Whale Oil ‘party’

Whale Oil is celebrating Cameron Slater’s tenth anniversary of blogging.



(They say “Dirty Politics” like it’s a bad thing!)

Calling it Decade of Dirt  ignores the damage that has done, much of it self inflicted damage. It is generally something that most people wouldn’t be proud of.

As you may have gathered, Wednesday June 10th marks our tenth birthday.  Cameron Slater will have been blogging for ten years on that very day.

That’s a notable achievement.

It’s a celebration.  Love him or hate him, you can’t ignore him.   John Key is the latest to give it go, and I can assure you it won’t help him at all.

So much has happened over the last ten years.   What on earth should we do to celebrate this millstone milestone?

So we sat down, and had a think.  And we thought:  politicians come and go, and we praise them and rip them apart.  But if there has been once constant pain in the butt through the last ten years who loathes Whaleoil as much as we loathe him, it has to be Winston Peters.

So we decided to ask him to MC our Decade of Dirt event for us.    And guess what he said?

Apparently he said yes, Then he found another engagement that was more important.

We were just about to announce this, and disaster struck.  Winston needs to be somewhere else on the same day.  I’m not sure who’s more gutted – Winston or us.

Dilemma:  how to replace a curmudgeonly opinionated know-it-all with someone else?  Someone who may have nothing to do?  Someone unwanted wherever he goes, just like Winston?

The answer was obvious.  Maurice Williamson.

He says he’s got nothing much on anywhere lately, and is just delighted to be wanted somewhere by anyone.

We are delighted to have Maurice as our MC.  We’re told he’ll consider dusting off some of his Rob Muldoon impressions for the occasion.

Not exactly the biggest drawcard in politics these days.

Details to come, but mark the evening of the 10th of June in your calendar and wait for the details on how to secure your tickets to this once-in-a-lifetime event.  If you are a pundit and you missed it, you will regret it for the rest of the week.

This will definitely be a Cash for Access opportunity as you will be able to mingle with the elite of the political, media and Dark Arts people as they wonder who you are and why you are cornering them with silly questions.

I wonder how much Williamson charges for access. He may need to pay for attention.

This will be an evening to take off the proverbial gloves and just celebrate Cam Slater’s ten year achievement in sitting at his keyboard in his undies every morning and bashing out a bunch of angry articles.   I mean, who wouldn’t be proud?

As media, you can’t avoid this event.  The place will be positively bursting at the seams with leaks.  And no doubt there will be some revelations during the evening as Cam might reveal some previously secret information, and debates with other MPs, media, dignitaries and aspirants.

So suggestions it could be a big reveal night. Does that remind anyone of Dotcom?

In case you’re wondering if a) this is satire, or b) who else is coming – the answers are a) no, and b) I’ll start name dropping soon.  Let’s just say we already have secured guests from the right and left of both media and politics.

It will be interesting to see who is prepared to be seen to be associated. Will Judith Collins front up? Or does she value her career prospects in National? Unlike Williamson she has a chance of being reinstated into Cabinet,

At this stage we’re talking through the possibilities of Cam telling the stories of Rawshark and Whaledump, by telling a room full of people in politics and media who they are in real life, but we are waiting for clearance from our legal counsel before we can announce that with certainty.

Big hints. If they don’t deliver it will be a megaflop rivalling one of Slater’s biggest rivals.

Until then…

…everyone* is invited, but who will have the guts to come?

I’m not sure who will be tempted to attend by that approach. It’s got nothing to do with ‘guts’.

It’s an odd invite to a birthday party that is being used as a fund raiser for someone promoting dirt.

I have no inclination to contribute.

‘These “hackers” and cyber terrorists are scum’

While the current hacking discussion continues who would say something like this?

These “hackers” and cyber terrorists are scum.  They are breaking the law. There are no “hacktivists”, just idiots that make other people’s lives and businesses hell because they are basically standing in the way of freedom. Freedom to move about on the Internet as you please, freedom of speech, freedom of association.

We’re in an interesting time in history where police are simply not equipped to deal with these levels of attacks.  But the GCSB can’t be the organisation that combats this.  The problems will only get worse, and we need to have a way for police to constructively deal with these kinds of crimes.

Instead of being the enemy, as “investigative Herald journalist” Nicky Hager and his friends Dotcom, Harre, “Tainted” Fisher, Nippert and Snowden would have it, the GCSB are actually here to protect those of us who are law abiding and believe in the rule of law.

It could be a genuine crusader for better online and political standards.

Or a dirty hypocrite. About the ‘freedom of speech’ at least.


And on that post is this comment:

Leaking is part of the game. WOBH benefits.

Now, someone at WOBH telling tales out of school would be fine. (it isn’t, but you know what I mean). But the fact we’re as tight as a drum on the staff front means they had to break in and take stuff.

Still silence on Rachinger at WOBH.

That’s the bit that’s both flattering and extremely annoying.

I’ve seen it as a mark of respect that they needed to break the law to get a hit on.

I wish they wouldn’t. But I can tell you this much. The WOBH/Dirty Politics project involved crime. It wasn’t the first time “that side” have resorted to it, and it won’t be the last.

We’ll get done over again. It’s the only way they think they can hurt us.

In the end, it hurt PEOPLE. But none permanently. And WOBH only grew stronger because of it.

What blogger would go around hurting PEOPLE? Yeah, right.

Talking of political rules

It’s hard to understand why Cameron Slater would think it is still a good idea to brag about Whaleoil’s Rules of Politics.

1. If you are explaining, you are losing

2. Utu is good, even necessary

3. Never hug a corpse – it smells and you end up smelling like the corpse too

4. Always know where the bodies are buried

5. Don’t let mongrels get away with being mongrels

6. Don’t mess with The Whale or Cactus Kate

7. Never wrestle with pigs, two things are for certain if you do. You will get dirty and the pig will enjoy it.

8. Never ask a question if you don’t already know the answer

9. Speak plain, Speak Simple

10. Remember, I’m telling this story

11. Never trust a politician if you aren’t close enough to them to hit them in the back of the head with a bit of 4×2

12. Never trust a politician with a moustache or a hyphenated name.

There’s quite a bit of irony in that list of the rules of dirty politics. A lot has happened since 2011, and the humour in this has become quite twisted.

‘Rule number 1′ is fairly stupid

In one of his growing number of ‘John bad, Judith good’ posts Cameron Slater highlights one of his hypocrisies. Having done a lot of trying to explain many things (apart from what happened to Freed and why he hasn’t denied paying Ben Rachinger to hack The Standard) he reverts back to one of his so-called political rules:


Leadership should be a truism. You are the leader because there is no other alternative.

When it no longer become s a truism then your leadership is in question. It may be still solid, but questions are now being asked.

And when those questions are asked you get forced into breaking Rule Number 1 in politics.

1. If you are explaining, you are losing

Why he wants to highlight that when he has post so much over the last year is a bit baffling.

In a round about way Slater is trying to explain that he thinks John Key is nearly history and Judith Collins is the heir apparent (if you forget everything that’s been revealed over the past year).

Unless leaders have surnames like Stalin or Pinochet then they have a basic responsibility to explain quite a few things on an ongoing basis.

If John Key is having to explain to his members that he is definitely sticking around then there are problems.  

Explaining is losing and there are increasing signs that there is pressure.

What Slater doesn’t explain is that he’s trying to talk up some pressure. Except scepticism is now rule number 1 when considering Slater style politics. It’s only bloggers like Slater and Greg Presland who try to convince people who never listen to things like The rise of Collins and the decline of Key.

Don’t expect wither Slater or Presland to explain why they are promoting the same futility.

But Slater goes on to try his best to explain how Key will lose his leadership. And he concludes:

When the polls start moving then you will see more action on finding a replacement for John Key.

The polls move around all the time. National have fluctuated between about 44% and 55% over the last few years. There has been no sign of ‘more action’ with any of those movements so far.

But expect Slater to try and keep explaining his strategy, frequently.

I’m waiting for a good explanation of why John is bad and Judith is good for National. And I’d be fascinated by any explanation as to why Slater is good for Collins’ prospects.

Rachinger continues on Twitter

Ben Rachinger switched from his blog to Twitter last night (see Benjamin Rachinger posts for a list of posts).

So don’t think I’m a right winger. We were playing high level, high stakes political games.

Embedded image permalink

Embedded image permalink

Mr Slater owns three firearms according to him.

Embedded image permalink

Mr Slater on his wife and daughters shooting skills. Oh and suggests 1k down payment for the hack

Embedded image permalink

Poor Megan Woods.

Embedded image permalink

Slater on Kim Dotcom.

Embedded image permalink

Mr Slater on Mr Prentice of The Standard.

Embedded image permalink

Slater on The Standard hack.

Embedded image permalink

Embedded image permalink

Mr Slater on what The Standard hack was to be used for.

Embedded image permalink

Mr Slater on my Work Plan re. The Standard hack. Also my Work Plan.

Embedded image permalink

Embedded image permalink

Embedded image permalink

An aside on claims he was a Young Nat:

Being fair about JK and Nats once and being followed by him doesn’t make me a Nat. I also advised Greens once.

An aside on support received:

This. Thanks for all the “support” Lefties but yes, thanks those who actually have messaged. Goodnight.

Embedded image permalink

Embedded image permalink

Maxamillian Shields @publicpurpose

Back to the dump:

Slater on Nippert.

Embedded image permalink

Mr Slater on our PM, Mr Key.

Embedded image permalink

Mr Slater asking me for ____? As I bury my grandfather.

Embedded image permalink

Mr Slater on Freed.

Embedded image permalink

Mr Slater on Mr Nash of the Labour Party.

Embedded image permalink

Mr Slater on Headhunters (88s) and Mr Blomfield.

Embedded image permalink

Mr Slater on the matter of $500 weekly payments to myself, prior to 5k offer for The Standard hack.

Embedded image permalink

Embedded image permalink

Embedded image permalink

Mr Slater on SAS being deployed secretly to ME. January.

Embedded image permalink

Mr Slater on Headhunters(88s)

Embedded image permalink

Embedded image permalink

Embedded image permalink

Embedded image permalink

Mr Slater on how he got in with the Headhunters.

Embedded image permalink

Embedded image permalink

Mr Slater on Mr Little being called up to Mr Keys office to get onside about signing away our civil liberties.

Embedded image permalink

Mr Slater on Mr Russell Brown of Public Address.

Embedded image permalink

Requests of Mr Slaters.

Embedded image permalink

Asked to “make sure everything you say connects with public interest”:

A known confidante of John Key and assistant to Jason Ede meets organised crime gang members? Public. Interest.

Asked “Am I correct in thinking that you intend to reveal WO’s media contacts soon enough/in good time, or are their barriers?”

I’ll show the journos, bloggers, media types and politicians that Whale deals with this week.

Meanwhile there seems to be a total absence of any mentions of Rachinger’s releases on Whale Oil. That’s to be expected, there is close control on what can be talked about there.

Blog rankings – April 2015

The Daily Blog

  • September: visits 504,304 page views 813,779
  • October: visits 210,877 page views 347,647
  • November: visits 160,716 page views 259,736
  • December: visits 126,534 page views 203,1264
  • January 2015: visits 116,155 page views 188,868
  • February visits 121,994 page views 205,870
  • March visits 163,445 page views 274,075
  • April: visits 353,964 page views 511,527

Boosted substantially by a single topic – John Key versus the waitress.

Whale Oil Beef Hooked

  • September: visits 3,716,364 page views 5,309,045
  • October: visits 2,008,487 page views 3,275,031
  • November: visits 1,776,421 page views 2,981,810
  • December: visits 1,764,050 page views 2,999,841
  • January 2015: visits 1,549,207 page views 2,771,035
  • February 2015: visits 1,697,269 page views 2,947,932
  • March 2015: visits 1,497,906 page views 2,669,703
  • April 2015: visits 1,275,864 page views 2,708,282

Visits continue to slide. It remains a mystery why Whale Oil still has over twice the numbers of any other New Zealand blog when it doesn’t seem to do much different, except for the number of posts per day which is much higher. That may be what keeps the numbers up.


  • September: visits 695,190 page views 1,093,806
  • October: visits 373,637 page views 604,405
  • November: visits 301,119 page views 522,519
  • December: visits 278,787 page views 515,827
  • January 2015: visits 232,512 page views 447,489
  • February 2015: visits 299,472 page views 541,919
  • March 2015: visits 322,036 page views 579,501
  • April 2015: visits 311,709 page views 566,587

A slight drop but one day less in the month may account for that.

The Standard

  • September: visits 429,438 page views 868,342
  • October: visits 255,449 page views 561,703
  • November: visits 194,646 page views 431,100
  • December: visits 182,211 page views 392,090
  • January 2015: 163,164 page views 356,129
  • February 2015: 189,833 page views 417,128
  • March 2015: 232,651 page views 490,905
  • April 2015: 226,436 page views 483,101

Steady taking into account one less day than March.

Note that these are a rough measure. They can be useful to monitor trends on a blog but the value of comparing blogs is debatable. Sitemeter can vary significantly from other measures.

Note: not all blogs supply Open Parachute with site statistics, notably Public Address and Pundit.

Open Parachute sitemeter rankings:

Slater should be as embarrassed as the Herald

There were some shallow claims made by Audrey Young and the Herald editorial today about their latest poll result. National was virtually unchanged (since the last Herald-Digipoll result) and they tried to explain this in relation to John Key’s hair embarrassment.

They are ridiiculed on Cameron Slater at Whale Oil in WHO’S EMBARRASSED NOW AUDREY?

Audrey Young said this:

I have not felt that in the past six-and-a-bit years he had led the country.

But to learn today that he pulled a waitress’s pony-tail on several occasions at his local cafe makes me cringe.

It is one of those stories that denigrates him and his office.

The public don’t agree Audrey

But the poll didn’t ask anything about that.

Slater went on to claim that John Armstrong, John Drinnan, Barry Soper, Duncan Garner and Matt Nippert should be embarrassed. For example on Garner:

Duncan Garner should be embarrassed too:

I know you accept that now but you should have worked it out much earlier. It screams power imbalance, Prime Minister.

You say it was fun and games that went too far and many people will side with you on that – but her side of the story reads differently.

No, Duncan you were wrong…many people, about 51% do side with the PM.

That’s a nonsense claim. There’s been no poll on how many people side with Key on the hair issue.

And in any case a significant amount of the polling was done before the news even broke, let alone got widespread coverage.

Slater should be embarrassed making such silly claims.

There’s no way of knowing how much the hair issue will impact on Key’s chances of re-election.

Timing meant that it would never have had a big impact on the Herald poll. It’s not surprising to see poll support for National hold up.

Winston Peters has improved his support but only appeals to a minority.

Russel Norman and the Greens have had a low profile and are currently selecting a new co-leader, so it’s hard to know where Green support may go.

Andrew Little and Labour chose to be missing in action in the Northland by-election, they remained virtually MIA over the school and Easter break, and remain MIA as Little travels to Gallipoli and Europe.

There’s no way of knowing what impact the hair embarrassment would have had on National in a poll if there was strong opposition, but the Opposition has never looked weaker in my memory.

If this weakness of any alternative continues Key may be unscathed in polls and possibly the 2017 election despite his falling from grace.

But he has increased his risks.

Now swing voters like me who see no better alternative might more readily drop our support for Key if a credible alternative materialises.

There’s no doubt that Key has been an unusually popular politician, and still is. But some of his support will have become more tenuous. And will continue to weaken, even if he maintains current poll levels.

But there’s now a greater change that enough swing voters will decide to swing away from National to swing an election.

No poll measures or tells us anything like this, no matter how hard journalists and (some) bloggers try to fit a poll result to their stories.

Whale Oil language gaff

Whale Oil frequently blasts other media when they make mistakes, especially NZ Herald. Missy pointed out:

I was having a brief look over at Whale Oil today, and I noticed a post Cam Slater has done on NZ Children learning languages, specifically Chinese, what struck me is that before posting a regurgitation of the article he put the following line in.

“Really? They don’t choose to learn Swiss or Brazilian?”

Now, since I thought it was common knowledge that Brazilian and Swiss are nationalities not languages – Portuguese is spoken in Brazil, and French, German, Italian and Romansh is spoken in Switzerland – I would have expected someone who seems to be picky about journalists in the MSM getting their facts straight would not have made such a stupid error.


To be fair Cameron Slater may have been trying to be cute with his opening comment – surely he wouldn’t pick two countries like Brazil and Switzerland in total ignorance, and he makes a dig at ‘Chinese’ versus ‘Mandarin’ – but Missy is right, that’s the sort of apparent ignorance he would blast the Herald for.

It looks dumb, especially on a post about language.

Also, to be fair to language correctness, Standard Mandarin is also referred to as Standard Chinese (as well as Putonghua and Guoyu) so ‘Chinese’ is as correct as ‘Mandarin’.

And if you want to be nit-picky about ‘Chinese’ versus ‘Mandarin’ then perhaps it should be pointed out that “there are as many as 292 living languages in China.”

The languages most commonly spoken belong to the Sinitic branch of the Sino-Tibetan language family, which contains Mandarin (spoken natively by 70% of the population), and other Chinese languages: 

While 70% speaking Mandarin is a significant majority 30% of the Chinese population is over 400 million people.

The official language of China is Standard Mandarin, a variety of Mandarin based on the Beijing dialect.

Mandarin is also known as Standard Chinese (so ‘Chinese is a correct-ish variant) and also as Putonghua and Guoyu


The Left’s handling of Key’s hair pulling

Labour and the Greens have had a bit to say about John Key’s hair pulling but this is a look at how left wing blogs have handled the hair story.

It began with EXCLUSIVE: The Prime Minister and the Waitress at The Daily Blog, and was introduced:

This is a guest blog from an anonymous waitress about the way John Key kept touching her when he repeatedly visited her place of work.  The waitress contacted us with her story, The Daily Blog did not seek her out or pressure her in anyway to write this blog. We are protecting her identity so she is not punished by her employer or social media victim blaming.

The question to ask after reading her words is if this bullying behaviour is acceptable from the Prime Minister of NZ.

It was entirely predictable that protecting her identity and preventing social media victim blaming was never going to succeed. Was ‘anonymous waitress’ duped and used by The Daily Blog, or were they really that dumb that they thought they could protect her?

The post has a date stamp only – April 22, 2015. It shows Last Modified: April 22, 2015 @ 6:02 am. The first comment was posted at April 22, 2015 at 6:22 am.

Two days later, on Friday evening, Danyl posted The story behind the story at The Dim-Post:

The other interesting (to me) thing about ponytailgate, or whatever we’re supposed to call it, is how the story broke.

If you take it to a blogger then that check for a balancing comment doesn’t happen. Bloggers don’t play by the rules. But what they do – and I’m thinking of Cameron Slater here, as well as his homologues overseas – is insert themselves into the story. They write it up, in imitation of a mainstream media story and then accompany it with commentary and interviews on the MSM outlets they affect to despise, and attempt to frame the story and promote themselves. In Slater’s case that tends to dilute the story since the attack is so clearly partisan and motivated by malice.

Bomber didn’t do that. Instead he simply published the waitress’s own account as a primary, information-rich source that the mainstream media could base their stories off. Reporters called the PM, but the scandal had already broken and the media were all matching each other’s stories. It couldn’t be shut down. And Bomber kept himself out of it all. That approach – publish a primary source and make it available to all media simultaneously – turned out to be a really awesome way to get the story out there.

Except that this isn’t The story behind the story, it’s only the first chapter.

If Whale Oil had posted an exclusive and David Farrar had picked up on it (or vice versa) possibly Danyl and certainly many on the left would have been shouting ‘two track Dirty Politics!’.

At 9.49 am on Wednesday morning there was a post at The Standard – My Little Ponytail. It looks well researched and carefully written post (not a rush job) by Te Reo Putake. He may well have been able to put that together in three hours. But he probably wouldn’t excuse a time lag between posts on Whale Oil and Kiwiblog. The concluding paragraph:

I simply don’t know if it’s accurate, but I do think we should be told Key’s side of the story. Or be presented with his head on a platter if it’s true.

So ” if it’s accurate” TRP wanted Key’s political head on a platter. And comments that followed feasted on a similar diet of downfall.

The Standard has been busy since then. Related posts so far:

22 April:

23 April:

24 April:

25 April:

Dirty politics was a common accusation – directed at the ‘attack as defence’ from Key defenders. The left forbid calling it dirty politics when they do similar.

And Danyl is wrong when he claims “Bomber didn’t do that. Instead he simply published the waitress’s own account ” and “And Bomber kept himself out of it all.”

That may apply to the initial post but on a blog you can’t look at one post in isolation.

Bradbury posted a follow-up statement from the waitress: UPDATE: The Prime Minister and the Waitress Part 2 – Dirty Politics? While he introduced it with this…

I think the young woman at the centre of the Prime Minister’s bewilderingly abusive and arrogant privilege is a hero. She has shown courage and fortitude that is pretty rare. To tell the Prime Minister to his face to stop touching her took enormous strength when you consider the power dynamics.

I did not believe her bravery should be denigrated by a mainstream media who look to get a victim blaming ratings kick. That was why I said I wouldn’t confirm her identity to any of the media who contacted me.

She thanked me for this but accepted that her name might be made public. This understood,  she was determined to direct that voice and allow it to be her narrative and her story told on her terms.

Out of her genuine concern for the reputation and economic ramifications her possible outing might have on her employers, she met with them Wednesday afternoon and was left in a position she had not agreed to.

She also challenges some of the comments the Prime Minister has made.

These are her words. She raises hard questions about the NZ Herald.

…the use of Dirty Politics in the headline and two photos, including this one…


Rachel Glucina and Government pollster and right wing political blogger, David Farrar

…make it fairly clear that Bradbury is far from keeping himself out of it. As far as I have seen Farrar has had nothing to do with this issue, he has commented a little (two posts) but has kept out of it far more than Bradbury.

I’ve seen no evidence Farrar had anything to do with Glucina’s hit job on the waitress in The Herald. Linking them like this is disingenuous. Some would call it dirty.

The Daily Blog currently features that same photo in it’s headline post. Dirty.

The Daily Blog (that Bradbury is a very prominent part of) has also been busy with other posts that aren’t ‘keeping out of it':

22 April:

23 April:

24 April:

25 April:

26 April:

Danyl himself has also been busier than usual, beginning with this:

I’ve already printed this out and posted it above my desk


I wonder what else he has posted above his desk. It’s easy to see what else he’s posted at Dim-Post:

Left wing blogs have been very busy on this story. The haven’t simply let the waitresss story speak for itself. They have promoted and exaggerated the hell out of it.  They have made all sorts of claims, assumptions, accusations and demands.

Like Psycho Milt encapsulated::

Which left-wing prime minister has been bullying service staff and then getting their friends in the media to do a hatchet job when the person complains?

That’s blogging.

I’ve posted a few times on this myself. But I don’t claim one side does Dirty Politics while trying to pretend the other side is squeaky clean.

There has been a concerted effort from the left to bag Key and damage him as much as possible. Some of them think that at last they have found the straw they can break the back of his Prime Minister-ship with.

As I’ve shown in Key “didn’t deliberately intend” to abuse power Key accepts that what he did was “very very silly”.

But left wing blogs – authors and particularly commenters – have been overplaying their hand, as blogs often do.

They saw blood and scratched for all they were worth.

It could all be completely uncoordinated spontaneous series of attacks. And every attack and perceived from the right could be orchestrated by John Key and his minions.

But both sides will be somewhere in between those extremes, despite their screams.

And amongst that there’s a bit of Dirty Politics Derangement Syndrome

Slaters threatening O’Sullivan

Cameron Slater, in a highly ironic campaign against Herald journalist, continues to threaten Fran O’Sullivan – while accusing the Herald of Dirty Media and after many attacks on Nicky Hager for revealing private emails.


I first thought of Fran O’Sullivan. She’s been writing some odd stuff (different to her usual) in the last few months

You are right, and O’Sullivan got herself caught up in the email trail with Cathy Odgers etc when all that went down and wrote a bizarre column covering her own backside that was highlighted on this very blog. Surely that qualifies as embroiling themselves in matters that they shouldn’t have.

Edit: here is her original piece of butt-covering.

There are plenty more emails that haven’t yet seen the light of day. If she continues her jihad they will.

And in a post today where he attacks O’Sullivan’s appointment in DIRTY MEDIA APPOINTED IN “NEW” ROLE – AS FIRST BROKEN ON WHALEOIL he plays ‘dirty media’ again.

And Slater’s wife joins the attack:

Let us not forget that Saint Nicky Hager kindly chose to leave out of his book all the Herald journalists who regularly were in contact with Whaleoil. He told the public that he felt that they deserved a chance to mend their ways but it also was a public declaration that he now owned them.

How hard would it be to say no to Saint Nicky when he wants a story run when you know that he has the power to destroy your career by revealing that you were involved in so called Dirty Politics?
Even worse imagine if you were someone really important, like I don’t know…Fran perhaps?

Oh baby!

Another threat.

There’s more attacks against O’Sullivan today in:

(I haven’t bothered checking every post put he often uses a blunderbus approach):

And so it goes on. His anti-Herald obsession as usual. Dirty politics as usual.

Who would risk trying to do anything with Slater if he is likely to throw a hissy and throw around threats against you some time later?


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 4,079 other followers