Are John Key’s pants on fire?

Written By: - Date published: 7:14 am, May 21st, 2014 - 142 comments
Categories: uncategorized - Tags:

GCSB Key

Following on from Karol’s post last night I thought that some further comment on John Campbell’s story on the GCSB was warranted.  It is fascinating the way that the story is interlinked with the Kim Dotcom case and I am sure that the development of both stories will continue.

One of the most interesting aspects of the Kim Dotcom case is his repeated assertions that he had met John Key and that Key knew about him and about the raid on his residence well before it happened.

I struggle to understand how the pair could not have met.  Kim is a larger than life character who was willing to spend his extraordinary wealth in the country of his choice on very public activities.  After all spending half a million dollars on a public fireworks display suggests a certain level of largesse and big noting which would suggest that Dotcom would do what he could to meet his local Member of Parliament and the Prime Minister of New Zealand.  And he did donate $50,000 to John Banks’ Mayoral campaign in 2010.  Apart from a general preference for pro business policies I get the impression that his motivation was that he wanted to be noticed.  Can you imagine the moneymen of the National Party not wanting to investigate the possibility of further donations being made by Dotcom?

Things fell apart when John Banks refused to do anything for Dotcom when he was in Mount Eden Prison with a bad back and without an adequate mattress to sleep on.  The sense of disillusionment on Dotcom’s part is considerable and understandable.  The least Banks could have done is visit Dotcom although it seems that Banks was ruled by political rather than human considerations.

In the High Court yesterday Dotcom chose to remind Banks of the original arrangement.  Previous evidence that ten donors of $25,000 were being sought by John Banks’ campaign ties in neatly to the claim that Banks requested Dotcom to give him two cheques for $25,000 “anonymously”.  Banks’ claim that nothing of the sort occurred is an interesting tactic.  Wayne Tempero backed up what Dotcom said and it may be that today Mona Dotcom will do the same.  And it seems perfectly plausible that Dotcom would prefer to bask in the publicity that his donation would create rather than want to hide it.  I look forward to the Judge’s determination on what actually happened.

Last night’s John Campbell show was a quiet sleeper of a programme.  This morning the media is ignoring the revelations.  The devil is in the detail.  If it is shown conclusively that John Key has lied then National is going to suffer considerable damage.

The details, that Key met with American Chief of Intelligence James Clapper shortly after the search for a new head of the GCSB had started, that a change in expectations for the Five Eyes network was communicated, that suddenly the GCSB was looking for a new chief without a military background, that Key had breakfast with Fletcher then scraps a list of potential candidates, then agrees to the appointment of Fletcher as the head of GCSB suggest a carefully choreographed series of events designed by Key to get his and the US’s preferred man into one of the most important security jobs in the country.

John Key’s description of how Ian Fletcher’s appointment was a “gee I have not seen him since school and the State Services Commission recommended him” sort of thing does not ring true.  He was the one to rule out the previous list of contenders and the one to ring Fletcher and he even had breakfast with Fletcher six weeks before Fletcher’s appointment was made.

DPF has gone into overdrive raising a whole lot of straw man arguments.  The basic issue he does not address is why has Key distanced himself from Fletcher’s appointment as chief of the GCSB when it seems clear he was up to his neck in the selection process.

And you have to wonder how Key could not have known about Dotcom before the raid.  Whether as a potentially large donor to the National Party or as a threat to the Western World you would think someone would have said something to Key about Kim.  After all sending in 76 officers some of who were armed and two helicopters to raid a private residence at the request of the US Government surely would have persuaded someone to tell Key what was happening more than a couple of days beforehand.

BLiP’s already impressive list of Key fibs has a couple of further entries.  I suspect the Government is in a state of trepidation waiting for what evidence Dotcom releases at his trial.

142 comments on “Are John Key’s pants on fire? ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. framu 1
    21 May 2014 at 9:11 am

    “and without a mattress to sleep on”

    wasnt it that they were too thin?

    (just in case someone starts to obsess over “inaccuracies”)

    [Right you are. Have amended – MS]

  2. exitlane 2
    21 May 2014 at 9:14 am

    David Cunliffe on Frontline this morning cuts to the chase on the crucial issue….

    The PM’s credibility deficit regarding what and when he knew about GCSB spying on Dotcom.

    http://goo.gl/ljIDQ1

    • marty mars 2.1
      21 May 2014 at 9:52 am

      For me the appointment of fletcher is the weak link and most exploitable for maximum damage against key as a liar.

    • ianmac 2.2
      21 May 2014 at 10:12 am

      Thanks exitline. David did a really good job of summing up the facts and the implications.
      And that there will be Questions today in the House.
      Wonder if Key will be there to dance on the head of a pin?
      The Speaker will protect him as he will have addressed the question – or not!

  3. Chooky 3
    21 May 2014 at 9:18 am

    interesting post…but what/who is DPF?

    re; “DPF has gone into overdrive raising a whole lot of straw man arguments. The basic issue he does not address is why has Key distanced himself from Fletcher’s appointment as chief of the GCSB when it seems clear he was up to his neck in the selection process.”

  4. karol 4
    21 May 2014 at 9:20 am

    Was KDC (alleged) evidence of Key knowing about Dotcom earlier than he claims, the damp squid revealed in court yesterday?

    Adam Bennett David Fisher of the NZ Herald, cheerleading for Banks’ lawyer, Jones:

    In questioning over Mr Dotcom’s sumptuous 2010 New Year’s Eve fireworks display, Mr Dotcom offered without prompting the claim that Banks had told the PM of the display. “He wanted him to come and watch it,” he said. “Is that what you call a nuke?” asked Mr Jones.

    The Eviscerated replied: “That was one of those things. There are others.”

    Banks smiled as he left the court.

    • veutoviper 4.1
      21 May 2014 at 9:51 am

      TheHerald article is by David Fisher, not Adam Bennett. Sorry, just being a pedant! Fisher is also the author of a recent book on Dotcom, the title of which I cannot recall offhand.

  5. ianmac 5
    21 May 2014 at 9:34 am

    “One of the most interesting aspects of the Kim Dotcom case is his repeated assertions that he had met John Key …….”
    The Vance story doesn’t actually claim that Dotcom said that he met Key. Just that the claim was that Key knew about Dotcom.
    We might wonder why Key would distance himself from any connection. Could it be that way back during the secret high level meetings, Key was warned to stay clear because the plan was already afoot to attack Dotcom. Denial for political distance.

    • veutoviper 5.1
      21 May 2014 at 9:55 am

      Snap. I was about to nitpick about the reference to KDC having asserted that he had ‘met’ Key. I have followed this whole saga closely and don’t recall KDC ever saying he had met Key; rather that he has maintained that Key knew about him well before the raid. I could be wrong, but if so, I would like to see a link where KDC has said he had met Key. I’m being a pedant this morning!

      • Tracey 5.1.1
        21 May 2014 at 10:17 am

        me three

      • Rosie 5.1.2
        21 May 2014 at 10:29 am

        VV, during the filmed GCSB select committee last year didn’t Dotcom say something to Key along the lines of “You did know of me (before the raid)”. That is just from memory and I can’t remember whether Dotcom was referring to Key actually meeting him or knowing of him. What ever it was it made Key very uncomfortable. Sorry, not much help, but you maybe able to confirm what he said and rule it out.

        • veutoviper 5.1.2.1
          21 May 2014 at 11:03 am

          Hi Rosie. Should be doing other things (LOL) but searched out the video of KDC’s appearance before the Intelligence and Security Committee last year and rewatched it.

          Here it is courtesy of TV3

          http://www.3news.co.nz/VIDEO-Kim-Dotcom-V-John-Key-Intelligence-and-Security-select-committee/tabid/370/articleID/303676/Default.aspx

          KDC reads his (shortened) statement for the first 14 minutes, then there was questions/discussion.

          At about 17 mins, Shearer asks KDC a question. In answer to Shearer, KDC states “He (meaning Key) knew about me before the raid.” leading to the back and forth between KDC and Key. But nothing about them having ‘met’.

          It was interesting to watch Key’s facial expressions and body language again in that video.

          • Rosie 5.1.2.1.1
            21 May 2014 at 11:28 am

            Thank you vv, and sorry, I should have really done that leg work!

            It was good to have another look at that exchange between Key and Dotcom. It was fairly loaded with tension – you have to wonder what more skeletons are going to come out of Key’s closet in light of the Campbell Live show.

            Hard not to smile at Dotcoms “I know you know…………and ……….why are you going red?”

            Key, ever the clown, using inappropriate language to finalise the session “It’s been fun” Trying to make light of something that’s so deeply troubling to him.

          • Tracey 5.1.2.1.2
            21 May 2014 at 11:35 am

            If his claim that Banks was inviting key tot he big birthday bash, then Boag’s statement about never having heard of dotcom is probably designed to assist the PM’s assertion he never heard of him… the fact that she uses almost identical language may or may not be here nor there.

            is banks giving evidence, that’s the next big thing for me. Isn’t Penny there? Penny?? has the defence indicated who its witnesses are, if any?

    • mickysavage 5.2
      21 May 2014 at 10:58 am

      Right you are. I have always worked under the assumption that they may have met but after looking through various interviews Dotcom only claimed that Key know of him well before the raid.

  6. Tracey 6
    21 May 2014 at 10:16 am

    not met or not heard of?

    Michelle Boag hadn’t heard of Dotcom either so it must be true?

  7. Tracey 7
    21 May 2014 at 10:18 am

    “looks like john campbell is drawing a very long bow on this” Gosman 21 May 2014

    ‘ HOW KEY’S STORY CHANGED

    “His appointment was made by the state services commissioner.” – John Key, March 27.

    “I wouldn’t go that far. I haven’t seen the guy in a long time.” – Key, March 27, when asked if Fletcher was a friend.

    “There were no more than a handful of interactions, in total, between Key and Fletcher between the mid-2000s and the time of Fletcher’s appointment at the GCSB.” – Key’s April 2 written answer to questions from The Dominion Post, which also confirmed he made the phone call to Fletcher.

    “I’d forgotten that at that particular time.” – Key on April 3 as to why he had not disclosed the call earlier. He also admitted: “I know his number.”

    “I genuinely have no clue. I do not know how I got the number.” – Key tells Parliament on April 16.

    He then followed that with: “I did not, at that point, have Ian Fletcher’s mobile phone number. To the best of my knowledge, I actually rang the directory service to get the Queensland number. I do not actually have his number.”

    “I have once attended a dinner … at which Fletcher was one of several people present … at the residence of the British High Commissioner on October 3, 2011 … during my time as prime minister I have twice had breakfast with Fletcher before he became director of the GCSB. This happened on March 12, 2010, at the Hyatt Regency in Auckland, and June 17, 2011, at the Stamford in Auckland.” – Key, April 23.

    “He recalls the prime minister telling him at a meeting in 2009 that he knew Fletcher … the commissioner was discussing his general approach to the recruitment of chief executives. The commissioner’s recollection is that the prime minister advised him that he knew Fletcher from school in Christchurch, and that he had met Fletcher infrequently since then.” – Statement from State Services Commissioner Iain Rennie, April 23.

    The Dominion Post” APRIL 2013

    “”Last week he admitted he knew Fletcher from school days – but when quizzed about the appointment said his only role was to accept a recommendation from State Services Commissioner Iain Rennie. .” March 2013

    State Services Commission

    “On 14 June 2011, Prime Minister agreed that the following members sit on the selection panel, as proposed by the Commissioner: Mr (now Sir) Maarten Wevers, Chief Executive of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet; Mr John McKinnon, Chief Executive and Secretary of Defence, Ministry of Defence; and Ms Helene Quilter, Acting Deputy State Services Commissioner (now Secretary of Defence). The Prime Minister was invited to suggest additional members of the panel but declined to do so.”

    …

    “On 6 July 2011, the Commissioner reported to the Prime Minister on the potential short-list of four candidates. The Commissioner advised the Prime Minister that he had concerns whether any of the candidates could undertake the role at the level of performance expected, given the context facing the GCSB. As the Prime Minister has indicated, it was agreed not to proceed further with the consideration of any of these candidates.

    Given the priority of providing GCSB with a permanent director, the focus of discussion between the Prime Minister and Commissioner was on identifying further candidates during the current appointment process. However, if not successful, it was understood that the position would need to be re-advertised in early 2012.

    As the Prime Minister has indicated, following the meeting with the Commissioner he contacted Mr Fletcher to advise him of the vacancy. Mr Wevers then advised the Commissioner of Mr Fletcher’s possible interest in the position.”

  8. thecard 8
    21 May 2014 at 10:25 am

    So, to summarise:

    Key meets foreign leaders and officials from time to time.

    Key meets with the staff of an agency that he oversees from time to time.

    That agency had a dysfunctional culture for a long time, and may have been violating the law. Part of the problem is that it was a dumping ground for retired generals. Key realised this and brought in an an old mate as new CEO without a military background, but with a strong record of success in both the UK and Queensland public service.

    Dotcom is the center of his own world, and can’t believe he isn’t the center of Key’s world as well.

    Campbell jumped the shark. The Standard didn’t, but only because the shark ate them years ago.

    • Tracey 8.1
      21 May 2014 at 10:39 am

      To summarise

      John Key repeatedly lied about his contact with, and role in the appointment of, the new head of the GCSB an agency which says “trust us, we wouldn’t spy on you.”

    • karol 8.2
      21 May 2014 at 10:43 am

      but with a strong record of success in both the UK and Queensland public service.

      Yes, that was the line used to justify Fletcher’s appointment back in 2013. But as I posted back then, Fletcher was not the best of managers in those roles. His record is questionable both with regards to ethics (his work re-the Iraq dossier when working for Turnbull & the Blair government in the UK) and managerial success (criticisms of him and his department in Queensland.)

      See my posts:

      CV of a Spy Boss
      and

      Fletcher GCSB Change manager – and QLD

      • Tracey 8.2.1
        21 May 2014 at 10:59 am

        Are you trying to use facts to challenge a post spewing out all the oft repeated spin around this?

        Helen Clark sat in a car that drove excessively fast to an All Black match = bad
        John Key ordered heated seats for his cars so he would be warm driving to an All Blacks match in a recession = good
        Helen Clark signing a painting she didn’t paint to raise money for charity = bad
        Judith Collins lying about helping her husband’s company earn more money = good
        Helen Clark having been told that Peters had a different version to Owen Glenn over a donation to NZF = bad
        John banks asking for cheques to be split for anonymity and then signing an official document saying he didnt know the cheques were from dotcom or skycity = ok

        I hope this is helping to clarify how things work karol.

        • thecard 8.2.1.1
          21 May 2014 at 12:34 pm

          Helen Clark sat in a car that drove excessively fast to an All Black match = who cares
          John Key ordered heated seats for his cars so he would be warm driving to an All Blacks match in a recession = who cares
          Helen Clark signing a painting she didn’t paint to raise money for charity = who cares
          Judith Collins lying about helping her husband’s company earn more money = who cares
          Helen Clark having been told that Peters had a different version to Owen Glenn over a donation to NZF = Winnie being his usual devious self
          John banks asking for cheques to be split for anonymity and then signing an official document saying he didnt know the cheques were from dotcom or skycity = Banks being his usual devious self

          FIFY

          • You_Fool 8.2.1.1.1
            21 May 2014 at 1:56 pm

            Not according to any political being in NZ, be them Right wing idiots or left wing soap box ranters

          • Tracey 8.2.1.1.2
            21 May 2014 at 1:58 pm

            seemingly nats care cos they spent months on the clark ones. especially extra caring by john key, hence he constantly lies… from buying bmws to lying about the appointment of the head of the gcsb.

  10. Ad 10
    21 May 2014 at 11:59 am

    This should be interesting, from Huffington Post:

    Obama Administration To Reveal Justification For Drone Strikes On U.S. Citizens

    WASHINGTON (AP) — On the eve of a critical Senate vote and under court order, the Obama administration signaled it will publicly reveal a secret memo describing its legal justification for using drones to kill U.S. citizens suspected of terrorism overseas.

    Two administration officials told The Associated Press that the Justice Department has decided not to appeal a Court of Appeals ruling requiring disclosure of a redacted version of the memo under the Freedom of Information Act. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about the matter.

    The decision to release the documents comes as the Senate is to vote Wednesday on advancing President Barack Obama’s nomination of the memo’s author, Harvard professor and former Justice Department official David Barron, to sit on the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., had vowed to fight Barron’s confirmation, and some Democratic senators were calling for the memo’s public release before a final vote.

  11. Once was Tim 11
    21 May 2014 at 12:14 pm

    “Are John Key’s Pants on Fire?”
    Well no – not yet …. because currently he thinks he has an engineered state apparatus putting out the flames (as well as a few sycophants rolling around that thing we call ‘the blogosphere’.
    What’s that expression? – hat tip Gossie and enterage.

    Christ Almighty – one could roll out all the cliches here ……

    I think it was North (apologies if not) that expressed concern elsewhere as to WHY the masses can’t see the bleeding obvious, and WHEN and IF they’ll ever be held to account.

    Give it time (@North). Certain South Americans that had been subjected to various manipulations wondered WHEN, IF and WHY as well. @Johnkey – try your bullshit on the Indians as well … they already know you as a philistine – DESPITE that (their) newborn agenda.

    Mussolini thought he had immunity. (Shame about how he died) – ah well – as they say …. what gose ren…. cums ren.

    I await the next generation/trend/aspirational class (the latter – especially when they rise up after being fukd over) – wuddn wanna be in their shoes!
    I’m not saying they’ll be strung up from Chinese owned lamp posts ……
    …..but the protagonists ……. as they go about their Masters of the Universe buzzniss….. never ever imagine they’ll be held to account …… i.e. EVER

    (Mussolini was one that thought that)

    These cnuts usually also profess to having a basic understanding of mathematics.

    /endrave (it’s just that it all seems pretty bloody obvious to me)

    ……. oh, and FFS!!!!!! on that Campbell Live thing as he approached Waihopai. How vulnerabe is that!
    I’ve no desire, but REALLY (given current tiknoljee …. especially amongst those fixated on ‘new technology, rather than the discarded OLD) – and that’s not a challenge – merely an observation

    Fuck me with a feather duster! I bet when it EVENTUALLY all turns to shit for ‘THEM’ – I’ll be expected to feel sympathy. I think not. I’ll either be there on the day (or returning from northern India, or South America, or Africa, or perhaps even Siberia) to piss on a few graves – all the while whilst an ICC in the Hague, and various other UN agencies pontificate, then get ‘on board’.

    Wuddn wann be in Key’s shoes!

    • nadis 11.1
      21 May 2014 at 1:12 pm

      Tim – what are you trying to say here?

      That LSD is good?

      • Gosman 11.1.1
        21 May 2014 at 1:52 pm

        It was cerainly an entertaining if not coherent little rant wasn’t it.

      • Once was Tim 11.1.2
        21 May 2014 at 4:28 pm

        actually it was a combined rant – but one I understand (without LSD or any other synthetic assistance).
        In short though – these ‘masters of the Universe’ generally operate under the illusion that they’ll never ve held to account.
        (Msg to self however – never make a comment when there’s a crowd around all chipping in)

  12. fisiani 12
    21 May 2014 at 12:52 pm

    Tonight on Campbell Live.
    “I stood on Lambton Quay and watched as every bus passed by. Each was going……….to a different destination. Then I noticed John Key carrying what appeared to be a takeaway from Subway, that American franchise, walk towards and right past me without even stopping as if he did not know me and then….spooky as… the next four buses were going…..to the Railway station!!! Must be a GCSB conspiracy.”

    • freedom 12.1
      21 May 2014 at 1:45 pm

      Satire fisiani, which I am guessing is what you were attempting, generally has a cohesive point where the known incident or topic being played on, melds with the reformed content presented in the satirical re-telling of the subject. Neither is present in the item above. It is this co-joining of the real and the fanciful that creates the cognitive friction that allows the mirth to ignite and thus warm the heart with laughter. Keep trying though, odds are it’ll happen one day.

      p.s. hard not to notice the lack of a sarc tag which is usually demanded by rwnjs like yourself, especially if “quoting” as you do above.

    • Skinny 12.2
      21 May 2014 at 2:56 pm

      Don’t give up your day job Fisiani as your a lousy comic.

      There is no doubting your ‘Garry Glitter’ Rock-Star Prime Minister, John Key and his National Government have sucked up to the Yanks by implemented the harshest erosion of our nations civil liberties in our history.

      He has walked all over our rights to privacy by condoning the unlawful carry on with Dotcom. Signing off on exposing us to Uncle Sam and their illegal spying operation. How the fuck is this democratic?

  13. srylands 13
    21 May 2014 at 2:01 pm

    What is behind all the fuss here? Are you suggesting that Fletcher is not a strong candidate to lead the GCSB? Or are you simply angsting over process, and dinners, and conspiracies?

    Ian Fletcher signalled his willingness to return to NZ before the GCSB role came up. I understand he was interested in the MFAT CEO job.

    In the end John Allen got the MFAT job, but Fletcher had indicated his intention. That he was thought of when GCSB came up should be no surprise. He held a Top Secret security clearance in NZ and the UK for many years and had done exemplary jobs in roles in the UK, Australia and NZ.

    What exactly is your problem? He seems a rolled gold appointment. Focus on something worthwhile.

    BTW I have now watched the Campbell thing. It is the most bizarre piece of political reporting I have ever seen. At the very least the instigator of the story should now be on stress leave.

    • Tracey 13.1
      21 May 2014 at 2:17 pm

      if you are right, why did the prime minister feel the need to lie.

      also, karol has posted evidence that he didnt do an exemplary job in prior roles, what is your source for believing he did?

    • framu 13.2
      21 May 2014 at 2:48 pm

      do you seriously not see the issue?

      sure theres a lot of joining the dots, but even if you dont agree with the conclusion i doubt your so dense as to not be able to figure it out – or am i wrong here?

      • bad12 13.2.1
        21 May 2014 at 3:00 pm

        When SSLands says something like ”focus on something worthwhile” in relation to a post or a subject of any discussion you know the knife is cutting to close to the bone,

        At the least Campbell live last night highlighted the casual glib lies Slippery the Prime Minister is in the habit of telling us all,

        At worst the whole series of join the ….s showed that the NZ security services are actually an extension of and directed by the US…

        • framu 13.2.1.1
          21 May 2014 at 3:04 pm

          oh i agree – its just one of those occasions where “the issue” is so clear that either srylands is talking BS or he has to admit to being very, very thick

          more of a test than an actual question

      • Gosman 13.2.2
        21 May 2014 at 3:05 pm

        Equally I could ask you why do you not see this as being rather inconsequential. Aside for John Campbell Live this has hardly gripped the attention of the media. Surely if it was as earth shattering as ytou imply TV3 would at least be promoting it as being their number one story given it was broken by one of their flag ship shows.

        • framu 13.2.2.1
          21 May 2014 at 3:11 pm

          oh shut up with you repetitive bullshit – your distractions are getting really old

          yet again your jumping in with some comment that is irrelevant to the point of the particular comment exchange – the last few days have been full of you doing this – are you tying to be pete george?

          all i said was that even if you disagree with the claim you would have to be stone cold thick as shit to not be able to figure out what the alleged issue is

          are you going to join the thicko club as well?

          • felix 13.2.2.1.1
            22 May 2014 at 7:29 am

            Founding member.

            Ever notice how much time Gosman spends on things he says are “inconsequential?

    • appleboy 13.3
      21 May 2014 at 3:55 pm

      Pathetic, not worthy of a comment but to say you are ridiculous in your one eyedness – but that is par for the course with Right Whinging Nut Jobs round here.

      Forgive us – we forget you live on planet key

    • Once was Tim 13.4
      21 May 2014 at 4:36 pm

      Geez – you’re all here today running diversionary flak eh? Fizz, Goz, Sry et al.
      You’re a bit like Key (or that matter ‘drawing a long bow Jude’) – doesn’t know when the best policy would be to just STFU.

    • Pascal's bookie 13.5
      22 May 2014 at 5:36 am

      Ian Fletcher signalled his willingness to return to NZ before the GCSB role came up. I understand he was interested in the MFAT CEO job.

      In the end John Allen got the MFAT job, but Fletcher had indicated his intention. That he was thought of when GCSB came up should be no surprise. He held a Top Secret security clearance in NZ and the UK for many years and had done exemplary jobs in roles in the UK, Australia and NZ.

      Yawn, so you read that Finny comment over at kb.

      Maybe you can explain why Fletcher wasn’t on the short list then, given his allegedly well known desire to return to NZ and his outstanding credentials for the job?

  14. weka 14
    21 May 2014 at 2:19 pm

    I’ve lost track of a few things… What’s the point of Key lying about knowing about KDC?

    • Tracey 14.1
      21 May 2014 at 2:29 pm

      that he is a liar? i am more interested in why he lied throughout his attempts to answer questions about fletcher and gcsb. none of his right wing supporters here actually understand that is what has been shown.

      • Gosman 14.1.1
        21 May 2014 at 3:08 pm

        No it hasn’t. There is really not a lot more information about Key’s interaction with Ian Fletcher than we knew about previously. John Key stated he simply could not recall the exact details of how Ian Fletcher got the job. You either believe him or you don’t. There is no smoking gun provided that proves he must have remembered it.

        • Tracey 14.1.1.1
          21 May 2014 at 3:55 pm

          what? if you can read you can see when he said iain rennie recommended fletcher he was lying.

          you dont have to guess at what key said, its all been set out in quotes. by all means dont read the quotes but dont expect to be taken seriously when you deny what they show.

        • Psycho Milt 14.1.1.2
          21 May 2014 at 4:17 pm

          There is no smoking gun provided that proves he must have remembered it.

          Well, duh – if someone caught in the act of lying declares he simply doesn’t remember the various actions he took that render his account of events completely untrue, there is indeed no way to “prove” that he does in fact remember them. An adulturer could, for instance, tell his wife he just doesn’t remember those visits to a hotel with a female acquaintance that he initially said hadn’t happened, and anyway there’s no reason to assume anything untoward occurred – but it’s unlikely she’d be charitable enough to find that an acceptable explanation.

          • Gosman 14.1.1.2.1
            21 May 2014 at 4:31 pm

            Seems the NZ electorate might be far more forgiving than a cheated upon spouse then if the polls are anything to go by.

            • Tracey 14.1.1.2.1.1
              21 May 2014 at 4:41 pm

              so your criteria for determing if someone in a position of power is lying is whether the public vote them out? how do you get on in situations where liars arent elected?

              • Gosman …
                21 May 2014 at 4:43 pm

                I didn’t state that. Liars can be reelected. Doesn’t make it right admittedly but it doesn’t usually preclude many either.

                • Tracey …
                  21 May 2014 at 4:50 pm

                  do you agree that when john key stated he hadnt had anything to do with fletcher for years and that iain rennie suggested they look at fletcher, he was not telling the truth?

                  • Psycho Milt …
                    21 May 2014 at 6:49 pm

                    Liars can be reelected.

                    Quite. They can do well in the polls, too. Doesn’t alter the fact that they are liars.

                    • RedLogix …
                      21 May 2014 at 9:29 pm

                      More to the point – it’s now a demonstrable fact that around 40% of New Zealanders quite like having a liar for PM.

        • Tracey 14.1.1.3
          21 May 2014 at 4:57 pm

          you understand that a lie is when you say something that isnt true?

          therefore key lied.

          now, his and you defence is he didnt remember.

          specifically that he didnt recall that during a meeting where four candidates were dismissed as unsuitable to lead a dept he is head of, he said he would contact ian fletcher to see if he wanted the job.

          now YOU believe he forgot. I dont. you believe he is SO forgetful about such a crucial matter but remains suitable to be a minister. i don’t.

          BUT what we believe doesnt change that he lied.

          • Gosman 14.1.1.3.1
            22 May 2014 at 5:21 am

            A lie is not simply an untruth. I might honestly believe what I am saying is the truth even though it isn’t. A lie is knowingly telling an untruth.

            • felix 14.1.1.3.1.1
              22 May 2014 at 7:25 am

              You know you’re on solid ground when your argument consists of defining the word “lie”.

              • McFlock …
                22 May 2014 at 11:48 am

                lol

              • Tracey …
                22 May 2014 at 1:05 pm

                and ignoring the assertion that a meeting about the failure to find a single suitable candidate for head of gcsb where you suggest a name and offer to contact them, is a forgettable event for the mi ister in charge of that agency.

            • Weepu's beard 14.1.1.3.1.2
              22 May 2014 at 11:55 am

              Yes, that was the Bushs’/Blair defence on non-existent WMDs and Saddam orchestrating 911. “I honestly believe what I’m doing is right”.

            • Stuart Munro 14.1.1.3.1.3
              22 May 2014 at 1:08 pm

              A lot of what Key says is not lies but bullshit.

              The key difference with bullshit is the utterer is unconcerned by the truth or falsity of their statements. Bush specialised in it – the WMD claims about Iraq were bullshit for instance, and everybody knew it.

              But about Fletcher Key lied. It was important to him to mislead the public on this issue. We should scrag the useless son-of-a-bitch.

      • tc 14.1.2
        21 May 2014 at 3:30 pm

        Yes Tracey and the lack of MSM coverage indicates they want this to go away by not giving it any oxygen.

        Fletcher seems as fit for the role as any other so why the porkys from Johnny and the dismissal of the list of candidates when he could have had Fletch added to the list, sham interview process, quality person, overseas experience etc etc, fascinating indeed.

        • srylands 14.1.2.1
          21 May 2014 at 5:17 pm

          The lack of MSM coverage indicates that the journalists who don’t work on Campbell Live are either (a) still rolling on the floor laughing or (b) they have better things to do, or both.

          It is batshit crazy moonlanding conspiracy stuff.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 14.2
      22 May 2014 at 7:05 am

      @Weka: what if the circumstances of Key’s knowing showed that political pressure was applied to the GCSB to get them involved in the first place?

      That’s the conspiracy theory.

      The SNAFU theory is far more appealing: that Key can’t say how he really knows because the meeting was secret, and his stupid mistake of commenting on intelligence matters in the first place meant he had to say something.

      He’s just a big-noting dickhead who chose the wrong lie at the wrong time.

  15. Anne 15
    21 May 2014 at 2:32 pm

    It was presumably part of the cover-up re- the NSA/FBI/ Hollywood Moguls plan to destroy Megaupload – and KDC in the process – in which John Key and the GCSB were inextricably entwined. I suppose he thought that if he claimed he never knew KDC existed until the day before the raid, then that would allay any suspicions of his involvement. He’s probably regretting that course of action now.

    Oh what a tangled web we weave, when we practice to deceive.
    (apols to William Shakespeare)

  16. weka 16
    21 May 2014 at 2:36 pm

    “that he is a liar? i am more interested in why he lied throughout his attempts to answer questions about fletcher and gcsb. none of his right wing supporters here actually understand that is what has been shown.”

    Tracey, I meant why would Key have lied about that one detail about KDC?

    • karol 16.1
      21 May 2014 at 2:40 pm

      Initially it was focused on because it related to the use of the GCSB to do illegal surveillance on Kiwi residents and citizens. Also, aligned with this, is the issue of the US agencies, the FBI and NSA, to target Kim Dotcom in support of the Hollywood and digital corporates.

      • Gosman 16.1.1
        21 May 2014 at 3:09 pm

        And that’s the rather long bow that is being drawn.

        • Tracey 16.1.1.1
          21 May 2014 at 4:01 pm

          if you think what i have posted today is about dotcom and not key lying about fletcher then you have proven two things

          you dont read peoples posts and
          you havent read the information from blip and karol in the thread where you made your long bow comments.

          i can however see why you wont address the information i have posted for you several times, because you want it to be only about dotcom… when it is about a pm with a history of lying, including about the appointment of the person who runs our most secret organisation. on that basis i feel justified in calling you an idiot. your long bow comment wasnt even made in this thread.

          • Gosman 16.1.1.1.1
            21 May 2014 at 4:41 pm

            The case against John Key as presented here.

            John Key may or may not have been upfront about how Ian Fletcher managed to be appointed to the job as head of GCSB. This much is known about and may be an issue or not.

            The reason John Key appointed Ian Fletcher in such a manner was because he needed someone loyal to enable him to carry out dodgy activities. There is no evidence for this beyond that John key knew of him previously.

            One of these dodgy activities was the spying on Kim Dotcom which John Key and Ian Fletcher knew about. There is no evidence for this at this stage.

            They were spying on Kim Dotcom on the orders of the US who are doing the bidding of Hollywood and other elites in the nation. This is bordering on the conspiratorial fantasies of rabid anti-Americans.

            Those last three points are pure speculation and is why it is appropriate to use the term drawing a long bow.

            • Tracey 16.1.1.1.1.1
              21 May 2014 at 4:44 pm

              no. the evidence on the table is that john key has lied about his dealings with fletcher. blip posted links to keys quotes and karol to cl analysis. you have not been able to refute any of it.

              simply repeating

              ” i dont believe it so it isnt true” over and over is not refutation. you are a lance armstrong fan arent you gosman.

              • Gosman …
                22 May 2014 at 8:25 am

                Has the opposition managed to get John Key to admit he lied? As far as I am aware all he stated was his recollection of events was incorrect. Whether that means he lied is open to interpretation. Quite obviously if you are on the left of the political spectrum you might think he was. However it is certainly not definitive and isn’t much of a story.

                • Tracey …
                  22 May 2014 at 8:52 am

                  So your position is that someone must admit a lie for it to be a lie?

                  • Gosman …
                    22 May 2014 at 9:12 am

                    No . To prove it is a lie you must show that it was very unlikely for the person not to have another reason for believing what he or she was saying was accurate. I would suggest there isn’t that much evidence here yet.

                    • McFlock …
                      22 May 2014 at 9:49 am

                      lol
                      true

                      He might not be a liar.
                      He might just be so incompetent as a minister that he can’t remember why or how he ignored all the public service recommendations for an appointment to put in place a guy he couldn’t remember from school.

        • Once was Tim 16.1.1.2
          21 May 2014 at 4:44 pm

          There’s that long bow again! Careful Goz – you might have to take a bit of stress leave before too long

    • Tracey 16.2
      21 May 2014 at 2:44 pm

      it was part of key distancing himself from knowing of the surveillance or raid of dotcom mansion, which was illegal.

  17. Puddleglum 17
    21 May 2014 at 2:55 pm

    As I’ve said before, the interesting thing about whether or not Key knew Dotcom (or even had heard his name) prior to the day before the raid (when he was briefed about the impending raid) is that Key volunteered the claim.

    Nobody would have been remotely surprised if John Key had said to John Campbell in that earlier interview shortly after the raid something like “Yes, I’ve heard of him vaguely – he’s in my electorate and he gave that birthday fireworks display, didn’t he?”.

    Instead, Key’s reaction was to claim that he had never heard Dotcom’s name before.

    From the link:

    “Dotcom clearly fascinates the media, and there were numerous stories about his presence in New Zealand prior to his arrest. His lifestyle, the mansion, his residency application: It all got media attention long before the raid.

    He even lit up Auckland’s night sky with a fireworks display.

    Prior to his arrest, Kim Dotcom was controversial, but also welcomed into New Zealand under immigration’s special investor plus category.

    He bought $10 million of government bonds – a big investment for an individual – and he moved in to one of the most famous residences in the country, not that far from National’s electorate [office] in Helensville.

    Chris was in charge of the building project at the Dotcom mansion. He and another contractor went to John Keys’ electorate office, to talk to him about the amount of money Dotcom was spending, the amount of jobs that was creating, and to ask Key for any support he could give.

    He spoke to his electorate secretary, and she said she’d pass it all on.“

    • framu 17.1
      21 May 2014 at 3:07 pm

      ” Key volunteered the claim.”

      thats always the tell in any crime acronym drama show

      generic bad guy – “i dont know nothing about that strangled ho”

      generic cops – “we didnt say she was strangled”

      • Blue 17.1.1
        21 May 2014 at 3:34 pm

        He always volunteers info when he’s being shifty. Take that racehorse the other day. Key was desperate to downplay it and started spouting off about how the horse hadn’t won anything and thus never made any money etc.

        That raises the question of whether he would have declared his interest in it if it had proved to be a champion and won loads of money. The answer is most likely no. But he waffled enough to outlast the attention span of the journos and they didn’t pick up on that point.

  18. Marius 18
    21 May 2014 at 4:45 pm

    not too many people sparing a thought for Mateparae. i have no idea what sort of a person he is but having to stand there with his head bowed while ‘prime minister Keys’ did that press conference was more than disgusting

    • Anne 18.1
      21 May 2014 at 5:12 pm

      I’ve thought of him Marius. On the face of it it looks like he was shafted. First, he’s appointed to the Directorship of the GCSB but before he’s had time to get his feet properly under the desk, he’s divested of the position and told he can be Gov. Gen. as a consolation prize. Now that the truth is dribbling out quite fast, he must be feeling embarrassed. I damm well would be if I was in his shoes anyway.

      • Huginn 18.1.1
        21 May 2014 at 6:47 pm

        Marius, Anne

        Now that the truth is dribbling out quite fast, he must be feeling . . . JUST FINE!!!!!!

        Maybe even like he dodged a bullet.

      • Gosman 18.1.2
        22 May 2014 at 11:53 am

        Do you think being the Governor General is a less prestigious position to being head of the GCSB? Not sure many others would agree with you.

  19. Marius 19
    21 May 2014 at 4:54 pm

    what was the squeaking noise Key uttered as he exited with a hooped back from that media ambush. god. talk about playing the sick child. freak

    • Richard Christie 19.1
      21 May 2014 at 5:21 pm

      That sound was almost certainly it was an involuntary constriction of vocal chords/muscles due to physical stress – ergo- due to having just told a blatant lie or two. This conclusion is supported by his undue haste in wanting to get away from the stressful situation.
      There are a couple of other clips of the same period, also on the subject of KDC raid, where Dishonest John displays similar non-verbal indications of stress (micro contractions of facial muscles, involuntary eye movement and vocal stress), all down to his probable deceit. You have to be a trained and habitual liar to avoid generating such indicators when lying.

  20. Philj 20
    21 May 2014 at 5:43 pm

    xox
    Don’t forget the throat slitting Key before the last election. That video clip disappeared from the Stuff website very quickly, never to be seen again. When it did reappear the vital 2 second clip was gone.

    • tc 20.1
      21 May 2014 at 6:37 pm

      Or the allegedly foolish remarks he made with blinky in that oh so private conversation he had invited the media to in 2011.

      Had ambrose been in one of the msm’s employ rather than a freelancer there wouldn’t have been the need for all that bother with the police I’d suggest.

  21. McGrath 21
    21 May 2014 at 5:59 pm

    I always enjoy a good conspiracy story. Reading the comments are highly amusing! I’m half expecting to read comments saying that the FBI have put chips in our heads at birth and that the American’s were actually responsible for 9/11…

    [lprent: Read OpenMike on a slow news day (probably after the election now I suspect). That is why we have OpenMike, it allows us to limit the leakage into posts. Leave too many off-topic comments in posts and you will get booted to OpenMike. Waste moderator time too much with repeat offenses and people get booted. There are periodic bursts of examining all sorts of interesting theories that go on there as advocates and denigrators go head to head in a battle of links and strained analogies. But read the policy. ]

    • Puddleglum 21.1
      21 May 2014 at 8:31 pm

      Let’s assume John Key is being entirely truthful on this matter.

      That means that one of the biggest investigations and surveillance activities the GCSB were carrying out and one that was in conjunction with extremely significant agencies of allies (or ‘very, very, very, very good friends’), was not mentioned to the Minister with oversight of the GCSB until a full-blown raid was about to occur.

      That means that it was not mentioned to Key – even in general terms – while in preparation (which must have been quite some time) or even during the month or more of direct surveillance prior to the raid.

      That does raise the question of whether the GCSB inform the PM, at their regular meetings, of anything at all that they are doing, doesn’t it?

      It’s almost worse if Key is telling the truth about knowing nothing. It suggests a rogue intelligence service that only mentions matters that are either fait accompli or as good as.

      I would have at least expected them to intimate to the PM that a major surveillance exercise of international significance was in preparation involving collaboration with other countries’ intelligence and criminal agencies – even if they didn’t mention names. And, if they did intimate something of that nature I would have expected John Key to have asked some questions about the nature of, at the least, diplomatic dimensions and potential repercussions, etc..

      If they did not intimate anything to the Prime Minister about this exercise then what on earth do we mean when we say that the PM has ‘oversight’ of these agencies?

      • One Anonymous Bloke 21.1.1
        22 May 2014 at 6:52 am

        +1

      • Tracey 21.1.2
        22 May 2014 at 8:55 am

        It also means that he forgets important things like the discussions around appointing a head of the GCSB that he was, according tot he SSC, closely involved in (in terms of discussing suitable and unsuitable candidates). HE FORGETS.

        Not, whether he ate at home or at a restaurant on a particular date some months ago, or what colour tie he wore three weeks ago… the appointment of the person to head the organisation he has ministerial responsibility for.

        IF he is telling the truth about his memory, he is in the wrong job, and needs medical tests to show he is fit for the job, or needs to step down.

      • Wayne 21.1.3
        22 May 2014 at 9:13 am

        The KDC operation was about an extradition warrant therefore run by the Police. The convention is not to tell politicians until it is about to happen to avoid any question of politicians influencing police operations.

        • Tracey 21.1.3.1
          22 May 2014 at 11:39 am

          did you often forget important things relating to appointment of the head of any ministry you oversaw wayne?

      • Gosman 21.1.4
        22 May 2014 at 11:51 am

        You are assuming it was a major investigation and that the GCSB played a large role. I have spoken to the Police detective in charge of the operation and from what I gathered from him the operation was reasonably routine. They were merely exercising an international warrant that they are legally obliged to do.

        • Anne 21.1.4.1
          22 May 2014 at 12:15 pm

          That must be Wormald (or whatever his name is)? Well, he ain’t gonna tell lil old Gossie the truth is he. You mean that massive raid on the Dotcom mansion was just routine? Gossie boy is a real comic isn’t he.

        • Richard Christie 21.1.4.2
          22 May 2014 at 1:02 pm

          I have spoken to the Police detective in charge of the operation and from what I gathered from him the operation was reasonably routine.

          Yes, just the routine use of FBI advisers and helicopters dropping swat teams armed with automatic weapons.

          I’m right with you.

  22. Chooky 22
    21 May 2014 at 6:21 pm

    From the Daily Blog and Martyn Bradbury

    Campbell Live Review: Extraordinary new GCSB revelations

    “What’s the difference between John Key and a Predator Drone? Trick question, there is no difference, both are controlled by Washington. Last nights astonishing revelations on Campbell Live prove how true that joke really is.”

    http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/05/20/campbell-live-review-extraordinary-new-gcsb-revelations/

  23. Dan1 23
    21 May 2014 at 7:54 pm

    No development of story on Campbell tonight. Fascinating! Who is setting up who?

    • Jartin 23.1
      22 May 2014 at 9:07 am

      I watched for some follow up also..none.
      Can’t tell what is going on about that as so little in the news.
      But surely they were all points to be talked about. It is if there is some fear in greater NZ society that they should not take heed of the exposure of JK’s lies for fear of having someone bang on the door at night and cart them off.
      How does someone get such a hold on the minds of voters.? I have personally thought he was a dishonest person in many senses from the minute I saw and heard him and I just can’t understand how so many people have been consistently sucked in by him.
      Does anyone have the answer to that?

    • appleboy 24.1
      22 May 2014 at 3:24 am

      Oh My God. Followed this link and read just the comments. You guys live in a parallel loonyverse to reality . You’re all nuts and any none of you RWNJ’s notices anymore how warped you are.

      My god that was a stomach curning eye opener into a side of New Zealand that deeply disturbs me. No wonder when you listen to Newstalk ZB and read Whaleoil. Seriously warped creepos. Please stay there and don’t come out.

    • Tracey 24.2
      22 May 2014 at 8:56 am

      makes you wonder why slater or Fookes or even you Naki man would be focusing on such a nothing piece of journalism.

      • Gosman 24.2.1
        22 May 2014 at 9:28 am

        Because it is comment worthy not because it was a damning investigative journalist piece.

  25. fisiani 25
    22 May 2014 at 8:54 am

    I wonder if the John Campbell apology to John Key will be broadcast on Monday. Apparently TV3 bosses did not know about the waste of time and money in a two year wild goose chase to find a whacky conspiracy case which tellingly has not been taken up by any other news medium.

    • appleboy 25.1
      22 May 2014 at 9:20 am

      Another example of that Loonyverse you right wingers live in. Only in your world journos should not question blatant lies from politicians.

      Get back in your box.

  26. Chooky 26
    22 May 2014 at 9:08 am

    From Martyn Bradbury on the Daily Blog

    “The obviousness of what has been exposed by Campbell Live on the GCSB

    To my eye there seem to be some obvious things sitting in the open in light of Campbell Live’s GCSB expose, and I would like to take a moment to point to some interesting things that seem to have been overlooked….

    http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/05/22/the-obviousness-of-what-has-been-exposed-by-campbell-live-on-the-gcsb/

    • Gosman 26.1
      22 May 2014 at 9:19 am

      Ummm… not sure there was anything obvious in that mess of an article.

      • Chooky 26.1.1
        22 May 2014 at 9:42 am

        Actually quite a lot of interest…sets the whole mess in context imo

        …according to Bradbury:

        “Expect a lot more Snowden files to surface before the election

        Adding to Russel Brown’s excellent narrative arc…
        But Campbell Live also implied a much more striking story arc. Which is that at the behest of the US, which wanted to refocus its intelligence activity towards the protection of intellectual property interests, the New Zealand government promoted General Jerry Mataparae out of his job as GCSB chief – a job he’d held for only a month – and made him Governor General, thus making way for Fletcher (who, as Key has noted, has significant intellectual property expertise) to become the GCSB’s first non-military director.

        A short list of military candidates had already been rejected and Fletcher was, in the end, the only candidate interviewed for the job. But how on earth did they come to appoint Mataparae to another very, very senior role shortly before the end of Adnan Satyanand’s statutory five-year term and then make him governor-general after a month in his new job?

        …Corporate Hollywood profits have been risen to National Security status, that is something that needs to be understood as an explanation to this all. Wars with their violent and bloody outcomes are too expensive and counterproductive, cultural imperialism however only has strength if intellectual property rights are protected to keep the profit margin rolling in. The Motion Picture Association of America have been trying to get their copywriter infringement fetish to National Security levels since 2010 and Chris Dodd, the MPAAs Hollywood lobbyist has threatened political funding for not elevating their piracy to National Security levels.

        Kim Dotcom has always pointed to this corporate Hollywood connection as the reason why he has been singled out for the level of attention he has…

        ….Where the focus now should turn is to the real reason as to why Key’s Government granted Kim residency. Why did the SIS initially turn Kim down for residency and then suddenly clear him? Why did that happen? I suspect the answer to that question will be most damning.

        Context
        The above must all be understood within the dynamics of a Sino-American cold war with the South Pacific as its theatre of choice. NZ is reliant on America for security, and reliant on China for our economy. The US doesn’t want to engage in real wars with really expensive and violent outcomes, they want to expand their soft power cultural influence. NZ may buy its flat screen TVs from China, but America want to ensure that we are watching American TV, music and films, that’s the soft power advantage America are looking for.
        The TPPA, the case against Kim Dotcom for corporate Hollywood intellectual property rights expanding into cyberspace and becoming National Security level threats and NZs sudden elevation to best friend forever with America as technology becomes the new force of power on a new battlefield are all interconnected.
        We are a stooge for the US and their corporate friends while enabling our own Government the ability to create a mass surveillance state. This has been an appalling erosion of civil rights with almost no wide spread consent.
        Having Key shrug and claim this is all a conspiracy is convenient and easily swallowed by the rest of the NZ media, but there’s more to come on this story.

        See more at: http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/05/22/the-obviousness-of-what-has-been-exposed-by-campbell-live-on-the-gcsb/#sthash.RMesnZSs.dpuf

        • tinfoilhat 26.1.1.1
          22 May 2014 at 9:59 am

          Hi Chooky

          Not sure whether you should rely too much on Martyn Bradbury and Kim Dotcom I’ve been concerned by those on the left who have placed their faith in these two to provide some kind of silver bullet that will swing an election our way while forgetting there are other more pressing avenues to fight the election on which probable resonate a lot more with potential voters.

          • Chooky 26.1.1.1.1
            22 May 2014 at 10:19 am

            @ tinfoil hat

            well yes I agree that for those struggling to keep food on their table , pay the rent or worse survive in someones garage or on a couch or in a car…and at the same time look after their children …this issue is not the most immediate or important!

            …however it is still a VERY important issue for the future DEMOCRACY of New Zealand and hence those at the bottom of the economic heap

            ……as i have said before Labour and the Left need a multi pronged approach to get rid of John Key and NACT …… and we need commentators like Martyn Bradbury on important issues such as this

          • Tracey 26.1.1.1.2
            22 May 2014 at 11:29 am

            are the left relying on dotcom? the collins stuff damaged the govt and had nothing to do with dotcom. labour and green focus on housing affordability has nothing to do with dotcom.

            • tinfoilhat 26.1.1.1.2.1
              22 May 2014 at 11:37 am

              Hi Tracey

              Yes, that’s why I wrote …”those on the left”

              • Tracey …
                22 May 2014 at 12:12 pm

                then xan you clarify who you mean by

                those on the left

                and your evidence they are relying on something from dotcom to swing the election?

                or do you just mean bradbury

        • Anne 26.1.1.2
          22 May 2014 at 10:15 am

          Quote from Russell Brown’s post:

          Why did the SIS initially turn Kim down for residency and then suddenly clear him? Why did that happen? I suspect the answer to that question will be most damning.

          The answer to that question is short and simple. John Key instructed the SIS to reverse their original decision to turn down Dotcom’s application. And the reason why has been discussed before – the FBI (on behalf of Hollywood’s corporate moguls) wanted Dotcom to be granted residency because they thought it would make it easier to extradite him.

          The question I should like to ask:

          Is this an acceptable way for John Key to be using the SIS?

          • Chooky 26.1.1.2.1
            22 May 2014 at 10:30 am

            answer to that would have to be “NO!”

            …however given that Dotcom’s cloud is just one of many operating in the USA and elsewhere….why go to such effort to get him with Key’s collusion?

            …because he was German?(reverse racism?.. Holly wood has a high concentration of Jewish moguls)

            …makes no sense to me…because I am told that there are a multitude of other ways to get Hollywood material off the internet from far bigger storage servers around the world and in particular in the USA ( just as there are many different storage container tankers travelling the oceans…why try to take just one storage container tanker out ?)

            ….why the fixation on Dotcom?…is it a cover for something else going on in New Zealand ?…if so what?…what plans do the oligarchy have for New Zealand that requires such intrusive electronic oversight?

            • Anne 26.1.1.2.1.1
              22 May 2014 at 11:08 am

              There was another dinner in 2012 (I think) that Campbell Live might like to investigate.

              We only discovered its existence because some soldiers were killed in Afghanistan the same week Key was preparing to go on a “private holiday” to watch his some play baseball in the USA. The funeral for the soldiers was on a Saturday and Key refused to delay his departure one day so that he could attend the funeral… even though the baseball game was still four days away.

              We later learnt that he stopped off on the way to attend a dinner in los Angeles hosted by Hollywood moguls. He claimed at the time it was a private dinner and would give no further details. It might be very interesting to discover who else attended that dinner.

              • Anne …
                22 May 2014 at 11:18 am

                oops, it should be to “watch his son play baseball…”

              • Tracey …
                22 May 2014 at 11:35 am

                some weeks ago when key revealled he knew who had visited the dotcom mansion some on the right here suggested wayne tempero had turned on his boss. in his testimony in the banks trial tempero’s version supported his former boss account. interestingly monas account differs from dotcom and tempero… if it had been identical to dotcom the defence would have pounced. its different and so they pounced ” have you forgotten your lines”…

                anyone, if tempero had leaked to john keys source who had visited the mansion, why wouldnt he just recant on tge basis of financial coersion by dotcom. you know, i wont pay what you are owed unless…

      • appleboy 26.1.2
        22 May 2014 at 11:36 am

        Typical – blind eyed Right Winger reply. Why do you bother? No friends? Home alone too much?

  27. Travellerev 27
    22 May 2014 at 11:02 am

    And again with the Conspiracy theory attack. Campbell can hardly be called one but hey you utter the CT word and bingo! Here is how that works. They must be running scared to use the old CT gag again.

    • Gosman 27.1
      22 May 2014 at 11:38 am

      No a conspiract theory is where you postulate from limited information a whole bunch of crazy ideas involving people colluding in a dodgy manner. That is entirely appropriate to the Campbell live story. Until it comes up with some hard evidence linking John Key to the arrest og Kim Dotcom it is merely a conspiracy theory.

      • McFlock 27.1.1
        22 May 2014 at 11:59 am

        for someone who wants to be extremely precise regarding the meaning of the word “lie”, you’re remarkably loose with the term “crazy ideas”.

        It’s almost like you don’t really care about definitions, or even the issues at hand, as long as you can keep rolling Key in glitter and pretending he smells like roses.

        • Gosman 27.1.1.1
          22 May 2014 at 1:47 pm

          I am not terribly fussed with John Key. My only real interest in him is that he riles up leftists like yourself something rotten and you keep telling yourself that him popularity is just an illusion that will go away as soon as people realise he is actually the Devil incarnate.

          • McFlock 27.1.1.1.1
            22 May 2014 at 2:48 pm

            I keep telling myself that, do I? What funny dreams you have.

            To take a theme from Felix (above), you know you’re on solid ground when you have to claim to be a troll rather than merely an incompetent fanboy.

      • UglyTruth 27.1.2
        22 May 2014 at 4:37 pm

        “No a conspiract theory is where you postulate from limited information a whole bunch of crazy ideas involving people colluding in a dodgy manner.”

        So what do you call it when you have reason to believe that two or more people have conspired to commit a crime, but you don’t have solid proof?

        Hint: it is a theory about a conspiracy.

        • One Anonymous Bloke 27.1.2.1
          22 May 2014 at 4:43 pm

          You call it an alleged conspiracy…to commit Oravida-related offences, for example.

        • Murray Olsen 27.1.2.2
          22 May 2014 at 7:54 pm

          You call it something worth investigating and look for answers as to why the main protagonists feel they had to lie about it. We know Key lied, that much has been documented, and after watching Fletcher, I wouldn’t buy a used car off him.

          More importantly, we should be asking what mechanisms we have in our democracy to stop a government breaking the laws and lying to us for the three years after winning an election. At the moment, any such mechanisms are looking pretty thin on the ground.

  28. Martin 28
    22 May 2014 at 8:44 pm

    This afternoon Stuff ran an article where Cunliffe called Key a liar over the GCSB and warned careful notes would be made of every PM utterance on the Matter.

    Tonight the article is gone from Stuff [can’t find it anywhere]

    Go figure!

Links to post