Similar Posts

- Advertisement -

4 Comments

  1. The only reason for security is security for the government against the people of New Zealand. This is the joke of a supposed 4th estate made up of professional journalists who are supposed to hold the government to account. For decades now politicians, right wing guest are allowed to outnumber left wing guests. I remember when Snowden was giving his speech which confirmed that John Key had directed the GCSB to spy on New Zealanders and all the media could do is act as adjuncts of the National Party. I don’t want to wast any ones time by listing how many times commercial media has let one by the National Party but there are a lot of cases like this. If the Prime Minister directs the GCSB and ISIS against an Internet tycoon and brakes every law in the process at the behest of the Prime Ministers rich Hollywood mates and can’t direct New Zealand’s Security apparatus into defending the governments own people well, then that ought to be all over every headline.

    1. Suggest an apolitical classical model intelligence service. Gather info from reliable sources, that info analysed, conclusions drawn. The far right in En Zed, neo-Nazis, skinheads, biker gangs are not noted for sophisticated organisation.
      “The only reason for security is security for the government against the people of New Zealand.”
      Latter quote indicates- in a western democratic state- a naive, opportunistic misunderstanding, perhaps calculated of the proper use of an intelligence service.
      In 1588 Francis Walsingham gave Elizabeth l’s Council the order-of-battle of the Spanish Armada. This allowed her navy to ambush them in the English Channel. The rest is history!
      Intelligence, ask the Israelis about the Six Day War, allowed David to defeat multiple Goliaths!
      Intelligence allowed Kennedy to call Kruschev’s bluff over the Cuban Missile Crisis in ‘63!
      There is intelligent political oversight in a western democratic state!

    2. Well I think the French GIGN and the DGSD has got it pretty much correct after decades even centuries of combating small guerrilla forces from Moroccan independence to ISIS today. There legislation allows them to infiltrate terror cells both internationally and domestically, they even have video footage of terrorist not even knowing they’re being filmed stock picking weapons in other European countries that are intended for strikes in France.

      Of course preventative measures can only go so far but in 2016 as part of an increased terror alert French soldiers deployed as part of the response spoiled a robbery at a McDonalds, GIGN operators armed but in plain clothes just waited outside for the perps to leave the restaurant to avoid a shoot out in a restaurant and just chased them down, perps tried shooting it out with them, one shot centre mass put that idea down pretty hard.

      So if we had of defined terrorism as the French do, perhaps we would have increased our terror alert so that our own SAS where deployable with in minutes of all major thoroughfares in New Zealand only to wait for Brenton to come out of the first mosque attack, only to take what he had learnt to the second mosque.

      And the French Military was able to put down an ISIS inspired coup in North Africa. I just don’t think we have what it takes any more, I just don’t think we make a Ross Meurant type of ass kicking any more. Since 1990 every bureaucracy in New Zealand has been infected by neoliberal millennials who just grew up to good. So do I think the SIS and GCSB is infected with this strain of neoliberal well yeah, I do think that. It would be extra ordinary if they didn’t, just look at Rebeca Kitteridge, she’s got as much intelegence as the CIA handbook on how to treat China, I mean if you’d want to nurture Pholosopher Kings well that’s one position that denotes Intellegence, don’t you think.

      I think we’d be much better off learning from The French on these matters than trying to rebuild The SIS, GCSB and police.

  2. Reminds me of the Erebus Crash and the Enquiry lead by Sir Robert Muldoon, I still do this day don’t understand why someone would change the flight path of the plane and not instruct the pilot ?

    Worse still destroy important documents and break into the pilots house and steal his diaries ?

    Wine Box Enquiry likewise ?

Comments are closed.