The things for me is, to paraphrase Voltaire, while I don't support what the Urewera Four were doing*, I support their right to do it. *I don't support the playing with firearms bit, the Tuhoe cause is something quite separate.
For me, the whole black Ninja thing was a sick farce. How, I wonder, are the Waihopai 3 faring? has that been forgotten? Ambrose came out of his fix well. Righteous bluster a la Judith Collins often goes nowhere but into the heads of Righty bloggers.
It's a funny thing this country of ours. If you are white, hold military style training camps with semi automatic military weapons, you are a dangerous white supremacist.
If you are brown, like to draw all over your face and do exactly the same thing you are a poor misunderstood individual that deserves understanding and a free pass.
This is effing nuts, it is as simple as that.
The fact that those on the left seek to appease ANYONE WITH ASSAULT RIFLES is just utterly insane.
This is your blind spot Robert, and it is huge.
It is the single biggest limitation on your effectiveness as an advocate for a more sustainable society.
The got charged and found guilty of the 'assault rifles' charges, didn't they, Shunda? I'm concerned about the 'terrorise the Tuhoe community with masked gunmen' charges tht haven't been answered yet. What about you? Reckon that was necessary? I don't.
Hand on, Shunda, weren't the terrorism charges in this instances brought during a Labour-led government, based on laws introduced by the same Labour-led government? It didn't look much like appeasement to me, so I'm not convinced by your "the left seek to appease anyone with an assault rifle" narrative. As I see it these guys were wandering around with guns and talking about how useless the government are. Which is exactly what the dairy farmers around my way are doing right now. It's also dumb and anti-social, but it's legal. Fair cop on the firearms charges, but the terrorism charge was a joke and deserved to be dumped, the Urewera Four were no more of a stereotypical terrorist than your typical dairy farmer. And I have a tinfoil hat for anyone who thinks farmers are organising to overthrow the government by force of arms.
the Urewera Four were no more of a stereotypical terrorist than your typical dairy farmer.
What an astonishingly ignorant statement.
I guess I base my opinion on probability and facts, perhaps you base yours on theoretical "oughts".
Fact: Tame has travelled internationally to 'visit' various controversial figures involved in undemocratic governments and also directly related to terrorism.
He has also fired shotguns at the NZ flag along with a multitude of other blatantly aggressive actions.
And I haven't even mentioned various statements he has made that are fundamentally opposed to a peaceful NZ.
When you can link farmers to such activities then I might listen, until then, you just sound like yet another blind and blinkered lefty (and to an astonishing degree).
It disturbs me deeply that people can be so incredibly blind.
Travelling overseas to meet controversial figures, undemocratic governments and terrorists does not make someone a terrorist. Nor is it automatically a crime. Shooting a flag does not make someone a terrorist. If it's a crime, it shouldn't be, they are just pieces of cloth. Possessing and using firearms, even without a licence, does not make someone a terrorist. Other aggressive acts that don't make NZ a more peaceful place? That's pretty general, how about something specific? The finest legal minds, with years of time and millions of dollars could not prove that the Urewera Four were terrorists. It's not a huge leap of faith to assert, therefore, that they are not terrorists. If you are suggesting that no farmer has: - travelled overseas to meet a controversial figure, deal with an undemocratic government or subvert the laws of the land, or - treated the symbols of the state with the utmost of disrespect, or - played soldiers with semi-automatic, then I'm calling you on your bullshit. My point is that the Urewera Four are not terrorists. If you don't understand the corollary, that farmers are also not terrorists, then I politely suggest that you check your head for blinkers and blindness before you make assertions about me.
Sorry Armchair Critic I can't agree with you. The local farmers, me included, do walk around with guns and complain about the government. However we do not bring in supposed experts to train us in assault tactics, terorise people at the point of a gun, create and use molotov cocktails and all.
RG if you want to have a go at the police for their overreaction then you need to do the same for iti and his band of fools. The police in their black gear are a menace to society and do need to be reigned in. By the same standard Iti and his fellow fools need to be in jail as well for exactly the same behaviour.
Shunda is correct - you have a huge blind spot. If it is some brown person it's ok but if it's the police doing the same thing it's not ok. And pulease spare me the 'stirred memories of colonisation'. There is no one still alive with memories of what happened in the 1800's. And it is no exceuse for law breaking.
Shunda and Paranormal - if you could repeat for me, what it is that I said that has you fuming so, I'd perhaps be able to understand this 'blind spot' you foam about. Was it the reference to the black Ninjas? I stand by that ststement. The police action involving detaining Tuhoe people, young and old, stopping buses, entering homes all masked-up and carrying assault rifles, was appalling and harmed that community significantly. Is that my blind-spot? As for the beareres of arms being terrorists - do you accept the courts findings or not? Is your distant opinion somehow better balanced than the judges? Your view is truly puzzling. Have you tried and convicted them from your lofty perches, oh wise ones?
Paranormal - "Shunda is correct - you have a huge blind spot. If it is some brown person it's ok but if it's the police doing the same thing it's not ok."
What nonsense - some of those police were Maori and some of the 'Urewera trainees' were European. If you can though, cite any statements I've made that support your claim that I think 'it's' okay, please do. I'm interested.
Come on RG you go on about Shunda and me foaming and yet you get all on your high horse when called to account. In this and previous posts you have consistently shown your support for the Iti idiot.
From even a cursory glance at the evidence it is plain that Iti et al were up to no good. What you seem to be doing is taking a not guilty verdict, at the end of a long and convoluted legal case, as a sign of innocence. Clearly that is not the case. This is where a spot of reform in our legal system would go a long way. A third option of "Not proven" as used overseas would be a far more accurate result.
I understand two of the reasons for the failure to convict and the crown deciding not to proceed with a retrial are firstly the clusterfuck that is Liarbours terrorism legislation and secondly the failure of the police to gather evidence that was allowable in court.
That doesn't mean they don't have proof - just that what they have is inadmissible. This is an all too regular occurence around the country today. Police and their prosecutors regularly stuff up the process and allow criminals to walk out of court.
Are you deliberately playing the naïve card or do you not understand that how courts operate?
As you will note form this and previous posts I do not agree with the Police paramilitary approach to armed offenders situations. They consistently overreact and are clearly unable to use the firearms thay have. That we have only had one incident like the shooting of an innocent bystander on the North Western motorway is purely blind luck. The police consistently flout the rules of safe firearms handling.
Having said that Iti and his crew of misfits are just as guilty of terrorising people. In just one of the incidents recounted in the court case his band of merry men held a car up at gunpoint - just like the police action that you are slavering on about.
Para - with all/any due respect, you've not cited one statement by me to support your claim that I have a blindspot and that i support brown over white and that I believe Tame Iti to be innocent etc etc. Not one statement have you provided to support your claim. And it's all I (politely)asked.
If you don't understand the corollary, that farmers are also not terrorists, then I politely suggest that you check your head for blinkers and blindness before you make assertions about me.
The only assertion I am making is that your example is ridiculous.
It is not at all unreasonable to assume that someone that would spout such nonsense has some fairly large blinkers on.
I get that you don't like duck shooting, I am not particularly fond of it myself, but to suggest that this is no different to Tame and his antics is utterly ridiculous. For a start, duck shooters generally don't shoot ducks with assault rifles, throw molotov cocktails, or train as though the ducks are going to fight back.
I withdraw my comment regarding you having blinkers, shunda. It's quite the opposite, you seem to have x-ray vision. Perhaps you need to try going digital. I've not mentioned ducks. I have no problem with duck hunting, as long as it is done humanely and have, in the past, hunted a wide range of wildlife. I still have hunting dogs, but I prefer gardening to hunting these days. I'm getting older. I know farmers who have set up target shooting ranges on the back of their farms and shot at cut outs and old scarecrows. I know farmers who have undertaken some pretty out-there role plays to demolish out-buildings. I know farmers who grumble about the government, who also hold quite an arsenal of weapons, including weapons outside the class of licence they hold. Are they terrorists? No, they are not. Is my example ridiculous? It's set completely in reality and the scope of my observations of life. And while reality can be ridiculous, in the sense I interpret your use of the word it is not.
I've a question: Why is it that, 'believing' that there were terrorists training in the Urewera and 'knowing' that threats about killing John Key had been made by one/some of them, did the police allow Key to visit the Urewera with no more protection than he usually has? Eh? Glitches. In the matrix. I look for them. There's one!
So, shunda, you have nothing to address either point? Except another wild web-based diagnosis. I'm sure you are much nicer in person than you are on the internet.
@ 1:06 - You might see it as a glitch in the matrix but it seems like your usual, business as normal, left hand - right hand, government stuff up to me. Just look at how good the secret service guys were at making sure there were no unexplained devices at a cafe table.
I'm sure you are much nicer in person than you are on the internet.
It is not efficient to be 'nice' on the internet, cut to the chase, provoke, respond, thrash it out.
I do most of my thinking on these discussions away from the computer, you can't judge a character by the blog thing, it is not an accurate enough (which is why facebook causes insecure people so much grief).
Yes, I am nicer in person, the blog comment stuff is more of an evolved personality.
Shunda - your goons=maximum protection argument doesn't wash with me. Do you really think that, believing that there was a real threat to his life, he'd go anywhere near that nest of terrorism, Iti Country? I think it's bullsh*t. The whole deal. Iti was mucking around with guns and things in a way that's worrying and has paid the price for that. Months/years of court/punishment hanging over his head can't have been 'nothing', but the police action/justification doesn't stack up, in my opinion.
Paranormal - you're stretching it beyond breaking point. Not noticing a little black bag on the tea table, while incredible, isn't in the same league as sending the Prime Minister into 'foreign territory' from which threats of assassination have emerged, armed only with a half-dozen goons. Not credible, not believable. Tui everywhere!
RG - you seem agitated today. Did you not read what I said?
I was merely using another very public example of security service bungling to show that as a possible reason for allowing Key's visit to Itiland. We all now know that bag contained a listening device. It may not have and could have been a serious threat that was not even addressed by his minders.
What is perhaps more likely is they had eyes on Iti and his crew whilst Key was there. Mind you that also requires belief around a level of competence.
Extending your proposition his minders wouldn't take him anywhere, perhaps even including parts of Parliament buildings, due to assasination threats.
Not agitated, paranormal, combative. I did read what you said. You said I was on my high-horse and that Tame Iti is an idiot. You said taking Key into Tuhoe country when it was known that there were plans to assassinate him, was just a police muck-up. And some other unlikely stuff.
34 comments:
Yayee!woke up to the great news!TAMA ITI XXX
The things for me is, to paraphrase Voltaire, while I don't support what the Urewera Four were doing*, I support their right to do it.
*I don't support the playing with firearms bit, the Tuhoe cause is something quite separate.
For me, the whole black Ninja thing was a sick farce.
How, I wonder, are the Waihopai 3 faring?
has that been forgotten?
Ambrose came out of his fix well. Righteous bluster a la Judith Collins often goes nowhere but into the heads of Righty bloggers.
I dont think you can compare the four up north with the waihoai 3.
Actually I see the the Jacob Estuary 1 has been busy again.
?
It's a funny thing this country of ours. If you are white, hold military style training camps with semi automatic military weapons, you are a dangerous white supremacist.
If you are brown, like to draw all over your face and do exactly the same thing you are a poor misunderstood individual that deserves understanding and a free pass.
This is effing nuts, it is as simple as that.
The fact that those on the left seek to appease ANYONE WITH ASSAULT RIFLES is just utterly insane.
This is your blind spot Robert, and it is huge.
It is the single biggest limitation on your effectiveness as an advocate for a more sustainable society.
The got charged and found guilty of the 'assault rifles' charges, didn't they, Shunda?
I'm concerned about the 'terrorise the Tuhoe community with masked gunmen' charges tht haven't been answered yet. What about you? Reckon that was necessary?
I don't.
Robert, educate me then!!
Please help me understand why certain people aren't overly concerned about what these guys were up to.
And community? were they? I guess I have a different idea of what being part of a community involves, ie, not brandishing assault rifles.
Send me an email if you want too, I really want to understand why you (and others) feel this way.
Oh, and I've got a new job I want to talk to you about.........
Hand on, Shunda, weren't the terrorism charges in this instances brought during a Labour-led government, based on laws introduced by the same Labour-led government? It didn't look much like appeasement to me, so I'm not convinced by your "the left seek to appease anyone with an assault rifle" narrative.
As I see it these guys were wandering around with guns and talking about how useless the government are. Which is exactly what the dairy farmers around my way are doing right now. It's also dumb and anti-social, but it's legal.
Fair cop on the firearms charges, but the terrorism charge was a joke and deserved to be dumped, the Urewera Four were no more of a stereotypical terrorist than your typical dairy farmer. And I have a tinfoil hat for anyone who thinks farmers are organising to overthrow the government by force of arms.
the Urewera Four were no more of a stereotypical terrorist than your typical dairy farmer.
What an astonishingly ignorant statement.
I guess I base my opinion on probability and facts, perhaps you base yours on theoretical "oughts".
Fact: Tame has travelled internationally to 'visit' various controversial figures involved in undemocratic governments and also directly related to terrorism.
He has also fired shotguns at the NZ flag along with a multitude of other blatantly aggressive actions.
And I haven't even mentioned various statements he has made that are fundamentally opposed to a peaceful NZ.
When you can link farmers to such activities then I might listen, until then, you just sound like yet another blind and blinkered lefty (and to an astonishing degree).
It disturbs me deeply that people can be so incredibly blind.
Travelling overseas to meet controversial figures, undemocratic governments and terrorists does not make someone a terrorist. Nor is it automatically a crime.
Shooting a flag does not make someone a terrorist. If it's a crime, it shouldn't be, they are just pieces of cloth.
Possessing and using firearms, even without a licence, does not make someone a terrorist.
Other aggressive acts that don't make NZ a more peaceful place? That's pretty general, how about something specific?
The finest legal minds, with years of time and millions of dollars could not prove that the Urewera Four were terrorists. It's not a huge leap of faith to assert, therefore, that they are not terrorists.
If you are suggesting that no farmer has:
- travelled overseas to meet a controversial figure, deal with an undemocratic government or subvert the laws of the land, or
- treated the symbols of the state with the utmost of disrespect, or
- played soldiers with semi-automatic, then
I'm calling you on your bullshit.
My point is that the Urewera Four are not terrorists. If you don't understand the corollary, that farmers are also not terrorists, then I politely suggest that you check your head for blinkers and blindness before you make assertions about me.
Sorry Armchair Critic I can't agree with you. The local farmers, me included, do walk around with guns and complain about the government. However we do not bring in supposed experts to train us in assault tactics, terorise people at the point of a gun, create and use molotov cocktails and all.
RG if you want to have a go at the police for their overreaction then you need to do the same for iti and his band of fools. The police in their black gear are a menace to society and do need to be reigned in. By the same standard Iti and his fellow fools need to be in jail as well for exactly the same behaviour.
Shunda is correct - you have a huge blind spot. If it is some brown person it's ok but if it's the police doing the same thing it's not ok. And pulease spare me the 'stirred memories of colonisation'. There is no one still alive with memories of what happened in the 1800's. And it is no exceuse for law breaking.
Paranormal
Shunda and Paranormal - if you could repeat for me, what it is that I said that has you fuming so, I'd perhaps be able to understand this 'blind spot' you foam about.
Was it the reference to the black Ninjas? I stand by that ststement. The police action involving detaining Tuhoe people, young and old, stopping buses, entering homes all masked-up and carrying assault rifles, was appalling and harmed that community significantly.
Is that my blind-spot?
As for the beareres of arms being terrorists - do you accept the courts findings or not? Is your distant opinion somehow better balanced than the judges?
Your view is truly puzzling. Have you tried and convicted them from your lofty perches, oh wise ones?
Paranormal - "Shunda is correct - you have a huge blind spot. If it is some brown person it's ok but if it's the police doing the same thing it's not ok."
What nonsense - some of those police were Maori and some of the 'Urewera trainees' were European. If you can though, cite any statements I've made that support your claim that I think 'it's' okay, please do. I'm interested.
paranormal
You should meet some of the farmers around my way. You and your neighbours sound a lot more civilised.
I'm not suggesting you, your neighbours, my neighbours or any farmers are terrorists.
Come on RG you go on about Shunda and me foaming and yet you get all on your high horse when called to account. In this and previous posts you have consistently shown your support for the Iti idiot.
From even a cursory glance at the evidence it is plain that Iti et al were up to no good. What you seem to be doing is taking a not guilty verdict, at the end of a long and convoluted legal case, as a sign of innocence. Clearly that is not the case. This is where a spot of reform in our legal system would go a long way. A third option of "Not proven" as used overseas would be a far more accurate result.
I understand two of the reasons for the failure to convict and the crown deciding not to proceed with a retrial are firstly the clusterfuck that is Liarbours terrorism legislation and secondly the failure of the police to gather evidence that was allowable in court.
That doesn't mean they don't have proof - just that what they have is inadmissible. This is an all too regular occurence around the country today. Police and their prosecutors regularly stuff up the process and allow criminals to walk out of court.
Are you deliberately playing the naïve card or do you not understand that how courts operate?
As you will note form this and previous posts I do not agree with the Police paramilitary approach to armed offenders situations. They consistently overreact and are clearly unable to use the firearms thay have. That we have only had one incident like the shooting of an innocent bystander on the North Western motorway is purely blind luck. The police consistently flout the rules of safe firearms handling.
Having said that Iti and his crew of misfits are just as guilty of terrorising people. In just one of the incidents recounted in the court case his band of merry men held a car up at gunpoint - just like the police action that you are slavering on about.
Is that selective blindness? You tell me.
Paranormal
Para - with all/any due respect, you've not cited one statement by me to support your claim that I have a blindspot and that i support brown over white and that I believe Tame Iti to be innocent etc etc.
Not one statement have you provided to support your claim. And it's all I (politely)asked.
If you don't understand the corollary, that farmers are also not terrorists, then I politely suggest that you check your head for blinkers and blindness before you make assertions about me.
The only assertion I am making is that your example is ridiculous.
It is not at all unreasonable to assume that someone that would spout such nonsense has some fairly large blinkers on.
I get that you don't like duck shooting, I am not particularly fond of it myself, but to suggest that this is no different to Tame and his antics is utterly ridiculous.
For a start, duck shooters generally don't shoot ducks with assault rifles, throw molotov cocktails, or train as though the ducks are going to fight back.
Get a grip on reality.
Robert, I think you have a point regarding the way the Police handled the raids, fair enough.
This wasn't done properly and I wouldn't like to see that happen again to the people up there.
However, I think that while the cops made a mash of it, there was plenty of reason to do something about that little training 'camp'.
Your opening post seems to indicate that this is what you have the issue with, not the injustice to the wider community up there.
I withdraw my comment regarding you having blinkers, shunda. It's quite the opposite, you seem to have x-ray vision. Perhaps you need to try going digital.
I've not mentioned ducks. I have no problem with duck hunting, as long as it is done humanely and have, in the past, hunted a wide range of wildlife. I still have hunting dogs, but I prefer gardening to hunting these days. I'm getting older.
I know farmers who have set up target shooting ranges on the back of their farms and shot at cut outs and old scarecrows. I know farmers who have undertaken some pretty out-there role plays to demolish out-buildings. I know farmers who grumble about the government, who also hold quite an arsenal of weapons, including weapons outside the class of licence they hold.
Are they terrorists? No, they are not.
Is my example ridiculous? It's set completely in reality and the scope of my observations of life. And while reality can be ridiculous, in the sense I interpret your use of the word it is not.
From Armchairs blog:
Meanwhile, down on the farm there were a bunch of drunken idiots dressed in camo, letting off shotguns.
It has a direct link to an article about the opening of the duck hunting season.
This is what I am talking about, blinkered, and now perhaps dishonest too.
and?
Explain the dishonesty, if you can. Then have a go at explaining how the courts got it wrong on the Urewera Four.
I've a question:
Why is it that, 'believing' that there were terrorists training in the Urewera and 'knowing' that threats about killing John Key had been made by one/some of them, did the police allow Key to visit the Urewera with no more protection than he usually has?
Eh?
Glitches. In the matrix. I look for them.
There's one!
Then have a go at explaining how the courts got it wrong on the Urewera Four.
Good grief.
You would make a great 'submissive' Christian.
Such unyielding faith in the 'justice' system.
The more you talk the more disturbed I become.
I'd have a go at explaining it, Robert, but my tinfoil hat and x-ray specs are out on loan. Maybe the person I loaned them to will make a comment.
So, shunda, you have nothing to address either point? Except another wild web-based diagnosis.
I'm sure you are much nicer in person than you are on the internet.
RG - so what is your view then?
@ 1:06 - You might see it as a glitch in the matrix but it seems like your usual, business as normal, left hand - right hand, government stuff up to me. Just look at how good the secret service guys were at making sure there were no unexplained devices at a cafe table.
Paranormal
Robert, I have seen Keys goons first hand (I think I was being eyed up/followed by one) it appears he has maximum protection wherever he goes.
To be honest, I really hope you are right about Tame iti.
It's just a shame his actions seem to indicate something quite different.
I'm sure you are much nicer in person than you are on the internet.
It is not efficient to be 'nice' on the internet, cut to the chase, provoke, respond, thrash it out.
I do most of my thinking on these discussions away from the computer, you can't judge a character by the blog thing, it is not an accurate enough (which is why facebook causes insecure people so much grief).
Yes, I am nicer in person, the blog comment stuff is more of an evolved personality.
Shunda - your goons=maximum protection argument doesn't wash with me. Do you really think that, believing that there was a real threat to his life, he'd go anywhere near that nest of terrorism, Iti Country? I think it's bullsh*t. The whole deal. Iti was mucking around with guns and things in a way that's worrying and has paid the price for that. Months/years of court/punishment hanging over his head can't have been 'nothing', but the police action/justification doesn't stack up, in my opinion.
Paranormal - you're stretching it beyond breaking point. Not noticing a little black bag on the tea table, while incredible, isn't in the same league as sending the Prime Minister into 'foreign territory' from which threats of assassination have emerged, armed only with a half-dozen goons. Not credible, not believable. Tui everywhere!
RG - you seem agitated today. Did you not read what I said?
I was merely using another very public example of security service bungling to show that as a possible reason for allowing Key's visit to Itiland. We all now know that bag contained a listening device. It may not have and could have been a serious threat that was not even addressed by his minders.
What is perhaps more likely is they had eyes on Iti and his crew whilst Key was there. Mind you that also requires belief around a level of competence.
Extending your proposition his minders wouldn't take him anywhere, perhaps even including parts of Parliament buildings, due to assasination threats.
Paranormal
Not agitated, paranormal, combative.
I did read what you said. You said I was on my high-horse and that Tame Iti is an idiot. You said taking Key into Tuhoe country when it was known that there were plans to assassinate him, was just a police muck-up.
And some other unlikely stuff.
Post a Comment