SIS get powers to spy in your house because 80 people like ISIS



The fear machine has worked. Apparently 80 people like ISIS in NZ so this means the SIS need new surveillance powers to spy on you in your house for 48 hours without a warrant.

How the hell does that make any of us safer?

When you consider the extraordinary powers of search and surveillance this Government has already handed over to the Police for their illegal spying in the Urewera ‘terror’ case and the extraordinary increase of mass surveillance powers Key has granted the GCSB (because they had illegally spied on 88 NZers), why the SIS all of a sudden need warrantless home video powers is a question we won’t get answered in the rush to ram these laws through Parliament.

Seeing as David Shearer secretly met with Key and promised to do a deal over the GCSB law before he got rolled as a leader, expecting Labour to show any spine on this is a waste of time.

The SIS get more video surveillance powers because supposedly 80 NZers like ISIS?

Seeing as Key’s newly created team of ‘Free thinkers’ are a lot of business leaders who fear environmental protests, it is only a matter of time before environmentalists are placed on these terror lists as their operations threaten their economic model.

And finally, does Key outing 80 NZers as possible threats generate an anti-Muslim backlash? Isn’t the job of the PM to protect NZ, not conflate divisiveness?

TDB Recommends

NZers will fall for anything if Key says it slowly enough


  1. Sensible and pragmatic move by Key …… contrary to Martyn’s views the sky won’t be falling anytime soon.

  2. New Zealand has around half that number of murders per year – makes you wonder why we bother having laws against it!

    • SGTHREE,
      When someone murders they have committed a serious crime but, by this government’s logic, I should also be locked up if I threatened you for making such a facile comment.

  3. Martyn, War-mongering we say this is prepping us for involvement in again, so a little reading is in order here.

    “80 people” indeed! identified as possible links to terrorism, would this include other normal peaceful folks like us too?

    This smacks of a fear campaign, designed to force us to accept future war measures upon us all.

    The truth is this world economy is in a big debt hole and some shady global elitists already want to wage another war upon us to get the economy going as did the last war. Buying of weapons is the goal they have here just for the money as the US Major General will inform us all of below.

    Oh it wont be their family’s sons and daughters going to fight as “boots on the ground”

    It will be all those poor and unfortunate languishing on the dole, believe it.

    “War is a racket”.

    This book was written by a retired U.S. Major General no less back in 1933.

    Worth a read at this time I reckon.

    War Is a Racket is the title of two works, a speech and a booklet, by retired United States Marine Corps Major General and two time Medal of Honor recipient Smedley D. Butler.

    “WAR is a racket. It always has been.

    It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives.

    A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small “inside” group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes.

    In the World War [I] a mere handful garnered the profits of the conflict. At least 21,000 new millionaires and billionaires were made in the United States during the World War. That many admitted their huge blood gains in their income tax returns. How many other war millionaires falsified their tax returns no one knows.

    How many of these war millionaires shouldered a rifle? How many of them dug a trench? How many of them knew what it meant to go hungry in a rat-infested dug-out? How many of them spent sleepless, frightened nights, ducking shells and shrapnel and machine gun bullets? How many of them parried a bayonet thrust of an enemy? How many of them were wounded or killed in battle?

    Out of war nations acquire additional territory, if they are victorious. They just take it. This newly acquired territory promptly is exploited by the few — the self-same few who wrung dollars out of blood in the war. The general public shoulders the bill.

    And what is this bill?

    This bill renders a horrible accounting. Newly placed gravestones. Mangled bodies. Shattered minds. Broken hearts and homes. Economic instability. Depression and all its attendant miseries. Back-breaking taxation for generations and generations.

    For a great many years, as a soldier, I had a suspicion that war was a racket; not until I retired to civil life did I fully realize it. Now that I see the international war clouds gathering, as they are today, I must face it and speak out.”

  4. This may be somewhat off target and sickeningly too long but anyways-
    I had a teenager party at my house on the edge of a rural town a couple years back- and quite simply, the local fuzz didn’t want a bar of it. They tried to call it an afterball, they tried to make up a whole series of potential ‘offences’, they tried to shut it down so that they wouldn’t have to do their job at 1 am.
    Even though parents were dropping off their kids and picking them up, the cops were stopping traffic outside my (rural) house.
    Then they wanted to come onto my property to ‘see if everything is okay” and I refuse, politely “nuffing to see here folks- on yer way”. Put plainly, they wanted any excuse to enter and close it down, but because its on a bit of acreage they couldn’t get close to it, and I had strictly ordered the kids ( mostly Maori, a few Pollies, and a few dozen Pakehas) that if anyone so much as showed their face to the cops when I was out at the gate- they were never coming back.So these 70 or so kids behaved themselves impeccably and stayed in the shed. The cops realised I wasn’t a push over, because when I shut the gate on them I smiled and said- “Please don’t think me rude- but I don’t want you thinking an open gate implies consent to enter”. So they drove around my property all night trying to get a vantage point- shining their big fucking beams into th back yard- scurrying around like ferals- until they had to give up. And they went home.

    They missed the end of the party, at 3:30 am when Mrs closed it down. THey missed me ferrying all the kids home to their beds until about 5am. THey missed these beautiful kids having a great nite without incident, without violence.

    And those filthy pigs’ behaviour- got me thinking- what if they had access to a little drone?
    THey were chomping at the bit to have a nose at a very private and well run party- seething they were- that they were stopped in their jackboots at the gate.

    They would have loved a wee drone- they would have loved to send their little bird over my paddocks and over my barn and hover there above these beautiful kids-watching and waiting to see a kid hand another kid a bottle of beer so they could raid the party and raise the tension and cause a disturbance and be aggressive and hopefully get to hurt some children in the process. And me most likely, and maybe one of my dogs too- the whole trifecta.

    THat’s my long winded way of saying- none of these bastards can be trusted with not abusing whatever powers they have, so give them none.

    • Exactly. Every time a little bit more authority is legislated, they take ten times more. Good on you for shutting the gate. More people need to do it.

  5. I can’t see why normal procedures aren’t perfectly adequate for the surveillance of any Isis-loving resident. It may well be a good idea to keep an eye on these people, but what is wrong with getting a warrant in the usual way?

  6. I expect it is already happening as Assange said at the moment of truth (I think it was him), spy agencies act as an independent group around the world and their governments are often irrelevant. You have only to look at all the CIA stuff that was done illegally.

  7. Why would SIS need to surveill your house for 48 hours without a warrant? Quick answer is that these are emergency measures, not ‘because we felt like it’ or ‘we have reason to believe so and so looked or acted suspiciously’. The basis for emergency if you use the term correctly is that there is an imminent threat, not implied.
    The consequence of abusing or being unable to justify emergency surveillance without quantifiable outcomes must be decisive and clear in my opinion, but other than that I believe that the SIS wont be doing this because they are bored.
    ISIS wants the world to come under the shroud of ISLAM, the alternative is a life without ANY rights accroding to Sharia law, or death. If you do not believe this then pick any video on Youtube with Dr Wafa Sultan on it, this is one brave woman. Take your pick.

    • Yep, that’s the weak words around it, but I think we both understand that after a fairly short period of time, the temptation to use such extraordinary powers are simply too much for a department with the weak oversight these ones do. An activist meets someone at their home, there’s a big protest march coming up, there’s an ’emergency’ to see what those two are talking about – environmentalists are threatening a coal ship from departing, let’s see what they are saying. Then there is the desire to build an intelligence landscape – who knows who, who is talking to who. What are they saying?

      Look at the contempt this government treats OIA requests – the 48hours will quickly become the norm. These are fishing expeditions

    • Notgandalfs last paragraph pretty much sums it up. It is impossible for an organisation that has as one of its fundamental tenets the notion that anyone who does not believe in their imaginary friend must die, to co-exist peaceably with the rest of the worlds population. Either ISIS is kept in check while it is manageable, or it is ignored while it goes about achieving its objective. If the later occurs, there is only one logical conclusion. It is as simple as that.

      • It will a like all those people on this site who backed the Green MP for supporting homeopathy as an Ebola treatment, then later even the Green party itself had the common sense to remove the portfolio from him. The left can be sensible and constructive, as can the right. The left of the left is just loony.

        • Dan says…”It will a (sic) like all those people on this site who backed the Green MP for supporting homeopathy as an Ebola treatment,” References please. I must have missed these supporting comments ’cause I didn’t see anyone on this site backing this MP. All I read was CLEANGREEN making a argument for not dismissing alternative medicine out of hand and, in my own case, stating that although I believed there wasn’t enough evidence to support homeopathy this shouldn’t prevent one from keeping an open mind.

      • Let us never forget just why there is now an ISIS ,…decades of western interference in the first place.

        Why ?…oil.

        Lets not forget the whole con job of George Bush junior and Tony Blair of the excuse for entering (invading , actually ) Iraq…

        WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION. They sold that lie and got a lot of mileage on that one alone.

        And while Tony Blair’s career ended after the British finally got sick of the con…lets remember back to George Bush senior….

        Who gave a speech about ‘ ‘No one will stand in the way of our NEW WORLD ORDER !!! ….OR OUR THOUSAND POINTS OF LIGHT ! ”

        What a peculiar thing to say…thousand points of light?….whatever did he mean ???

        Until one realizes that ‘one thousand points of light ‘ , …is a masonic and/ or occultic term for an illuminated one world government. And George Bush senior was a member of the Skull and Bones society.

        And no, is not just a young mans university club playing silly student games. It is a bonefied fraternity dedicated to elitist members who advocate global government.

        So..we have many young guys doing horrific things in ISIS… but who were the culprits who generated social conditions to incubate and foment such attitudes?….the west.

        And that includes the Russians in Afghanistan before the Americans and British.

        Makes you wonder if they’d jump into any fray if oil was suddenly discovered in Africa…

        I would have to say yes.

        So don’t be surprised if there are more state powers given to increase spy agencies ,….that also is part of the whole deal about one world government.

        Its called ‘controlling the masses ‘.

        Therefore , we now see who Key really works for…and it sure isn’t us.

    • What a load of rubbish, if there is an imminent threat, the police already have ample powers, so why would they have to first get the SIS, to come and install cameras and so, to film things, when shitty things are supposed to hit the fan?

      An imminent threat does not last 48 hours, my friend. And if there is reason to suspect something nasty is being organised, it will not be organised within a few hours, and if the SIS or police get info about it, they can go and rather swiftly get a warrant to take action.

      This is clearly an effort by the government to further undermine citizens’ rights, and that is also, why not only Winston First, Te Ururoa Flavell, but also Mr “Done Over Ohairioouh” (Dunne) were expressing concern about that part in their speeches in the house.

      The Nats and Key are clearly trying to test the ground, to get more freedom for the spy services to be active, no matter what. It will eventually be used against activists, unionists and the likes, as has happened before, while making up supposed “threat” arguments.

  8. I haven’t yet seen an explanation of what the short-comings in the NZSIS’s surveillance powers are and why they need to be adjusted. I’ve also seen little detail on what additional powers they will get. In the absence of this information I’m going to assume the worst. I’ve yet to be disappointed by taking this stance on surveillance issues.

    Now there’s been no particular mention of cameras in people’s homes, and to state such may sound melodramatic and risk accusations of fear-mongering. However, the NZSIS could very well put covert monitoring devices (read: bugs and cameras) into homes of people they wish to observe covertly. This legislative change seems likely to increase the number of people that would fall into the category of those they could legally monitor. So, in a way, it does mean more cameras in homes are likely.

    I’m sure there will be some who respond that this loss of liberty is all in the name of safety and so is therefore justified. Considering that we are statistically more likely to be struck by lightning than be victim of a terrorist attack, my reply would be if the justification is safety then we need to give the Met Service more powers to protect us from the more likely danger.

  9. Watch for the likes of left leaning blog sites such as the TDB and their supporters being ‘scrutinized’ by the SIS/GCSB/Police, with the excuse being possible subversive anti government activities! That’s if it’s not already happening!

  10. “Seeing as David Shearer secretly met with Key and promised to do a deal over the GCSB law before he got rolled as a leader…”

    Got a source for that?

  11. While I agree there’s a constant need to protect freedom of expression and individual privacy, I think Martyn’s assessment is clouded somewhat by cynicism and gives the issue a fairly superficial once-over. As I commented recenty, it’s a difficult balance to find the appropriate degree of surveillance to match the actual level of risk. Without knowing exactly who is being watched and how much, we are forced – as uncomfortable as it might be – to accept the possibility that the balance might be about right. To conclude that the balance is dangerously one-sided in favour of government agencies one really needs to have some concrete examples of where someone’s legitimate interests or freedoms have been compromised and I’m not aware there are many such instances.

    Similarly, I think it’s naive to assume there are not some genuinely risky individuals in our country – political or criminal – who have the potential to inflict harm. Just how harmful or not our local isis sympathisers are remains to be seen but given what we know I’d actually feel more comfortable if someone was keeping an eye on things. I mean, seriously, if something horrible occurred imagine how quick we would be to berate the various agencies for letting it happen.

    The concept of mass surveillance needs to be put into context. To some it means that we are all individually being watched or monitored all of the time. Although it’s mere speculation on my part I’m not convinced it works like that. I think our ‘spies’ – for want of a better term – probably monitor communications and organisational relationship and look for indicators that they then use to target what they think might be risks. My hunch is that the huge majority of us just fall through the net with little more than an occasional glance, if that.

    Who knows, perhaps this comment will get noticed because it contains certain words, but I’d have to be more than a little paranoid to think it would get anywhere above the lowest of low priorities for further attention. And if for any reason it prompted more attention than that, I’m not going to lose any sleep to find myself in the company of the millions of people who’ve written letters to the editor over the years to express a view. Surely this is what our democracy is designed to protect.

    If I’m wrong, I’ll be very, very cross.

    • David,

      “My hunch is that the huge majority of us just fall through the net with little more than an occasional glance, if that”.

      Sugar coat it as well as you may.

      But look at Key’s record of lying?

      We could write a volume on how many he has made, so I take cold comfort that this is merely an isolated spying saga.

      No no, they can spy on many at once nowadays as I was also in communications, so falling through the cracks is false thinking.

      A block can be placed on many hundreds at the same time so we will be subject to a dragnet surveillance system.

    • “Without knowing exactly who is being watched and how much, we are forced – as uncomfortable as it might be – to accept the possibility that the balance might be about right. To conclude that the balance is dangerously one-sided in favour of government agencies one really needs to have some concrete examples of where someone’s legitimate interests or freedoms have been compromised and I’m not aware there are many such instances.”

      What rotten logic. Without knowing, we’re not forced at all to give Key the benefit of the doubt. On one side you say “accept the possibility”, on the other “conclude”. What a dishonest way of framing things. Do you think we’re all stupid?

      • No I’m not being dishonest and neither do I think you’re all stupid, but I accept that my logic was off-balance there. The problem is I’m long in the tooth and having been involved in several political movements or campaigns I know from experience how easy it is to become fixated on a worst-case scenario when analysing the motives of our political foes, and how easy it is to discount the truth and include it with what we know to be untrue. There’s also the underlying inference that the GCSB/SIS are inherently evil, dishonest, easily misled, and out to get us — I think that’s a fanciful perception but an attractive one because it suits a particular mindset.
        However I am very concerned about threats to privacy and individual freedom. That’s why I agree that their activities need to have a degree of transparency, and there needs to be a high level of oversight and accountability exercised in a way that gives the public confidence that we are not being duped.
        Just as importantly, it’s difficult to restrict these sanctioned activities once they have been implemented and we need some sort of assurance, a sunset clause, so we know that any powers can be withdrawn once they are no longer deemed necessary.

    • Thanks for a thoughtful post. I agree with some of what you say, but here’s the thing: The Five Eyes appear to be building an international network of sensors which never forgets what it has seen. I say “appear to be” but in my estimation that’s what the evidence released so far amounts to. There is also significant use of intentional re-interpretation of terms like “collect” on the part of those in charge of the agencies, which I view as a blatant attempt to misrepresent their intentions.

      So say that’s what they’re building – a network which means that everything you put online, every website you visit, search term you enter, or thought you share is stored against your name and is searchable, forever. I don’t know about you, but I’ve said and done some remarkably stupid things in my lifetime, and the idea that – at any time – those things could be looked up is a prospect I find pretty disturbing.

      Now some people might say “nothing to hide, nothing to fear”, but because everything’s being stored, that question is in entirely the wrong timescale. The real question is “will you ever have anything to hide?” The answer to that is unknowable.

      Others have said “Why would the government take an interest in me?” Even if you’re not an activist, there’s situations in which that might happen: Say you receive a wrongly addressed email containing information which is in the public interest, but politically damaging. Suddenly you’re a person of interest. Now the likelihood of that ever happening to me, personally, is pretty low, but it’s bound to happen to someone, and I want that person to be able to do the right thing without fear of having their past dredged up.

      The powers that be are not giving open and honest answers about the conduct of these intelligence agencies. That, alone, is reason to be concerned. John Key has not been honest about this, nor have other GCSB representatives, and the senior figures in the Obama administration have blatantly lied to congressional hearings about their activities.

      These are not people I want to have ever greater power with ever reduced oversight. That’s never ended well.

      • I don’t particularly disagree with anything you say there. While my concerns about the GCSB/SIS are tempered with the belief that some sort of effective surveillance is necessary, I don’t have any such comfort when it comes to other 5 eyes members, and the plans that some other agencies have to store *everything* should worry us all. Similarly I don’t go along with the notion “nothing to fear nothing to hide” — I still feel that people like myself become irrelevant; things would need to be significantly worse than Orwellian for that to occur and I’d be making a lot of noise before things got that bad. Everybody has said or done something that could later cause them embarrassment.
        It will no doubt infuriate some people but I do believe the gcsb when they say much of their work involves monitoring cybercrime and internet attacks – I have a colleague in the internet business who supports this and is adamant that the public have no idea how serious this problem is.
        Again, it’s a question of balance and while I’m less alarmist that some commentators I’m under no illusion that we can let surveillance run rampant without stringent oversight and the ability to roll back redundant powers.

        • I still feel that people like myself become irrelevant; things would need to be significantly worse than Orwellian for that to occur and I’d be making a lot of noise before things got that bad.

          I suspect things might be a tad too late by that time, David…

  12. The problem with this is that it is more about “treating the *symptoms* rather than the cause”.

    If the problem were someone with a malarial fever, this would be akin to Key turning on a fan to cool him down rather than putting up a mosquito net and administering anti-malarial drugs.

    The lefties who cry about “loss of freedom” won’t say anything about the *loss of freedom of speech* in the UK and Europe (where you can no longer criticise Islam and expect not to be visited by the “boys in blue”). All caused by leftist “human rights” and “hate speech” laws that were only ever going to be used to protect the left’s favoured “group de jour” – Muslims.

    The irony of the left’s love and support of Islam – an ideology that has (by a good estimate) slaughtered 270 million people in 1400 years – an ideology that breaks every human right in existence (“human rights” being so beloved by the left) – seems to be completely lost on them.

    Yes, these measures are stupid but they are stupid because they are aiming at the *wrong target*.

    What *should* be done?

    Legally define Islam as exactly what it is – an ideology of hate that encourages and promotes hatred and violence to all those outside of it.

    ( There is precedent for this – Italy does not recognise Islam as a religion ).

    Once such a law were passed it could be used to ban any immigration here of people following an ideology of hate.
    It could also be used to close Islamic schools and mosques here.

    Oh, the Muslims and the UN would hate this (of course) but since when has either group had the best interests of the West at heart? Since never.

    We need to stop ignoring the “elephant in the room”.

    As for those who would bleat about “the rights of Muslims” – that is rich indeed given that Islam is the worst breaker of human rights in the world.

    • @ Coffee_Now

      If you are not left-wing, and do not understand left-wing principles, perhaps you would be better off stating your own thoughts rather than trying to pre-empt what ‘lefties will or won’t say’.

      Same goes for Islam.

      If you have no understanding of certain topics, why comment on them in the manner that you have. Why not just express your opinion on the subject – rather than make poor assumptions about groups that you don’t appear to have any understanding of at all?

      All you have achieved is severely mischaracterised both what lefties would or wouldn’t support and Islam.

    • …that is rich indeed given that Islam is the worst breaker of human rights in the world.

      Funny. The only acts of terrorism in recent history, in this country, were caused by the French (a supposed ally) and a rightwing nutjob who set a bomb at Wellington Trades Hall.

      Never mind Coffee Now. You need Common Sense Stat.

    • I agree with everything you say- with just one change- instead of Muslims, can we change that to ‘Anyone who believes in God?”.

      That would be just tickety boo thanks.

      Oh but wait- not yet- I think one of my kids still thinks God exists- so give us a couple more years and then we can just slaughter them all.

      Big thumbs up to you for making clear who has an ideology of hate.

  13. Hi,

    I’m a great believer in openness in all things. So I have no problem with the security agencies being granted these powers. I just think that if they use them it has to be transparent. Who they spied on and for what reason.

    The OP mentioned the Urewera mess. Where’s the openess in this? Yes the case fell through because of a mistake in the law. So why hasn’t someone released the transcripts of the evidence the police acted on so we can judge for ourselves whether the police acted correctly or not?

    Mary mentioned this website being scrutinised. Well yes, obviously. I assume it is. This is a public forum. Every comment posted is public. You can’t then realistically expect that all of New Zealand can read your posts but the GCSB can’t?

    This whole thing is a balancing act. You can’t have complete privacy and then expect the security agencies to keep you safe. You have to balance your privacy concerns against your public safety concerns.

    Does this latest bill go too far? I don’t know. But I do know that according to what we’ve been told eighty odd people in New Zealand have either gone to fight for ISIS, have financially supported them, or are otherwise engaged in radicalisation activities. I have no reason to doubt the PM on this. And all of these people would have to be considered a risk to New Zealand.

    So based on this the question becomes, do I as a citizen care more about these eighty odd people’s right to privacy or my right and my family’s right to safety? Or to turn it around, if I were one of these eighty should my right to privacy outweigh everyone else’s right to safety?

    I suspect the answer will be different for every one of us. But if we at least know how many non warranted 48 hour spy actions are undertaken, we can have some idea of whether our agencies are using or abusing their powers.

    Cheers, Greg.

    • This whole thing is a balancing act. You can’t have complete privacy and then expect the security agencies to keep you safe. You have to balance your privacy concerns against your public safety concerns.

      And yet, Greg C, you use a pseudonym?

      Why is that?

      It’s deeply ironic and amusing that those who advocate for greater State surveillance and concommittant loss of our privacy nearly always sign off with an anonymous pseudonym.

  14. What potential for political abuse. Key being head of SIS can get his rivals under surveillance for 48 hours with no warrant. He can read the transcripts watch the videos listen to the tapes. Then when it is decided that the surveillance was invalid all the files are wiped according to Key.
    Isn’t it too late then as he has all this illegally obtained information in his head that he can act upon?
    Who is going to be notified that an illegal surveillance that was not an emergency was undertaken and who the target was?
    The public? The opposition? Or John Key?
    The potential for abuse by the leader of the day is mindboggling!!
    Way too much power in one mans hands.

    • @ TRUTHSAYER – yep, I’m of the same mind as yourself with this one.

      Another point is the passport issue; withholding/withdrawing passports for Kiwis ‘under suspicion for being likely IS supporters’. The legislation change here could well be abused by government, used against any citizen ‘perceived’ to be a threat, regardless. Challengers or opponents of government, including non conformists could become targets of this move.

      A safety valve is required as a form of protection to prevent such scenarios arising.

  15. Yes, indeed, this raises very serious questions, that the wider public better start asking, but we know, the MSM has already categorised Key’s proposed measures and speech as “moderate” (once again), so it is all modus operandi.

    I have heard the main speeches that were shown on Parliament TV, as what the news presented was just basically the MSM version of the “policy release” that Key had his staff prepare to appear not too serious or much to worry about.

    Some trainers are supposed to train the hopelessly divided, demoralised, unreliable Iraqi military, while guarded “behind the wire” by SAS soldiers. Some humanitarian aid appears to be planned to be sent to Iraq, and some intelligence gathering may be done to assist the so “benign” US and other “allied” bombers, who will of course not only kill ISIS fighters, as we know by experience.

    It is all done with the UN not being involved, to assist the mighty big brother USA, who is now governed by a president, who has turned out to be a “lame duck” now, as his supporters lost control in both houses.

    The “home front” is the one to really worry about, and allowing the SIS to film and audiotape, after accessing property without a warrant for up to 48 hours is a massive expansion of the SIS’ power. The “excuse” is now, the police are already allowed to do the same, where there is reason to suspect some offending.

    Question is, why have the SIS involved then, when some criminal activity goes on, even if that may involve offences against the terror laws, which the police can already prosecute?

    Also the SIS is supposed to get another 7 million to expand their operations. So there are supposed to be up to 40 ISIS or IS “supporters”, followers or sympathisers, representing a real threat? Another 40 are suspected to be heading towards that high risk category, about which we got little or no detail.

    This will of course scare many in the public, so “mission accomplished”. Forget the MSM reports about the GCSB, the debate about the justifications of intrusion into privacy of citizens, and what else there was just a bit before the election, all that has been buried now, as the government is presenting effective “information politics” (propaganda) to serve its interests.

    And anyway, how did they know about these 80 sympathisers and worse? I doubt they learned about any “suspicious” activities by undercover operations, it seems this is information the GCSB has gathered, possibly on people using computers and watching ISIS or other fighter videos downloaded from YouTube.

    If they know who is a threat, why again not focus on them, and why the need to impose more surveillance, and more controls on civil liberties, on all, by law?

    But sadly even Labour have with Shearer, King and Goff (who seem in charge in the House at present) joined ranks with Key and Nats. The only opposition was coming from the Greens, and Metiria Turei held a rather fine speech.

  16. funny how these supposed terrorist attacks have been proven as hoaxes
    take the Ottawa Shooting for example, did the MSM mention the mistake they made about the claim of 9 bullet holes in the wall of the Canadian parliament – turns out they are also there on the virtual tour online pictures taken in 2003!!, let alone the many other inconsistencys .what about these fake beheading video’s – seriously ,they fail any real tests of scrutiny &/or analysis. we cant trust the MSM to tell us the real story, its best to do your own research , of course these propaganda videos (HD Quality) are an invitation to bomb the snot out of them ,who uses a (rubber) 3inch knife to behead people?. who wouldn’t fight back?. I challenge anyone who believes in these pretexts for war & loss of our liberty’s to actually do the research, we cant trust those who claim to be acting in OUR best interests (& not following their own agenda). Canada shooting was a staged event ,the beheading videos are hoaxes ,the Aussies killed some guy who had a plastic knife – its getting the Nat$i’s we are just boiling frogs & 1984 is a guidebook + a vision for the future ,we are not afraid of the boogeyman

  17. I am
    You are
    He IS
    She IS
    We are
    You are
    They are

    IS the odd third person singular present
    IS the threat to me, you, us and them
    IS from existence the extent of being

    IS thmus Auckland and Rongotai
    IS rael, NATO country code
    IS O 3166-1 alpha-2, Iceland

    How will we know if is is IS
    Except for context
    and the say so of SIS

    • Interesting really, we have the SIS, add the “intelligence” “I” as an “enhancement” letter in front of it, we have indeed “I-SIS” at home, right here, working under the government. How bizarre, how bizarre that is.

  18. Key is a deceitful power abusing disgrace of a prime minister and these laws will undoubtedly be abused just like the ones the SIS had in the past.

    When the police do a search because they smell someone has smoked a a joint they are invoking EMERGENCY search powers under the Misuse of Drugs Act.

    So emergencys can include a person smoking a joint in NZ. An Emergency for the SIS will probably be about as threatening.

    ISIS is USA created and Saudi funded. They talk of ‘revenge’, by which I guess they mean all the killing, destruction and support of Israel that the USA does in the region.

    If there were no oil in the middle east the yanks would not be active and involved there.

  19. Just look what has been done in Tasmania about new anti protest laws targeting environmental protesters.

    One question i have never seen asked when these new law/powers are granted, under what situation will you no longer need them. If they are really doing a good job of making us safer the powers should be removed once certain situations occur Ie no terror attacks for 4 years in NZ.

Comments are closed.