Dear Andrew Little – there are some really, really, really big problems with your Terrorism Suppression (Control Orders) Bill
For reasons known only to them, the bloody Greens decided to attack this Terrorism Suppression (Control Orders) Bill from the perspective of identity politics…
Ghahraman is worried that the legislation employs foreign nations’ definitions of what terror is. She said countries like Iran – where she was born – consider feminists and political activists as terrorists.
“We are literally doubling down on oppression that foreign nations might be employing to define dissidence as terrorists, and we’re not employing New Zealand law in this… There is no place for it.”
The law might affect Mark Taylor, known as the “Kiwi Jihadist”, a New Zealander who lived with IS extremists in Syria for around five years, and earlier this year surrendered to local forces and was jailed in a Kurdish prison.
Ghahraman said Taylor could be tried if he made it back to New Zealand, and agencies like the Government Security Communications Bureau (GCSB) could watch him closely.
“There’s no place for this extra sort of dog-whistle law-making.”
Ghahraman said what’s “frightening” about the new law is that New Zealand would be relying on evidence collected by “foreign agencies that may have employed torture and we know that’s not going to be reliable information”.
“We know that they may be relying on convictions that are completely unsafe, or are actually targeted at political dissidence rather than actual terrorists.”
Ghahraman said the proposed law panders to “that tough on crime, war on terror language that especially in a post-Christchurch New Zealand has no place here”.
“We know that it will rile up fear and anxiety about something that isn’t a problem… We do need terrorism to be a crime, but we need to try it in appropriate circumstances.”
…lovely, but beyond all the alienating identity politics rhetoric are same fundamental issues at stake here that the entire population needs to be concerned about and Andrew Little needs to re-evaluate.
Look, the idea that we have some type of safety net for the likes of this Mark Taylor clown is admirable. Electronic monitoring, restricted internet use, stopping association with some people, meeting with police twice a week and rehabilitation are all very worthwhile goals in attempting to reintegrate lonely people like Taylor back into the community, because you can’t just allow them to walk around without some attempt to rehabilitate them.
Taylor joined an Islamic death cult who is accused of some truly horrific acts, but his bumbling incompetence showed him up more as a lonely bloke who got caught up in online propaganda and realised very quickly that the dream of a Caliphate was a dreadful reality.
So sure, let’s have a law that entrenches a response to the Mark Taylor’s amongst us that builds an infrastructure of processes that helps rehabilitate him.
So far, so dandy.
But like with anything the bloody Government suggests, it’s not until you have a deep dive into the fine print that you start seeing a law that has a terribly large amount of worrying holes in it.
So you will be guilty of future terror acts that you don’t know anything about and it seems to rely on lots of secret evidence that you as the accused won’t be able to challenge.
Worst of all, the evidential standards for this are, let’s say, woeful…
…balance of fucking probabilities? The same evidential threshold in civil disputes?
The Government want to allow secret evidence to find people guilty of future terror attacks they didn’t know happened using the balance of probabilities as the evidential threshold?
As someone currently fighting the NZ Police from domestically adopting secret evidence and secret trials, I find them wanting to enshrine it here pretty chilling.
We want an infrastructure that helps rehabilitate the Mark Taylor’s of the world and this aspect should be welcomed, but scratch the surface and there are some very worrying aspects to this new law that have very little check and balance built in.
If the Greens could reframe this as a civil liberties issue, which it most certainly is, they would get a lot more support.
Dear Andrew Little – you need to have a long hard look at some of these loopholes because you could fly a plane through some of them.
Just for once thank God for the Greens, they make some excellent points and I for one hope they keep on making them. As for Labour why don’t they just merge with National and be done with it?
Golriz may come across as overly PC and petty on identity issues, but on this her legal qualifications show through, she could see there is something very flawed with this draft piece of law.
Modern Labour is looking more and more like National (Lite).
Where has the truly left wing gone, that genuinely cared for the 90+% of people, NOT the top lot who have enough money?
Ah, the good old days, eh? Sadly, we didn’t always know what we had.
Do we know now?
Words from a Kiwi Legend here 🙂
I know New Zealand has Changed a Lot for The Worst in my 62 years of life ! Back in The 1960’s-70’s NZ was Prosperous I was doing my Engineering Apprenticeship there was 10000 across NZ we had HEAVY Engineering Workshops at All The NZR sites around NZ place all the Private one’s like LEES INDUSTRIES who took over Skillings Implements where we Made Forklifts & Many other Hydraulic Equipment ! Then there was http://www.agprice.co.nz now just surviving NZ’s Largest Foundry Capable of Casting a 10 Tonne Job with All the Modern Machine shop to Finish The Job !
We had Huge Hydro & Geothermal Power Schemes on The Go EDNZ, MOW, P&T owned by The State for The PEOPLE of NZ ! Then Something Went Horribly Wrong in The 1980’s-90’s Rogernomics followed on from Muldoons Era when he had us All Fearing Cossacks Marching across Our TV screens & RED’S Under Our Beds because of BIG Norm’s, Kirks Pension Scheme which was GOING to Invest a Mere 15% INTO All NZ Businesses if They Needed Extra Fund’s ! Not Long after I Finished my Trade Muldoon had MOST Large Manufacturing Businesses Closing Down Their NZ Plant’s because Piggy Muldoon said it was Cheaper to IMPORT he was So Wrong in so many Ways “BIG Norms” Pension funds were worth Billions when Muldoon wound them up ! And when Piggy said IMPORT instead of Local Manufacturing he Created a Poorer New Zealand we have Lost Our Skill Base to CHEAP Communist China the People Muldoon Hated ! Now National Love Them they gave Multi Million dollar Railway Rolling Stock Contracts to China 10 Year’s which are a Failure in QUALITY ! I ask The Question has China made these Locomotives to The High ISO 9001 & Telarc Standards NZ uses ? If so why are they Failing 6 Loco’s to be Cut up for Scrap not even 10 Year’s old ? A&G Price Engineering from Thames WANTED that Work along with Hillside Workshops, Dunedin and there are Now 100 Locomotives & 900 WAGONS needed again by KIWI Rail Where will Labour get Them Made by KIWI’S or CHEAP underpaid Chinese ? Keep $2 Billion here in NZ Economy Create 1000’s of WELL PAID NZ Job’s It’s a NO BRAINER !
But hay Our Politicians aren’t Working For Us ANYMORE ?
You are Right the Left say they are Left but they continue to look after The Communist RIGHT ! It’s so Hard to know who’s LEFT, RIGHT or Communist Capitalists
I recommend emailing an appropriate copy of this to Andrew Little’s office, with a request for acknowledgement of receipt of that email. Perhaps with a print-out posted as well.
That way, they cannot say, eg, “Well, it was never raised”, or “It was never put to us”.
This is a really serious consideration, which will impact on NZ Aotearoa for a long time and have far reaching consequences.
And, to be sure such emails get read, it helps if the subject line is something to the effect of “Attention Bob Brown” (whoever).
FFS, are you stupid? They know what has been drafted, Little is a little nutter, a control freak nutter, wanting to bring in semi Nazi laws here.
Oh far out Marc. Kheala’s comment isn’t worth a spray. The key to this new legislation will be the government having to front the defendants legal fees.
I mean first of all to trigger a control order you would have had to nurture a terrorist network of friends and relationships in order to coerce a political outcome. Basically blow shit up, let’s not forget that.
Do I think that such an email would have any immediate effect on the bill, or on those working to get it passed? No.
But further down the track it is the words that were not spoken, the thoughts that were not expressed, that can cause the most regret.
By your argument, Ghahraman could have been talked out of speaking up. Yet her words have others stopping and thinking about it all, about what they’re doing, and the consequences.
Throw a pebble in a pond – the ripples are small, but they can spread a long way.
Andrew Little is neither a control freak, nor is he a nutter. The drafting of the bill would have happened under advisement, at least, from whichever branches of the multi-tentacled security bureau.
I think that Andrew would have considered that the security spooks ‘know best’ what is needed for national and international security, that he would be relying on their expertise and experience. Also, he is probably under various international pressures in regard to the format of the bill.
But all this offers us a chance to speak out against the toxic erosion of individual rights, while we still know what it is like to even have them.
I’m a strong supporter of the Government and what they are doing but I can’t stand the sight of Ghahraman. She would let Isis executioners into NZ and then say they are just misunderstood victims. I don’t trust her one bit and see her as a liability for the Government.
I can see what Andrew Little is trying to do but to my eye he is putting too much priority on placating the Greens and not enough of protecting Kiwis. He’s got the balance wrong.
Mark Taylor made diabolical choices. He betrayed every New Zealander and even advocated terror attacks on Anzac Day parades etc with all that entails. That alone should 100% guarantee he NEVER steps foot on NZ soil again. He had his opportunity to do the right thing but chose a different deadly path. That path was an epic fail and now he wants to return. Tough. I’m an empathetic man but Taylor and anyone like him can rot in hell.
There are genuine refugees who need our help. Taylor’s situation damages considerable goodwill toward those folk.
A big NO to ticking time bombs.
I will however give my blessing to Taylor returning to NZ as deck cargo…on a submarine.
Jacindafan – “I am a strong supporter of the Government and what they are doing but I can’t stand the sight of Ghahraman. She would let Isis executioners into NZ and then say they are just misunderstood victims. I don’t trust her one bit and see her as a liability for the Government. ”
Ditto. When I saw Ghahraman addressing this issue, what struck me immediately was how speedily and emphatically she laid out her views, totally devoid of the circumspection with which lawyers usually address such matters. This isn’t about placating the Greens, this is about NZ’ers seizing finite control of current and future threats to all.
Even if Taylor is just a dangerous fool, if he is to be allowed back into this country at all, then there should be no limits whatsoever to the personal restrictions placed upon him as he has tried to be a monster once, and he is unbalanced enough to try again.
If New Zealand had the Mental Hospital’s of the Past like Sea View in Hokitika where I was once a Boilerman ! PEOPLE like Taylor who were a Terrorist Threat to Our Good Nation would be Locked up Securely Feed, & Housed with Visiting Right’s etc ! He could be controlled & Monitored by Professional Psych Doctors & Nurses which would help vary better than any Copper !
You have outed yourself as a brainless Jacindafan, there is no other word for it. This draft law is draconian and stupid.
Marc,
Sorry to hear things are going so badly for you and that you’re all chewed up and bitter inside. Take comfort in knowing most blue cheerleaders are also struggling to function with their frustration and hatred at being in opposition. It’s a given that mindset won’t be changing in the next few years at least.
Yes, I’m a Jacinda fan. Well done for being astute enough to recognize that. The user name was obviously helpful to you so I’m happy to confirm I’ve been “outed” as such.
Unfortunately, you’ve outed yourself as a quintessential online troll who will insult anyone who has the audacity to have a different political perspective to yourself. I’m sure there is help available.
Thanks for proving my point.
Actually Marc you’ve offered nothing but vitriol and abuse…
“FFS, are you stupid?”
” Little is a little nutter, a control freak nutter”
“You have outed yourself as a brainless Jacindafan”
Can you offer alternatives to this bill? If not I suggest that it is you that is a stupid, brainless nutter, trolling these pages on behalf of Bridges.
People can disagree but the one thing Little has spades on you and your National mates, is intellect and integrity.
There are laws and surveillance measures in place for suspects and so forth, not more needed.
Yes. The Mark Taylors of this world can stay where they are, in some Middle East hellhole, and contemplate the meaning of life as they see it. There is NO reason for NZ to welcome/allow them back. We are (to remind you) a sovereign state, and can choose who comes here, and who never comes back.
In NZ the erosion of democracy and human rights is all in the fine print, and often ‘terrorism’ is used to do that.
The government, police/SIS/GCSB seem to use the terror laws to reduce free speech, work for big business, and surveillance on animal rights and anti capitalists rather than noticing the Tarrents in NZ, the 30 guns in an Auckland apartment, and not looking too hard as what our open borders mean, deregulated immigration, having people coming in and out of NZ under different identities so they don’t know who is in NZ or not, tuning a blind eye to corruption, fraudulent documentation, citizenship for capitalists and exploiters… https://www.immigration.govt.nz/about-us/media-centre/media-releases/migrant-exploitation-sentences-upheld-court-of-appeal https://www.immigration.govt.nz/about-us/media-centre/media-releases/migrant-exploitation-sentences-upheld-court-of-appeal https://www.immigration.govt.nz/about-us/media-centre/media-releases/man-arrested-for-human-trafficking-slavery-following-joint-inz-police-investigation
fake documentation from our ‘approved’ providers to get into NZ which contributes to fraud, poverty and terrorism, https://www.immigration.govt.nz/about-us/media-centre/media-releases/first-private-training-establishment-charged-convicted-immigration-fraud https://www.immigration.govt.nz/about-us/media-centre/media-releases/work-underway-to-address-risks-and-grow-vietnam-education-market
Maybe Labour and Greens need to look at what they appear to be promoting because defending a sex slave wannabe terrorist and P importers and not caring about the growing amount of people traffickers and exploiters getting citizenship here, organisations operating with history of frauds, and god knows how many terrorists are now dual citizens, just seem out of touch especially as they have a history of the above inaction for lengthy periods of time, little risk control, giving criminals citizenship or safe haven here who go on to offend and constant misuse of terror and surveillance laws on people who don’t seem to be doing any social harm while ignoring and encouraging people who are. (aka granting Tarrent automatic weapons and rubber stamping his gun license, allowing so much money laundering in NZ and when caught allowing discharges without conviction or 4 months home detention in your luxury penthouse apartment).
The above abuses on democracy and rights are 100% pure Natz, but sadly Labour seems to be too Nat Lite on human rights abuse law changes in the fine print just like the Natz.
“The Government want to allow secret evidence to find people guilty…”
Questions of secrecy of government info and charges is a ‘live’ one in Australia at the moment, apparently.
The Press/ Media are running a campaign which wants to see the following six changes to their laws:
1. The right to challenge a warrant to be used for a police raid against a journalist
2. Exemptions for journalists from some national security laws
3. Stronger protections for public sector whistleblowers
4. A more open approach to Freedom of Information
5. Curbs on the government stamping papers as “secret” to prevent their release
6. Defamation law reform
(However) “Prime Minister Scott Morrison declined to rule out the prosecution of ABC journalists Dan Oakes and Sam Clark and NewsCorp Australia journalist Annika Smethurst after police raids in June over their reports on national security.”
Yesterday, Monday 21st, some of the main newspapers redacted large sections of their front pages by way of protest, to illustrate their campaign. There’s an image of this, with the background information, at this Sydney Morning Herald link.
Suzi gives you a mention in dispatches, Martyn:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xW-_q2pxqw
Why is the Government falling over itself to formulate legislation for possibly only one person – a deluded individual who was trained by the NZ Army for heaven’s sake. Thank heavens for the Green spokesperson who seems to have a grip on reality and a pretty fair understanding on how the State can generate fear to impose draconian legislation that could come to haunt potentially innocent law abiding people who upset political sensitivities in the future. What does the government, and more so the opposition, think NZers are, a pathetic mob that needs a mother to protect them from some mythical ogre who hides behind the curtains at night? As a functioning society, we are at greater risk of exploitative corporate entities than a deluded individual who needs a psychiatrist more than the attentions of the bloated security systems of the state. As for National’s amendments – what a load of unmitigated cringeworthy stupidity. Treating 14 year olds as potential potential mass murderers is probably the best way to make sure they will be a future danger to society. One only has to look at the results of Hokio, Kohitere and the other State institutions for ‘child offenders’ of the past to see where such idiocy ends.
If a person is seconded to, say, the Jihad-e-Sazandegi, and after completing his or her term of service in Iran returns to New Zealand, no sensible person or government would consider slapping a terrorist control order on him or her.
But is it completely beyond the bounds of possibility that such a thing could happen under Andrew Little’s legislation, given the climate of grossly false claims and blatant dissimulation in which the Five Eyes alliance operates?
I don’t thing it is beyond the bounds of possibility, and that is one reason why this legislation must be resisted by all people of good will. It is bad law in principle and it may be worse in application.
This government, with a policeman’s daughter at its head, is intent on turning New Zealand into a police state, in which the Chief Censor and the security services between them will be able to control what members of the New Zealand public read, who they hear and who they associate with.
And we will just ignore their directions.
+1