Golriz Ghahraman

[Gordon]

Another MP behaving badly

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/133549684/golriz-ghahramans-political-career-in-danger-experts-say-she-should-front-up

Good to see that both sides of the political spectrum are saying this needs
to be cleared up.

As it stands the guilty until proven innocent is applying. No smoke without
fire.

A by-election with her as the Green party candidate would be a good way of
clearing the matter up.

Interesting days ahead. Can Democracy rule?

[Rich80105]

On 11 Jan 2024 23:41:00 GMT, Gordon <Gor...@leaf.net.nz> wrote:

>Another MP behaving badly
It is at this stage an allegation only.

>
>https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/133549684/golriz-ghahramans-political-career-in-danger-experts-say-she-should-front-up
>
>Good to see that both sides of the political spectrum are saying this needs
>to be cleared up.

That is as it should be

>As it stands the guilty until proven innocent is applying. No smoke without
>fire.

What a horrible belief to have - you must be a very sad individual.
Yes I understand that the "Dirty Tricks" supporters of NAct may well
push that view, but at this stage it is sad that such allegations have
been made about any member of parliament. To pre-judge the issue if
against the avowed principles of every party in parliament - but some
parties are not prepared to go as far as to recommend such views to
their members.

>A by-election with her as the Green party candidate would be a good way of
>clearing the matter up.

That is putting the cart before the horse, but she is a list MP
anyway, so there is no possibility of a by-election.

>Interesting days ahead. Can Democracy rule?

Of course it can. Do you see any potential difficulties in that
regard?

[Tony]

Rich80105 <Rich...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On 11 Jan 2024 23:41:00 GMT, Gordon <Gor...@leaf.net.nz> wrote:
>
>>Another MP behaving badly
>It is at this stage an allegation only.
>
>>
>>https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/133549684/golriz-ghahramans-political-career-in-danger-experts-say-she-should-front-up
>>
>>Good to see that both sides of the political spectrum are saying this needs
>>to be cleared up.
>That is as it should be
>
>>As it stands the guilty until proven innocent is applying. No smoke without
>>fire.
>What a horrible belief to have - you must be a very sad individual.
>Yes I understand that the "Dirty Tricks" supporters of NAct may well
>push that view, but at this stage it is sad that such allegations have
>been made about any member of parliament. To pre-judge the issue if
>against the avowed principles of every party in parliament - but some
>parties are not prepared to go as far as to recommend such views to
>their members.

You patronising fool - you judge all of the time, you tell people off for
believing something that you don't like, you are the worst of all possible
human beings in this forum. Grow up and leave other people to enjoy their
rights and privileges - your hopes of an authoritarian and undemocratic regime
are over thakfully ofr at least 3 years.

[Lawrence D'Oliveiro]

On 11 Jan 2024 23:41:00 GMT, Gordon wrote:

> As it stands the guilty until proven innocent is applying.

As a private citizen going about your private affairs, “innocent until
proven guilty” is the norm.

As a person in a position of special power over the rest of us, the onus
is on you to prove yourself squeaky-clean.

[Crash]

While I agree in general Gordon, this assumes that Gharamen is guilty
and honourable enough to resign. As a list MP there is no by-election
so therefore if she were to resign she would be replaced by the next
available Greens list candidate and would leave the current
Parliament.

Resigning and forcing a by election is only an option for electorate
MPs.


--
Crash McBash

[Crash]

On Fri, 12 Jan 2024 17:28:55 +1300, Crash <nog...@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:

Now this:

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/opinion/133553657/the-unanswered-questions-in-the-case-of-golriz-ghahraman-and-scotties-boutique

The situation gets worse and the likelihood of prosecution increases
because of the allegation of theft on multiple occasions.


--
Crash McBash

[Willy Nilly]

On Sat, 13 Jan 2024, Crash <nog...@dontbother.invalid> wrote:
>The situation gets worse and the likelihood of prosecution increases
>because of the allegation of theft on multiple occasions.

I remembered "journalism" praising her as a new light in NZ politics:
https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/saturday/audio/2018772797/golriz-ghahraman-finding-her-place-in-aotearoa

Ain't reality a bitch. How could she let all her people down?
Because none of them are actually ethical? She can hardly claim
poverty now, can she? But she can claim Marxist entitlement to the
property of others -- which is what the Greens actually stand for.

[Tony]

The truth will no doubt become public but let us remember that there have been
previous Green MPs (including one co-leader) who believed they had the right to
steal. What a pathetic bunch of entitled nobody's.

[Gordon]

Then there is also this


https://centrist.co.nz/kamikaze-damage-control-have-greens-overstepped-the-delicate-line-of-politicians-interfering-with-scales-of-justice-in-golriz-ghahraman-investigation/

Which makes some good points. Political parties and the legal system must
never be joined at the hip. There are allegations that the Greens may have
tried to cut this off at the pass buy meeting with the shop.

Along with this is a case of do as as say, not as I do. Supposed to be
representing the poor down trodden folks while stealing from a high end
shop.

As for her being the justice spokesperson for the Green is giviving us
evidence to confirm our own views og the Greens.

[Tony]

That link shows some very concerning possibilities. If true I would not be
surprised but we wait to see.

[Rich80105]

On Fri, 12 Jan 2024 21:23:13 GMT, w...@qwert.com (Willy Nilly) wrote:

>On Sat, 13 Jan 2024, Crash <nog...@dontbother.invalid> wrote:
>>The situation gets worse and the likelihood of prosecution increases
>>because of the allegation of theft on multiple occasions.
>
>I remembered "journalism" praising her as a new light in NZ politics:
>https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/saturday/audio/2018772797/golriz-ghahraman-finding-her-place-in-aotearoa
>
>Ain't reality a bitch. How could she let all her people down?

We don't know if she has yet - but that subtlety seems to have
by-passed quite a few people

>Because none of them are actually ethical?

Who is "them"? Immigrants, females, dark skinned people, politicians?
Most political parties have a story of at times finding one of their
own has been dishonest . . .

>She can hardly claim
>poverty now, can she?

Why should she?

> But she can claim Marxist entitlement to the
>property of others -- which is what the Greens actually stand for.

What rubbish . . .

[Rich80105]

Nothing proved - following the National party mantra of :anything goes
so long as you stay out of court", perhaps it is worth waiting to see
what happens . . .

[Tony]

Which is precisely what I wrote
- however the past theft by a co-leader was admitted by her and therefore that
part of what I wrote is fact.
So my entirte post was precise and accurate.
There is no such mantra by any party except perhaps the Greens - oh wait - yes
let us wait and see.
Thank you for admitting that.

[Tony]

The green party are marxists - fact, not rubbish at all.