And the backlash begins in 5-4-3-2-1
Alt Tv/Fleet FM Breakfast News Comment
The terrorism files
Today The Dominion Post reveals the secret evidence police amassed while investigating suspected terrorism activity in New Zealand. Compiled from hundreds of hours of covert surveillance, this is the intelligence that led to armed police conducting their controversial raids. This is the public's first chance to fully assess the merits of the police investigation.
What the bugs revealed ... Watched at every step ... The trail that led to armed raids ... Editorial: More than empty talk in Ureweras
Secret surveillance of Urewera bush camp trainees reveals discussions about killing people for practice, throwing Molotov cocktails into gas-filled buildings, blowing up power stations, television networks and the Waihopai spy base.
Electronic bugs also revealed United States President George W Bush as a possible target, and a discussion about assassinating National leader John Key.
Police say their bugs also picked up talk of copying IRA and Iraqi guerrilla tactics by using hit-and-run squads for bush and urban warfare.
The Dominion Post has obtained the 156-page affidavit presented by police to Manukau District Court. The information in it was used to obtain search warrants when police suspected terrorist plots were under way. It provides details from hundreds of bugged conversations and text messages, descriptions of police video footage - and the reasons why police believed people were training to be terrorists.
The affidavit was sworn on October 10 by a detective sergeant from special investigations, a unit that scrutinises radical groups and issues of national security. Five days later, armed police raided the suspects.
The affidavit says that, between November 2006 and September this year, six "quasi-military training camps" were held in the Ruatoki area. Police say the trainees planned to use small squads to commit terrorist acts.
Bugged conversations recorded talk of plans for urban and rural warfare, of killing police, removing Pakeha farmers, assassinating politicians and committing actions so brutal that the public would think al Qaeda was responsible.
On August 16 this year, police intercepted a conversation between two suspects in a car. They discussed Mr Bush and speculation that he could visit New Zealand - and talked of using a sniper's rifle.
The police affidavit says: "I believe this relates to a hypothetical conversation about how they could kill the president of the United States of America, George Bush, and a conversation about the effectiveness of firearms."
In another bugged conversation, in a car on August 17, a suspect talks of killing Mr Key after the next election: "Get someone to assassinate the prime minister, the new one, next year's one. Just been in office five days, bang ... Yeah, John Key ... just drop a bomb ... Just wait till he visits somewhere and just blow them ... They won't even find you."
In another bugged phone call, on July 21 this year, a suspect says Tuhoe would go to war for the Ureweras "so we, we gotta make a plan how we're gonna block in the bloody place, shutting the whole place down". According to the affidavit, another suspect responds, "That's what I wanna hear," and another says, "So I got a couple of years to have fun."
One suspect talks of a strategic bombing campaign and using violence so extreme it would divide New Zealand. Another talks of doing what the IRA did in Britain: "It's all about guerrilla, guerrilla war ... It's about hiding and being able to fight another day."
Another talks of training for two years, focusing only on going to war, and handpicking an IRA-type cell to kill and create chaos, the affidavit says.
In other bugged conversations, police say they heard talk of making nail bombs, targeting Parliament and screening recruits. Conversations refer to IRA and al Qaeda training manuals and police say one suspect said he would show another how to make napalm.
One suspect is said to have talked of making a sniper's camouflage suit and obtaining a rifle capable of killing from 2500 metres. Police say one suspect said 100 people had been through the camps, but that 50 would be enough to start a war if they were well-trained.
The affidavit says surveillance of training camps shows:
Vehicle ambushes and military-style drills with live rounds.
"Terrifying" counter-interrogation training, including holding guns to participants' backs and accusing one of being a police informant.
How to throw Molotov cocktails.
How to extract colleagues under rifle fire.
In the background to the affidavit, police say one trainee using the codename Bl@ckmask hacked into the National Party website in 2004.
The affidavit says police watched or recorded trainees leaving their homes around the country and heading toward Ruatoki, often picking up others en route. Police say they stopped following the suspects once they drove into Ruatoki, for fear of being discovered, but they installed video cameras on accessways and at campsites, and bugged a camp meal room and sleeping room.
At the last of the camps, police say surveillance picked up 18 people and 14 firearms.
Well, well, well - I wonder how mainstream NZ will react to this now. I have said it once, I'll say it again, NO PEACE ACTIVIST - NO SOCIAL JUSTICE ACTIVIST HAS ANY RIGHT TO PICK UP A GUN IN NZ! And the second you do pick up a gun - you are no longer a member of a social justice movement. Do I think these people are terrorists, no, I think it's a lot of arrogant boasts, but now the cat is out of the bag, there's no way the rest of NZ are going to see anything short of terrorism. So do those rallying around the Urewera 17 (or 16 if you are trying to distance yourself from Jamie Lockett) support any of this shit?
More from the Dominion Editorial...
The police have been accused of over-reacting, and of being racist. Supporters of those accused have argued there is nothing to justify the operation the police mounted, that notions of domestic terrorism are as insubstantial as the Urewera mist, and that those arrested are the victims of some sort of vendetta. They argue that those the police arrested are blameless. Their claims have not been tested in any meaningful way till now.
Solicitor-General David Collins, Qc, has spoken of "very disturbing activities". The material in the affidavit the police submitted to obtain search warrants more than confirms that description.
Some will continue to dismiss much of what was intercepted as the empty talk of people with delusions of guerrilla grandeur. They will say the police should not have taken seriously those who allegedly discussed assassinating National Party leader John Key should he become prime minister at the next election. They will still argue that the police were over-reacting when suspects allegedly discussed creating urban and rural warfare, killing police, removing Pakeha farmers, and committing actions so brutal people would think al Qaeda had arrived.
However, they will find it harder to dismiss what the affidavit says the police surveillance uncovered - trainees at camps in the Ureweras ambushing vehicles and carrying out military-style drills with live rounds, taking part in "terrifying" counter-interrogation training including holding guns to participants' backs and accusing a suspect of being a police informant, throwing Molotov cocktails, posting sentries and carrying out military drills.
I am a proud activist, I have been on more protest marches than I care to remember, I disagree completely with the TSA and have blogged on how disgusting it is for Helen Clarke to have the power to decide who is and who isn't a terrorist, I have spoken out against the Police in this country so many times that any suggestion I'm pro Police is simply farcical, philosophically I support damage to property to make symbolic statements, and if you get caught for that you man up and take the consequences - HOWEVER, as a matter of principle I would never pick up a gun against my fellow NZer - certainly there are moments in history, Bloody Sunday, the Sharpeville massacre where resistance has to go to another level against the oppressor - but in NZ the 'oppressor' uses 3 yearly proportional elections and the odd taser - hardly a rallying call for armed resistance now is it? These stupid clowns in the Urerweras have set back the activist community for 100 years, not race relations. By acting in the manner they have, they give the right wing all the bullets necessary to shoot at us, this is a home goal unlike any other, now watch the security spiders spin their domestic terror laws into something we all have to worry about now.
What the bugs revealed
Suspect tells another it would be good to kill Pakeha to get trainees used to killing. Also suggests making their own tracer ammunition and using tungsten projectiles to go through a "cop vest" and through "his f...... mate".
Bug in vehicle, recorded April 6, 2007.
"Get someone to assassinate the prime minister, the new one, next year's one. Just been in office five days, bang ... Yeah. John Key ... just drop a bomb ... Just wait till he visits somewhere and just blow them ... They won't even find you."
Two suspects in bugged vehicle, August 17, 2007.
"They want to start blowing shit up. You know, they want to blow up power plants, gas plants, Telecom, petrol f...... places and shit like that."
Two suspects in bugged vehicle, June 23, 2007.
"You know like the IRA in England ... it's gonna happen here ... I'm ready to die, mate. I'm gonna hurt this country, I've had a gutsful ... I wanna leave this planet making sure that I've done a f...... huge amount of harm to this country."
Suspect recorded on bugged phone, May 26, 2006.
"It'd have to be a, some sort of f......, sudden f......, because what it'll do, it'll come down on the thinking of the people, they'll think it's al Qaeda ... It's gotta be sudden and it's gotta be brutal."
Other suspect says: "Don't piss around with cities or doing the bush thing ... just go to Parliament."
Two suspects in bugged vehicle, August 17, 2007.
"I heard you talking about the napalm shit." Response from unknown man: "I'll make some and bring some next time round, show everyone how to make it."
Conversation in bugged vehicle, September 16, 2007.
"No, I'm teaming up with the Maoris, we have to ... I'll come and see ya, I can't f...... take the white man on without the c...s ... I'm declaring war on this country."
Bugged cellphone, May 22, 2007.
"Tuhoe wouldn't have popular support for a bombing campaign in New Zealand."
Reply: "It would in Tuhoe though ... What about if we did a bombing campaign that blew up Waihopai spy base, power dams, gas facilities, TV stations and radios ... It's a strategy that's gonna be f...... urban warfare. We are training in the wrong place."
First speaker: "What's going to be the strategy?"
Reply: "Strategy will divide, will divide Aotearoa ... extreme violence and extreme f...... actions too."
Two suspects in bugged vehicle, June 23, 2007.
"I cut down all of my work, right down. Ah, I'm only focusing to go to war."
Bugged suspect, April 26, 2007.
"There's nothing in this country can stop you once you got it, you can kill anybody you want. They'll never be able to find you."
Suspect talking in bugged vehicle about asking for sniper's rifle, August 16, 2007.
"Wait till bullets start going through people, that's f...... horrible ... Wait till your mate's head gets blown off because someone dobbed us in and we get f...... shot at."
Suspect in bugged sleeping room, June 23, 2007.
"There's about 10 manuals ... There's the al Qaeda manual and that's f...... good. That's right up to date."
Later another suspect says: "That last exercise was a bit freaky for me, having a gun in my back."
Response: "High level of secrecy, we needed, you know, we need to test people."
Bugged training camp room, June 23, 2007.
Suspect X tells Suspect Y he is tired of playing games. Suspect Y says they need good planning so they don't die on the first day. Both worry about the enemy within their ranks and talk about needing 20 small squads, such as in Iraq, carrying out their own missions.
Bugged vehicle, April 4, 2007.
Straw Poll time folks - what do we think - were the cops right to act or not?
posted by Bomber @ 6:29 am
67 comments
67 Comments:
This comment has been removed by the author.
Talking about it is one thing, which the 17 accused are fucking stupid for, but I believe they all through their conversations, talking about throwing shit to the wind by saying tough stuff, yet when the push come to shove, it seems like hot air... (translated) "talking shit."
Its comment like, "Get someone to assassinate the prime minister, shows the gutless wonders, real terrorist do get someone, they do it, themselves
18 months and none of these Maori's and co did anything apart from live their fantasy in the Urewera bush.
Any photos of the training camps, now thats what I want to see.
As a child, often I'd spend warm summer days roaming the bellying landscape playing war games with my chums. We'd use whatever was at hand, for example; doublehappy explosive devices (I'd call them crackers but that would no doubt inflame the passions of the resident rednecks here) which we'd buy in bulk over the Guy Fawkes period in order to use later in those decisive moments of battle.
However, the most effective weapon was in fact the simple fart gun.
This involved pointing your finger at the target, cocking your leg and dropping your reeking guts a few inches from the enemy's nose.
I shudder to think what would happen to an anal terrorist in this paranoid age if they decided to make real their fantasy, packaged one of their buttock burps into an airtight container and left it outside the Prime Minister's electoral office.
What a surprise, this evidence isn't enough for Mana to think that the cops were right to do something, no wonder they wanted the evidence surpressed...
Yes I think the cops were right to act. Judging solely from this information I doubt they could have done a fraction of what they talked about. Once the powers that be realised what was going on and a few people were killed, the would-be assassins would have been hunted down like dogs. Talking about killing GWB is laughable - they wouldn't have got anywhere near him. However the fact they were willing to try and talk so casually about killing Pakeha people just to get used to killing - says to me the police were right to act and that these people, at the very least the people who were doing the planning and leading, should still be nailed to the wall.
Like I said when this all began - do you really want to be showing solidarity with these people when you don't know what they've been up to? Well now you do know - still showing that solidarity? Pretty fucking dumb if you do.
Any 'activists' involved in this bullshit should be severely ostracised from the activist community - I'm no fan of activists but I do realise they are a part of any healthy democracy - so for the sake of activism in NZ these people need to be named and shamed and kicked squarely into touch. If they are allowed to protest and agitate along side you, you will be forever tainted by the association. The fact that you, Bomber, keep saying 'well follow me around for 6 months and I'll probably say I'd like to shoot so-and-so' doesn't help things much. But there is a huge difference between your saying such things casually and these people getting hold of guns and planning. CUT THESE DEAD BRANCHES OFF, FOR YOUR OWN SAKE ACTIVISTS.
Now might be a good time for John Minto to shut the fuck up as well. Plenty of people would relish the chance to write that shit-stirrer off as a nutter who's in bed with would be murderers.
As an activist you're not too keen on the rule of law are you Bumbler?
Bend it, break it, any way you want it, as long as it suits you it's alright.
These are rantings on a par with your own prior to this coming to light.
Locketts a nut bar & the rest is as Minto puts it, like anything you would hear at any gun club et al.
In the '80s the National Front made the claim and campaigned to kill a Maori. That came to nothing (no arrests)- well they killed a few of their own, & knee capped a few as well.
What were the conversations in the various Army Messes around NZ during the Fijian "Elections".
Can we do it too? After a few too many whos mind wouldn't wander on the wild side for fun?
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Several comments. First, as disturbing as all this is, it is completely out of context. Had my head been bugged this year, the thought of assassinating the pope would have passed through it several times. The chances of me actually assassinating the pope are precisely zero.
Second, there are all sorts of people who vent their frustrations with life on this troubled planet by indulging in "empowering fantasies". Hell - I know people who cut into others with knives for sexual kicks. Not my scene, disturbs me, but the reality is that these folk just need that release for reasons which escape me.
Almost without exception, people of all bents see the distinction between fantasy and reality, even though they might push the boundaries quite firmly and disturbingly. We have to allow people to do this, and yet have the law apply when their fantasies cross the line into reality. We have to allow actors to "get into character" by "being" the violent thugs they are to play on screen or stage. We have to allow people to write novels involving murder and rape and torture and worse. The law must be capable of allowing all victimless forms of self-expression, no matter how extreme the majority of folk might find them.
Last... is this not the perfect opportunity to call for an amnesty on all charges (including the arms act ones), and to conduct a sort of "truth and reconciliation commission" here? This whole affair is something that needs to unite our country, not divide it.
According to John Campbell only four people were involved in these heavy conversations. And this stuff has been around for a long time. Take a look at this interview with a maori activist who heard the same stuff from a self-styled 'Maori Revolutionary Army' on the 2004 hikoi:
http://readingthemaps.blogspot.com/2007/11/touring.html
"Several comments. First, as disturbing as all this is, it is completely out of context. Had my head been bugged this year, the thought of assassinating the pope would have passed through it several times. The chances of me actually assassinating the pope are precisely zero."
Those who say its just empty boasts etc, meaningless words need to take it in the context that those making these claims were also participating in these armed camps with the direct intent that they could then carry out such 'claims'.
Thats the difference and thats why you can't dismiss it as meaningless boasts.
Anon 10:23 said: Had my head been bugged this year, the thought of assassinating the pope would have passed through it several times. The chances of me actually assassinating the pope are precisely zero.
There is a VAST difference between what you are saying and actually getting hold of weapons and training to do such things with like-minded people which is what happened here.
Almost without exception, people of all bents see the distinction between fantasy and reality, even though they might push the boundaries quite firmly and disturbingly. We have to allow people to do this, and yet have the law apply when their fantasies cross the line into reality.
That's all well and good Anon, but at what point are you going to step in and stop them from doing what ever it is they have planned? Are you going to wait until they have committed one of these planned acts, because according to your logic how can we ever really be sure they are doing anything but fantasizing? And will you then be one of the people accusing the police of incompetence if they fail to stop these people of committing murder etc?
The law must be capable of allowing all victimless forms of self-expression, no matter how extreme the majority of folk might find them.
Fine and dandy - just imagine that it's you and your family that these people are talking about killing while they victimlessly play with guns and Molotov cocktails as a form of harmless self expression.
is this not the perfect opportunity to call for an amnesty on all charges (including the arms act ones), and to conduct a sort of "truth and reconciliation commission" here?
Um no, no it isn't. I am quite happy to discuss and debate with reasonable people, even radical people if it means we can understand each others perspective better - that is the way forward. But when you start training with guns and talking about killing pakeha just to get used to killing, then the discussion is over, you can get fucked. And I wouldn't want any sort of amnesty for these people any more than I would want an amnesty for neo-nazis who were planning and training to kill non-pakeha.
As i said before, I don't think these fools would have been able to do a fraction of what they were talking about, but that doesn't let them off the hook - these were adults with real guns, not stupid kids with comic books.
Hmm..
* Seems like a very small subset are actually the hardcore nasties. But the effect of ...
- "trial by media" is a far larger group of people, and the organizations they associated with have been condemned in the public eye.
- "arrest by mass raids" where the 4 or so real nasties were wishful wannabees without any support, they now have been made martyrs and heroes instead of clowns.
ie. Where you had 4 dangerous clowns before you now have many angry people who distrust the police even more. And many more useful and concerned members of society painted as terrorists.
Hold on there. According to Campbell, who saw the documents, a big majority of the 17 people arrested were not having these apparently wild conversations. And we also know that the cops were bugging scores of other activists, some of whom went through the camps.
It shouldn't be automatically inferred, then, that the camps were intended to foster actions of the sort this tiny minority was discussing. As has been pointed out already, Justin Taua was aware of people on the 2004 hikoi talking of starting an armed struggle. Does that mean the hikoi was a breeding ground for terrorism?
In addition, the context of these communications has to be considered. The transcripts published today have been twice removed from their original context. They were edited from much longer transcripts by the police, who were naturally looking for the 'juiciest' excerpts, and they have been edited again by the papers.
At a bail hearing I attended the defence actually used some of the intercepted communications to argue that their client was *not* a wannabe terrorist. They quoted a part of a transcript, which the police were apparently too dopey to expurgate, where the defendant argued *against* the use of violence to establish an independent Tuhoe nation. (Of course, this quote hasn't turned up in either the Dom Post or The Press.)
The defence used the quote about non-violence to suggest that the conversation which the police had recorded and edited was a very hypothetical one - the sort of freewheeling discussion where different scenarios and strategies for political change, including some quite outlandish ones, are kicked around in a playful fashion. I've certainly had plenty of conversations of this nature on long car journeys. If the cops recorded and edited them, they'd easily be able to make my words look much more sinister than they really were.
Quite frankly, I'm surprised the cops haven't been able to make more of the people they've recorded say outrageous things. And if there were one or two loose cannons that went through the camps, then that's a fairly low proportion. Certainly the nutter quotient would appear to be far lower than one finds in the army, or in the comments boxes of right-wing blogs.
The desperation of the cops, the right-wing press, and the terminally confused Bomber to lay a hand on the arrestees, after the humiliations of the last fortnight, is palpable. You'll play this for all it's worth, I'm sure, but the hype will quickly fade, and many New Zealanders will be able to see the essential shallowness of the police case.
...
Well hold on - that's not the line that has been used to defend the Urewera 17 - apparently this was a complete racist over reaction by the Police - well was it? And I notice the back peddling here, 'those are just crazy thoughts in ones heads' - where do you draw the line - when they are organising get togethers in the Ureweras and throwing Molotov Cocktails? Is that the threshold?
and the terminally confused Bomber
Could you explain that maps? I stated from the beginning that there were no terrorists, just some dumb clowns who once the allegations against them were made public would see the public turn against them - how does that make me terminally confused maps? It's a matter of principle, don't pick up a fucking gun - how hard is that for you to accept?
Certainly the nutter quotient would appear to be far lower than one finds in the army, or in the comments boxes of right-wing blogs.
Nice try arsehole - show us where people in these right-wing blogs talk about blowing up power plants, gas plants, Telecom etc and killing certain sections of the community, you know, just to get used to killing.
There is a big difference between just talking shit about people you dislike and making preparations to act our your "fantasies".
Don't forget the last MP to be murdered in NZ was when a nutter walked into the electorate office with a knife. So yes, they probably could have assassinated an MP if they wanted to.
How precisely are the Police meant to tell if they are serious but not quite ready yet or just playing silly buggers in the bush? Would you bet your own life on the good intentions of everyone in the 17? If not then the Police action was appropriate.
JP.
Bomber, I've no problem if you want to be an upstanding liberal and defend democracy and the rule of law in pious tones. But do try to be a little consistent, if you want to be taken seriously.
If you believe in the rule of law, then don't judge people on the basis of hearsay and tidbits from a police force with a long history of mendacity towards activists. You convicted the Urewera 17 of nefarious deeds on the basis of some tidbits from someone who attended the first meeting set up to defend them, and Chris Trotter convicted them on the basis that Howard Broad was a mate of his. If you blokes are the ramparts of liberalism in this country, then I'd hate to see the authoritarians.
Do I think it's wrong to pick up a gun in New Zealand? There seems to be a disease that talkback hosts contract, which prevents them thinking in anything
more complex than soundbites and rhetorical questions. In the 2004 interview I referred to earlier, Justin Taua gives a more subtle answer to the question of armed struggle.
There's a difference between terrorism, on the one hand, and a workers' militia or national liberation movement, on the other.
I'm pleased Te Kooti had arms in 1868. I certainly wish that the Red Feds had had more arms in 1913, when the police and Specials were aiming machine guns at them.
I wouldn't blame Tuhoe who looked at the experience of Pacific peoples in places like Bougainville, Palau, and Kanaky, as well as the direction of US foreign policy and the closeness of NZ and the US, and decided they wanted to build a popular militia for defensive purposes. I don't think there's anything in our history that gives the settler state the right to a monopoly of force over groups like the Tuhoe:
http://readingthemaps.blogspot.com/2007/10/dont-blame-tuhoe-for-underdevelopment.html
Anon: The argument that the police have both over-reacted and behaved in a racist manner isn't logically dependent on the arrestees being as innocent as driven snow.
Even if there had been an Al Qaeda cell training in the Ureweras, the police treatment of the Ruatoki North community would still have been racist.
And when he appeared on TV immediately after the formation of the Civil Rights Defence Committee on the day of the first raids, John Minto said that the arrestees should face firearms charges, if they were guilty of firearms possession. He didn't assert that the arresstees were necessarily innocent of any offence - he said that they were innocent of terrorism, and that the police had over-reacted.
Other high-profile critics of the police, like Keith Locke and Hone Harawira, took the same line. Agree or disagree with them (and I didn't agree with everything they said - I thought they were too ready to assume some guilt amogst the arresstees), but don't try to rewrite history.
Anon 2: ever been to, say, Little Green Footballs? I wouldn't advise it, but if you make the excursion you find daily calls for nuke strikes on Mecca and pogroms of Muslims in the West.
Anon 2: ever been to, say, Little Green Footballs? I wouldn't advise it, but if you make the excursion you find daily calls for nuke strikes on Mecca and pogroms of Muslims in the West.
I thought you were talking about right wing blogs in NZ, not American ones.
Are we supposed to take comfort in the Urewera 17 having lower nutter quotient (according to you) than that of a US right-wing blog?
You could find equally disturbing rubbish on DailyKos and other US leftwing blogs if you wanted to look for it, what is the point? Aren't we talking about what's going on in our own country?
Is it illegal to put some chemicals in a bottle, light it, and throw it so it breaks, to see what happens?
And if that's not illegal then we're talking about intent. How do we judge someone's intent?
Is there anything in the transcripts that shows specific planning of any specific crime that would harm another human?
Since when is it illegal to think bad thoughts? Or to teach oneself how to act on those bad thoughts, but not actually act on them?
If I decided I wanted to learn how to rob a bank and I taught myself all the skills necessary to rob a bank but never actually robbed a bank and never actually planned a specific bank robbery, would that make me a criminal?
Of the bits I've read so far, the only thing I saw in the transcripts that really concerned me was pointing guns at people's backs (if that happened in a threatening way) or doing that and telling someone you think they are a narc. But again, where is the context, intonation etc?
I'm not condoning what any of the arrestees have done. Not least because I still don't know what the arrestees have done, and neither does anyone else here. Likewise I'm not willing to condem them.
I agree with the comments about context. We simply don't know how or why these things were said. I also agree that it's appalling to see anyone, especially on the left, making judgements on the basis of what the mainstream media is drip feeding us. Have the full documents been posted on the internet? Why not?
I'm not supportive of that in fact, I don't think any of this information should be in the public domain until after the trials, but how can we trust the media to understand what they have in their possession when they are still so incredibly incompetent at reporting on pretty much anything to do with Maori?
*
maps, thank-you so much for your words of sanity and generally deeper knowledge of the issues involved.
It is interesting to see how the left slowly backtracks on it claims regarding the behavior of these activists.
First it was 'they're all peace loving protesters who never ever touched a weapon' and the police were just engaged in political harassment.
Then when details of military training camps and weapons practice emerged the left tried to excuse their actions by claiming that girl scouts and cubs did the same thing so it was totally innocent behavior. I don't recall during my 'tour of duty' in the scouts ever practicing with military style firearms or ambush techniques.
Finally when the actually transcripts are published we are told by the by activist's supporters that the conversations were taken 'out of context' and that we all say this kind of stupid shit every day to excuse and mitigate their actions although leaving out the fact that the context was being a member of a armed militia holding engaged in military training.
It will be amusing to see what excuses the activists will come up with when police surveillance videos of these 'boy scout' activities are released.
I would have thought that anyone planning to commit a crime of any sort - be it company fraud, bank robbery or terrorism, would be aware of the existence of ETCHELON and covert surveillance and would not do any of the planning over the phone, in their house or car, via email or cellphone etc. If you had any nous at all you would be so secretive that no-one would be able to intercept ANYTHING and there would be no trail!!On that basis, I think it's just loose talk taken out of context and lacking intonation etc. The scary thing is that the real terrorists (if there are any in Aotearoa)are making plans that you and I will never know about until it's too late, and this fiasco has just made them even more careful.
Maps - sorry mate, it's a matter of principle, you pick up a gun in NZ and I'm not interested, you may wish to twist that any which way you like to give you the reason you need, that's fine - but I hold to the point I originally made, and that is once the allegations got out that people would not see the Police action as an over reaction and that they would be very, very, very angry. Do I think anyone is a terrorist? No, I don't, but I also don't think the activist community help their cause by running around with guns. I'm no fan of the cops, I've criticised their stance on most issues but I think they had some cause for concern here, do I agree with the TSA? No, I've blogged about the abursdity of the Prime Minister deciding who a terrorist is well before anyone at Indymedia brought it up - I'm fascinated that stance makes me pious - so how about you Maps - explain to me how this was all an over reaction, are you one of those who rallied around the Urewera 17 (or are you an Urewera 16 kinda guy?). If I'm to understand it maps, the Police are racist facist bully thugs who set all the Urewera 17 (or 16 if you are trying to distance yourself from Jamie Lockett) up - because the 'they are all as pure as the virgin snow' line has had a bit of a setback from the Dom Post today haven't they?
Oh - PS Bomber, I've no problem if you want to be an upstanding liberal and defend democracy and the rule of law in pious tones. But do try to be a little consistent, if you want to be taken seriously. - I think I'd take pious over condescending any day of the week, and as for this..You convicted the Urewera 17 of nefarious deeds on the basis of some tidbits from someone who attended the first meeting set up to defend them,... I won't name the name, but those 'titbits' turned out to not only be true, they were from a very credible and high placed 'someone' okay maps.
Finally when the actually transcripts are published
Where have the transcripts been published? I've only seen the selected bits on Stuff.co.nz.
The indymedia site is conveniently offline. Things must be getting pretty ugly for them.
Its not everyday that the people you support as innocents are exposed by the press as gun crazed nutbars planning to kill people.
Maps said: "I certainly wish that the Red Feds had had more arms in 1913, when the police and Specials were aiming machine guns at them"
Off topic, and let me say that Maps I appreciate your learned perspective, but are you serious about this?
An interesting counterfactual, but that's ridiculous. You know that there was a Royal Naval frigate parked in Wgtn Harbour for part of the duration of the strike?
Would have been absolute bloodshed. Not good at all...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...
Certainly the nutter quotient would appear to be far lower than one finds in the army, or in the comments boxes of right-wing blogs.
Nice try arsehole - show us where people in these right-wing blogs talk about blowing up power plants, gas plants, Telecom etc and killing certain sections of the community, you know, just to get used to killing.
They may not talk about blowing up power plants, gas plants, Telecom etc but theirs a bunch of right idiots in Wellington that coughed up shit about privatisation of this country. But anon you're still assuming these dreamers were actually going to do something realistic; for fuck sake this is not the "Minority Report" movie were people should be arrested for thinking and boasting dumb ass shit.
-------------------------------
Anon 10:23
Kewl Post bud like it
quickly fresh
anal terrorist sounds lethal
weka
I totally agree.
-----------------------------------
worried righty said...
What a surprise, this evidence isn't enough for Mana to think that the cops were right to do something, no wonder they wanted the evidence surpressed...
Sorry I don't share your narrow minded view WR, I think I'll need a bit more than "caller 1 said, caller 2 said", to bring down the heavy finger like you do WR; yet please post up some links for me as to where the Activist or the defence council requested the evidence suppressed, other Anons have used this line failed to provide this proof before; Shit I am willing to see what you saw, if you don't mind showing me. I thought the Judges suppressed the evidence before and after the AG or SG saw the evidence, but I'll stand corrected if you have the evidence that says otherwise. Still would love to see some photos of the training camps and all the weapons they had, because if one Ak47 is all they got, what on earth were they going to do on the day of there uprising, share it?. With that said, I'll say it again, before you run down this road; NO I don't support them, but it neither justifies (in my book) The terrorism call or the raids; But if the Police submitted this evidence to the Attorney General before they acted, might of saved the Police the drama they now face.
We're all forgetting that what the activists did went far beyond 'thinking' unless of course you define thinking as obtaining weapons as well as organizing and training an armed group. We have no real idea what they were thinking but from the evidence the police have a fair idea of their intentions.
If the police caught someone was caught in your backyard dressed in black with their face covered with a balaclava and armed with a knife and some ducktape but they claimed that they were merely 'thinking' about committing an offence would you believe that they had no real untoward purpose apart from trespass or would you fear for your life?
Do the activist's supporters really think that kiwis are that stupid?
theirs a bunch of right idiots in Wellington that coughed up shit about privatisation of this country.
Who? Who has talked about the privatisation of this country? The whole country? Perhaps you aren't aware but quite a large chunk of NZ is already in private hands.
In any case, I'd like some of what you are smoking if you thinking privatising is as bad as blowing things up and murdering people.
for fuck sake this is not the "Minority Report" movie were people should be arrested for thinking and boasting dumb ass shit.
Yes thank you Mr Cruise, perhaps you missed the party where they were actually practising with loaded guns and Molotov cocktails, that's not quite the same as just "thinking and boasting" about it, is it? I'd be interested to know when you think it WOULD have been ok for the police to do something?
Thousands of maori own guns anon thousands most unlicenced, old and young, there ancestors before them had no licence neither did the colonist that came here. Should we just label them terrorist because of that fact?
Anonymous said...
Who? Who has talked about the privatisation of this country? The whole country? Perhaps you aren't aware but quite a large chunk of NZ is already in private hands.
In any case, I'd like some of what you are smoking if you thinking privatising is as bad as blowing things up and murdering people.
That would be Key and the frigging Nats the spoke about privatisation, I believe it was "Grey power" that told them to rethink that shit if they want to win the next election. dude pirvate owned and govt wannabe enforcing ideology of privatisation is two different things anony.. Now I don't smoke anything, but you're quite welcome to what I have taken in, it's call AIR. Bringing up privatisation was an answer to Anons right wing left comment, not to be used in the same context, as the 17 dreamers
Isn't it 16 dreamers and a stoner?
"Should we just label them terrorist because of that fact?"
If they formed armed groups, planned to kill innocent people and made explosive device then yes they should be labeled as terrorists.
Anonymous said...
"Should we just label them terrorist because of that fact?"
If they formed armed groups, planned to kill innocent people and made explosive device then yes they should be labeled as terrorists.
I think you are adding something to this story, Certainly not what I wrote before, but I glad you're not running the country.
Or rather the original poster was leaving something crucial out. Its deceptive of them not to use the correct analogy.
Unfortunately for you mana NZers are not morons and look at the facts presented before them rather than unsubstantiated rhetoric.
This is why this whole affair is turning out rather badly for the activist community and certain maori mp's. When you have police evidence being made public of plans to kill and bomb its kinda hard to portray the accused's as innocent.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...
Unfortunately for you mana NZers are not morons and look at the facts presented before them rather than unsubstantiated rhetoric.
I agree & disagree with you on this anon, some nzers are morons, take the morons that put together the TSA. Take the morons that raided Ruatoki, if they checked the evidence out with the AG or SG they wouldn't be the centre of attention right now, would they. Plus the the 16 + 1 stoner (thanks Tim) not sure if I should add them here, because there maori + 1... but their you have it. Now what facts have you seen anon? that caller 1 & caller 2 write up, that classes them as terrorist in your book? Sorry I need more to be convinced, why is that wrong? I don't want to be 35% sure anon, I want to be 100% sure. But you no, it really doesn't matter, at the end of the day theirs no law, that holds them accountable for an offence, at least not a TSA offence. You can blame that on the Morons that wrote it.
This is why this whole affair is turning out rather badly for the activist community and certain maori mp's. When you have police evidence being made public of plans to kill and bomb its kinda hard to portray the accused's as innocent.
Here I think you're over-reacting somewhat anon, it maybe from Media hype, so take a deep breath and look at the transcripts of the bugged phone calls again, it's not a plan, A plan is typically a procedure used to achieve an objective. If the callers said shit like 2.30pm I will pick up the gun for keys, you must bring the molotov cocktails at 3.00pm, now thats a plan, but we have some dreamers talking about killing the PM, not planning it. I am just unsure how there shit talk is a plan. Shit I wanted to kill Winston Peters when he said that us Maori's, come from the Zoot Su tribe in Northern China, does that now make me a terrorist or did I just plan his assassination. But all of this has done one thing for the activist community, if you watch the news you'll see it. Unity.
Where did this leak come from?
If nobody knows, you might as well consider it a work of fiction.
! anonymouse!
If you are representative of the activists supporters Mana I like the way you think.
The most important arena that this is to be played out is not the court room but in the media battling for public opinion.
The way you keep on insisting that the accused were engaged in nothing but wholesome fun and frolics in the wilds of tuhoe will contrast nicely with the release of police surveillance evidence.
It is these kinds of bald assertions, contrary to presented fact, which will discredit the maori independence movement and the activist communities in the eyes of middle nz and encourage politicians to give the police and sis additional powers. Bomber was correct when he said that if the allegations were true then it would hand the right a victory through fear.
Therefore I can only hope that you and your supporters carry on with this strategy.
Mana wrote
"yet please post up some links for me as to where the Activist or the defence council requested the evidence suppressed, other Anons have used this line failed to provide this proof before; "
http://www.stuff.co.nz/timaruherald/4258019a6432.html
"Much of the morning had been taken up discussion over whether media and film and photograph in court, a move that is opposed my many of the lawyers representing the 17 accused.
The Crown has taken the unprecedented stance of supporting the media's right to photograph and cover the entire hearing, with lawyer Ross Burns saying it had come under criticism for holding some earlier hearings in private.
Because of "the real and genuine interest" in the charges, it wanted all future hearings to be held in open."
Mana wrote
"yet please post up some links for me as to where the Activist or the defence council requested the evidence suppressed, other Anons have used this line failed to provide this proof before; "
http://www.stuff.co.nz/timaruherald/4258019a6432.html
"Much of the morning had been taken up discussion over whether media and film and photograph in court, a move that is opposed my many of the lawyers representing the 17 accused.
The Crown has taken the unprecedented stance of supporting the media's right to photograph and cover the entire hearing, with lawyer Ross Burns saying it had come under criticism for holding some earlier hearings in private.
Because of "the real and genuine interest" in the charges, it wanted all future hearings to be held in open."
LOL, Oh Anon "N" tried this exact same path, the same link and all, it unfolded like this;
The "N" SPEECH http://www.stuff.co.nz/timaruherald/4258019a6432.html
Snippet "Much of the morning had been taken up discussion over whether media and film and photograph in court, a move that is opposed my many of the lawyers representing the 17 accused. The Crown has taken the unprecedented stance of supporting the media's right to photograph and cover the entire hearing, with lawyer Ross Burns saying it had come under criticism for holding some earlier hearings in private.
Because of "the real and genuine interest" in the charges, it wanted all future hearings to be held in open."
I'll put this in caps for you so I am clear ok, don't want you to think I am excited: WHERE DOES IT SAY THE ACTIVIST OR THERE LAWYERS WANTED IT HIDDEN? until the lifting of the name suppression the DC Judges and Justice system made all appearances closed, with the suppression of everything (not names) including bail and the reasons why bail was denied, yet I didn't see where Ms Sykes or Moana Jackson said anything about private trials.
"N" Continued So in summary for your Mana it appears that the crown wanted open justice and for the public to be able to see the evidence, the Defense wanted hidden secret court hearings with the public not allowed to know what was happening.
Oh I see now, you summed this up yourself and now you want it to be made gospel, "N" this is your version; If the crown wanted open justice why did they suppress the reason why bail was declined? does not sound very open to me
"N" Continued Which is kinda ironic given the hysteria coming from Indymedia over hidden secret trials when its actually the activists who want it hidden.
Still your assuming right? because theres nothing in that link that says Activist wanted hidden trials, yet theirs proof to show that the crown, DC court system had closed court hearing for the accused, does seem a little ironic.
So Anon if we are all running down the same street on this one, let be specific, in the link you provided where does it say the defence council or the Activist made application to oppose open court?
Anonymous said...
If you are representative of the activists supporters Mana I like the way you think.
The most important arena that this is to be played out is not the court room but in the media battling for public opinion.
The way you keep on insisting that the accused were engaged in nothing but wholesome fun and frolics in the wilds of tuhoe will contrast nicely with the release of police surveillance evidence.
It is these kinds of bald assertions, contrary to presented fact, which will discredit the maori independence movement and the activist communities in the eyes of middle nz and encourage politicians to give the police and sis additional powers. Bomber was correct when he said that if the allegations were true then it would hand the right a victory through fear.
Therefore I can only hope that you and your supporters carry on with this strategy.
Tumeke indeed Anon, thanks, I do believe the 16 + 1 stoner (thanks Tim) where Dreamers, with a side order of Dumb Ass, but thanks
Umm Mana It appears you haven't read the article that you commented on. It says the following:
"The lawyers, Charl Hirschfeldt and Kahungunu Barron-Afeaki, objected to Judge Trestons ruling and said they would be seeking a judicial review in the High Court."
The ruling is having the media cover the trial in the courtroom.
Do you suffer from reading difficulties or do you have comprehension issues? It states quite clearly in black and white what they are appealing against.
As an aside I think the accused should get new counsel as the ones they have appear to be incompetent. Judicial review can only be used to review decisions of the executive branch of govnt not the judiciary.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
Umm Mana It appears you haven't read the article that you commented on.
Well anon I this it comes down to interpretations, I fail to see how not wanting the media into the court area, while evidence it still being looked at, (no charges laid) was suppression of evidence, if you believe it was, thats you're prerogative anon, truely it was the rights of the accused and defence council to see the evidence before the public, to enable the "right to a fair trial" I some what agree, the public should know, but only in my opinion, not before the defence council or not while investigation of the evidence was pending.
Judicial review can only be used to review decisions of the executive branch of govnt not the judiciary.
This is not correct, it can be done, I successfully brought through a Judicial View for a DC Judiciary decision made in Manukau; which I had over turned in the High court. I forget the formalities, but it can be done. Council Peter Kaye file my application and was approved.
Mana
Your interpretation is wrong because it is in direct contravention of what was said in the article. Are you telling me that the defense lawyers were lying to the judge when they didn't want the media to be in the court because that is what your interpretation goes toward.
You clearly either don't know what judicial review is or you have mistaken review for making an appeal against a decision of a lower court.
The paramenters for the jurisdiction of judicial review are very clearly set out. They only only extend toward decisions of the executive or bodies exercising a public function and only review the process and not the actual substance of the decision. Therefore decisions of the court are not open to review.
i know how easy it is to get confused with this type of thing mana.
My police force just spent over $8 million and all I got for christmas was 16 firearms offences
... and some of those look broken even before I've even got em out of the box ................
and they better call a bloody plumber .............. theres more leeks than at a welsh wedding
Anonymous said...
Mana
Your interpretation is wrong because it is in direct contravention of what was said in the article. Are you telling me that the defense lawyers were lying to the judge when they didn't want the media to be in the court because that is what your interpretation goes toward.
Anon I believe your confused here a little, I never interpreted anything, I actual questions yours, if you missed it here it is again, please pay attention; I fail to see how not wanting the media into the court area, while evidence it still being looked at, (no charges laid) was suppression of evidence Now it is fact that no charges were laid (apart from procession of firearms) and it is fact that the SG was still considering the TSA charges, so were is my interpretation of this? my opinion was; i failed to see the comparison between not wanting the media in the court room and the suppression of evidence. Hey but thats just me anon.
You clearly either don't know what judicial review is or you have mistaken review for making an appeal against a decision of a lower court.
The paramenters for the jurisdiction of judicial review are very clearly set out. They only only extend toward decisions of the executive or bodies exercising a public function and only review the process and not the actual substance of the decision. Therefore decisions of the court are not open to review.
Anon you are right I don't know much about it as I used a lawyer at this time so here I suggest you ring this is lawyer Peter Kayes number 093033590 Vulcan Chambers in Auckland, you tell him, he doesn't know his job.
i know how easy it is to get confused with this type of thing mana.
If i am wrong I am wrong, I'll admit it. I will step back from it, asses it then learn from it... I don't believe I can you would do the same.
Better yet why don't you post the name of the case that you won your judicial review on. Its a very simple solution.
Obviously I would have to back down in the face of such overwhelming evidence.
But if not....
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...
Better yet why don't you post the name of the case that you won your judicial review on. Its a very simple solution.
Obviously I would have to back down in the face of such overwhelming evidence.
But if not....
It's just not enough for you is it anon, no, hence the reason why I said I don't believe you will do the same. Sorry anon not able to do that see the High Court suppression that case, in relation to registrar decision from the DC, case was in regards to infringements, but I assume the next reply will say I am lying, yet you wont pick the phone and call the lawyer that put forth the review, so I will leave it up to your discretion. ghastly thought that though. Do lets us know how you get on anon, I am just starting to realise, how important, these little things, are to little minds.
"My police force just spent over $8 million and all I got for christmas was 16 firearms offences"
Your police force?
Dole bludgers don't pay taxes.
.......... oh dear it seems like more of those firearms charges are broken than I thought ............
..........apperently its a hell of an expensive business getting firearms convictions .....
.....worth their weight in gold they are.
or millions of dollars each by the time we 'throw out' the broken ones
NO PEACE ACTIVIST - NO SOCIAL JUSTICE ACTIVIST HAS ANY RIGHT TO PICK UP A GUN IN NZ!
Activists should have the same right to pick up a gun as any gun club member or wild pig (not the blue variety) hunter. Just because an activist picks up a gun, it doesn’t mean they are using that gun for their activism.
It's interesting how Mana like to make these grandiose claims yet in the end comes up with no proof to back them up.
This is why I suspect you're lying Mana.
It's very easy to sound like he knows something but when challenged he simply doesn't front up with anything real apart from a telephone number that anyone can get from google.
If he were to do this in the real world then he'd have fuck all credibility left.
show me the link to Peter kaye's number on the net then anon... would you like his mobile instead.... why don't you just call him. you so confident your right what holding you back?
heres Peter Kayes mobile as well 0212787707, good lawyer knows his stuff, just not according to you anon.
balls in your court now. Ill wait for your proof of getting Peter Kayes number of the net.
You're the one making the big claims here Mana. I've done nothing but ask you to substantiate and prove what you've said which you continually evade the issue and try to divert attention to other meaningless matters.
Wouldn't it would be easier to just tell the truth instead of trying to be the big man on campus? I wouldn't think anything less of you if you offered some honest comment but you have to insist that you're right because you've brought a case to the high court or whatever but you continually attempt to buttress your views through outright lying and half truths.
Didn't your parents ever tell you that honesty is the best policy. You're obviously intelligent enough but you'll never get a head in life through such blatant dishonesty. I sincerely hope you refrain from such practices in real life.
Its sad really.
Anonymous said...
You're the one making the big claims here Mana. I've done nothing but ask you to substantiate and prove what you've said which you continually evade the issue and try to divert attention to other meaningless matters.
Well anon you're dreaming again because you care to look at what i said, I said this: .......I forget the formalities, but it can be done. Council Peter Kaye file my application and was approved. Now you went on and on, mumbling some rubbish, then I said Anon you are right I don't know much about it as I used a lawyer at this time so here I suggest you ring this is lawyer Peter Kayes number 093033590 Vulcan Chambers in Auckland, you tell him, he doesn't know his job. so if you read what I said properly you will realise anon "I USED A LAWYER" So the best evidence is, (drum roll) the Lawyers contact details. Now as the big Anon hero that you ain't, you kept on telling me and all, that shit about to proving anything. Yet I have given you his mobile and office number, to call yourself. I realise now you couldn't debate the issue we started on, nooooo not anon, so you're working on this merit badge; yet to also missed the part where I said this anon. If I am wrong I am wrong, I'll admit it. I will step back from it and I will asses it, then I'll learn from it... I don't believe, you would do the same. Anon please get help or prozac
Wouldn't it would be easier to just tell the truth instead of trying to be the big man on campus? I wouldn't think anything less of you if you offered some honest comment but you have to insist that you're right because you've brought a case to the high court or whatever but you continually attempt to buttress your views through outright lying and half truths.
For what fucking reason would I have to lie about a court case? anon, hmmmmmm it's a court case anon, I think you're rather desperate for attention because you lost our debate about the 16 +1 (stoner) did you lose face over that debate.
Didn't your parents ever tell you that honesty is the best policy. You're obviously intelligent enough but you'll never get a head in life through such blatant dishonesty. I sincerely hope you refrain from such practices in real life.
Ah the not getting a head in life by blatant dishonesty speech, yes you should know all about that I am sure, speaking from experience are we?
Its sad really. but it will grow anon it will grow, remember either seek help or Prozac
Still waiting for the name of that court case.
Such a simple thing to provide to prove that you're telling the truth but no, its still beyond you.
Don't you want to prove me wrong by providing this one little detail.
anon are you truly that stupid? I guess so huh. Did you ring the number anon and find out Mana did actually give you Peter Kayes phone numbers and was to embarrassed to ask, because he may of been right about that as well.
I rang the numbers and can confirm they are Peter Kayes mobile phone number and the phone number at Vulcan Chambers where his office is. I think you're just bummed out, over your debate with Mana, in which he made you look pathetic, yes it did look pathetic for you anon and this is a weak ass attempt to save face, but actually it makes you look even more stupid than before anon. Thats my opinion, are you getting use to looking so stupid. then carry on.
I realise you might not understand this anon. you should just turn the pc off bud, you're not doing yourself any justice here.
Marky Mark
Still waiting for the name of that case mana.
Nice of you to post under another name to once again try confuse the issue.
Can't blame you though. I'd do the same thing if I made grandiose claims which I couldn't prove and somebody called my bluff by challenging my to ante up actual proof.
mana, you should use this opportunity to learn from this experience mana that you don't have to lie to people to make a point.
shameful.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
There is a moment is ones life anon when you should just say "NO to drugs" this is one of them moments.
Mana silence is golden, they are not worth the energy.
CF
CF is right
Better to retreat now with your tail behind your legs with whatever dignity you have intact.
no no anon.. I said your not worth the energy, please quote me properly
CF
just another one of mana's alternate profiles.
It's getting weak mana, just like you.
sorry sunshine I ain't Mana you can go play you stupid game somewhere else. I have posted here as CF for near 7 months...
Yes I still think your not worth the energy, but I needed to set that fantasy of yours straight... will you grow up anon...
CF
Post a Comment
<< Home