Hawkes Bay water and Whale Oil

Duncan Brown has sent this observation of a post and comments at Whale Oil on the Havelock North water problems.

On WhaleOil yesterday, in a post entitled, ” Did CHB shit cause the gastro outbreak in Havelock North?”, http://www.whaleoil.co.nz/2016/08/did-chb-shit-cause-the-gastro-outbreak-in-havelock-north/ the ubiquitous and anonymous Teknonym published an old photo of the Waipawa River, with the following text:

“It is shit from the non compliant CHB waste water scheme running into the Waipawa river. Not far down stream this runs into the Tukituki River, which runs down through CHB into Hawkes Bay past Havelock North.

The water from the Tukituki could be contaminating the Havelock North Town Supply.
Remember this is water that the extremely dodgy Hawkes Bay Regional Council is allowing to be polluted because they are not enforcing the consents on CHB, who continue to pour their shit into our rivers.”

The key line, an absolute conjecture is in the second paragraph, “The water from the Tukituki could be contaminating the Havelock North Town Supply.”

Fair enough, WhaleOil can have their hobby horses, every blogger does. It’d be nice if they could add a bit of science, you know, balanced reporting and all that, as they so regularly demand from the MSM and anyone else they disagree with.

But the conversation gets interesting in the comments:

First out of his corner is F T Bear…

  • F T Bear11 hours ago

    If you are not going to take the time to understand the aquifer system and how it works, and just sit back making silly conclusions based on someones personal crusade. You become just like all the Duncan Garners and HDPA’s and all the other left leaning fools that get a hard time on this blog.
    The water in the Tuki Tuki river has NOTHING to do with the water taken from a well near Havelock North

Pete jumps into the ring, wearing his gloves AND his referee’s uniform, and throws a haymaker…

  • Pete Mod F T Bear

    Mayor Yule can’t get two back to back water tests to deliver a consistent result, yet you keep coming here and have all the answers. Everybody says they have no real idea, including Tonkin Taylor, and you come here and are ruling this out. You might be right, but the council could do with your knowledge, your confidence and blind faith. Don’t waste it here.

Let me translate: It’s Mayor Yule’s fault, and because the results are inconsistent, HE is inconsistent. You obviously just don’t get it. No one really knows, and although you’ve obviously got your own opinion – and you might be right – any view other than Teknonym’s is not welcome on this blog.
Understandably, in the face of such worthy opposition, F T Bear backs-off, just a little, then jabs a bit

  • F T Bear Pete • But everything I have said is public knowledge. I just read and listen.

    The Tonkin Taylor report has nothing to do with Waipawa river, what I’m saying is you are misleading with your speculation.
    Since Saturday morning they have tested the water in Havelock every day and have no positive tests, to say he can’t put two tests back to back is also misleading.

Pete senses his opponent’s weakness, and gives him the old one-two…

  • Pete Mod F T Bear

    I just got it from the radio news where Mayor Yule said the latest test came back negative, so the previous one was a false positive. This is on the tanker.

    The point being that if these tests are so crap “publicly available” information is clearly not reliable.

    It amuses me that the first test was a false positive, as opposed to the second test being a false negative.

    You know. Spin, and all that.

    But that’s what this platform is for. And we don’t need your snide remarks. Just state your case, others, such as hard1 state theirs.

    ” You become just like all the Duncan Garners and HDPA’s” is sufficient to kick you to the kerb for trolling. I haven’t, because I’m sure it’s just a slip up. By all means defend your position, but don’t start kicking the moderators shins because they will eventually react.

Let me translate: My facts are better than your facts. We don’t like spin around here, unless it’s ours. Throw a punch we don’t like, even if it’s a legitimate comparison, that’s a foul and you’ll be out for the count. And don’t bother with any official protest, I’m the ref too, sucker!
And F T Bear whimpers a little, hits himself, throws his arms around a couple of times and throws in the towel…

  • F T Bear Pete

    Sorry, It is definitely not my intention to up set things, or you, I will give myself an uppercut.

    My points all along in this is that we jump to conclusions and start mixing fact with fiction that very soon becomes more fact.
    One of the issues is the terminology and on that I agree it could be better. As you and all your readers know sometimes our press are a bit fast and loose with the truth, misleading with bits and pieces just cause more angst.

    The problem with the test on the tanker that came back as a positive was the water was from a bore in Hastings which is why they chlorinated Hastings water. It is more than likely a tanker problem not a water problem. They haven’t had a positive test from the water in Havelock since the dosed it last Friday night.

    My other point is that the Waipawa river , RWSS, have nothing to do with this Havelock situation, I believe you only cloud and confuse by bring it up.

Translation: Thanks ref, I’m sorry I hit you where it hurts, here, I’ll do penance. Let me reiterate my point, but I’ll also blame the media cos I know that will make you happy. (whisper) And by the way, my points were valid.

And noting his opponent’s much subdued demeanor, the ref graciously doesn’t reply to the substance of his argument and declares himself the winner.

Judge’s decision: FT Bear loses the bout and might never return to the ring. The promoter loses cos he’s soon going to run out of fair-minded opponents. The audience loses and goes home disappointed to play tiddlywinks. The ref crows to his sycophants in the blue corner how once again he won the fight, fair and square, hardly noticing the rapidly emptying stadium beyond. The janitor of the once-worthy establishment prepares to turn out the lights, and heads off to the nearest bar to reflect on the good old days and weeps for what might have been.

Changed headline on failing students

A screen shot of a post at Whale Oil yesterday:


An obvious faux pas. It was actually posted as two separate images.

SB commented:

Heaven forbid the government try to help failing students. The teacher unions can’t be having that. Failing students is their job!

But the headline doesn’t reflect what the unions said, going by the article.

The latest increase – $12 million – will be targeted to 150,000 students who have been identified as being most at-risk of under achievement.

“We absolutely appreciate that’s a good thing to do but not at the expense of the operations grant which actually provides support for all children,” NZEI national president Louise Green says.

So it would appear to be both the One News headline writer and SB who have failed here. Perhaps neither read the article properly.

One News have since changed the headline.


The original headline text is still on the photo but at least the headline is now more appropriate.

No correction from SB though.

And why are WO screen shots in pieces?  One aim seems to be to remove ‘Source One News’ and replace it with ‘Screenshot-whaleoil.co.nz’.


More dirty blogging at Whale Oil revealed

Another court case has revealed more mercenary dirty blogging at Whale Oil by Cameron Slater. This was mentioned in comments here recently from news reports. A court judgment on costs reveals more details.

Stuff reported: Ex-Kristin principal recoups costs from ex-wife who judge said tried to ‘destroy’ him

A former top principal has been awarded $145,811 in court costs after his ex-wife allegedly tried to ruin his reputation.

Former Kristin School head Peter Clague was last year hauled to the Auckland District Court to answer a charge of assault – to which Judge David McNaughton quickly put an end.

in July last year Judge McNaughton threw the charge out, saying a jury would have been unable to convict and that the case had been brought in bad faith.

Clague has since sought costs for the court exercise, with his lawyer arguing that aside from bringing the prosecution in bad faith, Denham had also failed to respond to court directives or provide disclosure.

She had also allegedly launched a “sustained vicious and untrue media campaign on the part of Carrick Graham and [WhaleOil blogger] Cameron Slater”. 

Carrick Graham featured significantly in Nicky Hager’s ‘Dirty Politics’, for example in the paragraph named ‘Cash For Comments’ :

Cameron Slater willingly published years of pro-tobacco company spin as his own writing, some written by Graham…He then used the payments he received from Graham…”

And from the chapter titled ‘Chaos and Mayhem Limited’:

It is likely that Graham used the Whale Oil blog for various other clients…

An example of this was  the executive principal of a North Auckland private school who was in a matrimonial dispute with his exp-wife in late 2012. She hired Carrick Graham ‘to whom she was referred by her lawyer’ and a concerted character assassination began on Whale Oil.

The first post appeared on 24 October 2012, marked ‘via the tip line’ and hinted about a complaint made by the ex-wife…Posts followed on 28 and 30 October, then 3, 4, 6 and 8 November.

When a student tried to stick up for the principal in the Whale Oil comments, Salter responded ‘Is he running one up you too?’

That last comment was on the November 4 post titled ‘You Read it Here First’. It appears that the other posts are also still on public display.

Details of the Court judgment (made on 1 March 2016, published 11 July 2016) are available at Jackman v Clague [2016] NZDC 3266. This includes these paragraphs.

[9] In addition, Mr Lloyd sought to emphasise what he described as a sustained vicious and untrue media campaign on the part of Carrick Graham and Cameron Slater culminating in articles in the UK press as the defendant arrived there in August 2014 to take up a new position. He emphasised the collateral damage to the Kristin school community and submitted there was a very strong need for deterrents of bad faith prosecutions of this sort.

I would add bad faith blogging to that.

Paragraph [33] quotes from an earlier decision:

“I also observe that at the same time the informant was saying she was unable to remunerate a legal adviser and therefore required “pro bono” assistance, she was quite prepared to pay substantial fees to Mr Graham for his assistance in her approaching the media. She has also apparently decided to continue with these proceedings despite no doubt having been warned of a very serious cost implication should the defendant be found not guilty.”


Whenever I expose an issue that others are trying to keep quiet, the tip line literally explodes with new information. As I have always said, sunlight is the best disinfectant.

I don’t think Slater has ever explained that ‘tip line’ might refer to tips paid to him for posting dirty attacks, but I don’t think he has denied being a mercenary blogger, doing paid for online hit jobs.

And Whale Oil is, or at least was, a dirty mercenary blog. Pete Belt appears to have been directly involved at least later in the campaign against Clague.

From BET HE WAS REGISTERED, NOW HE’S RUNNING AWAY, which led with “Escaping New Zealand and a history of domestic assault means the UK now get a wife beater” Belt wrote in comments (note the use of ‘we’):

Fair call. The beating reference was because we call these people “wife beaters”, but you are absolutely correct. He is reported as having grabbed her by the throat and thrown her onto the stairs. No reference to beating.

So I should have said “Maurice doesn’t strangle his wife and throws her onto the stairs either”, to be fair.

‘Corporate refugee’ in response:

Well we don’t know that he did that either, it was “reported” (alleged really) by the person that is trying to bring the prosecution against him. Hopefully the court might be able to find out if it happened or not.


Oh, don’t be pedantic. Apart from the fact that we do know. Whaleoil has direct knowledge in this case.

Whaleoil has a direct witness that was there when it did take place. What are your credentials beyond having a contrary opinion.

‘Corporate refugee’ was allowed to make a number of comments (this thread was in May 2014, just before the Belt driven purges began at Whale Oil).

The importance obviously attached by Ms Jackman to ensuring that the story (i.e. that she has taken out a private prosecution) was made public before any name suppression could be obtained speaks volumes. It would appear that the main (sole?) objective of her actions is to create maximum negative publicity and damage to Mr Clague.

I suspect that she already realises that the outcome of the hearing is likely to be the same as the police investigation (inconclusive), but of course it does give her the opportunity to create a bit more humiliation. But only with a media mouthpiece.

If her motive were genuinely to seek some sort of personal justice for herself through the courts for what was a private incident, why would it be so important for her have as much publicity as possible about it in the media?

There’s a number of quite familiar aspects in all of this. As well as a number of what appear to be campaigns with commercial interests involving Slater and Graham, Whale Oil has been used in a number of attempts at character assassination. The campaign against Blomfield is one – that is still going through the Court, with incremental legal and financial losses mounting for Slater.

There are other well publicised defamation cases under way targeting Slater – Graham seems to have been able to escape direct legal attention so far.

And I wouldn’t be surprised if there is more sunlight yet to shine on dirty blogging and associated abuse of legal processes involving Slater, Whale Oil, and others.

Slater protected from comments

It’s well know that there has been some fairly extensive moderation exercised at Whale Oil over the past two or three years.

While Cameron Slater is promoted as a someone prepared to speak out and tackle issues  vigorously, confrontationally, supposedly bravely, that sort of approach has not been allowed in comments.

How Whale Oil moderation works is further revealed in a conversation yesterday.


Edit? What could I have possibly written in the above comment to require it to be signaled for approval?

Pete (Belt):

[MOD] You may have missed the “do not discuss moderation in public” rule. I guess you now know why. It drags everything sideways.


Our automatic system grabs comments with certain words so that a flesh and blood moderator can check it before it is released. Mine get held up all the time because I use my husband’s name. if I say his name the comment goes straight into moderation.

So all comments that mention Slater’s name automatically go straight to moderation awaiting approval.


And so it should, do you expect to publicly say or write something without your husbands approval. Are you not endeavouring to experience life as a Muslim female.

Interesting that that comment was allowed through.

It may have been an internal comment to try and make a point, Belt later appeared to try and explain “Humour is frequently lost in this medium, especially when it is accompanied by sarcasm or irony”.  Did he just approve the comment, or did he write it?

Slater responded to hookerphil:

I’m not a moderator…The monkey boy is in charge of that, ably assisted by the bogan pie eater.

Belt is Slater’s protecter. I was banned (about two years ago) when I posted an alternative argument to a Slater post, and it sounds like this was not uncommon.


You are joking right? His name is one of the many words on a long list because it may indicate that someone is abusing him rather than discussing the topic.

Slater, renowned for his abrasive name calling posts, sometimes described as abusive, is protected from anyone saying mean things about him.

An automated system is why our moderation is so good. The huge list of words means that anything potentially bad doesn’t get through until a moderator has checked it.

Many comments are filtered into moderation by ‘a huge list of words’. So commenters either have to take great care about what words are used or risk their comments being delayed or ‘disappeared’. That must affect the nature of discussions – which often sound sycophantic.

Most like mine are perfectly fine and are soon released. Remember we have been taken to court because of what our commenters have said on our blog.

Has Whale Oil been taken to court because of comments? I don’t recall seeing any examples of this. I’ve  seen Slater taken to court for some of his comments. And perhaps comments of people campaigning with him.

We have to err on the side of caution which includes what I say as a commenter.

Perhaps Whale Oil has to be more cautious due to past legal problems, but I don’t know why ‘a huge list of words’ has to be used to try filter out any problems.

That sounds like trying to monitor and control what is being discussed far more than protecting from legal threats.

Will Belt be contracting to run moderation at Freed? He has suggested offering hso moderation skills as a paid for service (unless that was humour, irony or sarcasm). Will any comments be allowed at Freed?

Freed trying again

It looks like attempts are being made to get Freed, a news/media alternative, off the ground again.

Slater pal Regan Cunliffe is back looking investors in Freed and railing against journalists.

It was over two years ago that Cameron Slater announced that Freed would be up and running by the last election – CAMERON SLATER’S NEXT MEDIA VENTURE.

We’ve been signalling that there is something in the wind that would see Whaleoil expand and grow without being specific about it.

At this stage we are not going to expand on any of the detail, suffice to say that instead of replacing Whaleoil, this new venture will implement similar strategies and draw on the same talents that is driving the unprecedented growth behind this site.  It will complement and run alongside Whaleoil, but is a completely separate venture focussed purely on “the news”.

It is time for a “New media” news service and a bit of a shake-up of the old media club.

It is not going to be right or left, but it is going to be a properly resourced new media venture with all the news, all the time.

 The post quotes from an NBR article:

[Cameron Slater] will start a news website before this year’s general election.

NBR ONLINE understands Instra managing founder Tony Lentino is funding
the news website which Cameron Slater says will have 10 staff.

There were job interviews in late 2014 but then things stalled.

In April this year on Whale Oil: IF YOU ONLY READ ONE THING TODAY…

For more than a decade I have been building online communities. I began by creating one of the first Olympic Games blogs with an average of 250,000 visitors each day. In recent years, I’ve worked on award winning TV-centric sites.

The one project I have constantly wanted to tackle is news. I’ve watched as media companies struggled to come to terms with the arrival and dominance of digital media. I’ve laughed and shaken my head in disbelief at what their reactions were. I’ve watched copious amounts of money be thrown at poorly executed attempts at second-rate delivery platforms. My frustration at what a real difference those resources in the right hands could make was palpable.

Knowing what to do and being able to do it are quite different things. In order to challenge the mainstream media, any new player needs a certain level of resources. Finding someone who recognised the opportunity in the media market and was willing to back it financially was the first goal.

In early 2014, Freed was incredibly close to launching at the end of that year. We’d had a great development run and a very successful round of interviews with potential job candidates and were weeks away from going live when it all changed. Tony became unwell and was diagnosed with cancer. This is public knowledge due to a Fairfax article.

Freed is an important project because we desperately need to change how journalism is done. I believe Freed has the answer. Careful preparation has been made and we’re ready to launch. Freed will monetise news without the need for advertising or paid subscriptions to access it. What we need now are a few more people who are prepared to put $50k+ on the table.

As established media organisations continue to diminish and devalue their newsrooms by eliminating the single biggest asset they have, their staff, I am of the belief that it is those who are investing in news who will not only survive, but become the new leaders in journalism. The incumbents are wandering around aimlessly like zombies as the world crumbles around them. We are young, excited, and full of vision for the future.

If you’re ready to help launch the next big thing in New Zealand, I’d love to hear from you and have you join us for the next leg of this incredible journey.

Regan Cunliffe
CEO Freed Media Group


I follow Freed Media and received the following e-mail yesterday. Freed wants to give readers the news they want, when they want it. You can help them with their planning and staff allocation by answering the questions and telling them what news coverage you want.

That’s an odd comment. SB implies she was advised by email but then appears to reveal details about Freed’s progress that are not mentioned in the email, which says:

Do you want better news coverage in New Zealand?

Hello friends!

In preparation for the launch of Freed, we’ve published a survey online to help us better understand how you currently consume news and how you’d like to.

You can find the survey here:http://freed.nz/survey.html

Please share this with anyone you think is dissatisfied with the current state of media in New Zealand.

The survey page at Freed:


Oddly the main page at freed.nz remains unchanged with a ‘subscribe’ option and no sign of the survey or any other information.

The SB post also appeared to repost Regan Cunliffe’s letter posted in April but it is an updated version with a number of changes, including:

The media landscape has continued to decay with their shameless pursuit of clickbait, and idle and malicious gossip.  Much of what passes as headlines and “breaking news” now is paid-for content that protects brands from ever having a bad thing written about them because they’re funding the survival of these clickbait engines.

Freed is an important project because we desperately need to change how journalism is done. I believe Freed has the answer.  Careful preparation has been made, new investors have been found and we’re gearing up for launch.  It’s not too late to be a part of history so please contact me if you’d like to learn more about how you can invest in the future of not only Journalism, but New Zealand.

Freed will monetise news without the need for advertising or paid subscriptions to access it.

So now “new investors have been found and we’re gearing up for launch” but also “It’s not too late to be a part of history so please contact me if you’d like to learn more about how you can invest…”

It closes the same as the earlier letter:

If you’re ready to help launch the next big thing in New Zealand, I’d love to hear from you and have you join us for the next leg of this incredible journey.

Regan Cunliffe
CEO Freed Media Group

The Freed Facebook page now links the the survey, which apart from a message about Lentino’s death is the first activity for about a year there. @FreedNZ has also become active again, promoting the survey.

But on the Whale Oil thread it was pointed out there were problems with the survey, and this was confirmed on Twitter:

It appears there was a DNS issue affecting some people trying to complete our survey today.

Supposedly being about to launch a survey seeing what people want is a curious approach.

While a lot of the public promotion appears to still be via Whale Oil it is interesting to see that, after being announced as “Cameron Slater’s next media venture”, Slater is now sort of out of the picture with Cunliffe appearing to be in charge and fronting things – although Slater does appear in comments.

Could extreme actions wipe out extremism?

SB asks Does it take extremism to stop extremism? at Whale Oil. An interesting question, but I don’t think there’s an easy answer.

If an ” extreme ” action or actions could make us 100% safe from Islamic terrorism in the West should we consider it if it would kill no one and physically harm no one?

If the West took the “extreme” action  of passing a law that legally defines Islam as a political ideology, stopped further Muslim immigration and closed mosques and Islamic schools, would terrorism be reduced and eventually stopped? Would removing the practice and proselytizing of Islam from the West make the West safe from Islamic terrorism again? Does it take extreme reactions to stop extreme actions?

No one would be killed by the extreme action.No one would be physically harmed but like all ” extreme” actions there would be a cost. Peaceful Muslims would lose the right to practice their religion inside a Western country because it will have been redefined as a political ideology that is unacceptable in the west.
This ” extreme ” action would take away their western given right to freedom of religion. A right that they either did not have themselves  in the countries they left ( Ahmadiyya in Pakistan for example ) or a right that they did not allow other religions such as Christianity in their Muslim countries.

When you look at it in a purely scientific or logical manner we have the choice:

  1. Allow freedom of religion for Muslims and we all ( Muslim and Non-Muslim alike ) continue to suffer from Islamic terrorism which means death, slaughter,violence, fear and terror or…
  2. Take away freedom of religion for Muslims and they get to keep all other western rights and freedoms inside the West and terrorism is eradicated.

It’s hardly a scientific or logical approach, and it is hardly a simple choice like that.

And it raises another extreme – naivety.

It seems to suggest that waving a magic wand that erases all Muslin beliefs and practices is somehow possible.

And it seems to believe that wiping everything Muslim out will somehow magically sort out the Middle East and stop all disputes, all disenfranchisement, and all terrorism.

Only one option involves loss of human life.

That’s neither scientific nor logical.

You have three things now to consider.

  • Would it actually work?
  • If you think it would work is it morally wrong to fight extremism with extremism?
  • Does the right to freedom of religion apply to something that is also a political ideology?
  • Is terrorism committed by Muslims undeniably linked to Islam?

That’s actually four questions, and I wonder if the last one is tacked on as an afterthought,  perhaps revealing Spanish Bride’s main target.

A starting point in trying to answer whether an extreme worldwide action against one and a half billion people would solve all the problems created by a few extremists and a few tens of thousands of followers is whether anything like this has ever worked before.

Oh, and the problems created by colonising powers over the last few hundred years. Would it be extreme to wipe out interference by major powers in other countries? Would that actually work?

Or has too much damage already been done?

Sexual identity survey

Whale Oil is running a reader survey on age, gender, sexual identity and where you live.

Actually they are running a second survey because the first one was faulty.

Brief Whaleoil Readership Survey because of poorly phrased original question

Dear Readers due to my inexperience I phrased a question poorly in the recent Whaleoil readership survey so the results were inaccurate.

In order to get an accurate picture I have redone that part of the survey and hope that you will all be so kind as to answer it for us.I have also added the option of not answering the sexual preference question.

Unusually for a survey SB has also included her predictions for what she thinks results will be.

SB is mistaken if she thinks she “will get an accurate picture” from a self-selecting online poll, no matter how many times she re-arranges the questions.

There is no way of determining what accuracy you can get from polls like this. They are generally regarded as totally unreliable, except by media organisations trying to make headlines and stories.

In particular asking a question about sexual identity is at the best of times difficult to get accurate results. Particularly with deeply personal questions (at least there’s an option for “None of your business that question is too personal”) it’s well known that people often avoid answering accurately.

I am asking the question because Whaleoil was a big supporter of the gay marriage bill but we have been accused of being homophobic by the left. I am interested to see how many gay readers we have for that reason.

It sounds like she may be using the survey to try and show that Whale Oil is not “homophobic” but given that there are a number of authors and many commenters the survey makes no attempt to evaluate homophobia.

The results from the first inaccurate question, indicated that we have seven gay readers.

No it didn’t indicate that at all.

Typically there are many more readers than active participants on blogs, so a survey is unlikely to give any meaningful measure of the sexual preference of readers.

Seven respondents indicated they were gay, whether they are ot not, that is all.

There is no assurance given of privacy of information – I don’t think Whale Oil would in this case misuse information provided by readers but many people are very wary of what they divulge on the Internet, as they should be. That will increase self selection and in particular self non-selection.

The survey may be ‘fun’ for SB but there can be no confidence in getting anything like an accurate picture of the sexual identity of it’s readers.

And even though some readers may be prepared to reveal their sexual identity that does nothing to determine whether straight or gay or bi or ‘other’ participants see Whale Oil as homophobic or not.

Where’s Whale Oil on Munich now?

Whale Oil jumped on the Muslim bashing bandwagon yesterday when news on the Munich shooting was sketchy. Today’s news that Islam apparently wasn’t a factor seems to have escaped their notice – or they are trying to ignore it.

Yesterday on Whale Oil (by ‘Whale Oil Staff’) on the Munich shooting:

3 attackers/gunmen/people/suspects in Munich Shopping mall

Information remains very fluid, and nothing has been officially confirmed.

The followed that with this quote from CNN:

The whole scene is very confused at this point. CNN had a woman on the phone who claimed to have been inside the McDonald’s who said the shooter shouted “Allahu akbar,” but the video being looped endlessly shows a person who doesn’t obviously appear to be Middle Eastern, though it’s hard to tell.

And this one also from CNN:

A witness who will only be identified as Lauretta told CNN her son was in a bathroom with a shooter at the McDonald’s. “That’s where he loaded his weapon,” she said. “I hear like an alarm and boom, boom, boom… And he’s still killing the children. The children were sitting to eat. They can’t run.” Lauretta said she heard the gunman say, “Allahu Akbar,” or God is great. “I know this because I’m Muslim. I hear this and I only cry.”

The response in comments was predictable:

Huia: “Even CNN are now reporting the gunmen were shouting Allahu Akbar, but the word Islam hasn’t been used yet.”

MaryLou: “I think they did that as soon as they opened the doors. It was hardly unexpected – ISIS said very clearly what they planned to do.”

Spanish Bride: “Three guns walk into a mall. Why the long face asks a guard? Allah wants a snack bar is the sad reply.”

Spanish Bride also posted:

If it turns out to be a Neo Nazi attack it will be widely condemned and the race and religion and political affiliation of the terrorist will be combed over in detail and the conservative German people will be blamed.

If he is a Muslim we will get the usual it has nothing to do with the religion of peace and it has nothing to do with muslims spiel.

EDIT: If it is a Neo Nazi attack then it has everything to do with Islamic terrorism and problems with Muslim migrants in Germany as that will be what triggered the violence. The more Islamic terrorism and rapes and violence inside Europe, the more likely it is that extremists on the other side will do these kinds of terrible things because the Govt is seen to be ineffective.

So she is trying to get a hit against Islam whatever the motive turns out to be.

And so on, fairly normal for Whale Oil.

Then another post later in the day (5.00 pm), again by ‘Whale Oil Staff’ – Munich attack summary: “Motive completely unclear”

This is the current official situation as presented by the authorities.

Munich police said the shooter in a deadly shopping mall rampage was an 18-year-old German-Iranian man whose motive was “completely unclear”.

…While police initially called the mall shooting an act of terrorism, they said they had “no indication” it involved Islamic extremism and at least one witness said he heard a shooter shout an anti-foreigner slur.

“The question of terrorism or a rampage is tied to motive, and we don’t know the motive,” Mr Andrae said. “We can’t question the suspect so this is all a little more difficult.”

And once they find his home-made peace symbol flag and his browser history being full of fluffy kittens and bad McDonald restaurant reviews, they can safely write this one off to a mental health driven loner that had a bad day.

Comments begin with: “The whole ‘motive unclear’ thing is so insulting to the intelligence of all but the most stupid and I guess, most of academia and the political left. Everyone knows what the motivation was even if they pretend otherwise.”

There are more along similar lines, but there is now some uncertainty showing:

Mike: “I for one will be awaiting more information before I come to a conclusion about his motives.”

Spanish Bride: “And now no mention of him saying Allah snackbar despite a Muslim witness reporting that he said it.”

From early this morning this sort of thing was being widely reported: Munich gunman inspired by rightwing Breivik: police

The lone teenager who shot dead nine people in a gun rampage in Munich was “obsessed” with mass killers such as Norwegian rightwing fanatic Anders Behring Breivik and had no links to the Islamic State group, police said Saturday.

“There is absolutely no link to the Islamic State,” Munich police chief Hubertus Andrae said.

He said the assault was a “classic act by a deranged person” and described an individual “obsessed” with mass shootings.

He said German investigators saw an “obvious link” between Friday’s killings and Breivik’s massacre of 77 people in a bomb attack in Oslo and a shooting rampage on the nearby island of Utoya exactly five years earlier.

Today Whale Oil’s early morning Face of the Day (by Whaleoil Staff) features Angela Merkel:

From teenage refugee’s axe attack on German train passengers to the Munich massacre – her grand immigration plan isn’t looking so grand these days.

Sadly, the train attack may have been the first, but yesterday proved it wasn’t the last.  In 800,000 people of any origin you’ll have some people with problems, and that’s before they have grown up in a culture that considers Germans to be infidels; their lives worth less or even nothing at all.

Clearly linking the Munich shooting to Islam.

At 8.00 am, by ‘Tekonym’: Munich shooter’s final recorded conversation

As well as quoting the widely published conversation they say:

Importing cultures that don’t integrate is a problem.  Pro-immigration people will say that a generation later, the integration happens with the children, because they grow up in the adopted culture.

This used to be true.  But it doesn’t work when the immigrants create enclaves, preserve language, culture and even insist on segregated schooling.

So far, no information of any use has been released.

They can’t have looked very hard.

One early comment: “And another day of the left-leaning news media and governments doing everything they can to even mention the elephant in the room.” 14 up ticks.

In response: “A German-Iranian teenager who shot dead nine people in Munich was a deranged lone gunman obsessed with mass killings who drew no inspiration from Islamist militancy, police said on Saturday.” – Reuters 1 up tick.

There’s a few more comments implying links with immigrants and Islam.

No comments from Pete or Spanish Bride and nothing else from Teknonym – now that the news doesn’t  fit their ongoing crusade against Muslims around the world and in New Zealand?

Perhaps they will catch up with the news when they get a chance.



Who and why is Whale Oil?

It used to be that Cameron Slater was synonymous with Whale Oil. He was credited with building the hard hitting political blog into the most popular in New Zealand.

But doubts continue to grow about who ‘Cameron Slater’ is as an author on Whale Oil.

It had long been obvious that Slater received help, ‘tips’ and input into his posts.

Two years ago Nicky Hager’s ‘Dirty Politics’ added substance to hints and suspicions – other people paid Slater to post promotional PR pieces on products and politics. And on the dirty side, there was now evidential indications that there were paid hit jobs on companies, business people, politicians and political candidates.

Since then different styles and different targets under a single ‘author’ continued.

Then last week it was announced that Slater would be leaving Whale Oil for an indefinite period – a month, or two, perhaps. Uncertainty over who Slater has ‘taken a sabbatical’ continues.

Since then there has been some remarkable admissions by Pete Belt. Fits in this response to a qury about the use of the new pseudonym ‘Teknonym’:


I must have missed it but do we know or was it said anywhere who Teknonym is?
He/she berry good!


    I duuno but I’m guessing it’s a name Pete gives to posts provided by readers etc.

    • Avatar

      Very perceptive. Yes, it’s not one individual. It is simply a label to aggregate the work while Cam is away. Careful observers will note that the “Whaleoil machine” without Cam simply continues to exist.

  • Teknonym is “simply a label to aggregate the work ” of presumably multiple unknown sources and authors.

    In a post at Whale Oil yesterday Belt expanded on this in FROM THE DRIVER’S SEAT: WHALEOIL, KEY AND SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST:

    The aim of the hacker, Hager and the left was to take Cam Slater down. The assumption: without him, there would be no Whaleoil. That hasn’t been true for a long time. If people really think that one person can produce all that content with only Anzac morning off all year, then you are in desperate need of a reality check.

    I’ve said this for years that Whaleoil is a sizeable community. Cam Slater may be our public face to it, he provides an edge or the cream on top, but the essential bits that make up this blog will continue even when Cam Slater isn’t there.

    It continued when he was an editor at Truth. It’s continued even when he was spending most of his time on court related matters. And it will continue even though Cam is off “having a break away”.

    …we realised that Cam was too central to the existence of Whaleoil and that had to change. Right now, Cam can be distracted for months on end and Whaleoil will continue 95% as it has before, just not with Cam’s voice. Cam has spent weeks in court. He’s gone hunting. And, somehow, everything just continues. It’s not magic; it’s well planned.

    A clear implication there that everything “just continues”, “just not with Cam’s voice”. Even though posts kept appearing under the authorship of ‘Cameron Slater’. That that was happening isn’t a surprise, but it curious that Belt is being open about how Whale Oil has been operating.

    And continues to operate, with the only change being a switch from ‘Cameron Slater’ to ‘Teknonym’ as “simply a label to aggregate the work”.

    It has been suggested that this distancing from Slater is perhaps designed to reduce ongoing legal risks. It’s harder to take legal action against an unknown author (although Belt is clearly in charge so that could increase his exposure to risks).

    It could be an attempt to build a defence for Slater – that it wasn’t really him who made defamatory comments in the past, or it can’t be easily proven that it was him. If so that could get interesting.

    Who is behind the “Whaleoil machine” and why they have changed brands and why they have shifted back into heavy handed censorship and message control are also interesting things to ponder.

    Teknonym “a label to aggregate the work”

    The most used ‘author’ name at Whale Oil has changed from ‘Cameron Slater’ to ‘Teknonym’. It appears to be largely same old under a new label.


    It will be exactly the same and completely new. And yes, I realise that both can’t be true.

    Whaleoil will continue to deliver stories with information that comes from the same network of people who have been the ‘invisible hand’ behind the blog for some time.

    What seems to have changed is that stories that used to be posted under “Cameron Slater” are now being posted under “Teknonym”. The posts seem similar and whoever is writing is trying to emulate Slater’s style.

    So who is Teknonym? Same old Whale Oil under a different name?


    I must have missed it but do we know or was it said anywhere who Teknonym is?
    He/she berry good!


    I duuno but I’m guessing it’s a name Pete gives to posts provided by readers etc.

    • Avatar

      Very perceptive. Yes, it’s not one individual. It is simply a label to aggregate the work while Cam is away. Careful observers will note that the “Whaleoil machine” without Cam simply continues to exist.

  • So various sources that used to supply and post under ‘Cameron Slater’ now supply and post under ‘Teknonym’?

    It was a questionable way to do things under ‘Cameron Slater’ but it’s quite an odd way to do things under ‘Teknonym’.

    Posts could have been written by any number of anonymous people. Or they could all be written by Pete Belt. Or whatever.

    An ironic post under Teknonym on Monday: WHICH POLLSTERS CAN YOU TRUST, AND WHICH ARE BOUGHT AND PAID FOR?

    Obvious questions will be which bloggers can you trust and which are bought and paid for? In Dirty Politics Nicky Hager exposed pay per posts at Whale Oil, under ‘Cameron Slater’.I don’t think that was ever really  denied by Slater.

    Suspicions remained, especially when posts related to apparent product endorsements and hit jobs (including political products).

    We know that Colmar Brunton are one of the most variable and have a clear bias towards Labour, for example.

    Who might ‘we’ be? “The same network of people who have been the ‘invisible hand’ behind the blog for some time”?

    They are either poorly informed or are deliberately discrediting Colmar Brunton. There is little movement in the latest One News Colmar Brunton poll and trends don’t look out of the ordinary – see One News Poll – June 2016.

    Whenever the Fraser House spy tells me that Labour are polling in the low to mid-thirties, and then paid-for polls come out, you can reliably subtract 4-6 points, every time.

    From anyone that would sound like vague unsubstantiated nonsense.


    • an anonymous person or persons,
    • who apparently share a pseudonym with a number of others (unless “it’s not one individual” means it’s a group of people working together, as in “we”),
    • citing an anonymous,claimed source,
    • citing private polls that are only leaked and never supported by anything authentic or with any substance,
    • on a blog with a reputation for posting false and misleading information,
    • a blog with a reputation for dirty politics,
    • a blog that still promotes itself on Twitter and Facebook with “THEY SAY DIRTY POLITICS LIKE IT IS A BAD THING”,

    …one could be forgiven for taking any posts by ‘Teknonym’ with a grain of political salt.

    So far it appears that Whale Oil is exactly the same with a completely new “label to aggregate the work”.

    It appears that Whale Oil  is continuing  “to deliver stories with information that comes from the same network of people who have been the ‘invisible hand’ behind the blog for some time”.

    UPDATE: a rather bizarre ramble by Pete belt this morning: FROM THE DRIVERS SEAT: WHALEOIL, KEY AND SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST

    Hello chaps and chapesses. This is your Captain speaking. With the recent changes at WO I expected to have some trouble. On day one, someone signed up and started to troll. On day two, we have a reader-led revolt because for some reason this blog may not criticise people readers feel don’t deserve it. Pack mentality set in and people who weren’t even in the conversation piled in and made things worse.

    Surprise surprise, trouble under the new regime.

    I’ve said this for years: Whaleoil is a sizeable community. Cam Slater may be our public face to it, he provides an edge or the cream on top, but the essential bits that make up this blog will continue even when Cam Slater isn’t there.

    It continued when he was an editor at Truth. It’s continued even when he was spending most of his time on court related matters. And it will continue even though Cam is off “having a break away”. A change is as good as a holiday, after all

    Has Slater actually been sidelined?

    And it sounds like more commenters who have differing opinions to Belt are also being sidelined.

    Whaleoil should have enough to appeal to our readers most days, even when there is something that’s not your kind of thing. Make a choice – stay or go. But if you’re going to go, please don’t embarrass yourself by chucking your toys. It makes work for the moderators, and an hour later, nobody even remembers you were even there.

    He is pissing on the remaining faithful. Slater may have restrained him before, bit now it seems to be open slather, plus lectures.



    Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

    Join 4,577 other followers