Thanks, I do think your analysis of the film is pretty much spot on.

I am very familiar with the history of the AR scene in NZ and there is a lot of very concerning stuff which has gone on. I have no problem with the police investigating criminal activity and prosecuting where the law has been broken. However my experience over the past decade has been that the police have been harassing and targeting protesters in a way which is grossly disproportionate to any offending. Most of what Rob, the Threat Assesment Unit and others have been interested in has at the most been public civil disobedience.

Similarly I am concerned when activists begin playing with firearms no matter how innocent their intentions are. What last nights film highlighted so effectively though was that the police did not treat the defendants like any other New Zealander but instead tried to paint them as terrorists. I agree Val's book and Abi and Errol's film are incredibly selective in what they go into but I know that a full investigation can not be done until suppression orders have been lifted. I do hope both Val and Errol publish more material after this entire saga is over.

I was in last nights film talking about police surveillance and harassment of activists. I thought the film was great at presenting the story as it was experienced by activists, perhaps the film could have been more explicit about this but I do not think it detracts from the value or impact of the film. The story's of those caught up in the raids have not been explored in this much detail before and few have taken a detailed look at how the raids fit into the portrayal of activists as terrorists.

I think the suggestion of police agent provocateurs must be understood in the context of police informant Rob Gilchrist. Gilchrist incited many activists to carry out serious illegal acts whilst working for the police. This included providing training on how to use police scanners and running direct action training camps etc. The film makers are intimately acquainted with the story of Rob and I'm sure this fed into the films speculation around paid informants. For more info read http://www.converge.org.nz/abc/pr38-180c.htm and http://www.converge.org.nz/abc/pr38-180b.htm

There is also a wealth of knowledge which I and the film makers are privy to which was covered in depositions hearings but is still suppressed. It was Errol and Abi's decision to release the film at this point but it is a decision I can understand given how long the project had already taken and that appeals could easily take several more years.