Written By: - Date published: 10:56 pm, August 2nd, 2008 - 120 comments
Categories: election 2008, john key, national -
Tags:
At last an upfront acknowledgement of the Exclusive Brethren’s support for National during the 2005 election campaign. According to Colin Espiner:
Day One of National’s annual conference is nearly over and so far the biggest clanger has been departing Tauranga MP Bob Clarkson’s thank-you to the Exclusive Brethren during his departing remarks to delegates.
There was some shocked silence and a few laughs but the look on president Judy Kirk’s face was priceless. Suffice to say she was not amused.
Bob Clarkson, who was thanked effusively for his “triumph” in beating Winston Peters in Tauranga last election, has just told the conference he had the help of 150 Brethren to do it!
I don’t think the leadership will be delighted with that admission. Interesting though. The delegates laughed but must have been dumbstruck at both the information and Clarkson’s generous parting gift to Peters’ campaign to reclaim the seat.
I am sure many within National would wish to see a veil drawn over that particular relationship. It isn’t that simple however. Having Steven Joyce, who was a key player in the Hollow Men, as one of their top list candidates is just going to keep Bob Clarkson’s revelations a live issue.
Mr Joyce has made no apologies for what happened in 2005, saying he worked to be a good campaign manager:
“I am just confident that everything that National did in that campaign among the campaign team was in keeping with the electoral act.”
John Key escaped much of the Hollow Men fall out and appears unconcerned at any of Joyce’s association with Brethren activity. According to Key, the party will benefit from Joyce’s political and business experience:
“Steven Joyce has over a number of years played an important role in the rejuvenation of the party…this contribution is set to continue in the years ahead.”
But how many National MPs feel similarly comfortable? And what does the future offer for Mr Joyce under the leadership of Key? Under National party rules it’s the leader who appoints the Cabinet (under Labour it’s a caucus vote).
Is Mr Key planning to have Steven Joyce sitting beside him around the Cabinet table? How will the current crop of MPs feel about the fast tracking of a man who brought considerable controversy to the party? What portfolios would Joyce be in line to get and at whose expense?
We’re used to headlines from Bob Clarkson, but full marks for his Brethren confession, even if it was on his way out the door. But with Steven Joyce moving into a top spot on National’s list, and Key’s ongoing support for Joyce, I’m expecting to see some fallout and rocky terrain ahead.
Facebook
Twitter
Scoopit!
Are the Exclusive Brethren the new Jews?
It appears to be so, as regardless of whether they are a cult, they still worship Jahweh, and follow his words which are delivered through Divine Leader who has a multi-million dollar mansion overlooking Sydneys Darling Harbour.
Brian Tamaki has been quoted as saying he wouldn’t mind being a “Divine Leader” but where would his multi-million dollar mansion go? Would it overlook Lake Rotorua? Or possibly the Kaipara?
The Brethren have money. The Jews have money (after all, they own the banking cartel), and Owen Glenn has money.
However, the Brethren getting involved in politics was a far bigger issue, as one of their main scriptures is “no politics”
Shouldn’t the NZ branch have been condemned to burn in hell for spending money on politics?
Or does the fascinating (yes, fascinating) Brethren methodology differentiate between spending money on business based political parties, who help business owners, which all Brethren are, and actually getting involved in Politics?
Divine Leader forbids getting involved in Politics as it actually means the EB have to think about other people.
– The whole saga is far more interesting that the issue of 1.5million spent on a leaflet destroying the Greens image. –
captcha: Yesterday Names – how apt.
[I just want to point out that this Jasper is not the Jasper who occasionally writes posts on The Standard. SP]
Are the Exclusive Brethren the new Jews?
It appears to be so, as regardless of whether they are a cult, they still worship Jahweh, and follow his words which are delivered through Divine Leader who has a multi-million dollar mansion overlooking Sydneys Darling Harbour.
Brian Tamaki has been quoted as saying he wouldn’t mind being a “Divine Leader” but where would his multi-million dollar mansion go? Would it overlook Lake Rotorua? Or possibly the Kaipara?
The Brethren have money. The Jews have money (after all, they own the banking and insurance cartel), and Owen Glenn has money.
However, the Brethren getting involved in politics was a far bigger issue, as one of their main scriptures is “no politics”
Shouldn’t the NZ branch have been condemned to burn in hell for spending money on politics? For that matter, how is the EB spending money on promoting a party any different to the B/I industry and OG donating money?
Well… its relatively simple.
The fascinating (yes, fascinating) Brethren methodology seems to differentiate between spending money on business based political parties, who help business owners, which all Brethren are, and actually getting involved in Politics.
Divine Leader forbids getting involved in Politics as it actually means the EB have to think about other people.
– The whole saga is far more interesting that the issue of 1.5million spent on a leaflet destroying the Greens image. –
Which is where the core issue really is. A third party, with apparent sanction by Brash, set out to destroy the credibility of a party that is likely to be in Parliament for a long time yet, and could well be the biggest party come 2014 – thanks to Generation 1979 – 1985 (y) It’s incredibly interesting the MSM and to a lesser extent, Hager, even bothered to investigate that angle. The EB will suffer under Green policies, and they know it.
The B/I industry and OG simply donate money to the parties, for them to spend as they see fit (and provide a few kickbacks along the way – like ACC’s work account)
captcha: Yesterday Names – how apt.
[lprent: Note that this is the another Jasper - not the one who writes posts. ]
I love the hang up the lefties have with the Exclusive Brethren when they used their own money to put out something they believed in. What is far more interesting and you guys wont got there is who tried to bribe the Maori party to go with Labour that was much more serious and was trying to steal away democracy in New Zealand. I only wish that the Maori Party had accepted the cheque and found our who it was. Then it all could have been exposed. Believe some people and parties may have had egg on their faces. I could imagine the up roar if this had happened and National was in power you guys would be going absolutely tropp about it, But no hardly a word said rather hypocritical don’t you think?
Tane:
“As for the Brethren objection, the issue was with National’s dishonesty around their use of the Brethren, a secretive and abusive cult on the fringes of society looking to elect National for some kind of far-right agenda.”
Draco TB:
“The problem with the relationship between National and the EB was that it was hidden. Such occult practices are the beginnings of bought and paid for policies.”
“rOb”:
“The underhand role of The Brethren in the 2005 election arguably cost National the election, and certainly cost National’s leader his job when the public found out the truth. It’s news. Tough.”
RedLogix:
“By contrast the EB’s tried to keep their relationship with National a secret. You really have to ask yourself why.” AND:
“As a matter of convention and commonsense all mainstream Churches I am aware of avoid overt involvment in politics, even though there is no specific statute against it. Equally from their own end, most of the major political parties have observed the same convention.
I’d hope no party would be so stupid as to accept such an arrangement, but recent events serve to convince me there are no depths to which some will not stoop in their quest for power. But at least we’d know.
But National were. And we do know.”
Oh, so the religious affiliation of voluntary helpers at the electorate level has now become an issue, on the Left, of obligatory declaration and publicisation?
Phil. The Brethren are not simply an ordinary minority Christian group, or a few “Christian businessmen”.
They are, as a matter of fact and record, a secretive, violent and abusive cult with some extreme right-wing beliefs.
Of course I have no problem with them helping National with buckets of money and manpower, so long as it’s transparent and above-board and subject to the reasonable financial limitations of a democratic society.
It is then up to the public whether they want to vote for a party that has a close association with such a group.
“Voluntary helpers at the electorate level”?
I think you have the wrong people there Phil, these were the ones meeting with Natonal Party leadership in private and spending inordinate sums, against the intent and spirit of the law, in order to try and influence an election. Wasn’t the address on their pamphlet a fake one as well, because I’d imagine that’s against the law.
Not surprisingly, you’ve taken the view that their religious affiliation was the most improtant thing, and are prepared to overlook the important aspect of it, the way in which they acted, which was, to say the least, rather anti-democratic.
PhilBest,
Most of the points have been covered higher up in this thread. In a nutshell:
1. Everyone agrees that there can be no objection to individual members of any Church being involved in politics.
2. Most have agreed that observing some degree of separation of Church and State is a good thing.
3. Some like Rex Widestrom and Tane above, take the ‘sunlight’ approach to this question, taking the line that any involvment is ok so long as it is done openly.
4. And while I endorse that transparency is a necessary condition, I have argued that it is not a sufficient one, that by observation, and from history, there is a special and peculiar risk that arises when both secular and ecclesiastical authority are undesirably entangled.
5. Therefore I accept that while it is not desirable to legislate against it, nonetheless I do argue that there remains a strong ethical argument for Churches and Political parties to avoid formal organisational links and/or support with each other.
This has been an unwritten convention of New Zealand politics for many decades. The only exception has been the various attempts at some form of Christian Party, all of which have failed to gain much endorsement from the electorate. For very good reason I would suggest.
I don’t know where you got the idea that I was against voluntary helpers (ie, passing out party pamphlets) when I specifically said that I was against the hidden collusion between a religious sect and a party done in such a way as to circumvent the law.
Yes but what about the corruption of someone trying to buy the election for Labour!! You haven’t mentioned it don’t want to go there smells a bit fishy!!
Would be a great crosby textor strategy if they announce who this was in September just before the Election or if the Serious Fraud Office discover who it was just before the Election derfintely not to Labours advantage is it!!
What on earth are you on about Rob, you’re losing the plot.
I notice you’re keeping silent on c/t handling of English-goes-off-the-cuff… As their no.1 cheerleader and groupie, I thought you’d be defending them, if not saying they’re not working on it or something. They probably feel abandoned by you Rob, what’s up? Losing a little of that blind, naive faith?
Who offered the Maori Party $250 k only if the ywent with Labour a wealthy over seas person funny that!! tried to bribe an Election in 2005
Do you think it might be all about to come out soon could be very interesting.
Crosby Textor on to it may be bery embarassing
You’re not the sharpest tool in the shed are you Rob?
Someone tell Rob that his little scoop has been in the news for about a month. He’s officially too stupid to function and I can’t be bothered.
[lprent: He is pretty boring, but he seems to have gotten the hang of not quite attracting my attention. It is a skill that many others have failed in. I'm afraid I leave the accuracy stuff up to the comments section.
Did you notice that Anita was having fun with him last week. I saw that she monitored his statements for a few days and didn't find one that was accurate. ]
Sharp enough to be very cutting at times Mathew who do you think tried to bribe the election for Labour in 2005 by bringing in the Maori Party only if they voted for Labour?
Could come out if the serious fraud squad investigate winnie I guess New Zealanders deserve to know who is trying bribe to make Government’s. Not very democratic really
Oh for the love of christ that information is already out in the public domain Rob.
If this is you being ‘sharp’ then at your more stupid moments you must forget how to breathe.
Lynn – indeed. I should just ignore it all as well, but sometimes I have a little time to kill and this doesn’t exactly take up much effort. Maybe Anita thought much the same!
I wish I had the time *sigh*
Tane said “Phil. The Brethren are not simply an ordinary minority Christian group, or a few “Christian businessmen’.
They are, as a matter of fact and record, a secretive, violent and abusive cult with some extreme right-wing beliefs.”
Do you have facts to support those allegations Tane? Especially the violence one? Perhaps individual members of the EB have been convicted of offences involving violence, but that does not a violent sect make. It would be like me saying that the SFWU is a violent union because one of its employees hits people with a megaphone.
Tane said:
“….They are, as a matter of fact and record, a secretive, violent and abusive cult with some extreme right-wing beliefs.
Of course I have no problem with them helping National with buckets of money and manpower, so long as it’s transparent and above-board and subject to the reasonable financial limitations of a democratic society.
It is then up to the public whether they want to vote for a party that has a close association with such a group.”
Inventory2 is right. Keep this up, Tane, and Mallard, and Cullen, and whoever. You show your true colours. There are enough NZ-ers who have EB neighbours, or who work with them, or have business dealings with members of the EB; that you guys are onto a sure-fire loser here. You haven’t got the same clout as that guy called Goebbells who finished up on the end of a hangman’s noose at Nuremberg. Too many NZ-ers know each other and our society is still too free.
I don’t believe the Tane assertion for a minute, that he has no problem with buckets of money from anyone helping his political opponents. His bleating over the EFB is evidence of that, and his caveat about “reasonable financial limitations”. Yeah, and a lawnmower and chainsaw shop owner is part of the great borgeoise plot to oppress the proletariat. Get a load of that politics of envy, that small-mindedness, everybody. BLEAH.
And what is all this banging on about “close associations” between a fundamentalist church and National?
DracoTB said THIS, and I will deal with that at the same time;
“….the hidden collusion between a religious sect and a party done in such a way as to circumvent the law.”
THAT, my friends, is merely a lie that has been repeated often enough that a tragically large number of people believe it.
I’ve read the emails etc. There was definitely collusion between National and the EB and they definitely kept that relationship hidden for as long as possible. There is definitely a spending cap on parties political advertising. The two advertising campaigns were designed within that relationship to support each other and bypass that spending cap, ergo, to circumvent the law.
Matthew Pilott said:
“….the way in which they acted, which was, to say the least, rather anti-democratic.”
And Redlogix wrote a nice little summary of why Christian churches should not participate in politics. Do you mean “members of Christian Churches”, or not?
Now, we need to talk about “democracy”. Democracy and free speech are things of which it can be said, “use it or lose it”. Some wise man once said that the price of liberty is eternal vigilance.
Democracy tends to involve participation, as the Trade Unions well know. Now, what we have, as John Tamihere said very well, is a good number of roughly “conservative” people who get on with making a living and raising kids and particpating in non-political communiy activity. While socialists devote whole lifetimes to plotting and organising.
There comes a time when conservatives of whatever stripe, wake up and realise that politics is coming after them and intruding into their lives, whether they like it or not. It becomes a question then, of whether it is “too late”, whether they have in fact lost those freedoms that were taken for granted at one time, because they hadn’t been using them.
The whole EB/EFB saga has probably filled a useful role of waking NZ-ers up, so God does indeed move in mysterious ways. We have experienced an exposure of more about what the Left really is. Participation in the democratic process is only OK for Trade Unions and supporters of socialism.
By the way, it is to the eternal shame of the Catholics that no Catholic did what the EB “Secret Seven” did, given what Pope John Paul said about the NZ Labour Government. Democracy means that anyone with a strong opinion for whatever reason, can express it, using their own money. It is not something that is to be circumscribed on the occaision that those opinions are based on a religious belief. Such people are just as entitled to their say as a Trade Union is.
It is a measure of the hypocrisy of the Left, that virtually every belief system is to be tolerated APART from the traditional one that has underpinned the very success of our culture. That is what this is really about. I suspect that Tane and co hate the EB because they exemplify how society once was, and still COULD be if the ethics of work and individual responsibility were still paramount. They have not been able to work out how to give us their utopia where everyone is well off and there is no crime; along with their abolition of “patriachy” and “bigotry” and “judgementalism” and the like. And they never will, because they have thrown out the baby with the bathwater.
Philbest, no one has a problem with the EB participating in politics in the normally accepted way mate. Except for the EB themselves of course.
Voting is beneath them or something, they are not supposed to take part in elections because on the one hand, ‘God raises up governments’, and on the other hand they are the elect and outside of the wordly affairs that bother the rest of us. It’s like with the military thing, they are all gung ho for other New Zealanders to be getting shot at, but prohibit themselves from being a part of it.
Given that, PhilBest, and seeing you have so much knowledge about these dead ordinary small business men, how is it that they fund political campaigns? Why is that ok but voting would be too corrupting for the dee wee petals?
Should other voters be entitled to know who it is that is trying to influence them? I reckon they should. I don’t think they should get a free ride just because they have a weird religion.
DracoTB says:
“I’ve read the emails etc…….”
WHAT “e-mails” (in the plural)?
What e-mails FROM THE NATS to the EB? What meetings apart from “Don Brash bumped into some EB in some maket place”?
What “etc”?
THIS in spite of Don Brash apparently being under 24 hour surveillance and the Nats e-mail system being systematically espionaged.
SOR-REEEE.
You guys and your lapdog allies in the MSM are as good as the Nazis were, at doing what you’ve done. Repeat lies; keep repeating; get ignorant masses to believe same. Trash lives of decent, honest, productive people. YOU SCUM.
Pascal’s Bookie, nice TRY.
“I don’t think they should get a free ride just because they have a weird religion.”
Translation: they are the ONLY PEOPLE who should NOT get a free ride, BECAUSE they have a weird religion.
Hmmmmmmmmmmm………….where have we heard that before?
Good lord PhilBest – Godwins Law strikes again.
I recall some months ago Mr Best trying to pass off every brethren member as a chainsaw shop owner or a lawnmower shop owner. It’s clear he knows two guys who are EB and thinks they’re quite alright, so they must all be alright. Attack them though, and he gets all exctied, shrieky (“SOR-REEEE”) and then turns into a downright bigot.
Not worth engaging with such SCUM when he can’t keep his little blurts to himself.
Phil, I’ll make one point. You are attacking us for criticising the EB (in case you’re a complete blind idiot, there’s a whole lot of stuff out there about what they have done to people. Ripping families apart and not allowing mothers to see their children…is that part of your sick ‘model society’? Spare me, thanks, I’d rather go with the Libertarians, at least they have family values. Try and use what little intellect God gave you and think for yourself whether those very well publicised incidents are symptomatic of a deeper malaise or not, though I truly doubt you have the capacity), and in doing so come up with comments such as:
“It is a measure of the hypocrisy of the Left…”
“You guys and your lapdog allies in the MSM are as good as the Nazis were, at doing what you’ve done”
“[you]…haven’t got the same clout as that guy called Goebbells”
“We have experienced an exposure of more about what the Left really is”
“While socialists devote whole lifetimes to plotting and organising.”
So, in being critical of the people attacking the EB, Phil Best attacks an entire ideology and a sizeable percentage of the world’s population. I imagine you will not be able to see the contradiction in reasoning, Phil, (I doubt you can see straight through all the unhealthy rage you’re trying to express) but to the rest of us you look like a hysterical nut-bar. You can’t defend one group by attacking another wholesale.
Get a grip.
Or: Trash lives of decent, honest, productive (left wing) people. YOU (really are) SCUM.
Reading and logic not your strong points then philbest? Or do just love the smell of burning straw?
And Redlogix wrote a nice little summary of why Christian churches should not participate in politics. Do you mean “members of Christian Churches’, or not?
To make this crystal clear.
No-one here has ANY problem with ordinary members of Christian Churches participating in politics in the normal, open and transparent way.
What I do have major reservations about is when any Church ORGANISATION, as a matter of policy elects to support and link itself to one specific party. Even less acceptable when they attempt to do it in secret.
As a matter of convention and common-sense most main-stream Churches and Political parties have mutually avoided such links.
The fact that it was done by the EB, who have to say the least a controversial record, was merely the icing on the cake.
“They have not been able to work out how to give us their utopia where everyone is well off and there is no crime; along with their abolition of “patriachy’ and “bigotry’ and “judgementalism’ and the like. And they never will, because they have thrown out the baby with the bathwater.”
Nuff said really. What a fucknuckle.
Matthew Pilott
August 5, 2008 at 1:38 pm
“I recall some months ago Mr Best trying to pass off every brethren member as a chainsaw shop owner or a lawnmower shop owner.”
Look, Matthew Pilott, there happened to be a media beat-up of these sinister, “super wealthy” people, and all the media could do was give us shots of the front of a lawnmower and chainsaw shop and an office fitout company, and shots of a latest-model Holden Commodore belonging to some EB bigwig, and talk critically about some EB bigwig’s “sprawling Villa”.
I mean, FOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO, eh? They really sound like company-buyout-and-asset-strip specialists, eh? They really sound like they holiday in the Bahamas in their private yachts, eh?
Seeing you raise our little discussions of a few months ago, I posted at that time, a few quotes off “theexclusivebrethren.com” that any fool could find, and Tane just gave it a brush-off to the effect that you couldn’t trust any propaganda these people put out about themselves.
SOR-REEEEE again. Decent ordinary Kiwis can SEE who are, and who stands for, the decent honest productive people; and who are the Nazi-channelling bigots attacking them.
RedLogix:
“What I do have major reservations about is when any Church ORGANISATION, as a matter of policy elects to support and link itself to one specific party. Even less acceptable when they attempt to do it in secret.
As a matter of convention and common-sense most main-stream Churches and Political parties have mutually avoided such links.
The fact that it was done by the EB, who have to say the least a controversial record, was merely the icing on the cake.”
And the comments of Pope John Paul on the NZ Labour Government? Any difficulty about that, had any Catholics who had it in their power, actually had the sort of respect for their Pope, to have done something like members of the EB did? Would that be a “Church ORGANISATION” “electing to support and link itself to a political party”? Something to be condemned and shut down and legislated against?
If you want to talk about what is really a “link” between a political party and some supposedly independent organisation , you can’t do better than to look at the “intertwined lovers” behaviour of certain Unions, and the Labour Party. THAT, my friends, is a “link”. The other, no. What members of the EB did, was participate in Democracy, based on their convictions, which is something NZ needs more of, and MORE balance in between Left and Right, not less. And if they had supported the Labour Party, you’d have said exactly the same.
Pascal’s bookie
August 5, 2008 at 2:49 pm
“They have not been able to work out how to give us their utopia where everyone is well off and there is no crime; along with their abolition of “patriachy’ and “bigotry’ and “judgementalism’ and the like. And they never will, because they have thrown out the baby with the bathwater.’
“Nuff said really. What a fucknuckle.”
Sor-reee, Pascals’s Bookie……..
I heard you go “ouch” when the truth hurt you. Try again.
Matthew Pilott:
“…..there’s a whole lot of stuff out there about what they have done to people. Ripping families apart and not allowing mothers to see their children is that part of your sick ‘model society’? Spare me, thanks, I’d rather go with the Libertarians, at least they have family values. Try and use what little intellect God gave you and think for yourself whether those very well publicised incidents are symptomatic of a deeper malaise or not……”
Are you talking about the “Family Court”, there, Matthew? Or perhaps the effects of the D.P.B.? Or the effects of the Prostitution Reform Law? Or the effects of the erosion of traditional morals and notions of responsibility, especially towards parenthood?
What is the proportion of ripped-apart families in the EB, compared to in YOUR model society?
DUH.
FROM THE ARCHIVES of “TheStandard” Hey, this little trip down memory lane was FUN……
# PhilBest
December 7, 2007 at 12:14 pm
Tane, read THIS
http://www.theexclusivebrethren.com/documents/Brethren Life.pdf
Quote: (Page 7, under “poverty relief and welfare support’)
“Poverty is rare but all people in needy circumstances have ready access to detailed assistance and care within the brethren community. One of our priority objectives is to provide every member of the Church with the opportunity to be equal with other members. We do not want class distinctions to cause dysfunction, friction, or division between any members of our community’.
(Further,under “Our role in the community’:)
” most are paid wages above the national average for the relevant work classification. Any shortfall in wages or underpayment that comes to our notice is treated seiously and is recompensed based on an independent assessment of the EMPLOYEE’S situation’ (my emphasis).
And (page 6, under “housing’)
“Brethren adopt an objective of equality as a key principle governing housing selection to prevent status differentiation and to provide a social environment where all brethren families can entertain each other at home without discrimination or unnecessary distinction ‘
And lots more like it. Read it all.
Tane, these sound like people inimical to everything you stand for, eh? People hand in glove with the “business roundtable’ and the super wealthy plot to screw the proletariat, eh?
Or are you gonna stick to your line, “yeah right’, anything the EB’s say must be lies, because they’re forever tarnished by the mental associations you have formed about them, guided by those paragons of honesty, the MSM journalists and of course Our Dear Leader and her crew.
The comments made by Dean at 5.44 yesterday seem to me to lend the ring of truth to the EB information.
# 62 Tane
December 7, 2007 at 12:26 pm
Phil, I didn’t come down in the last shower. You don’t judge groups by what they say about themselves, you judge them by their actions. The Brethren’s political activities have been secretive, dishonest and tilted towards the far-right of politics. Don’t expect me to think they’re all joy and happiness just because they say so.
# 63 PhilBest
December 7, 2007 at 12:46 pm
Oooooooooh, nasty. You can’t let any possibilty into your broad, capacious mind, that the EB’s may be the ones who are being told untruths about?
Come on, I can see even from reading Hager’s book and from the media reporting, that these guys have been unfairly labelled. What they say about themselves rings true. The media have done a big shock, horror, beat up of some proprieters of some very small businesses. One guy “lives in a sprawling villa in Mount Eden’. Yawn. You guys working up a plot of “the super rich’, including these guys, has me wetting myself with mirth. If only it wasn’t so damn ugly, and demeaning, and vicious, where these people are concerned.
Moving envelopes of cash around. Foooooooooooo. How much cash can you get in an envelope? When has Customs arrested any of these guys for having over the legal limit of cash on them?
In spite of the media’s massive efforts, including, I hear suggested now, massive payments and financial inducements to former members of the church in return for information/appearances, we have yet to see any tax havens, transfers of millions, or private yachts.
Come ON. This is a very nasty, propagandised, beat-up of a group who represent not “super wealth’, but thrift, hard work, enterprise, and personal responsibility. Not that you might not still hate them all the same for that, but part of the great plot against the proletariat the EB’s AIN’T.
# 64 PhilBest
December 7, 2007 at 12:51 pm
And my point about the Hollow Men book, is that Hager had all those e-mails, and he seems to have known who Don Brash was meeting every minute of every day. But he had NO e-mails FROM Brash to the EB’s, and NO details of any meeting other than one where some alleged EB bumped into Brash in a shopping mall or something.
If there was one thing the book utterly FAILED to prove, it was any “link’ between Brash and the EB’s. Nothing but Hager’s conjecture. And to my mind, it proved the opposite – because if there HAD been any evidence, Hager would have had it, such was the thoroughness of the political hit on Brash’s privacy.
# 65 Draco TB
December 7, 2007 at 3:14 pm
PhillBest said:
“Moving envelopes of cash around. Foooooooooooo. How much cash can you get in an envelope?’
I think it’s about 10k per envelope and carrying up to 40 envelopes.
http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2007/20071015_brethren/interviews.htm
“And my point about the Hollow Men book, is that Hager had all those e-mails, and he seems to have known who Don Brash was meeting every minute of every day. But he had NO e-mails FROM Brash to the EB’s, and NO details of any meeting other than one where some alleged EB bumped into Brash in a shopping mall or something.’
I suspect Hager was limited to information that his informants were limited to. This being the case I would suspect that he wouldn’t have had enough to establish a clear link but there was certainly enough to raise some serious questions.
# 66 PhilBest
December 7, 2007 at 4:26 pm
I anticipate the arrests of some EB’s next time they try the spiriting-illegal-amounts-of-cash-through-customs rark. This week, perhaps? Or don’t the Customs people read newspapers or watch TV?
Hey, we’re getting much more decency into this debate here. Draco TB: so now its just “enough to raise some serious questions’? Hey, I thought EVERYONE KNEW that the EB and Don Brash were in cahoots to “steal the election’. I thought people like Tim Pankhurst, Chris Trotter, John Campbell, et al, had ESTABLISHED ALL THAT BEYOND A DOUBT in the minds of the public?
Now, doesn’t all this start to look just a bit like the sort of shameful bully politics that have deeply stained the heritages of some of our fellow modern enlightened civilisations? Hasn’t this sort of stuff been the small beginnings of what developed into ghastly crimes against humanity?
We have a choice, here, guys – the truth, or the advancement of YOUR political cause by whatever it takes. And you, and Our dear Leader’s regime, and their media lackeys, are NOT looking good. Some of the media lackeys are waking up, the arseholes – they helped us into this mess. But it appears that of the regular bloggers on the Left, very few are decent, “moderate’ leftists.
# 67 Matthew Pilott
December 7, 2007 at 4:32 pm
PB for all your bluster about the EB you clearly know very little or you wouldn’t be talking about the EB as ‘very small businesses’. Unless you’re comparing them to GM or IBM, or perhaps Peru
# 68 PhilBest
December 7, 2007 at 4:46 pm
Matthew Pilott, if you think the EB businesses that the media have done a beat-up of are NOT just “small’ businesses, but VERY small businesses, YOU are the EPITOME of the small-mindedness that is ruining this country. That lawnmower and chainsaw shop musta had AT LEAST HALF A DOZEN STAFF, FOOOOOOO, EH, OOOOOOH, the ENVY, BLOW YA PUNY SOCIALIST MIIIIIIIIIIND.
# 69 the sprout
December 7, 2007 at 5:00 pm
have a drink phil
# 70 PhilBest
December 8, 2007 at 1:07 pm
Actually after some of my visits to the Standard I want to immerse myself in a vat of alcohol.
# 71 the sprout
December 8, 2007 at 1:10 pm
that would be good too, but don’t have any candles too close by
Phil Best, people’s objection to the EB is nothing to do with their wealth, or if they choose to openly participate in Democracy.
As for the family court, the DPB and the legalisation of prostitution, last I checked those state instruments were there for a variety of reasons – to spare families from going through full formal court proceedings, and to give precedence to childrens’ interests for one, to support those unable to work and support their families, and to allow sex workers to work in a safer legal environment and not criminalise people in an anready vulnerable situation.
Last I checked, you weren’t excluded from seeing your children if you changed religion in the real world (which is not, of course, my model society). I’d imagine the proportions of such families would be similar, if not slightly lower in the EB world because you don’t get entirely booted out of society for making difficult choices in the real world (incidentally, if you weren’t earning, society would SUPPORT you through the dpb)…
What is a capital “F” followed by a significant number of “O”s meant to signify? i’m afraid that you’re becoming unintelligible. Mabye it would be best if you come back another day when you can type rationally.
“Decent ordinary Kiwis can SEE who are, and who stands for, the decent honest productive people; and who are the Nazi-channelling bigots attacking them.”
Yes, that is true. There are decent, honest, productive people, probably both within and outside of the EB. It’s hard to tell when they’re removed from society and we get reports of people who have effectively had their children kidnapped by the EB but hey, benefit of the doubt – they can’t all be evil. Though your rants aren’t doing them any favours…
Stop embarrassing yourself with the Nazi references, it’s not doing your crusade any good.