Kitteridge report released

Written By: - Date published: 4:46 pm, April 9th, 2013 - 42 comments
Categories: accountability, defence, kremlinology, Parliament - Tags: , ,

Following the leaking of the Kitteridge GCSB report to the media (who had copies? who leaked?) and ructions in Parliament’s question time today, the report has been released early. It is available here (or direct link to pdf).

The timing is awfully convenient for the Nats, because for obvious reasons this won’t make the top story on the news tonight.

Up to 85 Kiwis have been illegally spied on – wonder who made the list…

42 comments on “Kitteridge report released ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Rogue Trooper 1
    9 April 2013 at 5:00 pm

    well…the Mob’s ears are always burning…and the Angels are always on our shoulder…

  2. mickysavage 2
    9 April 2013 at 5:00 pm

    Sooo …

    Who leaked it and why?

    Is it better for Key to be in or out of the country when it is released?

      • karol 2.1.1
        9 April 2013 at 6:43 pm

        Yesterday David Fisher on The NZ Herald added some more detail to Fletcher’s background.

        Ian Fletcher came to the role of Kiwi spymaster after a front-row seat at one of the greatest and most criticised intelligence operations of recent time.

        And he was interviewed and hired to run the GCSB while under investigation for contempt of the Queensland Parliament. The complaint went no further after Mr Fletcher made a correction to the parliamentary record. ..

        In 2002, he took a role that placed him at the heart of the British deliberations that led to its involvement in the Iraq war. He was principal private secretary to Sir Andrew Turnbull, the incoming Cabinet secretary and Britain’s most powerful civil servant.

        Documents released in the inquiry into the Iraq war show Mr Fletcher was privy to “extremely sensitive” and secret documents forecasting the march to war.

        Mr Fletcher saw early military planning and advice stating “US military planning is in full swing” in July 2002 – eight months before the invasion began and before Britain had committed to join the attack.

        Sir Andrew’s tenure ended in 2005, as did Mr Fletcher’s role. Sir Andrew later revealed Britain had gone to war on legal advice which was one page long – and substantially different to advice which had been given 10 days earlier. …

        In 2009, Mr Fletcher welcomed Prince Andrew when he moved to the UK’s Intellectual Property Office in 2007 – and then kept a portrait photo of the prince when he moved to Australia in 2009 to run Queensland’s Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation.

        Mr Fletcher became embroiled in controversy after having to correct evidence given to a parliamentary committee. He had been quizzed over an expensive lease which was broken when a government agency moved from Los Angeles to Latin America.

        He said the decision to move was made after the lease was signed – a statement contradicted when internal emails were leaked to a journalist. Mr Fletcher complained to the Misconduct Commission about the leak, whose investigation is ongoing.

        He has been criticised for an “extraordinary overreaction” by complaining to the commission, which has grilled public servants under threat of jail and on oath to find who leaked the emails.

        The complaint to Parliament’s Ethics Committee was made a week before he was interviewed for the GCSB job on July 26, 2011. He did not respond to questions relating to the incident – or whether it was declared during his interview for the job.

        h/t Bomber.

        • Treetop 2.1.1.1
          9 April 2013 at 6:59 pm

          I’d like to see what Fletcher declared at the interview for director of GCSB. See Keats did not declare a relationship and now an inquiry.

    • Treetop 2.2
      9 April 2013 at 5:48 pm

      Better for Key to be out of the country as the opposition can be sounded out and Key does not have to respond until he gets back.

      It is my understanding that Dotcom was left out of the Kitteridge report. When it comes to Dotcom the lawfulness of being spied on is not disputed, as for the consequences this is not determined other than sparking the Kitteridge report.

      So now the Inspector General has to look at the 88 people spied on to determine the lawfulness and the consequences.

      When it comes to the GCSB acting for the SIS I hold the GCSB resposible as all it required from the GCSB was NO (where are you Winston with a NO sign).

      • mickysavage 2.2.1
        9 April 2013 at 6:17 pm

        Key was just on Checkpoint and sounded pissed off that he was having to deal with the publication of the report from China.

        • TruthSeeker 2.2.1.1
          9 April 2013 at 6:34 pm

          I am in no doubt that the leaking of this report was done without Key’s knowledge or authorisation. I think it was deliberately timed to embarrass the PM and derail his trip to China.

          The question is who would do it, and why?

          English said in the House today that it was distributed to a number of agencies and ministers. But I also understand that Bruce Ferguson was given a draft copy of the report… so he and his friends in the GCSB could be responsible.

          It was interesting that on the same day The Dom got leaked the details of the report, the Herald got an interview with Ferguson slamming the PM. Both ended up on the frontpage. Coincidence?

          Also – I note that it *was* the lead story on all three channels.

          • Anne 2.2.1.1.1
            9 April 2013 at 6:47 pm

            I also understand that Bruce Ferguson was given a draft copy of the report… so he could very well be the source of the leak

            Out of order there TruthSeeker. No way would Ferguson even contemplate such an action. Far too much integrity for that.

            Your second guess is the more likely source of the leak:

            Otherwise it would appear that some in the civil service are as pissed off as we are…

            They have much cause to be.

        • Treetop 2.2.1.2
          9 April 2013 at 6:38 pm

          Will have to wait until 7pm CL to see if Fletcher shows. Interesting that he is going to be on when Key is out of the country.

          • TruthSeeker 2.2.1.2.1
            9 April 2013 at 7:15 pm

            “Um uh um uh um uh um uh”!

            • Treetop 2.2.1.2.1.1
              9 April 2013 at 8:00 pm

              Ok in my defence Fletcher had to go to get to a 7.30 pm appointment and time was limited!

              Um uh to some of Fletchers answers.

  3. ianmac 3
    9 April 2013 at 5:04 pm

    The drift of the Questions in the House today was that if this was an accidental leak there would be an Enquiry to find the leak. Yes? Er not much sign of that according to Mr English. Surely there would be – unless the leak was not accidental and a deliberate effort to deflate the debate over GCSB.
    There are Leaks and there are leaks.

    • Treetop 3.1
      9 April 2013 at 6:06 pm

      “There are Leaks and there are leaks.”

      When it comes to naming any of the 88 or anything specifis e.g. a date or region, careful not to have leaked this.

      Shambles and this is just the start of unravelling the interpretation of the law.

      What were the GCSB thinking and being a NZ citizen or resident would have triggered the alarm bells?

  4. ianmac 4
    9 April 2013 at 5:07 pm

    And wouldn’t it be interesting to know who had been spied on. That set of addenda?

    • ghostwhowalksnz 4.1
      9 April 2013 at 5:25 pm

      If they were doing it for the SIS, it would most likely be people who had links to foreign groups.
      Most likely NGOs like Greenpeace, or animal rights groups. And then those who have connections back to perhaps their country of origin, like Iran or Iraq or Afghanistan and even Tamil;s from Sri Lanka

  5. Rogue Trooper 5
    9 April 2013 at 5:28 pm

    well, I read past “30” and to be frank; it is all f*cked up (they shoulda’ “shoulder-tapped ” the ghost back in High School and then they would not be the the fools of ridicule they are now; don’t you know, the ghost is one of the most Intelligent people his peers know? F*ckin wasted talent is what I say; and while you are at it you clowns, I did despair over my stolen light; fringe indeed).may you all burn (metaphorically speaking, FFS).!!!

  6. Pascal's bookie 6
    9 April 2013 at 6:00 pm

    Who leaked it?

    Obvious innit?

    The same Labour Party techno-thieves who stole that Mr Brash’s emails.

    • mickysavage 6.1
      9 April 2013 at 6:11 pm

      Hehe

      Don’t get Matthew Hooton started on it!

      • Private Baldrick 6.1.1
        9 April 2013 at 6:29 pm

        Peggity Gwes !!!!

      • georgecom 6.1.2
        9 April 2013 at 10:43 pm

        Nothing for Mathew Hooten to get started on. Brash’s emails were not stolen, they were leaked by a Nat insider. If Brash et al want to classify that as stolen then they of course are entitled to their view. Brash et al should have then combed through the Nat party looking for the person who took and leaked the emails.

        • felix 6.1.2.1
          9 April 2013 at 11:01 pm

          He wouldn’t have had to look far either. Just had to turn around.

        • Draco T Bastard 6.1.2.2
          10 April 2013 at 12:47 am

          The Nats saying that the emails were stolen was a distraction from what the emails said that the MSM helped them with. None of the MSM got up and said “So, these emails were stolen and thus this is really what the National party are like: Total disrespect for the populace, deceitful and probably incompetent.” The RWNJs on the blogs helped as well by following the C/T lines and crying “STOLEN!!11!” as often as possible and the leftwing parties failed to point out that if they were stolen then what we had was an accurate indication of National’s psyche and it just ain’t nice.

          Would be interesting if this had been leaked by a National insider. It would show that there is a lot of anger over how National are acting and what they’re doing but is it that the possible leaker thinks National should act faster or that they should stop acting like sociopaths?

    • ghostrider888 6.2
      9 April 2013 at 6:12 pm

      well, there is that quote about “farce”. Honestly, I am not surprised people choose to remain ignorant and sedated; you could not make this sh*t up; do these people not read? they just want to send you to ‘Robben Island’ (god forbid we have any modern martyrs who are not photogenic) and wait until you contract pneumonia from your poorly insulated home.

      • Anne 6.2.1
        9 April 2013 at 6:31 pm

        I can’t keep up with all this news. It’s getting to be a bit mind blowing.

        And we’ve already had this weeks govt. agency email leak. Justice Dept. this time. Are there any agencies left to have a leak? 😯

        • Pascal's bookie 6.2.1.1
          9 April 2013 at 6:44 pm

          Defence.

          • ghostrider888 6.2.1.1.1
            9 April 2013 at 6:56 pm

            honestly P B, i shake my poor monastic head. I tells ya, it is just gonna keep on raining now; so much for ‘corporate governance’ Steven; ya shoulda stayed with radio, Hauraki has my vote. Long Live the Havoc.

        • felix 6.2.1.2
          9 April 2013 at 7:36 pm

          Tourism…

  7. Smith 7
    9 April 2013 at 6:54 pm

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10876344

    “Former GCSB director Sir Bruce Ferguson said media coverage of what was in the report ‘gels with everything I saw in the draft report’…

    …Sir Bruce, whose term ended in 2010 said he “assumed” he’d signed off on warrants for the bureau to assist the SIS in investigations which were now the focus of the report but he was unaware of any issues of legality when he signed those warrants.”

    Funny turn of events that. With the horse having bolted Sir Bruce seems to have come in abruptly from the cold and is waxing lyrical to all and sundry in a poorly thought-out attempt to distance himself from the fallout. 🙂

    • ghostrider888 7.1
      9 April 2013 at 6:59 pm

      party politics aside, all tarred; might as well put dog on the menu (keeps one warm in the cold apparently) 🙂 🙂 🙂
      (Tinker Tailor Soldier LIE)

    • karol 7.2
      9 April 2013 at 7:44 pm

      Well, I had concerns about what the GCSB was up to for a long time – especially since learning of it’s Echelon, five-eyes role.

      However, Ferguson seemed to be genuinely concerned about processes involved in the Fletcher appointment. Once he went public on that, Key indicated that Ferguson was in his firing line – as part of his deflection from the Fletcher appointment. Ferguson would surely be aware of that, and thus wanting not to let Team Key run away with their self-serving narrative about Ferguson.

      A complex situation – not clear cut between goodies and baddies by any means.

  8. beatie 8
    9 April 2013 at 8:05 pm

    Watched the Ian Fraser interview on Campbell Live. This bumbling, inarticulate simpleton is our top spy? Give me strength! He’s exactly as I imagined Key’s ‘childhood friend’ would be like.

  9. Murray Olsen 9
    10 April 2013 at 1:23 am

    The 85 would be 85 of us who are of interest to Washington. Our spy agencies and the top echelons of the RNZAF have long seen their first loyalty as being to Washington. I’m amazed the number has even been reported, unless someone wants to say it was happening under Helen Clark so that they can just keep doing it.

    We don’t need them. They are disloyal and incompetent. They should be dismantled.

  10. ak 10
    10 April 2013 at 5:55 am

    Interesting choice of words – “he must be smoking dope” – considering the source and subject.

    Metaphor? Or warning stab from untouchable aggrieved knight with stash of skeletons?

    Certainly would explain state of perpetual relaxation, obvious camaraderie with journalistic cabal, and of course, ongoing “brain fades”.

    Significantly, studiously ignored by media.

  11. chris73 11
    10 April 2013 at 12:52 pm

    It would be interesting to know when the 85 were spied on and who they were

    • felix 11.1
      10 April 2013 at 12:54 pm

      Yeah, let’s breach their privacy again.

    • Pascal's bookie 11.2
      10 April 2013 at 12:55 pm

      Yeah it would. They deserve apologies. Apparently it went on up until Sept last year. Hey, when did John Key find out that GCSB sucked and said he’d be on them like Hawks going forward just you see if I don’t?