Waihopai’s only got one ball
Did anyone else see the photo below this morning and start humming this song?
Hat tip/photo credit: The Standard
Bookmark to:
84 Responses to “Waihopai’s only got one ball”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
April 30th, 2008 at 4:13 pm
Frog
So you endorse acts of mindless vandalism?
April 30th, 2008 at 4:14 pm
I would have described it as ‘inspired’ rather than ‘mindless’.
April 30th, 2008 at 4:21 pm
Ok…so you support inspired vandalism?
April 30th, 2008 at 4:26 pm
I think it is kind of similar to the ‘is some graffitti art?’ debate that we had a couple of months ago.
April 30th, 2008 at 4:29 pm
There is no justification for vandalism Frog, or is it OK when it is something to do with the USA?
April 30th, 2008 at 4:41 pm
Think you are on sticky wicket here frog. Support this vandalism and you cant complain if something the Greens think is important is deflated or abused.
There is no such thing as “good” vandalism. If you think something should be changed then change the law that protects that what you find distasteful, you do not vandalise.
Anarchy is the only result.
mmm maybe that would not be a bad thing. Where is the nearest Green party office? (said as an example NOT a threat)
It cuts both ways.
April 30th, 2008 at 4:52 pm
Heh! I haven’t justified anything yet. I’ve just played a few semantic games and had some fun at GCSB’s expense.
Let’s put it this way I am certainly not going to criticise important political civil action where the participants are aware of and accepting of the consequences that accompany their actions (i.e. Te Whiti, Ghandi, King…) I personally think that today’s action falls into that camp and so earns my respect rather than distain. If I get time I might post on this tomorrow.
April 30th, 2008 at 4:59 pm
So its OK if somebody burns down a “sacred” meeting place or kills a few snails in the name of “political civil action” ?
Careful Froggie, you red roots are starting to show through.
April 30th, 2008 at 5:01 pm
I also note that one of the accused was the “minder” for Zaoui.
Bet I know where the minder got his ideas from for this act of terrorism.
April 30th, 2008 at 5:08 pm
I would agree that there is no excuse for vandalism in a proper democracy. On the other hand, when something is built with our money, without our consent and which involves us in wars we haven’t agreed to be involved in, then I’d say damaging it may be necessary.
I certainly didn’t agree to having my tax dollars spent on the Waihopai base, and I’m happy for the Ploughshares group to damage my portion of it. So far as I can see building this thing was an act of mindless vandalism.
April 30th, 2008 at 5:16 pm
Good on them i say ! - save your righteous indignation for civilians killed in Bhagdad.
April 30th, 2008 at 5:19 pm
No thanks Haz, I prefer to save it for the victims of terror.
April 30th, 2008 at 5:20 pm
“Bet I know where the minder got his ideas from for this act of terrorism.”
Terrorism? Are you so easily terrified that three Christians with sickles damaging an inflatable dome fill you with terror? You poor thing…
April 30th, 2008 at 5:21 pm
Without surveillance by the state we wouldn’t have known what was going on in the Ureweras. Then there’s the possibility of external terrorism, but not everyone would find that a problem would they “Frog”.
April 30th, 2008 at 5:24 pm
Are you sure they are Christians Sam? that could be spin like “peace activist” or “ecologist” (some of those supporting the Urewera 17).
April 30th, 2008 at 5:26 pm
Sam
More concerned about where they got the idea from given the time they spent with the convicted terrorist Zaoui.
April 30th, 2008 at 5:38 pm
The more spies the better I say, it’s not knowing what’s going on is the problem.
I too don’t support vandalism.
Again this ain’t a Green issue so please ignore it and concentrate on environmental issues.
April 30th, 2008 at 5:39 pm
It’s vandalism. It’s no different from damaging a Marae just because you happen to disagree with the actions of Maori.
Send them the 30K bill.
April 30th, 2008 at 5:42 pm
Come off it Big Bro, the Ploughshares movement have been conducting these sorts of actions for years, a long time before Zaoui made it to NZ. Nor did I ever notice Zaoui advocating breaking in to military facilities and conducting prayers. Aren’t you just throwing up a red herring?
Yes, I am sure these are Christians. Dominican priests do tend to be Christians last I heard, and the Ploughshares movement has always been made up of commited Christians following the Dorothy Day, Jacques Ellul and Leo Tolstoy brand of Christian activism.
April 30th, 2008 at 5:43 pm
If you’re to the left of Chris trotter (in John Minto territory) vote Green) otherwise vote for another party (but not ACT). Unfortunately it looks like we’re stuck with the same old mob in the “Green” party.
April 30th, 2008 at 5:46 pm
“The more spies the better I say, it’s not knowing what’s going on is the problem.”
So why do you post under a pseudonym?
April 30th, 2008 at 5:47 pm
How about swapping BJ for Keith, Sue and/or Meteria?
April 30th, 2008 at 5:48 pm
That’s “Yanky boy”.
April 30th, 2008 at 5:53 pm
Love the audio link frog - not sure how many people under 40 will get it, but still very clever!
BB, Gerrit: some of the greatest leaders of the last century (Gandhi and Mandela spring to mind) have engaged in or promoted actions of civil disobedience . I believe there is a higher justice than the law of the land, especially when the law is unjust.
Where I draw the line is at physical violence that has the potential to harm individuals. BB, you have posted some time ago on this blog about having physically intervened when someone was abusing an animal, and acknowledged that your intervention may have broken the law.
I don’t have a problem with what happened at Waihopai. It has helped to draw attention to the surveillance society that we live in. Waihopai is not even in the interest of New Zealand security, but is in the interests of foreign powers who want to gather international intelligence against their perceive threats. The perceived threats of foreign powers may be Ahmed Zaoui, or they may be you or me BB.
Tell me, BB & Gerrit, if a communist or fascist dictator achieved political power in New Zealand, would you sit back and say “the law is sacrosanct”? Or would you actively resist, including civil disobedience.
Somehow, I suspect you would support an armed insurrection, which is futher than I would go with civil disobedience.
April 30th, 2008 at 5:54 pm
More BJ, less SB.
April 30th, 2008 at 5:56 pm
>>if a communist or fascist dictator achieved political power in New Zealand
What do you mean “if”?
April 30th, 2008 at 5:59 pm
BTW, some of those posting here say “I don’t support vandalism”, but in previous posts over time have said “I support [undeclared and even internationally illegal] war” - particularly in Afghanistan and Iraq.
How can you justify the double standard. Vandalism damages or destroys only property, war destroys lives and families. What is more important?
April 30th, 2008 at 6:03 pm
Toad, while I agree with much of what you say, I really think you should have a look at Mandela’s record before you praise him. He ran a bombing campaign and went on to sell arms to Indonesia (or at least try to) during the time they were occupying Timor Leste. Gandhi was pretty suspect too, his anti-violence ethos didn’t seem to apply to violence against women.
If you want examples of decency, try the ordinary people around you, don’t look to ‘great leaders’.
April 30th, 2008 at 6:05 pm
BP said: “What do you mean “ifâ€??
BP, I still understand there wil be an election in October or November. If it fails to occur, I’ll be on your side - as I believe will be the whole of the Green Party - demanding a free and fair election. As I would if it were corrupted Zimbabwe-style.
But to proclaim there is currently a communist or fascist dictatorship in NZ now is just plain ridiculous. You are not doing much for your credibility here.
April 30th, 2008 at 6:05 pm
A marae would be private property though, whereas the spy base was paid for with public money. Though obviously the public will pay for the repairs.
April 30th, 2008 at 6:07 pm
Toad (unwisely) said:
“Where I draw the line is at physical violence that has the potential to harm individuals. ”
except where it is Tama Iti and co… They were just having fun.
April 30th, 2008 at 6:08 pm
“>>if a communist or fascist dictator achieved political power in New Zealand
What do you mean “ifâ€??”
So you think the NZ government is communist and/or fascist, but think those who damage their surveillance systems are vandals? Would you have had Russian dissidents thrown into the gulags as well?
April 30th, 2008 at 6:11 pm
I wouldn’t compare their actions with Gandhi’s; Ghandi used passive resistance against rule by Great Britain. What’s more we don’t what these people think they may be like some of you: give them a few wines and they may turn red.
April 30th, 2008 at 6:17 pm
Sam Buchanan said: I really think you should have a look at Mandela’s record before you praise him. Gandhi was pretty suspect too…
Fair comment Sam.
I was really just trying to remind a couple of the more strident contributors here that people who are now widely acclaimed as great leaders of the last century who acted in the interests of their people had extensive involvement in civil disobedience.
I was not trying to suggest that they made no political errors or gave no succour to the oppression of people in other countries, or women in their own in the case of Gandhi.
We’re all products of our culture and upbringing, and because of this, we all have the potential to oppress those whom we do not understand.
April 30th, 2008 at 6:50 pm
toad
Perhaps I should have put a
alongside my post….
You know, one of those amusing half-truths. Like the Greens are an environmental party…..
April 30th, 2008 at 7:03 pm
jh said: except where it is Tama Iti and co… They were just having fun.
Let’s wait for the evidence to come out in Court before we comment too much on that one, jh.
Apart from noting that the Solicitor-General determined that there was insufficient evidence for charges to be laid under the Terrorism Suppression Act.
April 30th, 2008 at 7:41 pm
except that somebody put the police affidavit on line [words + context of meeting arrangements] and the Solicitor general blamed the law: they would have just about had to do it before they could be charged…. It’s history Toad (except for those who “will not see”). What was it that the Solicitor General said: the police acted appropriately in bring “some very disturbing activities to an end”. The Red Stump of the “Green” Party is being absolutely disgusting by smoke screening that sort of activity. “Shame on you all! Shame I say”
April 30th, 2008 at 7:56 pm
“…and Goebells had no balls at all!”
C’mon Winston. How come you’re not singing along to the tune with us?
April 30th, 2008 at 7:59 pm
the greens never claim to be only environmental, indeed it is probably rightwing people who are concerned about the environment that want to vote for them but don’t care about social issues that are annoyed.
or people that are pro capitalist, and want to pay for a few carbon credits and everything else continue as per usual, when our environmental problems stem from something much deeper.
Yay for those committed peace activists, who attacked the military comms base in Waihopai.
And for the dupe earlier - it is Tame, not Tama.
Why fall back on attacking Zaoui, Helen Clark and the SIS did that and failed, except it.
NZ doesn’t have troops in Iraq but it does have troops in the middle east and it does have the spy bases here.
Good on those who made a stand.
Kia Kaha.
April 30th, 2008 at 8:02 pm
also someone started a rightwing green party some time back, and it didnt get far, hence why the national party is trying to do the ‘bluegreens’ that has no policy and open aimed to try gain green voters to support them.
When Brash is still a climate skeptic and English might be, and Nick Smith slightly was and Key could be but knows it would be political suicide… you know National are as green as Solid Energy.
~
April 30th, 2008 at 8:06 pm
You know, one of those amusing half-truths. Like the Greens are an environmental party…..
why dont you read their policy.. http://www.greens.org.nz it is clear they are not a single issue party.
April 30th, 2008 at 8:23 pm
Nobody is asking for a rightwing green party, we are asking for a NOT leftwing one so that we can get on with working within the government (whoever they might be) towards a long term sustainable future. The broader the support for our environment the better I say
April 30th, 2008 at 8:24 pm
Previously I hadn’t thought of our small but persistently “loyal” group of frogblog detractors as “naiive and trusting”.
This time, however, their responses can’t be interpreted in any other way!
I have to wonder about how much they each really know about Waihopi and the Echelon system as a whole, and whether they are following in detail the behaviour of the USA (currently under the George Bush Administration) in the World as a whole.
I suggest that it is time to stop being naiive guys! Waihopi implicates us in “The War on Terror” and its shocking “double standards” and excesses … and in the imminent potential starvation of many of the World’s poor as land is deliberately diverted to grow crops for fuel.
Some of the material that passes through Waihopai (that NZ does not even see, much less “vet”) could implicate Aotearoa New Zealand in War Crimes, or Crimes Against Humanity. I for one do not want this for the victims, nor for my country, (and definitely not for my descendants to have to live with.)
My personal reaction to the news of the symbolic break in?
I have send a donation (of as much as I can afford) towards the court costs of the selfless “vandals”. They care about humanity as a whole, and are committed enough to make a stand that could result in prison sentences for themselves.
How many of us on frogblog would be willing to do as much for something we believed in?
April 30th, 2008 at 8:25 pm
treesoftomorrow Says:
April 30th, 2008 at 7:59 pm
the greens never claim to be only environmental,
………….
but they don’t mind green being on the outside.
April 30th, 2008 at 8:35 pm
eredwen
I’m sure you are correct, it’s just that I feel I can do more by concentrating on Green. If you have other priorities, good for you, but they aren’t Green core business.
April 30th, 2008 at 8:39 pm
Eredwen: would you indulge me in one of your “we should come here to learn and listen” admonishments?
April 30th, 2008 at 8:47 pm
Sam
You (and the other Greens) show a remarkable acceptance of this religious group the Ploughshares movement, what a pity that acceptance does not extend to the Exclusive Brethren.
Or is it just religious groups that speak out against the Greens that you want to persecute?
April 30th, 2008 at 8:50 pm
“Why fall back on attacking Zaoui”
Why not?, the man is a convicted terrorist who should not be allowed to stay in our country.
April 30th, 2008 at 8:52 pm
Eredwen
We SHOULD be playing a part in the war on terror, I am ashamed at the way our anti American govt and its coalition partners have once again let others do the work while we enjoy the relative safety of their efforts.
April 30th, 2008 at 9:00 pm
All this anti-Americanism. Have you ever been there? Talked to the people?
The last time when I was in Seattle, a left (well, democrat) web celeb, who you may well have heard of, came up to me and apologised for being American. “Don’t apologise to me, mate, I’m from New Zealand”.
We had a laugh….
There’s the same level of ignorance in the US as there is here, or anywhere else. We are all people, FFS. The ideals of the American people mirror our own.
I’ve also been to the middle east. The people are an entirely different kettle of fish. Dark and medieval as $%^&, especially in Saudi Arabia.
I’d put faith in the Americans. Miles ahead of the Middle East.
Just sayin’….
April 30th, 2008 at 9:23 pm
In the 1930’s, Hilter, Stalin, The Japanese Emporer amongst other, all partoke in “civil disobedience” to get what they wanted (ie did not bother to much with proper law and justice).
Guess there is “good” civil disobedience (vandalism) and “bad” civil disobedience eredwen, No?
Your interpretation of “good” vandalism will enable “bad” civil disobedience to prosper.
If skin heads desecrate jewish graves is that “good” civil disobedience? Most would say no. However in the skinheads view it is “good”.
And as such it will be tolerated because we have your example of “good” vandalism to act as a trendsetter.
As I said to frog, it is the start of anarchy. Which suited the likes of the later day despots like Pol Pot, Idi Amin and Mugabe.
Your blind eye to “good” vandalism will lead to “bad” vandalism.
April 30th, 2008 at 10:06 pm
$1 million damage? …………. user pay!
April 30th, 2008 at 10:16 pm
Rich daughter thanks wananga
12:00AM Saturday December 03, 2005
By Jon Stokes
Susan Cullen has generated a fortune through educational programmes. Picture / Alan Gibson
Companies owned by the daughter of Te Wananga o Aotearoa head Rongo Wetere earned more than $74.2 million in five years from contracts with the institution.
[donated (only) 70k to Maori Party]
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10358266
April 30th, 2008 at 10:34 pm
One of them knows Keith (Zhaoui supporter)! Small world
April 30th, 2008 at 10:40 pm
how many hungry beneficiaries would $1m feed; how many condoms (better still); how many lesbian herbal collectives would it help set up; how many DOC workers would it employ; how many Te Wananga o Aotearoa’s would it dissapear down? Eh!???
May 1st, 2008 at 12:22 am
Well bugger me. I didn’t realise that Waihopai was set up for the sole purpose of gathering intelegence for the Iraq war.
Isn’t it funny that the intelegence gathering of protesters is faultless, and the intelegence gathering of spies is always wrong.
Most of these protesters are just nut jobs who don’t really know what they are protesting about. They are the same people who spat on the Medics that went over to the first Gulf war, to help with the destruction of the WMD’s that Sadam had been killing his own people with.
Spying is all part of world politics people, get used to it.
And before you critisize intelegence agencies, think about this:
The CIA intelegence that was gathered prior to the Iraq war was all correct. It was the Bush administration that faked the intelegence. If the evil CIA spies were listened to, there would have been no war in Iraq. But then if there was no war in Iraq, the protesters would have to find some other cause.
I think it’s also funny how there are only so many anti spy comments in this post, and similar anti-war comments in the ANZAC day post, but there are only 3 comments about Nandor’s “Day of action on Zimbabwe”.
Is the reason for silence on Zimbabwe, because there is only one solution left for that problem? I can understand how some people take pride in protesting against an unjust war, but how do they justify turning their backs on the slaughter of innocent people who cannot protect themselves?
I guess it’s just easier to protest against an unjust war than it is to call for a just one.
May 1st, 2008 at 12:26 am
BluePeter - I couldn’t agree more about anti-Americanism, I have lived in the US now for 6 years so I have a pretty good understanding.
My girlfriend and I just got back from London and the dislike towards her (she is American) was outrageous. We are planing to move back to NZ in another year and I’m sure she is going to have to put up with all the stupid and ignorant NZ’r telling her they hate her. How can you hate someone you have never met.
If you are going to comment on US politics then hate the government not the people. I will say it very plainly and clearly the US is not a democracy like in NZ. When you vote in the US you have 2 choices and their isn’t any difference between the 2 parties. Most Americans have realized long ago that there vote doesn’t count, they are lucky if half the registered voters bother to vote. So since the American people don’t choose the government how can you blame them for what the government does.
The principals of the US its core founding values are wonderful, the founding documents are so well written and worded. Unfortonately the US has lost its way and has grown to become an empire the very symbol of what the founding fathers were fighting against.
In the presidential primaries there was one candidate who was talking about taking the US back to its founding principals I’m sure no one in NZ has a clue who he was, I’ll give you a hint he wasn’t a democrat.
May 1st, 2008 at 1:14 am
The New Zealand public have consistently voted for parties that form the majority of Parliament that support the maintenance of Waihopai base and the intelligence gathered and distributed through it. The Greens don’t, so it’s ok to vandalise something most of the public, by implication, have no problem with.
You can campaign against it, ask for people to vote for you to stop it - but you cease being civilised participants in liberal democracy when you decide to move from campaigns and protests, to destroying property. Many would like to destroy the property of serious violent or sexual criminals, but they can’t. If you cannot convince a government (and by implication the representatives of a majority of voters) to implement your policy, it is childish to simply destroy something because of its tenuous links to something you don’t like which is going on overseas.
Peace? Hardly, the Greens will endorse violence as a means of achieving political ends. To put this on a par with Te Whiti, Gandhi and King who didn’t vandalise, but protested peacefully denigrates what those men did do.
May 1st, 2008 at 8:02 am
For the record, Keith Locke has said “his party did not condone criminal acts” when interviewed by the NZ Herald, so libertyscott’s comments “The Greens don’t, so it’s ok to vandalise something most of the public, by implication, have no problem with” are way off beam.
As for your libertyscott’s comments “the Greens will endorse violence as a means of achieving political ends”. Non-violence is one of the four Charter Principles Green politics is based upon. When have you ever heard an New Zealand Green [big G] endorsing violence? Admittedly, there may be the odd nut-job in Green Parties overseas, but as far as the NZ Greens are concerned I suspect that anyone endorsing violence would face potential expulsion or at least a severe reprimand and be stripped of any spokesperson role.
The Greens want the Waihopai spy base closed (or at least used for domestic, rather than foreign, intelligence only). That doesn’t mean they support acts of vandalism to achieve this, any more than their support for self-determination for the Palestinian people means they must also support the actions of Palestinian suicide bombers.
You are implying, libertyscott, that if people agree on the end, then they must agree on the means. It is an illogical argument. In fact, BB, it is the same illogical argument that got Ahmed Zaoui designated as a terrorist. Just because his organisation shared the same political objectives as an Algerian terrorist organistion doesn’t mean he supports terrorist means of achieving those objectives.
May 1st, 2008 at 8:35 am
Yeah Toad, but they weren’t exactly damning it either. The words sounded very hollow to me. Play to the base on one hand, but don’t scare the horses, eh.
>>The Greens want the Waihopai spy base closed
We shouldn’t help our allies with intelligence gathering? Why ever not?
Intelligence gathering and spying has existed long before America was settled.
May 1st, 2008 at 9:08 am
You’d expect a green party to give greater priority (in terms of support) to green issues. It is a matter of collating the common green concerns amongst the general population, that’s where numbers lie.
This party is cynically shooting for 5% so it can get it’s leftist phonies to act as penny weights in the system.
May 1st, 2008 at 9:30 am
DugT. You have obviously done a great deal of research on the demographics of protestors. As a protestor myself, and one who does not fit your demographic at all, I would be interested to know where you got your data from. Could you please post a reference so those of us with an academic bent can examine it.
LibertyScott. Your last posting would follow quite logically if the hidden premise it is based on was true; namely that governments will listen to the people that represent them, and be persuaded by logical argument. Unfortunately this is not the case. Governments listen to power, not to ordinary people, and not even to genuine experts. The sow crates and battery hen debate is a case in point. Most ordinary people want them banned. All independent scientists with expertise in animal science say they are inhumane. The Regulations Review Committee says they are illegal. What does the government do. Is it persuaded by this consensus of common sense? No. It twists the truth, deliberatley lies, gives in threats by industry and continues to allow abusive practices. So I support direct action (legal or illegal) against animal abusers.
I would need more information before giving my support or opposition to Project Ploughshares, but my opinion would be based on the justness of their cause, not on whether it was illegal. Similarly with anyone who smashed Green party property. In that case I would oppose them not because what they are doing is illegal, but because of the nature of their cause.
May 1st, 2008 at 9:30 am
There are three types of greens which one are you.
Dreaming Green
( He is the guy who says oil is going to get more expensive but don’t
worry we are all going to be driving around in hydrogen fuel cell cars.
We need to cut down on CO2 emissions now, the trouble is he has been
saying “now” for at least the last 15 years and we haven’t cut it down,
I suspect if NZ was almost underwater from polar cap melt he would still
be standing around telling us we need to cut down on our CO2
emissions.)
Red Green
(She is not Green at all but could no longer get elected in the Alliance
so joined the green party. Is some sort of left over communist where
as most of the rest of us decided long ago that communism was a silly
idea the message never got through to her.)
Realist Green
(Thinks Oil is probably going to keep getting more expensive so we as a
country should start preparing by changing how we produce food and
generate power and transport ourselves around.
Global Climate change is also probably going to happen since the US
and China really aren’t going to cut back on thier CO2 emissions, what
effects will we see in NZ and how can we prepare in NZ.)
May 1st, 2008 at 9:44 am
Realists Greens are, unfortunately, few and far between. Where is BJ, BTW?
Red Green - they’ll deny it till the cows cow home, crack open a beer, and take up residence on your favourite chair, but this lot are firmly in control.
Dreaming Green - that would be the rest of the party….
May 1st, 2008 at 9:49 am
What is worse the Red Green cracks open one of your beers, which is why I sugest keeping a dozen ranfurly beers in the fridge just in case the red green comes over. What ever you do don’t let’em get his hands on ya Monteith’s.
May 1st, 2008 at 9:55 am
Indeed.
They’d first talk a good game about drinking only the beer of the people, but at the end of the night, all your Stella’s would be gone.
May 1st, 2008 at 10:11 am
Why would anyone admit to being one of the first two ’silly’ green-types…
May 1st, 2008 at 10:20 am
Funny how people always jump up with “anti-American” whenever the US government is criticised. It has as much relevence as if I accused all my critics of being “anti-male” or “anti-Pakeha” when they disagreed with me.
Actually I can’t recall meeting an American I didn’t like - I’m sure it has happened - but generally they seem a lovely bunch.
I’ve also been in the Middle East and I thought they were pretty nice too, though I haven’t been in Saudi Arabia, so I’ll have to take Blue Peter’s word for it that the people there (presumably he’s talking about the men) are “dark and medieval”. Stalwart US allies though, aren’t they?
LibertyScott - If the NZ government had come to the NZ population and asked “do you want to spend millions on a spybase to supply the US government with intelligence and that might intercept your communications if you are talking to overseas groups we deem dangerous” and a majority had said “yes”, you might have a point. As it is, the government doesn’t have a clear mandate for this operation.
“Te Whiti, Gandhi and King who didn’t vandalise,”
Gandhi and King were certainly into breaking the law, don’t know about anything you wopuld specifically call vandalism. Te Whiti’s people ploughed up roads, built fences over them and removed survey pegs. They were imprisoned for it, as was Te Whiti. How does this differ from what you call “vandalism”?
“You (and the other Greens) show a remarkable acceptance of this religious group the Ploughshares movement, what a pity that acceptance does not extend to the Exclusive Brethren.”
I’m a green, not a Green. And I don’t recall having any problem with the EBs, other than a few of them telling porkies while remaining anonymous.
“before you critisize intelegence agencies…”
Sorry Doug, can’t help it, but this reminds me of a funny story…
Some years back I was invited to join one of the embassy teams at Wellington’s annual diplomatic quiz night. I found myself sitting next to a team from the military and intelligence agencies as we both answered general knowledge questions.
Our team won, they came last.
May 1st, 2008 at 10:31 am
BB, you really have to get over the delusion that the Greens are somehow into ‘persecuting’ religious groups…
May 1st, 2008 at 10:56 am
Stephen
I have never said that the Greens persecute religious groups, they reserve their persecution for the EB and those who dare speak out against them, it seems to be a trait they have learned from Labour.
May 1st, 2008 at 11:15 am
Sorry, got myself muddled up there. The EB were not persecuted (as in oppressed or harrassed), but had plenty of attention drawn to their antics, which I don’t have a problem with.
May 1st, 2008 at 12:25 pm
THE PEOPLE - 1 - HELEN CLARK - 0
May 1st, 2008 at 1:21 pm
Got any plans to start persecuting Dominican priests, BB?
Anyway, just how is it theat the Greens supposedly persecuted the EB. A number of media releases critical of their actions is hardly persecution.
“…and Goebells had no balls at all!� C’mon Winston! You’re still not singing along to the tune with the rest of us?
May 1st, 2008 at 1:48 pm
Toad
“Got any plans to start persecuting Dominican priests, BB?”
Only those who give shelter to convicted terrorists.
May 1st, 2008 at 2:06 pm
Thanks Kiori1 & Sam Buchanan, you just proved a point for me.
You both took pieces out of what I said, and either rubbished or poked fun at them.
You conveniently left out the point about the CIA intel gathered pre Iraq war, so this time I’ll only highlight one of the points I made.
May 1st, 2008 at 2:19 pm
DougT -v the Greens said a lot about Zimbabwe when we thought we could make some difference - i.e. when there were still cricket tours that gave succour to the Mugabe regime, and neither the NZ Government or the ICC would stop them. But at the moment, there is not really they could do to get any leverage re that tragic situation.
However, Nandor was doing his best at the International Parliamentary Union meeeting in Cape Town a week or so ago.
May 1st, 2008 at 10:10 pm
I don’t disagee that trying a diplamatic approach is the best way to resolve any problem, but there has to come a time when you realise that diplomacy is not working.
While the international community debates about how to get Mugabe to listen to reason, he is preparing to murder more of his own people.
May 1st, 2008 at 10:46 pm
So what are the things that you protest about then Kiori1?
I am actually intersted to know.
May 2nd, 2008 at 10:10 am
Doug, if you are going to make anonymous uninformed and pointlessly abusive comments such as the following, don’t get in a huff if I don’t take you seriously.
“Most of these protesters are just nut jobs who don’t really know what they are protesting about. ”
“But then if there was no war in Iraq, the protesters would have to find some other cause.”
Who are you accusing of turning their backs on Zimbabwe? What do you actually know about what they are doing or not about this issue? What are you doing about it?
You’re damn right that the ‘international community’ shows little interest in the plight of the Zimbabwe people (if they had lots of oil things might be different), so why is this the fault of activists? Or are you one of those people who thinks that people who try and change things are required to work on every single one of the world’s problems or be accused of being hypocrites?
May 2nd, 2008 at 10:31 am
Yeah, “if there was no war”, then the sad fact is that there are PLENTY of other things to protest about. I’m sure the protestors would be very happy if there was no war.
May 2nd, 2008 at 2:12 pm
Maybe I was a bit out of line by using personal experience to label most protesters. I’ll admit that.
You are quick to call me uninfromed, but you also make comments that have absolutely no basis on fact.
When you talk about the military you seem to put across a point that the military is a pro war organisation bent on fighting.
But you conveniently leave out the mine clearing duties that our Army performed in places like Lebanon, or the humanitarian aid that the NZ Provincial Reconstruction Team does in Afganastan, or the peacekeeping deployments to East Timor.
Do you even acknowledge the good work that the NZDF has been doing?
Or would that take some of the the sting out of your dislike for the military.
What do I know about the situation in Zimbabwe? Well I know from talking to a former Zimbabwean that Mugabe vowed to force every white person out of Zimbabwe before he dies.
I also know that Mugabe was quoted with this little gem.
“This Hitler has only one objective: justice for his people, sovereignty for his people, recognition of the independence of his people and their rights over their resources. If that is Hitler, then let me be a Hitler tenfold.”
Does that sound like the kind of man who can be talked around?
I was really asking any of you if you thought that military intervention should ever be looked at as a way to bring peace back to Zimbabwe.
There already seems to be alot of support for the opposition, so there should be a lower likelyhood of continued unrest after ousting Mugabe. Unless Mugabe rolls over, there will most likely be a civil war, which could last much longer than if an organised military force was to step in.
I took it that the silence on the issue may be a sign that some of you do realise that military force may be a necessary evil in some cases, but didn’t want to admit it because it might make you look like a warmonger for saying so, and that someone like me might take that as some kind of endorsement for all war. I didn’t want to say that though, because I really don’t know the reasons for the silence on the issue.
May 2nd, 2008 at 3:25 pm
I’ve praised the NZDF for its mine-clearing and UXO work on several occasions. The air force does some search and rescue at times and fisheries protection, which is no bad thing, though it’s coastguard work rather than military work. I don’t actually think the NZDF (or the army at least, which is the branch I’ve had most contact with) is that bad a bunch.
I’m bothered when it is presented as heroic, noble, glorious, etc. and the negative sides of its history are ignored.
I didn’t ask what youi know about Zimbabwe, I asked what you knew about the people you accuse of ignoring the issue.
Unfortunately, I can well imagine it becoming necessary to use military force to boot Mugabe out. Can’t see how it will be done, considering neighbouring governments are still backing him and Western intervention is both unlikely and would probably be seen as colonialism by many, not only Mugabe’s supporters. Western governments haven’t exactly earned a great reputation for humanitarian intervention in Africa over the last couple of hundred years.
May 2nd, 2008 at 8:12 pm
Toad says:
“When have you ever heard an New Zealand Green [big G] endorsing violence?”
True but needing glasses when not wanting to see violence is the next best thing:
“Let’s wait for the evidence to come out in Court before we comment too much on that one, jh.
Apart from noting that the Solicitor-General determined that there was insufficient evidence for charges to be laid under the Terrorism Suppression Act.”
Chris Trotter and others of the left were convinced.
May 5th, 2008 at 3:53 pm
“Chris Trotter and others of the left were convinced.”
First time I’ve heard Chris Trotter thinking something presented as evidence of it being true!