Posts by Stephen Judd
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I wish Scoop would desist from using this sort of language. This is a serious issue yet it reads like text from a school magazine produced by year-13 students.
Amen. But I'm afraid that despite their open editorial policy in terms of what news releases they accept, the Scoop team has... strong views on a variety of topics. Which is why they're my source of last resort.
-
And from here
Green Party Co-Leader Jeanette Fitzsimons says she was shocked to hear that police had raided the Taupo home of Eco-Show organisers Jo Pearsal and Bryan Innes.
"These are law-abiding, respected people, who have had their lives and businesses disrupted by the seizure of computer equipment.
"It is hard to see how disrupting a workshop on yeast-free bread-baking and seizing the underwear of the organisers of the very popular Eco Show, under the Terrorism Suppression Act, is contributing to protecting the New Zealand public."
No charges were laid as a result of the search.
Of course my very cynical view is: yes, trust the police when they go after Maori, but middle-class Pakeha greenies? That's crossing a line. I bet there's broken joinery in Ruatoki too.
-
Here is my informant's description:
[X and Y] got raided by 15 police and 2 dogs in
search of the great Kiwi Terror Cell... $15,000 of computer equipment and other stuff was taken.I'd say that's intimidating enough as it is.
-
-
Chaps, this is very unbecoming. Really.
-
Also, I'm not ready to take to the streets yet. I'm just saying that there had better be a bloody good justification for what's going on.
It's all different when it's personal, isn't it?
But we have incredibly strong institutions to effect change in this country, without having to resort to running around with guns.
We also have incredibly strong powers to maintain order and public safety, without having to round up people who don't have firearms and have done nothing worse than hang with the wrong folks.
Like everyone else, I just don't know right now, but what I do know, I don't like the sound of.
-
Joe, in 1951 my grandparents had a secret press in their basement, and my Dad delivered pamphlets on his bike, and that is exactly what I was thinking this morning.
-
I don't know what happened in Ruatoki, but I have just learned about two aquaintances of mine who had their house raided with dogs and all their computer equipment seized. (Think about that for a moment if you depend on computers for your living or your household management). As far as I can tell they have done nothing worse than be environmentalists with the wrong friends and family.
There had better be something bigger going on here than Tame Iti planning to shoot someone. I was sitting on the fence before, but now I'm getting a strong sense that this is a payback/fishing expedition that doesn't have much to do with "terror" at all.
-
Read this recently in a different context, but it's somewhat apropos:
You may demonstrate to a convinced syndicalist, believing in an ethic of ultimate ends, that his action will result in increasing the opportunities of reaction, in increasing the oppression of his class, and obstructing its ascent--and you will not make the slightest impression upon him. If an action of good intent leads to bad results, then, in the actor's eyes, not he but the world, or the stupidity of other men, or God's will who made them thus, is responsible for the evil. However a man who believes in an ethic of responsibility takes account of precisely the average deficiencies of people; as Fichte has correctly said, he does not even have the right to presuppose their goodness and perfection. He does not feel in a position to burden others with the results of his own actions so far as he was able to foresee them; he will say: these results are ascribed to my action. The believer in an ethic of ultimate ends feels 'responsible' only for seeing to it that the flame of pure intentions is not quenched: for example, the flame of protesting against the injustice of the social order. To rekindle the flame ever anew is the purpose of his quite irrational deeds, judged in view of their possible success. They are acts that can and shall have only exemplary value.
Max Weber, Politics as a vocation
-
Craig: the criticism wasn't that Jones was inherently disqualified from portraying non-SWM characters, but that he didn't do a good job of it.