all good investments of tax dollars are they?
October 20th, 2007 at 8:22 am
I am very doubtlful at giving the Prime Minister any designational authority under the Bill. A High Court Judge is best placed for that. SIS intell can be shown to a High Court Judge. Just how is the Prime MInister supposed to properly exercise essentially a judicial function without political considerations getting in the way.
October 20th, 2007 at 8:25 am
Sam, off topic perhaps?
I’m very concerned that this has been well overplayed. I see huge similarities to the Indian doctor in Qld who was prosecuted. Government agencies are very risk averse. They’d rather pursue someone inappropriately than run any risk of something going wrong. Government Ministers don’t like admitting their departments did wrong, so they will back them to the hilt, and like in Australia, raise the ante just at the wrong time.
I suspect this is all going to play out very badly for the Labour govt. On the one hand that makes me a little happy (electorally), on the other I see it as a common failing of governments irrespective of their hue, and I wish it didn’t happen in the first place. This is, of course, why we have a bill of rights.
October 20th, 2007 at 8:36 am
Much easier to accept authories claims and the demonisation of people that you don’t actually know aye David? Happens all the time, all over the world, on infinite issues.
October 20th, 2007 at 8:41 am
Oh the BIll of Rights. I thought the Bill of Rights was just somethning we trotted out when it suited our purpose. Not much attention to it re the EFB is there?
The Laughing Policeman:
I know a laughing policeman,
He’s always on our case,
He chases people in the bush
regardless of their race.
He came round and he took exception
to the books that I’ve read
I said what about the ‘Bill of Rights’
And this is what he said:
Ha hahahahahahahahah
Hah hahahahahahahah
ad nauseum
October 20th, 2007 at 8:43 am
I back Chris Trotter and Howard Broad.
Sure there needs to be room for legitimate protest, and I for one couldn’t entertain the fact that the PM (as a former demonstrator) would direct crackdowns on fellow political activists.
The level of reaction to the police raids was entirely predictable and to say that it was not anticipated is utter crap. What we are likely to see in my opinion is people progressively bailed as the investigation continues and focuses on the actual treasonous element. The police should not (and cannot) release details of the actions before charges are laid, lest it interfere with ability to prosecute said charges.
What I (and I suspect many others) would like know is this: will those people protesting at police action denounce individuals and groups if they are found to be plotting acts of rebellion against the state? If their alleged activities were indeed carried out, it is highly likely that many people (including children) would have been severely traumatised.
People should reserve judgement until all the facts are presented. If police SNAFUed – well someone will be held accountable. I, however find that hard to fathom.
October 20th, 2007 at 8:48 am
“People should reserve judgement until all the facts are presented. If police SNAFUed – well someone will be held accountable.”
wish i shared your confidence, PaulL.
October 20th, 2007 at 8:56 am
i..um..!..totally agree withyou dpf..re the no-bailing..
this is all just bullshit to cover their collective blue-hysteria..
there is no imminent danger..no need to imprison..
(and danyl said..
“..Chris Trotter did a strong column yesterday backing Police Commissioner Howard Broad, calling him a man of integrity.
If you can’t trust the investigative mastermind behind the Peter Ellis case, who can we trust?..)
(heh..!..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
October 20th, 2007 at 9:02 am
But no thanks to John Roughan’s spectacularly stupid ‘It’s All George Bush’s Fault’. Really? I prefer to blame Abel Tasman and James Cook – after all, we wouldn’t be having these problems if whitey hadn’t come here in the first place, would we?
October 20th, 2007 at 9:05 am
Quote from DPFs blog item..
“It goes without saying that I don’t think there is anything beyond coincidence that Parliament was due to be debating a terrorism bill this week.”
It goes without saying that I don’t think that the Waiheke Island foot and mouth non-event, was a timely event.
Do you want me to make a list of the convenient but non-coincidental news events that just happen to occur from time to time.
“Mmmmm, how very convenient.” (=copyright infringement)
October 20th, 2007 at 9:07 am
You kill yours kids, you get bail. You break the bail conditions. You get more bail.
You’re strolling the bush in the Urewera ranges with a shot gun and ????
The protesting leftists make me nervous that there may be something behind it, but I have not a single fact to back that up. And that makes me even more nervous.
October 20th, 2007 at 9:14 am
I’m concerned by the complete suppression of all information by the judge. That’s not justice being seen to be done.
What I’m beginning to think is that you have to think like a cop.
Maybe you have a few hard cases that are planning something stupid. You have a wider group who know the hard cases, but are unaware. Everyone in the group talks a lot of shit, in an environment where minor infractions of the law are common. Well, if you’re determined to build a case for terrorist conspiracy – if you’ve decided up front that’s what you have on your hands – then you have to proceed like this. And if some sceptical junior officer says “but sir, is this really, you know, __terrorism__?” they’ll be told to pull their head in and take things seriously.
October 20th, 2007 at 9:18 am
this is looking more and more like state-inspired intimidation of dissidents/protest.
(‘give them a short burst of prison-time..!..that’ll shut them up..!”..)
eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
October 20th, 2007 at 9:28 am
Berend: Whakatane is pretty much where my folks come from, and if you think the town is the Pretrograd Soviet with more melanin… dream on. I know this is going to be an unwelcome reality check to some folks, but there are plenty of people on the right (including myself and DPF) who are not ‘anti-cop’, and have zero time for Maori nationalism or radical chic lefties, but are beginning to wonder if the old fable of The Little Boy Who Cried Wolf is pertinent here.
Frankly, Greg O’Connor can froth and rant from here to kingdom come, there are legitimate questions that need to be answered. And the sooner the better.
October 20th, 2007 at 9:31 am
You’re quite properly and legally going hunting? Gee, you townies are a crack-up.
October 20th, 2007 at 9:34 am
And has anyone raided Jools and Linda Topp’s house yet – Labour-supporting arty-farty greenie lesbians who own guns, keep flammable liquids and sharp objects around the place and bug the hell out of me! Connect the dots people!
October 20th, 2007 at 10:07 am
NZ Herald Oct 20
” A group of officials – the Officials Committee for Domestic and External Security Co-ordination, which is chaired by the head of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet – met last week before the raids.
The committee provides strategic policy advice to the PM, with oversight in the areas of intelligence and security, terrorism, maritime security and emergency preparedness.
Greens co-leader Jeanette Fitzsimons said Mr Key’s comment about the SIS was the first she had heard of its involvement and she questioned what it would have been doing.”
Prior to this, who has ever heard of the Officials Committee for Domestic and External Security Co-ordination, apparently chaired by Heather Simpson [she is Head of the Prime Minister's Department is she not]?
[DPF: I had heard of them previously. And Heather is head of the PMO, not head of the DPMC]
October 20th, 2007 at 10:14 am
Your on to it StevenJudd, there`s no crime in being a retard. Unlicenced firearms are a myth, it`s the owner who is licenced and they are no where as common as unlicenced drivers who kill and maim on a weekly basis. Hey Craig never mind the Topps, take a waka across the Kaipara into real crazy country where the gate sign says “trespassers will be shot” and the rich white tangata whenua patrols the boundary with state of the art ordnance—we are talking “Blackwater” in the backwater. Believe me it`s for real.
October 20th, 2007 at 10:25 am
Yvette:
http://www.dpmc.govt.nz/dess/index.htm#OfficialsCommitteeonDomesticExternalSecurityODESC
“Officials Committee for Domestic and External Security Coordination (ODESC)
DESG is the support secretariat for the Officials Committee for Domestic and External Security Coordination (ODESC). The Cabinet Committee on Domestic & External Security Coordination, chaired by the Prime Minister, makes high-level policy decisions on security and intelligence matters. To support that process, ODESC is the committee of government officials charged with providing strategic policy advice to the Prime Minister on such matters. ODESC exercises policy oversight in the areas of intelligence and security, terrorism, maritime security and emergency preparedness.
ODESC membership comprises Chief Executives from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, the Defence Force, Ministry of Defence and NZSIS, GCSB, NZ Police, Ministry of Civil Defence & Emergency Management, Treasury and others as and when necessary. The Chief Executive of DPMC (Maarten Wevers) chairs the group.”
no mention of Simpson though, where did you get that info?
October 20th, 2007 at 10:30 am
If Jeanette Fitzsimons did not think the SIS would be involved in this then she is a loon. The fact of their involvement should come as no surprise to anyone if they ever gave a passing thought as to why the SIS was set up and what it does. Does Fitzsimons have even a minimal understanding of security issues – it appears not. And she has been a parliamentarian and party leader for years and years.
October 20th, 2007 at 10:35 am
PaulL -this has no implications for the govt, they didn’t order the arrests and they, unlike Howard, have stayed clear of the judical process now underway.. the police may come out looking very bad indeed if the allegtons are over the top but heads will roll if thats the case, the probelm will be operational not policy.
milo- wastewatch.co.nz .. found $1billion of waste from 7 years of spending (totalling around $325billion i estimate), and that incuded things that are obviously not all waste – $400 million for the new prison snd same for the Wananga – a $20,000 hiphop tour don’t pay for a lot of tax cuts… oh and the nat’s effort to shame the govt with all its waste was so successful that wastewatch is still going strong, right? right?
October 20th, 2007 at 10:41 am
Chris Trotter
“NZ has remained solidly supportive of propressive causes and reassured by the lefts steadfast refusal to either initiate violence, or respond to the violence initiated against it”.
Oh fucking please, so now the left are choir boys, butter wouldn’t melt in their mouths. So the left reject violence, I guess the just leaves bribery, corruption, forgery and been very economical with the truth.
October 20th, 2007 at 10:57 am
Tim Barclay: “Does Fitzsimons have even a minimal understanding of security issues – it appears not. And she has been a parliamentarian and party leader for years and years.”
Or is the Green Party’s involvement allowed and tolerated by Labour because they are eco-friendly eye-candy, who roll over and take it up the *** by Labour at the drop of a hat? Think it’s bad now, wait till Bradford knifes nice old Fitzsimons and takes the Greens where she want them…
October 20th, 2007 at 11:01 am
Sam Dixon – “PaulL -this has no implications for the govt, they didn’t order the arrests and they, unlike Howard, have stayed clear of the judical process now underway.. ”
was Helen completely oblivious of this situation? See link shown prior…which says:
“Director DESG:
The Director is responsible for providing timely, rigorous, relevant and accurate advice to the Prime Minister on issues affecting the security of New Zealand including policy, legislative, operational and budgetary aspects. A key role is to support the Prime Minister in leading a coherent and immediate national response to security crises and emergencies, and ensure the Prime Minister is kept informed of significant issues in these areas.”
What you are saying sounds a bit ‘There’s nothing to see here, move on…”
Am I right?
October 20th, 2007 at 11:35 am
The fact that Chris Trotter has a high regard for Howard Broad is just another nail in his coffin as far as I’m concerned.
Regarding the suppression of information, you can bet your bottom dollar that ANYTHING about this case or any other that might be an embarrassment to the policies of Our Dear Leader will NEVER be known. NEVER EVER.
Side show bob, you said it. I wish there was some forum where we could actually conduct some sort of debate with Chris Trotter. The mainstream newspapers never seem to print letters that forensically demolish his ideological drivel. I presume Trotter wouldn’t be seen dead participating in a forum like this one.
Trotter would be the first to accuse a “right-wing” government of maintaining its position by “violence” by virtue of legal penalties and jail sentences. He’ll never see that about any government like Castro, Chavez, or Clark, though. He’ll never say that about any parents jailed for the mildest discipline of their children. He’ll never say that about people stripped of property rights and their lives destroyed by the Resource Management Act. He’ll never say that about anyone jailed for “illegally” distributing political pamphlets. Or jailed for preaching out of certain sections of the Bible deemed to be “intolerant”.
The elephant in the room that Lenin was dealing with was that most of even the poorest people do not want THEIR homes, THEIR properties, THEIR rights, stripped away from them even if substituted by some allegedly superior utopia. Leftwing “liberal” government today may stop short of “de-kulak-isation” but it is inherently violent.
Furthermore, when you keep up the hypnopaedic repetition of leftwing theories of “victimisation”, it’s only a matter of time before those who are the subjects of this indoctrination “flip” and start murdering people in the name of the “injustices” they’ve suffered. Remember the Korean guy at Virginia Tech, and his rant about “injustice” and “rich kids”? Then when the “little revolution” starts, the theorists like Trotter who provided the motivation will stand back in assumed horror.
October 20th, 2007 at 11:53 am
Are Tame Iti’s alleged actions an example of how people may politically express their opinions when the EFB denies them normal alternatives?
October 20th, 2007 at 12:13 pm
Yes Puzzled. You can’t fill a kettle with water, weld its lid down, then put heat under it.
People see ‘democracy’ as a ‘right’ or ‘priviledge’ handed down from high. Actually it is an accumulation of checks and balances designed to protect society from the evils of disorder and civil strife.
Once a government or oligarchy starts to curtail proper democratic expression, it is admitting that ‘natural law’ is a better way forward. For example, the EFB will ‘encourage, even incentive covert action’ according to some.
An example might be when a judicial system treats paedophiles lightlly, first, you have the creation of advocacy groups like ‘Sensible Sentencing Trusts’ then when that is clearly not working, people become vigilantes.
Another is, when a law is passed to curtail the right to make political statements, then people start to indulge in covert shock tactics, first it is on ’soft’ targets like electricty, waterm transport, then it excalates to financial instituions and political institutions then to people. The state has little alternative to respond, and so you have the formation of ’special powers’ to curtail dissent.
Let us assume the Foreshore and Seabed Act is at the bottom of this particular ‘terrorst’ action.
The ’system’ is supposed to protect us from this by allowing us all the freedom of expression we require to assist in the running of society, not to make up new laws to stymie poeples desire to seek redress..
October 20th, 2007 at 12:20 pm
PaulL -this has no implications for the govt, they didn’t order the arrests and they, unlike Howard, have stayed clear of the judical process now underway.. the police may come out looking very bad indeed if the allegtons are over the top but heads will roll if thats the case, the probelm will be operational not policy
Now,, this is my major thinking at this time.
are these arests a major practice to use anti terroism laws against gangs.
Are gangs terroists??
Ideologically, no. They’re criminals
But is it possible to see the scenario of every gang residence in this country raided and their inhabitants arrested and the govt and NZ remaining mute. after all they’re criminals, what’s the fuss.
Michael laws will be celebrating from the roof tops.
Will this be the agenda regardless of govt.
Will the suppresion of gangs in fact drive an under life that will see collusion between protestors and gangs labelled ‘terroists’
In fact, who won’t be considered a terroist.
Grannies have already been forced to stop home baking for meetings by a council, no one said anything. I can’t remember any journalist commenting on that.
If home baking is considered anti social, well,,,,,,,
October 20th, 2007 at 12:25 pm
So the Terrorism Act will be a corollary of the EFB?
October 20th, 2007 at 12:36 pm
Puzzled in Ekatahuna ,,
well what does 1+1=
October 20th, 2007 at 1:58 pm
“He’s a fairly young guy, and locked up in prison until November. Now if he has broken the law, he will face consequences in court. But the part that is concerning me more and more is the refusal of bail. Sure that is reasonable to do if they really were part of some violent conspiracy. But if they merely broke firearms laws at a camp a few months ago, why treat them differently to anyone else who is charged with firearm offences?”
What people on here are typically failing to understand when they speculate in such a manner is the way the system works. The Police effectively have their hands tied, if they release information to appease the media they run the risk of prejudicing the Defendants right to a fair trial later in the course of things.
Which of course leads to the fact that the only real information people are basing their views on is as exhibited above, that so and so was such a nice boy he couldn’t possibly be guilty he should be freed its obviously the Police being nazi’s etc etc.
Its not the Police who are denying the Defendants bail, they might be opposing it but its a Judge who decides whether or not bail is granted based on such factors as the strength of the Police evidence, risk of re-offending, seriousness of the offending, risk to the community etc etc. Now for the Defendants to be refused bail and remanded indicates that the
the Police actually have some very strong evidence against the accused which is going to most likely make people on here and those protesting about over the top Police action look rather stupid when it comes out.
October 20th, 2007 at 2:35 pm
Most of us know nothing about the details of the case the police are trying to bring. It could be a good case, we just don’t know. But I think if you are going to deny people bail, then it better be a damned good case, and they shouldn’t have to wait very long to hear it.
Otherwise the Terror laws end up being used the way they are being used in the States. They’re not to actually bust anyone. They’re to put them in prison without even busting them, for indefinite periods. Then you let them go. The purpose is obvious – to scare people.
October 20th, 2007 at 2:45 pm
“The purpose is obvious – to scare people.”
and under terroism laws not have to pay reimbursement for false arrest.
Thats a collusion between police and govt, sanctioned by the courts.
that amounts to that dirty word we’re not sposed to talk about; conspiracy
October 20th, 2007 at 2:58 pm
“They’re not to actually bust anyone. They’re to put them in prison without even busting them, for indefinite periods. Then you let them go. The purpose is obvious – to scare people.”
What? You mean like to terrorise people?
October 20th, 2007 at 2:59 pm
“What? You mean like to terrorise people?”
touche !
October 20th, 2007 at 3:19 pm
PaulL -this has no implications for the govt, they didn’t order the arrests and they, unlike Howard, have stayed clear of the judical process now underway.. the police may come out looking very bad indeed if the allegtons are over the top but heads will roll if thats the case, the probelm will be operational not policy.
Sam: More than usually fatuous party hackery. Of course it will have ‘implications’ for the Government – because folks do actually understand that the Police don’t write and pass legislation, the legislature does. And Police Minister Annette King has been vocally – and quite properly IMO – defending the Police, so you think if claims are ‘over the top’ she would be completely unaffected by any backlash?
October 20th, 2007 at 3:20 pm
I’ve just found out through a friend that I personally know several of the anarchists who’ve been connected to the “para-military training camps”. Sure they’re people with radical politics, but they’re people who abhor violence of any kind … full stop.
I’ll give an example. I was at an anarchist conference about 4 years ago. About mis way through the conference 4 or 5 fascists, national front memebers to be precise, turned up and tried to provoke a fight. There was a round 80-100 of us – we could have delivered them humilating thrashing, But instead we chose to have a dialouge with them. We had a party planned that night – we learned that the NF had discovered its location via a website – so we decided to call the party off rather than risk violence from occuring.
Now several of the people have been arrested in connection with the paramilitary training camps were at the conference – and amongst the most vocally opposed to violence. To me it’s simply not credible that these people were aiming to become part of a merderous campaign. The more likely scenario to me is that they have been in contact with some maori radicals, and have possibly been involved in non-violent direct action camps (very common thinigs) to discuss non-violent direct action tactics – road blockages, street theater etc. This is the MO of the NZ enviro-anarchist scene.
This is what seems more likely to me anyway;
BTW i’ve just finished talking to chis trotter about this in person (he just delivered a speech at the Dunedin alliance conference). He thinks that the arrests are backed by credible information – the only thing is that he has no idea about how the intelligence has been analysed – i.e. could this be another case of “massaged intelligence data” i.e. Iraq and WMDs?
October 20th, 2007 at 3:26 pm
doh – spelling!
October 20th, 2007 at 3:27 pm
At a guess these non-violent anarchists will have got themselves into this mess by their inability to say no to the stupid ideas presented to them by the nutbars who’ve been playing soldiers.
What anarchist could say no to a bit anti-colonialist struggle, regardless of how daft or dangerous the person proposing in is.
October 20th, 2007 at 3:32 pm
Do you know any people who are active in New Zealand’s anarchist movement Richard?
October 20th, 2007 at 3:34 pm
“The more likely scenario to me is that they have been in contact with some maori radicals, and have possibly been involved in non-violent direct action camps (very common thinigs) to discuss non-violent direct action tactics – road blockages, street theater etc. This is the MO of the NZ enviro-anarchist scene.”
Certainly, this could be what the National Front took offense to, that so called peace activists were connecting with para military Maori activists,
and not to be confusing myself with the NF, I see their line of thinking, however blatantly over indulged it seems to be.
But the lesson here is the ancient divide and conquer.
the govt always knows NZ and its movements are too divided to be serious
threats. therefore its knee jerk reactions will be its undoing.
October 20th, 2007 at 3:34 pm
I have to say that if Chris Trotter thinks Broad is a man of integrity, that would confirm it to me that Broad is as twisted as they come and is doing H1 & H2’s bidding. Trotter is man without honour, without morals, and without honesty, he wouldn’t know integrity if it kicked him up the arse. The only thing that redeems Broad in my mind is that as Trotter has no idea what inegrity looks like, he can’t tell if Broad has it or not. His only motivation is to support against any evidence to the contrary, Helen Clkark and with her, the Labour party.
Mind you, if Broad was associated with the Ellis case, then it is case closed, he’s a F****n complete stuff up.
October 20th, 2007 at 3:41 pm
Craig said More than usually fatuous party hackery. Of course it will have ‘implications’ for the Government – because folks do actually understand that the Police don’t write and pass legislation, the legislature does. And Police Minister Annette King has been vocally – and quite properly IMO – defending the Police, so you think if claims are ‘over the top’ she would be completely unaffected by any backlash?
Absolutely it will have implications for govt.
When this story broke offshore US security wanted to know if there was any threat to US interests here. When they were briefed they laughed, and the opinion was that NZ police had over-reacted and this would most likely backfire on govt, and possibly make a Nat/Maori partnership more likely.
Maybe. We will just have to wait and see.
October 20th, 2007 at 4:04 pm
I wonder if the police are browsing this site for people who badmouth the witch and leftists in general.(THERES A KNOCK AT THE DOOR) now that could be scary if it was true, right .
October 20th, 2007 at 4:11 pm
Phillip John/Roger Nome:
Richard’s opinion is equally valid whether or not he moves in the same circles as you.
Oh, and anarchy and peace are mutually exclusive concepts when it comes to free-trade opposition. Everyone loses when insurance premiums go up to cover the many smashed windows, trashed private property – and the public hospital business does a roaring trade too.
Or do you know better?
October 20th, 2007 at 4:41 pm
“this would most likely backfire on govt, and possibly make a Nat/Maori partnership more likely.
Maybe. We will just have to wait and see.”
The Maori Party have already spoken their preference for National
Its co-leader Turiana Taria left the labour Party in disgust to form Maori.
It is highly likely the next govt will comprise a shared leader ship between
John Key, Rodney Hide and the Pita and Turiana.
Winston nowhere to be seen ??
That is what we will have to look for.
Situation bleak,, snafu.
October 20th, 2007 at 4:43 pm
“Oh, and anarchy and peace are mutually exclusive concepts when it comes to free-trade opposition. Everyone loses when insurance premiums go up to cover the many smashed windows, trashed private property”
Interesting – I’ve know dozens anarchists over the years – but have never heard one advocate “smashing windows etc” – do you know of any anarchists in NZ who have done such things? I don’t.
“Richard’s opinion is equally valid whether or not he moves in the same circles as you.”
He’s claiming to know the personalities of people who were arrested better than someone who knows them – he doesn’t.
October 20th, 2007 at 4:44 pm
From NoRightTurn
[quote]
“From Question Time today:
Keith Locke: Does the Prime Minister agree that the environmental, peace, and Māori rights movements have a long history of peaceful protests and should not be, in any way, smeared by association with the alleged acts of violence by one or two individuals?
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN: New Zealand stands for the right to peaceful protest; many of us in this House have engaged in peaceful protest in the past. Indeed, the *Terrorism Suppression Act itself is quite specific around that matter.
Indeed it is. For example, it provides an exemption to the laws on terrorist financing in s8 (2) making it clear that it is not an offence to collect funds “for the purpose of advocating democratic government or the protection of human rights”.
Naturally, the government is planning to repeal this clause in its Terrorism Suppression Amendment Bill currently before the House.”
[endquote]
This is a bill that has the wholesale support of the National Party. Rather than taking a stand and defend rights, they’ve gone along with the Government. Like most of the other legislation passed surrounding terrorism in the last few years, this bill has huge potential for abuse.
Or is it acceptable to strip away rights when they belong to people designated at as “terrorists”? One only has to look to historic precedent to see that the label terrorist is extraordinarily flexible, and can easily be applied to whoever the given enemy of the government is at the time.
October 20th, 2007 at 4:44 pm
“It is highly likely the next govt will comprise a shared leader ship between
John Key, Rodney Hide and the Pita and Turiana”
hehehehe.
October 20th, 2007 at 4:46 pm
Phillip John:
So do you condone the actions of fringe anarchic groups at free-trade protests?
October 20th, 2007 at 4:48 pm
Oh and Phillip John:
Richard actually said:
A lesson in reading comprehension 101 wouldn’t go amiss?
October 20th, 2007 at 4:52 pm
“So do you condone the actions of fringe anarchic groups at free-trade protests?”
You mean agent provocateurs/secret police agents? At these protests it’s often a group that no other protests recognise that are engaging in the window smashing etc – often they inspire others to join them.
And no I don’t condone these actions.
October 20th, 2007 at 4:55 pm
POC – he’s speculated on these people’s personalities – he doesn’t know them at all – his opinion is all but worthless.
October 20th, 2007 at 5:03 pm
Phillip John:
You mean agent provocateurs/secret police agents?
You can’t possibly be serious? That’s a ridiculous conspiracy theory. I’ll remember that next time I see masked thugs (hence your non-recognition defence, perhaps?) smashing in shop windows and causing mayhem – in the name of anti-free trade protest.
October 20th, 2007 at 5:12 pm
“You can’t possibly be serious? That’s a ridiculous conspiracy theory.”
By its very nature it’s difficult to prove – but occasionally they are caught out.
“Quebec provincial police admitted Thursday that three of their officers disguised themselves as demonstrators during the protest at the North American leaders summit in Montebello, Que.”
“Police came under fire Tuesday, when a video surfaced on YouTube that appeared to show three plainclothes police officers at the protest with bandanas across their faces. One of the men was carrying a rock.
In the video, protest organizers in suits order the men to put the rock down, call them police instigators and try unsuccessfully to unmask them.”
“”[Our union] believes that the security force at Montebello were ordered to infiltrate our peaceful assembly and provoke incidents,” said Coles, president of the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union.
Police said the three were told to monitor protesters who were not peacefully demonstrating to prevent any violent incidents, but they were called out as undercover agents when they refused to throw objects.”
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/08/23/police-montebello.html?ref=rss
October 20th, 2007 at 5:17 pm
I found out today that I also have met the young guy David is talking about, I have to say my initial thought was “no way he would be involved in something like that”
Thats not changed
The more this goes on the more I think it’s a wild over-reaction by the police.
October 20th, 2007 at 5:24 pm
Ross Meurant’s interview on the National Programme yesterday was interesting, there probably was something going on that required some sort of response and we just have to wait till the facts come out to see whether it was appropriate.
October 20th, 2007 at 5:28 pm
Phillip John:
I think it’s fair to say the “undercover” means “fit in the with the crowd”.
The Police line (the three were told to monitor protesters who were not peacefully demonstrating to prevent any violent incidents, but they were called out as undercover agents when they refused to throw objects) is more plausible to me – especially when there’s no evidence that (a) the rock was thrown; or (b) the protesters were incited by the police officer to cause mayhem.
But anyway – I still think that certain fringe protest groups have a penchant for violent protest. Which is why I disagree with your suggestion (as I understood it) that all enviro-political protests are peaceful.
October 20th, 2007 at 5:36 pm
“is more plausible to me – especially when there’s no evidence that (a) the rock was thrown”
Why would you be carrying a rock if your only intention was to “prevent any violent incidents”? Why would you be wearing a bandana around your face? Sorry POC – your ‘assessment’ is laughable.
“Which is why I disagree with your suggestion (as I understood it) that all enviro-political protests are peaceful.”
I don’t claim to have personal knowledge of every enviro-anarchist activist around the world. Just the ones that have been arrested in NZ.
October 20th, 2007 at 5:40 pm
Phillip John:
I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and say you display all the hallmarks of selective comprehension syndrome.
I said: I think it’s fair to say the “undercover” means “fit in the with the crowd”. They’re hardly going to turn up and sing ring-a-ring-a-roses now, are they?
October 20th, 2007 at 5:44 pm
POC
I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and say you display all the hallmarks of selective comprehension syndrome.
I said:
Why would you be carrying a rock if your only intention was to “prevent any violent incidents”?
Your answer?
October 20th, 2007 at 5:45 pm
My answer (again):
I think it’s fair to say the “undercover” means “fit in the with the crowd”.
October 20th, 2007 at 5:45 pm
POC
I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and say you display all the hallmarks of selective comprehension syndrome.
I said:
Why would you be carrying a rock if your only intention was to “prevent any violent incidents”?
Your answer?
October 20th, 2007 at 5:48 pm
And why would they be trying to fit in with the crowd by carrying rocks.
they stuck out like dog bollocks.
If they had of throwm them the police would have bought down the sledge hammer
and those three would’ve walked away unscathed
(probably had a pass word the police forces could identify them from.)
October 20th, 2007 at 5:52 pm
Here’s a very interesting piece by Aziz Choudry on this subject.
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0710/S00294.htm
October 20th, 2007 at 5:52 pm
Well, as I say Phillip John, I’ll be thinking of you when I next see images on TV of anarchic thugs smashing in shop windows and causing mayhem – wherever the next G8 summit might be.
October 20th, 2007 at 5:55 pm
Hmmm…
Predictable because the New Zealand state, built as it is on the dispossession of Maori and the continued colonization of Maori lands lives and resources has always inherently equated Maori resistance and decolonization initiatives with subversion, sedition and criminality.
“Interesting piece”???
October 20th, 2007 at 5:56 pm
“Well, as I say Phillip John, I’ll be thinking of you when I next see images on TV of anarchic thugs smashing in shop windows and causing mayhem”
Sure – and I’ll be thinking that they may be “anarchists”, or they may be agent provocateurs. Clearly that later thought won’t occur to you – such is your sheep-like trust in unaccountable authority.
October 20th, 2007 at 5:59 pm
So you say ALL of the rock-throwing, bottle-smashing loons at the G8 summits are agent provocateurs? Do the TV images suggest that to you? Priceless.
October 20th, 2007 at 6:01 pm
POC
I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and say you display all the hallmarks of selective comprehension syndrome.
I said:
“I’ll be thinking that they may be “anarchists”, or they may be agent provocateurs”
October 20th, 2007 at 6:03 pm
This piece of Aziz Choudry’s commentary hits the nail on the head for me..
“‘Credible’ police intelligence. Let’s see. Hmmm. In my experience that often means half-baked notions framed by a mindset that equates activism with criminality, and in a country so based on denial of its colonial reality, Maori advocating for self-determination have always been labelled as extremists. Along comes 9/11 and there is a whole new pretext for surveillance of domestic dissent. ”
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0710/S00294.htm
October 20th, 2007 at 6:04 pm
Phillip John:
And you’ve just proved my point. Not all anarchists engage in peaceful protest.
So:
I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and say you display all the hallmarks of selective comprehension syndrome.
And plagarism of my words without proper attribution is an academic offence
October 20th, 2007 at 6:06 pm
“Predictable because the New Zealand state, built as it is on the dispossession of Maori and the continued colonization of Maori lands lives and resources has always inherently equated Maori resistance and decolonization initiatives with subversion, sedition and criminality.
Interesting piece”???”
Take from it what you want – I’m guessing you’re white and from an economically privelaged background – at least that’s what comes through in your posts – so I could hardly expect you to identify with the above passage.
October 20th, 2007 at 6:10 pm
Phillip John:
Everything is written with a particular worldview – and Choudry’s is well-known.
You can read what you like from my posts. But if you think I’ve got where I have through privilege, then you’re a pompous ass. Want to call me a racist too, while you’re at it?
October 20th, 2007 at 6:12 pm
“‘Credible’ police intelligence. Let’s see. Hmmm. In my experience that often means half-baked notions framed by a mindset that equates activism with criminality, and in a country so based on denial of its colonial reality, Maori advocating for self-determination have always been labelled as extremists. Along comes 9/11 and there is a whole new pretext for surveillance of domestic dissent. ”
This is the best statement in a nutshell I have ever observed concerning race relations in this country.
Roger,, if thats your own statement ,can I have permission to use it for further reference ??
October 20th, 2007 at 6:13 pm
I say Roger, ole chap you seem to be focusing on this issue quite closely,
- more than a passing interest??
Would you be kind enough to let on the current 9th floor spin on this issue as Selma’s not talking to me at present.
October 20th, 2007 at 6:14 pm
“And you’ve just proved my point. Not all anarchists engage in peaceful protest.”
I don’t think they neccesarily do either (I do believe it’s a bit more complex than the way you present it though), but we’re talking about NZ here – not Europe or the US.
October 20th, 2007 at 6:15 pm
Any of these peace movement/anarchist types who “abhor violence of any kind” (roger nome) ever wear Che Guevara T-shirts?
October 20th, 2007 at 6:15 pm
Hinamanu:
I think you’ll find it’s taken from the link Phillip John provided: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0710/S00294.htm
October 20th, 2007 at 6:16 pm
Here’s another interesting passage from choudry’s piece.
“If they cannot distinguish between lawful political activity and criminal activity in the real world, they clearly cannot be trusted to do so in cyberspace. When police raided my house shortly after the illegal 1996 SIS break-in, which the Police’s own Criminal Intelligence Service struggled unsuccessfully to cover up, its stellar intelligence service had me down as being away at an SPCA conference, (an organization that I have had no dealings with, although I admit that it is possible that a reliable police source such as a stray cat pissing on the front of my section when they were watching my house may have led them astray) when I was on a publicly announced and promoted speaking tour against APEC and free trade, and being a known associate of some guy I had never even heard of. These were known facts – “credible intelligence”. Nonsense – and not even half-truths!”
October 20th, 2007 at 6:18 pm
“Any of these peace movement/anarchist types who “abhor violence of any kind” (roger nome) ever wear Che Guevara T-shirts?”
Nope (plants face in hand).
October 20th, 2007 at 6:32 pm
“I say Roger, ole chap you seem to be focusing on this issue quite closely,
- more than a passing interest??”
Yes – people I know have been locked up – and I’m suspecting on extremely dodgy grounds. I’m worried about them, and the future of our ability to engage in protest and civil disobedience – two very important democratic rights.
“Would you be kind enough to let on the current 9th floor spin on this issue as Selma’s not talking to me at present.”
Mate – save the tinfoil for the baked potatoes will you?
October 20th, 2007 at 6:34 pm
“if you think I’ve got where I have through privilege, then you’re a pompous ass.”
Why so defensive POC? Something tells me I wasn’t too far from the truth.
October 20th, 2007 at 6:34 pm
sonic – if the arrests were for criminal matters I would agree that there was a huge over-response.
But if they were for terrorist-related matters it was a huge under-response. You don’t take a news crew in for terrorists for a start.
Let us explore this theory:
The nature of the crimes were not organised or coordinated enough to constitute terrorism.
However, in order to coordinate a crack-down of this nature, it was considered expedient by someone to treat it as a terror alert.
The police thoght well, if that’s how it’s going to be portrayed, we’d better not cock-up.
So they went in with the proverbial hammer to crack the ….etc.
End result?
Someone gets to:
1) bask in a bit of international media attention adn take some attention from less deserving types in Fiji
2) look like they are ‘down’ with the international community when it comes to dealing with terrorists (look good on the UN -application CV)
3) is not around to answer any embarrassing questions from the NZ media
4) hold a bit of debating trump card over the Maori party (see EB=National =rort)
5) stir up middle NZ 10 times more effectively and cynically than any ‘Orewa’ speech
6) stifle left-wing criticism of the Suppression of Terrorism Bill
7) I can’t think of a number 7 but you get my drift.
Like I said if it was a criminal matter it was heavy-handed. But if it was a terrorism matter only one person could have sanctioned it:
was Helen completely oblivious of this situation? See link shown prior…which says:
“Director DESG:
The Director is responsible for providing timely, rigorous, relevant and accurate advice to the Prime Minister on issues affecting the security of New Zealand including policy, legislative, operational and budgetary aspects. A key role is to support the Prime Minister in leading a coherent and immediate national response to security crises and emergencies, and ensure the Prime Minister is kept informed of significant issues in these areas.”
Well whaddayathink?
October 20th, 2007 at 6:39 pm
Phillip John:
Too far from what exactly? That I’m white and from an economically privileged [note the correct spelling - as you seem to make this mistake quite often] background?
You don’t know about my life and my circumstances – so best not to speculate.
October 20th, 2007 at 8:53 pm
POC:
Phillip John/Roger Nome:
Do you know any people who are active in New Zealand’s anarchist movement Richard?
Richard’s opinion is equally valid whether or not he moves in the same circles as you.
If Richards opinion on anarchists is as vaild as Roger Nomes, then Roger Nomes opinion of you is as equally valid as your own.
October 20th, 2007 at 9:15 pm
Oh Mike – go and take a chill pill.
There’s actually a difference between all of us (Richard, Phillip John and me) speculating about anarchists – and Phillip John speculating about me. I think I know myself better than Phillip John.
October 20th, 2007 at 9:21 pm
“If Richards opinion on anarchists is as vaild as Roger Nomes, then Roger Nomes opinion of you is as equally valid as your own.”
yeah,, I thought that was a mouthful myself.
people get so inside themselves
October 21st, 2007 at 11:11 am
roger nome Says: “Do you know any people who are active in New Zealand’s anarchist movement Richard?”
Nope, but I’m guessing you don’t know everyone involved in the ‘movement’.
In any case I’m simply speculating how on how some anarchists may have become linked to the people playing soldiers.
As Sam Buchanan says in the SST today, “Our opposition to authority and domination leads us to become involved in feminist, anti-military and anti-colonial movements, and to oppose racism and abuse. Anarchists are also involved in mutual aid projects… .” http://www.stuff.co.nz/4245650a10.html
To be quite frank Mr Buchanan does look like the sort who holds a few silly beliefs. Who’s to say that the even dafter fringes of his ilk haven’t got in over their heads in something very silly.
October 21st, 2007 at 11:32 am
True – but I DO know a few of the “arrested”. If you did perhaps you would see why I think the idea that they were plotting a murderous campaign is such a joke.
October 21st, 2007 at 11:40 am
“There’s actually a difference between all of us (Richard, Phillip John and me) speculating about anarchists – and Phillip John speculating about me. I think I know myself better than Phillip John.”
Why? I know many of the arrested – and you don’t – So I undoubtedly know them better than you. As to some German anarchists protesting in Genoa who may or may not have broken some windows – well that’s a moot point – and largely irrelevant to the people we’re discussing.
i.e. Some free-market advocates, Pinochet comes to mind, have murdered, tortured and imprisoned hundreds of prisoners, yet this has little bearing on whether say Don Brash or John Key’s propensity to do violence.
October 21st, 2007 at 11:43 am
Should have been …
i.e. Some free-market advocates, Pinochet comes to mind, have murdered, tortured and imprisoned hundreds of people …..
October 21st, 2007 at 11:44 am
and ….
yet this has little bearing on Don Brash’s or John Key’s propensity to do violence.
October 21st, 2007 at 1:33 pm
For God’s sake, Phillip John. Read Mike’s post. Then read my response. Then you might see how you’ve misconstrued my words (again). You’ve clearly quoted it out of context.
October 21st, 2007 at 2:23 pm
roger nome said: “True – but I DO know a few of the “arrested”. If you did perhaps you would see why I think the idea that they were plotting a murderous campaign is such a joke.”
I too doubt that there was a murderous plot being hatched on Abel Smith St and other such places; out in the back blocks of the Ureweras I’m not so confident. I’ll not be surprised, should a murderous plot have been hatched, that some anarchist/anti-captalist had provided illegal assistance even if they had little idea of the end goals.
October 21st, 2007 at 6:37 pm
A very, very silly political movement that rationalises Palestinian suicide bombing and the Sept 11 attacks is morally capable of anything ultimately.
October 21st, 2007 at 8:36 pm
PhilBest
“A very, very silly political movement that rationalises Palestinian suicide bombing and the Sept 11 attacks is morally capable of anything ultimately.”
Oh dear.
October 22nd, 2007 at 12:18 pm
funny that the window smashing in this case was not done by anarchists but to them. it was filmed and on tv as well. why did police smash the glass at 128 when they did the raid? would not knocking of been sufficient?
now who is violent?
October 22nd, 2007 at 12:55 pm
Remember Neil Roberts? Don’t imagine it can’t happen here. I agree with Craig Ranapia earlier, John Roughan’s column in the Herald was spectacularly stupid. To get your cause recognised, start murdering people. The cringing western liberal intellectual class just loves it. This is “sowing the wind”.
It’s not as if we don’t have problems with suicidal youth, the mentally unhinged, and substance abusers, who are just not safe with an ongoing diet of propaganda about how everything that’s wrong with their life is the fault of “the rich”, males, or honkies.
November 20th, 2007 at 7:11 pm
Karan…
I just wanted to tell you that your site is really awesome and is of a fantastic quality. The content is great and I will be returning….
January 16th, 2008 at 9:12 am
Krish…
I love your site. They really look very nice. The articles provided are long enough to provide great content but not so long as to be totally engrossing, if you know what I mean….