Wednesday, 14 November 2007

UPDATE: Scoop has photos of the "Tuhoe-ain't-terrorists" march arriving in Helengrad, and then at Parliament. They're not really doing themselves any favours, are they ...


  1. For Shame Peter. Can't you see they have nothing to hide?

    You have force yourself to look behind the bandanas, the Oakleys and the balaclavas, past the Tiaha's and the Hakas and see the peaceful people inside.

    Maybe it's because I'm a honky racist but wouldn't it be interesting to know many of the marchers are gainfully employed paying the taxes that pays the dole to the Uruwera 16?

    I mean it would be nice to think that Tuhoe would be able to support themselves independent of the rest of the NZ taxpayers after they get their homeland.

  2. Well they do make the point that the police were similarly attired when they carried out the raids. Combat helmets, dark glasses and masks covering faces with no identification were the order of the day.

    How do you identify an agent of the law that oversteps the mark? What do they have to hide? Is police anonymity a sign of things to come?

  3. What should the police have done? Got into dresses and worn no protective gear?

    The full tactical gear does give a look of intimidation (good for getting compliance without having a firefight) but it's also practical protection.

    Plainclothes police currently have anonymity until they show their badge. Forcing officers to uncover their skin and remove protective gear does no good to anyone.

    People keep getting this out of perspective. There was a clear threat. The Police went in and aprehended the suspects. No shots were fired and no-one was injured. How anyone can say that's an overreaction is beyond me.


Say what you mean, and mean what you say.
Construct an argument, not a feud--build a mountain, not a molehill.
Spam will be removed , unless it's been asked for.
(Comment moderation is currently being reluctantly applied...)