Cunliffe Q&A on Facebook

David Cunliffe had Q&A on his Facebook page tonight. It worked much better than his last one (at The Standard) – a mix of policy and personable chitchat.

Cunliffe and Parker

Josh Lucas Evening lads. Q: What would an alternative Labour Budget have looked like?

David Cunliffe We’d deal to big housing crisis – 100,000 new homes. Taxing speculators and banning foreign buyers of existing homes. On jobs we’d get unemployment down to 4% in our first term with our Economic Upgrade. And our Best Start package would give every kid the best start in life, including the most vulnerable. See https://labour.org.nz/budget2014

Simon Gotlieb I’m curious David. We’re pretty certain about where Mr Key wants NZ to be in 20 years. How about you? When my children have children themselves what kind of society would you like to leave them?

David Cunliffe Hey Simon. We’re a bit worried about where NZ will be in 20 years unless we change course. It’s not clear Mr Key has a long term vision. He tends to make shorter term decisions. Our vision is for a NZ where everybody’s potential is recognised, everybody gets an opportunity to do and best they can be. I’m worried we’ve got a generation locked out of the housing market – and child poverty is a ticking time bomb.

Sophie Roil Why should we vote labour

David Cunliffe Because it’s about you, not us – and a fairer society. Take today. The Nats paid parental leave and parental tax credit policy is only half as good as Labour’s Best Start. Worse still, with 285,000 children below the poverty line, their package does not give 1c to the most vulnerable children. Not this year, not next year, not ever. https://labour.org.nz/beststart

Tayna King If you win the election will you remove the laws passed by national to violate the privacy of Kiwis eg: GCSB

David Cunliffe Our policy to immediately set up a full review of the NZ security services. We believe NZers have a right to be free from blanket surveillance, and that nobody should be spied on by NZ security services without a judge’s warrant.

David Kelly John Key’s budget speech — empty posturing, how do you stay sane listening to that drivel?

David Cunliffe You’re right, he seemed more interested in petty political point scoring than in addressing the issues that affect New Zealanders in their everyday lives.

Ian Vaudrey Do you think Labour will ever have a leader that can connect with the working man?

David Cunliffe You’ve got one.

Franquis Vegas ACC is a disgusting mess, leaving vulnerable people more vulnerable in order to make cash. Is there anything Labour will do once in government to fix ACC? Thanks 

David Cunliffe Franquis Vegas, I’ve had people in tears in my electorate office – who can barely walk, and ACC has told them they don’t have a problem. We will change the culture of ACC, so that it returns to the ideals for which it was set up – to help NZers who are the unfortunate victims of accidents, not to re-victimise them.

Naani Abercrombie How are you planning on helping to curb the high price of housing, especially in auckland? If a capital gains tax is part of your plan, what are the details of how it would work?

David Cunliffe We have to stop the crazy price increases which are locking young families out of a home of their own. We need to build more affordable houses – and we’re going to build 100,000 over 10 years. We need to remove the tax bias via CGT excluding the family home (currently renters subsidise landlords’ taxes). We also believe it’s a birthright for Kiwis to buy our homes, not foreign speculators.

Trudi Manning Do you believe in God? How about Aliens?

David Cunliffe One all at this end re God. (We’ll leave the aliens to Colin Craig).

Matthew Bowes What do you consider to be the 3 biggest issues facing New Zealands future? and what would you do to solve them?

David Cunliffe Work, homes, families.

Mawera Karetai We are a family with three kids and no plans to have more. We have a business that makes enough for us to survive and grow a little. We would get $200 per child per week under the new WFF tax credits and free health for all three kids – that will make a HUGE difference for us. What are you offering us? PS – we don’t have a trailer.

BY the way, I am a member of Labour and at the moment I am not sure if I can give Labour my Party vote, since I just can’t see where you give a damn about my family.

David Cunliffe Mawera, remember Labour brought in WFF. Our Best Start package is more generous than National’s immitation. Our economic policies will be better for everyone, including you. Our small business package will be something to look forward to.

Byron Donaldson David Cunliffe come to Westport to meet me I’m a great supporter of the NZ Labour Party please come and visit I’m still at high school and I’m the only student at my school who is a member of the Labour Party.

David Cunliffe I’m sure I’ll be there during the campaign. Well done for flying the flag.

Mihaela Soar By the way the so called surplus : selling strategic assets for 4 billions !

David Cunliffe Yes. And they made a loss compared with their promise, and now only 2% of NZers own those shares. (They’ve privatised our rivers too.).

Roger Tarry what do they mean surplus? we still have an overseas debt dont we?

David Cunliffe You’re right Roger. The vast majority of NZ’s debt is private debt, not Government debt – that’s debt held by Kiwi families and businesses, for things like mortgages. National are only talking about the Government surplus – not New Zealand’s external deficit, which they project will blow out to over 6% of GDP.

Curtis Omelvena Hey David. What could future generations lose if we do not raise the retirement age to 67? What are the alternatives to raising the age? Why do you think the best solution is to raise the retirement age? And could you modify the policy so some hard labour jobs retire earlier.

David Cunliffe Today’s Budget shows spending on super this coming financial year exceeding total Government spending on pre-school, primary, intermediate, secondary and tertiary education.Our aim is to ensure NZ super remains a sustainable, universal, publicly funded retirement policy. In order to do that we have to make the numbers add up in a predictable and fair way. We’re being honest with New Zealand. John Key isn’t. Under our policy, the hard labour jobs you talk about will be able to still retire at 65, because they will receive a transitional payment if they need it – no less than the super.

Simon Morris Why did you vote to keep rivers dirty with national

David Cunliffe We didn’t.

Kawhia Chambers do you truly want to represent the people of NZL or the big corporate banks feeding us an exploding crown dept

David Cunliffe I’m in politics to put people first.

Chris Mckissack if you promise to make the mighty waikato river blue again, ill vote for you 

Simon Gotlieb You’d need to get rid of all the cowshit first Chris. Good luck with that one, what with all the dairy farms

David Cunliffe We’ve said we’ll replace National’s weak NPS on “water quality” with a real one.
Clean rivers will not be allowed to get dirtier. Dirty rivers will be cleaned up. Increases in livestock/fertiliser/effluent will be controlled, not permitted.

Caitlin Blacktopp Aah ive written mine out like 5 times now

David Cunliffe I must vote Labour.
I must vote Labour.
I must vote Labour.
I must vote Labour.
I must vote Labour.

Alastair Ross Do you agree with economists saying there is little difference between National and Labours economic policies?

David Cunliffe Absolutely not – CGT, monetary policy reform, Best Start for kids, higher wages, cheaper power, fair employment laws. That’s just a start.

Byron Donaldson There was nothing in the Budget about child poverty I think that’s disgusting.

David Cunliffe So do we.

Jgl Lennon What concrete steps will you take to help the unemployed?

David Cunliffe We’ve set an agressive target to reduce unemployment to 4% by the end of our first term. There’s a whole package of policies that will work together.

SPEECH: New Zealand’s economic upgrade | New Zealand Labour

Ethel Leota Whittaker-Masiutama What kind of jobs would you create for “the people” of NZ

David Cunliffe Jobs with higher wages, all around our regions. In 14 out of 18 regions median wages went backwards since the start of this National Government.
Our manufacturing and forestry upgrade policies provide two examples of how we would get more and better jobs in specific sectors – with higher wages.

Stephen Kennedy Hey DC
As you know, we can’t solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them. What innovative thinking is driving Labour 2014+ ?
Yours in red, – Stephen Kennedy [teacher, married, 3 kids, mortgage, Kiwi]

David Cunliffe We need to tax capital gains, boost innovation, increase savings, reform monetary policy, provide decent work, and help NZ’s industry on the journey from volume to value.

Mo Mosameh We want to know if are you going to change loan policy for postgraduate students or not ? Because it is not fair international students get free education plus 498$ a week as a scholerdhip from our family tax and kiwis students borrow money from studylink to eat.

David Cunliffe Mo, we’re going to scrap the 5 year ceiling on the student allowance. The Nats in this Budget froze the income threshold for student loan payments for another 3 years, because apparently you’re rich if you’re earning $20k..

[Name removed as requested] Change we can believe in hey. Why do you think National ripped off half your policies?

David Cunliffe Because have no vision of their own. They are a pale version, and they haven’t addressed the underlying economic issues.

David Cunliffe Hi all, wrapping up soon. Thanks so much for your questions, and wish we had time for more of them.

Penny Clark I see you didn’t answer my question, was it too hard for you?

Bennett Morgan Penny – there are over 200 questions. A lot to answer in what was originally going to be a 20 minute Q+A. Currently there are 295 questions or comments. Some weren’t getting the response they wanted (in the time available that would have been impossible).

Bobbi Pagani Would you please answer this question I posted on your page (copied at the bottom of this thread).

Bobbi Pagani Ok David let me make this very clear, I have tried and tried to get Labour to answer my question. I was glad you’re heading the Labour Party. But I cannot get my question answered. You just about had my vote in the bag. If Labour will not answer me I’m not voting for you, ok Only one vote, but my property is prominent and last election your Bill board was on my fence. You won’t be getting that either! I’ve tried for months through many avenues. Please reply, I’m attempting till the last minute.

Dawn Elizabeth Pollard I hope you let us know what your full education policy is sooner rather than later…There are a lot of teachers in NZ and a lot of them are not happy with the direction National is heading. Teachers don’t always vote Labour, you need to show them what you will be doing in education!

Bobbi Pagani Yeah, you did not answer my question Yet again. What is it with that question, posted well before closing time?

Nick Lawson To be honest David Cunliffe I don’t feel your answers held much insight. You seemed to answer the really obvious question and have ignored any questions i would have deemed important, or answered them extremely vaguely. This doesn’t fill me with confidence and has actually turned me off labour completely. Just another national waiting in the wings.
Liam O’Connor Tell me why when, given Parker’s own words that paying down debt is the most important thing, you’d force compulsory savings on me for a retirement I won’t have/reach? Surely it’s better to put that money towards paying off my student loan — a debt I’m sure that many Gen Y felt they had no choice but to take to get ahead — than saving for a hypothetical rainy day. It’s bad economics. Needless to say that when I’m already struggling to live in Wellington because that’s where the jobs are (unless I wanna suffer more and move to Auckland) — and we don’t live extravagantly; I haven’t even been on a paid ticket to the cinema for years — the idea of locking away money with a private company until I’m 65+ (if I make it) on top of tax and student loan repayments seems ridiculous. Especially when you insinuate that this policy will help fund your mates in the forestry industry. Seems like cronyism to me, just in shades of red rather than blue.
Bobbi Pagani If you will not answer my question- to your electorate office, on your page several times, and now here well before closing, even though I thought you were great, no, no and no. I’m still giving you a chance to answer and up until the election, if you don’t I’m not going to tick the box for you.
Now I’m going to ask the question of other parties. 
I have not even received from you why you do not answer.
Bobbi Pagani What a waste of time that session was, and I really believed I would get a reply, posting as I did well before closing.
Ok David Thank you for this opportunity!  I want to address the Rates Rebate. (I have previously asked this question both at the Electoral Office and on Labour’s page and got nowhere, no response on the page.)
So, the rates rebate, as I’m sure you know is a rebate available on application to those on a low income. The maximum rebate amounts to about $600, not insubstantial.
There is a narrow timeframe in which to apply for the rebate. There is information required for the application which is usually not even available by the cut off date for the application, you are expected to guesstimate.
If you miss the cut off Auckland Council will deny the rebate entirely. They will require the full rates to be paid and slap on penalties as well.
This did not used to be so. As I recall some twelve or so years ago if there was a cut off date they did not apply it. Now they do, strictly. 
This may be in accord with the letter of the law but is entirely against the spirit of it. The rebate is there by definition for people who are not managing that well, the low income earners would include the sick, disabled, invalids, elderly. It is there to help, I suppose, (or maybe there’s another reason for it?) Yet Auckland Council requires of the very people who are not managing that they get their application in on time, or rather, really, ahead of time considering the required information isn’t even available. It rigorously enforces the cut off date and denies any extension. I think this is unfair so I have stopped paying rates. If the back rebates were allowed my rates would be well towards being paid.
I would like Labour to look at this law and amend it so that Councils do have to allow eligible applications for rebates and back rebates, regardless of date of application and also not be allowed to apply penalties on the rebates they should have allowed. If the rebate application is late they have had the use of money after all. I think this is fair, and in the spirit of the intention of the Act. Do you? Will Labour do this? I look forward to your reply. Regards, Bobbi.

Too long to deal with in a quick fire Q&A but he is getting frustrated.

From Parliament: Budget Debate – 15th May, 2014 – Part 1

Karam defamation case a warning to blogs?

Joe Karam has had a major win in a defamation case taken against two men who waged a campaign against him in social media.

People who comment on blogs and Facebook and Twitter and other online forums should carefully consider the potential implications of this case. I often see similar sorts of false or unprovable claims and personal attacks.

Karam awarded $535,000 over defamation

Joe Karam has been awarded $535,000 in a defamation case against two men who launched an “all-out assault” on his reputation because of his support for David Bain.

The online comments by Kent Parker and Victor Purkiss accused Mr Karam of being dishonest in his motivations for helping Mr Bain after he was cleared in 2009 of murdering five members of his family.

Mr Karam said the public campaign against his integrity was the “worst four years” of his life, and Justice Patricia Courtney said she believed the former All Black.

She ordered Mr Parker to pay damages of $350,500 and Mr Purkiss to pay $184,500.

Justice Courtney also ordered that all defamatory messages be removed from the websites.

She further punished the men by awarding indemnity costs against them because they “behaved egregiously” in choosing to use the defence of truth at the trial last October.

Justice Courtney’s judgment noted evidence of Mr Karam’s “integrity, generosity and altruism”.

That’s huge damages, made significantly worse because they tried to use the defence of truth,

Mr Purkiss did not attend it, but Mr Parker admitted under cross-examination by Michael Reed, QC, that he could not prove his claims.

A belated admission that claims could not be proven.

The legal bill could be $500,000 according to Mr Karam, bringing to around $1 million the cost to the defendants. That would make it one of the largest defamation damages and cost awards in New Zealand history.

Mr Karam said if the pair did not pay him, he would take bankruptcy proceedings against them.

Purkiss has moved to England and according to the herald the defamation case “was a factor in the break-up of his marriage”. From social media warriors to being in family and financial crap.

This should be a warning to bloggers and blog commenters, Twitter and Facebook users.

There have been major discussions on Kiwiblog on the Bain case and that has included many criticisms of Karam, not dissimilar to what have been described in this case.

In her ruling, released yesterday, the judge identified about 50 defamatory statements published on Facebook and on a private website by Mr Parker and Mr Purkiss — members of the Justice for Robin Bain group — to which there was no defence.

Mr Karam said the men had made “an all-out assault on me [in] an attempt to show that I’m shonky”.

He and Fairfax NZ had earlier agreed to settle defamation claims, on a confidential basis, arising from articles on stuff.co.nz that drew attention to the websites that contained the defamatory comments by Mr Parker and Mr Purkiss.

People commenting anonymously may think they are immune from defamation but that could be put to the test legally.

And bloggers who allow open slather comments should note that Fairfax NZ has been also held responsible in this case and have settled privately. I frequently see potentially defamatory comments made on a number of blogs.

At times stalking and harassment of me could amount to “an all-out assault on me [in] an attempt to show that I’m shonky”, and I’ve seen many other examples.

Most people being attacked online don’t take defamation action and the attackers probably think they are safe from being held to account.

Parker and Purkiss probably thought they were untouchable and could make unsubstantiated claims with impunity. They may have thought they could exploit the power of free speech.

They may have believed their own hype and thought that believing something was sufficient justification for attacking someone’s integrity. This seems have continued “in choosing to use the defence of truth at the trial”.

Those who think they are safe attacking and defaming online should have a good look at this case.

A PDF of the decision here.

“Labour face disaster at the next election”

Labour have struggled to make an impression since Helen Clark and Michael Cullen departed after their 2008 election loss.

They struggled under Phil Goff.

They struggled more under David Shearer.

And they continue to struggle under David Cunliffe.

It must be more than a leadership deficit. The Labour caucus and the Labour Party machinery seem to be in perpetual struggle mode.

In the last few days alone – launching their election year, a time when it was essential Cunliffe and Labour made a strong impression – Labour have lurched from embarrassment to stuff-up.

Their ‘baby bonus’ launch has been overwhelmed by controversies. As well as strong criticism for offering people on high incomes a baby benefit the policy has been beset by controversy and David Cunliffe has had to admit he made mistaken claims.

And amongst this Dunedin North MP David Clark, once promoted as a fast riser in the Labour ranks – Shearer promoted him to 12 in the Labour rankings – has made a major blooper suggesting the Government should be able to threaten to ban use of Facebook if the multinational didn’t pay enough tax.

3 News reported:

Banning Facebook was an extreme suggestion from Labour Party MP David Clark – and it took party leader David Cunliffe just 24 hours to shut it down.

Mr Cunliffe has now ruled it out completely, but ridicule from the Government still came hard and fast.

Just 24 hours? That was far too long, this embarrassment should have been dealt with swiftly. It wasn’t.

In yesterday’s post David Clark attacked from all sides on Facebook farce ‘Goldie’ commented on the litany of Labour errors.

The comment by Kiwi in America is spot on.

First, it underlines the lack of talent in the Labour caucus. Dunedin is a Labour stronghold, so the MPs should be the stars of the party – instead you have Clare Curran and David Clark.

Second, it shows the lack of discipline in Labour – there is absolutely no way, when the policy focus should have been the “baby bonus”, that Clark should have been permitted to talk on anything else. Cunliffe’s office is not operating as it should. It lacks grip over its MPs, and can’t control its own issues (witness the speed with which the “baby bonus” policy got derailed).

Third, Labour have not been able to uncover a single major scandal on the Government and Labour have not been able to make a single policy that has not been widely shredded within days in three years. It says to me that the political machinery behind the scenes – the party researchers and advisers – have become “hollowed out”.

In contrast, the Greens are busy, focused and confident. They have the great advantage of not needing to appeal to either centre or apathetic voters, but only to people who are going to vote left anyway. As National look increasingly like they will win the election, left-leaning voters will have less reason to stay disciplined to Labour, and will “shop around” (like what happened to National in 2002).

Labour face disaster at the next election.

It’s very early in election year but Labour, who desperately needed a strong start, have stuffed up again. And again.

Unless Cunliffe can transform himself into a strong and positive alternative (too many mistakes and too much sneering snark), unless the Labour caucus can look united and competent, unless the Labour media machine can provide competent advise and support and unless the Labour Party can function effectively then it’s on the cards that Labour could face disaster at the next election.

If that happens it will be bad for New Zealand politics. We need strong party leadership and performance, especially from the large parties. Labour is losing it’s way, losing credibility. If this continues we all lose.

Update: It appears to be continuing unabated. Good grief. David Parker this time, in Parliament yesterday. See Labour says Apple et al plundering NZ economy.

David Clark attacked from all sides on Facebook farce

Labour’s Revenue spokesperson David Clark has provoked derision from all sides for suggesting Government should have the banning of websites such as Facebook an option if they don’t pay enough tax – see Labour – pay more tax or ban Facebook.

No Right Turn – Not a credible solution

I am no fan of tax cheats, but comparing them to peaedophiles is a bit over the top.

People still access those paedophile websites, despite them being banned; how does Clark think it will work with one of the world’s most popular websites, which according to his own press releases has 2.2 million users in New Zealand? And does he think that people will vote for a party which threatens to turn off their web-crack?

Kiwiblog – Labour jumps the shark.

Oh my God. He is comparing Facebook to paedophile websites. How can anyone think Labour is even close to ready for power, when they come out with this crap.

And as it happens paedophile websites are not banned in NZ. It is illegal to download or upload paedophile images, and browsing such a site may be a criminal offence, but the Government has no power to ban any website.

Putting aside the sheer lunacy of advocating the Government should try and ban Facebook if they don’t pay more tax, isn’t there something deeply malevolent about an aspiring Government making such threats. If you think a company should pay more tax, then you change the law to close down loopholes. But to declare as an MP that you have unilaterally decided Company X should pay more tax, and that you will threaten to ban them from New Zealand unless they voluntarily agree to pay more tax is what you expect from some tin pot third world dictatorship, not a so called serious political party.

MP Gareth Hughes makes it clear Greens think it’s a no go.

@GarethMP

@pitakakariki you do it by changing the rules, not threatening to ban them. We should never ever talk about banning legal websites

Greens will not threaten to ban legal websites like Facebook

And it goes beyond being one dumb idea by one MP. It’s not the first time Clark has appeared out of his depth. This is another bad lok for Labour’s management, as ‘kiwi in america’ says on Kiwiblog:

Gosh – where to begin. Labour seems determined to score as many own goals as possible. When the Greens publicly and quickly disavow your policy musings you are in a power of trouble.

Labour proves it is light years away from being ready to govern because this comment reveals so many glaring deficiencies:

* Lack of message control by the new Leader’s Office – one thing a good LOO does is ensure all economic pronouncements uttered by any spokesperson are cleared through the LOO office first – even silent T knows this is electoral poison.

* Clark has made economically illiterate comments before about corporates not paying enough tax – that he has not been warned or advised to excercise constraint speaks volumes for the illiteracy that exists across the front bench. Neither Parker, Cunliffe nor any other prominent front bencher has sought to clarify or contradict Clark’s previous comments about taxing gross revenues rather than profits revealing a deep and fundamental ignorance of the business world and how it operates that is rampant through Labour.

* The notion that any senior politician in NZ would commit a mainstream party to the type of policy that is only seen in banana republics speaks volumes for how some on the left view the world. To contemplate shutting down the world’s largest social media site in NZ has a King Canute quality to it.

Finally, Labour had 9 years to attack the issue of multi national corporate transfer pricing tendencies and did ….. well nothing. There is a reason why ‘politics of envy’ specialist and lover of taxes on “rich pricks” Michael Cullen couldn’t manage to get the likes of Amazon or Apple to pay more tax in New Zealand and it’s because you’d have to address this issue and have agreement from not just every first world country’s tax authorities but a raft of tax havens as well. Not happening.

What will Clark and Labour do about this? Probably ignore it and hope it’s quickly forgotten, but this is part of an accumulation of incompetence.

The only plus for Labour is it took some of the attention off yet another policy announcement disaster, the ‘baby bonus’ scheme.

 

Labour – pay more tax or ban Facebook

Labour’s revenue spokesperson David Clark thinks that if Facebook doesn’t pay enough tax the Government should have an option to ban the use of it in New Zealand.

But it probably won’t come to that, he says that usually if you sit down and talk to them they will suddenly rearrange all their tax structures and up their payments here.

After that he can sit down and have a burger with MacDonalds, a coffee with Starbucks and then use Google to search for tax havens.

Labour threatens Facebook ban over tax issue

The Labour Party has put forward a possible solution to force multi-national corporations to pay more tax – ban them from the internet.

It says the Government should first talk with companies like Facebook, but if that doesn’t work it is important to have a backup, something Labour is describing as a credible threat.

Facebook is the world’s largest social network by far, but pays little tax here in New Zealand.

“The Government should always have in its back pocket the ability to ban websites,” says Labour revenue spokesman David Clark.

Clark is my local (Dunedin North) MP. This is embarrassing.

GCSB Watch

Your NZ will be informing and promoting discussion on the GCSB Amendment Bill.

I have also set up a page on Facebook to do the same there. Please at least Like this page to generate activity. Feel free to contribute articles of interest and comment.

https://www.facebook.com/GcsbWatch

Insidious marketing

In a post at Kiwiblog on Facebook, children and advertising there was this comment by Yoza:

It is the job of the dark-side, advertising and PR, to convince people they are inadequate if they do not accept the product or idea being hawked.

Sadly, very true.

There needs to be a campaign to make parents aware of these dangers, until that happens they won’t be looking after their kids properly. They should be made aware of all the facts.

They deserve it, and they’ll love it, and will get a feeling of being younger and thinner .

Threat to be quiet

Soon after the posting Confronting the real abuse I got an FB message:

Hi Pete,

I have noted this morning your references [deleted] and am writing to request you remove that please.

We have benn in negotiations with the Police, Internal Affairs, CIB & Ecrime to have that site closed down, included in that site are many lies, much of the emails he has reproduced there have been mocked up or changed to suit his agenda. He is on the verge of being arrested for extortion & blackmail also.

Im sure you wouldnt want to be involved in spreading the damage he has done to our clients, some of whom have had to be placed under watch for fear they would be harmed or harm someone else.

This man has attacked [deleted] since he approached [deleted] to be allowed to join us .. our response was considered on his previous legal charges and convictions.

If you want any further information do not hesitate to contact me.

I would also ask that you remove the reference to [deleted] as quickly as possible, as I said, Im sure you do not want to be drawn into the legal wrangle that is happening. You are looking for TRUTHS you will not find ANY on those pages.

Leigh
Senior Support Worker

On the surface this seems like a nicely worded request, but it is typical of other threats I’ve seen to back off or the lawyers/police will get you. Along with threats to release damaging ‘evidence’ that never happens. Like this posted yesterday on Facebook:

.. now really .. who is left to trust? I must say .. I am left with many documents I could produce .. but do I feel safe handing them over to anyone BUT the media? Thats hardly likely! I know for sure that I cannot trust handing them over to this site.

(Show NZ the Money!) seems to be getting fed up with the false accusations and threats of information legal action that never happens. Maybe they will start to wake up to the fact that they have been set up, fed garbage and been used as yet another anonymous mode of attack, by recidivist online abusers.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 228 other followers