Written By:
mickysavage - Date published:
12:12 pm, February 2nd, 2025 - 16 comments
Categories: crime, david seymour, genocide, human rights, immigration, International, israel, uncategorized -
Tags:
Ted Cruz is a walking talking embodiment of all that is wrong with American democracy.
He has attracted the attention of the Standard before. He is a wannabe Trump but completely devoid of any charisma.
He is a climate change denier. He is also a gun nut and thinks that calls for gun law reform are politicising the far too many occurances of school gun massacres that happen in the land of the free and the home of the brave.
And he was roasted at his response when Texas frooze over during an extreme weather event.
As I said previously what should a Texan representative do when the state is frozen over following an extreme weather event?
Tour the state? Make sure that Federal supplies of generators and fuel are delivered to where they need to be?
How about fly off to Cacun for a holiday?
If you guessed the latter then you would be right.
Ted Cruz, Texan Senator and wannabe President did exactly that.
The event caused the most perfect piece of twitter poetry (think Frank Sinatra) I have ever read:
Fly me to Cancun
And let me play among the stars
Let me order guac while people Freeze inside their cars
Cruz has burst into the news again this time by claiming New Zealand’s immigration law is different to what it actually is.
The link is broken but presumably refers to this Haaretz article that claims that New Zealand will now require every Israeli to provide details of their military service to receive a visitor visa.
Wanna be Cruzer David Seymour was quick to respond.
But Seymour’s response ducks the issue of what New Zealand should do if an Israeli soldier who has committed acts of genocide should visit here.
Under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide anyone can face action under the Convention.
It states:
Persons committing genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in article III shall be punished, whether they are constitutionally responsible rulers, public officials or private individuals.
Contracting parties are obliged to punish incidents of genocide.
The Contracting Parties confirm that genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in time of war, is a crime under international law which they undertake to prevent and to punish.
Contracting parties are also obliged to enact the necessary legislation to give effect to the provisions of the Convention.
There is also the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court which is recognised in our domestic law by the International Crimes and International Criminal Court Act 2000.
The Statute defines Genocide, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes. When you read the definitions you realise that a number of the proscribed actions have on the face of it occured in Gaza.
The ICC has the power to request for the arrest and surrender of a person to any State where that person may be found. States Parties are obliged to comply with requests for arrest and surrender. A failure to comply with a request can result in a reference of the matter to the Assembly of States Parties or, where the United Nations Security Council referred the matter to the Court, to the Security Council.
Ted Cruz’s take on Israel is about as good as his take on climate change. It is deeply at odds with the opinions of those who have actually worked out what is happening in Gaza.
Just over a year ago the International Court of Justice held that there was plausible evidence of genocide happening in Gaza. It required Israel to prevent genocide against Palestinians in Gaza and to enable the provision of basic services and humanitarian assistance, as well as prevent and punish incitement to commit genocide.
New Zealand not only has the right to screen Israeli soldiers coming into our country to see if they have been involved in the commission of war crimes, it also has an obligation to take steps should it learn that visitors have engaged in this sort of activity.
Contrary to Human Rights Commissioner Stephen Rainbow’s claim, this is not the targeting of an ethnic group. It is targeting members of an organisation which on the face of it has been engaging in really atrocious behaviour.
Seymour’s response is essentially that we will not ask or investigate. Turning a blind eye is one approach although given the enormity of the attrocities committed in Gaza not one that I would favour. A minimum of 46,000 dead men women and children and the wholesale destruction of neighbourhoods and the bombing of schools and hospitals should cause a state to check the backgrounds of those potentially involved in this.
But getting back to Cruz. He is wrong in suggesting the Government is requiring Israeli soldiers to detail their military service, it isnt, and he is totally, totally wrong to suggest that Israel is justified in what it is doing.
Can we do a citizens arrest for war criminals?
Only at night, or if directed by police to assist, for offences covered by the crimes act.
If so – can this extend to Peter Thiel even if he's not a war criminal — technically?
Getting back to Cruz, you're right in your final paragraph.
The Cruz assertion in his tweet about "self-indulgent left wing attacks" when applied to ACT, National and NZF is amusing.
When was the last time Seymour or the rest were accused of being left-wing?
Where is the discussion about Trump potentially visiting NZ when we specifically restrict convicted felons – along with many other countries? Winston and Seymour have gone into panic and suck up mode. Despite Luxon shaking hands with Cruz, the government's influence in the Trump administration is tiny and we will all pay for the trade wars Trump has begun.
Not with Chris Pēnk in charge of immigration. The man can’t even be bothered to spell place names correctly, let alone ensure visitors to New Zealand meet our good character requirements.
Although, Trump might be a loophole: he has no good character. Therefore, there’s nothing to assess.
Trump has diplomatic immunity.
Diplomatic immunity doesn’t override a country’s immigration laws. A diplomat still needs a visa (if required) and must meet entry conditions. Any country can deny or revoke a visa at its discretion.
New Zealand is a sovereign state, so yes, we absolutely have the right to deny entry to President Trump. Diplomatic immunity or no.
We won’t, of course. That would require a spine, a sense of principle, and a government that hasn’t already auctioned off its moral compass for parts.
We won't, because it would be ridiculously self-indulgent. We all hate him, but he is the legitimate Head of State of the world's apex superpower and that sort of posturing would only put us in the firing line for tariffs, which our economy really could not handle right now.
I happen to agree with you there: A truly independent foreign policy is a luxury we can ill afford as a small state.
It just sticks in my craw that our best chance for preserving something of the rules based international order we rely on for our prosperity and security is cravenly indulging the worst impulses of an egotistical authoritarian and his coterie of hangers-on, suck-ups and yes men.
I fully agree that Israel's actions in Gaza constitute war crimes, and New Zealand has legal and moral obligations under international law when it comes to war criminals entering our country.
However, this is one of those difficult situations where our principles run into cold, geopolitical reality and we discover our "independent" foreign policy isn't quite as independent as we like to believe.
As a small state, our foreign policy is always going to be constrained by the positions of our allies. That doesn’t mean we should stay silent on issues of human rights. But it does mean we have to be strategic about when and how we push back. Given the major challenges we face: trade relationships, climate change, and navigating an increasingly volatile world; insisting on individually investigating every Israeli visitor isn’t likely to be the most effective way to exert influence.
That said, Cruz’s mischaracterization of our immigration policy is just another example of his usual bad-faith grandstanding. And as always, it’s telling that his concern is about supposed mistreatment of Israeli soldiers rather than the atrocities being committed against Palestinian civilians.
Cruz is highlighting the point that some in the USA want to impose their pro Israel policy on allies. And they would use the threat of getting the attention of Trump, to a claim an ally is stepping out of line, to coerce compliance.
A better reaction from Peters would be to cite Australia's own position. And explain the circumstance of nations that conform to international law.
The UK has come to an arrangement with Israel to allow Israeli offIicials to visit the UK. This does not apply to ordinary citizens.
https://www.declassifieduk.org/israeli-army-chief-given-special-immunity-to-visit-britain/
https://www.declassifieduk.org/israeli-general-on-secret-trip-to-london-questioned-over-war-crimes/
For mine Peters, Seymour and Rainbow are embarrassing in their responses.
There is a three month tourist visa, and a longer period visitor visa. The visa waiver only applies to the former. And even if there is a visa waiver, they still require to answer questions to get NZeTA (New Zealand Electronic Travel Authority).
Given that no Israeli soldier has committed 'acts of genocide,' it's unsurprising govt MPs haven't considered what to do about that. It's possible an Israeli visitor may have committed a war crime, but that applies to any military-age visitor from many countries. It's not the NZ govt's job to investigate them all just in case.
‘
Psycho Milt @6
"….no Israeli soldier has committed 'acts of genocide"
Hi Psycho, it's a technical matter I know. Genocide, defined as the destruction of a people in whole or in part, is a collective effort, usually directed by government and military leaders. But individual soldiers who commit war crimes can also be convicted of committing genocide, if it is deemed that their actions were part of a wider directed government or military policy. The people of Gaza may not yet been destroyed in whole, but no one can deny that they have been destroyed in part. not even you.
Psycho Milt @6
"….an Israeli visitor may have committed a war crime, but that applies to any military-age visitor from many countries. It's not the NZ govt's job to investigate them"
Psycho, You may think war criminals who have committed grisly war crimes against women and children and other civilians should be allowed to freely roam around the country, but there is such a thing called international law, which New Zealand as a signatory to the Rome Statute must abide by. If Netanyahu or Gallant or any other individuals the ICC issue warrants against for committing war crimes, come to this country, it is the NZ govt' job to investigate them and even to arrest them and turn them over to the International Criminal Court for trial.
Given that no Israeli soldier has committed 'acts of genocide,'
You know, there are times when taking the stance of being a "contrarian" can be amusing, in a low-grade, unfunny way. But then there are times, such as the moronic statement I've italicised above, when it's just really, really dumb.
http://opiniojuris.org/2024/04/05/the-icjs-findings-on-plausible-genocide-in-gaza-and-its-implications-for-the-international-criminal-court/
Yes MASSA
(MASSA, Making Aotearoa Sub-Servient Again)
The big question is, Following Ted Cruz complaint, will Immigration NZ stop questioning IDF soldiers and reservists about their activities in Gaza and barring entry to those who can't or won't complete the questionnaire?