Daily Review 11/05/2015

49 comments on “Daily Review 11/05/2015 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Hateatea 1

   11 May 2015 at 6:22 pm

   Has anyone read or heard anything anywhere today about the 1080 ‘blackmail threat’ against baby formula being resolved in any manner?

   I was at my local supermarket around 2pm this afternoon when they began removing all the customer advisory information from around the store so I thought there might have been an announcement but Stuff is less than informative on the subject.
   • greywarshark 1.1

     11 May 2015 at 7:09 pm

     @Hateatea
     I don’t know but just remember that it was tied to a date which I think was the end of March as an ultimatum for not using 1080.
2. felix 2

   11 May 2015 at 6:37 pm

   Just read this: http://thestandard.org.nz/rachinger-on-dirty-politics-4-ben-asks-for-help/

   Anyone else surprised by the number of brand new commenters piling in to the thread to warn us not to trust Ben?

   Any prizes for guessing who’s behind those new commenters?

   In a way, it all lends credence to Ben’s story.
   • Colonial Rawshark 2.1

     11 May 2015 at 6:46 pm

     Feel free to send him money; I won’t be.
   • mickysavage 2.2

     11 May 2015 at 7:15 pm

     The post had a huge number of views within a short time.

     The information that Rachinger has been providing appears to be accurate. His approach to social media is obviously divisive but Launafinem is attacking him mercilessly and on Slater’s site there is not a mention of him. Slater has not denied a thing and clearly has put Rachinger’s name into auto moderation. So there is certainly a story to be told.

     Some have been deeply upset by Rachinger because of things he has done in the past. It could be that his EQ is not for a variety of reasons not high and obviously he has blundered into some interactions but if the question is would I trust him or Slater the answer is pretty clear …
     • Hanswurst 2.2.1

       11 May 2015 at 7:26 pm

       Hmmm. What about this scenario: Slater needs money to fund his various court actions. He convinces a former associate to publish some allegations about him that are morally questionable, along with some evidence which, while accurate, would not be legally damning if given in context. This associate then appeals for money, splitting the funding between Slater and himself and picking up some account and personal info on the donors while he’s at it. He gets Lauda Finem to attack this associate as a proxy, while making sure that as little scrutiny of the affair as possible takes place on his own blog, where it could be connected to him more easily.

       Sound far fetched? Yeah, to me, too, but funnily enough not significantly more so than, “I really want to finish telling this rather jumbled and directionless story I’ve teased you with so far, but I need money first because reasons”. Given that everything about the situation is so bizarre and neither the story nor the appeal for money is especially compelling, I’m inclined to assume that something at least as bizarre could be going on behind the scenes, and to be cautious about donating anything. If it’s that important, I’m sure he can find a channel to get it out there.
       • felix 2.2.1.1

         11 May 2015 at 7:37 pm

         Sure. Except “jumbled and directionless” isn’t much of a description for a story that’s pretty easy to follow and appears to fit with what we already know about the subjects via previous documentation.

         And “reasons” only seems unreasonable if you pretend not to understand the story so far.

         With those bits of your comparison given their proper context, I’d say your hypothesis looks, well, pretty far fetched.
   • the pigman 2.3

     11 May 2015 at 7:49 pm

     Oh come on felix, it is not just new commenters. Those who have been watching Ben for a while can see the scam. MONTHS and MONTHS ago he was in his tell-all, take-no-prisoners-and-take-these-bastards-down mode and it all amounted to nothing.

     As for the homelessness… well, I hate to rely on information procured from Lauda Finem, but as much of a troubled young man as he may be, his Paritai Drive address doesn’t elicit huge amounts of sympathy from me. (This is just one cherry-picked detail, but everything about this guy’s online fingerprint stinks. Telling people to beware of a con artist (and particularly tell Rob to be wary promoting his pleas for cash) is a public freakin service.)

     He says he’s in touch with all the “big players” in the MSM… let us see where they lead him. Doubtless the alternative media and the bombers of this world will lend him a soapbox if he needs it.

     We have social safety nets (that WE advocate for, and his mates in the Young Nats rile against) that he can rely on if he’s that down on his luck.
     • weka 2.3.1

       11 May 2015 at 7:59 pm

       people under a lot of stress and with a disability are often very badly supported by the state, so that blows that piece of judgmental.

       Your uncritical citing of LF makes the rest of your comment hard to take seriously.
       • the pigman 2.3.1.1

         11 May 2015 at 8:37 pm

         It wasn’t uncritical. I said I hate to cite anything he/she/it produces, BUT certainly Rachinger and his family were using their Paritai Drive home as their registered address for companies.

         Those who follow Rachinger know he is not at a level of the chronically transient who can’t get things together to engage with social services.
         • weka 2.3.1.1.1

           11 May 2015 at 9:19 pm

           I get that kind of judgemental shit directed at me too. It’s ignorant and prejudiced.

           You have no idea what his circumstances are but are willing to believe LF?
           • the pigman 2.3.1.1.1.1

             11 May 2015 at 11:56 pm

             It’s not a case of believing. Rachinger’s address as a director of the family companies as documented there is a matter of public record (the companies register).

             Like I’ve said – troubled young guy. Worse than naive to have fallen in with Slater in any way (but if he hadn’t been waving his h4xx0r e-peen around like a good Young Nat cheerleader he probably wouldn’t have fallen in with him).

             In situations like this, you need to make judgments, to discern whether what you’re being offered is bullshit or not.

             Now, I’ve said that many months ago he did a similar “big reveal” line on twitter, and it all fizzled out to nothing.

             If we disregard the history of this chap and his previous attention-seeking, John Key sycophancy, and everything else, where does that get us?

             I don’t think Standardistas should throw their hard-earned cash at him as a social justice cause when there are many more deserving, non-con-artist causes out there. I think I am doing the right thing by warning you against falling for it.
             • weka …

               12 May 2015 at 8:20 am

               “Rachinger’s address as a director of the family companies as documented there is a matter of public record (the companies register).”

               So? How much financial benefit does he get from that? Is that available to him now? How does his relationship with his family affect that? etc etc.

               It’s all just the same old bullshit. You are entitled to your own opinion about him and to warn others based on that, but I’m calling you on the judgemental shit that is not based in fact. People with disabilities get this bigotry all the time. Non-disabled people too, but the impacts on the disabled are often much worse.

               By all means based your view in judgemental opinion, I prefer to be more cautious.

               btw I’ve been following Ben online for 6 or 8 months, so I know about how he engages with people in that sphere, and I’m not disregarding it.
       • felix 2.3.1.2

         11 May 2015 at 9:19 pm

         “people under a lot of stress and with a disability are often very badly supported by the state”

         Yep. And people who think they’re being threatened by people with links to state power and organised crime are naturally reluctant to volunteer personal details to notoriously insecure state agencies with a known history of passing personal information to powerful people to use against their critics.
         • weka 2.3.1.2.1

           12 May 2015 at 8:50 am

           double yep. And we know that state agencies monitor their clients’ online lives and can use that against them when assessing entitlements to support.
   • Stephanie Rodgers 2.4

     11 May 2015 at 8:08 pm

     It isn’t just new commenters.

     There is a significant number of people who have been doxxed or threatened by BR who are worried about what he will do or say if they point out his history of threats, publishing screencaps of other people’s personal messages to “prove” he has some kind of power, his stated antagonism to people who use pseudonyms, the way he screams bloody murder at anyone who doesn’t accept everything he says at face value, and his repeated behaviour of threatening to “expose” people / deactivating his Twitter / coming back and pretending it never happened.

     I am one of those people.

     Just today he has incited his Twitter followers to harass a woman who has been attacked by him – demanding “proof” when he knows full well the tweets where he threatened to dox her (and others) and “report” them to their employers have been deleted.

     I want to be open-minded about his story. I have no doubt he’s had contact with Slater and his crew and heard interesting things. But I’m not seeing the knock-down destroying-the-Dirty-Politics-machine others are seeing, and given his history of abusiveness and lies I need far more conclusive evidence before I forget that he’s a dishonest bully.
     • felix 2.4.1

       11 May 2015 at 8:28 pm

       Noted. I’m just trying to keep an open mind too.

       Just today he has incited his Twitter followers to harass a woman who has been attacked by him

       Gorra link?
       • Stephanie Rodgers 2.4.1.1

         11 May 2015 at 8:46 pm

         You know what, felix? Scroll back through his Twitter timeline yourself if you doubt it. Because I am legitimately concerned about the consequences if I talk about what he’s done. He has already exposed personal information about me online to shut me up before. So I’m bowing out of this thread.
         • felix 2.4.1.1.1

           11 May 2015 at 9:03 pm

           What makes you think I doubt it? I just asked if you had a link ffs.

           “ the way he screams bloody murder at anyone who doesn’t accept everything he says at face value”

           Oh. Yeah.
           • weka 2.4.1.1.1.1

             11 May 2015 at 9:26 pm

             It’s pretty easy to find but hard to follow. I can’t see how rehashing this on twitter is going to help, and there was just a lot of he said she said stuff going on and escalating. He’s been called out in his actions towards a number of people he has outed quite a few times, and all that seems to happen is the same thing over an over. To me the situation looks complex all round, and I can’t see how a medium like twitter is going to be able to deal with that.
             • Stephanie Rodgers …

               11 May 2015 at 10:38 pm

               all that seems to happen is the same thing over an over.

               It has nothing to do with the medium and everything to do with people constantly prioritising his BS over the harm he’s done and the safety of others.
               • weka …

                 11 May 2015 at 10:45 pm

                 So how do you see this ending? Because I don’t see the current strategy as going somewhere good.
     • marty mars 2.4.2

       11 May 2015 at 11:51 pm

       Very good comment – thanks Stephanie
3. phillip ure 3

   11 May 2015 at 6:58 pm

   (apologies for double-posting – i forgot about this option..)

   ed:.imagined-conversations – overheard @ the little/labour schmooze-fest with big business:

   1st businessman:..’look andrew – we’re a bit worried about this capital gains tax policy you’ve had for the last two elections’..

   little:..’no worries – it’s gone – and it won’t be coming back..”

   2nd businessman:..’look andrew – we’re a bit worried about this idea floated the other day to end the tax-breaks we get on our investment-property mortgage-payments..what do you have to say about that..?’

   little:..’hah!..the other day was the first i even heard of that one – so no – you’ll be sweet..we won’t do that..’

   3rd businessman:..’look andrew – we’re a bit worried about rising wages under a labour govt. – what do you have to say about that..?’

   little:..’relax – we will be the same as the clark govt was..’nuff said..?..nothing will change in that area that much’..

   4th businessman:..’andrew – we’re a bit worried about the influence the green party would have on you in govt..’

   little:..’you can relax there too – didn’t you see our 2014-policies on mining/drilling etc..?..you have nothing to worry about there..

   ..and the greens were totally on board for all that – they just really want to be ministers..i’ll give them a couple of electric ministerial-limos – some more housing-insulation – they’ll be sweet..don’t you worry about them..”

   5th businessman:..’andrew – the radical-lefties keep calling for a financial-transaction tax – what will labour do about that..?’

   little:..’we will do nothing about that – we just never mention it..next question..?’

   6th businessman:..’andrew – there are all these calls from the media/bleeding heart liberals to ‘do something about poverty!’..will you just give them more money..?..will you raise benefit-levels..?’

   little:..relax..!..once again – i can promise you we will do the same as the clark labour govt did – things will stay the same – your taxes won’t rise..

   ..and once again – didn’t you see our policy on that at the last election..?..

   ..we said we would be the same as national in our treatment of beneficiaries –

   – and their benefits will only go up by the rate of inflation – under any labour govt. led by me..’

   7 th businessman:..’andrew – how do we know we can trust you to do what we want –

   what if we support you – agree that it’s labours’ turn – and then you turn on us.?..betray our support..’

   little:..’hey..!..i’m not silly..!..and it’s me..!..andrew..!..former head of the engineers’ union..!..remember..?

   ..what trouble did i ever give you guys when i was in that role..?

   ..i am a safe pair of hands for you..i’m not going to rock any boats…

   ..do we have a deal..?..’

   businessmen (in chorus..) ‘we have a deal..!’..

   (much handshaking and backslapping then ensued..)

   http://whoar.co.nz/2015/comment-whoar-imagined-conversations-overheard-labour-partybig-business-schmooze-fest/
   • Atiawa 3.1

     11 May 2015 at 7:28 pm

     Fuck off. You obviously don’t have any understanding of Andrew Little and the values he represents.
     • phillip ure 3.1.1

       11 May 2015 at 7:42 pm

       i do have a clear ‘understanding’ of labour party policies ’14 election/and record..tho’..eh..?

       ..and i know it is all rather damning when collected in one place..

       ..and could be rather hard for some to swallow..

       ..but the record speaks for itself..both recent and old..

       ..and i have seen no hint of any changes to that pattern..

       ..just the contrary..

       ..so tell me to ‘fuck off’ all you like..that record still stands..
     • Colonial Rawshark 3.1.2

       12 May 2015 at 12:07 am

       Fuck off. You obviously don’t have any understanding of Andrew Little and the values he represents.

       He voted for National’s anti terrorism legislation; he sidelined the Greens from the intelligence committee.
     • Charles 3.1.3

       12 May 2015 at 8:21 am

       “…Don’t forget to be kind to each other…”

       “Fuck off. You obviously don’t have any…”

       LOOL. Can you can feel the kindness?
4. jenny kirk 4

   11 May 2015 at 7:27 pm

   You have an over-active imagination, PU !
   • phillip ure 4.1

     11 May 2015 at 7:36 pm

     really jenny..?..the context and the actual words attributed..yes..

     ..but the policy record/enunciations are all current/past labour party policies/records of time in office..

     ..show me which aren’t..

     ..all satire has to have that core/kernel of truth..eh..?

     ..and really..what else was labour/little doing with that schmooze-fest with the enemies of the working-poor/unemployed..?

     ..if not to reassure them on all those subjects..?

     ..to show them what a ‘safe pair of hand’ (to for their interests) little-labour would be..?

     ..if not that..what..?
     • adam 4.1.1

       11 May 2015 at 7:40 pm

       Speaking of satire
5. b waghorn 5

   11 May 2015 at 7:36 pm

   On tv1 news the European union has decided that to stop people trafficking out Libya were people are trying to escape the misery of war is to start air strikes on the smuggling routes. What could possible go wrong.
   • Colonial Rawshark 5.1

     11 May 2015 at 10:14 pm

     Yeah I saw that. Reminds me of what Gandhi said about “western civilisation.” It would be quite nice to have some.
6. NickS 6

   11 May 2015 at 7:59 pm

   http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/car-registration-fees-drop-dramatically-acc-levies-slashed-6311337

   Oh for fucks sake, here we go again. What’s to bet this will really fuck with ACC’s finances in the long run, resulting in future governments having to put money into ACC to cover the shortfall this will create.
   • Maui 6.1

     11 May 2015 at 8:22 pm

     I thought there weren’t any proposed tax cuts this term… oh yeh there is. That’ll keep the middle voters happy.
   • Draco T Bastard 6.2

     11 May 2015 at 9:10 pm

     Someone’s obviously concerned about the decreasing use of cars in NZ and the lowered profits that come with them.

     http://transportblog.co.nz/2014/12/03/supply-curves-slope-upwards-demand-curves-slope-downwards-have-we-noticed/
     http://transportblog.co.nz/2014/11/03/what-does-the-next-aucklander-want/

     This government keeps building roads that nobody wants and so they’re obviously looking for ways to encourage more car use..
     • NickS 6.2.1

       11 May 2015 at 9:44 pm

       Which is affected primarily by fuel prices not ACC levies 🙄

       And yeah, of course a National government is going to ignore any strong empirical evidence that their policies art wrong, especially since only poor people must use public transport, despite the fact it’s pretty representative.
7. Philip Ferguson 7

   11 May 2015 at 8:05 pm

   With Andrew Little schmoozing big business and Tim Barnett flying the flag for taking money off people who don’t register to vote, perhaps unions should be rethinking some things about Labour:
   https://rdln.wordpress.com/2015/05/02/why-unions-should-not-be-affiliated-to-labour/
   • Stephanie Rodgers 7.1

     11 May 2015 at 8:16 pm

     By “schmoozing big business” do you mean “addressing a regional Chamber of Commerce at Budget time just like every Labour leader has done since forever”?
     • phillip ure 7.1.1

       11 May 2015 at 8:44 pm

       i think he is talking about this..

       http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11445665

       “..An evening function hosted by Andrew Little had Labour’s leader and his MPs schmoozing with some of the cream of New Zealand capitalism…”
       • One Anonymous Bloke 7.1.1.1

         11 May 2015 at 9:17 pm

         So he’s repeating the NZ Foxherald’s framing of the issue. And?
       • Anne 7.1.1.2

         11 May 2015 at 9:38 pm

         Little could just as easily be accused of smooching the unions because they were all there too.
         • phillip ure 7.1.1.2.1

           12 May 2015 at 5:49 am

           were they..?
         • Charles 7.1.1.2.2

           12 May 2015 at 8:26 am

           Andrew Little smooching the unions. Now there’s an image I have not previously considered.
8. NZSage 8

   11 May 2015 at 8:46 pm

   $6 Million of OUR money to “Offended” Saudi businessman,

   Was it a gift, compensation or bribe? No brainer in my view.

   This needs a full independent investigation.

   http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/nz-government-gifts-6m-offended-saudi-businessman-6309101
   • Potato 8.1

     11 May 2015 at 9:07 pm

     But today it becomes more offensive to us as it is revealed that the shipment of live sheep that died en route from Australia and that caused the banning of live exports belonged to the same Saudi businessman.

     http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/thousands-sheep-owned-compensated-saudi-farmer-died-ship-6311364

     I stand for … not rewarding animal cruelty by giving the owner more animals !
     • rawshark-yeshe 8.1.1

       11 May 2015 at 9:24 pm

       standing with you … he needs to be prosecuted. not rewarded.

       sometimes I am sure Key really is an alien walk-in.
   • b waghorn 8.2

     11 May 2015 at 9:09 pm

     Key claimed on the news to not know that it was the offended business mans sheep that died on the ship that led to NZ s banning of live exports.
9. Herodotus 9

   11 May 2015 at 10:47 pm

   ww.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11446800
   So, after our deputy mayor attempt to have central government assist in providing infrastructure, we now have it reported that to proceed with providing auckland with additional housing the government imposes that developers now fund projects that are the NZTA responsibility
   “Completion of the motorway infrastructure was also a requirement of the Millwater consent.” No wonder land is sooo expensive in Auckland.
   Is there no shame on the government in its attempts to achieve a surplus ?

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS