Search and Surveillance Submissions a sick joke
"Is it an act of provocation and arrogance or just simple ignorance that the Justice and Electoral Select Committee is meeting on the 15th of October to hear submissions on the Search and Surveillance Bill?" asked Peter Steiner of the October 15th Solidarity Group.
Two years ago to the day, New Zealand woke to the so-called 'Terror Raids'. Police Operation 8 was in full swing; Ruatoki was locked down, a school bus was stopped, other children were held in sheds and over 60 different places across the country were raided. 17 people ended up remanded in custody. It took a month for all of them to get bail.
"This bill legalises the dodgy and arguably illegal police tactics used in Operation 8. It is not at all extreme to suggest that this law creates a police state. The Parliamentary response to police breaking the law should not be to retrospectively legalise what they have done and give them more power."
Referring to the recent release of many SIS files, Peter Steiner said, "People have been appalled at the information contained in SIS files, they find it ludicrous that children as young as ten were followed. However, what is often over-looked is the fact that many of us are regularly under surveillance by the police, as proved in Operation 8 files.
"If the Bill comes to pass," Peter Steiner said, "the laws in this land will be fundamentally altered."
Peter Steiner explained that the Search and Surveillance Bill will allow more enforcement agencies to use more surveillance devices. It will also allow more searches without warrants. And very chillingly, the right to silence is removed.
"Using an Examination Order," he explained, "someone can be ordered to go to a certain place to answer questions from the police. People will be ordered to report for interrogation, if they do not talk, they can be charged."
At the time of the raids, there was public disbelief at the rampant state paranoia that obviously existed. There was shock at the level of police surveillance, including the knowledge that thousands of people's TradeMe accounts were looked at. And there was deep disgust expressed at the actions of the police in Ruatoki. Many people were offended by the police erecting a road block on the confiscation line.
Now, two years later, whilst some of those people caught up in the raids are commemorating the event with 'Explosive Expression', an art exhibition in Wellington, others will be in Parliament on the 15th presenting submissions against the Search and Surveillance Bill.
Some of the people caught up in the road block have contributed art work to Explosive Expression and are in Wellington this week.
"We invite people to visit the art exhibition at Thistle Hall," said Peter Steiner. "But we also ask people to speak out against the Search and Surveillance Bill. This Bill must be stopped."
Comments
Whether there is significance
Whether there is significance behind the timing of the committees hearings into the new Police State Bill before Parliament is to be seen, it feels that way, but the point is I suppose that there are parts of the bill that were intended to be knocked out, a ruse or sorts to give select committees the ability to be portrayed as proactive. However in the end it is merely rubber stamping the pathway for this country to enter into the next phase of Policocracy.
Questions need to be asked about Copaganda techniques used by police and Government preparing the NZ state for the new state order for the want of a better term.
Why is tv channel programming riddled with pro police series whether fictional or reality shows and should there be a limit in percentage wise of blatantly pro police propaganda shows on nationwide TV.
What percentage of mainstream media daily news comes from police sources? This has been the most worrying sign that the police are waging a psychological war against the reality that a large portion of society experiences when encountering police.
This approach seems to coincide with the fascist attitudes expressed by the chancellor on the film V for Vendetta where he states, "I want everyone to remember why they need us"...in this case the line is to protect us from terrorism / gangs. This type of tactic has been well used in the US by the fascist Homeland Security mob with their terror threat level propaganda.
Once upon a time the term, 'neighbourhood watch', used to refer to neighbours doing the obvious, watching out for each other, however police have launched a campaign to convert that social programme into the new dob in your neighbour hotline in order to create a nation of snitches and spies and thus converting the neighbourhood watch motto from one of neighbours working together to one of neighbours watching each other in the name of 'crime prevention' - a doublespeak term for precrimes intervention.
The other use of such websites as http://www.crimestoppers-nz.org (which is just a rebranding of the UK version) is by the police themselves, who in the UK, constantly ring these anonymous 0800 numbers and dob in suspects in order to manufacture the needed grounds for search and surveillance warrants.
Which begs the last question, how many calls to the 0800 hotline come from either police detectives themselves or from paid informants?
Seems like an argument for
Seems like an argument for opting out of television, at least from where I stand.
Re
I don't think those misguided people running around in the Urewera's with guns and playing soldier are the best example to use as to why the law should be fought, infact if anything the opposite, they would be seen as a reason as to why society feels they need it.
I think you are also misreading the public sentiment, even amongst the left and activist communities into the Urewera group, had the information as to what they had been doing been supressed and hidden you would be able to manipulate sympathy, but that isn't the case.
Not a good example or argument, sorry.
Thanks for that Aaron.
Thanks for that Aaron.
I think you are also
The public sentiment derived from an onslaught of 3 months of non-stop bombardment of one side of the news? You have got to be kidding right?
The first day, the cops said the word terrorism, the police commish guaranteed it, the media repeated every word verbatim, ratings went through the ceiling, and the public got blindsided by the word terrorism and the lack of any journalistic integrity.
Two weeks later the cops were still saying terrorism, PM Clark was saying it, Parliament sliced its way through a revamp of the terror act, and the media like little cop mouthpieces, repeated it all verbatim like a broken record, ratings went through the roof, and the minions bought it lock stock.
A month later the head stooge solicitor general said no terrorism, the cops were instructed not to publicly use the word terrorism anymore, the PM and executive felt betrayed by the police commish, the police commish felt betrayed by the dorks at Otahuhu, but the media kept up the terror onslaught and johnny public was none the wiser.
Three months later the cops were quietly awaiting the trials, dissapointed at no terror charges, resigned to firearms charges, a new Government in power, old executive start retirement plans, the media were still squawking terrorism, and the public were none the wiser.
Now two years down the track...with the 17 defendants still awaiting trial, courts suppressed up all the pretrial leadups, lots of hush hush about high court rulings with mainstream media sitting on the story of the century, yet the public are gently lead along by the piper onto other more pressing ratings raising events, none the wiser, no more informed than the first day of the raids.
It is surprising there is anyone out there in this country who does not hold the police position on the raids....ah back in the day they used to refer to that as brainwashed propaganda....nowadays its called the public sentiment. Fortunately not everyone is so fucking naive, and there are many who are awaiting the real story and many more who know those arrested and who refuse to be coerced into this society of secrets paranoid fantasy.
So again, public sentiment, pluueeze. Wait till the trials are over, save your judgement until then.
The only people manipulating sympathy to date are the cops, and the mainstream media....public sentiment is their world, hyped up fear mongering is their product.
Jellymonic proves the whole point
It is patently evident Jellymonic's own firm opinion is based solely on the "official" Crown line. It is a fact that Police unlawfully and oppressively exceeded their authority in these raids and it is a fact that the Court has indeed suppressed the ex-culpatory evidence which proves that these 20 or so accused are not terrorists. Jellymonic's ill-informed position demonstrates how extremely dangerous the misuse of public power is. Perhaps the most insidious is seeing how easy it is to get people like Jellymonic to believe - and act on - the opposite of what is true.
Currently there are no
Currently there are no warrants that allow cops to install cameras on private property. To say this bill is merely about updating the law is disingenuous. To go from no cameras to any cameras anywhere is a revolution in police powers.
the rules differ depending on who you are
We know that the police exceeded their powers in the so called terrorist raids thanks to people like Vince Siemer who on Kiwis first published an article about the suppressed Winkelmann decision which determined that in 6 of the 9 search warrants there was "No reasonable grounds for issue of (the) warrants"
Instead of addressing the real issues of how and why those warrants were issued and the implication on the rights of those effected by those warrants , those in power now appear to be again targeting Vince to silence him ..
What many are unaware of is that while we are wishing to give the Police wider search and seizure powers , so that they don’t have to break the law, we continue to restrict Private investigators ability to collect evidence for the defence by continuing to deny them the right to take Photographs and make recordings.
I was a police sergeant 20 years ago and have been a PI for 5 years , this world is different to the police service I served in , so much so that I think I am on a different planet read my story http://www.indymedia.org.nz/article/77852/animal-welfare-institute-new-zealand
Forget the BORA you have only three rights, Put up , shut up and pay up.
This bill brings up an issue
This bill brings up an issue that I think is worth discussing, particularly for those that advocate the end of private property doctrines. Is that even feasible an idea while the only power restricting police intelligence spy groups at the moment from placing surveillance cameras and bugs on private property eminates from the adherance of Parliament to the doctrine of land tenure. Would the removal of private land boundaries not open the floodgates to the police state? Just some thoughts.
I deal with people who have
I deal with people who have their houses sold out from under them when the so called Mortgaee cannot show proof of owning the mortgage,
people who have been illegally searched by the police ie warrants executed no charges laid
People who have had whole herds of deer taken by the dept conservation given to a person who runs deer shooting trips ( no charges no warrant ) ,
People who are prosecuted for taking a limb off the tree which rubs agaisnt their house in the wind.
People who have to keep windows and doors secured because they have a swiming pool and have brought up kids on a yacht while kids drown in council storm drains
We had rights over our property years ago but the council has moved inside the boundaries so why should the state not do the same they have a serious issue of not being able to produce evidence which was unlawfully gained when it is so easy to make it legal
There are judges who do not recognise the bill of rights .
If we have no rights to the rights afforded to us under the bill of rights why should we expect to have rights to our own property?