Posts by Russell Brown
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
What Stephen and Rich said: Thanks Graeme; and two years seems like an awfully long time to detain people we presume to be guilty*
It does. But as I noted in another thread, Iti and his nephew were on Friday granted leave to apply for home detention, which seems a reasonable compromise.
-
Fair enough. Richards should just be thankful he's not my partner, other wise he'd be in his very own am-dram production of the Lysistrata. :)
Heh. I'm scared just thinking about it ...
-
Consistency Russell.
You can't rubbish my question which leads to the OTT actions of Len and latter state it as fact without losing credibility.Sorry Michael, I don't understand your point.
-
Better do some work this morning, but while we're making predictions ...
I'm guessing most if not all of what's been leaked will turn up in evidence, but will stand or fall on its context (and, in the case of bugged conversations wrt to arms charges, its legal admissability).
We and/or a court might hear it and still think "paranoid police idiocy", but there will still be enough in it to embarrass the supporters of those arrested. John Minto's characterisation of the bugged evidence against those who won't be facing TSA charges as "something you'd hear at any gun club" may well be seen as very charitable indeed.
And trying to buy a grenade launcher (this seems pretty firm, given that the evidence has been presented in the police documents provided to the Dom Post by a defence lawyer, who does not seem to have denied it) might not make Tame Iti a terrorist so much as an idiot, but it won't look good. Some people will still be moved to defend that, starting a whole other shitfight.
I do feel sympathy towards at least some of those arrested, but the stupid statements by some of those around them make me feel less sympathetic than I otherwise might.
Anyway, I'm pleased that it appears that most or all of those denied bail (perhaps not Mr Lockett) will be able to apply for home detention. Given the time to trial, that seems only reasonable.
-
Bollocks. TV3's vision came from an indymedia guy with a handicam. Their shooters actually missed it.
Ah. Thanks for that. Still, I presume the stuff in their extended clip came from their own cameras?
What One needs to do is follow 3's example and start treating its website as a stand-alone news medium. That wild footage they posted is choice.
-
And SFW? Don't know why this needs repeating but OVENS WALKED AWAY - RICHARDS WENT AND MADE AN ALREADY HEATED SITUATION WORSE.
He did, but I thought I'd said as much. I was addressing Michael's dark mutterings about an "interesting insite" into Richards' actions wrt Ovens, which seemed completely obvious to me. He got upset because his partner didn't get a hearing, got into a stupid screaming match and then did something stupid and dangerous.
-
So why did you include that in you opening of your new thread?
Um, because it's a fact. You've mentioned it in several posts as if it's some kind of secret.
That peoples relations do play a part in their actions - Clarks defense for Mallards attack, an interesting insite as to why he clocked Mintos partner?
Well, duh. What happened to Ovens quite obviously is what made Richards lose his temper. She was given a megaphone by an organiser but never got to speak because the dimwit tendency among the protesters wouldn't stop chanting "Lies! Lies! Lies!"
CTU have lost their credibility Len & Jill aren't helping that any right now either
On what basis are you saying the CTU has "lost its credibility"? Do you actually know anything about the CTU?
And who are you planning on denouncing tomorrow, Michael?
-
This morning's Herald story is illuminating.
Turns out, Ovens had a reasonable expectation of a hearing when she went out to the crowd -- she was handed the megaphone by an organiser. But the idiot tendency kept on chanting "Lies! Lies! Lies!" until she gave up. I'm sorry, but what a bunch of fools.
-
But we're supposed to have a right to protest, so I'm a little concerned that the PM sends the spies after anyone who does, especially the ones that write books or make movies critical of government policies, and I'm concerned whether they said something really stupid last year or not.
Sigh ... believe what you want. You're clearly not amenable to reason.
-
Jill as a labour party member was a target of the protest irrespective of her personal stand point the party was the target of the protest to yeld would be to yeld to the party especially as she is a recent convert so "Scab" is fitting as well.
That's the part I honestly don't get. Are you saying all union members who are Labour Party members are "scabs" as of two weeks ago? What is the actual aim of such a protest? Contrary to certain fevered opinion, the Labour Party does not actually direct the police.
Last ←Newer Page 1 … 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 … 2279 Older→ First