Patu online

78 comments on “Patu online ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Julie 1

   22 October 2008 at 10:47 am

   This is great, I was trying to track down a copy of Patu a few years ago and it’s hellish to find, this will make it a lot easier, yay!
2. Tane 2

   22 October 2008 at 10:50 am

   Yeah, same here. I haven’t been able to find it anywhere. Thanks Bill.
3. Brett Dale 3

   22 October 2008 at 10:51 am

   A near civil war??? Oh please.

   Apartied was sick and had to be stopped and not supported in anyway.

   But no no one died during the tour.

   A few were injured.

   A rugby game was stopped.

   A bunch of protesters who were for peace and love for all races started throwing bottles at policemen who were just doing their job, a bunch of drunken idiot rugby supporters did the same thing. A bunch of teenagers who just wanted a scrap joined in.

   Aunty Helen was against it and so was I, too bad, two and a half decades later, she sucked up to the Chinese Government, an equal opportunity abuser of human rights, for a trade deal, and the left said nothing.
4. IrishBill 4

   22 October 2008 at 11:06 am

   Brett, some people were crippled for life after the beatings they received from the police.
5. Brett Dale 5

   22 October 2008 at 11:10 am

   Were they the same people that threw glass bottles and rock at the police?

   Im guessing a few policemen were seriously injured also? Sympathy for them?
6. rjs131 6

   22 October 2008 at 11:11 am

   For the sake of completeness will you also show coverage of the games. It may come as a shock, but some people at the time did nt think sport and politics didnt mix and thats why teh grounds were full.

   . Maybe Irishbill if you thought sport and politics did mix you could refer to your protests over NZ sending teams to the Moscow olympics in 1980 (only boycotted after the invasion) or the 1984 winter olympics (or are you saying Yugoslavia was a communist utopia at the time). Did you protest going to the 1968 summer olympisc (or dont you know why, if you standards so high why there was pressure over those games going ahead). I guess also you would have protested about NZ soccer teams playing in Iran recently for the sake of your high moral standards.

   IrishBill: I didn’t realise a publishing a CV of protest was a prerequisite for posting a link to a doco.
7. Joe Blogger 7

   22 October 2008 at 11:12 am

   I agree Brett, its a long stretch to describe the tour as near civil war. If it was then Muldoon showed great restraint by not deploying the armed forces as one would expect in that sort of scenario.

   Unfortunately I doubt we would see that sort of restraint today and deaths could almost be guaranteed.
8. Joe Blogger 8

   22 October 2008 at 11:18 am

   Irish Bill, some cops were equally disabled for life due to the actions of protesters.

   You seem to forget that these people commonly used home made weapons against the police, created home made shields with sharpened washes embedded in the edges etc.

   The left like to treat these people as heroes but they were nothing but criminals. The only people I feel sorry for in the whole stinking affair were the poor cops who only did their job.
9. lprent 9

   22 October 2008 at 11:24 am

   JB: It is quite likely that the army would have refused. There were a lot of people in the forces who were deeply unhappy with the governments level of stupidity in fomenting internal conflict.

   Perhaps you should review the constitutional position of the police and armed forces in NZ. The government does not have authority over them, except in terms of funding. Both report to the governor-general.
10. Stephen 10

    22 October 2008 at 11:25 am

    but some people at the time did nt think sport and politics didnt mix and thats why teh grounds were full.

    They shouldn’t mix, but the SA government made them mix by not selecting black players and stopping black players playing for other teams !
11. IrishBill 11

    22 October 2008 at 11:25 am

    Joe, I am unaware of any serious injury to police at the time. Perhaps you would like to supply evidence.
12. Tane 12

    22 October 2008 at 11:29 am

    Note to righties: your line here is supposed to be “tour? what tour? that thing? that was ages ago, who cares?”

    Getting worked up and arguing like you are only reinforces its relevance.
13. Brett Dale 13

    22 October 2008 at 11:32 am

    Of course the tour was huge, but the only reason for this post, is your trying to make Key look bad, your McCain style attacks wont work Im afraid.
14. higherstandard 14

    22 October 2008 at 11:34 am

    Completely off topic but …….. is it just me or are there far less fliers and associated cak for this election ?

    There was far more information and hoardings for the local body elections than there is for the general election – seems a bit odd.
15. IrishBill 15

    22 October 2008 at 11:38 am

    Brett, I saw Patu was online and thought it deserved promotion as it’s a very good Kiwi doco about a very important part of our political history. Could you please explain how I am trying to make Key look bad?
16. Joe Blogger 16

    22 October 2008 at 11:42 am

    Lprent, as the campaign due the effects of injuries and fatigue on the police officers it became a real possibility. I believe the army actually started training in crowd control/riot techniques.

    The big concern using the army however was is that military training at that time wasn’t geared up for those sorts of operations but rather the typical “engage and kill the enemy” stuff. As a result they were never used in this role however do provide teh Police massive logistical assistance in areas like transport, providing meals etc to them.

    Its interesting to note thatthe tour:
    – was the first time that the Police used Helicopters for policing duties (mainly to track the route protesters were taking etc),
    – Police considered the use of the fire engines as adhoc water cannons (final decision was that it would damage the fire department/public relationship too greatly)
    – Police also considered the use of rubber rounds and tear gas.
17. Tim Ellis 17

    22 October 2008 at 11:43 am

    Tane said:

    Note to righties: your line here is supposed to be “tour? what tour? that thing? that was ages ago, who cares?’

    Note to Tane: Righties, like Lefties, don’t have standard lines. We have a range of different views, just as the Lefties do, and don’t all necessarily support a single political party or share the same perspective on historical events.

    Big ups to the documentary though. It’s a very left-wing view of the Tour, but it adds an interesting dimension to public debate.

    [Tane: Tim, clearly taking the piss.]
18. Nick 18

    22 October 2008 at 11:43 am

    Irish Bill – my Dad served on the front line next to that madman Meurant and suffered very bad injuries to his body including, IIRC, a dislocated elbow burt certainly severe bruising to his back – I saw it. He was not alone. However it never made the news because the police didn’t publicise it as they saw it as their job to be hurt in the line of duty.
19. Daveski 19

    22 October 2008 at 11:45 am

    At the risk of blowing Tane’s observation on righties out of the water, there is a strong element of truth in IB’s post, at least for those who were involved.

    The anti-tour protest movement was an umbrella group for a wide range of people many of who were very moderate indeed.

    For those people, and I suppose I must have been one, the way in which the police were deployed and the actions of at least some – eg Red Squad etc – changed perceptions of policing forever. Undoubtedly, there were thugs and idiots among the protesters who deserved everything that they got. Equally without doubt, there were incident protesters who were beaten up for no reason and unreasonable forces was certainly used.

    Contextually, a lot was happening at the time. Keep in mind, that Arthur Allen Thomas was pardoned in 1979 and “Beyond Reasonable Doubt” only came out in 1980. There were generations of people who instinctively believed the police would only ever protect them.

    The developments in the Thomas saga coupled with the tour in 1981 fundamentally changed perceptions of police for a sizeable chunk of the population. Righties included, Tane!
20. randal 20

    22 October 2008 at 11:48 am

    HS for once you are right. Keys and his claque have collared the media and they think they can win without doing the hard yards but they in for a BIG SHOCK. yes indeedy
21. Joe Blogger 21

    22 October 2008 at 11:54 am

    Irish here’s two from my family.
    Officer 1 – Severed entire campaign
    x2 crush vertebra after being stomped
    x1 broken nose
    x3 broken rib
    x1 eye injured
    Result: Has required massive amounts of surgery especially in recent years as age has caught (about 12 lots so far and another scheduled for Jan), has to wear an eye patch.. Likely to be medically discharged over the next 12 months.

    Officer 2 – was injured fairly early on (2 match I think)
    Damaged knees after being struck with steel pipe.
    – Medically discharged mid 80’s

    BTW I do believe the Tour was a culturally significant event however no more than the death of Princess Diana or the September 11.
22. Matthew Pilott 22

    22 October 2008 at 11:57 am

    “The only people I feel sorry for in the whole stinking affair were the poor cops who only did their job.”

    But not the blacks who had to stay at home? irrelevant?
23. randal 23

    22 October 2008 at 12:01 pm

    meanwhile shonkey johnkey is in the sack sowing a few wild oats…kewl!
24. Brett Dale 24

    22 October 2008 at 12:03 pm

    IrishBill

    Your timing.
25. Joe Blogger 25

    22 October 2008 at 12:12 pm

    Lets be honest randal, I’m sure most on both side of the debate would have rather have been home sowing their wild oats.

    Matthew, to answer your question I personally believe that as the tour went on that yes they largely did became irrelevant and instead the focus moved to the tour itself.
26. The Realist 26

    22 October 2008 at 12:13 pm

    Irishbill,

    agree the tour was important for a number of reasons, however in terms of todays voters and a large majority under the age of say 40 it isn’t. For those invovled it will always be of consequence, but for those who of Gen x,y its history, and a long time ago at the that.

    Pre ipod, pre dvd, pre cd and even pre video in most cases. A time of 2 t.v channels and so forth.

    The issues is the everytime it gets bought up the usual people take sides and the rest either don’t care, sigh, or for those under 40 (gross generalisation i know) its a case of ‘yawn’. And not matter what Helen’s or John’s answers they have all switched off.
27. Steve Pierson 27

    22 October 2008 at 12:15 pm

    I think all the comments since Brett Dale dissed the idea that the Springbok Tour was near to civil war have shown him up.

    we seen that there was serious violence from both sides, people were arming themselves, the State was reacting by moving towards moblising the military. classic opening attacks of civil disorder. Of course, it never got to civil war but that’s not what is claimed.
28. Matthew Pilott 28

    22 October 2008 at 12:16 pm

    Yeah joe, it was a cheap dig (I assume no one would actually not care about it) but I think it’s handy to maintain a perspective of what it was all about.
29. Joe Blogger 29

    22 October 2008 at 12:25 pm

    No Steve I believe Bretts comment is still correct. The Tour was no where near to civil war.

    Civil disturbance without a doubt but Civil war no way or would you suggest that the the US nearly had a civil war over the Anti Vietnam ware Protests in the 60’s, the United Kingdom with Thatcher Poll Tax during the 80’s?

    BTW can I just say thanks to all the commentators, this has been a very interesting discussion.
30. Brett Dale 30

    22 October 2008 at 12:30 pm

    Steve:

    Actually it was claimed that it was a near-civil war.

    Civil disorder is far more correct.
31. IrishBill 31

    22 October 2008 at 12:33 pm

    If I may quote from my own piece:

    captures the sense of near-civil war that people on both sides of the divide felt at the time.

    A “sense of near-civil war” is not a “civil war”. Of course attacking the argument you wish I had made is a lot easier than attacking the one I did make which was that the tour was and is still an important part of our political landscape.

    The response of the right on this thread have done little to dissuade me of that notion.
32. randal 32

    22 October 2008 at 12:35 pm

    The thing is the 1981 tour was amatter of principle and in fact several principles. e.g. Should New Zealanders be a party to an apartheid state. Should elections be held ransom to sporting fixtures. and last but not least are kiwis are a gang of dunderheads who will take anything the national party decides to shove down their throats while promising them something else.
33. Brett Dale 33

    22 October 2008 at 12:43 pm

    It got no where near being the sense of a civil war. That is an overstatement. It was a awful time in our history and emotional for both sides

    IrishBill: and once again you misquote me to facilitate a straw man argument. Tell me Brett, how old were you at the time of the tour?
34. Killinginthenameof 34

    22 October 2008 at 1:01 pm

    Joe Blogger
    Unfortunately I doubt we would see that sort of restraint today and deaths could almost be guaranteed.”

    The youth of today would be much better armed, it sure would be messy

    Joe Blogger
    The left like to treat these people as heroes but they were nothing but criminals. The only people I feel sorry for in the whole stinking affair were the poor cops who only did their job.

    A large number of those police acted in a criminal manner also.
35. The Realist 35

    22 October 2008 at 1:17 pm

    Unless the tour was on MTV or a download on an ipod I doubt whether the ‘yoof’ of today would care.

    They may wear the badges, talk the lingo but when it comes to the actions it’s always too much trouble.

    They may get an A+ for the sweat shop essay in China, India etc, but are just as happy to buy the gap clothing, nike boots without a hint of irony.

    Maybe if there was free alco pops they might turn up!
36. Felix 36

    22 October 2008 at 1:35 pm

    “It’s a very left-wing view of the Tour”

    Reality does tend to have a left-wing bias.
37. Killinginthenameof 37

    22 October 2008 at 1:54 pm

    Felix

    “It’s a very left-wing view of the Tour’

    Reality does tend to have a left-wing bias.
    

    Well looks like the only pro tour people were the racist rugby supporters who were all too drunk to manage a cormorant comment. Or the racist cops too scared to show their face on camera. Neither of which are exactly conducive to intelligent comment or observation.
38. Joe Blogger 38

    22 October 2008 at 1:59 pm

    Killing in the Name of:”A large number of those police acted in a criminal manner also.”

    Would you care to back up your accusations? I don’t recall any police officers being arrested, charged or prosecuted for any criminal offences in relation to the tour.
39. lprent 39

    22 October 2008 at 3:28 pm

    The big concern using the army however was is that military training at that time wasn’t geared up for those sorts of operations but rather the typical “engage and kill the enemy’ stuff.

    That is why the military were concerned. They do get more of that training now because that is one of their primary missions.

    I’m aware of the logistical support. The EME’s for instance made my home neighborhood(Kingsland) look like a urban war training area. That was a major reason that I quit the army subsequently, Muldoon didn’t bother to actually get an order in council to use those units.

    I’ll back up KillingInTheNameOf’s accusations.

    The police acted in a criminal manner – yes. Like the policeman that attacked me with a baton and shoved my teeth through my upper lip for no reason apart from the fact I was protesting. That was simple assault. I accurately got his badge number, but apparently that badge was meant to be elsewhere in the country that day.

    The reason police weren’t charged was that they weren’t wearing anything identifiable because most of them had already swapped badges with police not at the protest (or they just lied about the duty rosters). Virtually every protester who put complaints into the police complaints got that response a year or so later. So of course there were no charges. Similarly the police were targeting any cameras that might identify them. The police were quite well aware that they were often acting illegally and took measures to ensure that they were not charged. Ask your police relatives about that.

    After that protest (the third test) and the subsequent whitewash by the police complaints, my standing (and current) viewpoint is that if it is likely that the police assault me at a protest. Then I will cause those police some damage. I’d sure as hell go along armoured and armed. If the police were going to act like thugs out of a gang then that is how I’d treat them. It still pisses me off almost 30 years later.

    There is no way that I’ll give up my ability to protest, and if the police insist on making it violent, then I’m not one to turn the other cheek.

    And Joe Blogger, that is how close it got to widespread civil violence, all it would have taken was another test. The confidence in the police that the many of the protesters (like me) had at the start of the tour was completely shattered by the end. I still have very little confidence in a lot of the police today.
40. Brett Dale 40

    22 October 2008 at 3:41 pm

    IrishBill:

    I was ten years old, and cared more about the all whites making it to Spain. I do remember being on a bus going to New Brighton mall, and the bus had to let us off, because some protesters about ten of them was sitting in the middle of the road, on the Brighton bridge, I remember walking over the bridge, looking at the protesters who were chanting “no tour” the police picked them up and put them to the sidewalk, no batons, no violence, just a peaceful protest.

    I do remember having a rugby loving teacher who was spitting tacks, telling us, no one has the right to tell him if he is allowed to watch a game of rugby, not being a union fan , I thought he was an idiot.
41. Killinginthenameof 41

    22 October 2008 at 5:23 pm

    Just out of curiosity, what is the legal basis for Police preventing a non violent protest?
42. lprent 42

    22 October 2008 at 5:41 pm

    Generally some kind of dispersal of people performing an illegal act.
    For instance blocking the door of a shop, blocking a road, rioting, etc….

    In the case above, none of the above applied because the road was already closed to vehicles. The police never did around to explaining the rationale of their attacks on non-violent protesters at that last test. It had not been required at any of the previous games, so I guess that there were just a pile of fuckwits in command that day, or the police just rioted.
43. Brett Dale 43

    22 October 2008 at 5:53 pm

    Killinginthenameof:

    Damage to property, stopping civilians from going where they have to be, public safety, noise control, etc etc etc.
44. Killinginthenameof 44

    22 October 2008 at 6:07 pm

    Brett Dale:

    Non Violent.
45. Killinginthenameof 45

    22 October 2008 at 6:13 pm

    lprent

    Generally some kind of dispersal of people performing an illegal act.
    For instance blocking the door of a shop, blocking a road, rioting, etc .

    Fair enough, I guess we don’t have it as bad as protesters in the USA. All the tour stuff was before my time, I was how ever proud (and surprised) that both my parents marched against it.

    In the case above, none of the above applied because the road was already closed to vehicles. The police never did around to explaining the rationale of their attacks on non-violent protesters at that last test. It had not been required at any of the previous games, so I guess that there were just a pile of fuckwits in command that day, or the police just rioted.

    How about “impeding the lawful swinging of a baton”. *cough* *cough*

    The video briefly mentioned and showed police plants amongst the protesters, what sort of role did they play? Ive read in Canada about police using plants to throw rocks and incite the police into action, or were they just there for intelligence purposes?
46. Dave 46

    22 October 2008 at 6:22 pm

    Iprent

    “There is no way that I’ll give up my ability to protest, and if the police insist on making it violent, then I’m not one to turn the other cheek”

    Since when have the police ever made a protest violent? Surely it is the other way round. I have seen a number of protests over the years, winding along lambton quay, and have never seen the police make any of the protests violent.

    Unfortunately many of the (anti tour) protesters chose the path of confrontation, rather than protest. There was a deliberate strategy by (some) protesters to make the protests violent, to confront and to challenge the police. Perhaps you should accept the consequences of your actions rather than blaming others.
47. randal 47

    22 October 2008 at 6:31 pm

    how do you know that dave? were you there?
48. Lew 48

    22 October 2008 at 6:34 pm

    Dave: Just FYI: protests which take place on Lambton Quay tend to be the most docile and well-behaved of anywhere in the country.

    L
49. Robinsod 49

    22 October 2008 at 6:41 pm

    Dave – you’ll be pleased to know I’ve personally been assaulted by the cops three time. I got a payout on one…
50. Dave 50

    22 October 2008 at 6:48 pm

    Randal – Yes I was there, in fact I was beaten by anti tour for watching the third test on my tv in my bedroom at my parents house.

    Lew – You are correct but im sure that the police still dont beat up protesters even in the rougher suburbs.
51. Dave 51

    22 October 2008 at 6:50 pm

    ha… that should have been beaten up by anti tour protesters
52. randal 52

    22 October 2008 at 6:53 pm

    sounds like you were beating something…
53. Robinsod 53

    22 October 2008 at 6:55 pm

    Lew – You are correct but im sure that the police still dont beat up protesters even in the rougher suburbs

    Let’s see. I’ve been put in an illegal choke hold until I blacked out. I’ve been repeatedly kicked in the ribs while taking part in a peaceful lock-down demonstration and I’ve been batoned across the hands and arms at a blockade after not moving out quick enough (there was nowhere to go because of crowd pressure behind me).

    I’d say you are wrong Dave. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

    Oh and I doubt you were beaten for watching a test. I’d say you just got your arse kicked because nobody liked you. Which is understandable really…
54. Lew 54

    22 October 2008 at 6:58 pm

    Dave: You should have worn your motorcycle helmet.

    L
55. randal 55

    22 October 2008 at 6:58 pm

    I’ll go for that last one
56. Paul 56

    22 October 2008 at 7:07 pm

    The army was used by the National govt during the tour – just not on the streets – I distinctly remember them dragging barbed wire around Carisbrook (we got past the barbed wire using the simple expedient of purchasing tickets – apparently there’s some unwritten law about only one guy being allowed to use a whistle at a rugby match … or at least the cops made it up that day).

    And don’t forget why the tour happened at all – It was election year, Bob Jones had started a party to the right of the Nats and Muldoon had to shore up his support on the right if he wanted to win – in the end Labour got more votes but the Nats still won (FPP of course)
57. Dave 57

    22 October 2008 at 7:08 pm

    Randal – not while im watching rugby!

    Robinsod – it wasnt my arse that got kicked it was my head…my skull was fractured. The only good thing that came out of it was my sister realising her boyfriend was a drop kick.
58. Robinsod 58

    22 October 2008 at 7:12 pm

    The only good thing that came out of it was my sister realising her boyfriend was a drop kick.

    You were dating your sister???
59. randal 59

    22 October 2008 at 7:13 pm

    quit while you are ahead dave
60. Dave 60

    22 October 2008 at 7:16 pm

    dating my sister…now thats funny!
61. randal 61

    22 October 2008 at 7:18 pm

    not if the cops find out
62. Dave 62

    22 October 2008 at 7:26 pm

    I didnt think it was illegal
63. Robinsod 63

    22 October 2008 at 7:45 pm

    Dave – lol! You’re alright…
64. Ag 64

    22 October 2008 at 8:09 pm

    I remember this well, although I was quite young at the time. If your job requires you to stand up for apartheid, then you need to find another line of work. The anti-tour people were right and the pro-tour people were wrong, as history has confirmed. I can’t think of anyone I knew who was pro-tour who wasn’t a worthless piece of crap.

    Any cop that got his ass kicked at these protests deserved it. And for me, anyone who went to a game, knowing what we knew, forfeited their own rights.
65. Brett Dale 65

    22 October 2008 at 8:15 pm

    AG: Any cop that got his ass kicked at these protests deserved it.????

    Charming. Great that you have respect for your common man, you sound some of the jackasses from “Peace Action New Zealand”
66. randal 66

    22 October 2008 at 8:35 pm

    brett dale you just sound like a jackass fullstop!
67. Brett Dale 67

    22 October 2008 at 9:49 pm

    Randal:

    I just dont like people who make extreme statements, saying “Any cop that got his ass kick deserved it” is extreme.

    And stomping on flowers at a memorial for the victims of 9/11 and saying the Holocaust is a Jewish lie is extreme, but that didn’t stop Peace Action NewZealand.
68. Felix 68

    22 October 2008 at 10:41 pm

    Fuck the police Brett.
69. milo 69

    22 October 2008 at 10:43 pm

    Who remembers “Sleeping Dogs”? It was a vision of New Zealand that seemed fantastical. And then it was played out, in large part, in the 1981 Tour. That was an extraordinary loss of innocence. That was the biggest impact of the tour, I think. All of a sudden, New Zealand lost its self-belief and self-appointed right to be the sanctimonious guardian of everybody else’s morals.

    Although big ups to the Standard Bloggers for doing their best to lead by example and restore that idealistic state of knowing that you’re always right and the world would be a better place, if only they’d listen.

    Of course, some of us think that’s what leads to all the trouble in the first place.
70. lprent 70

    23 October 2008 at 12:36 am

    KITNO: From word of mouth from protest activists. Police plants here are usually kind of obvious and are after intel. There have been reports of informers inciting, but I don’t really know – probably the best place to look would be indymedia.

    Dave: That was the point. Sure there were parts of the protest that were violent. But we’re talking MASSIVE numbers of people in a number of different and separated groups. In the groups I was in, the worst that a couple of protesters did was use a few small paint bombs. Tell me, does that justify the police batoning all protesters indiscriminately. The few subsequent protests I’ve been on have been managed well by both the police and the organisers. However you tend to vividly remember the one where the police acted like thugs.

    milo: The problem is that without an effort to improve things, societies always deteriorate. It is the same underlying principle as shows in economics. In the absence of external controls, a purely free market where there a significant barrier to entry to a particular area will tend towards producing monopolies. ie entrenched privilege. For instance look at early medieval Europe, which only eventually changed under the guise of ‘re-discovering’ the work of the earlier classical period and the stimulus of coping with the plague.

    Sure the idealism can cause problems. So does the alternative of probable stasis. But the latter doesn’t survive changes in external conditions easily, the former helps people to deal with change. And of course we can always rely on the skeptics to temper the idealism.
71. Brett Dale 71

    23 October 2008 at 8:02 am

    Felix:

    Support the Police, I doubt you or I could last one day in the job.
72. lprent 72

    23 October 2008 at 8:57 am

    Brett, I do support the police. When I was younger I could have done the job, but it isn’t one I’m particularly interested in. Their systems (computer, people, and management) look archaic from the outside.

    However supporting them blindly is just outright daft. The police partially separate themselves from the rest of society in their institutional nature. Now that is a good thing in that they aren’t the playthings of political forces (regardless how much the clown or hooten thinks otherwise). However it does mean that they have to reform themselves internally as the society they serve changes.

    The police need external comment to help it reform itself. Generally the type of comment in the msm hasn’t useful for a while because of their advertising driven headline obsession. Apart from that and the little bit of an interface that they have to the police minister, they appear to get little structured external comment about their performance and flaws.

    That is the underlying flaw in the polices institutional model, it allows the culture in the police to move a long way from the rest of society. It is what leads to problems like the Louise Nichols and others saga, to the continuing questioning about their handling of protest groups and industrial relations, to questions about operational priorities like south auckland and incis, etc. Each of those in turn causes alienation and a drop in the required support levels that the police depend upon to do their job.

    It is noticeable when the police get bad msm headline issues these days, that there are groups related to the issue that don’t raise a finger to defend them or to point out that it is an aberration. In fact they will often put the boot in as being the only way that change can occur in the institution of the police. It isn’t a particularly efficient way of getting change, but it is really the only one that seems to work.

    Now that is a problem.
73. Akldnut 73

    23 October 2008 at 9:00 am

    My brother was in red squad and is adament that it was incidents like that of Joe Bloggers family:
    Officer 1 – Served entire campaign
    x2 crush vertebra after being stomped
    x1 broken nose
    x3 broken rib
    x1 eye injured
    Result: Has required massive amounts of surgery especially in recent years as age has caught (about 12 lots so far and another scheduled for Jan), has to wear an eye patch.. Likely to be medically discharged over the next 12 months.

    Officer 2 – was injured fairly early on (2 match I think)
    Damaged knees after being struck with steel pipe.
    – Medically discharged mid 80’s

    And things like watching his best mate being mauled by a group of protestors at the second game, coming out with a broken nose, cheek bone, ribs & lacerations.
    This happened in the early scirmishes and forced police to take the hard line action. He also asserts that they were there to stop the confrontation of protestors with rugby supporters who were just as passionate and numbered many times more. They were in his words basically trying to protect the protestors from the supportes but where being used as a vehicle by politicians and some high ranking police officers with political ambitions. Coupled with a subversive element in the protestors instigating violence as well it was a clash that was imminent just from day 1.

    Just another veiw of the big picture!!!
74. randal 74

    23 October 2008 at 9:10 am

    akldnut…how we do know you are telling the truth and why are you cutting and pasting someone elses post?
    you are just spamming in my opinion
75. lprent 75

    23 October 2008 at 9:25 am

    Akldnut: There is no question that the violent parts of the protests were violent. As has been pointed out above there were people who really wanted to have a go at the police. Of course you’d have to ask yourself why there was such a need by parts of society to want to do that type of rumble. From what I saw when I was younger was that the level of racism in the police in those days would drive anyone of the wrong colour to want to hammer the police.

    However the people prepared to be violent were a minority amongst the protesters. At the most, probably less than a quarter of them.

    The real question I have about the tour, especially in that last test, was why the police felt the need to fall upon the peaceful protesters and baton the crap out of them. Were they just soft targets to vent frustration on?

    Almost 30 years on those incidents still color the way a lot of people view the police, and consequently the level of support that they receive. The problem for the police is that often the people who do get involved in groups pushing for social change (as milo implicitly pointed out above) are our idealists and often the best and brightest of their generations. What they see the police doing at age 20 will affect the viewpoint of them as they move into public society, and will affect the level of support that they give the police 30 years later.

    BTW: You can just link to other comments (right-click on the date and copy the link location). There is no need to copy-paste them.
76. Felix 76

    23 October 2008 at 10:31 am

    Brett the trouble is that if I start “supporting” people on the basis that they can do something that I probably couldn’t, then I’d likely find myself “supporting” all sorts of people whose jobs I couldn’t do:

    Commercial whalers (because I get seasick)

    Shortland Street cast members (because I have a sense of dignity)

    Robbie Williams (because I lack his looks and charm. And I have a sense of dignity)
77. Ianmac 77

    23 October 2008 at 10:57 am

    Iprent: October 23, 2008 at 9:25 am. Does the date-copy-paste work for a Mac- no right button? If not anyone know how?
78. Akldnut 78

    23 October 2008 at 11:12 am

    Randal – I have no reason to lie,nothing to gain whatsoever. I’m just sorry that I came into this at such a late stage. (because I’ve just spent the last 3 days pamphlet dropping in West Auckland) I was Living in Aus at the time and was saddened and sickened by what was happening to my people. I am BTW Maori as is my brother.
    I repeat nothing to gain whatsoever.
    I was cutting and pasting because I didn’t know how to link, not spamming. (Thanks Iprent)
    I was not trying to vindicate what happened, just show you that there was another side to see in the big picture and that not all cops were assholes (although it may have seemed that way) that some were there for good, to actually protect and serve. Unfortunately as with the protestors there were some real cowboys as well.(to say the least)

    I agree there was a level of racism in the force during that period.
    BTW heres something to ponder. Did you know that the Govt back then pulled all the Maori and Pacifica cops through-out the country to remove the Maori at Bastion Point so the demonstrators could not scream the race card at the front line cops. (My Brother was there also)

    Well gotta go now deliver some more pamhlets

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS