Thursday, March 18, 2010

Was the Waihopai attack justified?

Back in April 2008 three men launched a raid on the so called "spy base" or Government Communications Security Bureau installation at Waihopai, near Blenheim. They broke into the facility, cutting their way in, then used sickles to slash open the plastic cover protecting one of the dishes used to receive information.
Yesterday, a jury of 11 men and women in Wellington exonerated the men, finding them not guilty of the attack to which they had confessed, nor liable for the million dollars in damage.
Apparently, the jury were convinced that the men were acting according to their consciences, and doing what they believed was right.

Here's the NZ Herald articles:

At first glance the last article may not appear to fit with the other two, but think about it. The anti-abortionist who killed the late term abortion doctor was also acting according to his conscience. Therefore, if he happened to get this jury, he'd been not guilty.

I'll bet the Nazi Party are wondering where this jury was during the Nuremberg trials!

What kind of weak, pathetic excuse is this for finding people not guilty? Does this mean I can blow up a McDonalds because I genuinely believe it is killing our kids by encouraging obesity, and get off scot free? Can a Maori now legitimately steal property from a non-Maori on the argument that they genuinely believe they are owed restitution from some Treaty grievance? Can I shoot Keith Locke in the head because I genuinely believe that he is evil incarnate and the longer he spends spouting his drivel in parliament, the more irreperable damage he does to New Zealand's security?

These three traitors are guilty, guilty as sin. They have attacked a key installation which serves to defend our nation's interests as a Western power. They have cost the taxpayers of NZ more than one million dollars in property damage, not to mention their legal aid fees and the cost of the trial. They have shown no remorse for their actions, and simply provided encouragement to the liberal lunatic fringe of pacifist soft-cocks who will be the first ones to throw their arms up in surrender and offer to collaborate if NZ ever gets invaded. They need to be locked up for their actions, not freed. If this is the kind of farce we get from a jury system, then maybe it is time to look at reducing the public involvement in trial by jury, and creating a number of professional jurors. The interests of the state as a whole, and the security of its people, should never be set aside for the agenda of the few who happen to live some where in cloud cuckoo land where everyone hugs each other all day and no one is trying to kill them just because they come from a Western country.

Better yet, could we please send these three to Afghanistan? If they care so much about the people there, they'll do a much better job if they're actually living in the country, and we'll be much better off without them.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Search This Blog