Whale Oil wrong

It looks like Whale Oil have had another go at what looks like an attempt to smear me, but they get things wrong – not unusual for them. This was in  a post where the author hid behind ‘Whaleoil Staff’ – Colin Craig, and the object lesson of why your enemy’s enemy isn’t always your friend

Readers won’t be surprised that Martin Martyn Bradbury has met with Colin Craig to give Craig advice on evidence and strategy.  After all, the world knows that everything that Martin Bradbury touches turns to gold.

Other Slater haters, such as Lyn Prentice and Pete George sided with Colin Craig as the “hard done by” party, and in their enthusiasm managed to allegedly breach court ordered suppression a number of times.   No doubt it was all worth it, because whatever it takes to finally get rid of Cameron Slater is time and money well spent.

Trying to associate me with Bradbury and Prentice on this is petty and childish. I’ve had nothing to do with either on this and I don’t know what their opinions have been on the Craig debacle.

Playing the ‘Slater hater’ thing is lame – I think they’re the only ones who use that term as some sort of ‘poor me they hate me’ sort of sympathy card. If actions are anything to go by Slater is the one with a lot of hate for a lot of people. I’ve been the target of his attacks and attempts to, using one of their terms, fuck me over for quite a while. He can be a bit pathetic.

I haven’t sided with Craig on this at all as far as I can recall, so they have either dreamt that up, or it’s a deliberately false claim.

As I have said a number of times through this Craig seems to have acted badly, as political leader, as an employer and as a married man. And he has handled this since it went public via Whale Oil very poorly. His political career is justifiably shot and it would be a miracle if his marriage isn’t also shot.

But Jordan Williams and Slater have chosen to fuck Craig over as much as they can.

Williams claims harm was done to his reputation by what Craig said and distributed. Perhaps it was but the legal aspects of defamation are for the jury to decide.

But Williams seems intent on revealing every sordid and embarrassing detail of communications between Craig and his ex secretary Rachel MacGregor. I don’t know why all that is necessary to prove his case. It doesn’t seem to be in MacGregor’s interests. There’s some possibility she may be being thrown under a bus to deal to Craig, although she could be a willing participant.

With a lot more to come out from both sides I don’t know if Williams will help his own reputation or not, he’s taking some risks here.  Others may end up looking not so flash too.

I don’t know whether they genuinely think there’s a big pot of money to be made or not. Slater seems to be looking at it has double lotto. He gets to see Craig fucked over – he seems to enjoy sticking the boot in and then kicking people while they are down, metaphorically. And he has intimated that if Williams wins big then Craig could settle kilobucks with him before his case goes to court.

Craig’s reputation is toast, politically and morally, regardless of whether he can prove all the communications are not from him or not harassment, and that is largely his own doing.

Time will tell how other reputations emerge from five weeks of raunchy revelations and counter claims. Craig must have thought he could get something out of an expensive jury hearing. It’s hard to know what other than some return fire.

With Slater being involved anything could happen. He has been known to make absurd and false legal threats and allegations before, some against me.

Talking of which, the vague “allegedly breach” comment by ‘Whaleoil Staff’ is as far as I know without foundation. That’s par for this dirty course of action, in this instance anonymous – I wonder why.

Manolo Pedreschi – recidivist liar and blog bully

‘Manolo’ is a frequent commenter at Kiwiblog, although ‘comment’ might be a bit generous, he rarely comments other than to lie and abuse. He also abuses the generous free speech policy at Kiwiblog, seeming to think he can smear people with impunity.

He doesn’t seem to understand that with freedom of speech there are responsibilities. And if you abuse those responsibilities there can be consequences.

Yesterday he refused to take responsibility when challenged on a repeat of lies. He initially tried to pass it off as ‘humour’, and then he flaunted what he thought was his impunity.

I can only laugh at the overflowing pomposity and faux outrage. Long live KB’s GD!

I’m not outraged. I just stand up to blog bullies from time to time. And Manolo is a resident troll, a blog bully who thinks he can get away with it without consequence.

But this post is a consequence – and being a post it will be a more prominent record of Manolo’s recidivist abuse than a few comments in Kiwiblogs free-for-all General Debate.

As always here Manolo will have a right of reply, where he can correct any facts if I’ve got any wrong, and he still has a chance to retract.

Manolo has a small number of targets – most of his attacks are against Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Muslims and Maori, plus he smears and abuses a number of other Kiwiblog regulars. And he criticises just about every New Zealand politician and party, including National – this 2010 comment is typical of that:

Good to see DPF recognising (at least once) that his beloved Labour-lite is nothing but a transmogrification of the old and tired socialist Labour Party. Two sides of the same devalued red coin.

So Manolo seems unhappy with a lot of politics, but he should be grateful for what we have in New Zealand. He is from Peru, arriving here in 1989. He retired from his work in 2007 and lives in Wellington.

He appears to have commented at Kiwiblog since 2005 (David Farrar started KB started in 2003).

While Manolo acts as if he’s untouchable he has run foul of Kiwiblog’s ‘strike’ moderation policy twice now so next time he will cop a ban.

1st strike 11/3/15

The sad reality for you, corrupt-to-the-bone Miss Dim, is that nobody pays any attention to the litany of stupidities you spout here (polluting KB on a daily basis). So, do us a favor and fuck off!

[DPF: And that is Strike 1. Unacceptable to call a commenter corrupt or tell any other commenter to eff off]

2nd strike – 15/5/15

Dear Miss Dim, pay your rates first and speak later. Bludgers (and corrupt individuals) like you do not deserve a voice.

[DPF: That’s Strike 2- don’t call people corrupt]

That illustrates his repeat offending – and one of his responses to me would also appear to be a repeat offence, he told me to put up with his abuse or “bugger off”.

He has targeted me for some time. I’ve confronted him occasionally but I’ve never seen him retract, apologise or seem to care about his serial abuse and dishonesty.

His first comment yesterday was a typical general smear targeting Maori.

The brown elites in NZ are experts doing this: http://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/world/civil-rights-leader-disguised-herself-as-black/ar-BBl1BMC?ocid=mailsignout

A prominent civil rights campaigner is being investigated after it was claimed she had falsely portrayed herself as black for almost a decade.

President of the Spokane, Washington branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), Rachel Dolezal reportedly identified herself as part African-American upon applying for her post on the city’s citizen police ombudsman commission.

His second abuse was directed at one of his frequent targets:

Addled Griff not only supports the Paris talkfest, but he is dying to fly to it (first class, of course). It is called AGW dedication.

And soon after he turned on me:

P.G. is on commission. Dunne and UnitedFuture fund him based on traffic to his worldwide-known blog.

Manolo well knows that I’m not associated with UnitedFuture, but chooses to keep making things up and repeating what are deliberate lies intended to smear.

I often ignore him but had some time yesterday so chose to challenge him.

Manolo totally making things up again. Deliberately blatantly lying.

I fully fund Your NZ myself. I’ve never received any money from anyone else for it. I’ve never received any money from United Future for anything (I self funded my election campaign – UF don’t have money to dish out). I’ve had had no involvement with UF for over a year.

The issue raised (above) has nothing to do with Uf as far as I can see, so it’s just ignorant dirty politics from Manolo.

And:

Manolo – a test of your integrity.

Have you got any evidence to support your claim at 8.28 am? If not will you retract and apologise for making a false statement?

His response:

@P.G.: Have you lost your sense of humour these days? Lighten up or bugger off.

So he tried to excuse his repeat lying as ‘humour’. He may think it’s funny within his Kiwiblog bubble.

Another of his targets is someone familiar here, Ugly Truth, who commented:

For as long as I’ve been posting at KiwiBlog Manolo has been full of shit, Pete.

And:

“But I was only joking…” – Could you get any sleazier, Manolo?

Manolo’s final retort:

I can only laugh at the overflowing pomposity and faux outrage. Long live KB’s GD!

So apparently he thinks he can abuse and smear with impunity at Kiwiblog.

And obviously has no integrity, believing the repeating lies is acceptable. I disagree, and sometimes I’ll make a point.

Social media isn’t confined to protected bubbles. Putting this post on record is a consequence. If Manolo googles his name he’s as likely to find this as his pissy comments amongst the noise at Kiwiblog.

If there is anything inaccurate in this public record of Manolo’s serial behaviour I’ll correct it.

If Manolo wants a right of reply he’ll get it. I believe in free speech here.

And the responsibilities that go with it.

Labour accuse Government of interference in prosecutions

Labour list MP Andrew Little has accused the Government of pressuring the police to reduce the number of prosecutions. This has been strong denied by the police and Government. Stuff reports Pressure to lower stats – MP:

Police were under government orders to “minimise” the number of domestic violence charges they lay to make crime statistics look good, Labour MP Andrew Little claimed yesterday.

But the claim has been strongly denied by both police bosses and the Government.

Family violence figures released yesterday by the University of Auckland’s Family Violence Clearinghouse show police charges for domestic violence offences dropped by up to 29 per cent from 2009/10 to last year.

And for the same period, the number of offences recorded by police fell by nearly 10,000.

But the number of investigations into family violence grew from 86,800 in 2010 to 95,100 incidents last year.

Little, a list MP and New Plymouth’s Labour Party candidate, said he believed the drop in family violence charges was due to the Government putting direct pressure on police to lower the crime statistics.

“What I have been told authoritatively is that front line police have been told to minimise the number of charges they lay.

“That is not just family violence but across the board. I’m told it’s not just domestic violence, it’s all forms of offending.

“I think that a combination of that and using police safety orders is what is showing up in the reduced number of charges in relation to domestic violence,” Little said.

Little has said similar in a media release:

Police are being instructed to charge fewer people in order to meet National’s crime reduction targets, Labour says.

“Front line police and others in the criminal justice system are telling us police have had pressure put on by senior officers to reduce the number of charges they lay to meet the Government’s targets,” Justice spokesperson Andrew Little says.

On Firstline this morning David Cunliffe support these claims. He said that no evidence was available to support the claims but that they had been told of the issue.

Cunliffe said he had no “solid proof” but it had been heard on the street.

Government says the claims are unfounded and outrageous.

Some scepticism is justified, especially leading into an election campaign.

This is a serious accusation. Labour should back up their claims with evidence or they risk being seen as indulging in ‘cry wolf’ politics.

In a speech in the weekend David Cunliffe promised a clean campaign with no smear politics.

That’s what I believe in.

That’s what Labour believes in.

That’s what we’re all fighting for.

And that’s why on September 20 we will win.

This election campaign should not be about dirty tricks or dodgy deals; smear campaigns or a personality cult.

We’re going to run a positive campaign because people matter most.

It’s not long ago Labour were complaining bitterly (with some justification) about a lack of evidence in claims about Donghua Liu donations. They were saying it was a smear campaign.

There’s still a need for the Opposition to hold Government to account, but unless they can provide a solid case that Government have been interfering in prosecutions this may look like a dodgy dirty smear attempt.