“Beware of the words, “Internal security” for they are the eternal cry of the oppressor”.
But whether we like or dislike others, provided these
“others” confine their critiques to within prescribed rules of law, such as
avoiding insulting, offensive, threatening language as per statutory law and to
avoid the guillotine of civil litigation, by presenting their opinions based on
reliable evidence, “others” do have a right to speak out.
If we are denied the right to challenge, we are no longer a democracy.
Under the current reign of the Labour government using covid
as weapon to intimidate, the right to speak out, by my assessment, is definitely
under threat. For example, medical
professionals who present empirical research which challenges preferred
government protocols, can be threatened with de-registration at worst or
vilification at the least.
History tells us that no science has endured without facing
scrutiny which invariably modifies a proposition. Charles Darwin’s theory of Evolution, is
perhaps the best example.
Karl’s Slater article focuses on, ‘back-room’ strategy (aka
bar room wisdom) by police to deal with someone they consider to be a
miscreant. For example, he writes:
Ominously, a police
intelligence briefing disclosed concern that Slater “will continue to public
voice opinions on topical matters which may add to conspiracy theorist
engagement across social media”. And an unnamed senior sergeant wondered
whether the cops should pay Slater a visit because he posted “possibility [sic]
controversial racist comments” about the September terrorist incident at Lynn Mall.
And as Karl comments;
So, being anti-government is
now seen as a potential threat to public safety? This is the type of state
paranoia that ultimately leads to monitoring of phone calls and knocks on the
door at midnight. Slater was right to describe it as sinister.
Karl’s perspicacity may raise the question in the minds of
the more cerebral: “How deep does this attitude infect the police and where
did it come from?”
In my latest Novel, Out of the Inferno (of
which Chris Trotter wrote: The only way Meurant
can tell the truth is write fiction) one of three main players in the book – a
detective inspector, ruthlessly justifies rule of police over rule
of law, on the grounds of greater public good, when of course, he is
the arbiter of, “public good”.
The book is no parody – and feedback from former cops of my
ilk, say: “Meurant. You got this so
right.” That is the tragedy, which I
will now endeavour to succinctly expose, by validating the sagacity of Karl du Fresno’s
critique of Cameron Slater’s plight.
My former ilk?
As a former inspector in charge of police spies and before
that a Red Squad commander and before that a detective and AOS member, I was
once, Deep in the Forest of police culture.
In previous articles I have delved into this forest. North & South magazine (Oct
2011) produced When Good Cops Go Bad, 8,000 words of specific
names and places of profile events where police fabricated evidence to gain
convictions. Justification was
invariably; “We know best and do this for the good of the country.”
The article is brutal. It attracted denials and obfuscations
from senior police, but no one sued me.
Truth can be a bitch. To deny truth, is to avoid the problem and this
gets to the nub of Karl’s concerns.
As Plato said: “We can easily forgive a child who
is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the
light.”
This article will not regurgitate the case studies in, When
Good Cops Go Bad, (2)
but I take the following extract from the introduction section, and present it
as some part of the answer to the question; “How deep does this attitude infect
the police and where did it come from?”
Like most recruits, I entered
the police as an impressionable young man with a basic education, from a
working-class environment in provincial NZ. There were hundreds of peers like
me, before me and after me. I was nothing special but I was altruistic. We were
all cannon fodder. Easy to manipulate. We looked at the forest before us in
awe.
The moment you step into the
police, this subculture within NZ culture hits you. You are immediately part of
the thin blue line. You are part of a team and that team looks after itself.
You are special. You are the border between good and evil. The attitudes of the
police instructors, armed not with teaching certificates but with ten years'
exposure to the police subculture, either consciously or subconsciously invite
you into the forest.
To step out of police college
is to take the next step into the forest. You are now part of the difference
between law and order in the streets where gangs would rule and evil would
triumph. But for you and your fellow coppers, society would be a dangerous
place. Your mission is to protect society from this evil. Very soon you learn
to decide what is evil and what is not. You are no longer just a collector of
human rubbish at the base of the cliff but you have an obligation; yes, even a
duty to guide the country to a decent society. That direction is best decided
by you and others in your sub culture of police, for what better epitomises the
values of a decent society than those cherished by the men and women in blue?
Your task is honourable. What better vocation than to rid the country of evil? Thus,
achieving this end can even justify the means!
The further into the forest,
the more pervasive becomes this police culture. The heart of the beast is
centred in elite CIB squads like Regional Crime, Criminal Intelligence and Drug
Squad. These are the destinations to which the most ambitious and zealous
aspire. Together with the Armed Offenders Squad and Team Policing (Red Squad) units,
these entities are the bastion of police culture.
Of course, there are those who
do not aspire to these objectives but then, the police are also a government
department, which always harbour a good number of "glide timers":
there to collect their pay and do as little as possible, which is the best
route to longevity in any government agency. Often these people will suddenly
find themselves floating on the top of the pool.
Every new entrant runs the
same gauntlet. No recruit is ever formally "taught" to use violence,
to lie and cover up. None of my mentors did that to me and I never did it to
those whom I mentored. But the culture sends a very clear message. "When
you witness transgression by a colleague, keep your mouth shut at worst and at
best, provide an account which supports the miscreant and helps him/her out of a
sticky situation."
If you don't, as a new
recruit, you are ostracised. You may as well quit there and then. But once you
have provided succour, you have taken your next step into the forest. Later you
will witness another indiscretion and you will again "cover". After
all, you have been accepted as one of the team. You are "reliable".
To lose that status is not a desirable outcome. But already you are
compromised. Then one day you will commit an indiscretion and others will cover
for you. Then you are beholden. Then you have entered the forest proper.
There is no light to show the way home.
Where did this attitude come from? It’s been around for some time. Read the facts based 8000-word article: When Good Cops Go Bad (2)
I am mindful that some readers will despair at this description of the police.
Remember Plato.
If we don’t accept facts, we can’t fix
what’s wrong.
I see the documentation in Karl’s article, released under
OIA, exposes this police culture as being alive and well today. Clearly, the culture played a role during the
illegal raids on Dot Com which were condemned by then Judge Helen
Winkelmann). (3)
Anxieties of some may be assuaged, that the culture I was
caught in, represents about a third of the police (by my calculations when I
was a cop). However, invariable it is
this group who are, “leaders of the pack”.
I am mindful that many regard me as having been a
participant of, “Deep in the Forest” culture.
My excuse is, that I was just a country boy from a lower socio-economic
decile in a conservative rural rump of New Zealand. Easily lead. As were my grandfather and father, who typical
of the fodder who devotedly followed the flag of God, King and Empire and went
to Flanders and Alamein, I followed boldly the ‘back room’ instruction of the
NCOs whom I looked up to in awe at the time, and obeyed.
My epiphany arrived via exposure to a different input of
education. By the time I was a sergeant
I had completed all my promotion examinations to commissioned rank and was
granted a place at Auckland University. In
the new environment of education, gradually I began to understand that the rule
of law was of a higher value than the rule of the police.
As Karl writes in his defence of Slater’s right to challenge
authority:
“There are people in the
police hierarchy who apparently think that anyone who criticises the government
should be watched. This was also the mentality of East Germany’s Stasi, South
Africa’s BOSS (the Bureau of State Security) and Haitian dictator Papa Doc
Duvalier’s murderous Tonton Macoute.”
These are troubling times for New Zealand, as they are for most
every state on the planet. Covid was the
catalyst but as one views the pervasiveness of the WOKE culture, particularly
as it manifests in the education sector, my assessment is that New Zealand has
a major problem.
Where academics of high esteem are vilified, threatened with
de-registration and ostracised for speaking out in defence of western science
as having more empirical substance the Maori myth? Dr
Michael Bassett. Professor Liz
Rata. Professor Robert Nola. The list of eminent educationalists is
growing daily.
Meanwhile, Main Stream Media is a WOKE JOKE.
Thank you, Muriel. Don’t go away. Or should I say, “I hope they don’t take you
way.” For as Karl ponders:
“What next, I wonder. Will we
hear people like Slater described as “enemies of the state” or “enemies of the
people” – phrases used by brutal totalitarian regimes of both the extreme right
(Nazi Germany) and extreme left (the Soviet Union) to justify the incarceration
of troublesome individuals on the pretext that it’s for the good of society?”
Ross Meurant, graduate in politics both at university and as
a Member of Parliament; formerly police inspector in charge of Auckland spies
& V.I.P. security; currently Honorary Consul for an African state, Trustee
and CEO of Russian owned commercial assets in New Zealand and has international
business interests.
References:
(1) https://breakingviewsnz.blogspot.com/2021/12/karl-du-fresne-new-zealand-where-being.html#more
(2) WHEN_GOOD_COPS_GO_BAD.pdf - MEURANT
(3) https://www.odt.co.nz/news/national/dotcoms-lawyer-hails-tremendous-blow
(4) https://www.nzcpr.com/the-philosopher-stoned-for-his-defence-of-science/
1 comment:
The very same dynamics are at work among those in the media and any Government department. Imagine being young, working as a journalist or trying to be successful in a Government organization, and speaking out in favour of the idea of New Zealand being a democracy where everybody should be treated equally under the law. Your career would be just as doomed as a young police officer refusing to protect a colleague over a matter of principal, as Ross describes.
Post a Comment