Hard News: The Disingenuous Press
366 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 7 8 9 10 11 … 15 Newer→ Last
-
Danyl on the police announcement of insufficient evidence to investigate:
Really anything could have happened out there: all the police had to go on was TV footage from both networks, photographic evidence, parliamentary security cameras and dozens of eye-witnesses including members of the DPS. How Dr Norman’s flag went from in his hand to being trampled underfoot by the Chinese security forces will just have to remain a mystery for the ages.
-
The Standard has the official Chinese media release and transcripts of McCully from this morning's Q& A - worth a read if you want to see what craven toadying looks like.
When the delegation arrived at the entrance of the parliament building in Wellington Friday noon, it was hostilely harassed by a New Zealand demonstrator within close distance.
The demonstrator’s behavior posed a threat to the security and dignity of the delegation, and far exceeded the boundaries of the freedom of speech and freedom of assembly.
and
MURRAY Well look I've only seen the media reports of it, but I find it massively disappointing. Of course we have freedom of speech in New Zealand, but that doesn’t mean we have to use that freedom of speech to cause offence to people, particularly to overseas visitors. It seemed to me that what Dr Norman was doing was calculated to give offence to the Chinese Vice President who's an important overseas visitor. It seemed to me that he abused parliamentary privilege, because he was in a situation where no member of the public could have placed themselves, and so it was only his role as a Member of Parliament that enabled him to do so. When we have differences of views with other countries, and we do frequently, I think it's important that we express those views in a way that is respectful and courteous. That’s what we do on a regular basis. The other political parties in our parliament do understand this, we work together to promote New Zealand's interests internationally, and particularly in the area of trade.
GUYON Sure but is it okay Minister for a Chinese security guard to manhandle a New Zealand parliamentarian on the forecourt of parliament?
MURRAY Yeah I'm not gonna buy into what actually happened there, because as I say I've only seen the media reports and there's a process I guess under way in New Zealand involving the police and others to ascertain who was to blame for that. What I'm saying is that Dr Norman shouldn’t have actually been in that situation in the first place, if he'd have shown good judgement, and if he'd have put New Zealand's interests to the fore.
-
Hah, brilliant follow-up from Danyl:
Foreign Minister Murray McCully has been severely reprimanded by Chinese Ambassador Zhang Limin for exercising poor judgement when using his Ministerial credit card, the Chinese Embassy announced today.
Previously Prime Minister John Key has defended McCully’s $2000 laundry bill and high alcohol expenditure but the Chinese Ambassador has overruled Key’s position, calling McCully’s spending ‘unseemly and non-magnificent’, and issuing a formal reprimand of the Foreign Minister.
‘We feel the Minister’s level of decadence is inappropriate and counter-revolutionary,’ the Ambassador announced. ‘This behaviour is not acceptable from Party functionaries and will not be tolerated.’
-
The demonstrator’s behavior posed a threat to the security and dignity of the delegation, and far exceeded the boundaries of the freedom of speech and freedom of assembly.
Give these types an inch and they'll viciously thrust their groin into some hapless goon's knee.
When Bush the lesser addressed a joint sitting of the two Houses of the Federal Parliament in Canberra in October 2003, Green Senators Bob Brown and Kerrie Nettle wore signs calling for the release of the two Australians held at Guantanamo. Brown interjected during Bush's address, and although he later shook the preznit's hand the speaker of the house, Neil Andrew, used his powers to "name" Brown and Nettle, effectively suspending them from Parliament for the next 24 hours. This prevented Brown from being present during a similar address by Chinese President Hu Jintao the next day, where he'd openly announced that he intended to display the Tibetan flag.
-
Danyl on the police announcement of insufficient evidence to investigate:
Dude's on fire right now.
-
Hah, brilliant follow-up from Danyl:
DPF is in the habit of linking Danyl's satire more often than not. Wonder what the Kiwiblog types will make of that one...
-
As distasteful as I find the lack of action on the behaviour exhibited against Norman, people seem to be ignoring this part of the police comment: “Within the timeframes available to us police have decided there is insufficient evidence to substantiate any assault charges at this time.”
Do people actually expect the Police to determine the validity of charges, bring charges (over a weekend), get court orders to hold foreign security personnel at the border, and do it all in two days? The delegation was only here for three days, remember. We live in a nation where the rule of law includes due process. That means that holding people at the border requires presenting evidence to a judge sufficient to justify a warrant for arrest, and assembling that evidence takes time. This is not China, this is New Zealand. To achieve the required standard of evidence in under two days would be pushing the boundaries of reality to the very limits. The Police have taken a pragmatic view of the available time against the severity of the charges. It's common assault, not attempted murder. Get some fucking perspective before ragging on people who have severe constraints of time and law within which to operate.
-
Of course we have freedom of speech in New Zealand, but that doesn’t mean we have to use that freedom of speech to cause offence to people, particularly to overseas visitors.
This is the "freedom of speech until it actually starts to mean something" theory. It's a little read footnote in the BORA I think.
-
Kyle, I believe it's otherwise known as the "anti-Beatrice Hall" (the real author of the oft-misattributed quote I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.) philosophy.
-
The Police have taken a pragmatic view of the available time against the severity of the charges. It's common assault, not attempted murder. Get some fucking perspective before ragging on people who have severe constraints of time and law within which to operate.
Ah yes, you mean like the "pragmatic view" the Police took that properly investigating and prosecuting alleged breeches of election law on the part of National and Labour was a distraction from "real crime"?
Snark aside, you've made a reasonable and well-expressed point of general principle but do try and grok my perspective here. The Chinese are entitled to due process, but Norman is equally as entitled as everyone else to having his right not to be assaulted respected. And I'd prefer that the Police actually take every "common assault" complaint incredibly seriously. (I'd also note the little irony that the Police have been vocally demanding increased penalties for any assault on a police officer.) Foreign politicians and diplomats also need to be reminded that in this country they can't just break OUR laws at will, and blatantly obstruct police investigations. Diplomatic immunity and state visits aren't an open pass to do as you please.
To achieve the required standard of evidence in under two days would be pushing the boundaries of reality to the very limits.
Funny how in the last couple of weeks, we've seen the Police lay murder charges in under two days without news footage and a dozen eye witnesses. Just saying...
-
Craig, as I said, I would rather things not go this way. In a perfect world the Chinese officials in question would've been kept in NZ while events played out, been made available to the police for questioning, and been given the appropriate penalty (probably diversion, as would be fitting for the severity of the offence and their likely status as first-offenders) for their crime following on from a trial by jury: so, six-to-nine months from now, assuming no delaying tactics by their legal counsel.
However, it's not a perfect world. Their status as protection officers or diplomatic visitors complicates things. The fact that they left the country the next day (Saturday, not yesterday, as it turns out) complicates things. The delegation's obstruction of the investigation complicates things.To counter your "we've seen the Police lay murder charges in under two days", how hard was it for them to identify the murderer? Is it a contested charge? Did they have to contend with special status under NZ law? Was there potential to create a royal political shitstorm?
I agree that it stunk to high heaven that the police didn't investigate the election spending issue, but that's ancient history. They decided what they did, for whatever reason, and I would've called it far less a pragmatic decision than one strongly influenced by not wanting to shit in their own lunchbox.
-
Going upthread a little, I've compiled the curious facts of the PEDA story and wondered what on earth is wrong with the Herald.
-
It's common assault, not attempted murder
That it happened on Parliament's grounds against a serving Member "complicates things".
-
And for your entertainment, I recommend Matthew Hooten's essay in building a straw-man out of silage on Nine to Noon this morning.
-
That it happened on Parliament's grounds against a serving Member "complicates things".
Not in terms of the crime committed, though. There's no "Assault on a Member of Parliament" crime, or an "Assault within the precincts of Parliament" crime. It's complicated by the role of the Speaker of the House, but not by the location and victim changing the crime.
-
Matthew, I mean that it would be much less likely to draw a serious investigation if it were protestors in the street roughed up by visiting security staff. I don't think that's controversial to say, is it?
-
Ah. No, I don't think that's controversial. Sad? Yes. Damning? Yes. Controversial? Not so much.
-
NZPA picks up story of Key apologising to the Chinese.
Foreign Affairs Minister Murray McCully was critical of Dr Norman's action and last night told The New Zealand Herald that Mr Key had telephoned the most senior minister in the visiting Chinese delegation to apologise on Friday night.
He "conveyed his regret that there had been this encounter and expressed the hope that it had not unduly affected what has been a very positive visit," Mr McCully said.
Like many stories, it also fails to qualify the Police's response with "in the time available", making it seem that there was just no evidence of any wrongdoing.
-
Going upthread a little, I've compiled the curious facts of the PEDA story and wondered what on earth is wrong with the Herald.
Editorially and in its opinion pieces the Herald has always been the mouthpiece of the Northern Club, not the National party. Of course, there has always a big cross over between those two.
Generally though you used to be able to rely on the Herald to honestly cover the issues of the day in it's news sections. Those days are long gone. Over the last four-five years the Herald has begun to deliberately manipulate and slant it's general news coverage to the point where at times it is little more than a propaganda mouthpiece of the right wing of the National Party.
Interestingly, this descent into partisan mediocrity has almost completely coincided with the editorship of Tim Murphy. Murphy clearly has an agenda, and he clearly regards the Herald as his personal tool for pursuing that agenda. So my questions are these - who is Tim Murphy? What are his views on religion, politics and society? Why hasn't a magazine like Metro run the (un)authorised story of the man behind the paper?
-
Key apologising to the Chinese
Ick. I feel dirty by association, and I wouldn't vote for him if he were the only candidate in an election with mandatory polling.
-
Foreign Affairs Minister Murray McCully was critical of Dr Norman's action and last night told The New Zealand Herald that Mr Key had telephoned the most senior minister in the visiting Chinese delegation to apologise on Friday night.
He "conveyed his regret that there had been this encounter and expressed the hope that it had not unduly affected what has been a very positive visit," Mr McCully said.The two so-called New Zealanders (aka Gutless Fucks!) mentioned above (Key and McCully) do in no way represent the New Zealand I know or want to live in...
Was there fine print in that "Free Trade" deal we should know about? Obviously not the free and frank exchange of ideas between equals.
Shame on both of them (and English) for their siding with the Chinese - I have no respect for any of them and will actively engage to oust them from power at the next free and democratic (hopefully) election...
join me, act local... -
Why hasn't a magazine like Metro run the (un)authorised story of the man behind the paper?
Simple reason. He refuses to talk to any other media.
-
Then interview all those around him and dig out public records of his life - just like you'd expect journos to do with any subject unwilling to talk.
-
Colin Espiner comes down on the side of Russel Norman being out of line.
Strange how none of the many cameras there - both still and TV - managed to capture the so-called attack, or the flag trampling.
What they did capture, though, was an MP behaving in a way that no self-respecting member of Parliament with any dignity should behave.
Don't get me wrong. I fully support Russel Norman's right to have his say. This is a free country, unlike China.
But sometimes, I think the RIGHT to free speech and EXERCISING it are confused.
For example, I can walk down the street and tell someone I don't know that they're fat. I have that right. But to do so would be impolite and irresponsible.
One of the deals of having freedom is the responsibility that comes with it over how you use it.
-
Colin Espiner comes down on the side of Russel Norman being out of line.
in which he says...
The late Rod Donald maintained a silent but dignified protest against the Chinese when he held a Tibetan flag aloft at Parliament. He didn't make a scene.
well that's what Russel Norman was doing, too, until a flying phalanx of Chinese persons got all over him and pushed him back, creating a scene - Espiner seems to have signed up to the Key/McCully "China - Good, Kiwi rights - Bad" school of thought. shame on him and his Fearfacts masters, too...
and he should maybe realise that humour is not his strong suit:
I know it's fashionable to hate the Chinese, and everyone wants a free Tibet.
So much so you'd think they were handing them out in Weetbix packets.WTF!!??
Can't say I agree with his take on "its not appropriate for a politician to be a protester" either - I wonder what did Espiner had to say about the Gaza blockade busting attempt...
Post your response…
This topic is closed.