Satire: Garrett to discuss identity theft with Israeli officials

Act MP David Garrett today confirmed he is to travel to Israel to meet with officials and security experts to discuss identity theft and passport fraud.

"Israel have many years of experience in forging passports from a wide range of countries. They represent international best practice."

"Mossad, the Israeli intelligence agency has previously used identities of disabled people as part of security operations. I successfully obtained a false passport using the identity of a dead baby.
I look forward to learning from their experience" said Garrett.

Mr Garrett also noted that his Act party leader, Rodney Hide had taken a sympathetic attitude towards Israel after two Mossad agents were caught attempting to illegally obtain New Zealand passports in March 2004. After then Prime Minister Helen Clark criticised Israel for their actions, Hide said her anti-Israel sentiments were "an embarrassment". The Act party also defended the right of the deputy chief of staff of the Israeli army to visit New Zealand, after a stay was placed on all high level visits pending satisfactory resolution of the passport affair.

Mr Garrett also looks forward to discussing the Day of the Jackal with real intelligence operatives. "I want to know if more of the techniques from the book can be used for real."

"This is great stuff. Its just like the Boys Annual I read when I was 26."

The discussions with Israeli officials will be held alongside a tour of Israel by New Zealand MPs, led by the Speaker the Hon Dr Lockwood Smith

Garrett also hopes to discuss his trip with former Defence Science Agency chief Stephen Wilce, who has claimed to be a former MI5 and MI6 intelligence officer.

"Right thinking people can be rest assured they will not expect undue scrutiny when they lie and in Stephen's case, embellish their CV to impress the Defence Force and the Security Intelligence Service".

---
All quotes by David Garrett have been made up for the purposes of satire. He is scheduled to take part of a Speakers tour of Israel, however he is not meeting with Israeli officials to discuss passport fraud.

The attitude taken by the Act party in relation to the Israeli passport affair is based on true sources, including the quote from Hide.
---

Background
In 2004 two reported Mossad agents, Eli Cara, 50 and Uriel Kelman, 31, were caught and jailed for trying to illegally obtain New Zealand passports. In June 2005 Israel made a reluctant apology to the New Zealand Government where they promised that "Israel commits itself to taking steps to prevent a recurrence of similar incidents in future."

Yet in January 2010 a senior Hamas official was murdered in Dubai, and it emerged that the death squad used forged passports from countries such as Britain, Germany, Ireland and Australia to enter the United Arab Emirates. Many of the real 'owners' of these passports turned out to have visited Israel or were living there with dual citizenship. Thanks to the Israeli operation innocent civilians now found themselves on Interpol arrest warrants for murder and other serious charges. In response both Britain and Australia expelled Israeli diplomats.

Concerns about the Server in the Sky

The Herald reports that New Zealand is to be part of an FBI-led consortium that plans a global database of personal biometric information to "catch criminals and terrorists".

Biometric details and measurements, such as iris scans, palm and fingerprints would be swapped between countries, namely the US, the UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. As Iain Thompson points out, these five countries already co-operate in running Echelon, the global eavesdropping service that listens and records global telephone, radio and email communications. So while the public face may be in terms of police co-operation, its a fair bet the intelligence agencies will also be able to access this data. Perhaps the GCSB and the SIS see our participation as a way to gain greater access to US intelligence data in return.

While 'officials' in this country claim New Zealand is still considering whether to join the consortium, Police National Forensic Services Adviser Inspector John Walker said it was likely we would do so.

The FBI told the Guardian: "Server in the Sky is an FBI initiative designed to foster the advanced search and exchange of biometric information on a global scale. While it is currently in the concept and design stages, once complete it will provide a technical forum for member nations to submit biometric search requests to other nations. It will maintain a core holding of the world's 'worst of the worst' individuals. Any identifications of these people will be sent as a priority message to the requesting nation."
...
The FBI is proposing to establish three categories of suspects in the shared system: "internationally recognised terrorists and felons", those who are "major felons and suspected terrorists", and finally those who the subjects of terrorist investigations or criminals with international links. Tom Bush, assistant director at the FBI's criminal justice information service, has said he hopes to see a pilot project for the programme up and running by the middle of the year.

The proposal to share information about subjects of terrorist suspects is the most concerning. Suspects are not criminals, and should not be treated like criminals unless you wish to throw out the entire principle of 'innocent until proven guilty'. It is yet another example of governments using the excuse of 'anti-terrorism' to undermine core principles of the legal system for their own convenience.

Some elements of the police and security services in New Zealand have wished for a national biometric database of all citizens, whether they have committed a crime or not. This proposal has faced some resistance. But 'Server in the Sky' has the potential to implement this policy by default. The US now subjects all passengers, even those in transit to compulsory digital finger scans and photographs (which are also stored for an unknown period). Could the proposed consortium allow our police to import the finger scans of New Zealanders they are unable to legally obtain at home?

Even for those with criminal records the system could lead to some unjust outcomes. As a purely hypothetical example, supposing someone picked up a minor conviction in their teens. Years later they are wrongly implicated in a so called anti-terror operation. Due to their old record, their biometric information and criminal history could be spread about the world with little chance for correction.

I don't have so much of a problem with coppers sharing information about internationally active criminals convicted of serious crimes - but I suspect there are procedures in place for this already without the need for massive data sponge.

Interestingly, the US defence contractor linked with the proposed database, Northrop Grumman Corp, is the same company who created the IDENT1 database, an enhanced fingerprint identification system currently used by British police.

It is pleasing to see that the Server in the Sky proposal greeted with an element of scepticism in the UK media. This follows the embarrassing leak of detailed personal information on 40% of the British population late last year, and the case where an arrest for a terror offence by US investigators was based on a misidentified fingerprint match.

In the Guardian Nick Clegg is calling for the proposal to be treated with caution, as nothing, including biometrics, is fail safe. He highlights the importance of safeguards to ensure data collected under UK law remains subject to high data protection standards.
And once data is in the hands of the US authorities, there is no getting it back. We already send them massive amounts of information about air passengers, through a deal brokered by the European Commission, without any guarantee it will be properly safeguarded once it reaches the US. It would be foolhardy to start sharing further information without a simple guarantee: that data collected under UK law should continue to be protected even after it leaves Britain. We should share information when other countries can guarantee data protection standards that match, or exceed our own. Otherwise, who knows which one of us will be on the no-fly list next.

If the Government sign us up for Server in the Sky, at the very least they should be demanding this too. There also needs to be clear procedures to remove all traces of incorrect information. As the Zaoui case and the recent so called 'anti-terror raids' showed, both the SIS and our police are prone to bouts of Groupthink, where erroneous bullshit can only feed presumptions of guilt before innocence.

I hope we stay well clear of Server in the Sky. It can only fall down sometime.

Spying on Maori activists

Remember the story from November 2004 concerning allegations the security intelligence service (SIS) was spying on Maori activists? These allegations were denied as a "work of fiction" by then SIS Director Richard Woods.

In April 2005 an official investigation overseen by Justice Paul Neazor concluded "there is nothing to suggest that his allegations are true and a good deal that points to them not being true." Neazor is now the Inspector General of Intelligence and Security. Helen Clark responded to Neazor's report by demanding an apology the Sunday Star Times issue an apology and acknowledge they had been set up.

Murray Horton believes the so called "sources" for the Sunday Star Times story ran "a classic agent provocateur operation aimed at damaging the credibility of opponents of both the SIS and the Government", in particular Nicky Hagar who co-wrote the story.

Perhaps this all needs to be reconsidered given the events of the last 24 hours. Particularly given the indications that the police and security services have been working on this so called "case" for some time. The invesigation appears to have made widespread use of tapped calls and other forms of electronic surveillance which suggests NZ's other spy agency, the GCSB may have been involved.

The 'Officials Committee for Domestic and External Security Coordination' ODESC) met at the Beehive earlier this month to hear what was planned for today. This group is chaired by the Prime Minister and makes high-level decisions on terrorism, security, intelligence and civil defence issues. This group includes representatives from the SIS and GCSB.

Is there still nothing to suggest that the November 2004 allegations were true and a good deal that points to them not being true? I certainly remain unconvinced that today's operations were free of political intentions on behalf of the institutions of state - the mere fact that police cast their net so widely to include a number of seemingly unrelated groups is likely to cause many to question the credibility of aspects of the police case.

Two protest camps, Waihopai and Happy Valley

Apologies for the lack of posts of late, I have been out of town quite a bit, attending two protest camps in as many weeks. On 20th of January I travelled north to join the call of the Anti-Bases Campaign to close the Waihopai spy base, and last weekend I crossed the Southern Alps to join the occupation of the proposed open cast coal mine site at Happy Valley on the West Coast.

An 'indefinite' occupation was launched following a High Court decision last month to reject Forest and Bird's appeal against an Environment Court ruling in favour of mining. The mine threatens to destroy a completely unique tussock wetland that is a home to 13 endangered species, including the great spotted kiwi and the giant carnivorous snail powelliphanta patrickensis. Rivers will be polluted by acid mine drainage and twelve million tonnes of carbon dioxide will be released into the atmosphere.

The occupation of Happy Valley has been welcomed by Greenpeace.

Ongoing reports of the indefinite occupation can be read on the Save Happy Valley blog; "The beauty and expanse of Happy Valley is poignantly contrasted with the scarred and devastated landscape that is the Stockton open cast coal mine located not far from Happy Valley."

We travelled by van over to Westport on Friday and undertook the four hour tramp into Happy Valley the next day. It actually ended up taking us over six hours to get to our campsite as the weather was very hot and dry, making a long half-time break at a swimming hole absolutely essential. It was easily the best swimming hole I have ever been to, complete with many deep pools and waterfalls. One could get a great adrenalin rush by leaping from the tall banks of the river or the top of the waterfall into the pool below. It was completely safe, despite it being a long way down.

After a brilliant swim I was aghast to hear the brilliant swimming hole is also on Solid Energy's 'hit list' for mining once they have finished digging up Happy Valley. It is also possible the swimming hole will be polluted by the proposed Cypress Mine if the development in Happy Valley goes ahead.

Despite it being a very hot day, we had to be careful where we filled our water bottles, as some of the streams in the area are already polluted by acid runoff from the existing Stockton Open Cast mine. The water from the pristine streams tastes great.

It was really inspiring to see 75 people join our camp on the Saturday night. There was a great sense of community, even though people were tired from a long tramp saddled with heavy packs. Actions like this take a lot of commitment and sunscreen.

Solid Energy have continued to harass and attempt to intimidate protestors, even though the 'occupation' is occurring on public land. This has included attempting to deliver dodgy 'preemptive' trespass notices and continuing to film protestors against their wishes. Save Happy Valley Coalition spokesperson Frances Mountier said she believes security guards filmed the protestors as "a means to intimidate and quell any public opposition to what they (Solid Energy) are doing".

A spokesperson for Solid Energy Vicki Blyth disputes they are adopting intimidatory tactics, and claims they asked security guards to film protestors to ensure they had a record of any exchanges between the security people and protestors, "So that there can be no question about who said what to whom."

Well I happen to know personally this excuse is simply a croc of shit. If this was so, then Solid Energy would not have attempted to instigate 'exchanges' (under false pretences) with each of those taking part, by asking people if they would like to read a statement from Solid Energy and then shoving a camera in their face. But that is exactly what they attempted to do to me while I was standing on a Christchurch public footpath and had shown no interest in being on Solid Energy's land. Passively filming while security guards do they job is one thing, attempting to capture the faces of all your perceived opponents on camera is quite another.

We fell asleep listening to the calls of kiwi and other wildlife and hoped they could keep their natural home.

Categories: Environment, Mining, New Zealand, Politics, Happy Valley

Nazis: Well established baggage of the far right

David Neiwert has written a useful post debunking the ridiculous line of argument that the Nazis were leftwingers because they had the word 'socialism' in their name (Hat tip My Blahg). While I normally would not give the time of day to such claims, they do have a habit of reappearing from time to time among the blogs, so I thought I would bookmark David's post for future reference.

Neiwert explains how modern proponents of the "Nazis were socialists" claim are, in fact, falling for (and repeating) Nazi propaganda from the 1920s. Hitler and Mussolini did the classic bait-and-switch:
"They convinced working-class people to vote against their own self-interest by clever use of propaganda techniques and pretending to embody their values, but then screwed them over from one end to the other once they had obtained power. Sound familiar?"

By the time they gained power, Hitler and Mussolini were "unquestionably" on the right wing politically, acting to abolish trade unions, collective bargaining and the right to strike. As gangs of brownshirts continued to kill socialists on sight, the Nazis ensured the first people sent to the concentration camp at Dachau in 1933-34 were socialist and communist political leaders.

David sees an obvious reason for the popularity of this line of argument among the right.
"It's a convenient way of smearing the left for conservatives, as well as shedding their own well-established baggage from the far right."

In a similar vein, I have often thought it is more than a little ironic for right wingers to accuse those who oppose the war on Iraq of being 'appeasers' of Saddam, as 'appeasement' largely represents baggage for the right. Prior to the start of the war in 1939, support for the policy of appeasement was most widespread among right-wing conservatives.
According to historian Eric Hobsbawn:
"Many a good conservative felt, especially in Britain, that the best of all solutions would be a German-Soviet war, weakening, perhaps destroying both enemies, and a defeat of Bolshevism by a weakened Germany would be no bad thing"*.
British Intelligence services continued to concentrate on the 'Red menace' to such an extent that they did not abandon it as their main target until the middle 1930s.

Only the communists were consistent in their opposition to fascism. Winston Churchill deserves credit for being a lone voice within the Conservative party with his opposition to Hitler, though it must be added that Churchill also expressed support for Mussolini prior to the war.

Soviet leader Joseph Stalin desperately wanted an anti-Hitler pact, but western powers remained very very reluctant - this was one of the factors that led Stalin into the bizarre and fateful Molotov-Ribbentrop pact of 1939.

* Eric Hobsbawn, 'Age of Extremes'. p. 151

Paul Neazor QC: Rainbow Warrior and Zaoui

Good documentary on Sunday about the Rainbow Warrior bombing. Unfortunately I missed about 15 minutes of it because the video recorder stuffed up. Does anyone know if Sunday will be repeated later in the week? (and I don't mean another day off!)

Alain Mafart and Dominque Prieur were convicted of manslaughter for their part in the bombing of the Greenpeace ship.

I was very interested to learn it was Paul Neazor, as Solicitor General, who reduced the charges against the pair from murder to manslaughter. According to the Police account of 'Operation Wharf' he did so because "with the evidence available it could not be established that Mafart and Prieur were personally responsible for the placing of the explosive devices on the Rainbow Warrior, no that they intended anyone should be killed or injured."

Well I would have thought the use of any bomb implies an intention to injure, unless its a paint bomb or a marshmallow surprise.

The same Paul Neazor Q.C is now the Inspector General of Intelligence and Security, charged with the review of the 'Security Risk Certificate' issued to Mr Ahmed Zaoui. Many of the allegations against Zaoui are thought to originate from a smear campaign orchestrated by Algerian security services, agencies who are known to have close links with French security services. As Mr Zaoui says "France has a good big link with the military regime. They are involved with everything in Algeria."

Initially, the French government denied all knowledge of the Rainbow Warrior bombing. But as evidence of their involvement became overwhelming, French Prime Minister Fabius came clean. "Agents of the DGSE (Secret Service) sank this boat. They acted on orders." The French minister of defense resigned.

It would be fascinating to know how the Rainbow Warrior episode formed Neazor's views/attitude towards French intelligence agencies, as this could have quite a bearing on the Zaoui case. As the French and Algerian governments applied "immense pressure" on Switzerland to deport Zaoui to the African nation of Burkina Faso, they are likely to have 'influenced' the views of our own SIS.

Unfortunately, we are unlikely to know how much credence Neazor gives to the self-interested bleatings of French intelligence agencies.

Given that the last Inspector General Laurie Greig was forced to resign after he uttered the word 'outski' to the news media, comments interpreted as bias on his part, the new IG is not likely to reveal the personal views that influence how he exercises his discretion. But as David Small argues, this only demonstrates the fundamental problems with the office itself.

"Solicitor-General at the time of the 1985 “Rainbow Warrior” bombing, the new I-G reveals very little about himself. It appears that almost everybody who has had close dealings with the former Solicitor-General vouches for his integrity. However, the same was said about Laurie Greig when he took up the position. While the issue of "apparent bias" brought down Greig, any lack of “apparent bias” does not address the fundamental problems with the office itself.

PS: Being 9 years old at the time of the Rainbow Warrior bombing I remember thinking Ma-fart was a funny name :)

Helen: Insist on Sharon and his Spooks saying a Serious Sorry

Great to see Helen Clark sticking to her guns and demanding Israel make a formal apology for sending its spooks to New Zealand in an attempt to fraudulently gain New Zealand passports. While it was good she noted today's apology by Israel's head of state, as being 'encouraging' she should continue to demand a full apology and explanation from the man who is really running Mossard, Ariel Sharon.

Just think of what nearly happened. Mossad, Israel's foreign intelligence service have a long history of using foreign passports to mask their identities, and using this cover to carry out murders in third countries.

• Amman, September 1997: Mossad agents attempt to assassinate Hamas political leader Khaled Meshaal and are found with Canadian passports.
• Limassoi, Cyprus 1987: The killers of three PLO colonels carried Canadian passports.
• Beirut, April 13, 1973: 3/6 Mossad operatives used British passports to enter Lebanon to set up the assassination of senior PLO figures by Israeli commandos.

These examples are contained in an excellent article by Murray Horton in the latest version of Peace Researcher - 'Mossad Spies - Imprisioned in New Zealand' (not available on line yet).

What use could Israel's state sponsored terrorists have made of their New Zealand passports, gained under false pretences, in the name of a cerebral palsy sufferer who has never left the country? Horton speculates that Israel provided a possible example on February 21, with the assassination of Hizbullah official Ghaleb Awali in Beirut, a hit allegedly carried out by Israeli run agents.

Had this murderer being caught with a New Zealand passport, red handed so to speak, this could have had serious consequences for Kiwis, especially in the Middle East. Doors may have closed on visa-free access to many countries, and New Zealanders in Afghanistan and Iraq could have become targets (if they are not already given Helen's backpedalling on her initial principled stance on war on Iraq). Even if the passport was later found to be fake, the damage to New Zealand's reputation could already have been done.

Stick it out for a full diplomatic apology Helen, and make sure you get a decent explanation to go with it - from Sharon himself. If Israel continue to drag the chain, seek an international censure motion (like the ones Israel have ignored before) to ensure international law is upheld. Friendly countries have an interest in helping you. You never know, placing greater international pressure on Israel to comply with international law may lead to progress on the Palestine issue. Its only the West's blind eye to Israel that has allowed it to get away with so much for so long.

Make it clear New Zealand has no issue with the Israeli people, but the illegal and immoral actions of their Government. While the Israeli people may be subject to daily propaganda about 'terrorists', I doubt very much they are comfortable with the murderous and duplicious actions of Sharon and his spooky cronies.

More on SIS spying on the Maori Party

Over the weekend the Sunday Star Times printed further revelations about possible SIS monitoring of the Maori party, this time backed up by three former employees of our security services. One quit 'Operation Leaf' because he was disgusted at the surveillance of "decent, law-abiding , New Zealanders"

Spies Blow Whistle on SIS Bugging
Whistle Blown on Operation Leaf
We Could See it was for Dirt Collection

In response Clark said "I can say categorically that at no time in the past 5 years I have been the Minister in Charge of the SIS and Prime Minister have I ever been advised about anything happening in any other political party." (Press, 22/11/04) But note that Clark's denial does not say anything about her being advised about anything happening within the Labour party, such as during the period earlier this year when Turia was considering resignation. Turia says her phone was bugged during this time.

After consulting Parliamentary Services over the issue Turia asked a private security firm to investigate. The security firm had said at the time it was "unlikely" to be the SIS "because they would have far more sophisticated means of tracking a person's conversations, basically that they could have an arrangement with the telephone company to do that if it was serious".

Of course in order to do proper bugging the SIS would have required a warrant, and it is possible that the bugging occurred without one. So perhaps someone economised in more ways than one.

When the allegations first arose on Scoop, Turia said she accepted the word of Richard Woods , the SIS director, that the SIS did not spy on the Maori party. Thankfully, Turia is now calling for an inquiry.

As I pointed out in my post on the 13th of November, security services have previously got around prohibitions restricting their ability to spy on citizens of their own country by getting their mates in other Western security services to do it, so I was interested in reading that NZ SIS co-operated with Canadian security services during surveillance of a Maori academic based in Canada. There is a great advantage in such methods - deniability!

'SIS Employee/Spy': "Even before Leaf there had been other Maori related surveillance, I think the files and profiles of people from years ago, the progress they made, the overseas contacts etc all morphed into Op Leaf, I once heard a colleague mention a liaison with csis in Canada about some Maori academic there involved in stirring up shit with the natives of Canada, that was years before Leaf, so you can see that this is something the govt has always had a handle on."

Even if the claims are not true, I am afraid I do not find the offical reassurances reassuring. There are far too many holes in the explanations offered so far. Once again the case highlights the lack of real democratic oversight of security operations in New Zealand. And thats not even mentioning the foreign spybases such as Waihopai that transmit communications straight back to the NSA without any New Zealand oversight of the information (the infamous keyword system)....

Is the SIS Monitoring the Maori Party?

Scoop reports 'intelligence sources' say that the Security Intelligence Service (SIS) is investigating key figures within the Maori Party'.

Intelligence sources have revealed the New Zealand Security Intelligence Service (SIS) has launched a major covert operation investigating the Maori Party, co-leader Tariana Turia, its members, networks and associates.

Intelligence information came to light on Monday November 1st amidst speculation that political fallout from an inquiry into John Tamihere’s taxation affairs could have resulted in his resignation not only from Cabinet but also from Parliament. The later event would have forced a by-election in his Tamaki Makaurau seat.

This scenario [of the Maori party holding the balance of power] has caused intelligence officials to consider what the potential consequences of a centrist Maori political force would have on the internal security of New Zealand.

In response to Scoop's claims a spokeswoman for the Prime Minister Helen Clark said: "Any rational reading of s 4AA of the NZ Security Intelligence Service Act would confirm how laughable this is."

4AA. Political neutrality of New Zealand Security Intelligence Service—

1) The Director must take all reasonable steps to ensure that

(a) The activities of the Security Intelligence Service are limited to those that are relevant to the discharge of its functions:

(b) The Security Intelligence Service is kept free from any influence or consideration that is not relevant to its functions:

(c) The Security Intelligence Service does not take any action for the purpose of furthering or harming the interests of any political party.

(2) The Minister may not direct the Security Intelligence Service to institute the surveillance of any person or entity or any class of person or entity within New Zealand.

(3) The Director must consult regularly with the Leader of the Opposition for the purpose of keeping him or her informed about matters relating to security.

(4) Subsection (2) prevails over section 4(1)

While I have no further reason to believe whether the claims are true or not, I don't think Tariana Turia should be so quick to believe such assurances given the history of such operations. Even if the claims are not true, I am afraid I do not find the reassurances very reassuring.

It is well known that the NZ SIS have targeted legitimate NZ political activists, notably those involved in the peace movement, anti-globalisation actions and especially Maori nationalists.
While the SIS cannot offically target political parties, they have shown an uncanny interest in the advocacy of certain policies that most would regard as acceptable in a democracy, even if such ideas are a threat to conservative notions of economic and social orthodoxy. The botched break in of anti-APEC activist Aziz Choudry's Christchurch home in 1996 by SIS agents show that our security services do act against New Zealanders.

Aziz won his first legal battle for damages in the Christchurch High Court, only to have the Crown appeal. He eventually won an out of court settlement and a Government apology, after the Court of Appeal by a four to one majority decision to accept a certificate issued by Jenny Shipley that prevented judges from viewing documents essential to the trial, and said I-did-not-have-dinner-with-Kevin-Roberts Shipley should be trusted. The dissenting judge, Justice Roberts, was scathing of the decision, quite rightly alarmed that this ruling effectively denied Choudry access to the courts.

Rather than being reassuring, the above snippit of law highlights how little democratic or judical scrutiny there is of our SIS.

“It should not be overlooked that the Service is a covert intelligence agency. It is by definition not an open organisation accustomed to outside scrutiny. It will not welcome that scrutiny. Its officers are by virtue of their occupation practised in the art of deception. The Service, as with any covert intelligence agency, will strive under the cloak of secrecy to protect this country from perceived subversive interests and hostile forces. There is no reason to suspect that its officers will not believe, perhaps passionately, in the importance of their task or that they will be anything other than assiduous in carrying it out. Once it is accepted that the trust necessary to accept the certificate on its face is in reality a trust reposed in or embracing the covert intelligence agency itself, the manifestation of such abiding judicial trust seems strangely out of place. (Justice Thomas's minority opinion in Aziz Choudry case, July 1999).

Murray Horton speculates why the SIS may have wanted to break into Aziz house.

Of course, the case ends with none of us (including Aziz) any the wiser about why the SIS was breaking into his house. That is why the Government settled the case and paid up - to keep the SIS operation shrouded in secrecy. There has been public speculation that the break-in was aimed not at him but at his 1996 Mexican guest, Dr Alejandro Villamar, a speaker at the counter-APEC conference. Other speculation is that it was aimed at Maori activists Mike Smith* and Annette Sykes*, who were also at the conference. But we’ll never know, not officially anyway.

*Both I believe have been linked to the Maori party.

Additionally, there is an another obvious way for a Government to get around the legal restrictions governing the SIS, and that is, to use the security services of another country to report on your own citizens. There is the famous case where Margaret Thatcher roped in the Canadian security services to spy on two of her dissenting ministers she did not trust, thereby achieving her political aims by manovering around British laws that are similar to those govening the NZ SIS.

Edit: NZ Herald story where prominant Maori activists say they would not be surprised if the claims were true as they had been targets of the SIS in the past.