Saturday, December 25, 2004

Democracy or socialism

No right turn notes

Democracy works best when people participate

But if one reads the following post he spends his time trying to subvert democracy.

Writing in the Guardian, Tony Benn highlights six dangers for Labour which are progressively alienating its core supporters.
and that the New Zealand Labour Party has adopted the Blairite [read democratic] tactic of trying to outflank their opposition on the right. While this robs National of issues .

Labour has fought hard to avoid being labelled "soft on crime"

Which probably has something to do with almost everyone who voted telling them they wanted them to be harder on crime in a referendum. Labour has decided to only mildly ignore their wishes plotting a course halfway between democracy (following the referendum) and total disregard for democracy (doing what no right turn seems to want).

This is also curious
He argues

The SIS, in a transparent play for more funding, claims that Islamic terrorists are likely to be in New Zealand. I guess they have to explain the success of the free Zaoui campaign somehow. But seriously, I think Keith Locke is right to ask why, if there are so many "terrorists" and "terrorist sympathisers" in New Zealand, none of them have been charged. We have laws on our books making it a crime to collect money or financially support terrorist organisations. And we have laws against assisting in the production of weapons of mass destruction. If the SIS has concrete evidence that people in New Zealand are doing these things, they should hand it to the police so it can be put before the courts.

Well last time I check sympathising with terrorists was not a crime. These individuals have obviously not committed any crimes against NZ because there have been no terrorist actions against NZ since France attacked us (damn frogs).
NRT's question amounts to asking "why don’t we breach human rights by arresting people for crimes they have not yet committed". Or removing the presumption of innocence.
It is likely that there are some people in NZ who were terrorists overseas there is probably a large number of sympathisers and a small number of people who would take terrorist action if they had the chance the fact that one could say those things does not
A) Mean that one can tell exactly who is doing it
Or B) that arresting people for "excessive importation of fertilizer and sulphuric acid" is going to achieve anything other than making it impossible to keep an eye on those groups.


Blogger Greg Stephens said...

Sentences are longer than they ever have been previously under this government. Also that referendum question was so biased that it is impossible to say 'no', it asks about four different questions in one!

12:06 AM  
Blogger Genius said...

Come on do - you seriously think either of those two things make any difference at all? (public opinion will still be for harsher penalties)

1:14 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home