“Jihadi brides” and Peter Dunne

Written By: - Date published: 12:08 pm, December 10th, 2015 - 19 comments
Categories: peter dunne, spin, war - Tags: , , ,

Like a stopped watch, Peter Dunne sometimes gets it right:

United Future leader Peter Dunne questions ‘jihadi bride’ claims

United Future leader Peter Dunne has questioned claims that growing numbers of Kiwi women are becoming jihadi brides, saying the allegations from spy agencies could be aimed at “softening up” the public before an independent review into their work is released.
…
In a blog post, Dunne questioned why spy agencies were “raising this spectre of alarm” given the lack of evidence of a significant problem.

“Of the thousands of foreign fighters in Syria, and assumed to be fighting for ISIL, it is understood that less than a dozen may be from New Zealand.

“Unless the so-called ‘jihadi brides’ are marrying non-New Zealanders involved in the campaign, the actual numbers are very small, probably insignificantly so, indeed.”

Dunne said it was “possible but unlikely” that the number of jihadi brides had grown enough to be worth noting, while there had also been no change to New Zealand’s terrorism alert level in the last year that would account for it.

Instead, the remarks could be part of a “softening-up process” of the public and politicians by spy agencies ahead of an independent review of their work, due to come out early next year. …

Useful insights.

19 comments on ““Jihadi brides” and Peter Dunne ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. CnrJoe 1
    10 December 2015 at 12:14 pm

    Bouffant Bowtie says some things….he does do that…but more importantly
    Whats with new StarWars font around here?

  2. One Anonymous Bloke 2
    10 December 2015 at 12:44 pm

    Ethnicity has nothing to do with it.

  3. aerobubble 3
    10 December 2015 at 12:46 pm

    Sorry but given the PR tsunami that we are inundated by hourly anything coming out of any dept is going to be softing us up per say. Its not news Mr Dunne.

    The war on terrorism is a lie in the sense that our govts are playing into their hands. No terrorist group has ever matched the road toll, or the number dying in air accidents, or drug usage, etc. Sure minimize them all, yet let’s not change because yet another Polly has peed their pants in fear at some new threat they will solve.

    Chump is going to be the next President and he hasn’t even read the constitution, that would get him fired if he’d been hiring himself. It says impunity of the richest to be above us, the guy is a hypocrite.

    And what gives with Dunne, he never asks questions and Seymour seems to have asked more than any member, its called a representative democracy not an ACT platform.

  4. Detrie 4
    10 December 2015 at 12:53 pm

    Anything that relates to perceived fears or prejudices, distracting us from what’s happening in NZ and the real issues – e.g. unemployment, fair wages, housing etc. Nat politicians are masters at it, especially when they have the media in tow.

  5. ianmac 5
    10 December 2015 at 12:58 pm

    “Seymour seems to have asked more than any member”
    Wondered about that. It is legal for a party to give their questions to someone in another Party but I wonder if it has to be approved by the House first? It does up Seymour’s visibility.

  6. BLiP 6
    10 December 2015 at 1:32 pm

    ‘

    Yep, defintely a softening up process. The GCSB is working on the manufacturing of fear, while John Key is creating the perception that mass surveillance really isn’t mass surveillance. The Christmas rush, eh? What a great time to sack the Minister of Corrections and the Minister of Police and replace them with a corrupt former minister, get away with unnecessarily extending the SERCO contrACT for another year, and roll out yet more draconian state powers. I wonder what else the next few weeks have in store for us.

  7. Tc 7
    10 December 2015 at 2:01 pm

    Look at me, remember me ….thats right I am the willing seller of some more of your rights to that nice mr key.

  8. repateet 8
    10 December 2015 at 2:44 pm

    With looseness of language like the Briscoes lady, one of the expressions was “up to twelve” women heading to Syria. Rebecca Kitteridge confirmed it was less than a dozen.

    Well one? Two? 11?

    So “an increasing number of New Zealand women are heading to Iraq and Syria, ” according to Kitteridge. So it used to be one but now it’s two?

    Or because we have more people in New Zealand from that part of the world than ever before we had four going back to their grandmother’s funerals?

    This is part of the bullshit propaganda campaign.

    • shorts 8.1
      10 December 2015 at 2:58 pm

      wouldn’t be surprised that any Syrian kiwis that head back there for whatever reason is now to be considered a terrorist at the very least for PR purposes

      grandmother’s funeral
      aid worker
      whatever

      *sigh*

    • emergency mike 8.2
      10 December 2015 at 4:11 pm

      I’ll repost my comment from yesterday’s open mike:

      Jihadi Brides Threat Level Update: John Key has clarified the numbers regarding the crisis.

      Rebecca Kitteridge had said that the number of these potential ticking time bombs was ‘fewer than a dozen’. While she has no idea what they are doing there, what is known for sure is that they went went to that part of the world, and they are definitely female.

      But Key has subsequently said that a belief exists, an actual belief thingee, that the number of this fewer than a dozen that have in fact married Islamic militants is somewhere in the magnitude of “one or two”.

      Now that might seem a little low at first, but bear in mind that a) that’s one or two more brides than our SIS team had to monitor before, b) Key didn’t say which end of the one or two range the true figure is closer to, and c) my calculator informs me that this represents an infinity percent increase in kiwi jihadi brides. If this rate continues, every female in New Zealand will be a jihadi bride before I finish typing this sentence. Everyone is probably already dead. National is probably still polling 50%.

      • Ben 8.2.1
        10 December 2015 at 8:01 pm

        Close. Roy Morgan Poll out today:

        Nats 49%, Labour 28%, Greens 13%, NZF 6%.

        28+13+6=47%.

        • Kiwiri 8.2.1.1
          10 December 2015 at 8:58 pm

          John Key and Natz are formidable.
          But come 2020, the tide will come in very strongly and sweep Gracinda into power.

        • Robert Glennie 8.2.1.2
          11 December 2015 at 1:23 am

          New Zealand First is constantly underrated. I think it is probably closer to 8%, largely at National’s expense.

          Helium balloons like National cannot stay up at ceiling level forever. Eventually someone or something will bring down. What, when, how are the circumstances we do not know.

    • Lanthanide 8.3
      10 December 2015 at 4:53 pm

      “Less than a dozen” to me means ~5-6.

  9. Smilin 9
    10 December 2015 at 3:40 pm

    If we had any idea we would be a neutral nation by now
    Key is always overseas with something important that seems to come back with egg on the nations face
    Im mean really do we need history repeating itself . WW1 SHOULD BE ENOUGH for us to say by now not again.
    ps WW2 was a whole different ball game

  10. ZTesh 10
    10 December 2015 at 5:11 pm

    A neutral nation that doesn’t take a stand on anything?

  11. Gangnam Style 11
    10 December 2015 at 6:14 pm

    The Federation of Islamic Associations of New Zealand & the NZ Islamic Womans Council are very curious about it http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/74893140/islamic-womens-council-not-aware-of-any-kiwi-jihadi-brides but what would they know. I see Andrew Little is claiming the ‘Jihadi Bride’ thing too, http://www.pressreader.com/new-zealand/the-press/20151210/281500750188955/TextView

    • emergency mike 11.1
      10 December 2015 at 11:28 pm

      Sad to see, but somehow unsurprising. Also sad to see that article saying that it is known that New Zealand women have married Isis militants before going to Syria. Because Key only said that there was a belief about that. I recall from my epistemology days that those are two different things.

      Plus the article fails to mention that Key said the number of such people is “one or two”. Curious how he couldn’t remember which number it was. Dear ol’ brain fade.