Government hypocrisy

[awa355]

What a sorry piece of legislation. If this isn't justification for retaining the 3 year term nothing is.

A quote from one comment under the editorial.



" New Zealand's MP's have long believed that they are a law unto themselves and do not represent their electorates. Their sole task is to represent a Party and support their Party's policy while passing Laws the affect us all (no matter how much we the electors object).

Public Consultation means little under this system (in fact, it is an excuse for business interests to lobby hard for what is in their favour). Referenda are ignored.

The worst part is that when election time comes, one crook after another stands up, tells us that they are acting in our best interests, promises to listen- then we vote them in. They are no different from any of the others.

New Zealander's Rights have been whittled away by fly-by-night legislation (plenty of examples in the last decade). This is the latest one. "

What was it about the 'disabled' that required such secrecy?? Nationals greatest weapon is Labour, They have nothing to offer as an alternative.

I really dont know what the answer is.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz-government/news/article.cfm?c_id=144&objectid=10884930

[MSTRS]

A govt that would do this, as well as the disgusting SkyCity deal is out of control. Couple that to a prime minister (and lackeys) who will stand in front of us and tell us fracking is safe....I for one despair. There is no viable alternative to these pricks.
*seriously thinking of deserting the sinking ship*

[kevie]

Yep and next election what will the people of NZ do >>>>>>>> vote the same party back in again ..... i really believe the populous of voters here have effectively been brainwashed over the generations to believe national and Labors lie that "a vote for a minor party is a wasted vote"

I always ask ...... what makes a major party??????? i recon it is simply ......... the number of votes they get, nzers get sick of Nats so vote labor, sick of labor and replace them with nat ... and repeat the process every election....... i always tell friends, if there's a nationwide swing to minor party(s) then Nat and labor would possibly become ..... minor parties cos they may not get the threshold of votes.

time for nzers to return to the 50-60s and grow the balls to stand up and defend this nation,

I had labor guy come to my door last election to tell me how Labor is the party I should vote for...... i told him go away .... rally his party together and get the old documentation out and look at why the party was formed ..... not for the rich mates you (like nats) are looking after, but you were formed for the low class working family's of nz
Told him if they got back to what they should be ... then I will listen to what he has to say.

Only party that is attracting my attention at present is the new Conservative party..... worth looking at their site http://www.conservativeparty.org.nz/

[madandy]

David Shearer led Labour probably will become a minor party next election if Greens party attract more traditional red voters...

[mashman]

I really dont know what the answer is.

This is typical of economically focused governments that are becoming the norm across the globe. Forget the people, think about what will happen to the economy.

I've got an answer.

Repost (http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/140713-Stupid-World?p=1130548395#post1130548395) (albeit using slightly different words)


There is no viable alternative to these pricks.
*seriously thinking of deserting the sinking ship*

Bullshit. there's always an alternative! Don't leave, it's pointless. I came to NZ for very similar reasons, sick of the bullshit yadda yadda yadda and what did I find. Same 2 party politics with fuck all to do other than shift budgets from one populist policy to the next, year in year out, election in election out.

Instead of deserting the sinking ship. Perhaps you could help to build "mine" (ours)? 18 months and counting :blip:


Yep and next election what will the people of NZ do >>>>>>>> vote the same party back in again ..... i really believe the populous of voters here have effectively been brainwashed over the generations to believe national and Labors lie that "a vote for a minor party is a wasted vote"

I always ask ...... what makes a major party??????? i recon it is simply ......... the number of votes they get, nzers get sick of Nats so vote labor, sick of labor and replace them with nat ... and repeat the process every election....... i always tell friends, if there's a nationwide swing to minor party(s) then Nat and labor would possibly become ..... minor parties cos they may not get the threshold of votes.


Honestly. If the minor party's really wanted to make that much of a difference to the current system then they would have. They'd stick their heads together and short of a few different policy's for their flag carrying members, they'd give TPTB something to think about. The unfortunate thing is that the minority party's will have the same budget, the same country's to deal with, the same businesses in the country, the same financial system with the same rules etc... You just have to look at those who vehemently deny the Greens on the basis that they are environmental loons without any financial nouse. What chance do the other party's have?

You're right though, they have been brainwashed.

[scissorhands]

fuck the nasty party

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRGGbyZzuTg

[Swoop]

Nothing new with the news that MP's do not represent their electorate.


A psycologist mate explains it as:

1st year in, after the election = kick you in the balls.
2nd year = pick you up off of the floor.
3rd year = dust you off and tell you how great you are.
Then we are back to an election...

The ONLY time you have any form of control over your MP is close to an election. Lobby them HARD at that time.

[oneofsix]

David Shearer led Labour probably will become a minor party next election if Greens party attract more traditional red voters...

Labour and Nationals have both been minor parties for several elections now, just that people keep believing the media's simplification of the situation. As to the Greens they are becoming as corrupt in their policies as the others. Still real corruption is with the Nats with their lies and sell outs but they will still get enough votes to be able to shop around for partners to keep them in power, and this is where the duplicity of the "minor" parties shines through as they sell out their ideals to get a slice of the treasury benches.

But don't mention protest because then all the ney say will come out of the wood work to tell you how it would work and how you will never get enough people etc, funny how they are so afraid of something that supposedly wont work, are they afraid kiwis might grow a backbone and try to keep the Govt honest? It's ok the Nats will just pass a law like the maritime one, no protests within 200km of Parliament:bleh:.

[scissorhands]

hipocracy

is that a hippo who smoked some synthetic cannabis?

[MisterD]

fuck the nasty party

Don't worry, with Shearer as leader, they're doing it to themselves.

[Genestho]

Nothing new with the news that MP's do not represent their electorate.



The ONLY time you have any form of control over your MP is close to an election. Lobby them HARD at that time.

True story, and.. if it looks like the opposition has a good chance of getting in, lobby them HARD too... :msn-wink:

Something else I firmly believe is that if you're interested in your country then get involved, read legislation proposals and make submissions towards them, it's there where you find what's being put through.

Although general public won't and that's where any party or policy has the edge over a lot of its voters.

[MisterD]

If this isn't justification for retaining the 3 year term nothing is.


The point about 3 versus 4 years is that governments hardly ever get voted out after three years, so we end up with a defacto 6 year term.

If National were truly as awful as you hyperventilating lefties make out, they'd have been dumped after a first 4-year term.

[oneofsix]

The point about 3 versus 4 years is that governments hardly ever get voted out after three years, so we end up with a defacto 6 year term.

If National were truly as awful as you hyperventilating lefties make out, they'd have been dumped after a first 4-year term.

No they wouldn't. People were still talking Anti-Helen in the fourth year and so would have still given them a defacto 8 year term. Their asset sales and other stuff they were always going to do in term 2 would have still not have happened so term 2 would have happened. Your best hope is you would save ONE year, they would stand less chance of a third term and the opposition would have an extra 2 years to regroup however since MMP the weakening "major party" and the more minnows they have to do deal with is what eventually loses them the election. The likes of Dunn, Peters, and minor parties have brought down more Govts. than either Labour or National in opposition.

[mashman]

The ONLY time you have any form of control over your MP is close to an election. Lobby them HARD at that time.

Then once the election is over they can ignore anything they were lobbied for in the first place, coz they know that those minority who give a shit about the broken promises don't actually matter unless you're fighting a tight electorate. Even at that those who lobbied would likely be dyed in the wool in one colour or another. Just to be clear coz there's so many negative fuckstains on KB, I'm not saying don't try, just don't get yer knickers in a twist if you lose something whilst supposedly gaining something else.

[MisterD]

No they wouldn't. People were still talking Anti-Helen in the fourth year and so would have still given them a defacto 8 year term.

Which is possibly true, but that's a lot to do with how despised Clark was after her three terms...

[oneofsix]

Which is possibly true, but that's a lot to do with how despised Clark was after her three terms...

yeah and look what they got in her place. She might have been considered as interfering in their "private lives" but now they got corrupt lying buggers trying to control their private lives. :laugh:

[MisterD]

yeah and look what they got in her place. She might have been considered as interfering in their "private lives" but now they got corrupt lying buggers trying to control their private lives. :laugh:

Could you give an example of how this government is trying to control your private life? I'm quite prepared, as a Libertarian-minded type, to concede that they've been unnecessarily nanny-ish in a few areas, like driving with cellphones but I don't feel they've curtailled my freedom in a way that the Electoral Finance Bill did.

[scissorhands]

those anti-homo, shawl wearing, bible bashing christian talebanners, had a lot to do with the helen-hate

[Hitcher]

Rise up people. And not just against this government, against any government.

Start by deciding your priorities and a framework to discuss these. Then ask the political parties to outline how they think those priorities should best be delivered. Then vote for the party that you think offers the best solutions to delivering what you, the community, has decided needs to be done.

If not, you'll just continue to get bullied by a bunch of people who are only interested in themselves. I think they're called "politicians". Remember too that under MMP many of them have not been voted in by electors -- all of the Green Party and NZ First's MPs, for instance.

Rise up. Have your say.

[Genestho]

Rise up people. And not just against this government, against any government.

Start by deciding your priorities and a framework to discuss these. Then ask the political parties to outline how they think those priorities should best be delivered. Then vote for the party that you think offers the best solutions to delivering what you, the community, has decided needs to be done.

If not, you'll just continue to get bullied by a bunch of people who are only interested in themselves. I think they're called "politicians". Remember too that under MMP many of them have not been voted in by electors -- all of the Green Party and NZ First's MPs, for instance.

Rise up. Have your say.

This +1. :first: Get involved or keep on whinging, the choice is ours!!!!

[MisterD]

those anti-homo, shawl wearing, bible bashing christian talebanners, had a lot to do with the helen-hate

If you recall, the pamphlet that a group of businessmen, who happened to belong to the same church, produced was anti-Green. The nicely orchestrated outrage between media and lefty politicians carefully avoided that it was factually correct in every way.

Anyhoo, why is it that conservative Christian types involved in politics is bad, but it's ok for politicians to fawn all over Ratana and the votes they bring?

[oneofsix]

Could you give an example of how this government is trying to control your private life? I'm quite prepared, as a Libertarian-minded type, to concede that they've been unnecessarily nanny-ish in a few areas, like driving with cellphones but I don't feel they've curtailled my freedom in a way that the Electoral Finance Bill did.

the control and interfering may be the wrong way round but I would bet the nats interfering will end up more controlling. GCSB is one that will bite, control your having a say when you disagree.
As to the Electoral Finance bill I would like to know who is finance whom before I vote. Cellphones whilst driving should be banned and not just handhelds elther, mind on the driving not on the mistresses undies please.
Personal policy is to vote them out. One term only then all change please. The damage always starts in the second term and gets real bad by term 3.

[scissorhands]

This +1. :first: Get involved or keep on whinging, the choice is ours!!!!

naaa.... I'm going to give up and live on Akzle's farm, lose the interweb, lose society, and gain a REAL life away from all these pricks:niceone:

[scumdog]

naaa.... I'm going to give up and live on Akzle's farm, lose the interweb, lose society, and gain a REAL life away from all these pricks:niceone:

NOW you're talkin':banana:

[Banditbandit]

Could you give an example of how this government is trying to control your private life? I'm quite prepared, as a Libertarian-minded type, to concede that they've been unnecessarily nanny-ish in a few areas, like driving with cellphones but I don't feel they've curtailled my freedom in a way that the Electoral Finance Bill did.

Pray tell ... just how did the Electroral Finance Bill curtail your freedom??? It certainly never impacted on your freedom of speech.

It would seem to me that laws stoppping you using your cellphone while driving did more to remove a Freedom than that bill.

Isn't "being unnecessarily nanny-ish" curtailing your freedom? Or is that a level of curtailing you're prepared to accept?

[MisterD]

GCSB is one that will bite,

I just don't get the outrage over that...it's bad that GCSB might spy on NZ'ers, but ok if it's the Police? How does that work?


As to the Electoral Finance bill I would like to know who is finance whom before I vote.

The point about the EFB was that it dodn't just mandate that donations were declared, but it put limits on everyone except the bloody unions funding labour.


Cellphones whilst driving should be banned and not just handhelds elther, mind on the driving not on the mistresses undies please.

So what was wrong with doing someone, who crashed after using a cellphone, for Driving without due care? I still don't understand why more fucking laws were needed.

We should go back to MP's being part-timers, no bloody good comes from having a bunch of people employed full time to sit around and think about new laws to pass. Either that, or no new laws on the books until you've taken some off to make space.

[Banditbandit]

If you recall, the pamphlet that a group of businessmen, who happened to belong to the same church, produced was anti-Green. The nicely orchestrated outrage between media and lefty politicians carefully avoided that it was factually correct in every way.

Anyhoo, why is it that conservative Christian types involved in politics is bad, but it's ok for politicians to fawn all over Ratana and the votes they bring?

The issue with the pamphlet was not what it said - I think it probably was correct. And there is nothing wrong with Christian groups getting involved in politics - given the nature of their religion they would be hypocritical not to be involved .. but my recollection is that they did not do it openly and honestly.

The real issue was that it appeared that National were sidestepping the Electoral finance laws .. by getting someone else to PAY for attacks on the opposition National were getting more money spent on electioneering than they were allowed to spend ... that's a corrupt election practice ... John Key knew about the pamphlet and appeared to think it was a good idea ... a very bad look indeed if you are a politician ... shows a level of corruption he was prepared to accept .. and hasn't history shown just what that means ...

[oneofsix]

I just don't get the outrage over that...it's bad that GCSB might spy on NZ'ers, but ok if it's the Police? How does that work?

.

Shows how head in the sand you are. Police have to get warrants, are answerable to the courts and get their cases tossed if they don't do it right and are limited to why and how. The GCSB is only answerable to ... umm lets see themselves, nominally the head corrupt politican and very political.

[Banditbandit]

I just don't get the outrage over that...it's bad that GCSB might spy on NZ'ers, but ok if it's the Police? How does that work?





Naaa .. see it's not about who does it - I don't really give a fuck who does it .. the point is who controls it.

There are controls and balances on the police .. they work within rules (until they too get caught not doing that) and have to justify everything in court - and sometimes get caught because they can't ... Tuhoe raids wouild be a good example ... their Terrorism charges failed ... There is a process to go through to get phone calls intercepted ... to get a search warrant .. gather e-mails and watch interdweb traffic ... a process to follow for the police to spy on people

The GCSB only needs the Prime Minister's approval ... (or his deputy) ... it's very very bad to put that level of power in the hands of a politician with no checks and balances ... OPen to abuse all the time ... I simply don't trust the fuckers .. ANY of the fuckers ... and the left can be much worse than the right at this ...

[Tigadee]

Only party that is attracting my attention at present is the new Conservative party..... worth looking at their site http://www.conservativeparty.org.nz/

That's who I voted for because I couldn't bother with any of the others any more.

[Tigadee]

those anti-homo, shawl wearing, bible bashing christian talebanners, had a lot to do with the helen-hate

The same ones under whose watch the Same-sex marriage bill was passed? :scratch:

[Akzle]

What a sorry piece of legislation....
I really dont know what the answer is.

ahhhh. society's government.

wait. you have no complaining rights. you fucking voted for them.
(if you voted for any of them, you voted for all of them.)

it's okay. vote for someone else next time and see if that works...

[scumdog]

ahhhh. society's government.

wait. you have no complaining rights. you fucking voted for them.
(if you voted for any of them, you voted for all of them.)

it's okay. vote for someone else next time and see if that works...

I voted for nobody.

And they still got in...:confused::scratch:

[Akzle]

Naaa .. see it's not about who does it - I don't really give a fuck who does it .. the point is who controls it.

There are controls and balances on the police .. they work within rules (until they too get caught not doing that) and have to justify everything in court - and sometimes get caught because they can't ... Tuhoe raids wouild be a good example ... their Terrorism charges failed ... There is a process to go through to get phone calls intercepted ... to get a search warrant .. gather e-mails and watch interdweb traffic ... a process to follow for the police to spy on people

nonono. see crown court is expensive/profitable (depends which side of the bank you're on) and when crown agents (police) go to crown courts, to justify their actions under crown legislation with crown lawyers (appointed to you and them both),
well, someone's getting paid, innit?

the only time you'll actually get a cop in court is if a) you're fucking rich b) THEY take you there.

fucking silly, really.
so tell me, who is "the crown" and at what point i supposedly become answerable to them?

[imdying]

We're pretty much screwed... look up impotency in the dictionary, and you know you're going to find a picture of David Shearer :(

[Akzle]

We're pretty much screwed... look up impotency in the dictionary, and you know you're going to find a picture of David Shearer :(

no. you'll find the definition of the word impotency, that's what dictionaries are for. dumbass.

"politicians, like nappies, should be changed regularly,
...and for pretty much the same reasons"

[Akzle]

naaa.... I'm going to give up and live on Akzle's farm, lose the interweb, lose society, and gain a REAL life away from all these pricks:niceone:

bring guns and ammo, and bitches. Akzle loooooves bitches.

[MisterD]

Shows how head in the sand you are. Police have to get warrants, are answerable to the courts and get their cases tossed if they don't do it right and are limited to why and how. The GCSB is only answerable to ... umm lets see themselves, nominally the head corrupt politican and very political.

Yes, but the legislation is about allowing GCSB to assist the police where they have capabilities that the popo lack,

[Banditbandit]

nonono. see crown court is expensive/profitable (depends which side of the bank you're on) and when crown agents (police) go to crown courts, to justify their actions under crown legislation with crown lawyers (appointed to you and them both),
well, someone's getting paid, innit?

the only time you'll actually get a cop in court is if a) you're fucking rich b) THEY take you there.

fucking silly, really.
so tell me, who is "the crown" and at what point i supposedly become answerable to them?



DId I use the word "crown" then ???? What do you understand of "legitimation"? I only ask because if you understand trhe concept in relation to governments then I don't have to write a fucking book (or comic) to explain it .. if you understadn the concpet I can short cut the discussion ..

I was intrigued by Neazor's findings on the GCSB ... he did not say that what they did in spying on citizens in Godzone was good ... he said the current legislation was ambiguous and that arguably, the actions were legal .. and he did not say which side of that argument he would come down on ... a strong implicatrion that he would come down on the side of "wrong ..."

I'd trust the GCSB (as far as I'd trust any Government agency) in the hands of people like Paul Neazor .. but not in the hands of people like Key ..

[imdying]

no. you'll find the definition of the word impotency, that's what dictionaries are for. dumbass.

"politicians, like nappies, should be changed regularly,
...and for pretty much the same reasons"

Don't make me write my own dictionary :devil2:

[Swoop]

We're pretty much screwed... look up impotency in the dictionary, and you know you're going to find a picture of David Shearer :(

I would have expected to see Shearer having press conferences stating how labour would undo the GCSB legislation, reverse things done by national and set the course straight and true to improving NZ.

What have we got?
Silence. Which seems to indicate labour would do bugger-all to change anything.

[awa355]

People say " you voted for them" but I would say a big portion of voter don't vote for a change of govt based on forth coming ( hidden) agendas, but vote to get rid of the existing party. Most of what follows an election, ( new laws, changes etc ), is never laid out on the table beforehand, or if they are, policies are very vague at best.

The last four goverment changes have largely come about through distrust and dissatisaction with the incumbent govt.

[mashman]

I would have expected to see Shearer having press conferences stating how labour would undo the GCSB legislation, reverse things done by national and set the course straight and true to improving NZ.

What have we got?
Silence. Which seems to indicate labour would do bugger-all to change anything.

You're assuming that they have a choice given that we're talking about an agency that can spy on whomever they like :shifty:

[Oscar]

You're assuming that they have a choice given that we're talking about an agency that can spy on whomever they like :shifty:

Spy on whomever they like?
How does that work then?
Would you like to point out which bit of the legislation allows them to do that?
And before you start crapping on about conspiracies and such, think about how hard it would be to get a conviction with illegal surveillance.

Or is it just that there's a black helicopter following you around....?
Best you snug that tinfoil hat down tighter...

[mashman]

Spy on whomever they like?
How does that work then?
Would you like to point out which bit of the legislation allows them to do that?
And before you start crapping on about conspiracies and such, think about how hard it would be to get a conviction with illegal surveillance.

Or is it just that there's a black helicopter following you around....?
Best you snug that tinfoil hat down tighter...

They decide to spy on someone, then they go and do it. Not so hard really.
The ambiguous bit.
Who was talking about getting a conviction?

Not today, I think it must be their day off... or the stealth tech is finally working.
If that's what's required to have an open mind, then so be it. I'll even lend you my spare iffen ye want to remember what having an open mind was like.

[Genestho]

naaa.... I'm going to give up and live on Akzle's farm, lose the interweb, lose society, and gain a REAL life away from all these pricks:niceone:
What ever blows your hair back, darlin'!! Real life is what you choose to make of it, where-ever you are/n't......

Doesn't Akzle have the interwebs?
That whole losing society thing's working well, isn't it!!? :rolleyes: :devil2:

[oneofsix]

Yes, but the legislation is about allowing GCSB to assist the police where they have capabilities that the popo lack,

Yeah sure it is, and what's more they just completed an internal review of the alleged illegal spying they did on NZers before the law was changed and decided they did nothing wrong but no-one outside the closed circle gets to see the report, oh and please ignore the fact that they originally reviewed and said their spying on Dot Com was legal because they now admit they made a mistake there. :stupid:

Now they have the easy solution to this problem http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/8703308/Urewera-police-raids-report-due. In future just get the GCSB to "assist" the police, then no one will know.

[Winston001]

There are controls and balances on the police .. they work within rules (until they too get caught not doing that) and have to justify everything in court...


True but what if they don't prosecute? What about all the times they bug phones and video potential criminal activity? But find nothing. Never go near the court.

You won't know. Ever.

But the police will nevertheless have observed you, built up information and breached your privacy.

[Oscar]

They decide to spy on someone, then they go and do it. Not so hard really.
The ambiguous bit.
Who was talking about getting a conviction?

Not today, I think it must be their day off... or the stealth tech is finally working.
If that's what's required to have an open mind, then so be it. I'll even lend you my spare iffen ye want to remember what having an open mind was like.

An open mind?
That's pretty funny, coming from someone who rearranges reality to fit their own prejudices.
Whereas Govt oversight of the GCSB is pretty naf, it still exists, so that the actions you speak of would soon become obvious (and recently did become obvious, leading to the recent inquirey by judge Nazor). We’re talking about an agency that’s being bested in public by a fat German computer geek for fuck sake…

[Scuba_Steve]

Spy on whomever they like?
How does that work then?
Would you like to point out which bit of the legislation allows them to do that?
And before you start crapping on about conspiracies and such, think about how hard it would be to get a conviction with illegal surveillance.

Or is it just that there's a black helicopter following you around....?
Best you snug that tinfoil hat down tighter...

Maybee you missed the whole Dotcom thing? & it wasn't even legal for them then... But how many have been charged with their beach/disregard for NZ law???
Also like Dotcom they don't have to use the illegal surveillance in NZ, our Govt is Americas little bitch they will do as ordered.

[Oscar]

Maybee you missed the whole Dotcom thing? & it wasn't even legal for them then... But how many have been charged with their beach/disregard for NZ law???
Also like Dotcom they don't have to use the illegal surveillance in NZ, our Govt is Americas little bitch they will do as ordered.

Er - you missed the point.
They were caught doing something outside their remit, ergo the system works (and they can't spy on anyone they like as Mr. Mushbrain claims).

[mashman]

An open mind?
That's pretty funny, coming from someone who rearranges reality to fit their own prejudices.
Whereas Govt oversight of the GCSB is pretty naf, it still exists, so that the actions you speak of would soon become obvious (and recently did become obvious, leading to the recent inquirey by judge Nazor). We’re talking about an agency that’s being bested in public by a fat German computer geek for fuck sake…

See the following for a further explanation of that which far too many of you don't seem to grasp



Real life is what you choose to make of it, where-ever you are/n't

Oh it's an oversight now :killingme. Being fat and German doesn't stop your lawyer from knowing his job though eh... luckily.

[mashman]

(and they can't spy on anyone they like as Mr. Mushbrain claims).

Yes they can. They did. They only got caught because they went after a really really rich guy who could afford a full-time lawyer. You sure I can't interest you in an open mind sir?

[scissorhands]

What ever blows your hair back, darlin'!! Real life is what you choose to make of it, where-ever you are/n't......

Doesn't Akzle have the interwebs?
That whole losing society thing's working well, isn't it!!? :rolleyes: :devil2:

Well maybe not the interweb, [its my encyclopaedia Britannica now]
Akzle wants me to bring bitches, and the only bitches who will follow me are online.:mobile:

The ghosts of past societies follows me around like a bad smell, whispering crazy shit in my ear: 'you have schizophrenia.....'
I'll make my own society and call it Waco.

[Oscar]

Yes they can. They did. They only got caught because they went after a really really rich guy who could afford a full-time lawyer. You sure I can't interest you in an open mind sir?

Your definition of an "open mind" appears to involve conspiracy and very few facts.
Please explain how the other 81 instances of illegal spying came to light.
Did they all have high priced briefs?

B
You mind appears to be so open that there is a breeze going right through it.

[oneofsix]

Your definition of an "open mind" appears to involve conspiracy and very few facts.
Please explain how the other 81 instances of illegal spying came to light.
Did they all have high priced briefs?


Ironically yes they did, as employed by Mr Dot Com. It all came to light out of that affair.

[mashman]

Your definition of an "open mind" appears to involve conspiracy and very few facts.
Please explain how the other 81 instances of illegal spying came to light.
Did they all have high priced briefs?

B
You mind appears to be so open that there is a breeze going right through it.

That's certainly a part of it, but possibility comes with the territory.
You mean the other 88? those other 88 cases that would have been openly admitted to if there hadn't have been an investigation? Funny that they hadn't been admitted to until KDC's investigation.

That's the wind of change old man.

[MisterD]

Yeah sure it is, and what's more they just completed an internal review of the alleged illegal spying they did on NZers before the law was changed and decided they did nothing wrong but no-one outside the closed circle gets to see the report, oh and please ignore the fact that they originally reviewed and said their spying on Dot Com was legal because they now admit they made a mistake there. :stupid:

The point being that GCSB have always assisted the police, but it was an unintended consequence of whatever that last bit of legislation was, that doing so became illegal. The spying they did on Dotcom may have been illegal, but it was at the request of the police and if it had been done directly by the police it would have been fine.

[oneofsix]

The point being that GCSB have always assisted the police, but it was an unintended consequence of whatever that last bit of legislation was, that doing so became illegal. The spying they did on Dotcom may have been illegal, but it was at the request of the police and if it had been done directly by the police it would have been fine.

Are you saying that because the govt always secretly spied on its citizens it is OK to continue to do so? The was no "whatever that last bit of legislation", it was illegal and it is wrong.

[MisterD]

Are you saying that because the govt always secretly spied on its citizens it is OK to continue to do so? The was no "whatever that last bit of legislation", it was illegal and it is wrong.

I'm saying that law enforcement agencies should be able to spy on citizens if they get a warrant to do so, and that it's a bit silly to have an agency with all the surveillence bells and whistles unable to support them.

[oneofsix]

I'm saying that law enforcement agencies should be able to spy on citizens if they get a warrant to do so, and that it's a bit silly to have an agency with all the surveillence bells and whistles unable to support them.

But the GCSB don't get warrants as they were set up to spy outside NZ's borders, not internally. As for the bells and whistles, then why not combine them with the SIS but make them follow the SIS rules internally? Could it be that a Govt that is outlawing protest and the challenging of legislation wants to be able to use the GCSB to "control" anybody it considers undesirable?

[Banditbandit]

But the GCSB don't get warrants as they were set up to spy outside NZ's borders, not internally. As for the bells and whistles, then why not combine them with the SIS but make them follow the SIS rules internally? Could it be that a Govt that is outlawing protest and the challenging of legislation wants to be able to use the GCSB to "control" anybody it considers undesirable?

Yeah .. I do get your popint .. adn yeah .. I do worry ..

But yes, if an agency like the police does get a warrant then they can do the job ... if they have the flash hi-tech toys ...

But if an agency like the GCSB can already do it why do we need to double up on expensive equipment and staff .. cheaper to get the GCSB to do the job FOR the police - not for themselves ...

I think you're splitting hairs a litle .. but then again ... I do worry ..

[jasonu]

naaa.... I'm going to give up and live on Akzle's farm, lose the interweb, lose society, and gain a REAL life away from all these pricks:niceone:

Then you and him can ride share when you go to the dole office to collect your free cash...

[Akzle]

Doesn't Akzle have the interwebs?
That whole losing society thing's working well, isn't it!!? :rolleyes: :devil2:

nah bro. i'm here by telepathetics.

society involves mutual consent. i do not accept NZ society, by and large, nz society does not accept me.

[scissorhands]

Then you and him can ride share when you go to the dole office to collect your free cash...

I got tons of that shit, Akzle has too I think.
Dont need and dont want no free handout thanks

See I'm highly qualified and smart like he is
Used to work real hard when a young fella, coined 2k a week mid eighties....been retired since:bleh:
could walk into a 100k job tomorrow no worries
A boss mate in oil and gas wants me in Singapore.....
May still end up manufacturing in China....

Got my own 250hectare farm anyhows
if Akzle turns out to be a raving looney
who gets drunk and stands firing off:laugh:

I buy my own lunch
from my own money
[that my tenant gives me]
thanks

[Winston001]

Returning to the original point of HDC's thread, there is a dynamic tension between living in a secure society and giving away rights to absolute privacy.

If we desire a safe environment for our families then we must accept the existence of forces of law and order. Primarily this is the police but at the extreme, specialist agencies are necessary to protect us from aggressive foreign nations and guerrilla/terrorist activists. These are not phantoms, they exist in the real world and hurt real people.

The dynamic tension comes from drawing a line as to how far the police/SIS/GCSB etc can go to intrude into our lives. That is the $64,000 question and it should be asked every time the rules get changed.

Otherwise we succumb to a death by a thousand cuts - stealthy but final nevertheless.

[oldrider]

A govt that would do this, as well as the disgusting SkyCity deal is out of control. Couple that to a prime minister (and lackeys) who will stand in front of us and tell us fracking is safe....I for one despair. There is no viable alternative to these pricks.
*seriously thinking of deserting the sinking ship*

Well think about that ... where ever you go, there they are! ... It's like running away from earthquakes they are a "world" phenomenon! :facepalm:

MMP makes them responsible to each other, "not to the electorate" but the electorate doesn't really care anyway, they do as they are told! :mellow:

[mashman]

Well think about that ... where ever you go, there they are! ... It's like running away from earthquakes they are a "world" phenomenon! :facepalm:

MMP makes them responsible to each other, "not to the electorate" but the electorate doesn't really care anyway, they do as they are told! :mellow:

Cannot spread again yadda yadda. That's about as true as it gets.