Parsing John Key

Written By: - Date published: 8:30 am, April 21st, 2015 - 32 comments
Categories: john key, national - Tags: , ,

John Key is treating the New Zealand population with contempt in the way that it is responding to the latest Snowden revelations.  He would have us believe that Nicky Hager is propagating false information AND dealing with stolen information all at the same time.

So which one is it?  If Hager is lying then what he is saying ought to be easily disproved.  And if he is relying on stolen information then obviously it is accurate not to mention deeply disturbing.

Or is it that John Key is speaking out of many sides of his mouth at the same time?  He has an uncanny skill of doing this.  If you want an example then parse this recent passage from the Herald:

[Yesterday], Mr Key told Radio New Zealand the claims were “unproven”.

The paperwork revealed New Zealand’s GCSB spy agency worked with the United States’ NSA elite hacker team – the Tailored Access Operations division – which specialised in cracking computer systems and planting spyware on computers.

The documents emerged in a reporting project between the Herald on Sunday, investigative journalist Nicky Hager and the US news site, The Intercept, which had access to Snowden’s information.

But Mr Key said: “I would not take everything these guys say literally by any stretch of the imagination.”

He said he had not seen all the information that Hager had access to.

“[Snowden’s] a thief and he stole and you’ve got a bunch of people who’ve been out there propagating information that’s actually been proven to be incorrect.”

Mr Key said no country in the world, including China, talked about the work their foreign intelligence gathering services performed.

“They don’t do it in the United States … they don’t do it in China, they don’t do it anywhere else.

“In the end we have legally established foreign intelligence gathering services – they are there for a reason, they are there for the protection of New Zealand and New Zealand interests and that’s what we do.”

Get that?  In a few sentences Key goes from the claims being “unproven” (Hager always said he had no proof), to an aggressive false sequiter by saying Key would not take every single thing Hager had said literally (only most?), that he has not seen all of Hager’s information (who said he had?), Snowden is a thief AND propagating information proved to be incorrect (which is it?), New Zealand does not talk about these things (why can’t it issue a simple denial), and the GCSB is legally established (which is completely different to a legally established entity deciding to act illegally).

And the funny thing?  Key has not directly denied that the GCSB has worked with the NSA to spy on the Chinese.

The episode displays something about Key which is becoming more and more obvious.  He is not a big wheeler dealer who made his millions by the complexity of the deals that he completed.  He made his money by lining up contracts and persuading the parties through a combination of guile and sloppy language that for each of them it was the deal of the century.  He is a used car salesman on methamphetamine enhanced steroids.  With the assistance of the best focus grouping that money can buy he says what he thinks the various parts of our community will want to hear.  When he is under pressure he says many different things at the same time to a variety of different audiences with a group of tailored messages.

The last time he was this desperate was after the release of Dirty Politics when the response was the same, it was all a lie and the information was illegally obtained all at the same time.

Although I may buy a used car from that man I would prefer that he was not the Prime Minister of my country …

32 comments on “Parsing John Key ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Craig Glen+Eden 1
    21 April 2015 at 8:55 am

    But sadly the journalists hardly ever say, so hang on a minute PM? Is it that the info is stolen or false that you have a problem with? As you rightly point out if its just false made up shit you don’t have to steal a thing you just make up more false stuff.

  2. adam 2
    21 April 2015 at 9:32 am

    I think Ray Davies says it best about our dear PM. Thanks for reminding me of this song MickySavage.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMXdiSDjtH0

  3. Tracey 3
    21 April 2015 at 9:44 am

    “But Mr Key said: “I would not take everything these guys say literally by any stretch of the imagination.”

    Is that like “my office”, Prime Minister hat, Pary leader hat, ordinary bloke hat.

    OR transference

    • Stephanie Rodgers 3.1
      21 April 2015 at 10:22 am

      It’s a way of diminishing Hager/Greenwald/Snowden’s status as informed experts on the issue. If they’re just “these guys” they’re not to be taken as seriously as “these well-regarded investigative journalists and surveillance professionals.”

  5. dukeofurl 5
    21 April 2015 at 11:06 am

    Ask if the GCSB was spying on NZ residents or citizens when it was tapping on communications links between Chinese consulate offices

    • One Anonymous Bloke 5.1
      21 April 2015 at 11:10 am

      It would be very unusual for embassy staff to have permanent residency, let alone citizenship, in NZ.

    • Murray Rawshark 5.2
      21 April 2015 at 3:39 pm

      Indirectly, it would have been. You do not go to a Chinese visa office to obtain a NZ visa if you are Chinese. Such an office deals with visas to visit China. For an office in Greenlane, there is a slight possibility that at least some of the applicants would be Kiwis. Some of them may have even correpsonded with the Chinese diplomats using email, which would have been collected, which is apparently different from surveilled.

  6. hoom 6
    21 April 2015 at 11:39 am

    Here is how I parse Key: If his mouth is open & sound is coming out of it he is lying or at best telling half truths.

    It might be easier if Blip gave up on the lies list & went for the probably much shorter list of cases where he has actually been upfront with verifiable truth.

    The fundamental logic of this particular one is severely broken:
    If the documents are stolen *and* they are false -> Why are the NSA etc internally producing & storing so many false documents?

    • Murray Rawshark 6.1
      21 April 2015 at 3:43 pm

      “the probably much shorter list of cases where he has actually been upfront with verifiable truth.”

      Publishing nothing doesn’t have much impact.

      • vto 6.1.1
        21 April 2015 at 3:50 pm

        Hi there mr rawshark, just thought I would see if you have yet managed to explain how the rainbow warrior incident was “legally an act of war not terror”

        http://thestandard.org.nz/be-afraid-be-very-afraid/#comment-1002498 and other

        I am confused as to the lack of response

        [I just saw this. You guys know the rules. Open mike please – MS]

        • Murray Rawshark 6.1.1.1
          21 April 2015 at 4:15 pm

          Are you my new stalker? I can’t be bothered responding to you. I have useful things to do, like watch grass grow.

          [I just saw this. You guys know the rules. Open mike please – MS]

          • vto 6.1.1.1.1
            21 April 2015 at 4:24 pm

            Sure. What an epic fail. On both counts

            edit: you have given me the giggles again in suggesting the Rainbow Warrior was an act of war. he he

            • Murray Rawshark 6.1.1.1.1.1
              21 April 2015 at 5:21 pm

              A little chronology.
              1. You post a definition of terrorism and a list of a few things you consider terrorist acts, including the attack on the Rainbow Warrior.
              2. I state that my opinion is that the Rainbow Warrior attack fits the legal definition of an act of war, rather than your posted definition of a terrorist act.
              3. You laugh. I have no idea why. You ask for a definition of an act of war.
              4. I give you one, from an authoritative legal dictionary.
              5. You laugh some more.
              6. In a subsequent post, you suggest that your previous definition of terrorism is ridiculous.
              7. You misquote me, with “legally an act of war not terror”.
              8. You giggle some more.

              The epic fail would be to waste any more time debating with someone whose version of their past arguments is as slippery as FJK’s.

              • vto …
                21 April 2015 at 7:46 pm

                ffs it doesn’t fit the definition of war as provided by you…. which was … “The use of violence and force between two or more states to resolve a matter of dispute.”

                The Rainbow Warrior incident does not fit that definition you yourself provided. Can you see where?

                I’m out too. All that other shit you just posted you can keep – its yours not mine

            • In Vino 6.1.1.1.1.2
              21 April 2015 at 6:51 pm

              vto, what is wrong with you? Rainbow Warrior was deliberate sabotage, and qualifies as an act of war. You believe that it also qualified as an act of terrorism. I thought it did not, and that you were allowing Orwellian Newspeak to contaminate clear debate through over-loose definitions. (You have to go to really big dictionaries to get full definitions, and your internet-sourced short definitions are far from adequate.)
              I now see you have imputed political motives to some of my earlier replies. Are you calling me a right-wing troll? Just to reassure you, my support left the Labour Party along with Jim Anderton. I have never voted right wing, and my choices last election were either Greens or Te Mana.

              Got that?

              You may be young and passionate – I do not know. But I think you need to realise that dissent is not necessarily treachery.

              All too often the Left argue and fight harder amongst themselves than they manage to do against the Right.

              Neither Murray Rawshark nor I are Satan personified.

              Let it go.

              • vto …
                21 April 2015 at 7:48 pm

                I don’t know what you are on about.

                • In Vino …
                  21 April 2015 at 8:27 pm

                  Precisely

                  • vto …
                    21 April 2015 at 8:36 pm

                    You’re as bad as murray. Where is your definition and the facts that fit it? Eh?

                    murray’s never worked. How about yours? Where is it?

                    Never mind all that other crap, just concentrate on the point at hand.

  7. Sacha 7
    21 April 2015 at 11:46 am

    At least Kim Hill managed to laugh at his desperate lies. Didn’t manage to get past them though.

    As has been said by others, when is a journo going to do their fricking job and challenge the PM to specify exactly what has been ‘proven’ wrong about anything Hager, Snowden or Greenwald have published. Just one fact would be a start.

  8. saveNZ 8
    21 April 2015 at 11:55 am

    This is exactly why the SIS and GCSB should be more accountable.

    They should not be a support group for John Key allegations against Nicky Hager.

    The lack of transparency is lowering and making a mockery of our justice system.

    We have allegations of misuse of international and national law.

    But none can be proven because there is no transparency for these organisations. Therefore they can not be held to account and have limitless power.

    A few facts coming out….

    NZ allowing the US to spy on diplomatic Chinese cables in NZ.
    NZ spying on our Pacific neighbours including NZ’ers living there.
    Mass surveillance of all Kiwis, their information spirited away to another country and seen by unknown people and kept in an unknown state.
    GCSB misusing it’s position to aid National in making Phil Goff leader of Opposition look untruthful and incompetent.

    etc etc

    I think Key has gone beyond a 2nd hand car salesman and got himself into the treason situation of selling NZ’s personal information as well as allowing this to happen to our neighbour’s in the Pacific AND our trading partner China and indulging in personal attacks on rivals via intermediaries.

  9. mac1 9
    21 April 2015 at 12:12 pm

    mickeysavage says that John Key uses “a combination of guile and sloppy language.”

    A recent pronouncement if John Key’s about house prices deserves a similar ‘parsing’ treatment. He said on April 20 “There’s probably a general view that house prices are not over-valued.”

    Note his use of weasel words- ‘probably’, ‘general’ and ‘not over-valued’.
    Ask yourself what he actually has said that is certain or definite. There is nothing, except a lot of wriggle room if he got challenged upon what he actually means.

    It is such a meaningless statement that it could come from someone who actually believes that house prices are over-valued but is couched in terms which distance the speaker from the views expressed.

    What does John Key believe about the level of house prices?

    His ‘combination of guile and sloppy language’ provide a superficially reassuring comment on a huge political issue, that is meaningless and easily defended. The language is sloppy, but deliberately so. a

  10. Rolf 10
    21 April 2015 at 12:17 pm

    All information digging journalists publish is “stolen” because the information was never intended for them. This is how western democracy works. Journalists dig to expose misdemeanors and dirty works by politicians, to keep them honest, or so the public can sack them. New Zealand need a way to dispose dishonest politicians mid term. They should never feel safe.

  11. keyman 11
    21 April 2015 at 4:29 pm

    John key is the prim minister he can treated anyone anyway he likes he is a awsome

    • Pasupial 11.1
      21 April 2015 at 4:39 pm

      Even by keyman’s low standards that is total gibberish.

      Key is not prim, and his conduct is quite improper.

      • keyman 11.1.1
        21 April 2015 at 7:29 pm

        its people who question him or try to trick him who do not respect his high office people like hager printing that disgraceful book

  12. Pasupial 12
    21 April 2015 at 4:48 pm

    NRT makes a good point regarding Key’s evasions:

    When brave leakers and journalists have revealed the dirty deeds of “our” spy agencies, the government’s response has been to consistently stonewall. “We do not comment on security matters”, they say. Unless, apparently, they think they have a success story to tell us

    http://www.norightturn.blogspot.co.nz/2015/04/we-do-not-comment-on-security-matters.html

  13. david 13
    21 April 2015 at 6:10 pm

    JK is the master of the diss. So his language is peppered with “whatever”, “it can’t be verified”, ” my office”, “I can’t recall that sort of detail”, ” we can’t interfere with a market decision”.

    If an employee did this they would be seen as underperforming as they would be seen as Wafflers, not knowing what they talking about, and they would have no credibility.

    It seems people can end up governing countries for long periods if they are like this though.

  14. Sable 14
    21 April 2015 at 8:53 pm

    Who said Shonky is talking out of his mouth……

  15. PoliticallyCorrected 15
    22 April 2015 at 3:02 am

    Key has been talking out both sides of his face since he first spoke to the Equiticorp/H-Fee inquiry in 1991. Here’s him lying to Kathryn Ryan about his ‘truthful’ statement one week before brain-dead New Zealanders elected him Prime Minister. All the waffle about the transactions are meaningless. What is important is the dates he was at Elders 84-87, which he says he got ‘wrong’ in 2007. He had to ‘correct’ them in 2008 when his statement to the Equiticorp inquiry surfaced. He lied to the SFO, fabricated his statement to them to help out a mate who was facing fraud charges. He left Elders in 87, not long after Elders announced in June 87 they would be restructuring. How do we get Key’s statement investigated?