For the benefit of PM of New Zealand, John Key.
Definition of terrorist.
- a person, usually a member of a group, who uses or advocates terrorism.
- a person who terrorizes or frightens others.
- (formerly) a member of a political group in Russia aiming at the demoralization of the government by terror.
- an agent or partisan of the revolutionary tribunal during the Reign of Terror in France.
- of, relating to, or characteristic of terrorism or terrorists:
Origin of terrorist – French – 1785 – 1795.
British Dictionary definitions for terrorist.
- a. a person who employs terror or terrorism, especially as a political weapon.
b. (as modifier): terrorist tactics.
Word Origin and History for terrorist.
in the modern sense, 1944, especially in reference to Jewish tactics against the British in Palestine – earlier it was used of extremist revolutionaries in Russia (1866); and Jacobins during the French Revolution (1795) – from French terroriste; see terror + ist (also cf. terrorism). The tendency of one party ‘s terrorist to be another’s guerilla or freedom fighter was noted in reference to the British action in Cyprus (1956) and the war in Rhodesia (1973). The word terrorist has been applied, at least retroactively, to the Maquis resistance in occupied France in World War II (e.g. in the “Spectator,” Oct. 20, 1979).
Online Dictionary, 2010 Douglas Harper.
Terrorist – from a bill to law?
What has prompted this New Zealand “Government”, led by the arrogant PM John Phillip Key, to introduce a bill based on the term “terrorist”?
What is the reason behind pushing this terrorist bill through Parliament, over all preceeding bills waiting to be read, to be put through the three reading processes so fast so it becomes law?
Has there been any pressure voting to help push this bill through?
Who is responsible for the conception of such a bill to be passed into law?
Has the conceivable bill, come from an act of the PM’s own conceited attitude?
Has the PM’s own conceited attitude, played a part in ignoring advice from Jonathon Orphin, over re-amending such a bill, before putting it forward to Parliament to go through the necessary stages of reading to become law?
Has the PM and/or any of his MP’s and all advisors looked into the definition of the term terrorist?
Does the PM have any idea, of the seriousness of a public backlash he is causing, and having to face, for his own government, through the idea based on foreign action, through foreign powers (USA), that advocate the use 0f terrorist activity through acts of provocation, for foreign political control?
How does the PM and his government base the need for a law of terrorist activity against the people of New Zealand, when the people of New Zealand are acting in their democratic rights of interest, to protect what is theirs, which includes the Nuclear Free Zone Treaty of New Zealand?
Is the PM and his government thinking that the people of New Zealand will do to an American warship, what the French did to the Rainbow Warrior?
If this is what the National Government think, or base their radical thinking upon, then could it be that our government has something to hide, or something to fear?
Is this government of ours using the terrorist bill as a cover up to a plot that is designed to cause an act of terrorism in New Zealand by the National government, through a political activity in New Zealand?
If this is intended to be so, then in their political planning to use such a means, this is designed to incite a terrorist act, by planting infiltrators among the innocent protestors protecting their rights to democracy, in turn placing the blame of deliberate political threat of provocation upon the government by the people, while this politically led act of terrorism is the tool of distraction to the real actions from its political source of origin, a political intention of employing terror or terrorism, especially as a political weapon of control against this governments own people?
In this means of control against this governments own people, is this political tool being used to quell the masses and break their spirit, in the governments hopes that no protest will occur at the Naval celebrations, which will be politically motivated in designated act as a political tool of distraction, from the arms trade deal and the TPPA, which are all very closely connected with activated dates of convention for corporate-driven political gains.
The standards of todays political arena of politicians, has created a change vastly different by todays means of standards, in comparison to the days of such remarkably honourable leaders such as Sir Michael Savage, Norman Kirk, Lange, and to a degree, even Muldoon. Such politicians back then, had a backbone, an honour and integrity that meant something to the people, and the people in return respected such politicians. Most regrettably with misfortune, this is a feat of the greatest difficulty, far beyond any reach for someone such as our present PM, John Phillip Key, to ever dream of ever claiming as any poliitical achievement for himself to claim as a legacy to his name, let alone his words and actions. The words and actions that Key carries, have a consequence that is of the severest backlash of self-destruction, that any foolish politician, through use of blaming all others as a tool of deception, will eventually result in the rebound upon themselves.
The challenge that now faces Key, is how can he prove he has done everything he can to help protect New Zealand and its people?
Can Key prove his actions have been honourable, and of the best interests to the people of New Zealand, and not just to the benefits for his own vested interests?
Can Key state that he has been an honest politician, leading an honest government, with no outside influences or any form of corruption by any means?
Or would John Key himself prefer to call me a liar, and continue to blame others for his own failed actions, just as Key would brand me a terrorist with the intention of posing a threat to the government, by standing up and protecting what I believe in as my democratic right to being a New Zealand born citizen and dissenter of the present tyrannical government?
Is John Key going to create some lame excuse of forgetfulness, by stating that he has no idea of what he was doing at the time, or what he was in for, or where he was leading himself, from the days of him working as a banker in New Zealand, to working with Merril Lynch, to his present position of New Zealand’s PM, all the while, using these positions of employment to his very own advantage to project his personally financial career of investing and shifting money for his own personal gain, at the expense of so many others?
One thing is for certain. Only Key will know the truth to the answers to these questions. Nobody else will ever know for definite or beyond reasonable doubt, unless Key writes a book prior to himself laying on his deathbed, to which end all will be too late to act legally in prosecuting Key. Unless all is exposed on Key now, He will get away with whatever he can, and take it with him to his grave, just the real murderers of Jeanette and Harvey Crewe, the Bain family, and Mona Blades did. That will be John Phillip Keys only real legacy to himself. All based on how Key sold out on New Zealand and its people, just to rub shoulders with the empire of the wealthy world leaders, for his own personal gain of climbing the ladder of a high-rolling lifestyle of the over-indulging wealth.
Guess we’ll just have to wait for the race between Karma, and John Keys death, to see which one comes first. Worth betting on?