thedailyblog--2020-12-09--The Royal Commission Report: Staying Safely Inside “The Norms” Of Our Neoliberal Society.

THERE ’ S SOMETHING a bit creepy about the Royal Commission ’ s report into the Christchurch attacks .
That an agenda is at work throughout the document is incontrovertible – and it goes well beyond simply uncovering , describing and learning lessons from the actions that led to the tragedy of Friday,15 March 2019 .
It ’ s an agenda dedicated to the monitoring , management and eventual eradication of an entire way of thinking about the world .
The “ far-right extremist ” way of thinking .
Now , I ’ m quite sure there a plenty of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : “ And what ’ s wrong with that ?
” They would point to the mountains of skulls piled up by the Far-Right over the past two centuries and demand to know why the world would not be a better place without these awful ideas and their political executors .
But measuring the height of skull mountains is a mug ’ s game – especially if you ’ re on the Left .
The bone-piles of Joseph Stalin and Mao Zedong put Adolf Hitler ’ s to shame !
To which many @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Stalin and Mao weren ’ t actually of the Left , they were totalitarians – a very different beast altogether .
Possibly .
I would argue that the argument , at its heart , is all about how tolerant you are of people whose ideas contradict your own in a fundamental way .
Even the Royal Commissioners got this : stating , in their definition of political extremism , that : “ Extremism is generally understood as a belief system underpinned by rigid and uncompromising beliefs outside the norm of a society @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this might be by rejecting democracy , the rule of law and human rights .
Extremism can have different ideological underpinnings and manifest in a number of ways .
Central to extremist belief systems is a desire to bring about change and overhaul the political , social or religious environment to conform to the person ’ s or group ’ s idealised vision of society.
” That unwillingness to compromise is critical .
Rigidity , too , is a key aspect of the extremist personality .
Certainly , it ’ s pretty hard @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hitler weren ’ t rigid and uncompromising political leaders .
That said , there are elements of the Commissioners ’ definition that are deeply problematic .
The most obvious of these is the phrase “ outside the norm of society ” .
What , precisely , do they mean by that rather extraordinary statement ?
Society ’ s “ norms ” have a nasty habit of changing .
In 2020 , anyone advocating the incarceration of homosexuals , or their detention in a mental health facility , would be branded a homophobic extremist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they would be guilty of nothing more than reiterating “ the norm of society ” .
In 2020 , a left-wing activist calling for the “ socialisation of the means of production , distribution and exchange ” would be dismissed as an eccentric ideological throwback to a bygone era .
Seventy years ago , however , such a person would have been viewed as a potential threat to national security .
If we are going define extremism in relation to society ’ s “ norms ” , then we will discover very quickly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ moveable feast !
To illustrate the downright sneaky character of the Commission ’ s definition , let ’ s apply it to neoliberalism ’ s conquest of New Zealand in the mid-1980s .
The policies introduced by Labour ’ s “ free marketeers ” were indisputably outside the norms of New Zealand society .
Given the “ top-down ” manner of its imposition , one could even argue that “ Rogernomics ” amounted to a rejection of democracy , the rule of law and human-rights .
Certainly , the true intentions of its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the run-up to the 1984 general election .
In 1987 , Labour dispensed with a manifesto altogether !
It is also indisputable that neoliberalism ’ s advocates and defenders evinced a rigidity of mind and an unwillingness to compromise that was entirely consistent with the Commission ’ s definition of extremism .
Also present in the neoliberal mindset was a very strong desire to bring about change and to overhaul their country ’ s economic , social and political environment in comformity with the neoliberal ideology ’ s “ idealised vision of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ however , the authors of the Royal Commission ’ s report would have utterly discredited themselves if they had described neoliberalism as an extremist ideology .
If challenged on this point , they would simply argue that neoliberalism is now accepted as “ the norm of [ our ] society ” .
And therein lies the problem .
One hundred years ago , what the Commission now describes as “ far-right extremism ” was the norm of New Zealand society .
White supremacy was in evidence across the entire face of the planet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ morally and politically , the grossly exploitative economic policies of the British , French , Dutch , Portuguese and American empires .
New Zealand children educated in the 1920s , 30s and 40s were taught that Maori and Europeans were “ brothers under the skin ” – members-in-good-standing of the same Aryan race .
Many of those children are still alive today .
Over the course of a century they have gone from being perfectly “ normal ” New Zealand schoolchildren , to the hapless victims of far-right extremism .
This is the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so keen to consign to George Orwell ’ s “ memory hole ” .
The historical consciousness of constant change that should encourage extreme caution when determining what is , and what is not , “ extremism ” .
The consciousness that resists instinctively the totalitarian impulse to erase all memory of those moments in time when the current “ norms ” of society weren ’ t in the least bit normal .
The impulse which seeks to eradicate all perspectives but the totalitarian ’ s own .
An outcome that can only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wiser Royal Commission , rather than fetishizing the social and ideological milieu which spawned Brenton Tarrant , would have looked more closely at the historical causes of his crime .
It would have recalled a New Zealand in which established working-class communities ( especially Maori working-class communities ) were torn to pieces by the ideology of free market fundamentalism .
A country in which the social pathologies of poverty and marginalisation grew steadily worse .
It would have counted the casualties .
A wiser Royal Commission would also have questioned the bi-partisan political @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was just beginning to emerge in the 1980s , and turned it into a multicultural “ Asian nation ” ( as Jim Bolger memorably characterised New Zealand ) without the slightest attempt , on the part of either Labour or National , to secure a popular mandate for such a wrenching demographic transformation .
A wiser Royal Commission might have gone in search of the people who opened the nation ’ s borders – recklessly setting-up burgeoning communities of new immigrants as targets for populist wrath .
The people who provided the “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hatred .
Ah , yes , but that sort of Royal Commission would have ended up training its sights on a very different kind of right-wing politics – wouldn ’ t it ?
A politics defended by extremists a whole lot better resourced and infinitely more powerful than a handful of bewildered ethno-nationalist malcontents .

THERE’S SOMETHING a bit creepy about the Royal Commission’s report into the Christchurch attacks. That an agenda is at work throughout the document is incontrovertible – and it goes well beyond simply uncovering, describing and learning lessons from the actions that led to the tragedy of Friday,15 March 2019. It’s an agenda dedicated to the monitoring, management and eventual eradication of an entire way of thinking about the world. The “far-right extremist” way of thinking.
Now, I’m quite sure there a plenty of people on the Left who would say: “And what’s wrong with that?” They would point to the mountains of skulls piled up by the Far-Right over the past two centuries and demand to know why the world would not be a better place without these awful ideas and their political executors. But measuring the height of skull mountains is a mug’s game – especially if you’re on the Left. The bone-piles of Joseph Stalin and Mao Zedong put Adolf Hitler’s to shame!
To which many on the Left would respond by asserting that Stalin and Mao weren’t actually of the Left, they were totalitarians – a very different beast altogether. Possibly. I would argue that the argument, at its heart, is all about how tolerant you are of people whose ideas contradict your own in a fundamental way.
Even the Royal Commissioners got this: stating, in their definition of political extremism, that:
“Extremism is generally understood as a belief system underpinned by rigid and uncompromising beliefs outside the norm of a society. In the case of New Zealand this might be by rejecting democracy, the rule of law and human rights. Extremism can have different ideological underpinnings and manifest in a number of ways. Central to extremist belief systems is a desire to bring about change and overhaul the political, social or religious environment to conform to the person’s or group’s idealised vision of society.”
That unwillingness to compromise is critical. Rigidity, too, is a key aspect of the extremist personality. Certainly, it’s pretty hard to argue that Stalin, Mao and Hitler weren’t rigid and uncompromising political leaders. That said, there are elements of the Commissioners’ definition that are deeply problematic.
The most obvious of these is the phrase “outside the norm of society”. What, precisely, do they mean by that rather extraordinary statement?
Society’s “norms” have a nasty habit of changing. In 2020, anyone advocating the incarceration of homosexuals, or their detention in a mental health facility, would be branded a homophobic extremist. A century ago, however, they would be guilty of nothing more than reiterating “the norm of society”.
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
In 2020, a left-wing activist calling for the “socialisation of the means of production, distribution and exchange” would be dismissed as an eccentric ideological throwback to a bygone era. Seventy years ago, however, such a person would have been viewed as a potential threat to national security.
If we are going define extremism in relation to society’s “norms”, then we will discover very quickly that we have signed-up for an extremely moveable feast!
To illustrate the downright sneaky character of the Commission’s definition, let’s apply it to neoliberalism’s conquest of New Zealand in the mid-1980s. The policies introduced by Labour’s “free marketeers” were indisputably outside the norms of New Zealand society. Given the “top-down” manner of its imposition, one could even argue that “Rogernomics” amounted to a rejection of democracy, the rule of law and human-rights. Certainly, the true intentions of its proponents were not communicated to the electorate in the run-up to the 1984 general election. In 1987, Labour dispensed with a manifesto altogether!
It is also indisputable that neoliberalism’s advocates and defenders evinced a rigidity of mind and an unwillingness to compromise that was entirely consistent with the Commission’s definition of extremism. Also present in the neoliberal mindset was a very strong desire to bring about change and to overhaul their country’s economic, social and political environment in comformity with the neoliberal ideology’s “idealised vision of society”.
Thirty-five years on, however, the authors of the Royal Commission’s report would have utterly discredited themselves if they had described neoliberalism as an extremist ideology. If challenged on this point, they would simply argue that neoliberalism is now accepted as “the norm of [our] society”.
And therein lies the problem.
One hundred years ago, what the Commission now describes as “far-right extremism” was the norm of New Zealand society. White supremacy was in evidence across the entire face of the planet: indeed, it underpinned, both morally and politically, the grossly exploitative economic policies of the British, French, Dutch, Portuguese and American empires. New Zealand children educated in the 1920s, 30s and 40s were taught that Maori and Europeans were “brothers under the skin” – members-in-good-standing of the same Aryan race. Many of those children are still alive today. Over the course of a century they have gone from being perfectly “normal” New Zealand schoolchildren, to the hapless victims of far-right extremism.
This is the inconvenient truth the Royal Commission Report is so keen to consign to George Orwell’s “memory hole”. The historical consciousness of constant change that should encourage extreme caution when determining what is, and what is not, “extremism”. The consciousness that resists instinctively the totalitarian impulse to erase all memory of those moments in time when the current “norms” of society weren’t in the least bit normal. The impulse which seeks to eradicate all perspectives but the totalitarian’s own. An outcome that can only be successfully imposed by force.
A wiser Royal Commission, rather than fetishizing the social and ideological milieu which spawned Brenton Tarrant, would have looked more closely at the historical causes of his crime. It would have recalled a New Zealand in which established working-class communities (especially Maori working-class communities) were torn to pieces by the ideology of free market fundamentalism. A country in which the social pathologies of poverty and marginalisation grew steadily worse. It would have counted the casualties.
A wiser Royal Commission would also have questioned the bi-partisan political commitment that took the bi-cultural Aotearoa which was just beginning to emerge in the 1980s, and turned it into a multicultural “Asian nation” (as Jim Bolger memorably characterised New Zealand) without the slightest attempt, on the part of either Labour or National, to secure a popular mandate for such a wrenching demographic transformation.
A wiser Royal Commission might have gone in search of the people who opened the nation’s borders – recklessly setting-up burgeoning communities of new immigrants as targets for populist wrath. The people who provided the “context” for Tarrant’s exterminationist hatred.
Ah, yes, but that sort of Royal Commission would have ended up training its sights on a very different kind of right-wing politics – wouldn’t it? A politics defended by extremists a whole lot better resourced and infinitely more powerful than a handful of bewildered ethno-nationalist malcontents.


thedailyblog--2020-12-09--Printing money to save the power and wealth of the 1% is just stupid

The problem with the current measures being taken by the Reserve Bank to rescue the economy from an economic collapse is that they are directed at rescuing the wealth of the owners of big business not meeting the needs of the big majority of working people .
To a large extent , the same can be said for the economic rescue packages being carried out by the government which have largely involved giving money to businesses just to stay in business .
There are no limits imposed on executive salaries , shareholder returns , or keeping on staff long-term so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on as their normal greedy selves .
There will be problems down the road from the Reserve Bank simply printing the currently planned $ 128 billion dollars and then loaning it to the government to run budget deficits or giving that money directly to the banks at zero interest to loan on to speculators in the property market .
We are seeing a surge in property prices as one obvious negative that has occurred almost immediately .
New Zealand homeownership rates are now at a 70-year low according to a recent report from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at world-record levels in terms of average incomes .
Renters are also being driven into poverty .
“ The proportion of renting households that spent more than 30 % of income on housing costs rose from below 20 % in 1988 to over 40 % in 2019.
” Widespread homelessness is a direct consequence .
The government could fix this problem by building 10,000 state houses each year for the next decade and renting them to people at no more than25 % of their income .
They could use the money they are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not to do so .
The same argument is true when the government chooses not to implement the Welfare Expert Advisory Group ’ s report which would genuinely boost the incomes of the most in need and eliminate child poverty .
The cost of the steps needed to genuinely confront the climate crisis – like free and frequent public transport with electric vehicles and cycleways everywhere – could be implemented virtually overnight .
These steps could be made to happen if the money being printed was used for those purposes .
Instead , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ print up to $ 100 billion for the government to use and another $ 28 billion that they will simply give to the banks at no cost and with no restraints on how it should be used .
They can choose who to loan it to .
And profit is their sole master .
That is the nature of a privately-owned banking system .
Their greed leads to criminal behavior on a vast scale for which they only ever receive a slap on the wrists if it gets out into the public arena @ @ @ @ @ @ @ similar banks all over the world lead by the US Federal Reserve , are doing this and similar in almost every country , because their system , the capitalist system , is in the deepest crisis it has faced in 200 years .
The US Fed is naturally number one in the international pecking order because the US dollar is at one or both ends of 90 % of international financial transactions .
I explained in a blog a few weeks ago headlined A crisis of the system that no amount of spending @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just a product of the Covid-19 pandemic .
It is part of a cyclical crisis that happens every decade or so under capitalism but they seem to be getting more synchronised internationally and more severe in their consequences for working people .
In part , this has been a consequence of the financialisation of economic activity over the last three decades .
This has created a tiny financial oligarchy that controls most economic activity on the globe .
Financialisation was also associated with an explosion of all forms of debt – personal , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rather than this debt being used to accelerate growth under capitalism , the greed and predations of the dominant financial oligarchy appear to have become a brake on the system .
Growth over each of the last three decade-long cycles has been progressively weaker each cycle despite ( or maybe because of ) the ever-growing debt .
But this financial oligarchy calls the shots on what type of government policies are considered acceptable .
The debt market and interest rates are used to police those governments when necessary .
This is especially true @ @ @ @ @ @ @ After the inflationary 1970s it was an article of faith that no government would be allowed to simply print money and spend it – especially on social programmes that benefited working people .
Tax cuts for the rich were OK because that caused the governments to be even less able to spend money on anything useful .
Central Banks were removed from government control and made “ independent ” to prevent inflation beyond 2-3 % .
Many governments turned the need to always run budget surpluses into a religious dogma .
All those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Pushing back against complaints about their policies , the Reserve Bank Governor Adrian Orr simply asserted that booming house prices were a “ first-class problem ” and that the alternative is “ recession or depression ” .
That may be true but we have a right to discuss alternatives to how the money being created should be sued .
Essentially the world has gone through two crises over the last few decades where it became necessary to print money on a vast scale and simply hand it to the 1 % who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to use to facilitate payments between themselves .
In 2007-08 we had a crisis that had its origins in the US sub-prime mortgage market and swept the globe because much of the debt that had been created over the previous decade proved to be worthless .
When a huge player in the market like AIG insurance could collapse overnight no one was safe .
No one trusted each other anymore .
Credit froze .
To stop the system from collapsing at that time trillions of dollars were printed by the US Fed , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ central banks .
This was simply handed to the financial oligarchy that controlled the banks , pension funds and insurance companies so they could rescue themselves from their self-inflicted disaster .
The Reserve Banks essentially used the accounts these institutions have at the respective Reserve Banks for settling transactions between them and credited them with tens of billions of dollars each in their balances so there was no risk of default by any one of them in the short term .
This is explained well in The History and Significance of QE in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the rest of Europe austerity policies were imposed on working people to bring the budget deficits required back from deficit to surplus .
But the US Fed which led this process hasn ’ t been able to unwind the quantitative easing policies without threatening a new recession since the 2008 crisis .
A little over a decade later the unthinkable happened and financial markets began freezing up again despite the huge balances held at the relevant Reserve Banks .
Stress appeared in the Repo markets first .
Brooking explains : “ In September @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the market in which banks and others lend and borrow for very short periods of time , the repo market , led to a sharp spike in short-term interest rates and prompted the Federal Reserve to inject tens of billions of dollars of reserves into the markets.
” This was a signal that a new crisis was on the way .
The Covid-19 pandemic unfolded and the Rep market froze again .
Liberty Street Economics explains : “ The repo market faced extraordinary liquidity strains in March amid broader financial market volatility related @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the path of policy .
The strains were particularly severe in the term repo market , in which borrowing and lending arrangements are for longer than one business day .
In this post , we discuss the causes of the liquidity disruptions that arose in the repo market as well as the Federal Reserve ’ s actions to address those disruptions .
It was obvious from the unfolding Covid-19 crisis that a major economic downturn was happening and it would hit some sectors of the economy very harshly .
Bankruptcies would be inevitable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could take down major banks and finance companies .
The US Fed led a coordinated response across to globe to print deliver even greater amounts of dollars than they did in 2008 and encouraged other central banks to do likewise .
The US Federal Reserve admitted in its latest report on financial stability in the US that there has been $ 7 trillion increase in G7 central bank assets in just eight months in contrast to the $ 3 trillion increase in the year following the collapse of Lehman Brothers in 2008 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of debt held by their banks and other financial institutions that came under pressure including corporate “ junk ” bonds .
One measure of the US money supply US M1 has increased by 55 % since February .
What that means is that 35 % of all US dollars in existence have been printed in just the last 10 months .
Take a minute to think about that fact and how scared you should be as to why that is happening .
One echo of the 2008 crisis is that BlackRock , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and other financial wizards in the US had started to group together non-investment grade corporate bonds together and relabel as investment-grade because grouping them together allegedly reduced risk .
The same argument was used with US mortgages which were repackaged and resold as investment-grade Credit Default Swaps with allegedly low risk in 2008 .
And in true US-style one of the companies responsible for creating the new bonds is put in charge of buying them .
“ BlackRock… .
will earn relatively modest fees for helping the Federal Reserve run a bond-buying program @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” It is no surprise that two former BlackRock executives are on Joe Biden ’ s transition team to continue to manage economic policy for the 1 % .
The direct consequence of handing the financial oligarchy trillions of dollars in the midst of a crisis is that they use it to advance their own wealth and power .
That is the background to the fact that despite one of the worst economic crises in human history the 1 % has expanded their wealth and power .
Michael Roberts reports : “ The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 43 % of all personal wealth while the bottom 50 % have only 1 % .
The 1 % are all millionaires in net wealth ( after debt ) and there are 52m of them .
Within this 1 % , there are 175,000 ultra-wealthy people with over $ 50m in net wealth – that ’ s a minuscule number of people ( less than 0.1 % ) owning 25 % of the world ’ s wealth !
” Working people across the globe are caught in a dilemma .
We don ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ know we will be the worst affected .
So actions by governments to “ rescue ’ the entire capitalist system of finance and production and trade are needed .
But if we are going to do that why don ’ t we place the commanding heights of the economy , especially in the area of finance and money creation , into the hands of a publicly-owned and democratically controlled entity rather than simply hand the 1 % our cash as if they have some god-given right to it .
We have socialised all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not socialise banking itself .

The problem with the current measures being taken by the Reserve Bank to rescue the economy from an economic collapse is that they are directed at rescuing the wealth of the owners of big business not meeting the needs of the big majority of working people.
To a large extent, the same can be said for the economic rescue packages being carried out by the government which have largely involved giving money to businesses just to stay in business. There are no limits imposed on executive salaries, shareholder returns, or keeping on staff long-term so the owners of those businesses just carry on as their normal greedy selves.
There will be problems down the road from the Reserve Bank simply printing the currently planned $128 billion dollars and then loaning it to the government to run budget deficits or giving that money directly to the banks at zero interest to loan on to speculators in the property market.
We are seeing a surge in property prices as one obvious negative that has occurred almost immediately. New Zealand homeownership rates are now at a 70-year low according to a recent report from the Statistics department. Prices are already at world-record levels in terms of average incomes. Renters are also being driven into poverty. “The proportion of renting households that spent more than 30% of income on housing costs rose from below 20% in 1988 to over 40% in 2019.” Widespread homelessness is a direct consequence.
The government could fix this problem by building 10,000 state houses each year for the next decade and renting them to people at no more than25% of their income. They could use the money they are printing to do that. They choose not to do so.
The same argument is true when the government chooses not to implement the Welfare Expert Advisory Group’s report which would genuinely boost the incomes of the most in need and eliminate child poverty.
The cost of the steps needed to genuinely confront the climate crisis – like free and frequent public transport with electric vehicles and cycleways everywhere – could be implemented virtually overnight.
These steps could be made to happen if the money being printed was used for those purposes.
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
Instead, the Reserve Bank has said it will print up to $100 billion for the government to use and another $28 billion that they will simply give to the banks at no cost and with no restraints on how it should be used. They can choose who to loan it to. And profit is their sole master. That is the nature of a privately-owned banking system. Their greed leads to criminal behavior on a vast scale for which they only ever receive a slap on the wrists if it gets out into the public arena.
The NZ Reserve Bank, and similar banks all over the world lead by the US Federal Reserve, are doing this and similar in almost every country, because their system, the capitalist system, is in the deepest crisis it has faced in 200 years. The US Fed is naturally number one in the international pecking order because the US dollar is at one or both ends of 90% of international financial transactions.
I explained in a blog a few weeks ago headlined A crisis of the system that no amount of spending can fix that this crisis is not just a product of the Covid-19 pandemic. It is part of a cyclical crisis that happens every decade or so under capitalism but they seem to be getting more synchronised internationally and more severe in their consequences for working people.
In part, this has been a consequence of the financialisation of economic activity over the last three decades. This has created a tiny financial oligarchy that controls most economic activity on the globe. Financialisation was also associated with an explosion of all forms of debt – personal, government, and corporate debt. But rather than this debt being used to accelerate growth under capitalism, the greed and predations of the dominant financial oligarchy appear to have become a brake on the system. Growth over each of the last three decade-long cycles has been progressively weaker each cycle despite (or maybe because of) the ever-growing debt.
But this financial oligarchy calls the shots on what type of government policies are considered acceptable. The debt market and interest rates are used to police those governments when necessary. This is especially true when it comes to monetary policy.
After the inflationary 1970s it was an article of faith that no government would be allowed to simply print money and spend it – especially on social programmes that benefited working people. Tax cuts for the rich were OK because that caused the governments to be even less able to spend money on anything useful.
Central Banks were removed from government control and made “independent” to prevent inflation beyond 2-3%. Many governments turned the need to always run budget surpluses into a religious dogma.
All those dogmas have now been abandoned without explanation. Pushing back against complaints about their policies, the Reserve Bank Governor Adrian Orr simply asserted that booming house prices were a “first-class problem” and that the alternative is “recession or depression”. That may be true but we have a right to discuss alternatives to how the money being created should be sued.
Essentially the world has gone through two crises over the last few decades where it became necessary to print money on a vast scale and simply hand it to the 1% who control the banks and other financial institutions to use to facilitate payments between themselves.
In 2007-08 we had a crisis that had its origins in the US sub-prime mortgage market and swept the globe because much of the debt that had been created over the previous decade proved to be worthless. When a huge player in the market like AIG insurance could collapse overnight no one was safe. No one trusted each other anymore. Credit froze.
To stop the system from collapsing at that time trillions of dollars were printed by the US Fed, along with European, UK and Japanese central banks. This was simply handed to the financial oligarchy that controlled the banks, pension funds and insurance companies so they could rescue themselves from their self-inflicted disaster. The Reserve Banks essentially used the accounts these institutions have at the respective Reserve Banks for settling transactions between them and credited them with tens of billions of dollars each in their balances so there was no risk of default by any one of them in the short term. This is explained well in The History and Significance of QE in the UK.
In the UK and the rest of Europe austerity policies were imposed on working people to bring the budget deficits required back from deficit to surplus. But the US Fed which led this process hasn’t been able to unwind the quantitative easing policies without threatening a new recession since the 2008 crisis.
A little over a decade later the unthinkable happened and financial markets began freezing up again despite the huge balances held at the relevant Reserve Banks. Stress appeared in the Repo markets first. Brooking explains:
“In September (2019), a disruption in the market in which banks and others lend and borrow for very short periods of time, the repo market, led to a sharp spike in short-term interest rates and prompted the Federal Reserve to inject tens of billions of dollars of reserves into the markets.”
This was a signal that a new crisis was on the way. The Covid-19 pandemic unfolded and the Rep market froze again. Liberty Street Economics explains:
“The repo market faced extraordinary liquidity strains in March amid broader financial market volatility related to the coronavirus pandemic and uncertainty regarding the path of policy. The strains were particularly severe in the term repo market, in which borrowing and lending arrangements are for longer than one business day. In this post, we discuss the causes of the liquidity disruptions that arose in the repo market as well as the Federal Reserve’s actions to address those disruptions.
It was obvious from the unfolding Covid-19 crisis that a major economic downturn was happening and it would hit some sectors of the economy very harshly. Bankruptcies would be inevitable and a broader debt crisis provoked that could take down major banks and finance companies.
The US Fed led a coordinated response across to globe to print deliver even greater amounts of dollars than they did in 2008 and encouraged other central banks to do likewise. The US Federal Reserve admitted in its latest report on financial stability in the US that there has been $7 trillion increase in G7 central bank assets in just eight months in contrast to the $3 trillion increase in the year following the collapse of Lehman Brothers in 2008. The US Fed began buying any form of debt held by their banks and other financial institutions that came under pressure including corporate “junk” bonds. One measure of the US money supply US M1 has increased by 55% since February. What that means is that 35% of all US dollars in existence have been printed in just the last 10 months. Take a minute to think about that fact and how scared you should be as to why that is happening.
One echo of the 2008 crisis is that BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager, and other financial wizards in the US had started to group together non-investment grade corporate bonds together and relabel as investment-grade because grouping them together allegedly reduced risk. The same argument was used with US mortgages which were repackaged and resold as investment-grade Credit Default Swaps with allegedly low risk in 2008.
And in true US-style one of the companies responsible for creating the new bonds is put in charge of buying them. “BlackRock…. will earn relatively modest fees for helping the Federal Reserve run a bond-buying program to steady markets unsettled by the pandemic.” It is no surprise that two former BlackRock executives are on Joe Biden’s transition team to continue to manage economic policy for the 1%.
The direct consequence of handing the financial oligarchy trillions of dollars in the midst of a crisis is that they use it to advance their own wealth and power. That is the background to the fact that despite one of the worst economic crises in human history the 1% has expanded their wealth and power. Michael Roberts reports:
“The top 1% of households globally own 43% of all personal wealth while the bottom 50% have only 1%. The 1% are all millionaires in net wealth (after debt) and there are 52m of them. Within this 1%, there are 175,000 ultra-wealthy people with over $50m in net wealth – that’s a minuscule number of people (less than 0.1%) owning 25% of the world’s wealth!”
Working people across the globe are caught in a dilemma. We don’t want an economic collapse because we know we will be the worst affected. So actions by governments to “rescue’ the entire capitalist system of finance and production and trade are needed. But if we are going to do that why don’t we place the commanding heights of the economy, especially in the area of finance and money creation, into the hands of a publicly-owned and democratically controlled entity rather than simply hand the 1% our cash as if they have some god-given right to it. We have socialised all risk associated with private banking so why not socialise banking itself.


Sorry

These past couple of days have been filled with a lot of “ sorry ’ s ” from different people .
Just yesterday the PM , top spy and Police Commissioner all apologised to the Muslim community for their offices failings that led to a massacre as people prayed .
That harrowing thought of being on bended knee in prayer , then shot dead is inconceivable .
But it happened in our homeland , and maybe the 800-page report will give insight into why there were so many apologies yesterday .
Like how our national security intelligence officers were focused @ @ @ @ @ @ @ groups went unnoticed .
Like how there ’ s a lack of diversity in public service leadership positions and their community engagement processes are lightweight .
Following the massacre , the Police established armed response teams citing NZ had entered a new era of policing requirements .
The equivalent of SWAT movie cops in dark-tinted SUV ’ s from the armed offenders squad would now be patrolling our roads to react decisively to high pressure criminal activities on the streets .
With armed police stationed at the gate of every mosque in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It was rolled out in Christchurch .
And Hamilton .
And south Auckland .
Sorry ?
That ’ s right , Hamilton and south Auckland .
Close out data showed that over their 6 month pilot period these Police teams kept poor records and spent more time stopping traffic than dealing to high pressured situations , more suited to a an armed offenders squad call out .
There ’ s something extremely powerful in the expression of that word when made with sincerity .
I ’ ve sat in a number of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ advocate for employees who ’ ve been mistreated or misunderstood by their seniors .
These meetings are emotionally charged and draining for employees because when you ’ re on the lowest wrung in the organisation , you have no doubt as to who holds the power .
People lose sleep , stop eating and struggle to mentally get thru each hour of the day , totally stressed out by the possibility of losing their jobs that provide income desperately needed for their families .
A genuine and sincere sorry from a manager or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first of a number of steps towards restoring and strengthening the working relationship .
One of the hardest things to do in life is admit you ’ re mistaken , apologise and seek to repair and restore a relationship .
Over the years my observation has been people have resorted to saying sorry without any sincerity because it quickly cuts off your opportunity to talk through the pain and impact of what they ’ ve done to you .
Today ’ s contemporary sorry means that reparation need not be sought because sorry @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spy said it was a misconception that they were focused only on Muslim activity and noted her agency is a small organisation .
So I guess as a team you ’ d prioritise your work because there ’ s so few resources and focus on high priority areas .
Now that makes sense I reckon… so it ’ s hard to be persuaded by her statement .
Nonetheless , she did say sorry .
There ’ s that wonderful word again .
We ’ ll see how the Crown goes with the 40-plus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ help our nation heal , but I ’ m not that enthusiastic because racism and unconscious bias have been prevalent in the systems that failed us in the first place .
The new system and approach must be developed by those who recognise and have experienced the very prejudice needing to be dismantled from the old system .
The conversations will be uncomfortable , sobering and brutal , but they desperately needed now .
Tracy Chapman sings apt lyrics for this time – words ( followed by actions ) like sorry , forgive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t come easily .

These past couple of days have been filled with a lot of “sorry’s” from different people. Just yesterday the PM, top spy and Police Commissioner all apologised to the Muslim community for their offices failings that led to a massacre as people prayed. That harrowing thought of being on bended knee in prayer, then shot dead is inconceivable. But it happened in our homeland, and maybe the 800-page report will give insight into why there were so many apologies yesterday. Like how our national security intelligence officers were focused on Islamic movements, while white supremacist groups went unnoticed. Like how there’s a lack of diversity in public service leadership positions and their community engagement processes are lightweight.
Sorry.
Following the massacre, the Police established armed response teams citing NZ had entered a new era of policing requirements. The equivalent of SWAT movie cops in dark-tinted SUV’s from the armed offenders squad would now be patrolling our roads to react decisively to high pressure criminal activities on the streets. With armed police stationed at the gate of every mosque in the country this would enhance community policing measures. It was rolled out in Christchurch. And Hamilton. And south Auckland. Sorry? That’s right, Hamilton and south Auckland. Close out data showed that over their 6 month pilot period these Police teams kept poor records and spent more time stopping traffic than dealing to high pressured situations, more suited to a an armed offenders squad call out.
Sorry.
There’s something extremely powerful in the expression of that word when made with sincerity. I’ve sat in a number of employment meetings as a support person and advocate for employees who’ve been mistreated or misunderstood by their seniors. These meetings are emotionally charged and draining for employees because when you’re on the lowest wrung in the organisation, you have no doubt as to who holds the power. People lose sleep, stop eating and struggle to mentally get thru each hour of the day, totally stressed out by the possibility of losing their jobs that provide income desperately needed for their families. A genuine and sincere sorry from a manager or representative from the organisation, is the first of a number of steps towards restoring and strengthening the working relationship.
Sorry.
One of the hardest things to do in life is admit you’re mistaken, apologise and seek to repair and restore a relationship. Over the years my observation has been people have resorted to saying sorry without any sincerity because it quickly cuts off your opportunity to talk through the pain and impact of what they’ve done to you. Today’s contemporary sorry means that reparation need not be sought because sorry is enough. NZ’s top spy said it was a misconception that they were focused only on Muslim activity and noted her agency is a small organisation. So I guess as a team you’d prioritise your work because there’s so few resources and focus on high priority areas. Now that makes sense I reckon… so it’s hard to be persuaded by her statement. Nonetheless, she did say sorry. There’s that wonderful word again.
Sorry.
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
We’ll see how the Crown goes with the 40-plus recommendations in the report as that might help our nation heal, but I’m not that enthusiastic because racism and unconscious bias have been prevalent in the systems that failed us in the first place. The new system and approach must be developed by those who recognise and have experienced the very prejudice needing to be dismantled from the old system. The conversations will be uncomfortable, sobering and brutal, but they desperately needed now. Tracy Chapman sings apt lyrics for this time – words (followed by actions) like sorry, forgive me and I love you don’t come easily.


thedailyblog--2020-12-09--The Māori Party – walking between two worlds

New Zealand ’ s 53rd Parliament has been sworn in , and forty maiden speeches are being heard .
Personal stories of struggle , exile , intergenerational hardship , journeys to power through education and inspiration .
Union solidarity and strength , relative powerlessness , poverty , war and colonisation , hopes and dreams , aspirations , -legion are the motivations for the many new MPs .
But it is a richer Parliament for the return of the Māori Party .
Nowhere else in the world will you find MPs with moko and korowai , with these bone and stone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tiki .
Although Labour Māori MPs and Green Party members attempt to speak for Māori , nowhere else in the New Zealand Parliament will you hear in this particular way , the authentic , unapologetic , dissident , disaffected voice of Māori , than from the Māori Party .
But to be radical , revolutionary and reformist , to reclaim and sustain voice , from within a European institution designed to de-escalate tension , to co-opt and compromise , when Parliamentary presence means an acceptance of the legitimacy of colonial structures and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ walk an uneasy path between two worlds .
Māori Party co-leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer , in her maiden speech as a Member to the House of Parliament , sought to achieve better for future generations .
She accused past New Zealand MPs of being responsible for a Holocaust , for Māori genocide ; for rape and murder ; for the imprisonment of Māori without trial .
She referred to the effects of institutional racism , the impacts of ongoing racist legislation .
Co-leader Rawiri Waititi talked of a loss of Māori identity , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voices were echoes of Ranginui Walker ’ s ‘ struggle without end ’ .
But the Māori Party co-leaders walk between two uneasy worlds , speaking truth to power from the Māori perspective , and being part of what they see as a racist Parliamentary institution .
When the Parliament ’ s would-be speaker , Trevor Mallard disallowed Rawiri Waititi ’ s te reo Point of Order asking for an opportunity for an Address in Reply to the Speech from the Throne without losing their rights to maiden speeches the following week , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ngarewa-Packer said Mallard ’ s call to disallow a Māori Party Address in Reply ‘ was yet another example of the Māori voice being silenced ’ .
Waititi observed the process was an example of the tyranny of our democracy for minority parties ( his being the absolute minority in terms of size and indigenous ethnic representation ) , and that their walk-out was because they ‘ didn ’ t want to participate in a system that is based on being very unfair ’ .
But therein lies the rub .
Our institutions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ re not neutral or fair by design .
They are instruments of power .
And every element of their expression has power , and distorts and amplifies the inequality of its exercise .
So when for Trevor Mallard the tie is an irritant that he hasn ’ t mastered the art of tieing and for James Shaw it ’ s an anachronism , for Rawiri Waititi , the tie is a colonial noose .
In appearance , Debbie Ngarewa-Packer ’ s hat is a colonial artifact , the clothing of the oppressor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exercise of agency .
“ I ’ ll wear what I want ” she said in reply to criticisms , while cultural commentators say it ’ s a way of claiming indigenous identity , status and gender power , of co-opting and appropriating colonial artefacts , of taking and turning markers of oppression against those who wield them .
New ACT MP , Nicole Mckee in her poorly timed , tone-deaf maiden speech talked about the minority rights of the gun lobby , but more than fifty innocent Muslims were on the bloody @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ .
This week when the 800-page report into the Mosque attacks was released , the Prime Minister rightly acknowledged and apologised for the terrorism that impacted the Muslim community .
At the same time , decent New Zealanders should be appalled at the slow terror of colonial history that still leaves tangata whenua scarred , relatively landless , powerless , victimised and revictimized , a slow burning terrorism inflicted on people of this land , that leads to poorer life chances than for European counterparts .
When the Government acknowledges and regrets @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about institutional bias , educational inequalities , economic disparities and judicial processes and imprisonment rates that penalise Māori it sustains the very system that Waititi observes treats some minorities even worse than others .
Even when the Māori Party are required to win at least five per cent of the vote and/or an electorate seat to have an institutional presence in Parliament – as Māori , it ’ s evident the two worlds stand apart , with one world more powerful than the other .
Make no mistake this process says , Parliament @ @ @ @ @ @ @ designed to enshrine and maintain that power , not to share it .
With little perceived legitimacy of , and loyalty to Parliament , the Māori Party may find itself frequently frustrated and exercising more ‘ exit ’ power than ‘ voice ’ .
The formal and informal , political , economic and social power of this minority is still at the discretion and within the rules and structures of a perceptibly racist state .
In Māori cosmology , the past is laid out before us , to inform , instruct , illuminate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It ’ s appropriate that the Māori Party should carry its grievances , that are still being written , onto Parliament ’ s 53rd floor .
In ‘ Tears of Rangi : Experiments Across Worlds ’ by legendary Kiwi anthropologist Dame Anne Salmond , Captain Cook is quoted as saying of Māori “ ‘ I have allways found them of a Brave , Noble , Open and benevolent disposition , but they are a people that will never put up with an insult if they have an oppertunity to resent it.
” And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ MP ) prerogative too .
Salmond further notes , historically , ‘ While such ‘ rough intelligibility ’ allowed relationships to be forged , efforts at engagement between Māori and Europeans often backfired , thwarted by differing assumptions about how the world works .
At the same time in these encounters – titiro atu , titiro mai – hidden premises sometimes come to light , making it possible for new ideas and practices to emerge as taken-for-granted forms of order are challenged .
The element of surprise in such meetings was ( and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and creative.
” Over the three years of the new Parliamentary term , we can expect more disruptive , creative , surprising , revelations about hidden premises and differing assumptions about how the world works .
We can expect nobility , bravery – and probably insult and resentment .
The Māori Party embodied in its co-leaders may illuminate ways of being in the world , ways of the world working on tangata whenua , that may be invisible to other Parliamentary , political and economic elites .
With their best , staunch , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be forged , that challenge the old order , and give rise to new hope , new institutions , new understandings and solutions .
Or as political scientist Hannah Arendt said , it may reveal the truth that to bang your head against the wall is to break your head and not the wall .

New Zealand’s 53rd Parliament has been sworn in, and forty maiden speeches are being heard. Personal stories of struggle, exile, intergenerational hardship, journeys to power through education and inspiration. Union solidarity and strength, relative powerlessness, poverty, war and colonisation, hopes and dreams, aspirations, -legion are the motivations for the many new MPs. But it is a richer Parliament for the return of the Māori Party. Nowhere else in the world will you find MPs with moko and korowai, with these bone and stone pendants, with tikanga, tipuna and tiki. Although Labour Māori MPs and Green Party members attempt to speak for Māori, nowhere else in the New Zealand Parliament will you hear in this particular way, the authentic, unapologetic, dissident, disaffected voice of Māori, than from the Māori Party. But to be radical, revolutionary and reformist, to reclaim and sustain voice, from within a European institution designed to de-escalate tension, to co-opt and compromise, when Parliamentary presence means an acceptance of the legitimacy of colonial structures and the limits to Māori sovereignty, is to walk an uneasy path between two worlds.
Māori Party co-leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer, in her maiden speech as a Member to the House of Parliament, sought to achieve better for future generations. She accused past New Zealand MPs of being responsible for a Holocaust, for Māori genocide; for rape and murder; for the imprisonment of Māori without trial. She referred to the effects of institutional racism, the impacts of ongoing racist legislation. Co-leader Rawiri Waititi talked of a loss of Māori identity, the loss of Māori land. In their voices were echoes of Ranginui Walker’s ‘struggle without end’.
But the Māori Party co-leaders walk between two uneasy worlds, speaking truth to power from the Māori perspective, and being part of what they see as a racist Parliamentary institution. When the Parliament’s would-be speaker, Trevor Mallard disallowed Rawiri Waititi’s te reo Point of Order asking for an opportunity for an Address in Reply to the Speech from the Throne without losing their rights to maiden speeches the following week, the co-leaders staged a dramatic walkout. Ngarewa-Packer said Mallard’s call to disallow a Māori Party Address in Reply ‘was yet another example of the Māori voice being silenced’. Waititi observed the process was an example of the tyranny of our democracy for minority parties (his being the absolute minority in terms of size and indigenous ethnic representation), and that their walk-out was because they ‘didn’t want to participate in a system that is based on being very unfair’.
But therein lies the rub. Our institutions aren’t colour blind. They’re not neutral or fair by design. They are instruments of power. And every element of their expression has power, and distorts and amplifies the inequality of its exercise. So when for Trevor Mallard the tie is an irritant that he hasn’t mastered the art of tieing and for James Shaw it’s an anachronism, for Rawiri Waititi, the tie is a colonial noose. In appearance, Debbie Ngarewa-Packer’s hat is a colonial artifact, the clothing of the oppressor, but it’s also an exercise of agency. “I’ll wear what I want” she said in reply to criticisms, while cultural commentators say it’s a way of claiming indigenous identity, status and gender power, of co-opting and appropriating colonial artefacts, of taking and turning markers of oppression against those who wield them.
New ACT MP, Nicole Mckee in her poorly timed, tone-deaf maiden speech talked about the minority rights of the gun lobby, but more than fifty innocent Muslims were on the bloody and blunt end of those ‘rights’. This week when the 800-page report into the Mosque attacks was released, the Prime Minister rightly acknowledged and apologised for the terrorism that impacted the Muslim community. At the same time, decent New Zealanders should be appalled at the slow terror of colonial history that still leaves tangata whenua scarred, relatively landless, powerless, victimised and revictimized, a slow burning terrorism inflicted on people of this land, that leads to poorer life chances than for European counterparts. When the Government acknowledges and regrets, but is moved to do little about institutional bias, educational inequalities, economic disparities and judicial processes and imprisonment rates that penalise Māori it sustains the very system that Waititi observes treats some minorities even worse than others. Even when the Māori Party are required to win at least five per cent of the vote and/or an electorate seat to have an institutional presence in Parliament – as Māori, it’s evident the two worlds stand apart, with one world more powerful than the other. Make no mistake this process says, Parliament is a western institution of power, designed to enshrine and maintain that power, not to share it. With little perceived legitimacy of, and loyalty to Parliament, the Māori Party may find itself frequently frustrated and exercising more ‘exit’ power than ‘voice’. The formal and informal, political, economic and social power of this minority is still at the discretion and within the rules and structures of a perceptibly racist state.
In Māori cosmology, the past is laid out before us, to inform, instruct, illuminate and to guide the path ahead. It’s appropriate that the Māori Party should carry its grievances, that are still being written, onto Parliament’s 53rd floor. In ‘Tears of Rangi : Experiments Across Worlds’ by legendary Kiwi anthropologist Dame Anne Salmond, Captain Cook is quoted as saying of Māori “‘I have allways found them of a Brave, Noble, Open and benevolent disposition, but they are a people that will never put up with an insult if they have an oppertunity to resent it.” And that’s the modern Māori (MP) prerogative too. Salmond further notes, historically, ‘While such ‘rough intelligibility’ allowed relationships to be forged, efforts at engagement between Māori and Europeans often backfired, thwarted by differing assumptions about how the world works. At the same time in these encounters – titiro atu, titiro mai – hidden premises sometimes come to light, making it possible for new ideas and practices to emerge as taken-for-granted forms of order are challenged. The element of surprise in such meetings was (and still is) at once disruptive, and creative.”
Over the three years of the new Parliamentary term, we can expect more disruptive, creative, surprising, revelations about hidden premises and differing assumptions about how the world works. We can expect nobility, bravery – and probably insult and resentment. The Māori Party embodied in its co-leaders may illuminate ways of being in the world, ways of the world working on tangata whenua, that may be invisible to other Parliamentary, political and economic elites. With their best, staunch, efforts, new ideas and practices may be forged, that challenge the old order, and give rise to new hope, new institutions, new understandings and solutions. Or as political scientist Hannah Arendt said, it may reveal the truth that to bang your head against the wall is to break your head and not the wall.


thedailyblog--2020-12-09--VIDEO on DEMAND: Paul Buchanan and Selwyn Manning discuss Commission of Inquiry into Christchurch Te

VIDEO on DEMAND: Paul Buchanan and Selwyn Manning discuss Commission of Inquiry into Christchurch Terrorist Attack

VIDEO : In what is a precursor episode to a planned Evening Report panel-series through 2021 , Selwyn Manning and Paul Buchanan discuss and respond to elements of the Commission of Inquiry into the Christchurch terrorist attacks of March 15 , 2019 .
• Interaction : Comments welcomed during the LIVE programme via Facebook , YouTube , or Twitter ( via Periscope ) • The Report : Officially titled – Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Terrorist Attack on Christchurch Mosques on March 15 2019 .
The Inquiry ’ s terms of reference contained three areas : • Recommended changes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this kind .
This A View from Afar discussion will explore takeouts from the Inquiry ’ s report and will include ( Ref .
https : //chchroyalinquiry.cwp.govt.nz/the-report/ ) : ‘ The idea that intelligence and security agencies engage in mass surveillance of New Zealanders is a myth.
’ In 2014 , the intelligence and security agencies were in a fragile state .
A rebuilding exercise did not get underway until mid-2016 and was still unfinished when the terrorist attack took place in 2019 .
Between 2016 and 15 March 2019 , the primary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the counter-terrorism resources was on what was seen as the presenting threat of Islamist extremist terrorism .
There was an inappropriate concentration of counter-terrorism resources on the threat of Islamist extremist terrorism .
In May 2018 , there was one project focused on developing an understanding of right-wing extremism in New Zealand .
At that time , the New Zealand Security Intelligence Service had only a limited understanding of right-wing extremism in New Zealand and work on this was not complete when the terrorist attack occurred .
The intelligence function of New Zealand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not carrying out strategic terrorism threat assessments .
The SIS had a lack of capacity until mid-2018 both to deal with ( its perceived Islamic extremist ) threat and , at the same time , to baseline other threats .
Other agencies did not engage in informed discussion about the SIS approach nor consider the implications of this .
COULD THE TERRORIST HAVE BEEN DETECTED AND IDENTIFIED ?
: Given the operational security that the individual maintained , the legislative authorising environment in which the counter-terrorism effort operates and the limited capability and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was no plausible way he could have been detected except by chance .
The fact the individual was not detected was not in itself an intelligence failure .
The creation of a national intelligence and security agency ( NISA ) .
This will deliver a more systematic approach to counter-terrorism and countering violent extremism efforts .
The CEO of a proposed NISA would be the national adviser on intelligence and security .
Full implementation of our recommendations will result in a better organised counter‑terrorism effort with enhanced capacity and capability and a less @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to see far more political and public engagement and discussion and stronger oversight .
This will result in greater public trust and thus social licence .
We wish to see discussion about counter-terrorism normalised .
Our recommendations provide mechanisms for this to occur .
The Inquiry stated that should a public facing two-way discourse have been encouraged by governments through : a “ see something , say something ” policy , it is possible that aspects of the individual ’ s planning and preparation may have been reported to counter-terrorism agencies .
Such @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have provided the best chance of disrupting the terrorist attack .
If the known risk that a terrorist could take advantage of New Zealand ’ s lax regulation of semi-automatic firearms had been addressed earlier , it is likely that there would have been no terrorist attack on 15 March 2019 .
It will take time to enhance public trust and confidence in New Zealand ’ s counter-terrorism effort , so work to do so should begin urgently .
The agencies within the scope of the Inquiry include : National Security Group of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Cabinet , the Government Communications Security Bureau , Immigration New Zealand , New Zealand Customs Service , New Zealand Police and the New Zealand Security Intelligence Service .
You can interact with the LIVE programme by clicking on one of these social media channels .
Here are the links : You can also see video-on-demand of this show , and earlier episodes too , by checking out EveningReport.nz or , subscribe to the Evening Report podcast here .

VIDEO: In what is a precursor episode to a planned Evening Report panel-series through 2021, Selwyn Manning and Paul Buchanan discuss and respond to elements of the Commission of Inquiry into the Christchurch terrorist attacks of March 15, 2019.
NOTE from Selwyn Manning: In correspondence after this live episode, government sector law specialist, Graeme Edgeler, wrote:
Paul G. Buchanan responded to Mr Edgeler’s correspondence:
Once again you fail to distinguish between general precepts under the Inquiries Act and the specific terms of reference for this RCI. It specifies that all testimony, statements and documentary provision is voluntary on the part of those who agree to appear before the Commission. The blanket name suppression of all such people below the Director level was in part designed to encourage whistle blowers to come forward when they otherwise would not under the voluntary regime. All classified material was supplied at the various agency’s discretion–the RCI could not compel production of anything that the agencies refused to supply. This is known as a self-limiting or self-binding approach, something that limits the legal exposure of people who otherwise could be held liable for actions that (however indirectly) contributed to mass murder.
Graeme Edgeler further responded:
The Royal Commission’s terms of reference are publicly available ( http://www.legislation.govt.nz/regulation/public/2019/0072/latest/whole.html#LMS183988) They do no [sic] specify that all testimony, statements, and documentary provision is voluntary. In fact, the word voluntary does not appear at all. Nor do the words testimony, statement(s), document(s) or documentary. There are requirements in the terms of reference around secrecy, and confidentiality, around holding parts of the inquiry in private, etc, but there is nothing in them covering what you say is in there (feel free to suggest a clause you think has this effect). I do not rule out that as a matter of fact, the inquiry avoided using its power of summons in respect of material held by state agencies, but if it did, it was not because its terms of reference prevented it.
We thank Graeme for contributing to the discussion.
THE EPISODE:
EveningReport.nz Programme: A View from Afar
Live Discussion: Paul G. Buchanan (36th-Parallel.com) and Selwyn Manning (EveningReport.nz)
Interaction: Comments welcomed during the LIVE programme via Facebook, YouTube, or Twitter (via Periscope)
Time: Midday, NZDST (6pm, US EST), Thursday December 10, 2020.
The Report: Officially titled – Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Terrorist Attack on Christchurch Mosques on March 15 2019.
The Inquiry’s terms of reference contained three areas:
The terrorist’s actions
Actions of public sector agencies
Recommended changes that could prevent future terrorist attacks of this kind.
LIVE DISCUSSION POINTS:
This A View from Afar discussion will explore takeouts from the Inquiry’s report and will include (Ref. https://chchroyalinquiry.cwp.govt.nz/the-report/):
‘The idea that intelligence and security agencies engage in mass surveillance of New Zealanders is a myth.’
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
In 2014, the intelligence and security agencies were in a fragile state. A rebuilding exercise did not get underway until mid-2016 and was still unfinished when the terrorist attack took place in 2019.
Between 2016 and 15 March 2019, the primary, but not exclusive, focus of the counter-terrorism resources was on what was seen as the presenting threat of Islamist extremist terrorism.
There was an inappropriate concentration of counter-terrorism resources on the threat of Islamist extremist terrorism.
In May 2018, there was one project focused on developing an understanding of right-wing extremism in New Zealand. At that time, the New Zealand Security Intelligence Service had only a limited understanding of right-wing extremism in New Zealand and work on this was not complete when the terrorist attack occurred.
The intelligence function of New Zealand Police had degraded and from 2015 was not carrying out strategic terrorism threat assessments.
The SIS had a lack of capacity until mid-2018 both to deal with (its perceived Islamic extremist) threat and, at the same time, to baseline other threats.
Other agencies did not engage in informed discussion about the SIS approach nor consider the implications of this.
COULD THE TERRORIST HAVE BEEN DETECTED AND IDENTIFIED?:
Given the operational security that the individual maintained, the legislative authorising environment in which the counter-terrorism effort operates and the limited capability and capacity of the counter-terrorism agencies, there was no plausible way he could have been detected except by chance.
The fact the individual was not detected was not in itself an intelligence failure.
RECOMMENDATIONS (SECURITY/INTEL REFORM):
The creation of a national intelligence and security agency (NISA). This will deliver a more systematic approach to counter-terrorism and countering violent extremism efforts.
The CEO of a proposed NISA would be the national adviser on intelligence and security.
Full implementation of our recommendations will result in a better organised counter‑terrorism effort with enhanced capacity and capability and a less restrictive legislative framework.
NISA would provide:
Strategic policy advice.
Develop a counter-terrorism strategy.
Administer relevant national security legislation.
POLITICAL, PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AND STRONGER OVERSIGHT:
The Inquiry expects to see far more political and public engagement and discussion and stronger oversight.
This will result in greater public trust and thus social licence. We wish to see discussion about counter-terrorism normalised. Our recommendations provide mechanisms for this to occur.
PUBLIC DISCOURSE:
The Inquiry stated that should a public facing two-way discourse have been encouraged by governments through: a “see something, say something” policy, it is possible that aspects of the individual’s planning and preparation may have been reported to counter-terrorism agencies.
Such reporting, the Inquiry stated, would have provided the best chance of disrupting the terrorist attack.
RETROSPECTIVE CRITICISM:
If the known risk that a terrorist could take advantage of New Zealand’s lax regulation of semi-automatic firearms had been addressed earlier, it is likely that there would have been no terrorist attack on 15 March 2019.
INQUIRY ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
It will take time to enhance public trust and confidence in New Zealand’s counter-terrorism effort, so work to do so should begin urgently.
The agencies within the scope of the Inquiry include: National Security Group of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, the Government Communications Security Bureau, Immigration New Zealand, New Zealand Customs Service, New Zealand Police and the New Zealand Security Intelligence Service.
Be informed: Link to Inquiry Report.
COMMENT DURING THE LIVE DISCUSSION:
You can interact with the LIVE programme by clicking on one of these social media channels. Here are the links:
You can also see video-on-demand of this show, and earlier episodes too, by checking out EveningReport.nz or, subscribe to the Evening Report podcast here.


thedailyblog--2020-12-11--Face reality – bring Israel to account!

Face reality – bring Israel to account!

On Friday , 4 December , an Israeli soldier shot a 15-year-old boy , Ali Ayman Saleh Abu Alia , in the stomach .
The youngster died soon afterwards in hospital in Ramallah .
Ali had been watching , but not participating in , protests being held at the entrance to Al-Mughayyir village .
As was to be expected , Israeli Occupation forces lied when confronted with the crime .
The Army claimed that its soldiers did not fire live ammunition in the assault on protesters but used only rubber-coated steel bullets and US-made Ruger rifles .
However , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Israeli forces have used live ammunition to kill five children so far this year .
In October , the soldiers also beat up a 16-year-old youth , Amer Abdel-Rahim Snobar , who died later from ( as a post-mortem found ) asphyxiation .
Since its founding in the UK in 1919 , Save the Children ( SC ) has worked tirelessly in defence of children worldwide who have been , and are still being , subjected to cruelty and neglect through war and politics .
An SC report , published in October @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impact of the Israeli military detention system on Palestinian children ” , is a shocking addition to , and confirmation of , numerous UN reports concerning Israel ’ s shameful abuses of human rights .
This one tells of more than 470 children , taken prisoner ( most often at night ) living under Israeli military control in the West Bank , having endured many breaches of “ rights enshrined in international law ” , including physical and mental abuse .
For Israel , control of a subject population requires intimidation , starting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its courts and the terror of captivity to break the spirit of youngsters and force them into submission .
Imagine any child being awakened from its night ’ s sleep by armed Israeli soldiers , then abducted , blindfolded and forced into a military vehicle !
Moreover , nearly all the children interviewed had been strip-searched .
Israel complains that it is unfairly singled-out for criticism but it chooses to be the only country in the world that systematically prosecutes children through military courts .
The system works well for Israel of course @ @ @ @ @ @ @ example , records a conviction rate of 99.74 % .
No wonder the children believe it better to simply plead guilty , in the hope of being sentenced to less time in captivity !
Three Israeli human rights groups have condemned Israeli Army invasions of Palestinian homes , with over 250 being carried out at dead of night – every month !
The Guardian newspaper has published an article that includes evidence from Israeli soldiers expressing shame and regret – and one Palestinian family member telling the Observer newspaper that he had lost @ @ @ @ @ @ @ home had been subjected to : “ On one occasion , I remember I had gone to the mosque for the first early morning prayers .
When I came back , the soldiers were in my house .
They had put all of my family in the kitchen .
When I went into my bedroom I found three soldiers resting on the bed.
” He said he felt that the invasion of privacy was in order to “ control and humiliate.
” The title of an article in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 4am : Just another routine night of Israeli raids ” really says it all : With a stun grenade launched and detonated inside their house , the family of a man and his pregnant wife suddenly found themselves threatened by dogs unleashed by the Israeli Shin Bet ‘ security ‘ service .
The couple ’ s four-year-old son and nine-year-old daughter , as well as their 70-year old grandmother , were terrorised by men , in black uniforms , also menacing surrounding homes .
A Shin Bet officer told the family , including @ @ @ @ @ @ @ going to be blown up .
Last month , eleven Palestinian families were left homeless in the Jordan Valley , seeking shelter for themselves , as well as their sheep and newborn lambs , upon which their livelihood depends .
The Israeli Army had driven them from their homes .
Day after day , night after night , it continues , the Palestinian victims of this brutal oppression being persecuted because their homeland is coveted by others and because they do not possess the foreign regime ’ s required ethnicity .
The abundant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ potentially devastating for the racist Zionist enterprise , which is why it seeks to manipulate news media reporting of its conduct , with silence being the most easily-acquired form of complicity .
The fact that Israel has for so long been able to violate the provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention , without being called to account , demonstrates another ugly reality – it has allies in the highest places , including governments across the world , most notably among New Zealand ’ s Five Eyes partners .
The US and UK are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ambition – and the reason for that is self-serving .
Zionism entices the rich and powerful with the prospect of successfully undermining every aspect of true democracy .
They dream of imposing a world with fake freedoms based on ideological falsehoods .
In this , they rely on mainstream news media and public institutions , rendered subservient for fear of being branded ‘ anti-Semitic ’ .
When war was considered to be a normal component in the exercise of international relations , those ministries involved were honestly named ‘ war ’ ministries .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ World War , a thoroughly war-weary humanity wanted nothing other than peace .
And so ‘ war ’ ministries became ‘ defence ’ ministries – much easier to sell and therefore profit from ; watch out for politicians ’ circumlocution , there ’ s a lot of it about !
Zionism is not just a threat to Palestinians , it menaces the world through service to greed and alliance with kleptocracy .
So long as Zionism holds its place and influence , there can be no hope for world peace or justice .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ as follows : “ Semite , member of a people speaking any of a group of related languages presumably derived from a common language , Semitic ( see Semitic languages ) .
The term came to include Arabs , Akkadians , Canaanites , Hebrews , some Ethiopians , and Aramaean tribes .
Mesopotamia , the western coast of the Mediterranean , the Arabian Peninsula , and the Horn of Africa have all been proposed as possible sites for the prehistoric origins of Semitic-speaking peoples , but no location has been definitively established.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ accusing Israel ’ s critics of being anti-Jewish , Zionists use the misleading term ‘ anti-Semitic ’ in order to exclude from the public mind the very existence and right of the long-suffering indigenous Palestinian people to live , in peace , in their homeland .
Zionism ’ s conduct and use of terminology leaves it open to the same criticism that it aims at its victims .
According to its own logic , Israel ’ s contemptuous denial and prevention of Palestinian self-determination is , in itself , ‘ anti-Semitic ’ .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ weaponised Zionist terminology would be for Palestinian human rights supporters never to use it themselves but to always refer to it in single quotes – that is , as ‘ anti-Semitic ’ .
An article , dated 3 December , originally published by Stuff.co.nz , and also by the Israel Institute of New Zealand , far from apologising for Israel ’ s barbaric abuses of human rights , actually goes to the extreme of denying the UN-recognised right of return to their homeland for ethnically-banished Palestinian refugees .
To quote from the article @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a claim to return , there is no such right in international law.
” The Zionist mind would have us believe that there was no Nakba ( Catastrophe ) and no United Nations resolution 194 , passed in 1948 , that stipulates the rightful return of all Palestinians to their homes .
The Right of Return is a universally-recognised right in international refugee law that is also provided for in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights ( Article 13 ) , in major treaties protecting the rights of refugees in times of armed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ human rights conventions governing states ’ obligations and duties .
It is consistently referred to in UN resolutions .
The cold indifference to the plight of refugees expressed in the article illustrates very clearly the inhumanity embedded in Zionist ideology .
The piece also lambasts John Minto , personally , for his appeal to our Government to both “ finally join the right side of history and the majority of humanity by recognising the state of Palestine ” and to “ make its relations with Israel conditional on Israeli compliance with international law.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ expressed in the article with the declared hope that there would be a growing “ realisation by Arab states that their interests lie much more in pursuing normal trade , cultural , diplomatic and political relations with Israel.
” Greed and profit far outway humanitarian considerations , in the Zionist world view .
A video of a debate last year in London on the proposal that Anti-Zionism is Anti-Semitism is a telling example of the Zionist ideology ’ s remoteness from reality .
Journalist and author , Melanie Phillips , together with an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the proposal , while Israeli Professor at Exeter University , Ilan Pappé , and Al-Jazeera journalist , Mehdi Hasan , countered with an argument against , calling for equality and respect for Palestinian human rights .
It is fair to say that the debate ended with the Zionist proposal truly defeated !
At the beginning of the evening , opposition to it was at 59 % – by the end of the debate that had grown to 76 % .
Significantly , the ‘ undecided ‘ total had shrunk from 26 % @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Our new Foreign Affairs Minister , Nanaia Mahuta , has stated that this country needs to “ remain committed to a multilateral rules-based trade system that works for New Zealand.
” In March 2019 , as Māori Development Minister , she announced a Government plan of action to drive and measure New Zealand ’ s progress towards the aspirations of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples .
In 2010 she spoke in Parliament regarding the National-led Government ‘ s decision to ratify the Declaration on the Rights of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weakening the document presented to Parliament as non-binding and merely aspirational .
Mahuta told MPs that the occasion was “ not a time for window-dressing , empty promises , or hollow gains ” declaring also : “ In Labour we are proud to say what we mean and to do what we say.
” We look forward , therefore , to a clear declaration of policy towards Israel and Palestinian human rights from Nanaia Mahuta that reflect and reinforce the values outlined above .
At an event to mark International Day of Solidarity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ MPs took a pledge to form a new parliamentary Palestine friendship group and to “ .
.
.
raise the voices of Palestinian people in New Zealand ’ s parliament ” .
Will Nanaia Mahuta express solidarity with this move in defence of the indigenous Palestinian people ’ s human rights ?
Israel ’ s profiteering from enterprises , such as arms sales and population-control technology , was acceptable to Ron Mark and the ‘ Defence ’ Force who , as John Minto wrote , “ were oblivious to any moral issues ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ purchase of “ niche ” military equipment overrode other concerns .
Our Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade informs us that “ New Zealand was pleased to play a role as UN Security Council president in adopting UNSC Resolution 2231 ” The Resolution was passed to oversee an exclusively peaceful Iranian nuclear programme following the country ’ s co-operation with international supervision and inspection .
As is well known , Israel , the only nuclear-armed power in the Middle East , refuses any such openness regarding its own nuclear weapons programme .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Israel to allow international inspection of its nuclear sites – Petitions ( parliament.uk ) has been launched .
For anyone not familiar with Israel ’ s secretive nuclear arms programme it would be a revelation to read about the brutally-treated , heroic whistle-blower Mordechai Vanunu who , in 1986 , informed the UK Sunday Times of what Israel was so secretly up to .
Will the New Zealand Government be as pleased to pressure Israel to allow international inspection of its nuclear sites as it was to support UNSC Resolution 2231 and sanctions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if world governments were to join together in adopting ethical foreign policies , aligned with international law and United Nations resolutions .
With a great working majority , our Government now has an opportunity to set the world an inspirational example of rational foreign policy ; one that recognises international law and human rights as paramount , and essential for the creation of a just and peaceful future .

On Friday, 4 December, an Israeli soldier shot a 15-year-old boy, Ali Ayman Saleh Abu Alia, in the stomach. The youngster died soon afterwards in hospital in Ramallah. Ali had been watching, but not participating in, protests being held at the entrance to Al-Mughayyir village. As was to be expected, Israeli Occupation forces lied when confronted with the crime. The Army claimed that its soldiers did not fire live ammunition in the assault on protesters but used only rubber-coated steel bullets and US-made Ruger rifles. However, the Rugers were actually firing live 22-calibre rounds and Israeli forces have used live ammunition to kill five children so far this year. In October, the soldiers also beat up a 16-year-old youth, Amer Abdel-Rahim Snobar, who died later from (as a post-mortem found) asphyxiation.
Since its founding in the UK in 1919, Save the Children (SC) has worked tirelessly in defence of children worldwide who have been, and are still being, subjected to cruelty and neglect through war and politics. An SC report, published in October this year under the heading “The impact of the Israeli military detention system on Palestinian children”, is a shocking addition to, and confirmation of, numerous UN reports concerning Israel’s shameful abuses of human rights. This one tells of more than 470 children, taken prisoner (most often at night) living under Israeli military control in the West Bank, having endured many breaches of “rights enshrined in international law”, including physical and mental abuse.
Population control and home invasion
For Israel, control of a subject population requires intimidation, starting from childhood. The Zionist regime employs its courts and the terror of captivity to break the spirit of youngsters and force them into submission. Imagine any child being awakened from its night’s sleep by armed Israeli soldiers, then abducted, blindfolded and forced into a military vehicle! Moreover, nearly all the children interviewed had been strip-searched. Israel complains that it is unfairly singled-out for criticism but it chooses to be the only country in the world that systematically prosecutes children through military courts. The system works well for Israel of course; the Ofer Military Court, for example, records a conviction rate of 99.74%. No wonder the children believe it better to simply plead guilty, in the hope of being sentenced to less time in captivity!
Three Israeli human rights groups have condemned Israeli Army invasions of Palestinian homes, with over 250 being carried out at dead of night – every month! The Guardian newspaper has published an article that includes evidence from Israeli soldiers expressing shame and regret – and one Palestinian family member telling the Observer newspaper that he had lost count of the number of invasions their home had been subjected to: “On one occasion, I remember I had gone to the mosque for the first early morning prayers. When I came back, the soldiers were in my house. They had put all of my family in the kitchen. When I went into my bedroom I found three soldiers resting on the bed.” He said he felt that the invasion of privacy was in order to “control and humiliate.”
The title of an article in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz: “Dogs, shooting, explosions at 4am: Just another routine night of Israeli raids” really says it all: With a stun grenade launched and detonated inside their house, the family of a man and his pregnant wife suddenly found themselves threatened by dogs unleashed by the Israeli Shin Bet ‘security‘ service. The couple’s four-year-old son and nine-year-old daughter, as well as their 70-year old grandmother, were terrorised by men, in black uniforms, also menacing surrounding homes. A Shin Bet officer told the family, including the children, that their home was going to be blown up.
Last month, eleven Palestinian families were left homeless in the Jordan Valley, seeking shelter for themselves, as well as their sheep and newborn lambs, upon which their livelihood depends. The Israeli Army had driven them from their homes. Day after day, night after night, it continues, the Palestinian victims of this brutal oppression being persecuted because their homeland is coveted by others and because they do not possess the foreign regime’s required ethnicity.
Manipulation of language
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
The abundant evidence of its crimes against humanity is potentially devastating for the racist Zionist enterprise, which is why it seeks to manipulate news media reporting of its conduct, with silence being the most easily-acquired form of complicity. The fact that Israel has for so long been able to violate the provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention, without being called to account, demonstrates another ugly reality – it has allies in the highest places, including governments across the world, most notably among New Zealand’s Five Eyes partners. The US and UK are particularly staunch in their complicity with Zionist ambition – and the reason for that is self-serving. Zionism entices the rich and powerful with the prospect of successfully undermining every aspect of true democracy. They dream of imposing a world with fake freedoms based on ideological falsehoods. In this, they rely on mainstream news media and public institutions, rendered subservient for fear of being branded ‘anti-Semitic’.
When war was considered to be a normal component in the exercise of international relations, those ministries involved were honestly named ‘war’ ministries. But with the end of the Second World War, a thoroughly war-weary humanity wanted nothing other than peace. And so ‘war’ ministries became ‘defence’ ministries – much easier to sell and therefore profit from; watch out for politicians’ circumlocution, there’s a lot of it about! Zionism is not just a threat to Palestinians, it menaces the world through service to greed and alliance with kleptocracy. So long as Zionism holds its place and influence, there can be no hope for world peace or justice.
Confusion
The Encyclopaedia Britannica defines the term Semite as follows:
“Semite, member of a people speaking any of a group of related languages presumably derived from a common language, Semitic (see Semitic languages). The term came to include Arabs, Akkadians, Canaanites, Hebrews, some Ethiopians, and Aramaean tribes. Mesopotamia, the western coast of the Mediterranean, the Arabian Peninsula, and the Horn of Africa have all been proposed as possible sites for the prehistoric origins of Semitic-speaking peoples, but no location has been definitively established.”
Instead of directly, and clearly, accusing Israel’s critics of being anti-Jewish, Zionists use the misleading term ‘anti-Semitic’ in order to exclude from the public mind the very existence and right of the long-suffering indigenous Palestinian people to live, in peace, in their homeland. Zionism’s conduct and use of terminology leaves it open to the same criticism that it aims at its victims. According to its own logic, Israel’s contemptuous denial and prevention of Palestinian self-determination is, in itself, ‘anti-Semitic’. A big step forward in disabling this weaponised Zionist terminology would be for Palestinian human rights supporters never to use it themselves but to always refer to it in single quotes – that is, as ‘anti-Semitic’.
Denying the truth
An article, dated 3 December, originally published by Stuff.co.nz, and also by the Israel Institute of New Zealand, far from apologising for Israel’s barbaric abuses of human rights, actually goes to the extreme of denying the UN-recognised right of return to their homeland for ethnically-banished Palestinian refugees. To quote from the article: “. . .while there is a claim to return, there is no such right in international law.” The Zionist mind would have us believe that there was no Nakba (Catastrophe) and no United Nations resolution 194, passed in 1948, that stipulates the rightful return of all Palestinians to their homes. The Right of Return is a universally-recognised right in international refugee law that is also provided for in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Article 13), in major treaties protecting the rights of refugees in times of armed conflict under humanitarian laws, in core human rights conventions governing states’ obligations and duties. It is consistently referred to in UN resolutions. The cold indifference to the plight of refugees expressed in the article illustrates very clearly the inhumanity embedded in Zionist ideology.
The piece also lambasts John Minto, personally, for his appeal to our Government to both “finally join the right side of history and the majority of humanity by recognising the state of Palestine” and to “make its relations with Israel conditional on Israeli compliance with international law.” The coldness of Zionism is again expressed in the article with the declared hope that there would be a growing “realisation by Arab states that their interests lie much more in pursuing normal trade, cultural, diplomatic and political relations with Israel.” Greed and profit far outway humanitarian considerations, in the Zionist world view.
A video of a debate last year in London on the proposal that Anti-Zionism is Anti-Semitism is a telling example of the Zionist ideology’s remoteness from reality. Journalist and author, Melanie Phillips, together with an Israeli politician, Einat Wilf, spoke for the proposal, while Israeli Professor at Exeter University, Ilan Pappé, and Al-Jazeera journalist, Mehdi Hasan, countered with an argument against, calling for equality and respect for Palestinian human rights. It is fair to say that the debate ended with the Zionist proposal truly defeated! At the beginning of the evening, opposition to it was at 59% – by the end of the debate that had grown to 76%. Significantly, the ‘undecided‘ total had shrunk from 26% at the start to just 5%.
Recognition of Rights of Indigenous Peoples
Our new Foreign Affairs Minister, Nanaia Mahuta, has stated that this country needs to “remain committed to a multilateral rules-based trade system that works for New Zealand.” In March 2019, as Māori Development Minister, she announced a Government plan of action to drive and measure New Zealand’s progress towards the aspirations of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. In 2010 she spoke in Parliament regarding the National-led Government‘s decision to ratify the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, criticising Government caution in weakening the document presented to Parliament as non-binding and merely aspirational. Mahuta told MPs that the occasion was “not a time for window-dressing, empty promises, or hollow gains” declaring also: “In Labour we are proud to say what we mean and to do what we say.” We look forward, therefore, to a clear declaration of policy towards Israel and Palestinian human rights from Nanaia Mahuta that reflect and reinforce the values outlined above.
At an event to mark International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian people three New Zealand MPs took a pledge to form a new parliamentary Palestine friendship group and to “. . . raise the voices of Palestinian people in New Zealand’s parliament”. Will Nanaia Mahuta express solidarity with this move in defence of the indigenous Palestinian people’s human rights? Israel’s profiteering from enterprises, such as arms sales and population-control technology, was acceptable to Ron Mark and the ‘Defence’ Force who, as John Minto wrote, “were oblivious to any moral issues”, with Mark simply saying that the purchase of “niche” military equipment overrode other concerns. Our Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade informs us that “New Zealand was pleased to play a role as UN Security Council president in adopting UNSC Resolution 2231” The Resolution was passed to oversee an exclusively peaceful Iranian nuclear programme following the country’s co-operation with international supervision and inspection. As is well known, Israel, the only nuclear-armed power in the Middle East, refuses any such openness regarding its own nuclear weapons programme.
Action
In the UK, a movement to Pressure Israel to allow international inspection of its nuclear sites – Petitions (parliament.uk) has been launched. For anyone not familiar with Israel’s secretive nuclear arms programme it would be a revelation to read about the brutally-treated, heroic whistle-blower Mordechai Vanunu who, in 1986, informed the UK Sunday Times of what Israel was so secretly up to. Will the New Zealand Government be as pleased to pressure Israel to allow international inspection of its nuclear sites as it was to support UNSC Resolution 2231 and sanctions against Iran?
Zionism would not survive if world governments were to join together in adopting ethical foreign policies, aligned with international law and United Nations resolutions. With a great working majority, our Government now has an opportunity to set the world an inspirational example of rational foreign policy; one that recognises international law and human rights as paramount, and essential for the creation of a just and peaceful future.