#TeamKeySlater


Helen Kelly is interviewed on Vote Chat. Kelly raises questions about the Ports of Auckland & Key’s role in Dirty Politics. She has read some of Dirty Politics, & was axed from today’s the Nation Panel, then replaced by Josie Pagani.[Updated]
Nicky Hager’s Dirty Politics tells of the “two track strategy” of John Key’s leadership of the National Party & the country: a smiley nice front, & vicious, covert black ops behind the scenes. Key has overseen one of the darkest, nastiest periods in NZ politics. Vote Left for necessary, democratic change, for people-centred governance.
The intention of this post is to examine the similarities and differences between the hacking of Cameron Slater’s communications on the one hand, and the hacking of the Labour Party donor database on the other. There are two important issues to determine in both cases and I will cover them separately. The first is the legality of the hacking and the second is the ethics of using the resulting information regardless of whether the obtaining of the information in the first instance was unlawful.
I do so want to read this book right now. I can hardly wait. The preface is online… http://dirtypoliticsnz.com Nicky Hager is way way more of a gentleperson than I am. Explaining the material that is not in the book – “The fact that Slater and his associates have made a career of exposing the very private details of other people’s lives does not make it right to do that to them.”
I haven’t read the Nicky Hager’s book “Dirty Politics” yet. But I’m not surprised that Cameron Slater is up to his neck in dirt provided by John Key’s dirt merchant Jason Ede. That he has been given information sourced from the SIS is extremely surprising. I had not thought that John Key was quite that stupid.
So the book is an expose of the Slater-Ede-Key Dirty Politics machine, based on data acquired and leaked to Hager. Will Update: Update: Hager to be on Campbell Live tonight.
It’s been interesting to watch the nats and their busy little helpers working away at branding the election campaign as a nasty one.
It’s been disappointing to watch the media falling for it so hard.
Sociologist Dr Jarrod Gilbert takes everybody’s favourite right-wing spinster to task for misrepresentation and spin on gangs.
Every Sunday morning a group of Labour Activists attend the Avondale Market to hand out literature and talk to people. It is refreshing that ordinary people are not affected by beltway issues and are concerned at the basics such as housing, poverty and education.
Greenpeace has been told by the Electoral Commission that its Climate Voter Website requires third party authorisation and that a cap on the amount that can be spent applies. There is an exception in the law if the site is a “news media” site which is paradoxically the same defence Cameron Slater is running in his case against Matt Blomfield justifying his refusal to disclose who his informant is. The sense of irony is strong here …
Rob Salmond presents the David Farrar / Steven Joyce / John Key argument that 2011 non voters are a National-leaning bunch. Then he shows that a better look at their own data undermines their claim. This matters because it helps us understand which bloc has more to gain from voter mobilization efforts in 2014. This means the left has a lot more to gain than the right from mobilization in 2014.
It’s headline news again: Labour is trying to take away men’s rights and exile you all to a desert island. If you believe David Farrar, that is.
The Whaleoil blog is in court on Monday. There is a full day session in the High Court in Auckland looking at the appeal by Cameron Slater against Judge Blackie’s decision in the District Court that the blog is not a news medium. Therefore Slater was not a journalist, and was therefore not able to protect his sources who provided stolen material to allow him to apparently defame Matthew Blomfield. The decision will probably provide case law about the status of blogs in the law and the responsibilities of news mediums.
My comment at The Daily Blog responding to a section of one of Martyn ‘Bomber’ Bradbury’s post got moderated out. That does rather reinforce what my comment said. So I will simply repeat it here. The political scene is a very bad place to have as sensitive ego in as Bomber has. Most people involved around the political scene will have different opinions and they usually aren’t hesitant in expressing them. It appears that young Bomber lacks the backbone to withstand that diversity without having a fit of pique.
Poor David Farrar, he can’t write a post without getting accused of hypocrisy these days. It must have to do with that rancid stench he emanates whenever he gets on his high horse to lecture others. There’s only one political leader out there saying: “Tactical voting is a good idea for my supporters, and long may it continue, but it is a dreadful crime by others.” That leader is John Key.
David Farrar in his usual burst of hypocrisy and curious selectiveness about detailed numbers is proclaiming a headline rise in manufacturing. As is usual he is only interested in the top level numbers and doesn’t provide a link to even the summary data. I guess that is because they are rather depressing for his 9th floor of the Beehive view of employment and wage packets, which is what most voters expect from growth. There has been a slight decline in manufacturing jobs while we have a 11% growth in “manufacturing”.
Four alleged murders out west in the past month have caused a great deal of soul searching. What is going wrong? What can we do to prevent any further tragic loss of life?
For the second time in as many weeks, David Farrar has lied to his readers over at kiwiblog.
In Kiwiblog this morning, David Farrar appeared to be running a 9th floor pre-pump for John Banks to resign. But I was rather incredulous when I read this “I don’t think the Judge has actually helped the Government by delaying the decision on entering a conviction. Now that it is the Judge’s role to care about the impact on the Government.”. Huh? DPF badly needs to go back to do some adult education. Perhaps to night school?
David Farrar and then TV3 today get their analysis of Labour’s position on electoral law reform horribly wrong. Are we going to have to put up with this during election year?
Last week’s developments around Internet MANA have caused much conversation on the left in New Zealand. Some of that conversation has been constructive, strategic, and forward-thinking. And then there is Bomber:…. Whose analysis is designed to split the left, not unify it; and the recommendations would help the left lose, not win. Top work.
David Farrar has quite a thing for Winston Peters…
National Party pollster David Farrar must be seeing some numbers he really doesn’t like because he is claiming that David Cunliffe photoshopped himself into a rally that he was really at! Yeah right – a doyen of the local net governing body failed to use google before making a complete dick of himself on the net. I expect we will see a lot more of National’s paid for bloggers acting like fools heading into this election because National only being good at putting us heavily into debt (again!) rather limits the good news they can write.
Kiwi in America over at Kiwiblog has offered some no doubt heart felt advice to Labour on what it should be doing. But the advice appears to be based on a misunderstanding of the Party’s history and a wish that the Party becomes more like ACT. Why do right wingers think they can tell Labour what to do and is their advice sound?
Tim Watkin recently had a post over at Pundit, saying about why a 15% gap between Labour and National matters. His crux point is that in no MMP election has a party led by 15% and not formed the government. Unfortunately for Tim, this is demonstrably wrong.
It isn’t a new ploy from National or its supporters. “Mortgage rate rises under National: Good. Mortgage rate rises under Labour: Dreadful!”. I’ve seen David Farrar argue both that a recession is the perfect time to cut taxes because it stimulates the economy, and a recovery is also the perfect time to cut taxes to provide a dividend. It reminds me of that old chestnut, most recently applied to Don Brash: “The answer is tax cuts. What is the question again?”
David Farrar often bullshits on numbers. Does he have what appears to be a maths block that makes him so wrong so often (like Bill English)? Or is it just that he obeys orders like the good National puppet tools that he and Cameron Slater appear to be? Anyway, Rob Salmond pulls him up on a few obvious and significiant flaws in his ‘analysis’. DPF didn’t allow for people lying – just like he does
Standardista, andy (the other one) nails it: “Two days, two articles, two different media outlets admitting that they know National use Slater/Farrar to smear and dissemble.” Trotter raises questions about sources.
Slater and TV3 have double teamed an attack on Kim Dotcom suggesting that he has Nazi tendencies the day before the launch of the Internet Party. Is the main stream media being manipulated?
John Drinnan has written on the upcoming opening of Press Council membership to bloggers. He offers some positives. But I don’t see anything much in it for political bloggers. It would mean being dominated by a flawed Mainstream Media – the very thing many blogs aim to critique independently.
Yesterday one woman’s story blew the lid on our government’s treatment of beneficiaries. Sarah Wilson’s post on her ongoing struggles just to get […]
Rob Salmond at Polity points to the right wing publicists who pose as independents, set up publicity shells for nutters, and who seem to make outright lying their hallmark. Perhaps it is time that journalists start describing them as they are rather than quoting them as they prefer. They should be “blogger and National’s pollster” or “part-time lawyer and ACT supporter.”
The leaks by Edward Snowden show many ways state surveillance agencies can workaround the legal requirements placed on them. Selwyn Manning explained about the “Two Hop” surveillance of online targets. On Intercept Glenn Greenwald explains the information about the use of “online covert operations”. [Update Andrea Vance on NZ spy tactics]
One of the areas of concern in the current Blomfield vs Slater defamation case was the theft and copying of documents and stored data owned by Blomfield. Slater is covering for the source of this material by claiming he is a journalist. However this guest post argues that clearly his possession of the material in itself constitutes a number of crimes under the Crimes Act. Which makes the police’s refusal to charge Slater without a valid legal explanation rather peculiar.
New Zealand is getting its very own fact check website.