Government hypocrisy

[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?

[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...

[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

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

[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

[Oscar]

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

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.