Sign onto the October 15th Solidarity Statement

Not leniency - justice.

That statement is pretty vague, why do they demand unconditional freedom for those arrested?

Is it because they are innocent, ie they weren't running around with guns, molotovs and improvised explosives?

Or is it because they are saying that using guns, molotovs and explosives are ok and should be legalized if used against political targets?

It would seem abhorently hypocritical for anyone to accept and support the latter.

"Or is it because they are saying that using guns, molotovs and explosives are ok and should be legalized if used against political targets?"

Another "guilty as charged, until found dead" redneck kiwi bigot's view.
I suggest you move to China or another country where this is the kind of 'justice' meted out.
HD

"Tell me, why does a peace activist or pacifist need to train with firearms?"

WHY DO YOU STILL DOUBT THE POLICE. THEY HAVE ALREADY ANSWERED THIS QUESTION MANY TIMES OVER.

THESE PEOPLE WERE BEING DISLOYAL, THEREFORE THEY ARE TERRORISTS. YOU SHOULD NOT BE ASKING ANY MORE THAN THAT. THE POLICE SAID IT SO THATS ENOUGH.

oops caps

I know you communists find this funny, but its not...ok!

The police said these people were training to assassinate George Bush and John Key...

The police never lie. I believe the Police. The Police never rape, never misuse pepper spray to suppress legitimate protests, never misuse tasers, beating people sensless while gassing them with pepper spray for 20 minutes in their cells, nor filling someone full of lead for smashing a windows...the last shot going through the back of the shoulder blade exiting through the front colar bone while he lay dying on the ground...

See, so while the NZ Police may be riddled with power hungry rapists, violent abusers, many addicted to meth-amphetamine, mentally unstable nutters who set themselves on fire, and psychopathic sociopaths, we are being constantly directed by media not forget that in amongst this cesspool of mental illness and thuggery are one or two good cops...

so lets hang on to that 'direction', and believe EVERYTHING that is fed to us via the media directly from the whiteboards of police spin doctors.

well someone has to

"""See, so while the NZ Police may be riddled with power hungry rapists, violent abusers, many addicted to meth-amphetamine, mentally unstable nutters who set themselves on fire, and psychopathic sociopaths, we are being constantly directed by media not forget that in amongst this cesspool of mental illness and thuggery are one or two good cops...""""

Finally!!! someone that puts it accurate AS!!,,,

and then there is the "judges"...

Im assuming this or these are the original question:
"Is it because they are innocent, ie they weren't running around with guns, molotovs and improvised explosives?
Or is it because they are saying that using guns, molotovs and explosives are ok and should be legalized if used against political targets?"

I think its silly that you would align the left with the right and shows either your ignorance about left and right politics in this country, or it shows you are an avid follower of the US version of left and right which is not applicable here since NZ political alignment is more akin to that in Britain....something Roger Douglas pointed out recently (to the disgust of idiotboy and former ACT Party vice prez Trevor Loudon) when he announced his political ideas were left wing...

You also seem to miss the theme that has run through the replies above in that the basic premises in the initial question assumed several supposed facts that were promoted by the police and are yet to be proven in court. Point 1 is that these people were unlawfully in possession of explosives, point 2 is that they were unlawfully in possession of firearms.

So the direct answer to the first question, "Is it because they are innocent, ie they weren't.....improvised explosives?" is don't know. We will see when the court cases are done, however according to the police via media they are as guilty as sin....but then again according to the police so was Steve Wallace who was executed without any court session, then posthumusly found guilty of attempted assault on an armed officer, then there is Rawiri Falwasser who was found guilty by the police of being a person who believed in a bit of fair play, and a severe 20 minute beating and gassing was metted out, then there is Simon Oosterman who was found guilty on the day by police of being a protestor against capitalism and was given a gassing and a reminder who is boss...just to mention a few who have fallen under the direct judgements of police before any court could decide...not suggesting that the court system has a halo over its head either, but thats another discussion.

To the second part of the question which states: "Or is it because they are saying that using guns, molotovs and explosives are ok and should be legalized if used against political targets?"

This question of course assumes points 1 and 2 are true which is as stated has yet to have its day in court...and where on earth that assumption of legalisation comes from is beyond me. I have yet to read any commentary by anyone calling for the legallisation of such things, so the question reeks of bullshit agent provocaturism and got the reply it deserved.