Similar Posts

- Advertisement -

5 Comments

  1. I think Martyn Bradbury had it correct the first time – we don’t want the government to have real time surveillance powers.

    Police doing there job our side a court room or in the process of crown control is one. Arresting some one for disorderly behavoir or saying something stupid to incite mayhem then I’d expect the cops to nip that in the bud. But showing upto some guys house who is on the other side of town and arresting someone for muttering something is just going way to hard.

    The fact that state surveillance laws was set so low and broad that people can be warned, not even fined or sent to jail but just frowned at means the survelince acts was designed to be way to broad. If it was terrorist we were truely after then set the penalties for 15 year jail terms or what ever threshold comes out of the Tarrant case.

    To develop laws around high speed commendation technology an educated population is required. We allowed this monster to grow on us because our education system is simply not sophisticated enough to deal with modern high speed technology and nuance. We don’t just have to play with the things we have to be able to screw up and then fix it quick, Y’know. And with the current colonial testing regime a lot of nuance is lost in the ticking of boxes.

    So yeah we just have to go right back to first principles, Y’know? Who are we, where are we from, keep telling our stories. And don’t take no shit from no one,

  2. He’s just exploiting the work of the Free Speech Coalition for his political purposes.

    His tax policy, the work of the Taxpayers Union.

  3. The best way to deplatform Seymour is to completely ignore him. He already gets a disproportionate amount of airtime compared to vote percentage. Every time someone screams about what he’s said the media instantly put him on the tv/radio and it gives him a boost. Any publicity is good publicity right?

    1. As far back as I can remember every mino and micro party always complains about the lack of media coverage of minor parties. Okay so coverage is being heaped on ACT but do we really want to lessen coverage of minor parties just because it is ACT.

Comments are closed.