Northland: other candidates’ Q & A

From NZ Herald Northland by-election: Q+A with leading candidates the responses from the other eight candidates:

That’s right, like most media the Herald chooses in advance of the election who should be considered by voters and promotes them, and ignores the test. Typical undemocratic media pre-selection.

Last week the Herald did briefly mention the candidates it chose to exclude from this week’s Q & A, where the actually acknowledged Eleven candidates to contest Northland by-election.

Nominations closed today and the Electoral Commission’s list of candidates includes National’s Mark Osborne, Labour’s Willow Jean Prime, Act’s Robin Grieve, and New Zealand First leader Winston Peters.

They will go up against the Mana Party’s Rueben Taipari Porter and Maki Herbert for the Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party.

Farmer Joe Carr

…will contest it for the Focus NZ Party — a party set up by farmers and business people in Northland before the 2014 election to campaign on “old fashioned values”.

Many of its founding members have links to National, including Northland businessman Ken Rintoul, who was on the shortlist for the National Party selection won by Mike Sabin in 2011. Former National MP Ross Meurant helped set up the Focus Party but said he had withdrawn his support about a year before the election.

Mangawhai Ratepayer’s and Residents Association chairman Bruce Rogan

…is also standing as an independent.

Mr Rogan was one of the ringleaders in the 2013 ‘rates strike’ by Mangawhai residents objecting to hefty rates increases for a cost blow out in a waste water scheme.

In 2012, he apologised to Government Minister Nick Smith for an abusive email Mr Rogan had sent about the issue which Dr Smith had referred to police.

Serial independent candidate Adam Holland

…has also entered the contest.

Mr Holland stood in Epsom in 2014 on a tongue in cheek platform of introducing a 5 per cent flat tax for residents of Epsom only, and agreeing to do anything Prime Minister John Key said. He got 21 votes.

Mr Holland also stood in the Ikaroa-Rawhiti and Christchurch East by-elections in 2013. He gave his tribal affiliation as Utemi (Ireland).

Not mentioned except in a list of all candidates at the bottom:

Adrian Bonner (Independent)

Rob Painting (Climate Party)

New Zealand voters are usually very conservative about how they vote and this at least helped by and could be accentuated by media bias towards candidates and parties they choose to promote and against those candidates they choose to exclude from public scrutiny.

In Northland coverage Winston Peters has probably been given more free publicity from media than the rest of the candidates combined.

A typical response when media are questioned about their campaign pre-selections and bias is they provide coverage that their viewers/listeners/readers are interested in.

If alternative candidates aren’t given coverage viewers/listeners/readers won’t be able to choose for themselves whether they are interested in them.

Like others NZ Herald promotes headlines and demotes democracy.

UPDATE: and to further emphasise how this is done the Herald follows up to three chosen candidate Q&As with more coverage of Peters – Northland byelection: Peters evasive over long-term plan

They don’t try and find out even the short term plans of most candidates. My guess is that they will be beating their heads against a brick wall of media bias.

NZ Herald Northland headlines:


Looks like the Peters paper.

Latest Snowden revelations could be damaging

The latest installments of Snowden revelations from NZ Herald could be damaging.

Spy agency’s cyber tactic revealed

New Zealand’s spy agencies hacked into government-linked mobile phones in Asia to install malicious software to rout data…

Snowden revelations: Nicky Hager and Ryan Gallagher: New Zealand’s spy reach stretches across globe

Documents expose discrepancies between country’s secret agenda and official foreign policy.

New Zealand spies on Vietnam, China, India, Pakistan, South American nations and a range of other countries to help fill gaps in worldwide surveillance operations by the United States National Security Agency (NSA), documents show.

One camp will probably be happy to damage New Zealand’s credibility and ability to do international surveillance on the extreme end of this camp they don’t want any spying and will do what they can to undermine it.

And the other camp will have concerns about the possible negative impact on New Zealand’s (and the South Pacific’s) security.

I presume the Herald will have thought carefully about the possible impact of publishing this – and in any case if they didn’t have the scoops someone else would have published it.

And disclosing information confirming our spy agency GCSB spies will not surprise many, although it could cause some diplomatic issues.

The revelations confirm to some that we’re doing things they think we shouldn’t be doing.

And they highlight why spy agencies and their Governments try to keep what they do secret so it may strengthen the case to maintain secrecy.

Revealing details could be damaging to both sides of the debate as well as to New Zealand’s security.

The spy is falling, the spy is falling!

Does the New Zealand public (and media) have Hager fatigue or apathy over spy stories?

Nicky Hager has been promoting his reports on New Zealand content of the Snowden files, first through NZ Herald on Thursday and yesterday through Sunday Star Times.

Wider media interest seemed to quickly fade, and apart from some devout activists and the Greens there has been largely a resounding “so what?”

Is this because most people simply don’t care about spying, are not surprised that it’s happening but don’t think it applies to them or will affect them?

Or is it Hager fatigue? Perhaps apart from some loyal supporters he is seen too much as a pesky lefty stirrer.

It will be a mix of both apathy and Hager fatigue.

Yesterday the Sunday Star Times featured reports from Nicky Hager et al based on the Snowden files.  See Sunday Star Times – next installments of Hager/Snowden.

This follows NZ Herald on Thursday launching – Spy ‘revelations’ a flood or a trickle? – in what is promised to be a series of reports on New Zealand aspects of the Snowden files that Hager has been given access to.

There was some wider media coverage on Thursday, but little apparent public interest.

Yesterday the Sunday Star Times coverage appears to have been largely ignored by other media. And the public seems to have been mostly disinterested as well. One of the articles appeared at the bottom of Stuff’s “Most Popular” in the middle of yesterday but by evening there was no sign of anything about spying.

This morning Google news doesn’t include any past spy stories on it’s New Zealand news summary page but there is one Stuff ‘Reader Report’ – Spying news ‘should come as no surprise’.

Stuff leads this page with:

REVELATIONS: Edward Snowden’s latest batch of revelations showed New Zealand was spying on its Pacific neighbours.

New documents show New Zealand has spied on its neighbours and allies, including countries in the Pacific. What do you think about these latest spying revelations?

But the only response published is an emphatic “so what?”

The recent revelations by the investigative journalist Nicky Hager that the New Zealand Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) has spied on individuals or organisations located in our neighbouring countries and even allies should come as no surprise to anyone.

Our spy agency is there to spy and gather information from those who are seeking to hide something. The idea that terrorists or criminals can avoid detection by basing themselves in a friendly country is ludicrous.

The world is shrinking daily and decisions made in one continent can be acted on almost instantly in another. Information gathered anywhere can have relevance anywhere.

We need to think globally if we are to combat global terrorists and gather intelligence globally too.

As an ordinary, law-abiding citizen I hope that is what my tax-funded GCSB does. I have nothing to hide or fear and to be brutally honest I don’t care a jot where the spies get the information from or who they share it with.

So it seems that when it comes to real life spy stories New Zealand yawns.

To be honest yesterday I posted links to the Sunday Star Times stories but apart from a cursory glance at the lead paragraphs I couldn’t be bothered reading them.

Has Hager cried and cried wolf too often? He may be guilty of over-egging revelations – be it on dirty self interested politics or spying – that lack compelling evidence.

The problem with ‘The spy is falling, the spy is calling!’ approach is that something that’s barely of interest in the first place gets easily ignored.

A few of the most important and concerning aspects of our spying should probably warrant public scrutiny, or awareness at least.

But this is shrouded in a fog of scaremongering.

Dunne clarifies post-Northland “re-think”

A week ago I posted Threat of Dunne ‘rethink’ if Peters wins should help National where it appeared that NZ Herald’s headline was misleading.

The article (especially the headline) made it appear that Dunne had threatened to renegotiate his coalition deal with National if Winston Peters won the Northland by-election and reduced National’s majority.

Peter Dunne wants rethink if Winston Peters wins Northland

United Future leader Peter Dunne says he would look at revisiting his post-election concessions from the National Party if New Zealand First leader Winston Peters wins the Northland byelection.

Mr Dunne noted that his party signed a confidence and supply agreement when National had an outright majority. National has since lost a seat in the final election count and could lose another in Northland.

Asked whether he would seek greater concessions from National if it lost another seat, he said: “That’s something I’d want to consider. I don’t have an immediate answer at this point.”

It had looked to me like it was mostly a made up angle by the Herald, with Dunne just responding fairly vaguely,

And today it’s been shown that at least one other journalist took it as a serious threat of re-negotiation, but Dunne has clarified in response.

Brent Edwards @rnzgallerybrent

Let’s be clear. Despite the hysteria Northland by-election will make no difference to Govt.

Toby Manhire @toby_etc

@rnzgallerybrent hardly an upheaval, but no difference? That @PeterDunneMP has said he’ll seek to renegotiate suggests at least some

Peter Dunne @PeterDunneMP

@toby_etc @rnzgallerybrent I never actually said that – I told the Herald I might think about that if it happened – but was not doing so yet.

So Dunne responded vaguely when prompted and a more aggressive slant had been portrayed. He didn’t say he wanted a rethink, he said he would think about it if Peters won.

Bussing with dinosaurs

Body at NZ Herald:

Herald slant on Pacific reaction to ‘spying’

NZ Herald released ‘EXCLUSIVE” details about New Zealand spying on Pacific countries yesterday. Today they have a slanted article on reaction from Pacific countries.

Are they deliberately trying to justify what they have published? Or are they oblivious to their emphasis on one side of limited  response?

The headline is NZ breached our trust – Tongan PM.

First paragraph:

Leaders of Pacific nations are beginning to speak out about claims New Zealand has been keeping too close an eye on their people and one prime minister has called the move a breach of trust.

As will be shown later the Herald is seeking comment from them, which is different to “speaking out”.

Tongan Prime Minister ‘Akilisi Pohiva, who was elected last December, said he would raise the issue in his first meeting with Prime Minister John Key.

“It means New Zealand breached the trust that has been established between the two countries,” he told Radio NZ’s Checkpoint programme.

However, Mr Pohiva said if New Zealand authorities felt the information they had gathered needed to be shared with other world leaders, then that was up to them.

“Remember Tonga is small and we have nothing to hide. It may be a serious matter for superpowers.”

Headlines involve cherry picking, but “breach of trust” is part of what otherwise seems a moderate and unconcerned response once you read past the “however”.

Samoan Prime Minister Tuilaepa Sailele Malielegaoi slammed the media for sensationalising the issue and supported any monitoring of his country.

“Samoa doesn’t have anything to hide. Our daily lives are an open book. We follow good governance principles of transparency and accountability,” he said.

“As the leader of this country, I maintain frank and open lines of communication with all our diplomatic connections.”

Tuilaepa acknowledged the matters of a small island nation in the Pacific probably had no significant value to the world’s top leaders.

“We are not a security risk to any small island nearby and I’m sure the phone conversations by an old matai [chief] and his son in New Zealand for a taulaga [money] envelope will not be of interest to the FBI of the great USA.”

The Herald didn’t choose ‘Samoan Prime Minister slams media sensationalising‘ for their headline.

Commentators have also pushed the idea that China’s growing influence within the Pacific – particularly in Samoa and Fiji – has a lot to do with monitoring information in the region.

Commentators “pushed the idea” while the Herald just put balanced information out there? Yeah right.  They pushed their sensationalised exclusive while seeming to grudgingly tack on some alternate reality on the end of their self justification.

Auckland University Professor of Pacific Studies Damon Salesa said there was a shift happening within the region that world leaders were starting to catch on to.

The increase in spying was in keeping with “the intensification of interest in the Pacific with the rise of China,” he said. “We should consider it disappointing we are acting this way among our closest allies but most people working in this sphere are not naive about it.”

What would be disappointing about Pacific neighbours being helped and potentially protected by New Zealand intelligence gathering?

Requests for comment from leaders from Papua New Guinea, Fiji, Tuvalu, Nauru, Kiribati, French Polynesia, Niue, Solomon Islands and the Cook Islands went unanswered last night.

So after the lead phrase “Leaders of Pacific nations are beginning to speak out ” we find out that the Herald is requesting responses but most Pacific leaders approached have chosen not to “speak out”.

– additional reporting: David Fisher

Fisher has written articles opposing intelligence gathering and ‘spying’ for yonks and was credited with the revelation articles.

David Fisher David Fisher is a senior reporter for the NZ Herald.

EXCLUSIVE: GCSB collects phone calls, emails and internet data from NZ’s closest and most vulnerable neighbours, secret papers reveal

New Zealand is “selling out” its close relations with the Pacific nations to be close with the United States, author Nicky Hager has said.

Hager, in conjunction with the New Zealand Herald and the Intercept news site, revealed today how New Zealand’s spies are targeting the entire email, phone and social media communications of the country’s closest, friendliest and most vulnerable neighbours.

So it appears that David Fisher is doing follow-ups that support his exclusive revelations, that he worked with Nicky Hager on.

Hager is well known as an ‘investigative journalist’ who opposes intelligence gathering, and who has a habit of cherry picking data (illegally gathered in this case and for his ‘Dirty Politics’ election bomb last year) to support his activist slant.

This is a shame. There’s some aspects of this that deserve public attention, but appearing to be driven by an agenda does make it appear slanted.

Spy ‘revelations’ a flood or a trickle?

Yesterday John Key tried to pre-empt the flood of spy revelations due today. TVNZ reported:

PM: Discount massively everything Nicky Hager says today

Investigative journalist Nicky Hager has promised a big reveal today about New Zealand’s secret spying operations, but the Prime Minister shot down the allegations before they were even made yesterday.

Mr Hager begins a series of revelations from today which he claims show which countries our spies have targeted, when and why.

He said he had spent the last year working through information collected by ex-US National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden.

NZ Herald didn’t cover that but are leading the revelation charge this morning.

#snowdenNZ : Leaked documents show New Zealand spies on its Pacific friends and sends the data to the US

EXCLUSIVE: GCSB collects phone calls, emails and internet data from NZ’s closest and most vulnerable neighbours, secret papers reveal.

New Zealand’s spies are targeting the entire email, phone and social media communications of the country’s closest, friendliest and most vulnerable neighbours, according to documents supplied by United States fugitive andwhistleblower Edward Snowden.

Snowden’s files reveal a heavy focus on “full-take collection” from the Pacific with nearly two dozen countries around the world targeted by our Government Communications Security Bureau.

Information from across the Pacific is collected by New Zealand’s GCSB but sent onto the United States’ National Security Agency to plug holes in its global spying network, the documents show.

Being ‘exclusive’ makes this look like a carefully managed and packaged release.

That New Zealand collects information from across the Pacific is not a revelation, it would have been very surprising if they didn’t.

Mr Key said it was “bizarre” to reveal details about intelligence at a time when New Zealand faced a terror threat. “We’ve got the situation where we’ve Isil reaching out to cause harm to New Zealanders.”

He said he would not reveal details of intelligence but said it was done for “really, really good reasons”.

When quizzed mid-afternoon he said he had no idea what would be revealed. But, pointing to Hager’s election bombshell Dirty Politics, he said: “Nicky Hager was wrong last time. His information is old. I guarantee you it will be wrong this time.”

Challenged on claims of fabrication, John Key’s office couldn’t point to any basis for the claim.

Hager and the Herald have been researching this for months – Hager said “he had spent the last year working through information “. Key is just finding out today what they have chosen to uncover. We can expect him to fight back some more.


#snowdenNZ / The price of the Five Eyes club: Mass spying on friendly nations and sending vast amounts of intelligence to NSA

Another headline leading with a hash tag followed by a Twitter sized bite, obviously targeting a wide social media audience.

Leaked Snowden files show most of GCSB’s targets are not security threats to New Zealand, as Government suggests

New Zealand’s electronic surveillance agency has dramatically expanded its spying operations during the years of John Key’s National Government and is automatically funnelling vast amounts of intelligence to the US National Security Agency, top-secret documents reveal.

Since 2009, the Government Communications Security Bureau intelligence base at Waihopai has moved to “full-take collection”, indiscriminately intercepting Asia-Pacific communications and providing them en masse to the NSA through the controversial NSA intelligence system XKeyscore, which is used to monitor emails and internet browsing habits.

NZH balances this coverage with a link to something they published in September last year.:

John Key ‘comfortable’ that NSA is not spying on NZ

Prime Minister John Key says he can’t give an absolute assurance New Zealanders are not subject to mass surveillance by the US National Security Agency (NSA) but he is “comfortable” that is not happening.

Mr Key this afternoon said he was “sure it’s absolutely true” that former NSA analyst Edward Snowden had the capacity to see information about New Zealanders when he worked for the agency, but that information would not have come from mass surveillance programmes run by this country’s Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB).

They highlighted:

– Key concedes claim NZ data may be accessible through XKeyscore
– Says NZ contributes some information to Five Eyes databases
– “But not mass, wholesale surveillance as people might say”
– No evidence of mass surveillance, says security chief

These claims will no doubt be compared to the current flood of revelations.

This is all going to take some digesting and thrashing over to see if there’s anything damning to New Zealand.

And expect John Key to keep playing it down and claiming things have moved on from when Snowden got his data anyway.

It will take a day or few to work out if there are any remarkable revelations,or if it’s a trickle rather than a flood for Key and his Government.

Or if it’s little different to same-old spying that at the most most people will shrug at it and carry on with their lives, clinging to their mobile phones and tablets to keep them connected to the world wide web of intrigue.

Threat of Dunne ‘rethink’ if Peters wins should help National

NZ Herald seems to be trying to make up news but highligthing something they seem to have posited to Peter Dunne may end up helping National in the Northland by-election.

Isaac Davidson has an article with a misleading headline – Peter Dunne wants rethink if Winston Peters wins Northland – and a misleading opening paragraph.

United Future leader Peter Dunne says he would look at revisiting his post-election concessions from the National Party if New Zealand First leader Winston Peters wins the Northland byelection.

That sounds like Dunne has come forward with the idea of a rethink. And:

Mr Dunne pointed to Resource Management reforms as one area which he could have greater influence over if National lost a seat. He said the reforms, which he has expressed concerns about, would “take on quite a different hue” if National relied on his vote to pass.

Mr Dunne noted that his party signed a confidence and supply agreement when National had an outright majority. National has since lost a seat in the final election count and could lose another in Northland.

But then:

Asked whether he would seek greater concessions from National if it lost another seat, he said: “That’s something I’d want to consider. I don’t have an immediate answer at this point.”

So he was asked a question about it, said he would consider it but doesn’t have any answer ‘at this point’.

But by raising the risk to National of a Peters win in Northland should help National.

It makes the by-election a high stakes contest. Most by-elections change little apart from one MP. But Northland could significantly change the balance of power in Government.

This will ensure National is determined to do well. And it should help encourage more National voters to vote (by-elections typically have low turnouts).

And Peters’ decision to stand makes for an interesting twist.

If Peters were to win Northland it would hand potentially much more power to arch-rival Dunne.

It’s possible a Peters win would see National turn to NZ First for support, but that seems very unlikely. It would seem far easier to renegotiate a few policy positions with Dunne than get strung along by Peters in lengthy negotiations and then through the next two and a half years.

And it looks far simpler to motivate National voters to hold onto Northland.

Dirty politics Standard style

A claim that John Key, NZ Herald and David Farrar have all been involved in the ‘dirty politics’ promotion of the meme ‘Angry Andy” has backfired after a failure to provide any proof. Lies, more lies and then resorting to abuse.

A post on Little’s leadership at The Standard quoted a ‘Rodney Hide penned the second piece’ and commented:

Now I know some are reading some Machiavellian “reverse psychology” intentions into Hide’s support, but I think they overestimate both his complexity and his influence. I take the comments at face value, that Andrew Little’s leadership is receiving broad-based support. And that’s good news, because that’s what we need for the Left (as a whole!) to win.

I agree with Anthony (Robins) here (except for ‘we need for the Left to win) but others took to the Machiavellian approach.

This led to a claim by ‘One Anonymous Bloke’ about the promotion of the meme ‘Angry Andy” by John Key, NZ Herald and David Farrar.

As I’ve researched the use of ‘Angry Andy’ it looked to me OAB was making things up so I challenged him to prove his claims. He made lame excuses, diverted, got more lame and ended up resorting to abuse, all common tactics of OAB.

It clearly looks like he lied and kept lying.

Here’s the thread (as it is at the moment):

Incognito 7.3

The way I interpreted Hide’s opinion piece was that he’s trying hard to build a (new) narrative to box in Little. Perhaps the “Angry Andy” narrative wasn’t powerful enough.

  • Pete George 7.3.1

    It was a stupid narrative and only Slater seemed to be trying to push it.

    • One Anonymous Bloke

      And John Key.

      And the New Zealand Herald.

      And David Farrar.

      Only they didn’t “seem” to be doing it – I’ll leave the weasel words to you.

      • Sacha

        Just a beige coincidence, surely. Oh, you mean someone wrote a book last year about similar conniving?

      • Pete George

        Are you making that up or do you have evidence?

        I don’t remember seeing Farrar use it. Nor Key. Only once by Steven Joyce in Parliament on 26 November (the “cut the crap” day which I thought was good from Little).

        Searching NZ Herald they reported that from Parliament but that’s the only hit on ‘Angry Andy”.

        And only from Slater (frequently) since.

        If you have other evidence I’ll add it to my post.

        • One Anonymous Bloke

          Yes, I have evidence, gained from one simple Google search using the terms “Andrew Little angry”.

          Google tailors its results though, so I expect you’ll just end up reading interesting facts about beige.

          • Pete George

            Well it will be simple for you to prove it with your evidence.

            And if you don’t I’ll presume you’re buillshitting again.

            • Incognito

              A Google Advanced search on “Angry Andy” on the Kiwiblog site or domain gave me 50 hits. Do you want me to list all 50 links for you?

              • Pete George

                Just the ones made in posts by David Farrar will do.

                I’m well aware of the term being used in comments, sometimes that’s been directed at me.

            • One Anonymous Bloke


              No-one cares what the chief fact-checker presumes. Sad and true.

              Can you do something for me, Pete? Every time you plagiarise my remarks at Yawns, include the following disclaimer, there’s a dear.

              OAB says: get your petty unoriginal shite, right here at Yawns, with Petty George, the beige parrot.

              • Pete George

                So you must have bullshitted again. And have switched to your usual diversion and evasion.

                • One Anonymous Bloke

                  Or, I’m not providing you with links on principle. I told you how to find them, and that was more than you deserve.

                  No wonder your fact checking website was such a complete embarrassing failure, just as everyone said it would be.

                  I’ll post the links if you’ll give me your word that you won’t use them, or any material they contain, at Yawns.

                  Edit: and 3News.

                • Pete George

                  You’re digging yourself deeper. Caught out lying? Unless you can prove you weren’t.

                • One Anonymous Bloke

                  Key, Joyce, Farrar, 3News, The Herald, even Jamie Mackay has no trouble finding the facts.

                  Either find the links yourself, or commit to not using them at Yawns. Your choice.

                • Pete George

                  It seems clear “you are unable to substantiate with some proof”. Hard to see that as anything but a lying smear followed by lame excuses diversions.

                  Thanks, you’ve been helpful.

                • One Anonymous Bloke

                  What you find hard is none of my concern. What you find credible loses credibility thereby, as a result of your persistent banal unoriginal mendacity, as has been demonstrated here many many times.

                  You’re a liar, your website is a vehicle for lies. My contempt for it is matched by my contempt for you, and what’s more, it’s widely shared. The contempt, that is, not your website.

                  This website’s boring, mindless, mean.
                  Full of pornography.
                  The kind that’s clean…”

                  Apologies to Johnny Clarke

I’ve searched Google and know that OAB doesn’t have some magic version that gives him results no one else can get. I’ve also searched NZ Herald and Kiwiblog, and have found nothing backs up OAB’s claim.

And neither has he found anything obviously. Nor has Incognito come back with anything.

OAB often plays dirty, lies and smears like this. And claims that the left don’t do dirty politics. OAB is worse than Cameron Slater in some ways, although shares his vindictiveness if caught out..

OAB claims to not belong to a party and there’s nothing to suggest he (if it’s a he) is acting for any party.

But OAB is allowed to act like this at The Standard, Lynn Prentice has defended and made excuses for what he does in the past, and let’s him lie and abuse with impunity, as do the other moderators.

This is typical of the worst of The Standard, and commonplace.

Normal blog etiquette is to back up claims with evidence. Standard Rules state this too:

We are intolerant of people starting or continuing flamewars where there is little discussion or debate. This includes making assertions that you are unable to substantiate with some proof (and that doesn’t mean endless links to unsubstantial authorities) or even argue when requested to do so.

They’re only intolerant when it suits them.

Dirty politics is common like this on the left, and they are either blind to it – it’s only dirty if the other lot do it – or they are being deliberately malicious and hypocritical.

UPDATE: Here’s an ironic comment from OAB:

As an author you have more power than the rest of us. I like Lprent’s strategy of re-posing unanswered questions and giving the tr*ll the option of a citation, a retraction, or a ban.

I didn’t see lprent do that with unanswered questions from OAB today. Which is not surprising given lprent’s support of how OAB operates, like here:

OAB is a determined stirrer. It is often a bit like getting a accidental look into a mirror when I read their comments.

Except over the years OAB has been steadily paring down the number of words required to perform their effect.

And considering OAB’s efforts todazy this one from lprent is very ironic:

OAB expresses opinion, links to facts, and I can’t recall them ever putting a quote out of context. That you don’t like what he says doesn’t make it “dirty”. It just means that you don’t like it and rather than arguing (and having to work for an argu!entire), you prefer smearing. To me that is just lazy.

No links to facts and when called on it he went dirty. And for lprent to accuse me of preferring smearing when he allows OAB to smear at wil and he brags about smearing himself is extreme chutzpah.

A follow-up post here: OAB follow-up

Once were journalists

A very ironic post at Whale Oil – NZ HERALD, RIP – that claims ‘Once Were Journalists’.

Once_Were_Journalists_poste-630x760Cameron Slater once claimed to be a journalist. It’s true that he has done some journalist-type work amongst his posts for pay. The trouble is that it’s impossible to be sure which is which.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,940 other followers