Posts by Stephen Judd
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I just want to echo what kracklite has been saying about the nature of the so-called activists, their history with the police, and their reaction these events. If you look at things from their POV it's easy to understand why they have reacted the way they have, especially why they leaped to the defence of the arrested people straight away.
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?
Incidentally, I see both Minto and Moana Jackson have called for all the material to be published and an inquiry held. So presumably they feel that there is something to salvage out of this mess.
-
Believe me, I agree with you Finn.
-
Actually, as long as we're going for ambitious rationalisations: knowing the temperament of certain people, perhaps they knew they were being monitored and delighted in saying outrageous things to tweak the listeners.
That's certainly what I'd say if I were them.
-
Something that has troubled me from the start is that were was an odd absence of explicit denials, and now I think we can see why.
You know, I'm beginning to agree with Bomber, which pains me, because I don't usually agree with Bomber.
-
"When the did left decide that being no worse than the National Front was a badge of merit?"
Who said it was? The NF have only ever been brought up in the context that they don't get the same treatment.
On the face of it, I think the police were right to do something. Whether they what they did was done right is a different question, which itself hinges on things we still don't know and may never know. I don't see today's new as actually completing/solving/answering anything very much other than telling us why the police felt compelled to do something.
I'm really worried that we will end up with more draconian laws we don't need, and a policing/intelligence approach we don't need.
I too am very interested in who is leaking.
-
I can certainly guess which one is Lockett, but nothing leaps out as Iti.
-
That's interesting Graeme. I must admit I'm surprised that this might be legal, because I don't understand what the point of a closed hearing was otherwise, or why the SG would have warned TV3 about doing the same thing. I wonder if this means TV3 will have another crack now.
I also would have thought that in some ways it's worse that there are no names (although I can see why they would have to leave them out) because then those statements could stick to any one of the accused.
-
For me personally, certain things are unchanged. I think the TSA is wrong, and I think the police have handled this wrong.
If the evidence presented in the DP proves to be be true and representative, then my sympathy for certain people will evaporate.
The DP though: well really. If you boil down their justification for publishing, it is a) people are hating on the police, and that's bad b) it's in the public interest (ie we will sell a lot of papers and c) screw fair trials and the law, we're a newspaper! After all, everyone will have forgotten in a year when the defendants come up for trial.
I mean, why didn't any paper do this with the police rape trials?
-
(Btw that site I linked is just the first google result for "flare grenade launcher")
Well, we have a number of issues.
- do we know the police have actually found one?
- if so, do we know who it belonged to?
- if so, was it a dodgy-could-be-used-for-grenades one or some cuter, cuddlier type of device?
- if so, was it intended for a nefarious purpose or simply for the great NZ male pastime of making things go boom?We have a long way to go on all of those questions. Not so much an elephant, as a shadow in the dark room that could be an elephant or could be something quite different once the lights are on.
-