Wrong decision imo II

oh please pick me to be one of ya peers Yak - GUILTY and OFF WITH HIS HEAD are the two cries I shall bring

Bob you keep forgetting (unless I missed it) that the govt might agree with you:

"The Crown will now consider the judge's ruling and directions and decide if it is appropriate to pursue an appeal."

still a victory (for now at least) for them that believe in openess, accountability and above all else PEACE

Something worth remembering:


http://www.thestandard.org.nz/nat-kneejerk-over-waihopai-3/

Yak: Ok nothing new has been added and im not going to keep repeating.

Tony: youve got to be kidding me - Are you saying no one is allowed an opinion unless theyre an expert. Smoking is bad :sorry your not a scientist. Global warming? Likewise. Vegetarian: sorry your not a farmer or a butcher you arent qualified.

BD: not sure how its a victory for "openess, accountability and above all else PEACE" but how is off with his head peaceful unless youre after silence from me? :p

KB: what a biased article. He didnt say it set a principle in the legal or otherwise sense. But ill come back to this in a sec.

The article seems to skip over the fact that the govt sets the law for the courts to interpret. If the courts/juries interpret the law outside of what was intended then the govt would look at clarifying it. Perhaps excluding things such as this that were taken outside of its intended and previously used effect.

Criminal cases don't set precedence but they sometimes have loop holes or unintended consequences. There is a law that can be changed as they were judged by matching facts to the law (both in how a trial should run and the charges under a particular law.

As a slightly humorous outcome you could now see a situation where someone said I honestly thought it was legal to do what I did because those guys did and it worked. It would be possible to claim of right over claim of right :p

God knows all the lefty mouths runeth over in froth when a white collar fraudster gets off on a technicality of the law.

And reinforces my view also.

If I had an honest believe that the "Law of Dragons" required me to kill you etc.

Why is ONE regarded as reasonable, and the other gets me sent to a mental hospital? Isn't that going further than is allowed?

Well it's not for lack of me trying to get you to provide new information
You just keep stating things as fact and then not providing any source beyond your own jaded speculation!

Well it's about the reason why you hold that belief, right? If you hold the belief that dragons exist and it's because you're batshit insane, then the appropriate manner to deal with that would be NGRI and off to a mental hospital with you right? What exactly is your question here?

for christ sake pechora i went to the trouble of putting IMO in the title its not my problem you cant read. I even went to the trouble of saying im not interested in the legal ideals of a jury decision is right. Of course I don't know the specifics of what went through their minds and I'm only taking a guess as to what happened based on how a noninsane person would think and the public should react.

Oh, so putting "imo" after something means you get to say whatever you like and then get shitty at people who call you on not making sense and try to have a civil conversation about it? HUGE misunderstanding on my part - much apologies.

Not shitty, I was asked why I wasn't taking your points. Call it an editorial if you like, whatever.

Sure, and you can consider my posts a letter to the editor

note to ed: reader's letter needs abridging

Crown considers $1.1m lawsuit over Waihopai spy base damage... details to come via NZ Herald

"The Crown is considering suing the Waihopai Spy Base activists for $1.1 million.

Solicitor-General David Collins QC said the Crown is not able to appeal their not-guilty verdict in the District Court in Wellington, last week." from herald, no other new details

Well the law was being applied just fine up to this point. So I stand by the claim that the application of the law was wrong. Maybe it was a simply that no lawyer would have dreamed it would have worked when applied to this set of circumstances.

Anyway the disease ridden hippies should be locked up as public health dangers as a work around. As if theyre going to have enough money to pay for the damage.

fuck you with your fucking hippy call bob

If called them disease ridden Christian hippies is that ok with you?

http://www.3news.co.nz/Waihopai-supporters-may-have-spread-measles/tabid/419/articleID/148841/Default.aspx

An outbreak of measles in a remote Hokianga community may have spread to Wellington because community members travelled to the capital to support one of those on trial.

The supporters were in Wellington earlier this month to back the three men charged, and subsequently found not guilty, of damaging the Waihopai spy base.

One of the three, Sam Land, is a prominent member of their community.

Northland Health has reported that there are 30 cases in Hokianga and now one suspected case in Wellington.

One of the problems with the outbreak is the community do not believe in modern medicine and are refusing to have their children vaccinated against the scourge.

Health authorities told 3 News up to 50 children may not have protection against the virus.

One of Sam Land’s family members brought the measles over from India; Health Authorities are now trying to trace everyone who has been in contact with the measles carriers, but with the number of people who were at the Waihopai trial, containing the virus may be difficult.

no reference to him being a hippy

if he looks like a hippy, sounds like a hippy and smells like a hippy then he is a hippy

he lkooks like a man, he smells like a man he is a fucking man... who may or may not subscribe to this hippy label

which has no bearing on this at all

I think it is completely relevant - it is hippy beliefs which are at the very heart of what happened.

Holy hippy Jesus, this thread has definitely taken a turn for the worse

They have the money, just tied up in property in familty trusts. sue the hippy fuckers imo. lock em up if they can't pay.

So you're all for suing people for what they have 'tied up' in property in trusts?

BD: - Curious as to why you dont like them being called hippies - they seem to be what most people would call a variation of a hippy... though i cant say ive asked them.

hippy is a loaded stereotype and useage in instance like this pisses me off as it only serves to show the prejudice of them using the term

It causes some to form opinions of those involved by using the term (hippy on biggie carries a very negative connotation) and serves to distract from the topic

if they were black would you call them niggas?

Nice hippy logic Being a hippy isn't a physical attribute, it's a behavioural thing which is relevant..

being a nigga is a state of mind

now fuck off with your logic - being black is cultural as well as physical

Uhh, no it's not. Can you tell behavioural things about someone given their skin colour? No, you can't. Some people call that racism Is a black person adopted out at birth to a rich whitey family going to behave similarly to one raised in the ghetto?

A hippy, however, is a label which denotes a specific mindset, way of behaving etc - so it's completely different.

??does it??

Maybe it does for some of the gun-toting right-wing yuppies on biggie, but to me it's a word I don't take very seriously. Like clown. Look at that clown.

Any scientist will tell you that it's not nature v nurture, it's nature AND nurture. They do not exist exclusively to each other.


In this instance, there is definitely a "black culture" that also exists. From Malcolm X to Melvin Van Peebles to Chuck D and to Dave Chappelle. You can't deny its presence as a social phenomenon.

Of course there is a stereotypical 'black culture' - my point is that being black doesn't necessarily mean that you subscribe to that culture. You might have black skin and identify as a european ethnicity. So by looking at someone who is black, you cannot tell what sort of person they are, how they would behave in certain situations, what their general values would be etc etc...

This is completely different to a 'hippy' which is a term to describe a general class of values/behaviours etc. So it's much more relevant in the discussion... understand?

edit: Oh, and this has nothing to do with nature/nurture at all...

dude you've been here long enough to know the majority of biggies are conservative and tend to emulate the opinions of their parents

I mean they all like tool ffs

back on topic - this strategy of the govt smacks of sour grapes - they have been found not guilty by a court of law... and now the govt is looking to punish them anyway

I wager most of them finance companies dudes do not get similar treatment

it is not relevant - as none of these people have claimed they are, were or indeed ever will be hippies

they might identify with black culture on the other hand - striking a blow against the man who spies on the black mans arab borthers and sisters....

or as I keep saying the term and useage in this thread does nothing but reinforce peoples perception of those involved

But you can differentiate black culture from black skin colour. Hippie is a culture not a skin colour.

Of course I understand. But you'd be naive to assume that people are labeled hippies just because of their actions and beliefs. There is also a stereotypical "look" associated with it that in my experience, is more often the reason one is labeled as such.

Oh and I mentioned nature/nurture thing because you brought up the point of a black child taken out of the ghetto and raised by white middle class (I assumed you were meaning middle class whites from your example) parents. It's an interesting example, while I'm sure there are many examples where it wouldn't happen, I'm sure there would be plenty where that child would actively look to reconnect with their culture and lineage. I guess that's getting carried away on a tangent though.

As I just said. There is definitely a stereotypical "look" associated with hippies though. You seem to be glazing over the stereotypical associations with the term for your arguments sake.

Sorry got distracted before posting that a bit late.

BD: So what if its negative. You use similar types of language to describe groups you are disparaging of.

And yup they got found found not guilty of criminal liability. They can now, in that same court be found liable or not of damaging someone elses property in civil court. Im not sure if you are trying to hide behind the law or ignore it - you shouldnt choose how the law gets applied as to how it suits you or your beliefs.

ah your beloved 'suits' stereotype eh bobd?

not a suits stereotype - I have nothing against the suit as a piece of clothing... greedy swindlers/white collar criminals and supporters of the trickle down effect on the other hand...

I have no idea what your point is. Its not the skin colour that defines "black culture" it is the clothes, language, behaviour etc. Just like its the clothes language and behaviour makes up the "look" associated with hippies. Therefore the word nigger has nothing to do with black culture nor comparable to hippy.


These people look like hippies, behave like hippies and talk like hippies so theres a good chance they are in fact hippies. If that has negative connotations then that might be the intention but it seems to meet other peoples definitions. Is there a PC term for a hippy?

By the way - Its possible I am less liberal than some but I dont rate as a conservative by any normal measure.

Btw BD - if the law lets known finance fuckwits off being responsibility for their actions/omissions then are you going to be supporting the courts and saying anyone who is pissed off just has sour grapes? I think not eh.

the hippy call is a bugbear of mine... you lot could have let it pass -not you bob, I did expect you to reply

I'm not hiding behind the law - I don't even get what you mean by that... nor am I choosing how the law is applied - I was both surprised and pleased with the not guilty outcome. Nor am I surprised (a tad disappointed perhaps) that the govt is looking at pursuing them through civil court, it would be amazing if they weren't found guilty

*as an aside its bloody painful not being able to read the thread when composing a reply

I'm expecting them to on the whole get away with most of their 'crimes'... which will anger me a lot - I have no duty to agree with every finding of the courts cause in one instance I agreed with them (or not)

they work the law and its loopholes with professional ease and the govt (yes labour too) have allowed them to

As long as you are fine with the hypocrisy.

Nobody's glazing over anything Yes, there is a stereotypical "look" associated with hippies, but it's also nearly 100% correlated with actually BEING a hippy, so it's completely different. Not all black people subscribe to "black culture", but nearly every single person on the planet that looks like a hippy looks that way because they ARE a hippy, which is a value/behaviour thing. I mean conservative people don't just decide to start dressing like a hippy right? Unless it's a costume party.

part of life ain't it

pechora what does a hippy look like?

could not a suit be a hippy in disguises... as in its a state of mind way way more than a state of dress

Of course - but generally people who dress like hippies are hippies. Go down to nelson and have a look

In this case they also act and behave like them too.

Is a good start?

- People in a suit might really be hippies (though unlikely, a true hippy wouldn't wear a suit).
- But people that look like a hippy, are basically never going to be a conservative suit in "disguise". That's the important point here.

Ugh, capitalist hippies, the WORST kind.

I live in grey lynn... and just like many other who dress to a set look many don't actually subscribe to the values

So Grey Lynn folk are dressing up like hippies but are actually pro-war, pro-capitalist, materialistic, authoritarian people?
I'm not buying it

Besides, you can generally smell a hippy before you see them - them wearing a suit wont hide the smell :p

I would contend that *actual* hippies are a rare breed these days and there seems to be some confusion between environmentalist and hippy cultures.

My original point had more to do with conforming to stereotypes and the negative connotations involved in that but I was just being argumentative really. I'm bored today and looking for distractions from studying.

I've lost interest now and am watching Arrested Devlopment from the beginning again.

I give up too... I think its great we host surveilence equipment in this country for others benefit

I bet we get like a million dollars for the services we provide

My neighbour mows the lawn between our driveways, I help them with their computer problems on occasion.... In this case we are contributing to international security. I dont see why you would be so sour about it?

Haha fair enough I'm just trying to truck through Breaking Bad myself.
Nearly done second season. It was a bit OTT and unrealistic at first but it's starting to get beter

the envirinmental movement and the hippy movement were always intertwined

indeed a propos the story that this thread follows, members of a commune in the Hokianga (happy hippy hunting ground of yore) travelled to Wellington to support like minded defendants, spreading disease (endangering innocent lives), the consequnce of their befuddled reasonings

Actually for hippy, read disaffected, disengaged from the mainstream , romantically deluded and you have the perfect description for these three

I haven't been following this thread but just saw this in the news...

Government to review 'claim of right' defence
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/3573948/Government-to-review-claim-of-right-defence