Post by Rich80105On Thu, 08 Jun 2017 20:06:07 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tonyhttp://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/93481260/mine-staff-safety-threatened-after-protesters-padlock-gate-at-mt-karangahake-gold-mine
Presumably they had the opportunity to have their say before the decision to
grant permission to mine gold was made.
If so, they are low life and deserve to be trespassed.
Putting other people's lives at risk and preventing other people from going
about their lawful business is not acceptable.
Tony
Anti-democracy? Really? Next you will be calling it Terrorism!
No I wouldn't but you would, after all you lie all the time, even more than
Trump!
Post by Rich80105Did you read the article? It says quite clearly that there was strong
Why do you deliberately miss simple concepts? The point is that permission to
mine was given and therefore previous opposition to the approval is now moot,
can you follow that?
Post by Rich80105The decision to allow the mine to start has nothing to with democracy
It was given after due democratic process (you know, powers given to
departments and councils by duly elected governments, can you follow that?)
Post by Rich80105- there is no threat to our government's ability to use Conservation
land to enrich another private company, and no threat to our ability
to vote accordingly at the next election.
Your mindless obsession with imaginary activities is once again noted.
Post by Rich80105Protesting a decision that they did not agree with is not per se
illegal
I didn't say it is illegal, do you think it is - if not why do you say such
silly things?
Post by Rich80105, and there is no indication that they were treapassing.
It is extremely likely that they were, they closed (ppresumably) and locked (as
reported) a gate on the access access way.
Post by Rich80105Putting others lives at risk is however not acceptable, and the action
by an unknown person may well have been illegal. I hope it is
investigated and if approriate that a charge is laid.
You finally got something right, well done, it was of course inevitable (enough
monkeys playing with typewriters will eventually write something that remotely
resembles an English word)!
Post by Rich80105As for freedom, yes it does appear that freedom to enjoy part of oour
Conservation estate has been restricted - but not by the protestors.
Your sarcsam lets you down once more.
The freedom to conduct ones business is what I referred to but you of course
don't believe in that.
The protesters put lives at risk and they obstructed the rights of other people
to conduct their lawful business. If you disagree with any of that please say
so with evidence, otherwise stop trying to be smart - that takes more than the
limited brain cells that you still have.
Tony