Tuesday, November 25, 2014

I Am Confused Again.



Hagar claims justification for publishing emails obtained in extremely dodgy circumstances for profit  and political advantage, as being in "the public interest". There is still no evidence as to who hacked Slater's electronic  systems and removed a bunch of emails. The emails were then selectively edited and published with a serious intent to manipulate our democratic process,

As a senior opposition person Phillip Goff outright lies to the media that he was not briefed on a security matter and a press operative in the Prime Minister's office releases direct evidence to Slater that Mr Goff lied and that is somehow not "in the public interest" as defined by the socialist sycophants.

Now color  me whatever you will, but evidence of a senior Politician publicly lying to paint himself innocent is a greater moment of "public interest" than rather normal interaction between friends in private via email.

Oh and it seems fairly obvious that the very same duplicitous Phillip Goff may be the source of the pre-release 'leaks' from the report of the ministerial inquiry due out later today.

But that is perfectly OK when the socialists do it, I quite forgot myself again.

4 comments:

Psycho Milt said...

You are indeed confused. Allow me to explain:

1. The Security Intelligence Service has been acting as a partisan tool of the governing party.

2. The Prime Minister lied to try and cover it up.

3. Unfortunately for him, the truth is now out and Hager is (yet again) proved correct in his allegations.

4. This puts an unpleasant light on the PM's constant efforts to increase the powers of the country's security services. His claim is that we can trust the neutrality of those services; plainly, demonstrably, we can't.

pdm said...

Milt in 3 don't you mean `the receiver and profiteer from stolen property' Hager?

Budgieboy said...

All well and good Milt, your take on things is worthy of consideration.

You have not however, given any consideration to the actual content of the post by GD. His post makes some excellent points and I can't fault his thinking or his logic.

But back to your comment. For you to say that the "SIS was acting as a partisan tool of the governing party" seems a tad melodramatic to me.

Tucker was being called a liar - by a senior opposition politician - with limited ways to defend himself. That he ensured that we (the public) got that information - you know, the truth - is a good thing in my view - even if you don't agree as to how he got it out to us.

Psycho Milt said...

The report suggests that Tucker, far from providing "the truth," provided information that was "incomplete, inaccurate and misleading" for the specific purpose of damaging Goff. We don't know whether Goff lied, but we know that Tucker did, from the point at which he continually mentioned briefing "the Prime Minister" about the activities of the Security Intelligence Services, when he was actually briefing a low-level political appointee from Key's office. My description of Tucker's activities is sound.

You have not however, given any consideration to the actual content of the post by GD.

Fair enough - I'll do that now:

Hagar claims justification for publishing emails obtained in extremely dodgy circumstances for profit and political advantage, as being in "the public interest".

Publishing evidence of wrongdoing by government officials is "in the public interest," a fact evidenced by the lack of a prosecution. Gravedodger may not like it, but them's the breaks.

As a senior opposition person Phillip Goff outright lies to the media...

This is an assertion for which the only backup is a claim by Mr Tucker, who has just been shown by the enquiry to have misled the public in a way that made Goff look bad. So it's a pretty tenuous assertion.

...and a press operative in the Prime Minister's office releases direct evidence to Slater that Mr Goff lied...

...the now-discredited evidence, yes. We're aware that political appointees are weasels, that's immaterial - what is of interest here is the PM's shameful manipulation of the OIA process and the SIS via his appointed weasels, his shameful, lying denial that it had happened, and the shameful complicity of the SIS in that manipulation of the OIA process.


...evidence of a senior Politician publicly lying to paint himself innocent...

Oh, the irony...

...is a greater moment of "public interest" than rather normal interaction between friends in private via email.

The report singles out Mr Ede to highlight the pernicious effect of political appointees, dealing with issues involving the fucking SIS for Chrissake, using private email channels to avoid risk of public disclosure of those dealings.

Oh and it seems fairly obvious that the very same duplicitous Phillip Goff may be the source of the pre-release 'leaks' from the report of the ministerial inquiry due out later today.

Well, yeah - GD does read Kiwiblog, so in fact he reads stuff falling into that category on a very regular basis. As he points out, it only bothers him when the contents are inconvenient.