"The Terrorism Files"
850 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 11 12 13 14 15 … 34 Newer→ Last
-
I don't generally read much into what protestors where, but - following on from danyl above - this is funny -
He said the masks were aimed at making members of the public understand what residents of Ruatoki went through during the police raids.
"You ask people, would you be angry if someone in a mask turned up at your place, woke you up, pointed guns at your children and your wife. Would you be entitled to be a little bit angry?"
He said wearing masks was part of the "theatre of education" but it didn't always work.
"People just feel further intimidated and less sympathetic and that's a risk one takes," Mr Kruger said.
-
A S,
Maybe, but it's not all hypotheses are of equal value simply because they're hypotheses. There is the problem of some activist getting their hands on the exact documents and handing them to TV3 and the Dompost when it is extremely unlikely that they could somehow break into the police or SG's offices versus the far more likely scenario of someone already inside doing the deed.
When I said political, I wasn't referring to the lunatic fringe of activists, I meant politicians.
Your hypotheses are drawing a fairly long bow without any compelling evidence other than pre-conceived notions, so lets not assume that any one set is better than another.
What I've been trying to say about the leaks is that we don't know the full story. We are unlikely to know in the short term, and making shit up can come from any perspective. I'm just honest enough to admit that I'm inventing possible scenarios.
-
I think there's a genuine sense of having been betrayed here, stemming from the fact that local police who'd supposedly been engaged in building an ongoing liaison with Tuhoe were hung out to dry by the pre-emptive nature of the raids.
I agree. I still can't understand why local police liaison wasn't used.
With the Government & opposition effectively out to lunch on this issue it's a bit hard to see what's to be gained by this ongoing bagging of Sharples.
It's not an ongoing bagging. I just cringe every damn time he uses words like "stormtroopers" -- or his MPs say worse -- and when he complains about a heightening of alarm, I do find it a bit rich.
-
He said wearing masks was part of the "theatre of education" but it didn't always work.
Was it a protest or Kabuki?
-
Right on cue ...
and:
Again from Pita Sharples today, on the Dom Post:
Could have been worse, could have been Tariana Turia.
Or maybe I wrote too soon...
-
I am prepared to bet that a large group of New Zealanders, maybe even a majority, think "Stormtrooper" refers to the white-armoured minions in Star Wars.
-
Tariana Turia has been a cracked record of late defending the indefensible.
But fair play to her, last night she was on the news getting stuck into kohanga reo administration and saying kohanga reo administering bodies must be held accountable. She sounded quite cross with them. Good for her. She gained status in my eyes.
-
I'm honestly trying to see if anyone can come out of this with dignity.
From Politicians who can't write laws to cops who storm buses.
From race relations set back 100 years to the media perverting justice for the ratings.
From strident hikoi marchers to rabid letters-to-the editor writers.
Who ripped the head off the collective chicken?
-
I am prepared to bet that a large group of New Zealanders, maybe even a majority, think "Stormtrooper" refers to the white-armoured minions in Star Wars.
I've thrown the term around a bit recently and that's certainly how I meant it; I had in mind those geeks in the US who like to dress up as stormtroopers.
I still think the decision to raid Ruatoki was terribly ill-advised, but it seems a bit more reasonable in light of their evidence.
-
Play along -
Police = StormTroopers
Helen = Emperor
Iti = Ewok rebel
Emily = Princess LeiaSorry this is serious but ...
-
Andrew
Which buses were stormed? This claim was debunked
-
John minto = Luke Skywalker?
Roger Kerr = Darth vader (well he's tall enough and big money MUST be pulling the strings somewhere, surely?)
Pita Sharples = Han Solo -
You, if only some enterprising journo would ask Sharples whether he meant these guys instead. (A hugely inappropriate simile if so).
-
Leaping to the defence of people is fine, implicitly supporting the breaking of some fairly serious laws through inaction, isn't.
Look, I'm also against paedophilia, holocaust denial, anti-semitism, intellectual property theft and offensive body odour. It's a thoroughly disingenuous argument to claim that because someone has not explicitly spoken out against something, it must be assumed that they're "implicitly" for it.
Do they have to parade around in T-shirts reading "Peace Action... meaning that we're for peace... as in not violence... definitely not terrorism...really"?
Surely we've thrashed that dead horse into mince by now?
I don't particularly like police for a raft of reasons, but I have absolutely no sympathy for anyone who doesn't have the guts to front up and say that while the police handled things badly, the acts that people are accused of have to be condemned out of hand.
Gutless? A lot of them have been punched in the guts by police. A lot have been to the police in the past with rape complaints and guess where that got them. As I wrote earlier, a lot of these people have had serious issues with the police that go way beyond "not liking" them related to how fairly they have been treated in the past, how fairly they're likely to be treated and how anything they say could be used against them and their friends in the future.
Glibly suggesting that they're middle class kids playing games with no consequences betrays a great deal of wilful ignorance. As you said, you just don't care about their POV.
No reasonable, sane person outside of these causes is going to support people or organisations that look to be linked to assassination attempts, bombing campaigns or generally trying to undermine all that they have worked for.
And I'm sure that that is just what some in the police force are counting on by roping in the pacifists and environmentalists with the really dangerous people.
Oh, and of course I condemn terrorism, just in case. (Again)
-
what this has done is probably start to stir a groundswell against so many of the causes that these 'activists' represent.
Which could well be part of what the police hoped to achieve.
No reasonable, sane person outside of these causes is going to support people or organisations that look to be linked to assassination attempts, bombing campaigns
"Look to be" being the key phrase. The disturbing quotes are apparently from just 5 of the arrrestees, and there's nothing to suggest that the other 12 would support such evil acts. Which didn't protect them from being locked up for a month without trial.
when are some groups going to start owning their own shit and say that if people are found guilty, they're beyond the pale?
Apart from anything else, nobody is being charged with terrorism, so being found guilty of it isn't very likely. And the firearms charges are simply charges of failure to comply with bureaucracy, which doesn't strike me as beyond the pale.
On the subject of informants, I think it's worth reminding people that activist groups associated with the raids uncovered infiltration by paid spies not that long ago, though it's not clear if the police had any involvement.
-
Look, I'm also against paedophilia, holocaust denial, anti-semitism, intellectual property theft and offensive body odour. It's a thoroughly disingenuous argument to claim that because someone has not explicitly spoken out against something, it must be assumed that they're "implicitly" for it.
ITA, Kracklite - but sometimes it does help to state the obvious. Personally, I cringe every time I've heard the Maori Party defend military thugs and kleptocrat monarchies... as long as they iz black.
-
A S,
Look, I'm also against paedophilia, holocaust denial, anti-semitism, intellectual property theft and offensive body odour.
And firearms offences?
Glibly suggesting that they're middle class kids playing games with no consequences betrays a great deal of wilful ignorance.
I suggested no such thing. Stop making shit up to suit your story.
And I'm sure that that is just what some in the police force are counting on by roping in the pacifists and environmentalists with the really dangerous people.
And the pacifists and environmentalists aren't doing a great deal to help their own cause, are they? The police don't need to worry about it, these groups are doing it to themselves.
As I've posted earlier, I wonder why I haven't seen any condemnation of the alleged acts from any except those that you seem to be railing against? i would have expected any principled groups to be very clear that activities of the sort alleged are completely out of line. If they don't their credibility is totally shot (no pun intended) in the eyes of most NZers.
Lets be very, very clear here. Regardless of intent to assassinate/baiting authorities arguments etc. etc. illegal guns and playing with molotov cocktails is NOT OK. Anyone who says they aren't serious issues should do some reading on what small arms fire can do to people, and what effects serious burns can have.
-
I don't see anything off the wall in assuming that our police would behave in much the same way as the UK police / security forces. There's pretty much no oversight that would stop them engaging in that sort of activity (using major criminals as informers).
I'm sure they do. I wasn't aware it was illegal, though probably more often it's done by catching one, and then giving him a deal to testify against the rest, rather than paying money to one.
I just fail to see how the behaviour of the UK police in dealing with a mafia gun runner and drug dealer, makes it likely that the police paid someone to infiltrate the 'Te Qaeda' group. It's a tenuous connection held together by old sticking plasters and wishful thinking.
I'd find it much more believable, as an alternative to my 'peace activist finds camps not to liking, tells police' story, if someone was to wave around 'one activist gets approached by police, who put the heavies on them for their future legal career/international travel', and activist spills to save themselves.
And I'm sure that that is just what some in the police force are counting on by roping in the pacifists and environmentalists with the really dangerous people.
It's not of course possible that there's one or two police officers who are for peace, or green themselves, who might find the unjustified linking together of the 'pacifists and environmentalists' with the 'really dangerous people', y'know, immoral and illegal.
I don't get why some people, with anything to do with the police, jump first to the conspiracy theory. Given that the same people think the police 'leak like a sieve' whenever it's convenient for them, wouldn't it also be logical that if police start getting that fucked up, that this also might become public?
-
Apart from anything else, nobody is being charged with terrorism, so being found guilty of it isn't very likely. And the firearms charges are simply charges of failure to comply with bureaucracy, which doesn't strike me as beyond the pale.
Yup. It's not running military style training camps and talking about killing people that's the problem.
It's failing to fill in the paperwork for your training camp. OSH regulations you understand.
FFS.
-
Is it reasonable to be angry with everyone at this point? With people who want to shoot their fellow citizens, with clumsy police and dastardly leakers, with the arrogant bugger-your-fair-trial Dompost, and with people who do their own causes no good?
At least you're angry - I'm just feeling the same out weary misanthropic comtempt for the naked ape this story has been inspiring for quite a while.
-
The most frightening part of all of this is that I haven't seen a statement from any of the various causes named
Maybe you haven't seen anything yourself, but it is simply untrue that these people haven't disociated themselves from violence. I walk past 128 Abel Smith St every day, the door's always open and it's always been plastered with posters stating quite clearly what the various groups using the house are for and against. Now of course it's on a busy intersection and they've got a big banner with smiley faces to subvert the consciousness and undermine the work of the commuters.
You see, they don't have the cash for a large PR firm.
And what I've heard, there is a great deal of disagreement among the various groups, with the arguments boiling down into a spectrum between two camps: (a) everyone's been accused of terrorism and charged collectively with firearms offences and therefore for legal reasons, they should all keep quiet and (b) a clear distinction should be publicly made (which would no doubt be buried on page 20). In the case of the latter, that's been done to some degree already.
And:
Glibly suggesting that they're middle class kids playing games with no consequences betrays a great deal of wilful ignorance.
I suggested no such thing. Stop making shit up to suit your story.
Ahem:
Sure it is nice to play protester and blame everyone else for the woes of the world, but when are some groups going to start owning their own shit
-
A S,
Ahem:
Sure it is nice to play protester and blame everyone else for the woes of the world, but when are some groups going to start owning their own shit
No mention of middle class kids that I can see there.
-
OK, but it's "implicit" and that's enough, isn't it? You're happy with implications. It's suggested, so don't hide behind pedantry. Your quote marks around activists as they were only pretending, the use of the word "play" and saying that they don't own their own shit all serve to reinforce the impression of triviality and insincerity in their motivations.
Sure, you did not say "middle class kids", but you clearly constructed your description to convey a definite impression. I call that a suggestion.
It is not my impression of people I have known closely for years that they are shallow, trivial or insincere.
-
And the firearms charges are simply charges of failure to comply with bureaucracy
No they're not - that would be possession without a license. The accused are being prosecuted for "possession for an unlawful purpose", which may see them jailed even if the weapons were legally owned, on the basis of what the police believe they might do with them.
Note, might do. Because what they were doing - target practice - would normally be considered entirely legal. This is a crime of context, in which interpretations of purpose are highly relevant - and this is why the police leaking of inadmissible evidence is so damaging to their chances of a fair trial.
(I should add that this is the same law the police tried to get Iti on a couple of years back over the flag-shooting incident).
-
Yup. It's not running military style training camps and talking about killing people that's the problem. It's failing to fill in the paperwork for your training camp.
As far as I'm aware, yes, that is essentially all they're actually being charged with. Military-style training isn't illegal, or paintball would be banned. And people can talk about whatever they like in private conversations, if they're not actually planning to do anything - and by the police's own admission, nothing had been planned. The raids took place on the basis of "we think these people might plan a crime at some point in the future".
Post your response…
This topic is closed.