Winston “hundreds of thousands”

October 9th, 2012 at 7:27 am by David Farrar

3 News reports:

Prime Minister John Key says he won’t close the door on Afghan interpreters who say their lives are at risk after working with New Zealand troops.

Twenty-six interpreters work with the Provincial Reconstruction Team (PRT) in Bamiyan. They say the Taliban will target them as soon as the troops pull out.

When the PRT leaves in April next year, they are planning to leave behind the interpreters. But Mr Key wants to be certain the risk is as bad as has been presented before he welcomes them here.

“We just need to assess the risks – whether the risks are real and genuine to them,” says Mr Key. “We need to work through the issue and see what it might all mean. I’m not closing the door to them.”

If there is a genuine and significant risk, we should take them. Of course the claims may be exaggerated in order to be allowed to move to NZ, as even if there is no risk to their security – NZ is always going to be a far nicer place to live than Afghanistan.

But by opening the door at all, New Zealand First says it could be impossible to close again.

“Well they will have effectively jumped the UN queue for a start,” says Winston Peters. “The second thing is they will be bringing hundreds of thousands as well with them. That’s the previous model.”

So 26 interpreters will bring in hundreds of thousands of family members? Why do the media give such statements any credibility? If Shearer or even the Greens said such an obviously false thing, they’d be pummeled by the media. But as usual, there is a double standard when it comes to Peters, where lying is seen as just Winston being Winston.

Tags: ,

35 Responses to “Winston “hundreds of thousands””

  1. Mobile Michael (473 comments) says:

    I say take them. They speak english, they obviously aren’t radicalised and they’ve help NZs interests. I don’t dispute the danger, so that would make them genuine refugees.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. virtualmark (1,306 comments) says:

    I really do wonder whether Winston is starting to go senile.

    Either that or journos should ask Winston how many whiskeys he’s had before allowing him to answer any questions.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Pete George (23,793 comments) says:

    Has anyone asked them if they would like to come to New Zealand? Have they asked to come here?

    I haven’t seen that reported, just that they will be at risk. It’s all a pointless discussion if they prefer help to be safer in their own country.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. IHStewart (388 comments) says:

    ” If there is a genuine and significant risk, we should take them. ”

    Well no brainer number one.

    They are not refugees in regard to to our obligations to UN. They would need to register with the UN to fit that category and then be selected by the UN for resettlement. It may have escaped John Key’s attention but New Zealand is in fact a sovereign nation. We don’t fucking well need to have any justification other than we ie. NZ inc. think it is a bloody good idea to look after our friends, I would think these guys fall into that camp.

    John Key vacillations on this are just about as mind numbingly fucking stupid as Winston Peter’s stupidity.

    John just fucking do it. Winston shut the fuck up.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Griff (8,419 comments) says:

    IHStewart
    +1

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Scott Chris (6,178 comments) says:

    +2

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Keeping Stock (9,373 comments) says:

    I’ve also just blogged on this. It is typical Peters to play the xenophobia card over these Afghani interpreters who have a genuine humanitarian claim. He should be widely and roundly condemned for his hyperbole and bullshit. I wonder if he’s talked to Ron Mark about the merits of this case, or just shot his mouth off as usual.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. tvb (4,553 comments) says:

    We gave a duty to help those with asylum if their lives are at risk because they helped our troops. It is not an open door to all but it comes out of our annual refugee quota.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Keeping Stock (9,373 comments) says:

    @ Pete George – from what I read at the weekend and yesterday, they have asked the NZ government to consider taking them, and we most certainly should. This should be a no-brainer for Key.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. b1gdaddynz (279 comments) says:

    Let’s see if you dare to dance with a woman they cut your head off…if you colaborate with the infidel enemy I’m sure the Taleban won’t hold that against them. Look these people have risked their lives beside our troops on patrols in hostile environment to help us; we are Kiwi’s and when someone helps us we help them back end of story! I think the reason no one really questions Winston is because the reasoning will be even more moronic than the statement and if you can’t figure him out on face value then no amount of further questioning will help you.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. b1gdaddynz (279 comments) says:

    Let’s be real if the Taleban get these people they will be lucky if all they do is kill them! We owe them!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Nostalgia-NZ (5,318 comments) says:

    The situation with the interpreters rose its head a few years ago, but is obviously becoming a pressing point with both the intended withdrawal next year and the associated reality that revenge will be top of the list of priorities. Neighbours that may have watched these men and their families for years will predictably see them as enemies. In the furore and fear for Afghans, to show solidarity, after the withdrawal all sorts of false allegations will be made against innocent people or enemies in order for the accusers to find favour in the eyes of the Taliban. In effect those that helped us won’t have a chance in my belief. The reputation of NZers and our soldiers would be damaged, but even that isn’t the main issue because more importantly we would be seen to have turned our backs on those that helped us. The risk doesn’t have to be determined because it is present and real for these men and their families, what needs to be determined is how NZ can prioritise their safely and see them as no different than our troops and other operatives. This is not a ‘kick around the cabinet table’ decision, but a priority and it makes me angry to think that our Ministers in the safety of the Beehive and big limousines are such heartless and up themselves bastards that they can play this out as if it were a political topic.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. hj (7,156 comments) says:

    “But by opening the door at all, New Zealand First says it could be impossible to close again.
    “Well they will have effectively jumped the UN queue for a start,” says Winston Peters. “The second thing is they will be bringing hundreds of thousands as well with them. That’s the previous model.”
    ……………………………………
    I think we should take them.
    He does have a point though about doors opening and being “impossible to close” as this is what has happens in practice.
    Immigration policy changed in the 1990’s (without public consultation) and yet now we are talking about Forecasts released by Statistics New Zealand today indicate within the next 20 years, Auckland’s population will have grown by a third from the current 1.5 million to around two million..

    and take a look at this:
    John Carran, 2 April 1996

    “Vehement opposition to immigration, particularly from Asian countries, in New Zealand from an ill-informed and xenophobic rabble persists despite overwhelming evidence that immigration will improve our long term economic prospects.

    In 1988 The Institute of Policy Studies published detailed research by Jacques Poot, Ganesh Nana and Bryan Philpott on the effects of migration on the New Zealand economy. The research, which abstracted from the social and environmental impact of immigration, concluded that “…a significant migration inflow can be beneficial to the performance of the New Zealand economy and subsequent consumption and income levels.” The authors point out that this is in general agreement with Australian research on the economic consequences of immigration.”
    http://www.gmi.co.nz/news/1021/opposition-to-immigration-why-let-the-arguments-get-in-the-way.aspx

    Savings Working Group [a group of experts appointed by the government]
    January 2011

    “The big adverse gap in productivity between New Zealand and other countries opened up from the 1970s to the early 1990s. The policy choice that increased immigration – given the number of employers increasingly unable to pay First-World wages to the existing population and all the capital requirements that increasing populations involve – looks likely to have worked almost directly against the adjustment New Zealand needed to make and it might have been better off with a lower rate of net immigration. This adjustment would have involved a lower real interest rate (and cost of capital) and a lower real exchange rate, meaning a more favourable environment for raising the low level of productive capital per worker and labour productivity. The low level of capital per worker is a striking symptom of New Zealand’s economic challenge.”
    http://www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/reviews-consultation/savingsworkinggroup/pdfs/swg-report-jan11.pdf
    with this

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Komata (1,220 comments) says:

    Echoes of 1973 here – four decades later we still don’t seem to solved the problem. . .

    (Mind you, the fact that they’d be bringing their well-known ‘religion of peace’ and all its tennets doesn’t exactly help- despite what wussell et al may say to the contrary)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. cubit (190 comments) says:

    NZ employed interpreters and other local civilian employess were left behind in South Vietnam in 1972. Their future turned out to be “re- education” (possibly not quite as bad as Talioban re-education) and some were dealt to as old scores were settled. Others became boat people.

    It was and remains a blot on our supposed liberal humanist philosophy.

    Be under no illusion. Most of the Afghan NZ civilian employess are shit scared of their future having identified themselves as supporters of the infidels. Let’s do the right humane thing for them this time.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. hj (7,156 comments) says:

    “Others became boat people.”

    Winston might not be so wrong. You have to remember that :

    “Both in New Zealand and globally, the best of the leftwing tradition has always rejected small-minded nationalism, xenophobia and racism. In fact, leftists of an internationalist tradition have always favoured globalization and getting rid of national borders and barriers to migration. Progressive advocates of globalization of course do not defend a handful of rich imperialist countries, including New Zealand, dominating the world’s economy, but instead advocate an integrated and radically egalitarian world economy where production is based on social need and not on private profit. ”
    http://liberation.typepad.com/liberation/2012/02/guest-blog-post-john-moore-leftwing-xenophobia-in-new-zealand.html

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. David Garrett (7,698 comments) says:

    My two cents…there IS some risk of bringing more members of the “religion of peace” into NZ..but the mere fact that these guys were willing to work for the infidel suggests they are unlikely to be fanatic head choppers….So my vote goes with IH Stewart and others….Just do it John…forget about the UN and all the other bollocks..

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. hj (7,156 comments) says:

    I remember when Keith Locke wanted to bring in Guantanamo Bay detainees (his pet a pit bulls).

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. lastmanstanding (1,310 comments) says:

    As one who is against the faux so called refugees who come here I support bringing these people and their families. Good grief as other have said the Teleban aint gonna welcome them as brothers in arms after our troops depart.
    These people have served our forces and so deserve our protection.

    Why dont we just tell the UN that we are taking X numbers of these people and their families and that number will de deducted from the numbers we are forced to take by the UN because Klark signed up to it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. kowtow (8,936 comments) says:

    The pollies are telling us the Afghan intervention has been succesfull and we can hand over to the locals,the plce having been “reconstructed”, I take it this panic is proof that the whole thing is actually a failure.

    Western intervention in these places (if at all) shouldbe limited to the modern equivalent of the gun boat diplomacy of old. “Vacate the palace or we blow it away”,then you put your guy in charge.

    The idea that these places can be democratised and that human rights and our standards can be transferred out the back of an aeroplane along with a few soldiers and NGOs is simply madness.

    Should we take them? Morally ,yes.But how many more come after is a genuine concern. In any event after 5 years on the taxpayer they’ll be off to Sydney or Melbourne.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. KH (695 comments) says:

    100,000 is obviously an exaggeration. But the point is correct. New Zealand (Helen Clark) took a bunch of Afghan teenage boys after that ship fiasco in Australia. There was a figure of how many ‘family reunification’ tehncame and joined them over some years. It was a huge figure. (does anybody have a reference). The multiplier effect holds.
    Generally I think the refugee process is the one one we need to stick to here. And not allow the cue to be jumped.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. ChardonnayGuy (1,231 comments) says:

    It’s good to see multipartisan agreement on this. This is a matter of human rights and human decency toward those who have helped protect our brave New Zealand men and women in Afghanistan. We have a moral obligation toward them, given that they have provided security to members of our armed forces. I would note that KH cannot seem to find the figures in question for his claims of ‘excessive’ Afghan refugees. I hope we never descend into the bipartisan, lowest common denominator cesspit over refugee and asylum issues that both the Liberal/National Coalition *and* the Australian Labor Party have done.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Lloyd (125 comments) says:

    The Afghan students who began as refugees and are now enrolled at Canterbury are model students who are hardworking and are determinably Kiwis. If you ask where they are from, they will immediately answer ‘from Christchurch’, insisting that here is their home now. Interestingly, several have not bothered pursuing any religion and espouse the view that religion ’causes too many problems’.
    The translators – and their families – would be welcome here.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Viking2 (11,672 comments) says:

    So 26 interpreters will bring in hundreds of thousands of family members? Why do the media give such statements any credibility?

    Umm, well because that is what inevitably happens. Count up the number of times we have been down this track. think refugee’s,boat people, Somalis, Indians, Pacific Islanders, Vietnamese if you want to go back a bit further, even further we can look at pommes, and dutch after the war. and so it goes on.

    Don’t even start on the bloody Muslims.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. hj (7,156 comments) says:

    ChardonnayGuy (43) Says:

    I hope we never descend into the bipartisan, lowest common denominator cesspit over refugee and asylum issues that both the Liberal/National Coalition *and* the Australian Labor Party have done.
    …..
    I would argue that a nations first responsibility is sustainability not to take population blow out refugees.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. barry (1,191 comments) says:

    Peters has been remarkeably “On the dot” over the years re imigration.

    Most refugees dont want to integrate, they want re-create the crap societies that theyve come from – and we see the bloody north east africans with their dislike of women and their muslim ideas creating quite a problem here in Hamilton. Little parts of this city look like a typical refugee camp in Africa. Rubbish all over the place and anything of worth covered in grates and metal gates.

    In one area a shop had to build a fence around the shop and leave a nasty dog in there at night. After the local medical centre attended to 6 cases of dog bites – the message got around. Breaking into (or trying to break into) that shop wasnt a good idea.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. joana (1,983 comments) says:

    Why should they be allowed to come here?
    I am sure they were well paid for doing whatever they did and they knew of any risk when they took their first payment.. The Afghani men I know of in CHCH spend all their time telling moderate and almost ex muslims to wear head scarves and to make their sons wear long sleeved shirts etc..and only God knows if they wack their wives….Afghani men in Afghanistan openly wack their wives over the head with bricks…
    We don’t need these people..Would all the people wanting them to come want them as neighbours? Of course not.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. b1gdaddynz (279 comments) says:

    Joana- Yes I would actually! White middle class people don’t always make the best neighbours either!!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. cubit (190 comments) says:

    Joana @4.52

    How many Afghani men do your really know or is this just a stereotypical judgement that you have made?

    Unlike most other refugees these people have been associated closely with hundreds of decent NZers over 10 years. We just might be able to form first hand opinions of their qualities and no doubt (God or Allah forbid) even some weaknesses. No doubt the opinions of these people will be more valid than those that are regularly concocted for a fee by immigaration agents and which seem to be readily accepted.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. joana (1,983 comments) says:

    When did you guys live in an islamic country? How many islamic countries have you spent time in?
    Afghan boys are in gangs in CHCH. Every day , in Afghanistan , Afghan women self immolate. They would rather burn alive than live with their Afghani husbands..and then we have the way dogs are treated there..and the poor boys..regularly raped even in the police stations.. Afghan men had to ask American doctors how to get their wives pregnant..they were disgusted by vaginal sex.
    When did importing social problems become a good idea? I would have thought we had enough social problems of our own.
    Even in the context of refugees , these people are queue jumpers . They are wanting to come here ahead of people who have spent twenty years in refugee camps.
    When will NZers ever wise up?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. chiz (1,174 comments) says:

    Afghan men had to ask American doctors how to get their wives pregnant..they were disgusted by vaginal sex.

    Sounds like an urban legend.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. joana (1,983 comments) says:

    Chiz
    Sounds like you don’t know much about Afghanistan and other islamic countries..Homosexual sex is everywhere..just more of the hypocrisy that they hang gay men in places like Iran.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. MH (830 comments) says:

    Tame Iti would have them in a jiffy. It’s a no brainer,put them on the return flight with those vets who are going on to the El Alamein reunion.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. ChardonnayGuy (1,231 comments) says:

    Yes, well, in case some of you are not familiar with the regurgitative habits and drug addiction and alcoholism of certain white supremacist skinhead pondscum, I’d point out that they’re not particularly attractive neighbours either, particularly if you’re on the receiving end of the contents of their genitourinary or digestive tracts…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. chiz (1,174 comments) says:

    joana – even supposing for the sake of argument that sodomy is as common as you claim I still strongly doubt that they don’t how to get a woman pregnant.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote