Same old National

62 comments on “Same old National ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Tane 1

   19 December 2007 at 1:52 pm

   If it wasn’t so amateur in its execution I’d say it had John Ansell written all over it. He’s been a regular over at Farrar’s blog lately and it seems to suit his style.

   Watch as Farrar tries to distance his little front group from the National Party, but he’s not fooling anyone. This is a guy who did ten years for the party in Parliament and had Bill English as a guest at his recent birthday bash. He’s the insider’s insider and this would not have been done without National’s backing or at least approval.
2. Sam Dixon 2

   19 December 2007 at 2:05 pm

   Not to mention money.

   The Free Speech Coalition hasn’t raised any serious amount of money from the public, tha’ts obvious from their site.

   The ‘public donations’ is just a cover for large secet doantions to the FPC from the same people who secretly back National.
3. Billy 3

   19 December 2007 at 2:15 pm

   Tane,

   Might be time for one of your famous “DPF, what’s your game…” conspiracy comments at Kiwiblog.
4. Sam Dixon 4

   19 December 2007 at 2:27 pm

   Billy – its not conspiracy theory – its true that Farrar is a national party activist and he works in their HQ. Now, he’s putting up billboards – where do you think the idea, the money, and the production assistance came from?

   Do you think a National party operative just starts a major campaign without talking to the party? No.

   This is a National Party campaign… Farrar’s sticky fingers are all over it, most notably in the fact that the concept of the billboards is childish and unclever… but it is a National campaign none the less.
5. MikeE 5

   19 December 2007 at 2:30 pm

   So you got anything better than an ad hominum attack on the FSC because ONE of their members is involved with the National Party?

   I suppose Hone Hariwara is a National Party stooge too with tht reasoning.

   Go on, shoot the messenger, rather than debating the argument, the standard seems to excell at that
6. rjs131 6

   19 December 2007 at 2:35 pm

   Good to see schools in the local mangere area are so well funded as a result of the efforst of taito philip field, that they have seell billboard space…..
7. Tane 7

   19 December 2007 at 2:36 pm

   because ONE of their members is involved with the National Party?

   Actually, the two main people in the FSC are National Party operatives – David Farrar and Cameron Slater. It’s pretty clearly a National Party front. And as I see it, the ads are being attacked on their own merits – they’re filthy, disgraceful and offensive – but we should also not ignore where they’ve come from.

   I suppose Hone Hariwara is a National Party stooge too with tht reasoning.

   Hone Harawira had nothing to do with these tasteless billboards or National’s Free Speech Coalition. He’s far too smart an operator for that.
8. Robinsod 8

   19 December 2007 at 2:38 pm

   I just had a look at KB on this issue. These hysterical fools sound like they’re gonna be dragged outta their beds in the middle of the night, bound and gagged and disappeared into a state run interrogation centre. Come to think of it maybe that’s not such a bad idea… Except for the interrogation part of course – these fuckers don’t need any more excuses to blurt their vile thoughts.
9. Seamonkey Madness 9

   19 December 2007 at 2:41 pm

   Seriously are you guys running a comedy club or a political blog? At times like these, it is hard to tell. 😀

   And while the school did ask for it to be removed, the were acting on behalf of the Ministry of Education = fair enough. But what about the political billboard that was there last election and wasn’t asked to be removed.

   Serious question now. Do you want to see billboards like this banned?

   Tin foil hats in place! Regular transmission will now resume!
10. Robinsod 10

    19 December 2007 at 2:44 pm

    SMM – what political billboard? The one Davey said “someone” told him about?
11. Phil 11

    19 December 2007 at 2:51 pm

    I can’t wait for Tui to get invloved in this…
12. Seamonkey Madness 12

    19 December 2007 at 2:54 pm

    Robinsod,

    I am sure if digging is required, a smart investigate reporter might do some asking at the billboard agency. Which is proably what David did, if he had to answer a question such as that. You don’t go out on a public, political limb like that without have done your research.
13. ZenTiger 13

    19 December 2007 at 3:02 pm

    I thought the virgin Mary episode on Southpark was just a bit beyond the pale. It was called satire apparently.

    I wasn’t thrilled when Labour issued those fake eviction notices last campaign either. Pretty low really.

    And now we have this. And the “billboards” on your previous post. This is the society Labour is helping to build. One where we have to tolerate anything in the name of satire. Well, fair enough I suppose.

    Although this paranoia that it is a “National Party” campaign is equally amusing. Fighting Labour’s more stupid policies is just a week-end hobby. Exploiting workers is a full time job, there aint much time left over for political activism unless it is a hobby.

    On another matter, a bit ironic that now there is a spending cap on third party spending of $120,000 that Labour launch a 5 million dollar billboard campaign. Puts the FSC effort of $7,000 to shame. Just not sure they’ve picked the right slogans: Labour’s 5 million dollar billboard campaign
14. djp 14

    19 December 2007 at 3:03 pm

    Tane: according to the article (read the headline guys) the billboard was pulled for “political reasons” not because of the content.

    Also, does anyone actually have some sort of proof that the Free Speech Coalition is a front for National or are we just resorting to rumor and hearsay?
15. Robinsod 15

    19 December 2007 at 3:13 pm

    You don’t go out on a public, political limb like that without have done your research.

    SMM – I’m not sure David would have done any research into this claim. As I’m banned from KB I can’t ask him if he did. Perhaps you could do so?
16. r0b 16

    19 December 2007 at 3:18 pm

    Labour launch a 5 million dollar billboard campaign.

    The original post is obviously satire, but not as Zen reproduces it. I wonder how long before this now stray meme shows up as “fact” on Kiwiblog?

    Also, does anyone actually have some sort of proof that the Free Speech Coalition is a front for National

    djp – see Tane’s post above. You might just as well ask if anyone has any sort of proof that the CTU is allied with Labour.
17. Seamonkey Madness 17

    19 December 2007 at 3:25 pm

    I’m sure David can read The Standard and answer this question for himself.

    Meanwhile, can all_your_base answer djp’s question: Also, does anyone actually have some sort of proof that the Free Speech Coalition is a front for National or are we just resorting to rumor and hearsay?

    DPF has a clear statement of disclosure on his site, in a prominent position. Read it.

    Can anyone answer my question I posed before please – should billboards like this be banned?

    (Captcha = triple official. A good description of Labour beuracracy if ever there was one!)
18. Kimble 18

    19 December 2007 at 3:25 pm

    New Definition Alert:

    Any third party that opposes any party is from now on refered to as a “front” for any party they have had any relation with.

    As such, Greenpeace is now a Green Party “Front”, same for PETA and the wild greens.

    By calling something a “Front” you can conveniently ignore anything they have to say. It has been tainted by the assumed relationship.
19. MikeE 19

    19 December 2007 at 3:28 pm

    I am very sure bernard darnton would take offense at being called a national party front.
20. Sam Dixon 20

    19 December 2007 at 3:28 pm

    djp – its being pulled because its political – that’s just a poor headline – clue: read the article, don’t make conclusions from headlines

    imagine the worldview you would have if you jsut read the headlines! oh, djp, I, I think I understand you now.

    its well-documented that the leaders of the FSC are national operatives, that makes it a national operation.
21. Seamonkey Madness 21

    19 December 2007 at 3:37 pm

    DPF/Kiwblog/CFS = National operative/front
    âˆâ€  The Standard/KBB = Labour operatives/front?
22. Tane 22

    19 December 2007 at 3:37 pm

    Can anyone answer my question I posed before please – should billboards like this be banned?

    Of course not, but they should be held up for criticism, and in some cases ridicule, and the people behind them should be held to account for their contents. And of course, there should be limits on how much any one group can spend so as to keep our electoral system a reasonably level playing field. It’s democracy in action my friend.
23. gobsmacked 23

    19 December 2007 at 3:39 pm

    I see they are planning a billboard featuring Chairman Mao.

    Did DPF run this by his old boss Jenny Shipley, who is prominently involved in developing business relationships with China? I wonder how this will go down with the Beijing dictatorship, for whom Mao is still a revered figure?

    Of course offending China shouldn’t matter when there’s a principle at stake (except, um … protestors … buses … free trade agreement … Dalai Lama … Jiang Zemin … etc)

    Expect the Mao one to be pulled. Orders from above?
24. unaha-closp 24

    19 December 2007 at 3:48 pm

    They are running OTT attack ads, how silly can they get? The fools use their free speech in the worst possible manner free speech can be used to drive up hatred and expect ordinary people to say “We need more of this.” It is stupid.
25. r0b 25

    19 December 2007 at 3:50 pm

    unaha – agreed (for a change!).
26. r0b 26

    19 December 2007 at 3:52 pm

    âˆâ€  The Standard/KBB = Labour operatives/front?

    As far as I know I’m the only one “out” on this blog as an active member of the Labour Party. And I’m just a random poster, not management.
27. Billy 27

    19 December 2007 at 4:04 pm

    I notice that Sam Dixon has been quiet in his condemnation of comparison of Labour to dictators. Given his vandalising of DPF’s wiki entry and linking him to Nazi parties, I guess he has to be a bit quiet.

    At least Tane, Robinsod and all condemned Sam…oh, hang on…
28. ZenTiger 28

    19 December 2007 at 4:10 pm

    its well-documented that the leaders of the FSC are national operatives, that makes it a national operation.

    It’s well documented that if witches float, they are made of wood, and therefore can be burned at the stake.

    Although I don’t think that logic has stood the test of time Sam.

    Actually, I think the Automobile Association are behind this. Their membership reach is staggering. And when I posted my concerns about the EFB, I received in the mail the very next day a “suggestion” from AA Life that I better take out “life insurance”. The threat was clear, and they KNEW WHERE I LIVED. Chilling stuff. Sam would know what I mean.
29. Robinsod 29

    19 December 2007 at 4:11 pm

    Billy – if Sam was the “wiki vandal” then good on him. Gave me a laugh and considering the man tolerates comments like this on his blog:

    “Jill Pettis is the sort of bitch domestic violence arose to counter..shes mad!”

    Nice bloke that DPF…
30. insider 30

    19 December 2007 at 4:13 pm

    So the unions run by Jill Ovens and Andrew Little are by Tane’s definition Labour fronts? Is that what you are saying Tane or is it one rule for fronts on the left and another for fronts on the right?

    Isn’t Irish Bill a Labour man? He is certainly close to the Dunedin branches from his own writing.
31. Billy 31

    19 December 2007 at 4:18 pm

    Don’t think it was tolerated at all. The person got demerits.

    Robinsod, you are going to have to explain to me why comparison of DPF to Nazis is fair enough, but comparison of the Labour party (who, like it or not, have just passed a law seen by many people of doverse political leanings to be undemoctratic) with Bainimaramara is not. Because I just do not understand that.
32. Robinsod 32

    19 December 2007 at 4:22 pm

    Billy – I’m not offended by the billboards. Oh and the person got 20 demerits. I got banned for life with no warning and no prior demerits for taking the piss out of DPF over the KtB campaign. In my book 20 demerit points is toleration.
33. Billy 33

    19 December 2007 at 4:27 pm

    “I’m not offended by the billboards.”

    That is fine then. You think it is OK acceptable to compare people to dictators.

    Tane obviously feels differently:

    http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2007/12/some_billboards_to_enjoy.html#comment-384778

    I look forward to Tane’s condemnation of Sam’s vandalism.
34. gobsmacked 34

    19 December 2007 at 4:27 pm

    Your future news headlines, January 2008: “Key slams billboard, sacks Farrar”.

    Far-fetched? Here’s something that really did happen:

    From Stuff.co.nz, May 2006 (no longer online) …

    “A mob of angry Chinese students protested at Massey University yesterday after Chairman Mao was lampooned on the cover of the student newspaper.

    Students likened the cover of Chaff, which this week satirises women’s magazine Cosmopolitan, to the anti-Muslim cartoons circulated around the world in February.

    Tempers flared outside Massey’s library as about 50 Chinese Massey and UCOL students and a Chinese lecturer confronted Chaff staff.

    Students said the issue is racist and the last straw, as many have also suffered verbal abuse on the streets of Palmerston North.

    Tianxiang Mao said it was common for Asian students to be lambasted with racial slurs when driving.

    “People yell `F-ing Asians’ when we are in the car driving down the road. I don’t say anything. What can I do?”

    UCOL student Xing Tang said Chaff staff are ignorant of Chinese culture.

    “Chairman Mao is like Jesus to us,” he said on the verge of tears.”

    ENDS

    Yep, those Mao billboards are definitely up for a re-think! (once Key’s strategists have worked out how many Chinese voters there are out there …)
35. Billy 35

    19 December 2007 at 4:28 pm

    And this:

    http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2007/12/some_billboards_to_enjoy.html#comment-384785
36. Tane 36

    19 December 2007 at 4:29 pm

    So the unions run by Jill Ovens and Andrew Little are by Tane’s definition Labour fronts?

    No, because between them they have nearly 70,000 members. They’re mass grassroots organisations.

    KtB is National Party activists like Davey and Whaleoil, a couple of dozen nutters from the Kiwiblog right and the usual smattering of hollow men like Don Brash and Roger Kerr. It looks like a front group, it has the membership of a front group and it acts like a front group. My guess is it’s a front group.
37. Tane 37

    19 December 2007 at 4:32 pm

    I look forward to Tane’s condemnation of Sam’s vandalism.

    Billy, I know it’s hard seeing the right fuck up like this, but plese stop trying to divert the thread with this nonsense.

    I’ve said repeatedly that I oppose Wikipedia vandalism and have extended my sympathy to DPF for what happened. Is it too much to do some basic research before you start flinging mud at me?
38. James Sleep 38

    19 December 2007 at 4:32 pm

    Wonder if the public want to know about the kind of things the co-founder of this group gets up to.

    Like photo shopping a 15 year old boys head onto gay porn?

    I was very quiet about it – but now that they start to compare our leaders to the leaders/dictators of corrupt countries I feel so empowered to expose Cameron Slater, who of course is working with David for the National party.
39. Billy 39

    19 December 2007 at 4:40 pm

    “Having said that, I don’t support Wikipedia vandalism and can see why David was upset”

    http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2007/12/the_wikipedia_vandal.html#comment-376179

    Cf

    “Absolute fucking filth. You should be ashamed of yourself David.”

    http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2007/12/some_billboards_to_enjoy.html#comment-384778

    You’re right Tane. Complete consistency there.
40. Tane 40

    19 December 2007 at 4:50 pm

    Billy, if you can’t see the difference between a childish and unfortunate piece of vandalism on a Wikipedia page and a divisive, high profile billboard campaign comparing political leaders to some of the world’s worst dictators then I’m not sure I can help you.

    Neither are great and I’ve condemned both, but I think you need to get some perspective on this one.
41. Billy 41

    19 December 2007 at 4:51 pm

    And the issue is hardly Wikipedia vandalism (which, of course, is not to be condoned). Either you think it is OK to compare people a very long way away from dictators to dictators, or you don’t. Once you have decided on which side of that line you fall, you either consider it all as acceptable (like Robinsod) or none of it.
42. Billy 42

    19 December 2007 at 4:52 pm

    “childish and unfortunate piece of vandalism”

    Linking DPF with Nazis?
43. Santi 43

    19 December 2007 at 5:03 pm

    You bunch of socialists are beyond salvation.

    What if is DPF’s or someone else’s money and he/she wants to spend it that way? What business is of yours?

    You will never understand the meaning of freedom and not to meddle/interfere in the lives of others.

    Get lost.
44. Seamonkey Madness 44

    19 December 2007 at 5:03 pm

    Oh my god James, just go to the media already and “expose” Cam!

    I can write the email they are going send you. It goes alittle something like this:

    Dear Mr Sleep,

    HAHAHAHAHA!

    Regards,

    A. Journalist

    (Captcha words = satisfactory Urine! Ye gods!!:D)
45. Tane 45

    19 December 2007 at 5:12 pm

    He linked DPF with the National Front. I think that’s pretty shit and I condemned it. If he’d put up billboards comparing DPF to Hitler I’d have suggested he take them down. I’m not sure what you’re trying to get at here, other than to try and distract from the fact that DPF’s latest campaign is absolutely vile.

    You can harp on all day about whether you think I have done enough to condemn someone who I don’t even know for something that had nothing to do with me, but you’re grasping mate. The fact is this campaign stinks something rotten and DPF and the National Party need to be called on it.
46. Santi 46

    19 December 2007 at 5:18 pm

    Tane said “The fact is this campaign stinks something rotten and DPF and the National Party need to be called on it.”

    Why? Just because the campaign is not pro-Labour and attacks the people you love and adore?

    Let democracy play its role, and, more important, let people determine what they want to see, publish, print and broadcast.

    This is not the Democratic Republic of New Zealand, yet.
47. Pascal's bookie 47

    19 December 2007 at 5:19 pm

    Billy

    If someone put up some billboards saying DPF was a Nazi, you’d have some reason to expect a perfectly consistent response.

    As it is, someone made a change in a link on his wikipedia page so that if someone followed that link they would end up at the National Front site. Is that how it went? Tane can defend himself, but he has said he disagrees with both things, the more serious one, more forcefully.

    Are you busy on KB accusing people of hypocrisy if they;

    1, agreed with DPF’s response to that vandalism,

    but are

    2, ok with the billboards?

    Or are you just being a dick because a bunch of people on your side of the fence have confused the streets of our fine land with a kiwiblog comment section, and their nuttiness is on full display?
48. Billy 48

    19 December 2007 at 8:15 pm

    Pascal’s Bookie,

    In answer to your question: I am trying to be a dick.

    What the fuck do you think?
49. Pascal's bookie 49

    19 December 2007 at 8:27 pm

    I think you’re doing a very good job
50. Mike Porton 50

    19 December 2007 at 8:36 pm

    Burn! Jees, Billy you walked into that.
51. Billy 51

    19 December 2007 at 9:24 pm

    “I am trying to be a dick.”

    Sorry, I was using sarcasm. I was not really trying to be a dick. At all.
52. illuminatedtiger 52

    19 December 2007 at 9:52 pm

    *sigh* This is why we need to EFB. To stop fools with money trying to buy opinion and elections. The amount of bullshit going around about the EFB is staggering.
53. Lampie 53

    19 December 2007 at 10:01 pm

    I was not really trying to be a dick

    Pussy then?
54. djp 54

    19 December 2007 at 10:54 pm

    >djp – its being pulled because its political – that’s just a poor headline – clue: read the article, don’t make conclusions from headlines

    Thanks for that Sam but the article says exactly the same thing:

    “The billboard, which criticises legislation passed yesterday limiting what can be spent on political advertising, was deemed to be ‘political’ and therefore not allowed to be displayed on school grounds.”

    I read the headline *and* the article…. what did you read???

    >its well-documented that the leaders of the FSC are national operatives, that makes it a national operation.

    Sam Dixon: care to let the rest of us in on this well documented evidence?
55. Santi 55

    20 December 2007 at 6:43 am

    “*sigh* This is why we need to EFB. To stop fools with money trying to buy opinion and elections.”

    Will it stop the CTU or EPMU? The opinion of such dim tiger.
56. The Double Standard 56

    20 December 2007 at 7:56 am

    “No, because between them they have nearly 70,000 members. They’re mass grassroots organisations.”

    With annual revenues that measure in the 10s of millions of dollars. How much are we talking about here again? Under $20,000.

    Pity that the Auckland council is no longer stacked with billboard-hating “clean up the city” campaigner’s eh boys?

    Here’s an idea – why don’t the standardistas get some funding together and erect some billboards of their own?
57. Spectator 57

    23 December 2007 at 9:47 pm

    To Seamonkey Madness: I do not believe the media in New Zealand are anywhere near as tolerant of child pornography as you seem to believe they are.

Links to post

1. Farrar Launches Billboard Campaign « KiwiBlogBlog: posted on 19 December 2007 at 2:04 pm
2. Secret Money Buys Crappy Campaign « KiwiBlogBlog: posted on 19 December 2007 at 3:09 pm
3. Thesproutandthebean: posted on 20 December 2007 at 8:25 pm
4. DPF’s bloody good deal at thestandard.org.nz: posted on 31 December 2007 at 11:06 pm
5. Mao Zedong features as preferred PM at thestandard.org.nz: posted on 3 March 2008 at 12:23 pm

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS