‘Whale Oil for Winston’ versus Seymour and ACT

David Seymour has been targeted by Whale Oil over his criticism of Winston Peters.

Last week:  Winston Peters criticised for telling Islamic communities to ‘clean house’

Winston Peters has told Parliament New Zealand’s Islamic communities “must clean house” and it “should start with their own families”.

Mr Peters was criticised by the next speaker, ACT leader David Seymour.

“There will have to be a more serious and wider debate about when and whether such an event can happen here,” he said.

“And it will have to be a debate without naked political opportunism, as we have heard from New Zealand First.”

Whale Oil has picked up on this. They have been campaigning against every party except NZ First, and frequently have anti-Muslim posts, some of them tending towards the extreme.

Cameron Slater has griped about National since he was cold shouldered after Dirty Politics, and he seems to have held a grudge Bill English for a long time.  Yesterday in  This election the choices are stark:

I can’t and won’t support a party led by Bill English. Not after the UNSC 2334 debacle, not after intransigence on immigration, and not for personal reasons.

One of Slater’s biggest difficulties as a political activist is he gets too personal, with long standing grudges and many burnt bridges resulting in ongoing flaming. He frequently attacks all parties – except NZ First.

For some reason Whale Oil has become very pro-Winston Peters – quite a turnaround from the past. And Peters’ anti-Muslim stance fits with the Whale Oil campaign – they often have several anti-Muslim posts a day, under the names of ‘Cameron Slater’ and ‘SB’ (Slater’s wife).

After Seymour’s criticism of Peters  Slater has switched his  attacks to Seymour and ACT.

On Saturday:  According to David Seymour it is Winston Peters who causes radicalisation and terrorism

Another email to David Seymour from a reader:

To: David Seymour
From: [Redacted]

An anonymous email which just happens to sound as contrived as many Whale Oil posts.

Dear Mr Seymour,

My party vote for 2017 was up for grabs after being a National voter since 1975. However, you blew it by castigating Winston Peters over his speech warning us that radical Islam is on our doorstep.

When you are a bit older, you might gain some sense about what the world is all about. Sadly, it appears that you are merely a product of mushy university-think and your actions re Winston Peters reveal that you are completely out of touch with the real problems of the real world.

You came tantalizingly close to getting a new voter but you have now revealed that your right-centre stance is fake.

That’s funny. Whale Oil has previously ran a number of posts purportedly from voters deserting National because of a handful of issues that happen to coincide with the Whale Oil campaign focus that is largely pro-Israel and anti-Muslim.

Dirty Politics alleged that Whale Oil was paid to promote certain lines. And there is some evidence of this in the past.

Stuff in 2014:  Blogging, money and blurred lines

The man at the centre of the Dirty Politics firestorm sits on a leafy street in Tel Aviv, Israel, just a block from the shores of the Mediterranean, sipping a blended mint lemonade.

Cameron “Whale Oil” Slater is bleary-eyed, having spent 24 hours on a plane, and now finds himself in a war zone during a ceasefire. It’s Friday in Israel; Saturday back home.

He’s one of a group of international journalists invited to visit by the Israeli government, which has been earning bruising international condemnation over the civilian death toll in the Gaza conflict.

The Israeli embassy approached him about the trip, he says, and covered some costs, but he is paying for a significant portion of his travels. He has posted anti-Hamas and pro-Israel stories on his blog in the past.

The arrangement may sound vaguely familiar to anyone who has read certain chapters of Nicky Hager’s controversial new book Dirty Politics, which is based on thousands of emails stolen from Slater’s computer.

Besides his central claims that National used Slater’s Whale Oil blog as an conduit for “dirty” attacks on its political enemies, Hager also says Slater took cash in exchange for running stories for a range of commercial clients.

That trip, paid at least in part for by the Israeli government, awkwardly coincided with the Dirty Politics implicating Slater as a mercenary blogger.

Seymour responded to the anonymous Whale Oil ‘reader’:

To: [REDACTED]
From: David Seymour

Date: 7 June 2017

There are 46,000 Muslims in NZ, 1 per cent of the population. The best way to make sure the few radicals amongst them do some thing stupid is to have an idiot like Winston persecuting the whole community for political gain.

Your vote, however, is your own,

David

‘Cameron Slater’ reacted to this:

A few?

David Seymour needs to understand some basic math. If just 1% of Muslims are radicalised then there are around 500 of them running around NZ spreading hate and plotting. That is a low percentage, a more realistic number would be 10%, that means there are 5000 of them…and it is thought that the actual percentage is much higher if you believe Pew Research…and I do.

It’s not so much basic maths that are absent, it is basic facts. There are none.

Slater needs to understand what Seymour actually said.

Seymour:  “There are 46,000 Muslims in NZ, 1 per cent of the population”.

Slater: “If just 1% of Muslims are radicalised then there are around 500 of them running around NZ spreading hate and plotting.”

That’s an assertion unrelated to what Seymour said, and not backed by any facts.

Slater continued:

That is a low percentage, a more realistic number would be 10%, that means there are 5000 of them…and it is thought that the actual percentage is much higher if you believe Pew Research…and I do.

A more realistic thing for a journalist to do would be to base their assertions on facts, but Slater is obviously not wearing is journalist hat here.

He mentions ‘Pew Research’ as some authority for his escalating 1%, 10%, “much higher” assertions but lacks basic facts.

A Pew Research from last month:  Muslims and Islam: Key findings in the U.S. and around the world

There is no reference to ‘radical’ or radicalized’ anywhere in the report (there are some in comments).

There is no mention of New Zealand (nor Australia except a couple of times in comments).

Slater also showed an appalling grasp of maths and facts in this post:  Muslims will outnumber Christians in New Zealand in 60 years – Pew Research that quotes RNZ:

There will be more Muslims than Christians in the world in fewer than 60 years, new research shows – and New Zealand is one of eight countries that will lose their Christian majority in that time.

The number of countries with a Christian majority is expected to decline from 159 to 151 by 2050, with the proportion of Christians in New Zealand slumping from 57 percent of the population at present to 44.7 percent.

At that point, according to the study’s projections, the largest religious category in New Zealand will be “unaffiliated” at 45.1 percent.

He takes two projections…

  1. There will be more Muslims than Christians in the world in 60 years
  2. The proportion of Christians in New Zealand slumping from 57% of the population at present to 44.7% by 2050

…and claims from that that there will be more Muslims than Christians here.

But he ignores or fails to notice “the largest religious category in New Zealand will be ‘unaffiliated’ at 45.1”.

So Pew estimates there will be about 90% Christians plus ‘unaffiliated’. Muslims and all other religious affiliations are estimated be only 10%, so Muslims alone will be nowhere near a majority.

Currently there are more Hindus (2.11%) and Buddhists (1.5%) in New Zealand than Muslims (1.18%), with ‘other religions’ and ‘Spiritualism and New Age religions also totalling 1.35%.

The Slater and Whale Oil attacks on Muslims, and on Seymour and Act, are based on bull – whether it is deliberately wrong or based on ignorance doesn’t matter.

I think it is fair to be very sceptical of the comments on the all the activist campaign posts at Whale Oil too. I think it’s well known that Whale Oil ‘moderates’ out comments and commenters that don’t fit with their messages.

And I think there’s a good reason to be very suspicious of who some of the commenters actually are. I know that some of those associated with Whale Oil have a habit of using multiple IDs.

It’s easy to guess why Whale Oil is campaigning against ACT/Seymour and it is obvious why they are campaigning against National and Bill English.

Why they have become a NZ First promotion blog is less obvious, but the open support for them and their strong bias against other parties and MPs is farcical for a site sometimes claiming to be ‘media’ and ‘journalism’.

And hugely hypocritical yet again given their attacks on other media as being ‘the media party’.

I’m not sure that al this will help NZ First. ‘Whale Oil for Winston’ is more likely to be a toxic association than a vote winner.

42 Comments

  1. PDB

     /  June 12, 2017

    Good summary PG.

    ‘Whale Oil for Winston’ – and from this day forth it was known as ‘Winston Oil’.

  2. Blazer

     /  June 12, 2017

    why give [deleted, use names – PG]…oxygen.

    • Why not hold to account?

      • Brown

         /  June 12, 2017

        Because you are just as selective as Winston (whom I have had no time for since a personal encounter in about 1982). What’s worse is that you are ignorant of Islam’s history, theology and political objectives while defending its followers rather than looking to challenge and debate the writings that their world view is based upon. Muslims need to be called to account but you give them a free pass and that is not helping. Its a shitty political system masquerading as a religion and its followers should be darned uncomfortable with its history because its perfectly consistent with the teachings.

        The reality is that a significant % of Muslims want to preserve their own political systems within new countries and do not out the violent people within their midst. That % is not 1% – its vastly higher and that is a concern to thinking people.

        • I selected facts that show how baseless and ridiculous his selected assertions are.

          I note that you don’t have any facts in response.

          • Gezza

             /  June 12, 2017

            Pretty sure there have been surveys done in the US & UK & possibly elsewhere which have linked to in this blog before which support Brown’s post above.

            There is absolutely no reason to think the situation with Muslims in this country will be any different when there are enough of them of various sects.

            Completely agree with what Brown says. Doesn’t happen often.

            • PDB

               /  June 12, 2017

              Not dismissing that point of view out of hand but also not sure that is totally true – I’ve a bit more faith that NZ has better selection processes than more European countries, we also don’t have the problem of random people coming in and also residents popping back on short visits to Syria etc. Our isolation & relative low world importance makes us less inviting to terrorists, well behind the likes of Aussie which is a target.

            • Gezza

               /  June 12, 2017

              No, we don’t have any test that picks up the flavour & fervour of religious beliefs, pants. And there are two problems which loom. Larger communities, demand for Sharia to st alongside or govern Muslims, plus growing lack of tolerance for criticism of Islam = danger.

              Disaffected or disturbed young adult children of Muslim immigrants offended by *things* anti-Muslim here or overseas. The givernment is to monitor this closely. Would give me no joy to have something happen & say “we told you”.

            • Gezza

               /  June 12, 2017

              Sht!*
              * The government is WISE to monitor this closely. Would give me no joy to have something happen & say “we told you”.

            • PDB

               /  June 12, 2017

              Not having a group of people doing their own thing outside our existing laws is paramount……….I just need the Maori tribes to agree now.

            • Gezza

               /  June 12, 2017

              Not going there with that one.

  3. Alan Wilkinson

     /  June 12, 2017

    Thank God Slater is not a Muslim.

  4. Loki

     /  June 12, 2017

    How did Slater fund his 12k per day legal team?
    [Deleted – unsubstantiated claims and implications about a lawyer with a lot of experience in defamation cases are not a good idea here. PG]

    • Albert

       /  June 12, 2017

      Criticise Slater all you want…but he has a business and he employs people. I suppose he could always decamp to the far north sit on his Couch drink copious bottles of scotch and smoke yards of weed who I railing against injustice from that same Couch.

      For that at least we should be grateful.

      PG seems to have an unhealthy fixation with slater…you have to wonder why when according to his own claims…and I admit my own belief that Slater is irrelevant to politics now.

      • I think that I have much less of “an unhealthy fixation” with Slater that WO has with slagging off Muslims, Seymour, NZ Herald, Craig, English, Muslims, Media, Craig, National, Labour, Greens, Muslims et al.

        • Gezza

           /  June 12, 2017

          I know there’s history. But if there weren’t so many WO posts I wouldn’t miss them. Don’t really like what I know of the man, but so what? He probably wouldn’t like me either & with good fortune, for both of us, our paths will never cross.

          Interested in any Cam Slater trials though, must admit. Mainly because of the legal issues, the evidence, & the strategies.

          • Posts aren’t always done for the active audience.

            • Gezza

               /  June 12, 2017

              👍

            • High Flying Duck

               /  June 12, 2017

              Are the WO posts your version of the cat videos other sites use as click bait?
              I enjoy his site, but have to admit posting on his hypocrisy and changing positions is fish in a barrel stuff.

      • PDB

         /  June 12, 2017

        Albert: “Criticise Slater all you want…but he has a business”

        Begging for money from his readers is a business??

        • Revel

           /  June 13, 2017

          Chugger -charity mugger

        • MaureenW

           /  June 13, 2017

          Apparently it is PDB – there’s bugger all else going on there. I will admit that I sometimes take a look at the Daily Roundup, it has some good cut-and-pastes from elsewhere.

    • Bill Brown

       /  June 12, 2017

      @loki who cares how he funded it !

  5. The hit jobs on Seymour, albeit akin to flagellation with a wet bus ticket, are utterly contemptuous. And the emails are BS. They’re obviously written by [name deleted], they have the same terrible style and overlaboured prose.

    The support for NZ First is about hurting National, it’s like dating the rival girl not because she’s good looking but because you want your ex to suffer. ACT is in the way, so Seymour is getting beaten up on for that reason only. Unless he [deleted] or something. Anything is possible.

    But how stupid. How petty. Maybe I’m old fashioned, but politics is about policy to me, not settling old scores. If NZ First is the answer, it was a fucking stupid question.

    • The accusation and smear that I wrote the e-mails sent to us by readers is unjustified, malicious and defamatory. I would have hoped that Pete George would have deleted unsubstantiated allegations like that.

      • It’s just an opinion Juana. A bit like the one where Slater thought there was a second Craig victim. Or claimed I’d tried to stand for C&R. Whether true or not, it’s not like you or your husband are above such shenanigans, are you?

        To qualify for defamation, you have to have a good reputation that can be defamed in the first place.

      • Bill Brown

         /  June 13, 2017

        Pete said a while back he had some other cases he could not comment on / maybe it’s around defamation on this blog?

      • You had the option here of responding, which you have done. As you chose to address this publicly rather than the normal way claims of defamation are dealt with I presume you are happy for the assertion and response to remain.

  6. John Schmidt

     /  June 12, 2017

    If dirty politics is true then the answer would be follow the money.

    • Blazer

       /  June 12, 2017

      of course dirty politics is true….a feature of Keys reign in a career interlude.Can’t see English condoning it..he actually has some decency.

  7. Klee Gluckman

     /  June 12, 2017

    As bad as each other some of your refutement is inaccurate. And Slater’s point about 1 percent radicalisation is spot on and I hate agreeing with Slater.

    • So where is the evidence of that?

      Note that Slater said much more than 1%: “a more realistic number would be 10%, that means there are 5000 of them…and it is thought that the actual percentage is much higher if you believe Pew Research…and I do.”

      • Bill Brown

         /  June 12, 2017

        They are all in Dunedin aren’t they ?

  8. You don’t need to go far back in history to read the outright contempt and expletive laced venom for Peters. He called him the Pensioner from Herne Bay and that was on a good day. I put this in the Damascene conversion basket.

    “Where’s the $158,000 Winston?
    by Cameron Slater on August 18, 2010 at 9:10pm

    The corrupt Winston Raymond Peters, now a pensioner, it seems, of Helensville wants to try and win the seat off John Key.

    Well colour me annoyed. This short-arsed, mendacious, thieving, lying, philandering, prick still hasn’t paid us back the last $158,000 he nicked from the taxpayers of New Zealand.

    He should be black-listed by the media until he starts fronting with our cash.

    Every time he gets on a podium the first question asked of Winston Raymond Peters, 65, pensioner of Helensville is “Where’s our Cash?”

    John Key will kick his lying, corrupt arse. He should quickly change the law to make WRP, 65, POH’s registration fee for any public office $158,000.

    I think the blog mobile will be spending a great deal of time following the thief around.”

    So he’s “corrupt a liar and a thief”

    Winston hasn’t changed, he’s exactly the same bloke Whaleoil railed against. On the other hand, National hasn’t changed really, except it didn’t tack right.

    If the answer that blog comes pup with is Winston, then heaven knows the questions they’re asking themselves.

    https://www.whaleoil.co.nz/tag/winston-raymond-peters/

    • MaureenW

       /  June 13, 2017

      Who’s paying and who’s playing? So much for the fan-club.

      • You might be on the money. Yes, I’m wondering, in general terms about lawyer’s bills

  9. More…

    “Winston Peters is incontinence pants down
    by Cameron Slater on August 5, 2010 at 8:53am
    Winston Raymond Peters just can’t help himself. He is so crooked that when he stands up to his full 4’11” height and stretches his crooked little neck he is still crooked and lies like a flatfish.

    His must hyped first speech to announce the return of Winston Peters turned out to be a fact free tirade.

    The New Zealand Aged Care Association has rubbished figures provided by New Zealand First leader Winston Peters on overseas ownership of rest-homes.

    In a speech titled “NZ for Sale” at an RSA in Rangiora, North Canterbury, Mr Peters today railed against privatisation of rest homes.

    “Care of the elderly has been internationally privatised and sold off overseas.”

    About 75% of 870 New Zealand rest homes were run by foreign companies and last year the Overseas Investment Office approved sales of aged rest care facilities worth $1.5 billion, he said.

    But association chief executive Martin Taylor said the figures were completely false.

    “The truth is about 4000 out of 34,500 beds are operated by foreign owned companies.”

    Over the last year only one retirement village company, which included 335 aged care beds, was sold – for $135 million to Australians, Mr Taylor said.

    Soooooo….Instead of New Zealand’s rest homes being sold off and run by evil foreigners to the tune of 75% it turns out that the number is actually just 11%. Instead of facilities worth $1.5 billion being sold off to evil foreigners it turns out that just one company was sold – too Australians – for $135 million.

    The figures supplied by Winston Raymond Peters were so wrong they are fraudulent. Which considering the utterer of the figures perhaps isn’t a surprise. But wait….

    Offsetting this, the fourth-largest aged care provider Radius has in the past year returned to full New Zealand ownership, so as such foreign ownership of aged care sector has decreased in the last year.

    Oh so there isn’t an export of pensioners care to evil foreigners, there is actually an import.

    Matthew Hooton was right about Winston Raymond Peters, he is a c*nt. Not only that he is a fraud, a liar, corrupt and a f*ckwit.”

    Etc ……….

    https://www.whaleoil.co.nz/2010/08/winston-peter-is-incontinence-pants-down/

    https://www.whaleoil.co.nz/tag/winston-first/

  10. To Albert – too many names and speculation and insinuations and possibly also threats. And you appear to have commented here before under a different pseudonym.

    I’ll address some of your points in a post sometime.

  11. Albert again: due to the content of your comment, due to the apparent threats against me and others who have commented here, and due to you posting from the same IP as ‘spanish bride’, you don’t qualify for free speech here.

    The irony and hypocrisy in what you suggest is noticeable, but you may be oblivious to that.

  12. I would love for SB to share with this cynic how and why Slater converted to the Winston First team. As I said, it’s Damascene in it’s completeness.

    Answer me this SB.

    Do you think that Winston has changed from the “c**t, fraud, a liar, corrupt and a f*ckwit ” or the “short-arsed, mendacious, thieving, lying, philandering, prick’ Cameron has called him previously?

    If not, one must assume Cam’s stance is purely political or that there is another personal driver as equally compelling.

    • Gezza

       /  June 14, 2017

      Excellent points, trav.
      Excellent research as well. 👍
      Looking forward to the response. Immensely.