Saturday, July 5, 2014

THE GIFT THAT KEEPS ON COMING

Once again and in a glorious own goal David Cunliffe has managed to divert attention from the MFAT cock-up (caused by rogue elements in MFAT) with his 'sorry I am a man' speech.

I don't think I have ever seen such a furious reaction in the blogsphere before with the Herald and Stuff closing off their comments facility simply because of the traffic volume running at 99% negative.    Just how Cunliffe thinks his outburst will endear him to the so called 'Waitakere Man' lost Labour voter sure beats the hell out of me.

He is undoubtedly the gift that keeps on coming.   Wanted by only 60% of Labour voters compared with 99% of National voters .... and 'they' wonder why.  

p.s.    I bet Rolf Harris wished he had faced Judge Phillipa Cunningham



17 comments:

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

This will be spun as a demonstration of Cunliffe's impeccable political judgement.

After all he must have been tempted to deliver his bombshell from the conference - centre stage - but instead chose a remote wimmin's refuge.

Edward the Confessor said...

"caused by rogue elements in MFAT"

You don't have any evidence for that smear by any chance? No? McCully's not a rogue, he's an incompetent psychopath.

Noel said...

Rouge implies someone doing something against procedure. Information in the public domain suggests he was released to appear at an inquiry in Malaysia. Doesn't appear he was returning to a setup where he could not be returned to face charges. Oh well there always has to be a scapegoat in these situations and it is never a Minister.

Edward the Confessor said...

Not only against procedure, but intentionally so in order to embarrass the government. A vile smear from Vet, for which there is no evidence. McCully caused this through his incompetence and psychopathic "leadership" style. You're right though, Noel, Key just let him off the hook.

Watcher said...

Don't worry the Vet will come back with a defence of "Ministers don't get involved in the minutiae or operational situations."
Kinda reminds me of the time Collins put here hands on the suitcase of drugs whilst aghast officials were pondering if the change of evidence had been tampered with.

The Veteran said...

C'mon Girls ... deep breath.

For EtC. The official letter from MFAT to the Malaysian High Commission, now in the public domain, requested that that Malaysian Govt waive diplomatic immunity for Rizalman so as to enable him to be charged here in NZL

Their response was to decline the request and ask that the police file against him be 'sealed'.

You follow so far?

Then we had the Deputy Chief of Protocol at MFAT give a convoluted message to the Malaysian High Commission that led them to believe that it was ok to send him home.

If that's not going rogue or massive incompetence then I don't know what is.

On another thread I posted a comment from an ex-serviceman (unknown to me) who had served as a Defence Attache o'seas. His experience is that there are elements in MFAT so far up themselves and consumed with there own importance that he could understand how this might have happened.

My own experience is somewhat similar.

But that wasn't the point of my post.

And none of your responses attempt to defend Cunliffe for his 'foot in mouth' extravaganza. One has to wonder why. Perhaps defending the indefensible is a bridge too far for even the true believer.

p.s. For Watcher ... suggest you proof read your posts b4 letting go "here" (her) hands and "change" (chain) of evidence is just plain sloppy and, as for the rest of it, you are really clutching at straws aren't you.

Edward the Confessor said...

"Then we had the Deputy Chief of Protocol at MFAT give a convoluted message to the Malaysian High Commission that led them to believe that it was ok to send him home."

Throw a junior official under the bus when your poor leadership and botched restructuring is exposed. It's the National Party way. While your at it hint that it was done on purpose for political reasons. No evidence required. In short a bunch of hideous wankers from the top down to the lowest toadie.

The Veteran said...

EtC ... yes or no. Did the Deputy Chief of Protocol deliver a message which might be interpreted at variance from the official line.

Answer ... yes.

Is that going rogue or incompetence?

Answer ... your call

BTW ... the Deputy Chief of Protocol would be dreadfully upset to see that you have referred to her as a "junior official".

And your position on Cunliffe's apology? Don't bother ... you'll only embarrass yourself.

Edward the Confessor said...

Why was a junior official placed in that position in the first place? Where was actual management on such an important issue? I'll tell you; responding to McCully's silly micro-managing and unable to cope following his botched restructuring. Incompetence starts at the very top.

And your hysterical reaction to Cunliffe raising the issue of male on female violence says more about your vile attitudes than anything else.

The Veteran said...

EtC ... I'll say it again s l o w l y so even you can understand.

The Deputy Chief of Protocol ain't no junior official.

and it ain't just me wondering why Cunliffe is doing his version of walking the plank. Read the blogs, read the media. The Waitakere man has gone beserk and with good reason. I'm not sorry for being a man in the same way as Annette King doesn't need to apologise for Myra Hindley

Edward the Confessor said...

"The Deputy Chief of Protocol ain't no junior official."

Yes it is; the role's not even 4th tier. It's hard to be more junior. All class the Nats. They screw up and it's the actual worker that gets thrown to the wolves.

"The Waitakere man has gone beserk and with good reason. "

A non existent creature has gone beserk? The only people who have gone nuts are the bullies on the right, coz they've been made to feel uncomfortable. One of the Nat's biggest donors and pals, one they granted citizenship to against the rules, recently got done for DV, ouch.

The Veteran said...

EtC ... I'm not going to argue the toss with you the status of an MFAT employee earning in excess of what an MP gets. You may consider her junior. I don't and I suspect she doesn't either.

But if she goes rogue or is just plain incompetent then there's a price to pay.

As for Cunliffe ... more power to his elbow ... and I say that very, very sincerely.

Edward the Confessor said...

"I'm not going to argue the toss with you the status of an MFAT employee earning in excess of what an MP gets."

Yeah, you just made that one up, chief.

"But if she goes rogue or is just plain incompetent then there's a price to pay."

The incompetence is McCully's, but he's not going to pay is he? That's for the junior official.

Alby said...

EtC
"Throw a junior official under the bus when your poor leadership and botched restructuring is exposed."

You must have hated Helen Clark for throwing her "speeding cops" driver under the bus.

Edward the Confessor said...

Man you're one confused individual, Alby. How were some speeding cops exposing a botched restructuring of the Police that Helen Clark supposedly needed covering up? And did Helen demand those officers be fired? It's so very hard for you, I know, but how about you compare apples with apples?

Nookin said...

"A non existent creature has gone beserk..."

Wasn't the Waitakere man the mythical creature by which Labour, or its conscience Chris Trotter, measured its performance?

Seems you cant win with some people.

The Veteran said...

EtC ... nah. The salary bands are pretty easy to find out if you know where to look.

But lets stick with your version of events ... so, if say a Corporal (guess that equates with your 'junior' official) goes off and negotiates a 'deal' with say the Malaysians in defiance of the wishes of his/her Commanding Officer then your solution is to throw the CO under the bus.

Strange.

This thread is now closed.