Posts by Danyl Mclauchlan
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Revolution is the Mother that eats it's own children.
The above quote always leaps to mind whenever the subject of anarchy is raised - and a virtual chocolate fish to whoever can remind me who said it. I think I first read it in French, so that might be a clue.
-
Not this time though. The cops will have been very careful. Before listing the Terrorism Suppression Act on an application for a warrant, advice will have been sought not just from legal advisers, but senior lawyers at national headquarters, independent crown prosecutors, and crown counsel. They will have dissected the evidence, and the law.
The trouble with this argument is that its really not in the best interests of the various counsels involved to hamstring the police at this stage. If, say, the crown counsel decided their evidence wasn't robust enough and put the kibosh on the operation, and six weeks later an horrific attack occurred then the wrath of the nation, media and politicians would quickly descend on whatever group of lawyers made that call.
On the other hand, if it does transpire that our police and intelligence services have embarked on a gigantic boys adventure then blame will fall heavily on them, not the lawyers and judges that signed off on their various enterprises.
Do judges and senior lawyers think like that? I've no doubt some do - others might have put their faith in the various other actors in the drama ('whom am I to question an operation that's already been signed off by Crown Counsel?') Large groups of very smart people can and do make astoundingly silly decisions.
-
Who determines what is made public about the bail hearings? The crown, the police or the judge? They would presumably all have different motivations for not disclosing certain information. We may have unanswered questions at the moment but would this alleged secrecy have any negative or positive effect on the defense case?
I suspect the judge has much the same attitude towards this as the government - even if there is only a small chance that the police are correct it's still worth indulging them because the stakes are so high. If the judge releases someone on bail who then goes on to blow up a food court full of people the judicial system isn't going to look too flash. The judge also has the luxury of knowing that if it is all just an enormous blunder its the cops who will take the fall.
The HoS has a story in which Jamie Lockett claims his threats to wage war against the state were a joke he was playing because he knew the cops were monitoring his phone - this wouldn't have sounded very plausible to me a week ago but ever since the raids I've amused myself by phoning friends and starting conversations with 'terrorist napalm assassinate clark nuclear koran Tuhoe Hi its Danyl here', so who knows?
-
I rather suspect that Labour is actually pretty much hating this.
Ten weeks away from an election year in which Labour is facing a brutal contest with the Maori Party for one of their core demographics and the police decide to dress up as commandos and play solider in one of the heartlands of Maoridom? I think you might be right.
-
This is interesting:
(a) Maybe I just haven't noticed it before but the Herald have started to post videos of their interviews online - an interesting development as one of my only remaining reasons to watch TV news slips away.
(b) This interview is with Paul Buchanan (who presumably has some time on his hands) about the recent arrests. He suggests that the lack of involvement of the SAS counter-terrorist unit suggests that the police claims of terrorism are not terribly serious.
-
Didn't all that happen about eighteen months before Public Address enabled comments?
Nope, but don't let that stop you from forming a few theories of your own.
This irritated me enough to take a look back through PA System - which proved to have kicked off in November 06 some fourteen months after the Exclusive Brethren story broke. The threads about 'The Hollow Men' appear to be blissfully free of merc drivel.
I'm sure whatever imaginary arguments you made were very convincing.
-
Remembers last time being called a conspiracist here re. EB's and Brash, wonders why bothers to ask genuine question at all
Didn't all that happen about eighteen months before Public Address enabled comments?
It's striking how similar the rhetoric employed by guys like James George and the various left-activists who've popped out of the woodwork over the last few days is to that of the various right-wing nutters dotted around New Zealands blogo-sphere - the absolute contempt for anyone that doesn't buy into their fragmented and delusional worldviews is identical.
It must be very exhausting being the only one who knows the truth alone in a world filled with deluded sheep.
-
Neil, the bathroom's free, unlike the country under the current Thatcherite junta
Lockett sounds like a pretty crazy guy and I'm glad the police are taking an interest in his activities - but one could say the same about d4j who also appears to have attracted his fair share of police curiosity over the years. I don't imagine d4j to be a 'terrorist threat' and I also have trouble imagining Lockett to be much of a danger to the ongoing stability of the state.
-
* "I'm training up to be a vicious, dangerous commando"
* "White men are going to die in this country"
* "I'm at war. I'm declaring war on this country very soon"
The Herald are running the above 'chilling' quotes from Jamie Lockett - perhaps they'd be a little more frightening if I hadn't been reading kiwiblog for such a long time and grown accustomed to nutters like Redbaiter and Dad4Justice promising civil war and oceans of blood.
-
Te Quaeda
Heh. I'm gonna use that.